Exploration of Students' Computational Thinking on Geometric Transformations Through AI-Assisted Geogebra

Arie Wibowo

doi:10.67686/didaktika.v10i2.2313

Penulis

Arie Wibowo UPTD Sekolah Menengah Pertama Negeri 5 Batu Ampar, Indonesia , UPTD Sekolah Menengah Pertama Negeri 5 Batu Ampar, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.67686/didaktika.v10i2.2313

Abstrak

Berpikir komputasional (BK) merupakan kompetensi utama dalam pembelajaran matematika abad ke-21, khususnya geometri, yang melibatkan penalaran spasial dan pemecahan masalah. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengeksplorasi bagaimana perkembangan BK siswa ketika menyelesaikan masalah transformasi geometri melalui pembelajaran GeoGebra berbantuan kecerdasan artifisial (KA). Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan Educational Design Research (EDR) yang melibatkan 18 siswa kelas sembilan sekolah menengah pertama. Desain pembelajaran mengikuti lintasan pembelajaran hipotetis dengan tiga tantangan yang semakin kompleks: translasi dengan orientasi tetap, translasi dengan posisi bervariasi, dan kombinasi translasi dan rotasi. Data dikumpulkan dari artefak siswa, termasuk lembar kerja, prompt KA, perintah dan tangkapan layar GeoGebra, observasi guru, dan lembar refleksi akhir, dan dianalisis secara kualitatif menggunakan pengkodean deduktif berdasarkan empat komponen BK. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa siswa menunjukkan kemampuan yang kuat dalam dekomposisi dan pengenalan pola, sementara abstraksi dan pemikiran algoritmik tetap menjadi tantangan utama, terutama dalam transformasi kompleks. GeoGebra dan KA pada dasarnya berfungsi sebagai alat untuk refleksi dan debugging, bukan sebagai penyedia solusi langsung. Studi ini menyoroti pentingnya pembelajaran berbasis tantangan dan dukungan bertahap guru untuk mendukung pengembangan BK dalam geometri. Namun, temuan ini terbatas pada satu sesi pembelajaran dengan ukuran sampel yang kecil.

Referensi

Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Dettori, G., Ferrari, A., Engelhardt, K., Kampylis, P., & Punie, Y. (2016). Developing computational thinking in compulsory education. Implications for policy and practice. EUR - Scientific and Technical Research Reports, 68. https://doi.org/10.2791/792158.

Chen, Y., Wang, Y., Wüstenberg, T., Kizilcec, R. F., Fan, Y., Li, Y., Lu, B., Yuan, M., Zhang, J., Zhang, Z., Geldsetzer, P., Chen, S., & Bärnighausen, T. (2025). Effects of generative artificial intelligence on cognitive effort and task performance: Study protocol for a randomized controlled experiment among college students. Trials, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-025-08950-3.

Denning, P. (2017). Computational thinking in science. American Scientist, 105(1), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1511/2017.124.13.

Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(1), 103–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-0400-z.

Ediyanto, A. (2023). Integrasi Nilai-Nilai Pendidikan Karakter pada Mata Pelajaran Matematika dengan Modif COC KOBE. Jurnal Nispatti, 8(1), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.26811/nispatti.v8i1.163.

Elizar, E., Trisna, T. A., & Ikhsan, M. (2022). Abilities and difficulties of ninth-grade students in solving geometry transformation problems. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 23(4), 1724–1737. https:// doi.org/10.23960/jpmipa/v23i4.pp1724-1737.

Gerlich, M. (2025). AI tools in society: Impacts on cognitive offloading and the future of critical thinking. Societies, 15(1), 6. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/soc15010006 .

Guzdial, M. (2016). Learner-centered design of computing education: Research on computing for everyone. Springer.

Hohenwarter, M., Hohenwarter, J., Kreis, Y., & Lavicza, Z. (2008, July 8). Teaching and calculus with free dynamic mathematics software GeoGebra [Paper Presentation]. The 11th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME 11), Monterrey, Mexico. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228869636_Teaching_and_Learning_Calculus_with_Free_Dynamic_Mathematics_Software_GeoGebra.

Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2019). Artificial intelligence in education: Promise and implications for teaching and learning (1st ed.). Center for Curriculum Redesign.

Istiqlal, M., Retnawati, H., Widihastuti, W., & Sari, D. K. (2026). Assessing Students’ Computational Thinking AbilityBased on Mathematical Reasoning. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 14(2), 773-796. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v14i2.1602

Leinwand, S., Brahier, D. J., Huinker, D., Berry, R. Q., Dillon, F. L., Larson, M. R., Leiva, M. A., Martin, W. G., & Smith, M. S. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. NCTM, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2018). Conducting educational design research (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Narohita, G. A. (2023). Pemanfaatan Aplikasi GeoGebra Mampu Meningkatkan Pemahaman Grafik Fungsi Kuadrat Siswa SMA Negeri 1 Singaraja. Jurnal Nispatti, 8(1), 19-36. https://doi.org/10.26811/nispatti.v8i1.171.

Ninghardjanti, P., Umam, M. C., Subarno, A., Winarno, W., Langgi, N. R., & Widodo, J. (2025). Evaluating the impact of AI on the critical thinking skills among the higher education students by combining the TAM model and critical thinking theory. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1719625. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1719625.

Özerem, A. (2012). Misconceptions in geometry and suggested solutions for seventh grade students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 55, 720–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.557.

Plomp, Tj., & Nieveen, N. (2013). Educational design research. Part A: An introduction. SLO.

Sinclair, N., & Yerushalmy, M. (2016). Digital technology in mathematics teaching and learning. In Á. Gutiérrez, G. C. Leder, & P. Boero (Eds.), The Second Handbook of Research on the Psychology of Mathematics Education: The Journey Continues (pp. 235–274). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-561-6_7.

St Omer, S. M., Evers, K., Wang, C. Y., & Chen, S. (2025). Technology-enhanced mathematics learning: Review of the interactions between technological attributes and aspects of mathematics education from 2013 to 2022. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05475-7.

Susilawati, S., Supriyatno, T. ., Yasin, A. F. ., Tasir, Z. ., Asmawati, R. I. ., Chakim, A. ., & Dalle, A. R. A. (2026). Integrating Computational Thinking and Spirituality in Developing Students’ Critical Thinking: A Comparative Study of Indonesia and Malaysia. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 14(1), 413-438. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v14i1.2439

Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22, 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6.

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. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215 ,

Yunianto, W., Galic, S., & Lavicza, Z. (2024). Exploring computational thinking in mathematics education: Integrating ChatGPT with GeoGebra for enhanced learning experiences. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 12(6), 1451–1470. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.4437 .

Ziatdinov, R., & Valles, J. R. (2022). Synthesis of modelling, visualization, and programming in GeoGebra as an effective approach for teaching and learning STEM topics. Mathematics, 10(3), 398. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10030398.