An Analysis of Students Error In Solving PISA 2012 And Its Scaffolding

Yurizka Melia Sari, Erik Valentino



Based on PISA survey in 2012, Indonesia was only placed on 64 out of 65 participating countries. The survey suggest that the students’ ability of reasoning, spatial orientation, and problem solving are lower compare with other participants countries, especially in Shouth East Asia. Nevertheless, the result of PISA does not elicit clearly on the students’ inability in solving PISA problem such as the location and the types of student’s errors. Therefore, analyzing students’ error in solving PISA problem would be essential countermeasure to help the students in solving mathematics problems and to develop scaffolding. Based on the data analysis, it is found that there are 5 types of error which is made by the subject. They consist of reading error, comprehension error, transformation error, process skill error, and encoding error. The most common mistake that subject do is encoding error with a percentage of 26%. While reading is the fewest errors made by the subjects that is only 12%. The types of given scaffolding was explaining the problem carefully and making a summary of new words and find the meaning of them, restructuring problem-solving strategies and reviewing the results of the completion of the problem.


Analysis of Student’s Error, PISA, Newman Analysis, Scaffolding

Full Text:



Australian Council for Educational Research. (2014).Newman’s Error Analysis. PAT Resources Centre.

Cahyono, Adi Nur. (2010). Vygotskian Perspective: Proses Scaffolding untuk mencapai Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) Peserta Didik dalam Pembelajaran Matematika. Yogyakarta, Makalah Seminar Nasional Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 3(1).

Clements, M. A. (Ken). 1983. Analyzing Children’s Error on Written Mathematical Tasks.

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E. & Airasian, P. (2011). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications (9th ed.).

Newman, M. A. (1977). An Analysis of Sixth-Grade Pupils’ Error on Written Mathematical Tasks. Victorian Institute for Educational Research Bulletin, 39, 31-43.

OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 Results: What Students Know and Can Do – Student Performance in Reading, Mathematics and Science (Volume I). OECD Publishing.

OECD. (2013a). PISA 2012 Assessment and Analytical Framework: Mathematics, Reading, Science, and Problem Solving and Financial Literacy. OECD Publishing.

OECD.(2013b). PISA 2012 Results in Focus: What 15 Year Olds Know and WhAt They Can do With What They Know. OECD Publishing.

Rahayuningsih, Puspita, Qohar, Abdul. (2014). Analisis Kesalahan Menyelesaikan Soal Cerita Sistem Persamaan Linear Dua Variabel (SPLDV) dan Scaffoldingnya Berdasarkan Analisis Kesalahan Newman Pada Siswa Kelas VIII SMP Negeri 2 Malang. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Sains Tahun II, No. 2, 109-116.

Shofan, Fiangga (2014) Tangram Game Activities, Helping The Students Difficulty In Understanding The Concept Of Area Conservation. Proceeding of International Conference On Research, Implementation And Education Of Mathematics And Sciences 2014

Stacey, Kaye. (2011). The PISA View of Mathematical Literacy in Indonesia. IndoMS, J.M.E, 2(2) , pp. 95 -126.

Wijaya, Ariyadi, Marja van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, Michiel Doorman, Alexander Robitzsch. (2014). Difficulties in solving context-based PISA mathematics tasks: An analysis of students’ errors. The Mathematics Enthusiast, ISSN 1551-3440, 11(3), pp. 555-584.

Wijaya, Ariyadi. (2015).Kesalahan Siswa Dalam Memilah Data Relevan Pada Soal Matematika Berbasis Konteks. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, UMS, 2015, Surakarta: UMS Press.

Article Level Metrics


  • There are currently no refbacks.