Pembangunan dan Keberkesanan Modul Berasaskan Permainan Dengan Penerapan Pemikiran Komputasi
Abstract
Penyelidikan ini bertujuan membangun dan menilai keberkesanan modul pengajaran dan pembelajaran berasaskan permainan dengan penerapan pemikiran komputasi (PPPK) bagi tajuk pecahan sekolah rendah. Penyelidikan ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif dengan reka bentuk penyelidikan pembangunan serta kaedah kuasi- eksperimen. Penyelidikan pembangunan yang diaplikasikan dalam penyelidikan ini adalah berdasarkan kepada langkah-langkah pembinaan modul yang diubahsuai daripada model Plomp, yang mengandungi lima fasa iaitu (i) penyelidikan awal, (ii) perancangan, (iii) realisasi dan kesahan modul, (iv) penilaian, kepraktikalan dan keberkesanan serta (v) pelaksanaan. Komponen-komponen modul yang dibina terdiri daripada buku modul, lembaran kerja murid dan rancangan pengajaran dan pembelajaran. Penilaian modul PPPK melibatkan ujian kesahan, kebolehpercayaan, kepraktikalan dan keberkesanan. Sampel penyelidikan ini terdiri daripada 120 orang murid di dua buah sekolah di negeri Johor yang dipilih dengan menggunakan teknik persampelan bertujuan. Dapatan penyelidikan menunjukkan bahawa modul PPPK yang dibina memenuhi syarat kesahan berdasarkan penilaian oleh tiga orang pensyarah matematik dan tiga orang pakar pendidikan matematik dengan nilai IKK kesemua item melebihi nilai 0.80 daripada nilai maksimum 1.00. Instrumen penilaian modul PPPK yang dibina juga memenuhi syarat kebolehpercayaan apabila diuji terhadap murid tahun 5 yang menjadi responden penyelidikan dengan nilai pekali kebolehpercayaan indeks persetujuan kesemua item melebihi 80% daripada nilai maksimum 100%. Dari aspek kepraktikalan, penyelidikan yang dilakukan mendapati bahawa modul PPPK adalah praktikal digunakan berdasarkan penilaian oleh enam orang pakar. Begitu juga modul PPPK berkesan dalam meningkatkan pencapaian dan minat murid jika dibandingkan dengan kaedah pembelajaran konvensional. Ini adalah kerana terdapat perbezaan yang signifikan (t=-16.428, p<0.001) antara pencapaian murid kumpulan rawatan (Min=13.150, SP=4.278) dan kumpulan kawalan (Min=7.317, SP=2.849) di mana pancapaian murid kumpulan rawatan adalah lebih tinggi berbanding dengan kumpulan kawalan.
Downloads
References
Acharya, K. P. (2016). Fostering critical thinking practices in primary science classrooms in Nepal. Research in Pedagogy, 6(2), 1-7.
Adler, R. F., & Kim, H. (2018). Enhancing future K-8 teachers’ computational thinking skills through modeling and simulations. Education and Information Technologies, 23, 1501-1514.
Ahmad. (2018). Pembinaan dan penilaian modul pengajaran dan pembelajaran matematik berasaskan masalah dengan penerapan saintifik. [Tesis], Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris.
Bartlett, J. E., Kotrlik, J. W., & & Higgins, C. C. (2001). Organizational research: Determining appropriate sample size in survey research. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 19, 43–50.
Beecher, K. (2017). Computational thinking: A beginner’s guide to problem-solving and programming. Swindon, UK: BCS Learning & Development Limited.
Benakli, N., Kostadinov, B., Satyanarayana, A., & Singh, S. (2017). Introducing computational thinking through hands-on projects using R with applications to calculus, probability and data analysis. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48(3), 393–427.
Bentley, B., & Bossé, M. J. (2018). College students’ understanding of fraction operations. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(3), 233-247.
Bower, M., Wood, L. N., Lai, J. W., Highfield, K., Veal, J., Howe, C., ... & Mason, R. (2017). Improving the computational thinking pedagogical capabilities of school teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(3), 53-72.
Boyle, E. A., Hainey, T., Connolly, T. M., Gray, G., Earp, J., Ott, M., Lim, T., Ninaus, M., Ribeiro, C., & Pereira, J. (2016). An update to the systematic literature review of empirical evidence of the impacts and outcomes of computer games and serious games. Computers & Education, 94, 178–192.
Braithwaite, D. W., Pyke, A. A., & Siegler, R. S. (2017). A computational model of fraction arithmetic. Psychological Review, 124(5), 603.
Burke, B. (2016). Gamify: How gamification motivates people to do extraordinary things. Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK.
Creswell, J. W., & Hirose, M. (2019). Mixed methods and survey research in family medicine and community health. Family Medicine and Community Health, 7(2), e000086.
Denning, P.J., Tedre, M. (2019). Computational thinking. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Durak, H. Y., & Saritepeci, M. (2018). Analysis of the relation between computational thinking skills and various variables with the structural equation model. Computers & Education, 116, 191-202.
Farozi, M. (2016). Rancang bangun website gamifikasi sebagai strategi pembelajaran dan evaluasi hasil belajar mahasiswa. Semnasteknomedia Online, 4(1), 4-2.
Fraenkel, R.J., Wallen, E. N., & Hyun, H.H. (2015). How to design and evaluate research in education (9th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hil.
Gadanidis, G., Cendros, R., Floyd, L., & Namukasa, I. (2017). Computational thinking in mathematics teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 17(4), 458-477.
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2018). Computational thinking: A competency whose time has come. Computer Science Education: Perspectives on Teaching and Learning in School, 19(1), 19-38.
Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170-179.
Haseski, H. İ., İlic, U., & Tuğtekin, U. (2018). Defining a new 21st century skill - computational thinking: concepts and trends. International Education Studies, 29-42.
Islam, M. R. (2018). Sample size and its role in Central Limit Theorem (CLT). International Journal of Physics & Mathematics, 1(1), 37-47.
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.
Korkmaz, Ö., Çakir, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the computational thinking scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558-569.
Krejcie, R.V. & Morgan, D.W. (1970) Determining Sample Size for Research Activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30, 607-610.
Kwon, J., & Lee, Y. (2016). Serious games for the job training of persons with developmental disabilities. Computers & Education, 95, 328-339.
Lazić, B., Abramovich, S., Mrđa, M., & Romano, D. A. (2017). On the teaching and learning of fractions through a conceptual generalization approach. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 12(3), 749-767.
Lenz, K., & Wittmann, G. (2020). Individual differences in conceptual and procedural fraction knowledge: what makes the difference and what does it look like?. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 16(1), em0615.
Maciejewski, M. L. (2020). Quasi-experimental design. Biostatistics & Epidemiology, 4(1), 38-47.
Mateya, M., Utete, C. N., & Ilukena, A. M. (2016). Factors that cause poor performance in mathematics at National School Secondary Certificate level compared to Junior Secondary Certificate level in four selected schools in the two Kavango Educational regions. Journal for Studies in Humanities and Social Sciences, 158-168.
Mestadi, W., Nafil, K., Touahni, R., & Messoussi, R. (2018). An assessment of serious games technology: toward an architecture for serious games design. International Journal of Computer Games Technology, 2018, , 9834565:1-9834565:16.
Mok, S.S. (2008). Psikologi pendidikan & pedagogi murid dan alam belajar. Kuala Lumpur: Kumpulan Budiman Sdn. Bhd.
Norizah, K., Hasmadi, I. M., & Misnah, E. O. (2014, February). Remote sensing and GIS application in best harvest management planning in Sultan Idris Shah Forestry Education Centre (SISFEC), UPM. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (Vol. 18, No. 1, p. 012138). IOP Publishing.
Prasetyo, I. A., Destya, S., & Rizky, R. (2016). Penerapan konsep gamifikasi pada perancangan aplikasi pembelajaran al-qur’an. Semnasteknomedia Online, 4(1), 4-8.
Ruseffendi, E. T. (2010). Dasar-dasar penelitian pendidikan dan bidang non-eksakta lainnya. Bandung: PT Tarsito.
Siegler, R. S., & Lortie-Forgues, H. (2015). Conceptual knowledge of fraction arithmetic. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(3), 909.
Siegler, R. S., & Pyke, A. A. (2013). Developmental and individual differences in understanding of fractions. Developmental Psychology, 49(10).
Son, J. W., & Lee, J. E. (2016). Pre-service teachers' understanding of fraction multiplication, Representational knowledge, and computational skills. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 18(2), 5-28.
Sung, W., Ahn, J., & Black, J. B. (2017). Introducing computational thinking to young learners: Practicing computational perspectives through embodiment in mathematics education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 22, 443-463.
Syed Arabi Idid. (1998). Kaedah penyelidikan komunikasi dan sains sosial. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Tsai, M. C., & Tsai, C. W. (2018). Applying online externally-facilitated regulated learning and computational thinking to improve students’ learning. Universal Access in the Information Society, 17, 811-820.
Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2022). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally. Pearson. One Lake Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
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, 127-147.
Wijaya, A. (2017). The relationships between indonesian fourth graders' difficulties in fractions and the opportunity to learn ractions: A snapshot of TIMSS results. International Journal of Instruction, 10(4), 221-236.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35
Yasar, O., & Maliekal, J., & Veronesi, P., & Little, L. J. (2017, June), The essence of scientific and engineering thinking and tools to promote it .Paper presented at 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Columbus, Ohio. 10.18260/1-2--28966.
