Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 153 Download : 43

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Python programming is widely employed in educational institutions worldwide. Within the Merdeka Belajar curriculum context, this programming is recognized as a suitable vehicle for mathematics instruction, significantly influencing students’ motivation and learning outcomes, particularly following periods of educational hiatus. This study examines the effectiveness of Python programming in promoting heightened learning outcomes by examining the intricate relationship between student motivation and learning. The study uses quantitative research methodologies to evaluate student learning facilitated through Python programming, encompassing problem-solving assessments and the administration of motivation questionnaires. By engaging in coding practices, students understand the symbols they manipulate, facilitating their ability to juxtapose data derived from mathematical modeling with the resultant programming output. When disparities arise, students are empowered to reassess their work, fostering a more profound comprehension of the subject matter. These exercises serve to augment students' capacity to retain and process information within memory. Furthermore, students demonstrate a favorable disposition, exhibiting persistence in resolving programming challenges by meticulously analyzing error outputs, particularly those pertaining to TypeErrors. Encouraging students to confront errors through thoroughly examining error output manifestations engenders an efficacious learning paradigm. This research proffers invaluable insights for educational institutions contemplating the integration of Python programming as an instructional adjunct.

Keywords

Learning Motivation Merdeka Belajar Curriculum Process Information Python Programming

Article Details

Creative Commons License

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

How to Cite
Rais, D., & Zhao, X. (2024). Elevating student engagement and academic performance: A quantitative analysis of Python programming integration in the Merdeka Belajar curriculum. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(2), 495–516. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v15i2.pp495-516
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Abdulsahib, R. H. (2021). Learning difficulties in mathematics and its relationship to cognitive failures among middle school students. Ilkogretim Online, 20(6), 2291-2325. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2021.06.211
  2. Alyoussef, I. Y. (2022). Acceptance of a flipped classroom to improve university students’ learning: An empirical study on the TAM model and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT). Heliyon, 8(12). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12529
  3. Auccahuasi, W., Santiago, G. B., Núñez, E. O., & Sernaque, F. (2018, December). Interactive online tool as an instrument for learning mathematics through programming techniques, aimed at high school students. In Proceedings of the 6th International conference on information technology: IoT and Smart City (pp. 70-76). https://doi.org/10.1145/3301551.3301580
  4. Austin, A. C., Hammond, N. B., Barrows, N., Gould, D. L., & Gould, I. R. (2018). Relating motivation and student outcomes in general organic chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 19(1), 331-341. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RP00182G
  5. Balreira, D. G., Silveira, T. L. D., & Wickboldt, J. A. (2022). Investigating the impact of adopting Python and C languages for introductory engineering programming courses. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 31(1), 47-62. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22570
  6. Bascuñana, J., León, S., González-Miquel, M., González, E. J., & Ramírez, J. (2023). Impact of Jupyter Notebook as a Tool to enhance the learning process in Chemical Engineering Modules. Education for Chemical Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2023.06.001
  7. Bao, Y., Wang, G., & Sun, Z. (2021). Exploration and Research on Integrating Programming Education into Junior Middle School Mathematics Classroom. In Proceedings of CECNet 2021: The 11th International Conference on Electronics, Communications and Networks (CECNet), November 18-21, 2021 (Vol. 345, p. 356). IOS Press. https://doi.org/10.3233/FAIA210422
  8. Bertoletti, A., Cannistrà, M., Soncin, M., & Agasisti, T. (2023). The heterogeneity of Covid-19 learning loss across Italian primary and middle schools. Economics of Education Review, 95, 102435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2023.102435
  9. Caccavale, F., Gargalo, C. L., Gernaey, K. V., & Krühne, U. (2023). SPyCE: A structured and tailored series of Python courses for (bio) chemical engineers. Education for Chemical Engineers, 45, 90-103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2023.08.003
  10. Carević, M. M., Petrović, M., & Denić, N. (2019). Figurative Numbers Contribution in Perceiving the Legality in Numerous Strings Tasks and Long-term Memory of Numerous Data. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(4), em1692. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/103387
  11. Donnelly, R., & Patrinos, H. A. (2022). Learning loss during Covid-19: An early systematic review. Prospects, 51(4), 601-609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-021-09582-6
  12. Doruk, B. K., Aktümen, M., & Aytekin, C. (2013). Pre-service elementary mathematics teachers’ opinions about using GeoGebra in mathematics education with reference to ‘teaching practices’. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 32(3), 140-157. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrt009
  13. Fabic, G. V. F., Mitrovic, A., & Neshatian, K. (2018). Investigating the effects of learning activities in a mobile Python tutor for targeting multiple coding skills. Research and practice in technology enhanced learning, 13, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-018-0092-x
  14. Fauzan, F., Ansori, R. A. M., Dannur, M., Pratama, A., & Hairit, A. (2023). The Implementation of the Merdeka Curriculum (Independent Curriculum) in Strengthening Students’ Character in Indonesia. Aqlamuna: Journal of Educational Studies, 1(1), 136-155. https://doi.org/10.58223/aqlamuna.v1i1.237
  15. Filgona, J., Sakiyo, J., Gwany, D. M., & Okoronka, A. U. (2020). Motivation in Learning. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 10(4), 16–37. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2020/v10i430273
  16. Firdaus, F., Kailani, I., Bakar, M. N. B., & Bakry, B. (2015). Developing critical thinking skills of students in mathematics learning. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 9(3), 226-236. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v9i3.1830
  17. Frunza, M, C. (2016). Chapter 2F - Non-Parametric Techniques. Academic Press, 2016, pp. 169-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-804494-0.00012-7
  18. Fonseca, N. G., Macedo, L., & Mendes, A. J. (2016, June). CodeInsights: Monitoring programming students' progress. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies 2016 (pp. 375-382). https://doi.org/10.1145/2983468.2983492
  19. Gül, Ş., & Köse, E. Ö. (2018). Öğretmen Adaylarının Protein Sentezine Yönelik Algıları: Öğrenme Güçlüğüne Karşı Önerilen Çözümler. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20(1), 237-250. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.307083
  20. Hevia, F, J., Vergara, L, S., Velásquez, A, D., & Calderón, D. (2021). Estimation of the fundamental learning loss and learning poverty related to COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico. International Journal of Educational Development, 88(1), 102515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102515
  21. Hsiao, T. C., Chuang, Y. H., Chang, C. Y., Chen, T. L., Zhang, H. B., & Chang, J. C. (2023). Combining Building Block Process With Computational Thinking Improves Learning Outcomes of Python Programming With Peer Assessment. SAGE Open, 13(4), 21582440231217715. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231217715
  22. Inguva, P., Bhute, V. J., Cheng, T. N., & Walker, P. J. (2021). Introducing students to research codes: A short course on solving partial differential equations in Python. Education for Chemical Engineers, 36, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2021.01.011
  23. Isaeni, N., & Nugraha, A. (2022). Teknologi Dalam Transformasi Pembelajaran Kurikulum Merdeka. Direktorat Guru Pendidikan Dasar, Kemendikbudristek. https://doi.org/10.4444/jisma.v2i6.736
  24. Jakubowski, M., Gajderowicz, T., & Patrinos, H. A. (2023). Global learning loss in student achievement: First estimates using comparable reading scores. Economics Letters, 232, 111313. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2023.111313
  25. Karnalim, O., & Ayub, M. (2017). The use of python tutor on programming laboratory session: Student perspectives. Kinetik: Game Technology, Information System, Computer Network, Computing, Electronics, and Control, 327-336. http://dx.doi.org/10.22219/kinetik.v2i4.442
  26. Kong, Q., Siauw, T., & Bayen, A. (2020). Python programming and numerical methods: A guide for engineers and scientists. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2018-0-04165-1
  27. Koupritzioti, D., & Xinogalos, S. (2020). PyDiophantus maze game: Play it to learn mathematics or implement it to learn game programming in Python. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 2747–2764. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10087-1
  28. Kozakai, R., Kobayashi, T., Wenxuan, Z., & Watanabe, Y. (2022). Tendency Analysis of Python Programming Classes for Junior and Senior High School Students. Procedia Computer Science, 207, 4603-4612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2022.09.524
  29. Kuriki, M. (2021). Using Python and Google Colab to teach undergraduate microeconomic theory. International Review of Economics Education, 38, 100225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iree.2021.100225
  30. Lee, D. Y., & Chung, J. I. (2019). The effects of middle school mathematical statistics area and Python programming STEAM instruction on problem solving ability and curriculum interest. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society, 20(4), 336-344. https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2019.20.4.336
  31. Leifheit, L., Tsarava, K., Moeller, K., Ostermann, K., Golle, J., Trautwein, U., & Ninaus, M. (2019). Development of a Questionnaire on Self-concept, Motivational Beliefs, and Attitude Towards Programming. Proceedings of the 14th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education on - WiPSCE’19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3361721.3361730
  32. Ling, H. C., Hsiao, K. L., & Hsu, W. C. (2021). Can students’ computer programming learning motivation and effectiveness be enhanced by learning python language? A multi-group analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 600814. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.600814
  33. Mhlongo, S., Mbatha, K., Ramatsetse, B., & Dlamini, R. (2023). Challenges, opportunities, and prospects of adopting and using smart digital technologies in learning environments: An iterative review. Heliyon. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16348
  34. Možina, M., & Lazar, T. (2018). Syntax-Based Analysis of Programming Concepts in Python. In Artificial Intelligence in Education: 19th International Conference, AIED 2018, London, UK, June 27–30, 2018, Proceedings, Part II 19 (pp. 236-240). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93846-2_43
  35. Nurmuiza, I., Maonde, F., & Sani, A. (2015). The Effect of Motivation on Mathematics Learning Outcomes High school student. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(2), 113-122. https://doi.org/10.36709/jpm.v6i2.2065
  36. Pabón, O. S., & Villegas, L. M. (2019). Fostering motivation and improving student performance in an introductory programming course: An integrated teaching approach. Revista EIA, 16(31), 65-76. https://doi.org/10.24050/reia.v16i31.1230
  37. Papadakis, S. (2020). Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age. International Association of Online Engineering.
  38. Peng, R., & Fu, R. (2021). The effect of Chinese EFL students’ learning motivation on learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(6), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6235
  39. Rais, D & Xuezhi, Z. (2023). Human cognitive: learning mathematics through Python programming to support students’ problem-solving skills. Anatolian Journal of Education, 8(2), 85-98. https://doi.org/10.29333/aje.2023.826a
  40. Ramli,I, S., Maat, S, M., & Khalid, F. (2019). Learning Analytics in Mathematics: A Systematics Review. International Journal Research in Progressive Education and Development, 8(4): 436-449. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v8-i4/6563
  41. Rodrigues, L., Toda, A. M., Oliveira, W., Palomino, P. T., Avila-Santos, A. P., & Isotani, S. (2021, March). Gamification works, but how and to whom? an experimental study in the context of programming lessons. In Proceedings of the 52nd ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 184-190). https://doi.org/10.1145/3408877.3432419
  42. Sakharkar, S. (2023). Systematic Review: Analysis of Coding Vulnerabilities across Languages. Journal of Information Security, 14(4), 330-342. https://doi.org/10.4236/jis.2023.144019
  43. Santos, H., Batista, J., & Marques, R. P. (2019). Digital transformation in higher education: the use of communication technologies by students. Procedia Computer Science, 164, 123-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.12.163
  44. Saraswat, S., Keswani, B., Kulshrestha, R., Sharma, S., Verma, N., & Alam, S. (2022). Accuracy assessment of several machine learning algorithms for breast cancer diagnosis. Mathematical Statistician and Engineering Applications, 71(4), 12578-12587. https://doi.org/10.17762/msea.v71i4.2378
  45. Schacter, D. L. (1999). The seven sins of memory: Insights from psychology and cognitive neuroscience. American psychologist, 54(3), 182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.182
  46. Sentance, S., & Csizmadia, A. (2017). Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher’s perspective. Education and information technologies, 22, 469-495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0
  47. Suherman, S., & Vidákovich, T. (2022). Assessment of mathematical creative thinking: A systematic review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 44, 101019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101019
  48. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational psychology review, 31, 261-292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
  49. Tabet, N., Gedawy, H., Alshikhabobakr, H., & Razak, S. (2016, July). From alice to python. Introducing text-based programming in middle schools. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 124-129). https://doi.org/10.1145/2899415.2899462
  50. Takefuji, Y. (2023). An updated tutorial on reproducible PyPI applications for advancing chemometrics and boosting learner motivation. Chemometrics and Intelligent Laboratory Systems, 241, 104941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemolab.2023.104941
  51. Tilak, J. B. (2021). COVID-19 and education in India: A new education crisis in the making. Social Change, 51(4), 493-513. https://doi.org/10.1177/00490857211050131
  52. Wainer, J., & Xavier, E. C. (2018). A controlled experiment on Python vs C for an introductory programming course: Students’ outcomes. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 18(3), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1145/3152894