Siti Farida, Endah Budi Rahaju

Proses Berpikir Komputasi Siswa dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Numerasi Konten Geometri dan Pengukuran Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif

Introduction

Proses berpikir komputasi siswa dalam menyelesaikan soal numerasi konten geometri dan pengukuran ditinjau dari gaya kognitif. Menganalisis proses berpikir komputasi siswa SMP pada soal numerasi geometri & pengukuran, ditinjau dari gaya kognitif (FI/FD). Gaya kognitif memengaruhi keterampilan komputasi siswa.

Abstract

This study aims to describe the computational thinking processes of junior high school students with field independent (FI) and field dependent (FD) cognitive styles in solving numeracy problems in geometry and measurement content. This study uses a qualitative approach with descriptive analysis techniques. The research subjects were two students (one FI and one FD) of the same gender and with equivalent high mathematical abilities. Data were collected through the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT), AKM numeracy problems on geometry and measurement content, and interview guidelines. The results of the study indicate that FI students meet all five indicators of computational thinking, namely decomposition, pattern recognition, abstraction, algorithms and procedures, and generalization. Meanwhile, FD students only met three indicators: decomposition, abstraction, and generalization. These findings indicate that cognitive style influences the development of computational thinking skills, so teachers need to design appropriate learning strategies to support students with different cognitive styles in numeracy learning.

Review

This study meticulously investigates the computational thinking (CT) processes of junior high school students, differentiated by field independent (FI) and field dependent (FD) cognitive styles, as they solve numeracy problems within geometry and measurement content. Employing a qualitative descriptive approach, the researchers provide a detailed analysis of two students with equivalent high mathematical abilities, one FI and one FD. A core strength lies in the explicit mapping of observed problem-solving behaviors against the five established CT indicators (decomposition, pattern recognition, abstraction, algorithms and procedures, and generalization). The findings clearly indicate a disparity, with FI students meeting all five indicators, while FD students demonstrated engagement with only three. The paper makes a valuable contribution by empirically demonstrating the influence of cognitive style on the development and application of computational thinking skills, particularly within a domain as critical as numeracy. The methodology, integrating the Group Embedded Figures Test (GEFT), AKM numeracy problems, and structured interview guidelines, appears well-suited for generating rich, descriptive data relevant to the research question. The identification of specific CT indicators met by each cognitive style offers actionable insights for educational practitioners. While the depth of analysis for the two case studies is commendable, it is important to acknowledge that the highly restricted sample size inherently limits the generalizability of the findings, positioning this as an important exploratory study rather than a universally conclusive one. Despite the sample size, the practical implications for education are substantial. The observed differences powerfully highlight the need for educators to design and implement learning strategies that are sensitive to students' varying cognitive styles, especially when fostering complex skills like computational thinking in mathematics. This research provides a compelling rationale for integrating cognitive style considerations into instructional design and teacher professional development. Future research could productively expand upon these findings by examining larger and more diverse student populations, exploring the effectiveness of specific pedagogical interventions tailored to enhance CT skills for different cognitive styles, or investigating these relationships across different educational levels and subject areas. Overall, this paper offers significant insights into the intersection of cognitive psychology and mathematics education.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.