Mathematical reasoning in thermodynamics content: An analysis of semiotic representation in the laws of thermodynamics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31980/wvf7t064Keywords:
Mathematical reasoning, Physics education, PV diagram, Representation, Semiotics, Diagram PV, Fisika, Penalaran matematis, Representasi, SemiotikaAbstract
Mathematical reasoning is central to physics learning, yet little research has examined how the representations embedded in physics textbooks scaffold this reasoning within a single, tightly bounded topic. This study addresses that gap by analyzing the mathematical reasoning embedded in thermodynamics content through the lens of Peircean semiotics. Using a qualitative content-analysis design, the study examined the First Law and Second Law chapter of a widely used introductory physics textbook (Giancoli, Physics: Principles with Applications, 7th ed.), coding each equation, pressure–volume (PV) diagram, schematic energy-flow diagram, and summary table as an icon, index, or symbol following Carter's (2012) semiotic framework. The analysis shows that mathematical reasoning in thermodynamics content is carried jointly by iconic representations, which visually preserve the relations of a process (PV diagrams, energy-flow schematics), and indexical representations, which use subscripted letters (H, L, i, f) as sign-posts that let a solved sub-result be reinserted at the correct place in a derivation, exactly as Carter describes for pure mathematics. This interplay allows a complex derivation, such as the Carnot efficiency, to be broken into manageable steps. The findings imply that physics and mathematics instruction should make this icon–index interplay explicit rather than treating diagrams as mere illustration.
Penalaran matematis merupakan kemampuan inti dalam pembelajaran fisika, namun masih sedikit penelitian yang mengkaji bagaimana representasi dalam buku teks fisika menopang penalaran tersebut pada satu topik yang terbatas secara ketat. Studi ini mengisi kesenjangan tersebut dengan menganalisis penalaran matematis yang terkandung dalam konten termodinamika melalui kerangka semiotika Peircean. Menggunakan desain analisis konten kualitatif, studi ini mengkaji bab Hukum Pertama dan Hukum Kedua Termodinamika pada buku teks fisika pengantar yang banyak digunakan (Giancoli, Physics: Principles with Applications, edisi ke-7), dengan mengoding setiap persamaan, diagram tekanan–volume (PV), diagram skematik aliran energi, dan tabel ringkasan sebagai ikon, indeks, atau simbol mengikuti kerangka semiotik Carter (2012). Hasil analisis menunjukkan bahwa penalaran matematis dalam konten termodinamika dibawa secara bersama-sama oleh representasi ikonik, yang secara visual mempertahankan relasi suatu proses (diagram PV, skema aliran energi), dan representasi indeksikal, yang menggunakan huruf dengan subskrip (H, L, i, f) sebagai penanda (sign-post) yang memungkinkan hasil suatu sub-langkah disisipkan kembali pada tempat yang tepat dalam suatu penurunan rumus, persis seperti yang dideskripsikan Carter untuk matematika murni. Interaksi ini memungkinkan penurunan yang kompleks, seperti efisiensi Carnot, dipecah menjadi langkah-langkah yang lebih mudah dikelola. Temuan ini mengimplikasikan bahwa pembelajaran fisika dan matematika perlu membuat interaksi ikon-indeks ini eksplisit, alih-alih memperlakukan diagram semata sebagai ilustrasi.
References
Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001
Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2009). A disciplinary discourse perspective on university science learning: Achieving fluency in a critical constellation of modes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 27–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20265
Bing, T. J., & Redish, E. F. (2009). Analyzing problem solving using math in physics: Epistemological framing via warrants. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 5(2), 020108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.020108
Carter, J. (2012). The role of representations in mathematical reasoning. Philosophia Scientiæ, 16(1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.4000/philosophiascientiae.716
Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(1–2), 103–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-0400-z
Font, V., Godino, J. D., & Gallardo, J. (2013). The emergence of objects from mathematical practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(1), 97–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9411-0
Giancoli, D. C. (2014). Physics: Principles with applications (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
Hu, D., & Rebello, N. S. (2013). Using conceptual blending to describe how students use mathematical integrals in physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 9(2), 020118. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.9.020118
Karam, R. (2014). Framing the structural role of mathematics in physics lectures: A case study on electromagnetism. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 10(1), 010119. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.010119
Kuo, E., Hull, M. M., Gupta, A., & Elby, A. (2013). How students blend conceptual and formal mathematical reasoning in solving physics problems. Science Education, 97(1), 32–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21043
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM.
Peirce, C. S. (1965). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Radford, L. (2003). Gestures, speech, and the sprouting of signs: A semiotic-cultural approach to students’ types of generalization. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(1), 37–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327833MTL0501_02
Rau, M. A. (2017). Conditions for the effectiveness of multiple visual representations in enhancing STEM learning. Educational Psychology Review, 29(4), 717–761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9365-3
Redish, E. F., & Kuo, E. (2015). Language of physics, language of math: Disciplinary culture and dynamic epistemology. Science & Education, 24(5–6), 561–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9749-7
Sherin, B. L. (2001). How students understand physics equations. Cognition and Instruction, 19(4), 479–541. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI1904_3
Tuminaro, J., & Redish, E. F. (2007). Elements of a cognitive model of physics problem solving: Epistemic games. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 3(2), 020101. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.3.020101
Uhden, O., Karam, R., Pietrocola, M., & Pospiech, G. (2012). Modelling mathematical reasoning in physics education. Science & Education, 21(4), 485–506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-011-9396-6
Van Heuvelen, A. (1991). Learning to think like a physicist: A review of research-based instructional strategies. American Journal of Physics, 59(10), 891–897. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.16667
Wilcox, B. R., Caballero, M. D., Rehn, D. A., & Pollock, S. J. (2013). Analytic framework for students’ use of mathematics in upper-division physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 9(2), 020119. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.9.020119
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ade Ramdani, Arip Nurahman, Irma Fitria Amalia

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.





