P-ISSN 2527-5615 

E-ISSN 2527-5607 

 

Kalamatika: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika 

Volume 5, No. 1, April 2020, pages 69-82 

                                                                             

 This work is licensed under a Creative 
Commons Attribution - ShareAlike 4.0 International 

License.  

69 

STUDENTS’ ABILITY TO READ STATISTICAL DIAGRAM 

Sugeng Sutiarso  

University of Lampung, Jl. Sumantri Brojonegoro No. 1, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia  

sugeng.sutiarso@fkip.unila.ac.id 

ABSTRACT 

Reading diagrams is an important ability needed by college students, particularly to writing their thesis. This 

ability could help students in describing and communicating the results of their research. Conversely, the inability 

to read diagrams causes errors in interpreting the results of the research. This descriptive qualitative study aims 

to describe the ability of students to read diagrams in terms of gender differences and the tendency to choose 

problems between bar/line diagrams, and the reasons behind the difficulties for students reading diagrams. This 

study involved 25 students who were finishing their thesis in Mathematics Education, Faculty of Mathematics 

and Natural Sciences, University of Lampung. Research data were collected using test and interview instrument. 

This table reading test consists of 2 essay questions, which are reading bar and line diagrams. Semi-structured 

interviews aimed at completing the diagram reading test data. The results showed that students’ability both male 

and female to read diagrams was classified as moderate, the ability to read bar charts of female students was 

higher than that of male students but the ability to read line diagrams of male students was higher than female 

students, female students tend to choose bar diagrams rather than line diagrams while male students tend to 

choose line diagrams rather than bar diagrams, and the cause of difficulties in reading diagrams for female 

students were errors in understanding the meaning words while male students were errors of logical thinking in 

associating data with other data. 
 

ARTICLE INFORMATION 

Keywords  Article History 

Literacy 

Diagrams  

Statistical thinking 
  

Submitted Mar 11, 2020 

Revised Apr 27, 2020 

Accepted Apr 28, 2020 

Corresponding Author 

Sugeng Sutiarso  

University of Lampung 

Jl. Sumantri Brojonegoro No. 1, Bandar Lampung, Indonesia 

Email:  sugeng.sutiarso@fkip.unila.ac.id 
 

How to Cite 

Sutiarso,  S. (2020).  Students’ Ability to Read Statistical Diagram. Kalamatika: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 

5(1), 69-82. 

https://doi.org/10.22236/KALAMATIKA.vol5no1.2020pp69-82 

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


70         KALAMATIKA, Volume 5, No. 1, April 2020, pages 69-82 

 

 

INTRODUCTION 

Statistics is one part of mathe taught at all levels of the school, because statistics are 

widely used in daily life. In addition, statistics is not only taught to students majoring in 

mathematics, but to all students outside the department of mathematics (Yenni & Andriyani, 

2019). Diagrams are an important part of statistical material. In the 2013 curriculum, the 

diagram; or often also called graphics, has been taught in schools ranging from grade 3 

elementary school to grade 12 high school, even to the college. The teaching of diagrams at all 

levels of education is intended so that students can have communication skills and mathematical 

representation (NCTM, 2000; Sumarmo, 2012). The ability to read diagrams must be possessed 

by students. Because the diagram can function as a communication medium of a situation or 

condition, and vice versa a situation condition can be represented by a diagram. 

Reading diagrams consists of 2 words that form it, namely reading and diagrams. 

Reading is interpreted as a thought process to understand and interpret the meaning of the 

writing/symbol (Dalman, 2013). Literally, diagrams are pictures (blurred, sketched) that show 

or explain a situation/condition based on the data (KKBI, 2020). Means, reading diagrams is a 

thought process to understand and interpret the meaning of a situation/condition based on the 

data. In statistics in several types of diagrams, including bar charts, lines and circles (Sutiarso, 

2011). Each diagram has a different form and purpose. Bar charts are shaped in sections to show 

the development of the value of an object in a certain time span. Line diagram in the form of a 

line to show the observations of the value of an object at a certain time. A circular circle diagram 

to show the percentage of a part.  

Diagrams are widely used in educational activities and daily life. In educational 

activities, diagrams are used by students when learning mathematics (statistics). In daily life, 

diagrams are often found on information boards, activity reports or research (thesis). Diagrams 

are widely used in education and daily life because of the benefits of these diagrams, which 

present too much or complicated data to be adequately explained in less space (Slutsky, 2014), 

facilitate the presentation of data (Yulianti et al., 2015), and display data at a glance, facilitates 

comparisons, and can reveal trends and relationships in the data (In & Lee, 2017). Although 

diagrams have been widely used by students in learning statistics, several studies have suggested 

that there are still many students having difficulty reading or understanding diagrams. 



Sutiarso     71 

 

.  

 

 

Some research on the ability to read diagrams has been done by researchers ranging from 

elementary school students to college students. Specially research on college students was 

reported by Subekti & Kusuma (2016) that some students still weak in understanding the symbol 

on the frequency histogram/polygon. Takaria & Talakua (2018) stated that students have 

difficulty understanding normal curve digrams due to weak concepts about data distribution. 

Rafianti, et al. (2018) reported that more than 30% of students mistakenly interpret the circle's 

circles because they have not precisely determined the ratio of a data to all data. Andoko & 

Pamungkas (2018) founded that only 10% of college students were able to interpret data from a 

given case. Based on some of these studies, it appears that the ability of students in reading 

diagrams is low. Although research on reading diagrams has been done by researchers, this 

research is limited to the description of reading ability and the factors causing difficulty of 

reading diagrams. The research also has not analyzed the tendency to choose questions between 

the bar and line diagrams and has not differentiated the ability to read between gender 

differences. 

Analysis of the tendency to choose questions is considered important because by 

knowing the tendencies of these students can be considered by the teacher in choosing a material 

over other materials. The choice of material on this other material is part of student interest in 

learning. A student who has an interest in a subject matter, the student will have a high 

motivation to learn the material, or in other words, a high-interest student in learning can 

encourage high motivation too (Cahyono, 2018; Shin et al., 2019). Likewise, analyzing gender 

differences will make it easier for teachers to apply effective teaching models or methods. 

Because some studies mention that there are differences in abilities between male and female 

students in certain sections, namely mathematical problem solving (Wardani, 2014), 

understanding mathematical concepts (Kurniasi, 2016), mathematical learning achievement 

(Anjum, 2015), student creativity profile in solve problems (Febryana, 2018), mathematical 

reasoning (Salmina & Nisa, 2018), and mathematical proof (Sutiarso, 2019). This study aims to 

describe the ability of students to read diagrams in terms of gender differences and the tendency 

to choose questions between bar/line diagrams, as well as the causes of difficulties for students 

reading diagrams. The selection of students who write their thesis is based on the consideration 

that when students doing their thesis a lot of data will be processed and concluded. 

 



72         KALAMATIKA, Volume 5, No. 1, April 2020, pages 69-82 

 

 

METHOD 

This type of research is descriptive qualitative which describes the results of the study 

without any treatment. This research involved 25 college students (8 male and 17 female) of 

Mathematics Education Study Program, FKIP, University of Lampung, who were writing their 

thesis in odd semester of the academic year 2019/2020. The selection of these thesis finishing 

students as research subjects is based on considerations, namely (a) college students are people 

who study at the highest level of education, (b) thesis writing is an activity that involves data 

processing and concludes it. Research data were collected through test and interview 

instruments. Before being used in this research, the instument was validated by two experts 

(colleague) and it was stated that both were valid.    

This table reading assessment consists of 2 essay questions, which are reading bar and 

line diagrams. The test questions on the two questions are the same, which is 4 items. However, 

it is different in the diagram shown, which is the bar and line diagram (Figure 1). On the test 

sheet, it does not write the number of questions, and students can choose the questions solved 

first between the bar and line diagrams. 

Figure 1. Questions on Reading Diagram Ability Test 

 

The interview is in the form of semi-structured which aims to complete the result data 

by reading the diagram test. The interview question is what is the (logical) reason for choosing 

to solve the problem of a diagram rather than another diagram? The data result obtained through 

test and interview were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Specifically, for the test results, the 

average answer score is classified based on the following level of interpretation as seen on table 

1. 



Sutiarso     73 

 

.  

 

 

 

Table 1. Average Score and Interpretation Levels of the Answers  

No Average Score (x) Level  
1 0,00< x < 1,33 Low 

2 1,33<x < 2,66 Moderate 

3 2,66 < x < 4,00 High 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

Ability to Read Diagram as A Whole  

 The results of college students' ability to read this diagram are based on the test reading 

bar and line diagrams. Each test contains 4 items with the same questions. The results of the 

analysis of the answers given by 25 students showed the average score of students' ability to 

read bar charts 1,52; line diagram 1,36; and both 1,44 (maximum score of 4). The average score 

of the students' abilities is stated in figure 2 below. 

 

Figure 2. Students' Ability to Read Diagrams 

 

Based on figure 2, several findings are obtained, namely (a) as a whole, the ability of 

students to read diagrams is classified as moderate (average score 1,44), and (b) the ability to 

read bar charts is higher than line charts. These results indicate that the ability of students (thesis 

authors) in reading diagrams is classified as moderate. Even though reading diagrams is an 

important ability and highly will be found by college students in writing a thesis. In writing a 

thesis, students collect and process data. Furthermore, to ensure that the data is easily 

understood, the results of data processing are represented as diagrams, and vice versa 

interpreting the diagram above the previous data. Subsequent findings show that students' ability 

to read bar charts is higher than reading line diagrams. Besides, the results obtained that there 

are college students' answers that are not consistent in completing bar and line diagrams. The 

Bar Diagram Line Diagram
All Diagrams
(Bar & Line)

Students' Ability to Read
Diagram

1.52 1.36 1.44

1.25

1.3

1.35

1.4

1.45

1.5

1.55

A
v

e
ra

g
e

  
S

co
re



74         KALAMATIKA, Volume 5, No. 1, April 2020, pages 69-82 

 

 

students' answers to the two questions should be the same even though the diagrams are 

different. 

The results of the analysis of the student answer sheet found 2 main errors that caused 

the students difficulty in reading the diagrams, namely errors understanding the meaning of 

words and errors of logical thinking in associating data with other data.  Generally, female 

students make  errors understanding the meaning words, whilemale students make errors of 

logical thinking in associating data with other data.The following are examples of student 

answers based on these 2 errors, namely: 

1. Errors understanding the meaning of words 

What is meant by misunderstanding the meaning of words is the words 'lowest' and 

'reasonable'. Some students understand the word 'lowest' is the difference in value between 

posttest and pretest more than 0 (zero and negative values are not included), and some other 

students understand the word 'lowest' is the difference in value between posttest and zero 

pretests. The truth is, the word 'lowest' means the smallest difference in value between posttest 

and pretest (including zero and negative values). Likewise, most students understand the word 

'reasonable' is understood by students if there is an increase in scores between posttest and 

pretest, and the increase is not too high. The correct understanding is that the word 'reasonable' 

means an increase between posttest and posttest, except when the pretest gets the maximum but 

when the posttest gets the minimum value. 

Understanding the meaning of words is a complicated activity. To understand the 

meaning of words properly, a person needs to know the conceptual, compositional, and 

operational approach of a word (Chaer & Muliastuti, 2014). The conceptual approach states that 

each word inherently contains a concept, idea or thought about something that exists, happens 

or takes place in the real world. Componential approach states that each word's meaning consists 

of several components which as a whole form the meaning of the word. The operational 

approach states that the meaning of a new word is clear when the word has been used in the 

context of a particular sentence. Based on the three approaches, the meaning of a word can be 

understood if someone knows the ideas contained in the word, the components that form the 

word, and the relationship with other words. 

Understanding the meaning of words also requires knowledge of the meaning of lexical 

and grammatical words (Sarnia, 2015). The meaning of the lexical word is the meaning of the 



Sutiarso     75 

 

.  

 

 

word that is written in the dictionary. The meaning of the grammatical word is the meaning of 

the word formed using the said word under the correct grammar. This means a word can be 

interpreted correctly if someone has sufficient knowledge about the meaning of words as written 

in the dictionary, and knowledge of the word meanings by correct grammar. Furthermore, to 

understand the meaning of words, knowledge of the meaning of denotation and connotation is 

needed (Widiyawati et al, 2017). The meaning of denotation is the actual meaning of the word 

and does not contain any particular feeling or value. The meaning of connotation is the meaning 

contained in a word that has a sense of value both positive and negative. So, when interpreting 

a word, a person needs to know the true meaning and sense value of the word. The example of 

errors in understanding the meaning of the words 'lowest' and 'reasonable' from student answers 

can be seen in figure 3 below. 

 

Figure 3. Examples of Mistakes in Understanding the Word Meanings 

 

2.  The error in logical thinking in associating data with other data.  

This error occurs when the students associate the increase in the highest and lowest score, 

as well as associating the reasonable and unreasonable values. All students answered correctly 

to the question "Who gets the highest increase?", but all students answered incorrectly to the 

question "Who got the lowest increase?". Likewise, all students answered correctly to the 

question "Who gets the fair value?", but all students answered incorrectly to the question "Who 

gets the fair value?". The two questions are actually conflicting questions; that is, the first answer 



76         KALAMATIKA, Volume 5, No. 1, April 2020, pages 69-82 

 

 

is the opposite of the second answer and vice versa. If students can think logically then both of 

these questions should be answered correctly, or if they are answered wrong then the other 

should be wrong. The example of logical thinking errors in associating data with other data can 

be seen in Figure 4 below. 

 
Figure 4. Examples of Errors on Logical Thingking on Data Interrelation 

 

Ability to Read Diagrams Based on Genders 

Overall, the average score of college students' ability to read diagrams based on gender 

differences showed that female students (average score of 1,47) obtained a higher score than 

male students (average score of 1,38). Moreover, if seen from the table question it is found that 

the ability to read bar diagrams of female students is higher than that of male students, but the 

ability to read line diagrams of male students is higher than female students with a small gap 

between these two. In summary, the average scores of female and male student abilities are 

shown in Figure 5 below. 

 



Sutiarso     77 

 

.  

 

 

 

 Figure 5. The ability to Read Diagrams Based on Genders 
 

Based on Figure 5, it shows that female students more easily understand bar charts than 

male students, while male students more easily understand line charts than female students. 

These results provide information (new findings) that female students more easily read discrete 

data, and male students more easily read continuous data. Discrete data is defined as calculated 

data, and continuous data is measured data (Sutiarso, 2011). Based on these definitions, it means 

that discrete data represent rounded data and continuous data describes data that are fractional 

(interval). In other words, female students tend to more easily understand rounded data, and 

male students tend to more easily understand fraction data. This result is in line with Sutiarso 

(2019) which states that male students tend to have higher original (imaginative) thinking 

abilities than female students, while female students tend to have higher fluency abilities 

(routines) than male students. These results may be related to the fact that when the students 

face objects (data) that are not fixed (fractions), imaginative abilities are needed, and vice versa 

when dealing with objects that are fixed (round) routine abilities are required. 

Ability to Read Diagrams Based on Selection of Questions 

Overall, the average score of students' ability to read diagrams based on the tendency to 

choose questions obtained by students who choose bar diagram questions have higher mean 

scores than line charts, and students who choose line charts have higher mean scores than bar 

charts. These results indicate that the ability of students following the tendency to choose 

questions between bar/line diagrams.  Based on gender, female students tend to choose bar 

diagrams rather than line diagrams while male students tend to choose line diagrams rather than 

bar diagrams. The average score of students' ability to read diagrams based on the choice of 

questions is shown in Figure 6 below. 

Bar Diagram Line Diagram
All Diagrams
(Bar & Line)

Female 1.59 1.35 1.47

Male 1.38 1.38 1.38

1.2
1.25

1.3
1.35

1.4
1.45

1.5
1.55

1.6
1.65

A
v

e
ra

g
e

  
S

co
re



78         KALAMATIKA, Volume 5, No. 1, April 2020, pages 69-82 

 

 

 

 

Figure 6.  Ability to Read Diagrams Based on Selection of Questions 

Based on Figure 6, shows that the ability to read diagrams following the tendency to 

choose the diagram problem and this tendency is related to the interest in an object. Likewise, 

in learning, that one's learning interest greatly influences the learning outcomes. Interest is a 

feeling of preference and a sense of interest in a thing or activity without the need of anyone 

asking for it (Slameto, 2010). It can be interpreted as a student who is interested in learning will 

learn with pleasure, thus resulted in a positive impact on learning outcomes. The results of the 

study showed that the higher interest possessed, the higher the learning outcomes, and 

conversely the lower learning interest, the lower the learning outcomes will be (Pangestu et al., 

2015; Otoo et al., 2018). 

The results of interviews with students (male and female students) about the reasons for 

the tendency to choose a line diagram or bar chart problem is that the line diagram problem is 

easier to solve than a bar diagram or vice versa. The tendency of students to choose questions is 

based on the assumption that it is 'easier' to solve line diagram problems than bar charts, or vice 

versa. The following is an interview conversation about the reasons for the tendency to choose 

the questions (lecturer and students): 

Lecturer: "Why do you choose line diagram problems first over bar charts?" 

Student_1 (male): "I prefer line charts, I think it's easier" 

 

Lecturer: "Why do you choose a bar chart problem over line diagram?" 

Student_2 (female): "I prefer the bar charts. Bar charts are easier to understand rather than 

line charts " 

 

Bar Diagram Line Diagram
All Diagrams
(Bar & Line)

Bar - Line Diagrams 1.56 1.56 1.56

Line - Bar Diagrams 0.86 1.43 1.15

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8

1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8

A
v

e
ra

g
e

 S
co

re



Sutiarso     79 

 

.  

 

 

 

CONCLUSION  

The ability to read diagrams is one of the important knowledges for students, especially 

students who are writing their thesis. When writing a thesis, students must be able to collect and 

process data, as well as represent data in the form of diagrams. The inability to read this diagram 

shows the inability of students to communicate the results of their research. The results of this 

study can be used as evaluation material for lecturers in teaching statistical material (diagram 

material), including the use of learning methods for female and male college students. The 

results of this study indicate that (1) students’ ability both male and female to read diagrams 

was classified as moderate, (2) the ability to read bar charts of female students was higher than 

that of male students but the ability to read line diagrams of male students was higher than 

female students, (3) female students tend to choose bar diagrams rather than line diagrams while 

male students tend to choose line diagrams rather than bar diagrams, and (4) the cause of 

difficulties in reading diagrams for female students were errors in understanding the meaning 

words while male students were errors of logical thinking in associating data with other data. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

On this occasion, the author would like to thank to Dr. Caswita (head of department on 

mathematics and natural education science education) for their assistance and facilities, as well 

as students of mathematics education Unila. May Allah SWT blesses you for the good deeds 

you have done.  

REFERENCES 

Andoko & Pamungkas, A. S.  (2018). Kajian Literasi Statistik Mahasiswa dalam Membaca, 

Menyajikan Data dan Menafsirkan Data. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan 

Matematika FKIP UIR 2018, 29-30 Agustus 2018, 8-14. 

 

Anjum, S. (2015). Gender Difference in Mathematics Achievement and Its Relation with 

Reading Comprehension of Children at Upper Primary Stage. Journalof Education and 

Practice, 6(16), 71-75. 

 

Cahyono, A. E. (2018). Identifikasi Faktor Internal yang Mempengaruhi Motivasi Belajar 

Mahasiswa IKIP PGRI Jember. Jurnal Fektor, 15(1), 18-25. 

 



80         KALAMATIKA, Volume 5, No. 1, April 2020, pages 69-82 

 

 

Chaer, A., & Muliastuti, L. (2014). Makna dan Semantik. Jakarta: UT Press. 

 

Dalman. (2013). Keterampilan Membaca. Jakarta: Raya Grafindo Persana. 

 

Febryana, D. (2018). Profil Kreativitas Siswa dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Segitiga dan 

Segiempat Ditinjau dari Gender . Siska Journal of Mathematics Education, 4(1), 50-58. 

 

In, J., & Lee, S. (2017). Statistical Data Presentation. Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, 70(3), 

267-276. 

 

KKBI. (2020). Received January 1, 2020, dari http://KKBI.web.id/diagram 

 

Kurniasi, E. R. (2016). Profil Pemahaman Matematis Mahasiswa Pendidikan Matematika 

Ditinjau dari Jenis Kelamin. Jurnal Prima, 5(2), 1-7. 

 

NCTM. (2000). Principles and Standars for School Mathematics. Reston: NCTM. 

 

Otoo, D., Iddrisu, W., Kessie, J., & Larbi, E. (2018). Structural Model of Students' Interest and 

Self-Motivation to Learning Mathematics. Hindawi Education Research International, 

2018, 1-10. 

 

Pangestu, A. D., Samparadja, H., & Tiya, k. (2015). Pengaruh Minat terhadap Hasil Belajar 

Matematika Siswa SMA Negeri 1 Uluiwoi Kabupaten Kolaka Timur. Jurnal Penelitian 

Pendidikan Matematika, 3(2), 17-26. 

 

Rafianti, I., Setiani, Y., & Novaliyosi. (2018). Profil Kemampuan Literasi Kuantitatif Calon 

Guru Matematika. Jurnal Penelitian dan PembelajaranMatematika, 11(1), 63-74. 

 

Salmina, M., & Nisa, S. K. (2018). Kemampuan Penalaran Matematis Siswa Berdasarkan 

Gender pada MateriGeometri. Numeracy , 5(1), 41-48. 

 

Sarnia. (2015). Polisemi dalam Bahasa Muna. Jurnal Humanika , 15(3), 1-16. 

 

Shin, D., Lee, H., Lee, G., & Kim, G. (2019). The Role of Curiosity and Interest in Learning 

and Motivation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 



Sutiarso     81 

 

.  

 

 

Slameto. (2010). Belajar dan Faktor-Faktor yang Mempengaruhinya. Jakarta: PT. Rineke 

Cipta. 

 

Slutsky, D. J. (2014). The Effective Use of Graphs. Journal of Wrist Surgery, 3(2), 67-68. 

 

Subekti, F.E. & Kusuma, A.B. (2016). Deskripsi Kemampuan Komunikasi Matematis Ditinjau 

dari Rasa Percaya Diri Mahasiswa. Jurnal Euclid, 3(1), 377-525.  

 

Sumarmo, U. (2012). Pendidikan Karakter serta Pengembangan Berpikir dan Disposisi 

Matematik dalam Pembelajaran Matematika. Makalah Disajikan dalam Seminar 

Pendidikan Matematika di NTT Tanggal 25 Februari 2012 . 

 

Sutiarso, S. (2011). Statistika Pendidikan dan Pengelolaannya dengan SPSS . Bandar Lampung: 

Aura Printing & Publishing. 

 

Sutiarso, S. (2019). The Ability of Students' Mathematical Proof in An Introduction to Group 

Theory in terms of Gender Differences. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 20(2), 60-67. 

 

Takaria, J.& Talakua, M. (2018).  Kemampuan Literasi Statistik Mahasiswa Calon Guru 

Ditinjau dari Kemampuan Awal Matematika. Jurnal Kependidikan, 2(2), 395-408. 

 

Wardani, A. K. (2014). Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah berdasarkan Perbedaan Jenis 

Kelamin. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika STKIP PGRI Sidoarjo, 2(1), 99-108. 

 

Widiyawati, Sumarti, & Riadi, B. (2017). Diski pada Kuliah Umum Etika Frans Magnis Suseno 

SJ serta Komplikasinya . Jurnal Kata (Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pembelajaran), 5(2), 1-12. 

 

Yenni & Andriyani, R. (2019). Bahan Ajar Statistika Berbasis Generative Learning untuk 

Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemahaman Matematis. Kalamatika: Jurnal Pendidikan 

Matematika, 4(2), 151-162. 

 

Yulianti, Hartono, Y., & Santoso, B. (2015). Desain Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek pada Materi 

Penyajian Data di Kelas IX. Numeracy, 2(2): 1-2. 

 



82         KALAMATIKA, Volume 5, No. 1, April 2020, pages 69-82