A volume-formula misconception (writing volume as s × s × s for a cuboid cake) occurred only among traditionally taught students, not REACT students¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? 12.5% of traditional-learning students wrote the cake volume formula as s × s × s despite reaching a correct final answer; this misconception did not occur in the REACT class. → Sari 2018

Evidence¶

Sari 2018¶

Sari, D.P., Darhim, & Rosjanuardi, R. (2018). Errors of students learning with REACT strategy in solving the problems of mathematical representation ability. Journal on Mathematics Education, 9(1), 121-128. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1173659

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Qualitative analysis of posttest answers on problem 2, a black forest cake volume problem with two size options (31 cm x 20 cm x 10 cm and 38 cm x 25 cm x 10 cm). The article states this occurred "only in students who learning with traditional learning".

"A small percentage of students (12.5%) who obtained traditional learning does misconception by writing the formula to find the volume of cake = s × s × s (s = edge length)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The mean percentage of student errors on mathematical representation was lower for REACT-strategy students (21.74%) than for traditionally taught students (47.92%) — a broader claim this one bears on
• The most prominent errors in mathematical representation for both REACT and traditionally taught students occur on the symbolic representation indicator (solving problems involving arithmetic symbols) — related
• Traditionally taught students erred far more than REACT students on the visual representation indicator of making an image of a real-world situation — related
• Misconceptions about matter collecting or deficit on electrode parts are less frequent in the STAD-with-models group than in the other groups — related