Siska Firmasari(1*), Dadang Juandi(2),

(1) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia Universitas Swadaya Gunung Jati
(2) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author


This study aims to analyze students' rigorous mathematical thinking from three levels of cognitive function structures associated with their contribution to self-assessment metacognitive knowledge in Real Number System lectures. This research is qualitative research with a type of case study. The research subjects were three students of the Mathematics Education Study Program who contracted the Real Number. System course selecting research subjects based on test results identifies students into three rigorous mathematical thinking cognitive function structure levels. This study's results indicate that rigorous mathematical thinking contributes to students' self-assessment metacognitive knowledge. The quality of review of students who have a rigorous mathematical thinking level can lead to thoroughness, intellectual perseverance, critical investigation, and truth-seeking in solving problems appropriately, structurally, and systematically into a direct experience in the learning process is described as metacognitive. Students at the level of abstract relational thinking can assess their own abilities very well, learn independently, and choose with certainty how to solve problems by placing the right method. Qualitative thinking level students focus more on symbols or symbols and represent their knowledge through visualization. He prefers that the type of evaluation problem solving is not in the form of long, detailed sentences but instead immediately transforms the sentences into clear mathematical symbols


Alpi, K, M, & Evans, J, J. (2019). Distinguishing Case Study as A Research Method From Case Reports as A Publication Type. Journal of The Medical Library Assosiation, 107(1), 1 – 5.

Catarreira, S, M, V., Lopes, V, G., Garcia, L, M, C., & Gonzalez, R, L. (2017). Evaluation of Changes in Cognitive Structures After the Learning Process in Mathematics. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 25(2), 17–33.

Chang, M. (2010). Effects of Self-Monitoring on Web-Based Language Learner’s Performance and Motivation. CALICO Journal, 27(2).

Colognesi, S., Piret, C., Demorsy, S., & Barbier, E. (2020). Teaching Writing—With or Without Metacognition?: An Exploratory Study of 11- to 12-Year-Old Students Writing A Book Review. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(5), 459 – 470.

Creswell, J, W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Fitriyani, H. (2013). Profil Berpikir Matematis Rigor Siswa SMP dalam Memecahkan Masalah Matematika Ditinjau dari Perbedaan Kemampuan Matematika. AdMathEdu, 3(1).

Griffin, P. (2018). Assessment for Teaching (Second Edition). Sydney: Cambridge University Press.

Hern, J, & McMillan. (2008). Student Self-assessment: The Key to Stronger Student Motivation and Higher Achievement. Educational Horizons, 87(1), 40 – 49.

Hostetler, K., Luo, T., & Stefaniak, J, E. (2018). Aligning Information Literacy Assessment with Metacognitive Strategies. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 15(5).

Hsu, Y, S., Iannone, P., She, H, C., & Hadwin, A. (2016). Metacognition for Science and Mathematics Learning in Technology-Infused Learning Environments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 243 – 248.

Ifenthaler, D., Masduki, I., & Seel, N, M. (2011). The Mystery of Cognitive Structure and How We Can Detect It: Tracking the Development of Cognitive Structures Over Time. Instr Sci 39, 41–61.

Jaleel, S, & Premachandran, P. (2016). A Study on the Metacognitive Awareness of Secondary School Students. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(1), 165-172.

Kinard, J, T. (2006). Creating Rigorous Mathematical Thinking: A Dynamic that Drives Mathematics and Science Conceptual Development. Transylvanian Journal of Psychology, 5.

Kinard, J, T, & Kozulin, A. (2008) Rigorous Mathematical Thinking: Conceptual Formation in the Mathematics Classroom. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Magsalay, R, J, M., Luna, C, A., & Tan, R, G. (2019). Comparing the Effect of Explicit Mathematics Instruction with Rigorous Mathematical Thinking Approach and 5E’s Instructional Model on Students’ Mathematics Achievement. American Journal of Educational Research, 7(6), 402-406.

McComas, W. F. (2014). The Language of Science Education: an Expanded Glossary of Key Terms and Concepts in Science Teaching and Learning, (p. 63). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.

Navaneedhan, C., & Kamalanabhan, T. (2017). What Is Meant by Cognitive Structures? How Does It Influence Teaching –Learning of Psychology?. IRA International Journal of Education and Multidisciplinary Studies (ISSN 2455-2526), 7(2), 89-98.

Nbina, J, & Viko, B. (2010). Effect Of Instruction In Metacognitive Selfassessment Strategy On Chemistry Self-efficacy And Achievement Of Senior Secondary School Students In Rivers State, Nigeria. Academic Leadership: The Online Journal, 8(4).

Nuhfer, E., Fleisher, S., Cogan, C., Wirth, K., & Gaze, E. (2017). How Random Noise and A Gr How Random Noise and A Graphical Conv Aphical Convention Subention Subverted Behavioral Scientists' Explanations of Self-assessment Data: Numeracy Underlies Better Alternatives. Numeracy, 10(1).

Prabowo, A, & Juandi, D. Analisis situasi didaktis dalam pembelajaran matematika berbantuan ICT pada siswa SMP. Pythagoras: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 15(1), 1 – 12.

Purwaningsih, W, I. (2017). Hubungan Kemampuan Metakognitif dan Kemampuan Kognitif Mahasiswa dalam Pembelajaran Learning Cycle 7E Berbantuan Microsoft Mouse Mischief. Jurnal Pendidikan Surya Edukasi (JPSE), 3(2), 56 – 66.

Schoenfeld, A, H. (2015). What Mathematics Should Kids Learn, and How Should They Learn It? The American Journal of Psichology, 122(3).

Sukiyanto. (2020). Munculnya Kesadaran Metakognisi dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Matematika. Aksioma Jurnal, 9(1), 126 – 132.

Syafa’ah, H, K, & Handayani, L. (2015). Pengembangan Metacognitive Self–Assessment untuk Mengukur Pengetahuan Berpikir Evaluasi dalam Membaca Teks Sains Berbahasa Inggris. Unnes Physics Education Journal, 4(1): 43 – 48.

Syafa’ah, H, K, & Handayani, L. (2015). Pengembangan Metacognitive Self–Assessment untuk Mengukur Keterampilan Berpikir Evaluasi dalam Membaca Teks Sains Berbahasa Inggris. Unnes Physics Education Journal, 4(1).

Syahputri, A, L, & Fitriyani, H. (2019). Pendekatan Rigorous Mathematical Thinking untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Siswa. Indonesia Mathematics Education, 2(2): 71 – 81.

Siahaan, M, F.(2017). Students’ Perceptions of the Constructivist Instructional Methods in A Teaching and Learning Course. International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education, 1(2), 155 – 173.

Ultanir, E. (2012). An Epistemological Glance at the Constructivist Approach: Constructivist Learning in Dewey, Piaget, and Montessori. International Journal of Instruction, 5(2), 195 – 212.

Veenman, M, V, J. (2012). Metacognition In Science Education: Definitions, Constituents, And Their Intricate Relation With Cognition. In A. Zohar & Y. J. Dori (Eds.), Metacognition in Science Education: Trends In Current Research, Contemporary Trends And Issues In Science Education, 40, 21–36. Dordrecht: Springer.

Wilkerson-Jerde, M., & Wilensky, U. (2011). How do Mathematicians Learn Math?: Resources and Acts for Constructing and Understanding Mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 78, 21–43.



  • There are currently no refbacks.