ISSN (Online): 2321-3418
server-injected
Education And Language
Open Access

How Far Math Teachers Evaluate Attitude Students at Vocational School? Studies Phenomenology in Yogyakarta

, , , , , ,
DOI: 10.18535/ijsrm/v13i03.el04· Pages: 4028-4040· Vol. 13, No. 03, (2025)· Published: March 27, 2025
PDF
Views: 497 PDF downloads: 171

Abstract

Importance evaluation attitude students at School Intermediate Vocational often neglected, though matter This own impact on the development of students and preparation for the world of work. Study This aims to understand to what extent the mathematics teacher evaluates the attitude of students at vocational school. With an approach to phenomenology and involving 16 vocational school teachers in Yogyakarta, the research used a questionnaire open and interview for collecting data. Data analysis shows that math teachers evaluate the attitude of students through five stages, including base evaluation attitude, planning, implementation, obstacles, and suggestions. The findings mainly cover the fact that evaluation attitude is not optimal, more teachers focus on the instrument cognitive, and yet There is an instrument valid and reliable attitude. Need exists attention more to evaluation attitude for increase quality education at vocational schools.

Keywords

EvaluationAttitudePhenomenology

References

  1. Ardıç, M. A. (2021). Opinions and attitudes of secondary school mathematics teachers towards technology. Participatory Educational Research, 8(3), 136–155. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.58.8.3DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  2. Asempapa, R. S. (2022). Examining Practicing Teachers’ Knowledge and Attitudes toward Mathematical Modeling. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 10(2), 272–292. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2136DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  3. Asli, A., & Zsoldos-Marchis, I. (2022). “Teacher`S Attitudes Towards Teaching Mathematics” Scale: Factor Analysis. INTED2022 Proceedings, 1(March), 10190–10197. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2022.2680DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  4. Atnafu, M. (2014). Secondary school mathematics teachers’ attitude in teaching mathematics. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 9(1–2), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/281DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  5. Bogdan, dan Biklen, S. (2007). Penelitian Kualitatif untuk Pendidikan: Pengantar Teori dan Metode (A. & Bacon, Ed.; Edisi ke-5). Boston.Google Scholar ↗
  6. Bogdan, R. C., & Bilken, S. K. (1992). Quality research for education: An introduction to Theory and Methods. Qualitative Research For Education An Introduction to Theory and Methods : : Allyn and Bacon., 106–156.Google Scholar ↗
  7. Buntins, K., Kerres, M., & Heinemann, A. (2021). A scoping review of research instruments for measuring student engagement: In need for convergence. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 2(December), 100099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2021.100099DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  8. De-la-Peña, C., Fernádez-Cézar, R., & Solano-Pinto, N. (2021). Attitude Toward Mathematics of Future Teachers: How Important Are Creativity and Cognitive Flexibility? Frontiers in Psychology, 12(July), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.713941DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  9. Demirci, C. (2017). The effect of active learning approach on attitudes of 7th grade students. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2017.1048aDOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  10. Dudung, A. (2018). Penilaian psikomotor. Karima.Google Scholar ↗
  11. Evans, D., & Field, A. P. (2020). Maths attitudes, school affect and teacher characteristics as predictors of maths attainment trajectories in primary and secondary education: Predictors of Maths Trajectories. Royal Society Open Science, 7(10). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.200975DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  12. Garrett, T. (2008). Student-centered and teacher-centered classroom management : a case study of three elementary teachers. 43(2004), 34–47.Google Scholar ↗
  13. Gerard, L. F., Ryoo, K., McElhaney, k. W., Liu, O. L., Rafferty, A. N., & Linn, M. C. (2016). Automated guidance for student inquiry. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(1), 60–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000052DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  14. Gunawan, I., & Paluti, A. R. (2017). Taksonomi Bloom – Revisi Ranah Kognitif : Kerangka Landasan Untuk Pembelajran, Pengajaran, dan Penilaian. E-Journal.Unipma, 7(1), 1–8.Google Scholar ↗
  15. Hanisah, H., & Noordyana, M. A. (2022). Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematis Siswa pada Materi Penyajian Data di Desa Bojong. Plusminus: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 2(1), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.31980/plusminus.v2i1.1588DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  16. Hidayad, A., Masrukan, M., & Kartono, K. (2017). Instrumen Asesmen Sikap Siswa Berbasis Konservasi pada Pembelajaran Matematika SMP. Journal of Research and Educational Research Evaluation, 6(1), 30–38.Google Scholar ↗
  17. Hidayati, R. (2022). Pengembangan Model 5 S Untuk Mewujudkan Profil Pelajar Pancasila Di SDN Pendem 01 Kota Batu. Jurnal Pendidikan Taman Widya Humaniora, 1(4), 170–193.Google Scholar ↗
  18. Hii Bii Hui, M. S. M. (2023). Influence of game-based learning in mathematics education on the students’ cognitive and affective domain: A systematic review. Https://Www.Ncbi.Nlm.Nih.Gov/Pmc/Articles/PMC10086333/.Google Scholar ↗
  19. Ibnu Wachyudi, Sukestiyarno, B. W. (2015). Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Unjuk Kerja Pada Pembelajaran Dengan Model Problem Solving Berbasis Tik. Journal of Research and Educational Research Evaluation, 4(1), 20–27.Google Scholar ↗
  20. Islam, M. A., Haji Mat Said, S. B., Umarlebbe, J. H., Sobhani, F. A., & Afrin, S. (2022). Conceptualization of head-heart-hands model for developing an effective 21st century teacher. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.968723DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  21. Jailani, J., Retnawati, H., Rafi, I., Mahmudi, A., Arliani, E., Zulnaidi, H., Abd Hamid, H. S., & Prayitno, H. J. (2023). A phenomenological study of challenges that prospective mathematics teachers face in developing mathematical problems that require higher-order thinking skills. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(10), em2339. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13631DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  22. Jailani, Retnawati, H., Apino, E., & Santoso, A. (2020). High school students’ difficulties in making mathematical connections when solving problems. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 19(8), 255–277. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.8.14DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  23. Kalkan, F., & Dağlı, E. (2021). Views of secondary school students on ideal teacher qualifications: A phenomenological analysis. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(1), 317–329. https://doi.org/10.11591/IJERE.V10I1.20565DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  24. Kemdikbud. (2022). Buku Saku Kurikulum Merdeka; Tanya Jawab. In Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan.Google Scholar ↗
  25. Kholis, N., Kartowagiran, B., & Mardapi, D. (2020). Development and validation of an instrument to measure a performance of vocational high school. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 955–966. https://doi.org/10.12973/EU-JER.9.3.955DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  26. Koopman, K. J., & Koopman, O. (2020). Phenomenology and educational research: Theory and practice. 3(8), 251–260.Google Scholar ↗
  27. Kusaeri, K. (2019). Penilaian Sikap Dalam Pembelajaran Matematika. JPM : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 5(2), 61. https://doi.org/10.33474/jpm.v5i2.1588DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  28. Landsverk, N. G., Olsen, N. R., & Brovold, T. (2023). Instruments measuring evidence-based practice behavior, attitudes, and self-efficacy among healthcare professionals: a systematic review of measurement properties. Implementation Science, 18(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-023-01301-3DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  29. Lara Nieto-Márquez, N., Cardeña Martínez, A., Baldominos, A., González Petronila, A., & Pérez Nieto, M. Á. (2020). Assessment of the Effects of Digital Educational Material on Executive Function Performance. Frontiers in Education, 5. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.545709DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  30. León-Mantero, C., Casas-Rosal, J. C., Pedrosa-Jesús, C., & Maz-Machado, A. (2020). Measuring attitude towards mathematics using Likert scale surveys: The weighted average. PLoS ONE, 15(10 October), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239626DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  31. Lusiana, D., & Lestari, W. (2013). Instrumen Penilaian Afektif Pendidikan Karakter Bangsa Mata Pelajaran Pkn Smk. Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 2(1), 1–6.Google Scholar ↗
  32. Mamolo, L. A., & Sugano, S. G. C. (2023). Digital interactive app and students’ mathematics self-efficacy, anxiety, and achievement in the “new normal.” E-Learning and Digital Media. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530231167646DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  33. Marchis, I. (2011). Factors that influence secondary school students’ attitude to mathematics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29(2010), 786–793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.306DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  34. Marsh, H. W., Hau, K. T., & Wen, Z. (2009). In search of golden rules: comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320–341. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  35. Maryani, I., Prasetyo, Z. K., Wilujeng, I., Purwanti, S., & Fitrianawati, M. (2021). HOTs Multiple Choice and Essay Questions: A Validated Instrument to Measure Higher-order Thinking Skills of Prospective Teachers. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 18(4), 674–690. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2021.97DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  36. Mauleto, K. (2019). Analisis Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Ditinjau Dari Indikator Nctm Dan Aspek Berpikir Kritis Matematis Siswa Di Kelas 7B Smp Kanisius Kalasan. JIPMat, 4(2), 125–134. https://doi.org/10.26877/jipmat.v4i2.4261DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  37. Mendikbud. (2014). Peraturan Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan Republik Indonesia Nomor 104 Tahun 2014 Tentang Penilaian hasil Belajar Oleh Pendidik Pada Pendidikan Dasar dan Pendidikan Menengah. Pedoman Evaluasi Kurikulum, 13, 13,23.Google Scholar ↗
  38. Net, W. W. W. P., Rachmaningtyas, N. A., & Kartowagiran, B. (2023). The importance of honing elementary school students’ mathematical talents from an early age. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 13(3), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.13.03.07DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  39. Nolan, M. M., Beran, T., & Hecker, K. G. (2012). Surveys assessing students’ attitudes toward statistics: A systematic review of validity and reliability. Statistics Education Research Journal, 11(2), 103–123. https://doi.org/10.52041/serj.v11i2.333DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  40. Nurrahman, A., Sukirno, S., Pratiwi, D. S., Iskandar, J., Rahim, A., & Rahmaini, I. S. (2022). Developing student social attitude self-assessment instruments: A study in vocational high school. Research and Evaluation in Education, 8(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.21831/reid.v8i1.45100DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  41. Putra, Z. H., Rahmadhani, D., Noviana, E., & Hermita, N. (2022). Prospective elementary teachers’ attitude toward technology-based mathematics assessment. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2279(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2279/1/012007DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  42. Rohantizani, & Isfayani, E. (2023). Pendampingan Guru Matematika Menyusun Instrumen Penilaian Afektif Dalam Pembelajaran Berbasis Kurikulum 2013. Catimore: Jurnal Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat, 2(1), 10–16. https://doi.org/10.56921/cpkm.v2i1.40DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  43. Russo, J., Bobis, J., Downton, A., Feng, M., Hughes, S., Livy, S., McCormick, M., & Sullivan, P. (2023). Characteristics of high enjoyment teachers of mathematics in primary schools. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 35(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-021-00372-zDOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  44. Sabon, Y. O. S., Istiyono, E., & Widihastuti, W. (2022). Developing “Pancasila Student Profile” instrument for self-assessment. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Evaluasi Pendidikan, 26(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/10.21831/pep.v26i1.45144DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  45. Soriano, R. M., & Co, A. G. (2022). Voices from within: Students’ lived experiences on English language anxiety. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 11(1), 449–458. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i1.21898DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  46. Suharsimi Arikunto. (2016). Prosedur Penelitian Suatu Pendekatan Praktik Revisi. Rineka Cipta.Google Scholar ↗
  47. Turgut Karakose , Hakan Polat, Ramazan Yirci, Tijen Tülübaş, Stamatios Papadakis, T. Y. O. and M. D. (2023). Beliefs, Academic Amotivation and Attitudes toward the Teaching Profession Using Structural Equation Modelling. Https://Www.Mdpi.Com/2227-7390/11/2/449, 11(2).Google Scholar ↗
  48. Uyun, M. F., Haryono, H., & Hudallah, N. (2023). Pengembangan Instrumen Penilaian Pendidikan Karakter Profil Pelajar Pancasila Siswa SD Berbasis Android. Al Qalam: Jurnal Ilmiah Keagamaan Dan Kemasyarakatan, 17(3), 1781. https://doi.org/10.35931/aq.v17i3.2132DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  49. Wan, K., Kwong, T., Xiao, C., & Wong, E. (2021). Examining the effectiveness between course delivery modes in a teacher training spoc-based flipped course. In B. C., S. M., F. R., & W. T. (Eds.), Proceedings of the European Conference on e-Learning, ECEL (pp. 536–545). Academic Conferences and Publishing International Limited. https://doi.org/10.34190/EEL.21.059DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  50. Wen, R., & Dubé, A. K. (2022). A Systematic Review of Secondary Students’ Attitudes Towards Mathematics and its Relations With Mathematics Achievement. Journal of Numerical Cognition, 8(2), 295–325. https://doi.org/10.5964/jnc.7937DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  51. Yigletu, A., Michael, K., & Atnafu, M. (2023). Professional development on assessment for learning and its effect on pre-service teacher’s self-regulated learning. Cogent Education, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186x.2023.2222875DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  52. Zafar, M. (2025). Leadership strategies for the success of foreign-owned U.S. startups. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management, 13(02), 2321–3418. https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsrm/v13i02.em07DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  53. Zamir, S., Yang, Z., Wenwu, H., & Sarwar, U. (2022). Assessing the attitude and problem-based learning in mathematics through PLS-SEM modeling. PLoS ONE, 17(5 May), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266363DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  54. Zickuhr, B. K. M. (2016). Pengembangan perangkat pembelajaran matematika berstandar NCTM (national council of teachers of mathematics) pada pokok bahasan bentuk akar di SMK kelas X (Issue June). http://repository.unej.ac.id/handle/123456789/75935Google Scholar ↗
  55. Zurqoni, Retnawati, H., Rahmatullah, S., Djidu, H., & Apino, E. (2020). Has arabic language learning been successfully implemented? International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 715–730. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2020.13444aDOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
Author details
Nuryani Dwi Astuti
Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta and Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa Yogyakarta
✉ Corresponding Author
ORCID ↗
👤 View Profile →
Mami Hajaroh
Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
ORCID ↗
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication
Yuli Prihatni
Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa Yogyakarta
ORCID ↗
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication
Ari Setiawan
Universitas Sarjanawiyata Tamansiswa Yogyakarta
ORCID ↗
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication
Heri Retnawati
Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
ORCID ↗
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication
Slamet Suyanto
Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta
ORCID ↗
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication
Mohd Kasturi Nor Abd Aziz
Malaysia Perlis University, Malaysia
ORCID ↗
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication