Main Article Content


This study aims to examine mathematics teacher-candidate students’ mathematical creative reasoning ability based on the level of Adversity Quotient (AQ). This study uses a mixed method of sequential type by combining quantitative and qualitative methods in order. Population in this study is all students attending the course of Calculus in Mathematics Education of Master Program at STKIP Siliwangi that consist of 270 students divided into six classes. The results are AQ gives effect to the achievement of students’ mathematical creative reasoning abilities based on the whole and the type of AQ climber, champer, and quitter. The achievement of students’ mathematical creative reasoning abilities and based on AQ, the champer and climber fall into the medium category, while on the quitter type, it falls into the category of low. On the other hands, the achievement of students’ mathematical creative reasoning abilities is yet to be achieved well at the indicator of novelty.


Adversity Quotient Creative Reasoning

Article Details


  1. Acuña Ruz F. (2015). Incentivos al trabajo profesional docente y su relación con las políticas de evaluación e incentivo económico individual. Estudios pedagógicos (Valdivia), 41(1), 7-26.
  2. Bergqvist, E. (2007). Types of reasoning required in university exams in mathematics. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26(4), 348-370.
  3. Fathurrohman, M., Porter, A., & Worthy, A. L. (2017). Teachers’real and perceived of ICTs supported-situation for mathematics teaching and learning. International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education, 1(1), 11-24.
  4. Figueroa, B., & Aillon, M. (2015). Escritura académica de un ensayo mediado por el aprendizaje colaborativo virtual. Estudios pedagógicos (Valdivia), 41(1), 79-91.
  5. Hendriana, H., Rohaeti, E. E., & Hidayat, W. (2017). Metaphorical thinking learning and junior high school teachers’ mathematical questioning ability. Journal on Mathematics Education, 8(1), 55-64.
  6. Hendriana, H., Hidayat, W., & Ristiana, M. G. (2018). Student teachers’ mathematical questioning and courage in metaphorical thinking learning. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 948(1), 012019.
  7. Hidayat, W., & Prabawanto, S. (2018). Improving students’ creative mathematical reasoning ability students through adversity quotient and argument driven inquiry learning. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 948(1), 012005.
  8. Infante, M. (2010). Desafíos a la formación docente: Inclusión educativa. Estudios pedagógicos (Valdivia), 36(1), 287-297.
  9. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  10. Kotzé, G. (2007). Investigating shape and space in mathematics: A case study. South African Journal of Education, 27(1), 19-35.
  11. Lithner, J. (2008). A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(3), 255-276.
  12. Parvathy, U., & Praseeda, M. (2014). Relation between Adversity Quotient and Academic Problem among student teachers. Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 19(11), 23-26.
  13. Phoolka, S., & Kaur, N. (2012). Adversity Quotient: A new paradigm to explore. Contemporary Business Studies, 3(4), 67-78.
  14. Ponte, J. P., Pereira, M. J., & Henriques, A. (2012). O raciocínio matemático nos alunos do ensino básico e do ensino superior. Praxis Educativa, 7(2), 355-377.
  15. Prahmana, R. C. I., & Kusumah, Y. S. (2016). The Hypothetical Learning Trajectory on Research in Mathematics Education using Research-Based Learning. Pedagogika, 123(3), 42-54.
  16. Prahmana, R. C. I., Kusumah, Y. S., & Darhim (2017). Didactic Trajectory of Research in Mathematics Education Using Research-Based Learning. Proceeding of the Asian Mathematical Conference 2016. Bali: Indonesian Mathematical Society.
  17. Robbins, S. P. (2010). Manajemen. Jakarta: Erlangga.
  18. Runisah., Herman, T., & Dahlan, J. A. (2017). Using the 5E learning cycle with metacognitive technique to enhance students’mathematical critical thinking skills. International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education, 1(1), 87-98.
  19. Soedjadi, R. (2000). Kiat pendidikan matematika di Indonesia. Jakarta: Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Tinggi Departemen Pendidikan Nasional.
  20. Stoltz, P. G. (2004). Adversity Quotient: Mengubah hambatan menjadi peluang. Jakarta: Grasindo.
  21. Syah, M. (2010). Psikologi belajar. Jakarta: Rajagrafindo Persada.
  22. Toledo Jofré, M,, Magendzo Kolstrein, A., Gutiérrez Gianella, V., & Iglesias Segura, R. (2015). Enseñanza de'temas controversiales' en la asignatura de historia y ciencias sociales desde la perspectiva de los profesores. Estudios pedagógicos (Valdivia), 41(1), 275-292.
  23. Velez, I., & Ponte, J. P. D. A. (2013). Representations and reasoning strategies of Grade 3 students in problem solving. In B Ubuz, C Haser & MA Marioti (eds). Proceedings of the Eight Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education. Ankara: Middle East Technical University.
  24. Visser, M., Juan, A., & Feza, N. (2015). Home and school resources as predictors of mathematics performance in South Africa. South African Journal of Education, 35(1), 1-10.
  25. Weybright, E. H., Caldwell, L. L., Xie, H., Wegner, L., & Smith, E. A. (2017). Predicting secondary school dropout among South African adolescents: A survival analysis approach. South African Journal of Education, 37(2), 1-11.
  26. Young, J. R. (2017). Technology integration in mathematics education: Examining the quality of meta-analytic research. International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education, 1(1), 71-86.