Peningkatan Kemampuan Berpikir Komputasional pada Guru Madrasah: Scratch

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59698/afeksi.v5i6.375

Keywords:

berpikir komputasional, scratch, guru madrasah

Abstract

Penelitian ini mempunyai tujuan terkait pemahaman guru madrasah pada kemampuan berpikir komputasional sebelum maupun setelah kegiatan implementasi pelatihan scrath serta bagaimana efektivitas penggunaan teknologi scratch dalam proses pembelajaran di kelas oleh guru madrasah. Metode dalam penelitian yang akan telah digunakan adalah penelitian eksperimen  dengan desain one grup  pretest and posttest. Populasi pada kegiatan penelitian ini adalah guru madrasah di wilayah binaan kementerian agama di Kabupaten Semarang dan Kudus. Teknik sampling yang akan digunakan adalah teknik sampling incidental dimana yang akan terpilih menjadi sampel adalah guru yang akan ditugaskan oleh sekolah dalam mengikuti kegiatan pelatihan pembelajaran dengan menggunakan scratch. Selanjutnya akan digunakan uji peringkat bertanda alam mengetahui peningkatan kemampuan berpikir komputasional dengan menggunakan scratch. Hasil penelitian menyebutkan bahwa pemahaman guru sebelum mengikuti kegiatan implementasi scratch pada proses pembelajaran  sebesar 13,33. Setelah diadakan kegiatan pelatihan implementasi scratch dalam pembelajaran pemahaman kemampuan berpikir komputasional guru menjadi 88,33. Nilai rata-rata tes kemampuan berpikir komputasional guru sebelum kegiatan pelatihan adalah 23, 89 dan selanjutnya setelah mengikuti kegiatan pelatihan maka nilai rata-rata menjadi 73,06. Berdasarkan hal tersebut maka dapat dilihat ada peningkatakan kemampuan beripikir komputasional akibat diadakan kegiatan pelatihan scratch dalam pembelajaran.

Author Biographies

Saiful Marom, UIN Salatiga

Prodi Tadris Matematika

Wulan Izzatul Himmah, UIN Salatiga

Prodi Tadris Matematika

References

Allinder, R. (1995). An Examination of the Relationship Between Teacher Efficacy and Curriculum-Based Measurement and Student Achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 16(4), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259501600408

Angeli, C. (2020). Computational thinking education: Issues and challenges. In Computers in Human Behavior (Vol. 105). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106185

Castro, F. G., Kellison, J. G., Boyd, S. J., & Kopak, A. (2011). A Methodology for Conducting Integrative Mixed Methods. National Institute of Health, 4(4), 342–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689810382916.A

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research : Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research.

Ezeamuzie, N. O. (2022). Computational Thinking Through an Empirical Lens: A Systematic Review of Literature. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 60(2), 481–511. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331211033158

Guggemos, J. (2021). On the predictors of computational thinking and its growth at the high-school level. Computers and Education, 161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104060

Kemdikbud. (2021). Materi pelatihan program sekolah penggerak. In Dirjen GTK Kemdikbud.

Kong, S. C. (2022). Computational identity and programming empowerment of students in computational thinking development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(3), 668–686. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13175

Labusch, A. (2023). Learning computational thinking in secondary school (year 8) in Germany in international comparison: Results from ICILS 2018. In Teaching Coding in K-12 Schools: Research and Application (pp. 319–329). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21970-2_21

Marom, S., Waluya, S. B., Mariani, S., & Susilo, B. E. (2024). Computational Thinking Processes in Solving the Corona Epidemic Model: Pre-service Maths Teachers. International Journal of Experimental Research and Review, 43, 56–70. https://doi.org/10.52756/ijerr.2024.v43spl.005

Octalia, R. P., Rizal, N., & Siswandari, H. (2021). Pengembangan Media Pembelajaran Digital Berbasis Game Challenges untuk Meningkatkan Computational Thinking dalam Pembelajaran Mandiri sebagai Upaya Mewujudkan Merdeka Belajar. 149–166.

OECD. (2021). OECD member countries and Associates decided to postpone the PISA 2021 assessment to 2022 to reflect post-Covid difficulties. This draft vision was created before the crisis. The final version will reflect the new name of the cycle “PISA 2022.” 95. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/sitedocument/PISA-2021-mathematics-framework.pdf

OECD. (2022). PISA 2022 MATHEMATICS FRAMEWORK. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisa-2021-mathematics-framework-draft.pdf

Pérez-Marín, D. (2020). Can computational thinking be improved by using a methodology based on metaphors and scratch to teach computer programming to children? Computers in Human Behavior, 105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.027

Rich, P. (2022). Using Dr. Scratch as a Formative Feedback Tool to Assess Computational Thinking. In Research Anthology on Computational Thinking, Programming, and Robotics in the Classroom (Vol. 2, pp. 550–572). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-2411-7.ch026

Sari, D. M., Suhendra, & Elah Nurlaelah. (2024). How Prospective Mathematics Teachers Do Computational Thinking (CT) Task? : An Analysis Of CT Prior Knowledge. Hipotenusa: Journal of Mathematical Society, 6(1), 31–43. https://doi.org/10.18326/hipotenusa.v6i1.1908

Sentance, S. (2017). Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher’s perspective. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 469–495. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0

Soegeng, Y. (2017). Dasar-dasar penelitian : bidang sosial, psikologi, dan pendidikan. Magnum Pustaka Utama.

Tabesh, Y. (2017). Computational thinking: A 21st century skill. Olympiads in Informatics, 11(Special Issue), 65–70. https://doi.org/10.15388/ioi.2017.special.10

Trocado, A. (2022). Developing Computational Thinking in Portuguese Mathematics Curricula with Collatz Conjecture. In Proceedings of the Asian Technology Conference in Mathematics (pp. 363–372). https://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85142434828

Wibawa, B. (2014). Konsep Dasar Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. Metode Penelitian Pendidikan, 1–60. http://repository.ut.ac.id/4022/1/MIPK5201-M1.pdf

Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. March 2006, 3–3. https://doi.org/10.1109/vlhcc.2011.6070404

Wing, Jeannette M. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1881), 3717–3725. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2008.0118

Downloads

Published

2024-12-09

Issue

Vol. 5 No. 6 (2024)

Section

Articles

Citation Check

License

An author who publishes in  AFEKSI agrees to the following terms:
  • Author retains the copyright and grants the journal the right of first publication of the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal
  • The author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book) with the acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  • The author is permitted and encouraged to post his/her work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Read more about the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 Licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/.