Analysis of Student Misconceptions in Linear Programs Reviewed from Computational Thinking in Problem Solving
Ili Yanti
University of Jambi, Jambi, Indonesia
Syaiful
University of Jambi, Jambi, Indonesia
Yantoro
University of Jambi, Jambi, Indonesia
ABSTRACT
This study aims to describe the misconceptions experienced by students in solving linear program problems of the two-phase simplex method based on computational thinking in problem solving. This research is case study research with a qualitative approach. The research subject consisted of 1 student of the Tadris Mathematics Study Program at UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi who met the requirements as a research subject. This research subject was determined using a purposive sampling technique. The instruments used include an essay question test on two-phase simplex method material consisting of one item based on problem solving ability and interview guidelines to clarify the misconceptions that occur. The data analysis technique is to reduce the data that shows misconceptions in the two-phase simplex method material, then present the data that shows misconceptions and draw conclusions. The results showed that in the decomposition indicator S1M1 fulfilled his problem-solving ability, in pattern recognition S1M1 experienced misconceptions in some of the problem planning carried out. in the abstraction indicator in problem solving all subjects almost experienced conceptual errors in determining which information was needed and which was not needed for problem solving, and in the preparation of the algorithm, S1M1 was more dominant in experiencing misconceptions, where conceptual errors started from errors in determining the ratio value in the first iteration table in phase 1 until the error continued until the final result.
KEYWORDS:
misconception, linear programing, computational thinking, problem solving
HOW TO CITE:
Yanti, I., Syaiful., & Yantoro. (2025). Analysis of Student Misconceptions in Linear Programs Reviewed from Computational Thinking in Problem Solving. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(1), 87-103.
Plagiarism scanned by
UJER is open access and always free