Student's Computational Thinking Ability in Solving Sequences and Series: The Difference between Male and Female
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31980/mosharafa.v13i1.1987Keywords:
Barisan dan Deret, Berpikir Komputasi, Gender, Sequences and Series, Computational ThinkingAbstract
Berpikir komputasi telah menjadi keterampilan penting di era digital abad ke-21, yang melibatkan kemampuan memecahkan masalah, menganalisis data, dan membuat keputusan menggunakan prinsip komputasi. Berdasarkan penelitian sebelumnya, keterampilan CT dapat dipengaruhi oleh perbedaan gender. Tujuan penelitian ini yakni untuk mengkaji perbandingan kemampuan berpikir komputasi matematis siswa laki-laki dan perempuan, serta mendeskripsikan kemampuan berpikir komputasi matematis siswa ditinjau dari gender dalam menyelesaikan soal barisan dan deret. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah mixed method dengan desain sequential explanatory yang menekankan pada pengumpulan data kuantitatif lebih dulu kemudian data kualitatif. Penelitian ini dilakukan pada siswa kelas VIII SMP di Kota Bandung dengan melibatkan 18 orang siswa, terdiri dari 7 siswa laki-laki dan 11 siswa perempuan. Teknik pengumpulan data terdiri dari tes kemampuan berpikir komputasi dan wawancara. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tidak terdapat perbedaan yang signifikan antara kemampuan berpikir komputasi siswa laki-laki dan perempuan. Sedangkan secara kualitatif, menunjukkan siswa laki-laki dan perempuan menyelesaikan persoalan dengan proses yang berbeda khususnya pada keterampilan dekomposisi dan abstraksi, lalu pada keterampilan pengenalan pola dan berpikir algoritmik tidak ditemukan perbedaan.
Computational thinking (CT) has become an essential skill in the digital age of the 21st century, involving the ability to solve problems, analyze data and make decisions using computational principles. According to previous research, gender differences can impact CT skills. This study aimed to compare male and female students' mathematical CT abilities and describe students' mathematical CT abilities in terms of gender in solving sequence and series questions. The research method used is a mixed method with a sequential explanatory design that emphasizes collecting quantitative data first, then qualitative data. This research was conducted on class VIII students of junior high schools in Bandung City, involving 18 students, consisting of 7 male students and 11 female students. The data collection technique consisted of a CT ability test and an interview. The results revealed no statistically significant difference between male and female students' CT abilities. While qualitatively, it shows that male and female students solve problems with different processes, especially in decomposition and abstraction skills, there is no difference in pattern recognition and algorithmic thinking skills.
References
Aminah, N., Maat, S. M., & Sudarsono. (2023). Computational Thinking of Prospective Mathematics Teacher Viewed from Entrepreneur Character. Mosharafa: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 12(2), 267-278.
Barcelos, T. S. (2018). Mathematics learning through computational thinking activities: A systematic literature review. In Journal of Universal Computer Science, 24(7), pp. 815–845).
Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing Computational Thinking to K-12: What is Involved and What is the role of the Computer Csience Education Community? Acm Inroads, 2(1), 48–54.
Boaler, J., & Selling, S. K. (2017). Psychological imprisonment or intellectual freedom? A longitudinal study of contrasting school mathematics approaches and their impact on adults’ lives. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(1), 78–105. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.48.1.0078
Bortz, W. W., Gautam, A., Tatar, D., & Lipscomb, K. (2020). Missing in Measurement: Why Identifying Learning in Integrated Domains Is So Hard. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09805-8
Creswell, J. ., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Mixed methods procedures. In, Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. In Microbe Magazine. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Csizmadia, A., Curzon, P., Humphreys, S., Ng, T., Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2015). Computational Thinking: A Guide For Teacher.
Dagienė, V., & Sentence, S. (2016). It’s computational thinking! bebras tasks in the curriculum. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 9973 LNCS(Bebras), 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-46747-4_3
Danindra, L. S., & -, M. (2020). Proses Berpikir Komputasi Siswa Smp Dalam Memecahkan Masalah Pola Bilangan Ditinjau Dari Perbedaan Jenis Kelamin. MATHEdunesa, 9(1), 95–103. https://doi.org/10.26740/mathedunesa.v9n1.p95-103
Davita, P. W. C., & Pujiastuti, H. (2020). Anallisis Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Ditinjau Dari Gender. Kreano, Jurnal Matematika Kreatif-Inovatif, 11(1), 110–117. https://doi.org/10.15294/kreano.v11i1.23601
de Freitas, E. (2016). Number sense and the calculating child: Measure, multiplicity and mathematical monsters. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(5), 650–661. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2015.1075703
Demİr-Kaymak, Z., Duman, İ., Randler, C., & Horzum, M. B. (2022). The Effect of Gender, Grade, Time and Chronotype on Computational Thinking: Longitudinal Study. Informatics in Education, 21(3), 465–478. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2022.22
Dilla, S. C., Hidayat, W., & Rohaeti, E. E. (2018). Faktor Gender dan Resiliensi dalam Pencapaian Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif Matematis Siswa SMA. Journal of Medives : Journal of Mathematics Education IKIP Veteran Semarang, 2(1), 129. https://doi.org/10.31331/medives.v2i1.553
Doleck, T., Bazelais, P., Lemay, D. J., Saxena, A., & Basnet, R. B. (2017). Algorithmic thinking, cooperativity, creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving: exploring the relationship between computational thinking skills and academic performance. Journal of Computers in Education, 4(4), 355–369. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-017-0090-9
English, L. (2018). On MTL’s Second Milestone: Exploring Computational Thinking and Mathematics Learning. In Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 20(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2018.1405615
Geary, D., Saults, J., Liu, F., & Hoard, M. (2001). Sex Differences in Spatial Cognition, Computational Fluency, and Arithmetical Reasoning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77, 337–353. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2000.2594
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
Gunawan, Y., Putra, Z. H., Antosa, Z., Dahnilsyah, & Tjoe, H. (2023). The Effect of Gender on Fifth-Grade Students’ Computational Thinking Skills. Mosharafa: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 12(3), 465-476.
Harmini, T., Annurwanda, P., & Suprihatiningsih, S. (2020). Computational Thinking Ability Students Based on Gender in Calculus Learning. AKSIOMA: Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika, 9(4), 977. https://doi.org/10.24127/ajpm.v9i4.3160
Ho, W. K., Looi, C. K., Huang, W., Seow, P., & Wu, L. (2021). Computational thinking in mathematics: To be or not to be, that is the question. Mathematics - connection and beyond: Yearbook 2020 association of mathematics educators. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789811236983_0011
International Society for Technology in Education and the Computer Science Teachers Association. (2017). Computational thinking teacher resources.
Ioannidou, A., Bennett, V., Repenning, A., Koh, K. H., & Basawapatna, A. (2011). Computational Thinking Patterns. Online Submission, 2, 1–15.
Islami, A., Fatra, M., & Diwidian, F. (2023). Model Search, Solve, Create, and Share untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Berpikir Komputasi Matematis Siswa Berdasarkan Self Efficacy. Plusminus: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 3(3), 453-468.
Junaeti, E., Herman, T., Priatna, N., Dasari, D., & Juandi, D. (2023). Students' Computational Thinking Ability in Calculating an Area Using The Limit of Riemann Sum Approach. Mosharafa: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 12(2), 215-228.
Korucu, A. T., Gencturk, A. T., & Gundogdu, M. M. (2017). Examination of the Computational Thinking Skills of Students. Journal of Learning and Teaching in Digital Age (JOLTIDA), 2(1), 11–19.
Kwon, K., Cheon, J., & Moon, H. (2021). Levels of problem-solving competency identified through Bebras Computing Challenge. Education and Information Technologies, 26(5), 5477–5498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10553-9
Lee, T. Y., Mauriello, M. L., Ahn, J., & Bederson, B. B. (2014). CTArcade: Computational thinking with games in school age children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 2(1), 26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2014.06.003
Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51–61. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012
Mattew, M., & Huberman. (2009). Analisis Data Kualitatif. Jakarta: UI-Press.
National Research Council. (2013). The mathematical sciences in 2025. In The Mathematical Sciences in 2025. https://doi.org/10.17226/15269
Nur, A. S., & Palobo, M. (2018). Profil Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematika Siswa Ditinjau dari Perbedaan Gaya Kognitif dan Gender. Kreano, Jurnal Matematika Kreatif-Inovatif, 9(2), 139–148.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstroms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. NY : Basic Books Inc.
Pérez, A. (2018). A framework for computational thinking dispositions in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(4), 424–461. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.49.4.0424
PISA. (2022). Pisa 2022 Mathematics Framework ( Draft ). November 2018. https://pisa2022-maths.oecd.org/files/PISA 2022 Mathematics Framework Draft.pdf
Richardo, R., Dwiningrum, S. I. A., & Wijaya, A. (2023). Computational Thinking Skill for Mathematics and Attitudes Based on Gender : Comparative and Relationship Analysis. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 13(2), 345–353. https://doi.org/10.47750/pegegog.13.02.38
Rojas López, A., & Garcia-Peñalvo, F. J. (2021). Initial Performance Analysis in the Evaluation of Computational Thinking from a Gender Perspective in Higher Education. Ninth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (TEEM’21), 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1145/3486011.3486429
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
Sırakaya, D. A. (2020). Investigating computational thinking skills based on different variables and determining the predictor variables. Participatory Educational Research, 7(2), 102–114. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.20.22.7.2
Snodgrass, M. R., Israel, M., & Reese, G. C. (2016). Instructional supports for students with disabilities in K-5 computing: Findings from a cross-case analysis. Computers & Education, 100, 1–17. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.04.011
Sovey, S., Osman, K., & Matore, M. E. E. M. (2022). Gender differential item functioning analysis in measuring computational thinking disposition among secondary school students. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13(November), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.1022304
Sung, W. (2020). Factors to consider when designing effective learning: Infusing computational thinking in mathematics to support thinking-doing. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 53(4), 404–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1784066
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining Computational Thinking for Mathematics and Science Classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational Thinking. Communications of the ACM. Concurrences, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 1118178.1118215
Wing, J. M. (2017). Computational thinking’s influence on research and education for all. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/922
Yadav, A., Gretter, S., Good, J., & Mclean, T. (2017). Emerging Research, Practice, and Policy on Computational Thinking. Emerging Research, Practice, and Policy on Computational Thinking, 205–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52691-1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Mosharafa: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
