Content uploaded by Achmad Hidayatullah
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Achmad Hidayatullah on Jan 09, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of
beliefs based on the field study
La dimensionalidad de las creencias personales; la investigación de
creencias a partir del estudio de campo
Achmad Hidayatullah
University of Szeged. Szeged, Hungary
achmad.hidayatullah@edu.u-szeged.hu
Csaba Csíkos
University of Szeged. Szeged, Hungary
csikoscs@edpsy.u-szeged.hu
Ruth Nanjekho Wafubwa
Population Council. Nairobi, Kenya
rnanjekho@popcouncil.org
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine whether personal epistemological beliefs are
more sensitive to domain study or not. We also examine the relation of this belief
with other relevant factors such as parent education, gender, attitude, and academic
performance. Two hundred seventy-six students from mathematics education and
primary teacher education participated in this study (15 % male and 85% female,
mean age = 20.65). A quantitative approach was used in the present study. The
finding of this study suggested that certainty of knowledge and attainability of the
truth are more specific domains. Mathematics education students hold stronger
beliefs about the certainty of knowledge than primary teacher education students, the
principle in mathematics is unchanging, and most of the truth in mathematics is
already found. In contrast, the beliefs about the justification for knowing and the
source of knowledge are more general domains. We found mathematics education
students and primary teacher education are equal in their beliefs about the
justification for knowing and the source of knowledge. The influence of these beliefs
on academic performance is significant. In both field studies, personal
epistemological beliefs correlate with attitudes toward academic performance. Both
Male and female students in the mathematics education and primary teacher
education department are equal in personal epistemological beliefs. This study
contributes to improving students' academic performance in higher education.
Keywords: beliefs, attitudes, performance, parent education, gender.
Resumen
El propósito de este estudio era examinar si las creencias epistemológicas personales
son más sensibles al estudio del dominio o no. También examinamos la relación de
esta creencia con otros factores relevantes como la educación de los padres, el
género, la actitud y el rendimiento académico. Participaron en este estudio 276
estudiantes de educación matemática y de magisterio de primaria (15 % hombres y
85 % mujeres, edad media = 20,65). En el presente estudio se utilizó un enfoque
cuantitativo. El hallazgo de este estudio sugirió que la certeza del conocimiento y la
posibilidad de alcanzar la verdad son dominios más específicos. Los estudiantes de
educación matemática tienen creencias más sólidas sobre la certeza del conocimiento
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 2 de 26
que los estudiantes de formación docente primaria, el principio de las matemáticas
no cambia y la mayor parte de la verdad en las matemáticas ya se encuentra. Por el
contrario, las creencias sobre la justificación del conocimiento y la fuente del
conocimiento son dominios más generales. Encontramos que los estudiantes de
educación matemática y la formación de maestros de primaria son iguales en las
creencias sobre la justificación del conocimiento y la fuente del conocimiento. La
influencia de estas creencias en el rendimiento académico es significativa. En ambos
estudios de campo, las creencias epistemológicas personales se correlacionan con las
actitudes hacia el rendimiento académico. Tanto los estudiantes masculinos como
femeninos en el departamento de educación matemática y el departamento de
formación de maestros de primaria son iguales en creencias epistemológicas
personales. Este estudio contribuye a mejorar el rendimiento académico de los
estudiantes de educación superior.
Palabras clave: creencias, actitudes, desempeño, educación de los padres, género.
1. Introduction
The growth of digital technology in the 21st century changed many things in various
aspects (Danesi, 2016; Hidalgo-Cajo & Gisbert-Cervera, 2021; Wang Ng, 2018). In the
educational context, the integration of digital technology has been conducted massively
and affected the changes in teacher-student interaction patterns (Danesi, 2016). In social
life, modern jobs require new skills beyond cognitive ability because digital technology
has eliminated human roles in some aspects (NRC, 2011). OECD has conceptualized
21st-century skills and competencies for a learner. These are cognitive, intrapersonal, and
interpersonal skills (Geisinger, 2016; NRC, 2011). The most important thing that should
be known is how to build these individual skills. Students’ conceptions, the extent to
which learner believes in knowledge, make meaning, and justify their knowledge, have
been known plays a key role in determining their performance in various aspect (Buehl
et al., 2002; Buehl & Alexander, 2001; Hidayatullah & Csikos, 2022; Hofer, 2000) such
as cognitive, intrapersonal, and interpersonal skill. For instance, in cognitive skills, the
ways students solve non-routine tasks are governed by their beliefs about word problems
(Garofalo, 1989; Greer et al., 2002; Reusser & Stebler, 1997; Verschaffel et al., 2020).
However, the previous investigation regarding personal epistemological beliefs has left
one problematic issue that should be clarified: that is the sensitivity of these beliefs in
other domains or field studies.
In the literature review, there has been controversy among researchers on whether beliefs
system are more general or specific domains. One group of researchers perceive personal
epistemological beliefs across domains or more general domains. Whereas other
researchers viewed that personal epistemological beliefs are sensitive to field study or
more specific domain (Limón (2006). The concept of beliefs as a domain-general was
driven by Schommer's epistemological beliefs that consisted of four dimensions; fixed
ability, simple knowledge, quick learning, and specific knowledge (Clarebout et al., 2001;
Schommer-Aikins, 2004). The authors also proved that individual general beliefs are
linked with beliefs about problems solving, reading ability, problem-solving ability, and
grade point average (GPA). In other words, the authors successfully showed that general
beliefs mirror students’ cognition and specific beliefs, such as problem-solving beliefs.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 3 de 26
Other empirical research suggested that beliefs about knowledge are more specific
domain. Through empirical study, Hofer & Pintrich (1997) investigated and compared
students’ epistemological beliefs based on the different domains. The researchers
proposed discipline-focused epistemological beliefs (DFEQ) as the theoretical framework
of personal epistemological beliefs to prove the specificity of domain beliefs. DFEQ
consists of four dimensions: beliefs about the certainty of knowledge, beliefs about the
justification of knowledge, beliefs about the Source of knowledge, and beliefs about the
attainment of the truth. This empirical study compared two groups of students:
psychology and science. This study also examined whether their beliefs relate to
Schommer's epistemological beliefs (Hart, 2005; Hofer, 2000; Muis et al., 2006). The
author found that the influence of disciplinary differences was very significant, indicating
that students in different domains hold different beliefs about knowledge. Students in
science hold stronger beliefs that knowledge is unchanging than students in psychology
(Hofer & Pintrich, 1997).
Although prior studies (Hofer, 2000; Hofer & Pintrich, 1997; Op ’t Eynde et al., 2006)
have shown that beliefs about knowledge are related to academic performance, and Hofer
(2000) has shown that personal epistemological beliefs are more sensitive to field study,
the dimensionality of these beliefs in the different field is still unexplored questions. A
clearer understanding of whether the sensitivity of personal epistemology also exists in
other domains is necessary to provide a new explanation of the role of these beliefs on
academic performance and other aspects. Little is known whether personal
epistemological beliefs based on the field are associated with attitudes and academic
performances.
This investigation aims to explore whether personal epistemological beliefs are more
specific domains or more general domains. This study also explores whether these
personal epistemological beliefs are associated with attitudes and influence academic
performance in the field study. Pehkonen & Pietilä (2003) suggested that beliefs in
mathematics could pertain to subjective knowledge, while attitudes can pertain to an
emotional aspect. Caprara et al. (2003) showed through their empirical investigation that
beliefs determine personal attitudes. The stronger students hold their beliefs, their
attitudes toward an object are more positive. Moreover, we investigated another factor
(e.g., gender and parents' educational level) relevant to exploring students'
epistemological beliefs in the Indonesian context. Therefore, the research questions below
guided our investigations:
1. Through the empirical investigation of personal epistemological beliefs in the
different field studies, are the students’ beliefs more specific or general domains?
2. Do personal epistemological beliefs influence students’ academic performance?
3. Do personal epistemological beliefs correlate with students’ attitudes toward the
academic context?
4. Were there any differences between male and female students in personal
epistemological beliefs?
5. Do parents’ educational backgrounds generate different personal epistemological
beliefs?
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 4 de 26
2. Theoretical framework
2.1 Beliefs definitions.
Beliefs are very difficult to define precisely. Because the differences in the academic
background sometimes generate different definitions and conceptualizations. In the
literature review, the term beliefs time was written with other words such as ideology,
religion, attitudes, ideas, thinking, value, and perceptions. There are wide definitions of
beliefs based on the domain of field study. The most confusing thing is that sometimes
authors do not differentiate between self-efficacy beliefs and beliefs about a certain
object. However, Pajares (1992), research about beliefs is merit in various domains, such
as mathematics, anthropology, education, physiology, science, medicine, law, sociology,
and business. Although there is no consensus among researchers regarding the definitions
of beliefs, some definitions can be used to conceptualize the structure.
Some researchers, such as Goldin (2002), said that beliefs as part of the cooperative or
affective configuration that constitute some attributes such as value. The consequence of
these definitions may affect the inclusion of some values as part of belief constructions
in certain domains. Besides, based on these definitions, perceive beliefs as an affective
domain. While other researchers, such as Di Martino & Zan (2011), perceive those beliefs
as not having an affective or cognitive aspect. But, belief positions between the two may
also consist of affective and cognitive aspects. Hestener & Sumpter (2018) define belief
as a person's understanding that influences how they conceptualize and involve
mathematics in all behavior, actions, and thoughts. Thus, beliefs are the roots of activities
and ideas involving mathematics. In other words, what anyone does daily reflects their
beliefs about an object or something. For example, we can trace one’s beliefs based on
behavior patterns during problem-solving learning. We also can identify teacher beliefs
based on their style and strategies during teaching and learning in the class.
Other researchers, such as Rokeach (1968) and Grootenboer & Marshman (2016), defined
beliefs as personal assumptions of truth that act as a predisposition to action. This
definition is also in line with the previous definitions by Hestener & Sumpter (2018).
Therefore, in the educational context, what a person perceives about an object would
generate the consequence of the activity, although it does need justification. Because they
believe that what they do in their activity is true. Bobis et al.(2016) define beliefs as
conceptions about an object, ideology of personal, a world of view, and values about their
purposes and their daily practices. What people perceive about themselves in
environmental situations imply to the extent to which they read and evaluate a
phenomenon. An important definition of beliefs is proposed by Dewey (1993), who said
that beliefs as something outside the individual that be tested according to their
perceptions. One’s beliefs generate statements about facts and legal principles. These
definitions indicate that beliefs definitions depend on the current domains and mention
that there is no single definition of beliefs correct or fit. All of them rely on the situation
and domains.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 5 de 26
2.3 Personal epistemological beliefs
According to Hofer (2000), the core of the personal beliefs system is the nature of
knowledge (how someone deals with beliefs and knowledge) and the nature of process
knowing (how someone comes to know). The beliefs of the nature of knowledge may
consist of certainty and simplicity of knowledge, and the nature of process knowing
consists of the source of knowledge and justification of knowledge (Watson, 2020). Using
exploratory factor analysis, Hofer (2000) generated four dimensions, beliefs about the
certainty of knowledge, beliefs about the justification of knowledge, beliefs about the
Source of knowledge, and beliefs about the attainment of the truth.
Ernest (2016) postulated that certainty has two meanings; the first is those whose
adherents admit no uncertainties and are aware that they can endure any tests and
skeptical inquiry. In modern epistemological frameworks, such views are viewed as
indisputable. Another definition of certainty is an assessment of knowledge's actual
objects or propositions that reflect beliefs. They can also be said to be certain or to have
certainty if they are thought to be objectively justified and now able to withstand any
doubts, inquiries, or challenges to their veracity. Certainty of knowledge is the dimension
of the belief system that elaborated to the extent to which students perceive knowledge
as fixed or fluid (Chen et al., 2019). These beliefs were adapted from Perry and
Schommer’s work to explore whether students perceive knowledge as tentative or fixed.
Perry investigated how students in higher education deal with knowledge and knowledge
attainment (Trautwein & Lüdtke, 2007). The finding of Perry’s investigation exerted the
tendency of first-year university students to perceive that knowledge was certain. In the
last year's study, students recognized that knowledge was tentative (Schommer, 1990). In
the present study, certain absolute truth exists at lower levels. At more advanced levels,
knowledge is provisional and in constant evolution (Hofer, 2000)
The simple of knowledge is the person's belief whether knowledge is simple or complex.
Simple knowledge relates to the perception of isolated facts (Schommer, 1990, 1993).
Knowledge is considered as a collection of information or as correlating with one another
on a continuum. At the lower-level beliefs, someone will perceive knowledge as concrete
facts, but at the high level, someone will acknowledge that knowledge is more contextual
(Hofer, 2000). Regarding the Source of knowledge, Hofer (2000) argued that the Source
of knowledge is how a person perceives the Source of knowledge from the outside person
and resides in an external authority. In lower models, knowledge derives outside the self
and exists in the external authority from whom it may be transferred.
Justification of knowledge relates to how people perceive how to gain knowledge and
clarify their claims. Justification of knowledge is a way for people to prove their
knowledge, such as following the information from the experts or doing research to
discover the answer (Chen et al., 2019). In her empirical research, Hofer (2000) proposed
a new dimension, namely, the attainment of the truth. Chen et al.(2019) interpreted the
attainment of the truth as a concern with how someone believes that the ultimate truth can
be obtained or unobtainable. The items in this dimension are closer to the justification of
knowledge but emphasize the justification of experts, such as the statement that “experts
in this field can ultimately get the truth” and “if the scholars try hard enough, they can
find the answers to almost anything.”
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 6 de 26
2.5 The relation of personal epistemological beliefs and attitudes
Attitudes are defined as the evaluation dimension of a concept, such as whether the
concept is good or bad. They are described as mediating evaluative responses, including
liking, enjoyment, and interest, or the opposite side dislikes concepts or objects (Ernest,
1989; Fishbein, 1963). Attitudes relate to affective responses that involve moderately
intense and reasonably stable positive or negative feelings. For example, attitudes toward
mathematics include liking geometry, disliking word problems, or disliking analysis-real
mathematics (McLeod, 1992). If students tend to dislike a certain topic, it will imply their
behavior during the learning process.
The relationship between attitudes and performance has been extensively researched.
Particularly, the empirical study examines the contribution of a positive attitude to
students’ performance. Attitude has also been conceptually linked to students’
engagement in class, homework completion, and abstinence (Green et al., 2012; Pitsia et
al., 2017). The history of attitudes research also attracted attention to the critical issue in
affect study, particularly on beliefs, because attitudes and beliefs have rarely been
differentiated (Di Martino & Zan, 2011). Sometimes, attitudes and beliefs are used
interchangeably with each other. Pehkonen & Pietilä (2003) bunched beliefs as subjective
knowledge or cognitive aspect while attitudes are emotions. See figure 1. Then, the
authors explained that the two sub-domains interconnect since someone can imagine
statements that can be comprehended simultaneously as beliefs and attitudes. For
instance,” I am not good at mental calculations” can be understood as a belief and attitude
toward mathematics. In this study, we assumed that attitudes are more emotions and
beliefs are more cognition, both of which strongly correlate. However, empirical study
that connects attitudes to students’ beliefs is still rare.
Figure 1. the relationship between beliefs, attitude, and knowledge (Pehkonen & Pietilä,
2003).
Thematic Group 2 EUROPEAN RESEARCH IN MATHEMATICS EDUCATION III
E. Pehkonen, A. Pietilä6
Figure 1. Relationships between main concepts in beliefs.
In knowledge, we distinguish between its objective and subjective share, and the
former is situated outside of the individual (cf. Sfard 1991). However, objective and
subjective knowledge are thought to be in interaction with each other. Since the
individual’s subjective knowledge contains also some part of his emotions, these two
areas intersect each other. It could be thought that a pupil has knowledge on his
emotions. The pupil recognizes, for example, that when he has solved a difficult task,
he feels joy and satisfaction.
Mathematical beliefs pertain to subjective knowledge, and mathematical attitudes to
emotions. But these two sub-domains intersect, since one can imagine statements that
can be understood at the same time as beliefs and attitudes. For example, the statement
”I am not good in mental calculations” can be understood as a belief concerning
oneself, but also as an attitude toward mathematics. The schema of Figure 1 has been
dealt with in detail in the published dissertation (Pietilä 2002).
References
Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. 1996. Rethinking learning. In: The handbook of
education and learning. New models of learning, teaching and schooling (eds. D. R.
Olson & N. Torrance). Cambridge (MA): Blackwell.
Boyer, C. B. 1985. A history of mathematics. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University
Press.
Ernest, P. 1989. The knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: a
model. Journal of Education for Teaching 15 (1), 13-33.
Fennema, E. & Sherman, J.A. 1976. Fennema-Sherman mathematics attitudes scales.
JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 6, 31 (Ms. No. 1225).
Furinghetti, F. (1996). A theoretical framework for teachers' conceptions. In E.
Individual
OBJECTIVE
KNOW-
LEDGE
EMOTIONS
SUBJECTIVE
KNOWLEDGE
MATHEMATICAL
BELIEFS MATHEMATICAL
ATTITUDES
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 7 de 26
2.6 Gender and personal epistemological beliefs
Gender is also questioned in the Indonesian educational context as the most prominent
Muslim country. Religion is one of the issues that cause inequality in gender (Muliah,
2016). There is evidence that gender differences in academic contexts still exist in several
Muslim countries. For example, Shafiqs' (2013) investigated the differences in gender in
an academic context in some Muslim countries. This research involved students from
Turkey, Indonesia, Kyrgyzstan, Jordan, Azerbaijan, Qatar, and Tunisia. The researcher
compares students’ performance in those countries based on gender differences. The
research found that the mathematics performance of girls’ students in Indonesia, Tunisia,
and Kyrgyzstan is lower than boys’ students. The significant differences have also been
proved by Martha et al. (2021), who found significant differences in learning competence
between male and female students in higher education in Indonesia. Other studies
suggested that women are more likely to work in some aspects, such as STEM and social
work, than men (Maskur et al., 2022).
Nowadays, males and females have the same chance to access education in Indonesia.
However, in Indonesian education, several private Islamic schools segregate male and
female students. These divisions were founded on the presumption that putting male and
female pupils in the same class or an environment where they may interact would have a
negative effect on behaviour (Srimulyani, 2007). In higher education, universities follow
a modern education system where there is no segregation between male and female
students.
Concerning the relation between gender and beliefs in an academic context, researchers
have recorded that gender issue also exists in the context of beliefs study. Li (2004)
investigated gender differences and beliefs in mathematics education. The authors found
that beliefs about mathematics are really different based on gender differences, where
males showed higher beliefs than females. Samuelsson & Samuelsson (2016) also
reported that male students perceive themselves can do more in mathematics than
females. However, no association between personal beliefs and gender differences study
has been conducted in the Indonesian context. Therefore, in the present study, we
explained the personal epistemological beliefs based on students’ gender differences.
2.4 Parents' educational level and personal epistemological beliefs.
Parents' education as part of social-economic status is another factor that has been
recognized to influence students’ performance. Parents with a high level of education,
such as more than four years of experience in higher education, spend more time with
their children than parents with less educational experience (Guryan et al., 2008). Parents’
education may affect how they interact and send messages to their children. Some of their
messages to their children provide information regarding the values and importance of
education, such as in mathematics and science fields (Jacobs & Bleeker, 2004). Research
by Azhar et al. (2014) reported that parents' education significantly influences students’
performance in the university.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 8 de 26
The relationship between personal epistemological beliefs and parents' educational study
has rarely been studied. There is little evidence of the relationship between the two. For
instance, the study by Davis-Kean (2005) reported that parents' education influences their
beliefs and behavior, leading to positive outcomes for children and youth. The role of
parents in students' beliefs has also been recorded by Gladstone et al.(2018). In that study,
researchers investigated students’ beliefs about mathematics in grades 5-12, students’
abilities towards mathematics, and parents’ beliefs about their children. This study's result
showed an association between students' beliefs, students' ability in mathematics, and
parents' beliefs about their children in mathematics. Therefore, in the present study, we
will examine the relations between parents' educational background and students’
personal epistemological beliefs.
3. Method
3.1 Participants
This study took place in Surabaya city-Indonesia, which is an urban or a metropolitan
city. A total of 276 higher education students participated in this research, where 86 % of
participants were females and 14 % were males (Mean age = 20.65, SD = 2.29). The
participants in the present study are from the Primary teacher education (PME)
department and the mathematics education (MED) department. We used the snowball
random sampling method to collect our data using the online system with Google Forms.
When we spread our instruments online to students in higher education, various students
from different backgrounds also participated in the present study. We decided to focus on
the two departments, mathematics teacher education, and primary teacher education. We
excluded students from another department since the number of participants from other
departments is not enough to be calculated using statistical analysis.
Finally, 146 students in MED and 130 students in PME departments participated in this
study (See table 1). Although the students in these two departments have similarities
because of the same faculty, the differences lie in the curriculum structure. MED students’
college focused on mathematics for teaching, and they obtained several topics for
teaching-learning mathematics in primary-senior high school. Students in MED learned
natural mathematics such as calculus, algebra, geometry, theory graph, analysis real and
statistics mathematics, etc. Students also study teaching and learning strategies,
assessments, and training for teaching methods, etc. PME students’ college, on the other
hand, focused on all topics for primary teacher education teaching and learning method
pedagogy. Students from these departments learned about mathematics for elementary,
teaching and learning strategies, assessments, and instruction training. Based on those
subject differences, MED students learn more in the mathematics area, while PME
students learn more in teaching and learning strategies for elementary students. The
output from these two departments is different, MED students have been trained to be
secondary school teachers or junior and senior high schools teacher in the Indonesian
context. While PME students have been trained to be a teacher for primary students or
elementary students in the Indonesian context.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 9 de 26
Table 1
Summarize the demography of participants
Characteristic
Full sample
Percentage
Major
Mathematics education (MED)
146
53%
Primary teacher education (PME)
130
47%
Gender
Males
39
14%
Females
237
86%
Father Education
Elementary Schools
81
29%
Junior High Schools
35
13%
Senior High Schools
109
39%
Higher Education
51
19%
Mother Educations
Elementary Schools
70
26%
Junior High Schools
56
20%
Senior High Schools
102
37%
Higher Education
48
17%
3.2 Instruments
Personal epistemological beliefs. We adapted the Discipline-focused epistemological
beliefs questionnaire (DFEQ) was used to measure students' beliefs, their perceptions
about knowledge, and knowing their discipline study. This questionnaire was developed
by Hofer (2000) and consisted of four dimensions with 18 items: certainty of knowledge
consisted of eight items. For example: “All experts in this field understand the field in the
same way, “and “Truth is unchanging in this subject.” Justification for knowing entails
four items: “Firsthand experience is the best way of knowing something in this field,” and
“I am more likely to accept the ideas of someone with firsthand experience than the ideas
of researchers in this field.” The Source of knowledge consisted of four items. For
example: “Sometimes you just have to accept answers from the experts in this field, even
if you don’t understand them “and “If you read something in a textbook for this subject,
you can be sure it’s true.” Attainability of truth entails two items: “Experts in this field
can ultimately get to the truth” and “if scholars try hard enough, they can find the answers
to almost anything. This instrument was rated with a Likert scale from 1-5 (1 = strongly
disagree, 5 = strongly agree).
Attitude for academics. We adapted the instruments of attitude from Kennedy et al. (2016)
were adopted in the present study. For example, I find many interesting and important
things in this field. Both questionnaires were administrated using a Likert scale rate range
of 1-5 (1 = Strongly disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree).
Parents’ educational background. For the personal background data, we obtained from
parents' educational level. We asked students what their father and mother’s educational
level is; 1 = primary school, 2 = Junior high school, 3 = Senior High School/ Vocational
school, 4 = Higher education. Student achievements were collected by asking students for
their grade point average (GPA). In Indonesian, the system GPA range from 1-4.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 10 de 26
3.3 Procedure
In the present study, we identified students’ personal beliefs about knowledge in their
field study. Therefore, we adapted the Discipline-focused epistemological beliefs
questionnaire (DFEQ) developed by Hofer (2000). In the first step, we translated the
instruments into the Indonesian language. Before we administered this questionnaire,
there are three researchers from Indonesia validated the instrument. We tried to
communicate with students and colleges from universities in Indonesia. We explained our
research aims. Also, we tried to communicate with some lecturers in Indonesia to get
information on how to collect data. Then we used snowball random sampling methods.
Both the students and the lecturers in Indonesia helped us to spread our online survey. In
the present study, most students from two departments (mathematics and Primary teacher
education) were asked to respond to this survey package consisting of the instrument
discipline-focused epistemological beliefs questionnaire (DFEQ), a student attitude, and
a brief demographic questionnaire such as their parents’ education. We excluded the
participants from another department since the number of participants was insufficient to
be accounted for with statistical methods. The measurement of this study took place in
Surabaya, the capital city of East Java province, during the pandemic. We collected our
data on 1-30 April 2022. It means that the online collection of data was the only possible
solution.
3.4 Data analysis
This study uses a quantitative study approach. Several data analyses were performed in
the present study: confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to confirm the stability of
validity instruments. The model fit for confirmatory factor analysis can be presented by
the comparative fit index (CFI), tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and the root means a square
error of approximation (RMSEA). According to van de Schoot et al. (2012), the
coefficient of CFI ≥ .90, TLI ≥ .90, and RMSEA ≤ .08 are adequate. Cronbach's alpha
was used to examine the reliability of DFEQ instruments. Descriptive statistics were used
to analyze students’ discipline-focused epistemological beliefs, and a t-test was used to
compare students’ discipline-focused epistemological beliefs for mathematics education
students and primary teacher education students. Regression analysis was used to
examine the contribution of personal epistemological beliefs to students’ achievements.
We also performed a t-test to examine the differences in personal epistemological beliefs
based on gender differences. Finally, we performed ANOVA to identify the differences
in personal epistemological beliefs based on parents' educational backgrounds.
4. Results
4.1 Confirming the validity dan reliability instruments
We performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) in this study to confirm the model of
discipline-focused epistemological beliefs in the Indonesian context (see table 2). We
found the acceptable fit model (Chi-squared = 5024.33, df = 153, p <.001, NFI = .93,
RNI = .96, GFI = .97, TLI = .94, CFI = .96, RMSEA = .08). All items had a good factor
loading, range .45 - .83. We checked the internal consistency of this model using
Cronbach alpha.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 11 de 26
Table 2
Construct validity of epistemological beliefs and attitudes toward academic
Variables
𝝌𝟐
CFI
TLI
RMSEA
Alpha
Personal epistemological beliefs
5024.33
.96
.94
.08
.89
Attitudes towards academic
234.43
.98
.96
.04
.73
Regarding the reliability of our instruments, the result of Cronbach alpha analysis showed
that all of our instruments are reliable. Overall, the factors of discipline-focused
epistemological beliefs had good reliability (Cronbach alpha = .71 - .80). Attainability
of truth got the highest reliability (𝛼 = .80) among factors of these beliefs. Certainty of
knowledge also gained high reliability (𝛼 = .78), and the Source of knowledge gained
high reliability (𝛼 = .71). Justification for knowing had the lowest reliability among other
factors (𝛼 = .67).
Concerning the attitudes instruments, we also examine the construct validity and the
reliability of attitudes toward academic performance. The instrument of attitudes also
presented a fit model (Chi-squared = 234.43, df = 21, p <.001, NFI = .93, RNI = .98, GFI
= .98, TLI = .96, CFI = .98, RMSEA = .04). The Cronbach alpha coefficient showed that
this instrument is reliable (Alpha =.73).
4.2. Descriptive statistics
As shown in Table 3, each factor of personal epistemological beliefs is correlated with
attitudes toward academics. The highest correlation was shown by the pair of the source
of knowledge and attitudes towards academics (r = .71). Students who hold beliefs about
the source of knowledge, such as believing that the source knowledge (e.g., textbooks and
experts) is favorable to have positive attitudes towards academics. The pair of certainty
of knowledge and attitudes towards academics obtained a strong correlation (r = .67). The
more students believe that knowledge is certain, the more favorable students are to have
a positive attitude towards academics. The lowest correlation has been shown by the pair
of the attainability of truth and justification for knowing (r = .39). The correlation between
the source of knowledge and justification for knowing has gained moderate correlations
(r = .55). It means, the level of student’s beliefs about the source of knowledge such as
textbook is correlated with their beliefs how to make meaning and justify their
knowledge. Attainability of the truth has a strong correlation with the certainty of
knowledge (r = .63) and the source of knowledge (r = .61). Justification for knowing was
moderately correlated with attitudes towards academics (r = .59).
Table 3.
Descriptive statistics and correlation of each variable
Variables
Mean
SD
Max
Min
1
2
3
4
1. Certainty of knowledge
28.87
5.53
40.00
8
1
2. Justification for knowing
13.73
2.98
20.00
4
.59
3. Source of knowledge
13.34
2.97
20.00
4
.61
.55
4. Attainability of truth
7.79
1.72
10.00
2
.63
.39
.61
5. Attitudes towards academic
24.67
4.18
35.00
7
.67
.59
.71
.62
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 12 de 26
4.3. RQ1: Through the empirical investigation of personal epistemological beliefs in
the different field studies, are the students’ beliefs more specific or general domains?
We performed an independent sample t-test (see table 4) to examine whether personal
epistemological beliefs are more specific or more general domain, in the context of
mathematics education field and primary education fields. As we discussed earlier,
students in MED learned a lot of mathematics topics, such as calculus, algebra, geometry,
etc. Although PME students also learned mathematics in elementary students, most of the
subjects in their field are related to pedagogy teaching and learning. In the Indonesian
context, the main output of MED is mathematics teachers in secondary schools. At the
same time, the output of PME is to provide elementary teachers. Therefore, the
differences between the two will be identified if personal epistemology is more specific
to the domain study. In contrast, both studies will have no significant differences if
personal epistemological beliefs are more general domains.
The data in table 5 described significant differences between the two in the context of
personal epistemological beliefs but not in all dimensions. MED students hold stronger
beliefs about the certainty of knowledge than PME students; M = 29.75, SD = 5.01 and
M = 27.88, SD = 5.93, respectively, t (274) = 2.84, p < .05. MED students also hold
stronger beliefs about the attainability of truth than PME students (M = 8.18, SD = 1.47
and M = 7.35, SD =1.87, respectively, t (274) = 4.13, p < .05). However, MED and PME
were equal in the beliefs about the justification for knowing (t (274) = 0.62, p = .54). It
means the way students in both field study had the same conception how to justify their
knowledge. Both the students were also equal in their beliefs about the Source of
knowledge (t (274) = 1.75, p = .08). This data showed that either MED or PME were in
the same way in believing about the Source of knowledge in their area. In other words,
the certainty of knowledge and attainability of truth were more sensitive to domain study.
In contrast, justification for knowing and the Source of knowledge was across domains.
Table 4
Comparison of students’ beliefs based on their discipline
Factors
Mathematics
education (MED)
Primary teacher
education (PME)
t (274)
p
M (SD)
M (SD)
Certainty of knowledge
29.75 (5.01)
27.88 (5.93)
2.84
.005
Justification for knowing
13.62 (2.92)
13.85 (3.04)
0.62
.54
Source of knowledge
13.63 (2.77)
13.00 (3.15)
1.75
.08
Attainability of truth
8.18 (1.47)
7.35 (1.87)
4.13
.005
Note. NMED= 146, NPME = 130, p < .05 indicated significant. Certainty significant, t
(274) = 2.84, p = .005, attainability of truth significant, t (274) = 4.13, p = .001 < .05.
We further examine the differences between the two in the level items by performing an
independent t-test (See table 5). The first factor is belief in the certainty of knowledge. In
general, the differences between the two have been identified based on the mean result,
although not in all items. For instance, both students in MED and PME are equal in their
beliefs about the answer to the questions in their field study is very dependent on the
experts' findings, as indicated by the high mean result of the corresponding items (3.52
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 13 de 26
and 3.64, from a five-point likers scale, 5= strongly agree). 58% agreed or strongly
agreed, while 13% strongly disagreed or disagreed with the item “Answers to questions
in this field change as experts gather more information.” However, both students are
really different in some beliefs about the certainty of knowledge. MED students were
more positive than PME students with respect to the item “all experts in this field
understand the field in the same way” (M = 3.49, SD = 1.10 and M = 3.24, SD = 0.94,
respectively, p < .05). MED students hold stronger beliefs that the truth was never
changing rather than PME students (M = 3.47, SD =1.27, and M = 3.05, SD = 1.23,
respectively, p < .05). MED students expressed more positive beliefs than PME students
that there is only one right answer in their field based on the mean results (M = 3.88, SD
= 1.09 and M = 3.28, SD =1.18, respectively, p <.001). MED students (M = 4.05, SD =
0.87) were more positive than PME students (M = 3.76, SD = 0.96, p <.05) in their beliefs
that the idea should be questioned in their field study.
Second, justification of knowing. From these beliefs, we noted a few differences in
personal epistemological beliefs based on the field study preferences. Both MED (M =
4.08, SD = 0.92) and PME students (M = 4.06, SD = 0.98) expressed strong beliefs that
their first experience is the best strategy to know about some things, as indicated by the
high mean result of the corresponding item. Both students also viewed that they were
more likely to accept the idea from firsthand experience rather than the result of research
(M = 3.40, SD = 1.03 and M = 3.49, SD = 1.04, respectively).
Third, Source of authority. The data showed that both students expressed strong beliefs
that they had just accepted the answer from experts, although they did not quite
understand the problems, as indicated by the mean result (3.71 and 3.51, in five of the
point likers scales). Both students had minor differences in their beliefs about the truth in
the textbook. MED students (M = 3.52, SD = 0.89) were more positive than PME students
(M= 3.25, SD = 1.00, p < .05) in their beliefs that they were sure about the truth when
they read the textbook resource in their field study. However, both students were equal
with respect to the item “If my personal experience conflicts with ideas in the textbook,
the book is probably right” (M = 2.73, SD = 1.08 and M = 2.80, SD = 1.07, respectively).
MED and PME students were also equal in response to the item “I am most confident that
I know something when I know what the experts think “(M = 3.66, SD = 0.97 and M =
3.45, SD = 1.00, respectively)
Table 5
The t-test of students’ personal epistemological beliefs in MED and PME
Variables
MED
PME
sig
Mean
Med
SD
Mean
Med
SD
Certainty of knowledge
Answers to questions in this field change
as experts gather more information.
3.52
4.00
1.11
3.64
4.00
0.99
.66
All experts in this field understand the
field in the same way.
3.49
4.00
1.10
3.24
3.00
0.94
.04*
The truth never changes in this field
3.47
4.00
1.27
3.05
3.00
1.23
.006*
There is only one right answer in this
field
3.88
4.00
1.09
3.28
3.00
1.18
.00**
Principles in this field are unchanging.
3.42
4.00
1.18
3.22
3.00
1.14
.17
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 14 de 26
The answers to questions from experts
are the same in this area.
3.76
4.00
1.05
3.65
4.00
1.09
.38
The idea should be questioned in this
field
4.05
4.00
0.87
3.76
4.00
0.96
.008*
Most of the truth has been known in this
field.
4.09
4.00
0.94
4.04
4.00
1.02
.67
Justification for knowing
Firsthand experience is the best way of
knowing something in this field.
4.08
4.00
0.92
4.06
4.00
0.98
.90
I am more likely to accept the ideas of
someone with firsthand experience than
the ideas of researchers in this field.
3.40
4.00
1.03
3.49
3.00
1.04
.48
Correct answers in this field are more a
matter of opinion than fact.
3.24
3.00
1.07
3.09
3.00
1.05
.25
There is really no way to determine
whether someone has the right answer in
this field.
2.90
3.00
1.18
3.20
3.00
1.04
.03*
Source of knowledge
Sometimes you just have to accept
answers from the experts in this field,
even if you don’t understand them.
3.71
4.00
1.06
3.51
4.00
0.99
.100
If you read something in a textbook
about this subject, you can be sure it’s
true.
3.52
3.00
0.89
3.25
3.00
1.00
.02*
If my personal experience conflicts with
ideas in the textbook, the book is
probably right.
2.73
3.00
1.08
2.80
3.00
1.07
.60
I am most confident that I know
something when I know what the experts
think.
3.66
4.00
0.97
3.45
3.00
1.00
.07
Attainment of truth
Experts in this field can ultimately get to
the truth.
3.92
4.00
0.88
3.54
4.00
1.00
.001**
If scholars try hard enough, they can find
answers to almost anything.
4.27
4.00
0.77
3.81
4.00
1.01
.001**
Fourth, attainment of the truth. Generally, we found that students in both fields believed
that experts in their field can gain the truth and discover the answers if they try hard
enough based on the mean results. 61% of students from both fields agreed or strongly
agreed, whilst 6% disagreed or strongly disagreed with the item “Experts in this field can
ultimately get to the truth.” 73% agreed or strongly agreed, and 5% disagreed or strongly
disagreed with the item “If scholars try hard enough, they can find answers to almost
anything.” However, we find the differences between students in these beliefs' level item.
MED students expressed more positive beliefs than PME students that the expert in their
field can obtain the truth (M = 3.92, SD = 0.88 and M = 3.54, SD = 1.00, respectively, p
< .001). MED students were more positive about the belief that scholars can discover the
answer to all things if they try hard enough than PME students (M = 4.27, SD = 0.77 and
M = 3.801, SD = 1.01, respectively, p < .001).
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 15 de 26
4.3 RQ2: Do personal epistemological beliefs influence students’ academic
performance?
Multiple regression analysis was used to answer the fourth question, whether personal
epistemological beliefs influence students’ performance in both MED and PME. Table 6
shows the contribution of each belief’s dimensions to academic performance. The result
indicated that in MED, personal epistemological beliefs contribute more to academic
performance than PME.
Table 6
The regression of DFEQ on students’ academic performances
Factors
r
𝜷
r.𝜷. 100
t (4)
p
Mathematics Ed (MED)
Certainty of knowledge
.62
.32
19.84
3.99
.001
Justification for knowing
.51
.16
8.16
2.18
.03
Source of knowledge
.60
.31
18.6
4.08
.001
Attainability of truth
.47
.10
4.7
1.38
.17
Total variance explained
51%
Primary Ed (PME).
Certainty of knowledge
.47
.22
10.34
1.73
.09
Justification for knowing
.44
.19
8.36
1.73
.09
Source of knowledge
.43
.14
6.02
1.12
.26
Attainability of truth
.39
.05
1.95
.39
.70
Total variance explained
26%
Note. N = 146; F-statistics MED. = 14.55. p < .001. N = 130; F-statistics PME = 11.09,
p < .001. Academic performance ranges from 1-4.
In the context of MED, data table 6 showed that all predictors explain students’ academic
performance, 51% of the total variance academic performance, R2 = .51, p < .001. The
model regression of discipline-focused epistemological beliefs were significant, F (142)
= 14.55, p < .001. All the dimensions, but not the attainability of truth, significantly
influence academic performance. Certainty of knowledge positively influences academic
performance (𝛽 = .31, t (142) = 3.99, p <.001). Justification for knowing was also
positively significant in influencing academic performance (𝛽 = .16, t = 2.18, p = .03) as
well as the Source of knowledge (𝛽 = .23, t = 4.08, p < .001). However, we did not find
the influent partially of the attainability of truth (𝛽 = .10, t = 1.38, p < .001) on the
academic performance in MED.
Whilst in the PME context, the result indicated personal epistemological beliefs could
predict and explain students’ academic performance, 26% of the total variance, R2 = 26,
p < .001. The regression model also indicated that all the dimensions of the discipline-
focused epistemological beliefs influence students’ academic performance, F (126) =
11.09, p < .001. However, in the partial dimensions, none of the discipline-focused
epistemological beliefs dimensions partially influence students’ academic performance.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 16 de 26
4.4 RQ3: Do personal epistemological beliefs correlate with students’ attitudes
toward the academic context?
Table 7 presents the relationship between students’ beliefs and attitudes toward their
discipline study. We performed a simple correlation to evaluate whether each of these
beliefs’ dimensions correlates significantly with their attitudes toward academic
performances.
Table 7
The correlation between epistemological beliefs and students’ attitudes
Dimensions
MED
PME
Certainty of knowledge
.55**
.73**
Justification for knowing
.56**
.65**
Source of knowledge
.68**
.72**
Attainability of truth
.51**
.68**
Note. * P < .05, **p < .001
Table 3 data describes that in MED, the pair of sources of knowledge and attitude has the
highest correlation coefficient (r = .68). It means the more students’ beliefs about the
Source of knowledge, such as the statement “Sometimes you just have to accept answers
from the experts in this field, even if you don’t understand them, “the more students have
high attitudes toward academic context. The other dimensions have shown a moderate
correlation with attitude. The correlation between the certainty of knowledge and attitudes
is 55(r = .55). Justification for knowing also has a moderate correlation with attitude (r =
.56). The more students’ beliefs about the certainty of knowledge, such as believing that
knowledge in mathematics unchanging or the principle in this field is unchanging, the
stronger positive attitude students towards mathematics. Attainability of truth showed
moderate relation with attitude toward academic context (r = .51).
In PME, the correlation between personal epistemological beliefs dimension and attitude
is stronger than in mathematics education. Certainty of knowledge gained the highest
correlation coefficient to attitude (r =.73). It means the more students perceive that
knowledge in their field is stagnant, the more students have positive attitudes toward
academic context. Justification of knowing is the lowest correlation among other
dimensions. However, the correlations between these beliefs and attitudes are also strong
(r = .65). The correlation between the Source of knowledge and attitude academic
performance is strong (r = .72). The moderate correlation has been shown by the
attainability of truth (r =.68) and attitude toward academic context.
4.5 RQ4: Were there any differences between male and female students regarding
personal epistemological beliefs?
Table 8 below presents the differences in students’ epistemological beliefs based on
gender differences. We performed an independent sample t-test to measure the role of
their gender on beliefs in both MED and PME. Because according to a prior study (Li,
2004), there was an association between beliefs and gender preferences. Males students
showed higher beliefs about mathematics education than female students. In this study,
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 17 de 26
generally, we did not find differences in beliefs about mathematics education in terms of
gender preferences, either for MED students or PME students.
Table 8
Comparison of students’ personal epistemological beliefs based on the gender
differences
Factors
Male
Female
p
M(SD)
M(SD)
Certainty of knowledge
29.96 (3.82)
29.70 (5.25)
.81
Justification for knowing
12.85 (2.60)
13.80 (2.98)
.13
Source of knowledge
13.63 (2.87)
13.63 (2.76)
1.0
Attainability of truth
8.26 (1.70)
8.17 (1.42)
.77
Note. Significant if the p < .05
First, the data from table 8 indicated that either males or females hold strong beliefs about
the certainty of knowledge (M = 29.96, SD = 3.82 and M = 29.70, SD = 5.25, respectively,
t (274) = .97, p = .33). We further investigated by performing a t-test on the level items.
For instance, both males and female students perceived that all experts understand the
field in the same way according to the mean result (M = 3.46, SD = 1.02, and M =3.36,
SD = 1.11, respectively). Males (M = 3.41, SD = 1.12) and females (M= 3.24, SD = 1.29)
have the same level of belief that the truth is not unchanging in their study.
Second, for justification for knowing, males (M = 12.85, SD = 2.60) and females (M =
13.80, SD = 2.98) students indicated that they had the same conception of how they justify
the knowledge (t (274) = -.14, p = .16). For further investigation in the level items, we
also examine students’ responses for these beliefs by performing a t-test. For instance,
males (mean = 4.05) and females (mean = 4.07, sig = .90) are equal in the belief that
firsthand experience is the best way of knowing something.
Third, in Source of knowledge, there was no significant difference between males and
females in this belief (M = 13.54, SD = 2.75 and M = 13.30, SD = 3.00, respectively, t
(247) = .46, p = .65). In the level items, for instance, both males (M= 3.64, SD = 1.09)
and females (M = 3.61, SD = 1.03) students are equal in beliefs that they only have to
accept answers from the experts, even if they don’t understand them.
Fourth, there were no significant differences between males and females students in
beliefs about the attainment of the truth (M = 8.10, SD = 1.70 and M = 7.74, SD = 1.72),
respectively, t (274) = 1.21, p = .23). Then, we examine the differences between the two
in the items level. Males (M = 3.79, SD = 0.98) and females (M = 3.73, SD = 0.96) are
equivalent in perceiving that experts in their field study can ultimately get to the truth.
Males (M = 4.31, SD = 0.89) and females (M= 4.01, SD = 0.92) also expressed the same
belief that if scholars try hard enough, they can find answers to almost anything.
4.6 RQ5: Do parents’ educational backgrounds generate different personal
epistemological beliefs?
We performed ANOVA to answer whether parents’ education generated significant
personal epistemological beliefs for both MED and PME students. We used mothers’
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 18 de 26
and fathers’ education as the independent variables (See table 9). In mathematics
education departments (MED), we did not find personal epistemological belief
differences based on parents' education, either father or mother's education. For instance,
students were equal in beliefs about the certainty of knowledge (F (3) = 1.34, p = .27),
justification for knowing (F (3) = 0.69, p = .65), Source of knowledge (F (3) = 1.57, p =
.20), and attainment of the truth (F (3) = 0.72, p = .54) according to mothers’ education.
Students’ personal epistemological beliefs were also equal according to the father's
education level, the certainty of knowledge (F (3) = 0.53, p = .66), justification for
knowing (F (3) = 0.14, p = .94), Source of knowledge (F (3) = 0.36, p = .78), and
attainment of the truth (F (3) = 0.16, p = .92)
Table 9
Personal epistemological beliefs according to mothers’ and fathers’ educational level
Variables
Edu
Level
Mother education
Father Education
M
SD
F
p
M
SD
F
p
Mathematics education department (MED)
Certainty of
knowledge
ED
28.75
6.42
1.34
.27
28.97
5.59
0.53
.66
JHS
29.33
4.70
29.35
6.16
SHS
30.65
4.55
30.08
4.51
Univ.
29.75
3.98
30.32
4.45
Justification for
knowing
ED
13.91
3.20
0.69
.65
13.44
2.67
0.14
.94
JHS
13.44
2.94
13.45
3.98
SHS
13.80
2.84
13.68
2.77
Univ
12.86
2.78
13.88
2.84
Source of
knowledge
ED
13.42
3.22
1.57
.20
13.22
2.92
0.36
.78
JHS
13.19
2.86
13.90
3.04
SHS
14.15
2.60
13.72
2.74
Univ
12.90
2.21
13.76
2.45
Attainment of
the truth
ED
8.27
1.44
0.72
.54
8.22
1.48
0.16
.92
JHS
8.00
1.69
8.25
1.89
SHS
8.23
1.21
8.21
1.27
Univ
7.86
1.93
8.00
1.47
Primary Education Teacher department (PME)
Certainty of
knowledge
ED
26.76
6.75
0.84
.47
27.13
6.67
0.52
.67
JHS
29.07
5.92
28.67
7.00
SHS
28.08
5.86
28.66
4.90
Univ.
27.85
4.76
27.62
5.68
Justification for
knowing
ED
13.78
3.73
0.61
.61
13.78
3.35
0.04
.99
JHS
14.14
2.84
13.73
3.58
SHS
13.35
2.71
13.86
2.54
Univ.
14.29
2.67
14.00
3.11
Source of
knowledge
ED
12.46
3.97
1.15
.33
12.80
3.68
0.22
.89
JHS
13.31
2.77
12.73
3.77
SHS
12.73
2.61
13.11
2.47
Univ.
13.81
2.91
13.35
2.95
Attainment of
the truth
ED
6.95
2.16
1.31
.27
7.13
2.14
0.40
.75
JHS
7.24
1.92
7.40
2.16
SHS
7.78
1.67
7.57
1.52
Univ.
7.44
1.58
7.35
1.79
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 19 de 26
Note. ED = elementary education level, JHS = Junior high schools level, SHS = senior
high schools level, and Univ = University level.
The differences in personal epistemological beliefs according to parents’ education in the
primary education (PME) department were insignificant. For example, students’ personal
epistemological beliefs were equally based on the mother's educational level, the certainty
of knowledge (F (3) = 0.84, p = .47), justification for knowing (F (3) = 0.61 p = .61),
source of knowledge (F (3) = 1.15, p = .33), and attainment of the truth (F (3) = 1.31, p
= .27). There were no significant differences of personal epistemological beliefs
according to fathers’ educational level in PME, the certainty of knowledge (F (3) = 0.52,
p = .67), justification for knowing (F (3) = 0.04, p = .99), Source of knowledge (F (3) =
0.22, p = .89), and attainment of the truth (F (3) = 0.40, p = .75)
5. Discussion
The finding of this study contributed to clarifying specificity and generality domain
beliefs in mathematics education and primary teacher education. The relation of personal
epistemological beliefs with achievements, attitudes, parent education, and gender is also
explored. We explore the validity and reliability of each questionnaire by performing
confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Cronbach alpha before we further analyze the
data. Our instruments are valid and reliable for the Indonesian context. Most important,
by investigating the role of personal epistemological beliefs as proposed by Hofer (2000),
this study found the critical role of these beliefs on academic performance and attitudes.
Surprisingly, our finding not only supports that personal epistemological beliefs are a
more specific domain, but our finding also supports that certain beliefs are more general.
We found that MED students hold stronger beliefs about the certainty of knowledge than
PME students. For instance, MED students more positively viewed that the principles in
their field study are not changing than PME students. Also, MED students hold stronger
beliefs about the attainability of truth than PME students. This finding partially reveals
the same result as the previous study by Hofer (2000), who found the dimensionality of
personal epistemological beliefs. In other words, the result showed that the beliefs
(certainty of knowledge and attainability of truth) are more specific domains. Our
interpretation regarding the differences between the two is that MED students frequently
receive subjects more about natural mathematics in their classroom than PME students.
They frequently encounter the formula and problem-solving that are more certain than
PME students. Bandura (2001) mentioned that students’ cognitions and behavior are
influenced by their learning experience in the class. Interestingly, we found that MDE
and PME students are equal in their beliefs about the justification for knowing and the
Source of knowledge. This finding is in line with the study by Schommer et al. (2005),
which suggested that beliefs are more general. For instance, MED and PME students are
equal in believing that firsthand experience is very important to know something in their
field study. Limón (2006) argued that both general and specific beliefs domains are the
theoretical framework and method matter. In other words, possibly there may be some
differences and some similarities in beliefs about knowledge based on the field study, but
it depends on the theoretical framework and the methodological issue.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 20 de 26
The second finding of this study explains that personal epistemological beliefs
significantly influence students’ academic performance. This finding is consistent with
the prior research (Csíkos et al., 2011; Hidayatullah & Csíkos, 2022; Hofer, 2000;
Schommer-aikins et al., 2005) that suggested the stronger students' beliefs, the higher
their achievement in academic performance. Cartagena Beteta et al. (2022) argued that
personal beliefs would affect intrinsic and extrinsic behavior and academic performance.
In MED, we found all of the factors of personal epistemological beliefs can explain 51%
of students' academic performance. This prediction statistically is higher than PME
students. Besides, all of the factors of personal epistemological beliefs significantly
influence academic performance except the attainability of truth. Although personal
epistemological beliefs in PME also determine students’ academic performance, the
partial influence of each factor is not significant. From this stage, the possible explanation
of what students learned during mathematics class contributed to their personal
epistemological beliefs, such as certainty of knowledge and justification for knowing, and
in turn, affected their academic performance. In comparison, PME students get more
general topics about teaching and learning for primary education. So, their personal
epistemological beliefs on academic performance are lower than MED students.
The third finding of this study showed the relationship between personal epistemological
beliefs and attitudes toward academic performance. As mentioned by McLeod (1992) and
Pehkonen & Pietilä (2003), beliefs are cognitions aspect, while attitude is a more
emotional aspect. We found a significant correlation between personal epistemological
beliefs and attitudes in both MED and PME fields. All of the factors have high
correlations with attitudes toward academic performance. Our interpretation for this stage
is that if students increase their personal epistemological beliefs about knowledge, it will
affect their attitude toward the academic context. The impact of students’ beliefs and
attitudes toward the academic context in the university may also reduce the possibility of
college students dropping out of their studies.
Fourth, we find no significant differences between males and females in their personal
epistemological beliefs. Both MED and PME students are equal in all the factors. This
finding contradicts the prior research (Samuelsson & Samuelsson, 2016; Li, 2004), which
finds significant differences between the two. Our interpretation of this stage is that the
Indonesian government provides opportunities for all students to pursue their high
education. Higher education also provides equal access for males and females in
Indonesia. Although we do not find any significant differences between male and female
students, gender equity it remains should be considered because equity is a process. We
do not say male and female students are equal in all subjects or field studies. Therefore,
further investigations are still needed to investigate gender differences.
Finally, our findings showed no significant differences in personal epistemological
beliefs according to the mother and father's educational background. Students with fathers
with no educational background or students with parents with high education
backgrounds showed equal personal epistemological beliefs. The differences in the
mother's educational level also do not show the differences in students’ personal
epistemological beliefs. This finding contradicts the previous study (Guryan et al., 2008;
Jacobs & Bleeker, 2004) that the level of parents' education may affect students' cognition
and behavior, as mentioned by Davis-Kean (2005) and Gladstone et al.(2018) that the
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 21 de 26
number of education parents receives may affect how they set the environment at their
home. We assume that students in higher education in the Indonesian context are more
independent than secondary schools. Therefore, the parental educational level influence
is not significant.
However, several limitations in the present study should be noted. The limitation of this
study lies in the number of participants, and students' field studies are in the same area,
which is education. Therefore, further research may consider the different dimensionality
of students based on the different areas, such as the comparison beliefs in social
humanities and engineering faculty. Although we found that students in MED show hold
stronger certainty of knowledge than PME, we have no information on whether their
beliefs change or not at the end of their study. Therefore, a longitudinal study is required
to confirm whether the personal epistemological beliefs of students changes or not. In this
study, we only measured the association between personal epistemological beliefs and
general point academic (GPA). We have no information on how personal epistemological
beliefs influence academic performance and its relation to other aspects. Future research
also needs to examine the influence of these beliefs on academic performance indirectly
and directly.
6. Conclusion and Implication
To summarize this study, the finding of this research is significant because it provides
empirical data to clarify the debatable among researchers about the general and specific
domain of beliefs in different studies. In the Indonesian context, this finding supports both
general and specific domains. Certain beliefs (certainty of knowledge and attainability of
the truth) are more specific domains, and other beliefs (justification for knowing and
source of knowledge) are more general. We also found that personal epistemological
beliefs influence academic performance and correlate with attitudes toward academic
performance. We did not find significant differences in personal epistemological beliefs
based on gender and parents' educational background preferences.
The wealth result of this study is very important for academic research, teaching, and
learning. For academic research, the finding of this study can be used as an analysis
discourse in mathematics education and the primary teacher education departments. For
the educator in both departments, the improvement of students’ beliefs in justification for
knowledge is needed because our data showed that students' response to these beliefs is
weak. The educator in primary teacher education should put much effort into improving
students’ beliefs about the source of knowledge. Our findings also mention that personal
epistemological beliefs are associated with students’ academic performance and attitudes.
The educators need to improve and maintain students’ personal epistemological beliefs
because these beliefs would affect their attitude and their academic performance.
Therefore, educators should design their class environment, so that students can shape
their beliefs about knowledge in their area to improve their academic performance.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the MTA-SZTE Metacognition Research Group.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 22 de 26
Received: September 9, 2022
Accepted: December 12, 2022
Published: January 9, 2023
Hidayatullah, A., Csíkos, C., & Nanjekho, R. (2023). The dimensionality of personal
beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study. RED. Revista de
Educación a Distancia, 23(72). http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
Funding
This research has not received any specific grant from funding agencies in the public,
commercial or non-profit sectors.
References
Azhar, M., Nadeem, S., Naz, F., Perveen, F., & Sameen, A. (2014). Impact of parental
education and socio-economic status on academic achievements of university
students. European Journal of Psychological Research, 1(1), 1–9.
Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Annu. Rev.
Psychol., 52, 1–26.
Bobis, J., Way, J., Anderson, J., & Martin, A. J. (2016). Challenging teacher beliefs
about student engagement in mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher
Education, 19(1), 33–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-015-9300-4
Buehl, M. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2001). Beliefs about Academic Knowledge.
Educational Psychology Review, 13(4), 385–418.
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011917914756
Buehl, M. M., Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (2002). Beliefs about schooled
knowledge: Domain specific or domain general? Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 27(3), 415–449. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.2001.1103
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., Petitta, L., & Rubinacci, A. (2003).
Teachers’, school staffs and parents’ efficacy beliefs as determinants of attitudes
toward school. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 18(1), 15–31.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173601
Cartagena Beteta, M., Revuelta Domínguez, F. I., & Pedrera-Rodríguez, M.-I. (2022).
Psychometric Properties of a Test on Teachers’ Beliefs about ICT Integration.
Revista de Educación a Distancia (RED), 22(70).
https://doi.org/10.6018/red.524401
Chen, J., Turner, J. E., & Tang, M. (2019). What engineering students think of
knowledge in their discipline and how to measure it: An exploratory study. ASEE
Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings.
https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--32347
Clarebout, G., Elen, J., Luyten, L., & Bamps, H. (2001). Assessing Epistemological
Beliefs: Schommer’s Questionnaire Revisited. International Journal of
Phytoremediation, 21(1), 53–77. https://doi.org/10.1076/edre.7.1.53.6927
Csíkos, C., Kelemen, R., & Verschaffel, L. (2011). Fifth-grade students’ approaches
to and beliefs of mathematics word problem solving: A large sample Hungarian
study. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education, 43(4), 561–571.
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 23 de 26
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0308-7
Danesi, M. (2016). Learning and teaching mathematics in the global village : math
education in the digital age. Swiss: Springer International Publishing.
Davis-Kean, P. E. (2005). The influence of parent education and family income on
child achievement: The indirect role of parental expectations and the home
environment. Journal of Family Psychology, 19(2), 294–304.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.19.2.294
Di Martino, P., & Zan, R. (2011a). Attitude towards mathematics: A bridge between
beliefs and emotions. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education,
43(4), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0309-6
Di Martino, P., & Zan, R. (2011b). Attitude towards mathematics: A bridge between
beliefs and emotions. ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education,
43(4), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0309-6
Ernest, P. (1989). The Knowledge, Beliefs and Attitudes of the Mathematics Teacher:
a model. Journal of Education for Teaching, 15(1), 13–33.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0260747890150102
Ernest, P. (2016). The problem of certainty in mathematics. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 92(3), 379–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9651-x
Fishbein, M. (1963). An Investigation of the Relationships between Beliefs about an
Object and the Attitude toward that Object. Human Relations, 16(3), 233–239.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001872676301600302
Garofalo, J. (1989). Beliefs and Their Influence on Mathematical Performance. The
Mathematics Teacher, 82(7), 502–505. https://doi.org/10.5951/mt.82.7.0502
Geisinger, K. F. (2016). 21st Century Skills: What Are They and How Do We Assess
Them? Applied Measurement in Education, 29(4), 245–249.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08957347.2016.1209207
Gladstone, J. R., Häfner, I., Turci, L., Kneißler, H., & Muenks, K. (2018). Associations
between parents and students’ motivational beliefs in mathematics and mathematical
performance: The role of gender. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54(June),
221–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.06.009
Goldin, G. A. (2002). Affect, Meta-Affect, And Mathematical Belief Structures. In G.
C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A Hidden Variable In
Mathematics Education (pp. 59–72). New York, Boston, Dordrecht, London,
Mosco: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Green, J., Liem, G. A. D., Martin, A. J., Colmar, S., Marsh, H. W., & McInerney, D.
(2012). Academic motivation, self-concept, engagement, and performance in high
school: Key processes from a longitudinal perspective. Journal of Adolescence,
35(5), 1111–1122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.02.016
Greer, B., Verschaffel, L., & De Corte, E. (2002). “The Answer is Really 4.5”: Beliefs
about Word Problems. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A
Hidden Variable in Mathematics Education? (pp. 271–292). USA : Kluwer
Academic Publishers. http://ebooks.kluweronline.com
Grootenboer, P., & Marshman, M. (2016). Students’ Beliefs and Attitudes About
Mathematics and Learning Mathematics Abstract. In Mathematics, Affect and
Learning : Middle School Students’ Beliefs and Attitudes About Mathematics
Education (pp. 55–74). Springer : Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-287-
679-9
Guryan, J., Hurst, E., & Kearney, M. (2008). Parental education and parental time with
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 24 de 26
children. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 22(3), 23–46.
https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.22.3.23
Hart, L. C. (2005). A Four Year Follow-Up Study of Teachers’ Beliefs After
Participating in a Teacher Enhancement Project. In A.J. Bishop (Ed.), Beliefs: A
Hidden Variable in Mathematics Education? (31st ed., Vol. 31, pp. 161–176).
Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47958-3_10
Hestener, Å., & Sumpter, L. (2018). Beliefs and Values in Upper Secondary School
Students’ Mathematical Reasoning. In B. Rott, G. Törner, J. P. Dasdemir, A. Möller,
& Safrudiannur (Eds.), Views and Beliefs in Mathematics Education : The Role of
Beliefs in the Classroom (pp. 79–80). Switzerland : Springer.
Hidalgo-Cajo, B. G., & Gisbert-Cervera, M. (2021). The adoption and use of digital
technologies in university faculty: An analysis from the perspective of gender and
age. Revista de Educación a Distancia, 21(67). https://doi.org/10.6018/RED.481161
Hidayatullah, A., & Csikos, C. (2022). Assessing students ’ mathematics-related
beliefs system in the Indonesian context Assessing Students ’ Mathematics -Related
Beliefs System in The Indonesian Context. AIP Conference Proceedings 2633,
030014(September). https://aip.scitation.org/doi/abs/10.1063/5.0102302
Hidayatullah, A., & Csíkos, C. (2022). Mathematics Related Belief System and Word
Problem-Solving in the Indonesian Context. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics,
Science and Technology Education, 18(4). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11902
Hofer, B. K. (2000). Dimensionality and Disciplinary Differences in Personal
Epistemology. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(4), 378–405.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1026
Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories:
Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of
Educational Research, 67(1), 88–140. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543067001088
Jacobs, J. E., & Bleeker, M. M. (2004). Girls’ and boys’ developing interests in math
and science: do parents matter? New Directions for Child and Adolescent
Development, 106, 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.113
Kennedy, J. P., Quinn, F., & Taylor, N. (2016). The school science attitude survey: a
new instrument for measuring attitudes towards school science. International
Journal of Research and Method in Education, 39(4), 422–445.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2016.1160046
Li, Q. (2004). Beliefs and gender differences: A new model for research in
mathematics education. Interchange, 35(4), 423–445.
https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02698892
Limón, M. (2006). The domain generality-specificity of epistemological beliefs: A
theoretical problem, a methodological problem or both? International Journal of
Educational Research, 45(1–2), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.08.002
Martha, A. S. D., Junus, K., Santoso, H. B., & Suhartanto, H. (2021). Assessing
undergraduate students’ e-learning competencies: A case study of higher education
context in Indonesia. Education Sciences, 11(4).
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11040189
Maskur, R., Suherman, S., Andari, T., Anggoro, B. S., Muhammad, R. R., Sreet, P., &
Untari, E. (2022). The Comparison of STEM approach and SSCS Learning Model
for Secondary School-Based on K-13 Curriculum : The Impact on Creative and
Critical Thinking Ability. RED: Revista de Educación a Distancia, 22(2).
McLeod, D. B. (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: A
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 25 de 26
reconceptualization. In Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning
(pp. 575–596).
Muis, K. R., Bendixen, L. D., & Haerle, F. C. (2006). Domain-generality and domain-
specificity in personal epistemology research: Philosophical and empirical
reflections in the development of a theoretical framework. Educational Psychology
Review, 18(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9003-6
Muliah, M. (2016). Pedagogi Feminisme Dalam Perspektif Islam. Konferensi
Internasional Feminisme Diadakan Oleh Jurnal Perempuan Di Jakarta, 1–18.
https://www.jurnalperempuan.org
NRC. (2011). Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop. J.A. Koenig,
Rapporteur. Committee on the Assessment of 21st Century Skills. In Social
Sciences. National Academies Press (US).
Op ’t Eynde, P., De Corte, E., & Verschaffel, L. (2006). Epistemic dimensions of
students’ mathematics-related belief systems. International Journal of Educational
Research, 45(1–2), 57–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2006.08.004
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers ’ Beliefs and Educational Research : Cleaning up a
Messy Construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1170741
Pehkonen, E., & Pietilä. (2003). On relationships between beliefs and knowledge in
mathematics education. In M. Mariotti (Ed.), Proceedings of the third conference of
the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education Department of
Mathematics of the University of Pisa. http://www.dm.unipi.it/~didattica/
CERME3/proceedings/Groups/TG2/TG2_pehkonen_cerme3.pdf.
http://www.cimm.ucr.ac.cr/ciaemIngles/articulos/universitario/concepciones/On R
Pitsia, V., Biggart, A., & Karakolidis, A. (2017). The role of students’ self-beliefs,
motivation and attitudes in predicting mathematics achievementA multilevel
analysis of the Programme for International Student Assessment data. Learning and
Individual Differences, 55, 163–173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.03.014
Reusser, K., & Stebler, R. (1997). Realistic Mathematical Modeling through the
Solving of Performance Tasks. 1–12.
Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes, and values: A theory of organizational change.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Samuelsson, M., & Samuelsson, J. (2016). Gender differences in boys’ and girls’
perception of teaching and learning mathematics. Open Review of Educational
Research, 3(1), 18–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2015.1127770
Schommer-Aikins, M. (2004). Explaining the Epistemological Belief System:
Introducing the Embedded Systemic Model and Coordinated Research Approach.
Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 19–29.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3901_3
Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of Beliefs About the Nature of Knowledge on
Comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498–504.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.3.498
Schommer, M. (1993). Comparisons of beliefs about the nature of knowledge and
learning among postsecondary students. Research in Higher Education, 34(3), 355–
370. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00991849
Schommer, M., Duell, O. K., Hutter, R., & Schommer-aikins, M. (2005).
Epistemological Beliefs, Mathematical Problem‐Solving Beliefs, and Academic
Performance of Middle School Students. The Elementary School Journal, 105(3),
RED. Revista de Educación a Distancia. Núm. 72, Vol. 23. Artíc. 6, 9-enero-2023
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6018/red.540251
The dimensionality of personal beliefs; the investigation of beliefs based on the field study.
Achmad Hidayatullah, Csaba Csíkos & Ruth Nanjekho. Página 26 de 26
289–304.
Shafiq, M. N. (2013). Gender gaps in mathematics, science and reading achievements
in Muslim countries: a quantile regression approach. Education Economics, 21(4),
343–359. https://doi.org/10.1080/09645292.2011.568694
Srimulyani, E. (2007). Muslim Women and Education in Indonesia: The pondok
pesantren experience . Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 27(1), 85–99.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02188790601145564
Trautwein, U., & Lüdtke, O. (2007). Epistemological beliefs, school achievement, and
college major: A large-scale longitudinal study on the impact of certainty beliefs.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3), 348–366.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.11.003
van de Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement
invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(4), 486–492.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.686740
Verschaffel, L., Schukajlow, S., Star, J., & Van Dooren, W. (2020). Word problems in
mathematics education: a survey. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 52(1), 1–16.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01130-4
Wang Ng. (2018). New Digital Technology in Education: Conceptualizing
Professional Learning for Educators. Switzerland: Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05822-1
Watson, E. (2020). The Slippery Business of Measuring Beliefs: Lessons from a Failed
Attempt at Developing an Instrument to Measure Teachers’ Epistemic Beliefs about
Physics Knowledge. Electronic Journal for Research in Science & Mathematics
Education, 24(2), 119–140.