Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 443 Download : 212

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Current research indicates the presence of highly skilled and motivated students with robust computational thinking backgrounds seeking opportunities to leverage their expertise in driving innovation and success in this era. These studies also reveal that students' computational thinking skills vary widely depending on educational resources, curriculum emphasis, and individual aptitude. Nonetheless, there is a growing recognition of the importance of fostering these skills, with efforts underway to integrate them more comprehensively into education systems worldwide, including in Indonesia and Japan, as representatives of developing and developed countries. Therefore, assessing the competency of computational thinking in these two countries would be intriguing. The descriptive qualitative research method was employed to delineate the computational thinking competencies of students in Indonesia and Japan. Student worksheets, specifically designed for this purpose, were utilized to gauge the development of these competencies during the learning process using the Scratch application. The results revealed that students employed various strategies in solving the given geometry problems. On the other hand, geometry is one of the mathematics topics that can identify students' computational thinking using this application. These findings were utilized to categorize students' computational thinking skills in the two countries and to identify potential obstacles students experienced in their efforts to enhance these skills. Nevertheless, these constraints offer significant insights into potential areas for future investigation and enhancement. Subsequent endeavors could prioritize conducting experiments by implementing specific learning approaches or methods that have demonstrated effectiveness in improving students' computational thinking skills. This study not only underscores the potential for expanding research on students' computational thinking skills but also provides an overview of the learning process, learning culture, and students' competence in solving geometry problems with tiered difficulty levels using their computational thinking skills.

Keywords

Computational Thinking Skills Geometry Indonesia and Japan Primary School Scratch

Article Details

Creative Commons License

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

How to Cite
Prahmana, R. C. I., Kusaka, S., Peni, N. R. N., Endo, H., Azhari, A., & Tanikawa, K. (2024). Cross-cultural insights on computational thinking in geometry: Indonesian and Japanese students’ perspectives. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(2), 613–638. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v15i2.pp613-638
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Aminah, N., Sukestiyarno, Y. L., Cahyono, A. N., & Maat, S. M. (2023). Student activities in solving mathematics problems with a computational thinking using Scratch. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 12(2), 613-621. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v12i2.23308
  2. Ardito, G., Czerkawski, B., & Scollins, L. (2020). Learning computational thinking together: Effects of gender differences in collaborative middle school robotics program. TechTrends, 64, 373-387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00461-8
  3. Ausiku, M. M., & Matthee, M. C. (2023). A framework for teaching computational thinking in primary schools: A Namibian case study. The African Journal of Information Systems, 15(3), 2. https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2309&context=ajis
  4. Bagea, I. (2023). Cultural influences in language learning in a global context. Indo-MathEdu Intellectuals Journal, 4(2), 630–645. https://doi.org/10.54373/imeij.v4i2.248
  5. Basso, D., Fronza, I., Colombi, A., & Pahl, C. (2018). Improving assessment of computational thinking through a comprehensive framework. Proceedings of the 18th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3279720.3279735
  6. Bender, J., Zhao, B., Dziena, A., & Kaiser, G. (2023). Integrating Parsons puzzles within Scratch enables efficient computational thinking learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 18, 022. https://doi.org/10.58459/rptel.2023.18022
  7. Colorafi, K., & Evans, B. (2016). Qualitative descriptive methods in health science research. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 9, 16-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/1937586715614171
  8. Cui, Z., & Ng, O. (2021). The interplay between mathematical and computational thinking in primary school students’ mathematical problem-solving within a programming environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59, 988-1012. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120979930
  9. Dahlman, C. (2007). Technology, globalization, and international competitiveness: Challenges for developing countries. Industrial development for the 21st century: Sustainable development perspectives (pp. 29-83). Department of Economic and Social Affairs, United Nations. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/full_report.pdf#page=37
  10. Fagerlund, J., Häkkinen, P., Vesisenaho, M., & Viiri, J. (2020). Assessing 4th grade students’ computational thinking through scratch programming projects. Informatics in Education, 19(4), 611-640. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2020.27
  11. Global Education Monitoring Report Team - SEAMEO Regional Open Learning Center. (2023). Technology in education: A case study on Indonesia. UNESCO https://doi.org/10.54676/WJMY7427
  12. Gökçe, S., & Yenmez, A. A. (2023). Ingenuity of scratch programming on reflective thinking towards problem solving and computational thinking. Education and Information Technologies, 28(5), 5493-5517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11385-x
  13. Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K–12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38-43. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X12463051
  14. Hendroanto, A., van Galen, F., Van Eerde, D., Prahmana, R. C. I., Setyawan, F., & Istiandaru, A. (2018). Photography activities for developing students’ spatial orientation and spatial visualization. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 943(1), 012029. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/943/1/012029
  15. Iskrenovic-Momcilovic, O. (2020). Improving geometry teaching with Scratch. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(2), em0582. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/7807
  16. Israel-Fishelson, R., & Hershkovitz, A. (2022). Studying interrelations of computational thinking and creativity: A scoping review (2011–2020). Computers & Education, 176, 104353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104353
  17. Jiang, B., & Li, Z. (2021). Effect of Scratch on computational thinking skills of Chinese primary school students. Journal of Computers in Education, 8(4), 505-525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00190-z
  18. Kale, U., Akcaoglu, M., Cullen, T., Goh, D., Devine, L., Calvert, N., & Grise, K. (2018). Computational what? Relating computational thinking to teaching. TechTrends, 62, 574-584. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0290-9
  19. Kalelioğlu, F., Gülbahar, Y., & Kukul, V. (2016). A framework for computational thinking based on a systematic research review. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(3), 583-596. https://www.bjmc.lu.lv/fileadmin/user_upload/lu_portal/projekti/bjmc/Contents/4_3_15_Kalelioglu.pdf
  20. Kobayashi, Y., & Hasegawa, S. (2020). A proposal for the learning environment to evaluate a computational thinking for elementary school in Japan from operation point of view. IEICE Technical Report, 120(167), 13-18.
  21. Kobayashi, Y., Ota, K., & Hasegawa, S. (2022). Development of learning environment to evaluate computational thinking for elementary school students from operation perspective. Transactions of Japanese Society for Information and Systems in Education, 39(2), 210-223. https://doi.org/10.14926/jsise.39.210
  22. Marcelino, M. J., Pessoa, T., Vieira, C., Salvador, T., & Mendes, A. J. (2018). Learning computational thinking and scratch at distance. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 470-477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.025
  23. Molina-Ayuso, Á., Adamuz-Povedano, N., Bracho-López, R., & Torralbo-Rodríguez, M. (2023). Computational thinking with Scratch: A tool to work on geometry in the fifth grade of primary education. Sustainability, 16(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16010110
  24. Molina-Ayuso, Á., Adamuz-Povedano, N., Bracho-López, R., & Torralbo-Rodríguez, M. (2022). Introduction to computational thinking with Scratch for teacher training for Spanish primary school teachers in mathematics. Education Sciences, 12(12), 899. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12120899
  25. Ogegbo, A. A., & Ramnarain, U. (2022). Teachers’ perceptions of and concerns about integrating computational thinking into science teaching after a professional development activity. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 26(3), 181-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2022.2133739
  26. Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2007). Digital inequality: A five country comparison using microdata. Social Science Research, 36(3), 1135-1155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2006.09.001
  27. Piedade, J., & Dorotea, N. (2022). Effects of Scratch-based activities on 4th-grade students’ computational thinking skills. Informatics in Education, 22(3), 499–523. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2023.19
  28. Purwasih, R., Turmudi, & Dahlan, J. A. (2024). How do you solve number pattern problems through mathematical semiotics analysis and computational thinking?. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(2), 403-430. http://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v15i2.pp403-430
  29. Rafiepour, A., & Farsani, D. (2021). Cultural historical analysis of Iranian school mathematics curriculum: The role of computational thinking. Journal on Mathematics Education, 12(3), 411-426. http://doi.org/10.22342/jme.12.3.14296.411-426
  30. Robinson, L., Cotten, S. R., Ono, H., Quan-Haase, A., Mesch, G., Chen, W., ... & Stern, M. J. (2015). Digital inequalities and why they matter. Information, Communication & Society, 18(5), 569-582. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1012532
  31. Rodríguez-Martínez, J. A., González-Calero, J. A., & Sáez-López, J. M. (2020). Computational thinking and mathematics using Scratch: An experiment with sixth-grade students. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(3), 316-327. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1612448
  32. Román-González, M., Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2019). Combining assessment tools for a comprehensive evaluation of computational thinking interventions. Computational Thinking Education, 79-98. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6528-7
  33. Roque, R., Rusk, N., & Resnick, M. (2016). Supporting diverse and creative collaboration in the Scratch online community. In Cress, U., Moskaliuk, J., Jeong, H. (Eds.) Mass Collaboration and Education. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series, vol 16 (pp. 241–256). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13536-6_12
  34. Rose, S. (2019). Developing children’s computational thinking using programming games. Doctoral Thesis. Sheffield Hallam University. https://doi.org/10.7190/shu-thesis-00257
  35. Sáez-López, J., Román-González, M., & Vázquez-Cano, E. (2016). Visual programming languages integrated across the curriculum in elementary school: A two year case study using "Scratch" in five schools. Computer & Education, 97, 129-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.03.003
  36. Saritepeci, M. (2020). Developing computational thinking skills of high school students: Design-based learning activities and programming tasks. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 35-54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00480-2
  37. Shute, V., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EDUREV.2017.09.003
  38. Smith, S. M., Novak, E., Schenker, J., & Kuo, C. L. (2022). Effects of computer-based (Scratch) and robotic (Cozmo) coding instruction on seventh grade students’ computational thinking, competency beliefs, and engagement. In Kim, JH., Singh, M., Khan, J., Tiwary, U.S., Sur, M., Singh, D. (Eds.) Intelligent Human Computer Interaction. IHCI 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13184 (pp. 325–336). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-98404-5_31
  39. Sparrow, R., Dartanto, T., & Hartwig, R. (2020). Indonesia under the new normal: Challenges and the way ahead. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 56(3), 269-299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00074918.2020.1854079
  40. Stewart, W., & Baek, K. (2023). Analyzing computational thinking studies in Scratch programming: A review of elementary education literature. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 6(1), 35-58. https://doi.org/10.21585/ijcses.v6i1.156
  41. Willis, D., Sullivan-Bolyai, S., Knafl, K., & Cohen, M. (2016). Distinguishing features and similarities between descriptive phenomenological and qualitative description research. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 38, 1185-1204. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945916645499
  42. Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
  43. Yadav, A., Good, J., Voogt, J., & Fisser, P. (2017). Computational thinking as an emerging competence domain. In Mulder, M. (Ed.) Competence-based Vocational and Professional Education. Technical and Vocational Education and Training: Issues, Concerns and Prospects, vol 23 (pp. 1051–1067). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41713-4_49
  44. Yunianto, W., Bautista, G., Prahmana, R. C. I., & Lavicza, Z. (2023). GeoGebra applet to learn programming and debugging in mathematics lessons. Proceedings of 2023 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE) (pp. 1-5). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/SIIE59826.2023.10423707
  45. Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9. Computers & Education, 141, 103607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103607
  46. Zhao, L., Liu, X., Wang, C., & Su, Y. S. (2022). Effect of different mind mapping approaches on primary school students’ computational thinking skills during visual programming learning. Computers & Education, 181, 104445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104445

Most read articles by the same author(s)