Exploring the Integration of Computational Thinking and Mathematical Modelling in STEM Education
Abstract
Purpose of the study: The aim of this study is to explore the effectiveness of integrating Computational Thinking (CT) and Mathematical Modelling (MM) in STEM education to improve students’ understanding of mathematical concepts, problem-solving skills, and engagement in the learning process.
Methodology: This study utilized a quasi-experimental method with pre-test and post-test design. The sample of this study consisted of 200 students, who were randomly selected from four high schools in the Jambi City and Muaro Jambi areas. Tools included a mathematics achievement test and a student engagement questionnaire. Data were analyzed using paired t-tests and independent t-tests with the aid of SPSS software.
Main Findings: The integration of Computational Thinking and Mathematical Modelling significantly improved students' understanding of mathematical concepts, problem-solving skills, and engagement. The experimental group showed a notable increase in post-test scores and higher engagement levels compared to the control group.
Novelty/Originality of this study: This study introduces a novel framework for integrating Computational Thinking and Mathematical Modelling in STEM education, highlighting its potential to enhance both cognitive and affective aspects of learning. It provides empirical evidence supporting the use of innovative approaches to advance mathematics education.
References
D. Akgunduz and C. Mesutoglu, “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education for Industry 4.0 in Technical and Vocational High Schools: Investigation of Teacher Professional Development,” Sci. Educ. Int., vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 172–181, 2021, doi: 10.33828/sei.v32.i2.11.
P. Caratozzolo, E. Bravo, C. Garay-Rondero, and J. Membrillo-Hernandez, “Educational Innovation: Focusing on enhancing the skills of Generation Z workforce in STEM,” Proc. 2021 World Eng. Educ. Forum/Global Eng. Deans Counc. WEEF/GEDC 2021, no. June 2022, pp. 488–495, 2021, doi: 10.1109/WEEF/GEDC53299.2021.9657304.
Z. Lavicza et al., “Developing and Evaluating Educational Innovations for STEAM Education in Rapidly Changing Digital Technology Environments,” Sustain., vol. 14, no. 12, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su14127237.
E. A. Dare, K. Keratithamkul, B. M. Hiwatig, and F. Li, “Beyond content: The role of stem disciplines, real-world problems, 21st century skills, and stem careers within science teachers’ conceptions of integrated stem education,” Educ. Sci., vol. 11, no. 11, 2021, doi: 10.3390/educsci11110737.
U. Sari, E. Duygu, Ö. F. Şen, and T. Kirindi, “The effects of STEM education on scientific process skills and STEM awareness in simulation based inquiry learning environment,” J. Turkish Sci. Educ., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 387–405, 2020, doi: 10.36681/tused.2020.34.
J. Contente and C. Galvão, “STEM Education and Problem‐Solving in Space Science: A Case Study with CanSat,” Educ. Sci., vol. 12, no. 4, 2022, doi: 10.3390/educsci12040251.
J. Fagerlund, P. Häkkinen, M. Vesisenaho, and J. Viiri, “Computational thinking in programming with Scratch in primary schools: A systematic review,” Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 12–28, 2021, doi: 10.1002/cae.22255.
R. Isharyadi and D. Juandi, “A Systematics Literature Review of Computational Thinking in Mathematics Education: Benefits and Challenges,” Form. J. Ilm. Pendidik. MIPA, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 69–80, 2023, doi: 10.30998/formatif.v13i1.15922.
V. Dolgopolovas and V. Dagiene, “On the future of computational thinking education: Moving beyond the digital agenda, a discourse analysis perspective,” Sustain., vol. 13, no. 24, 2021, doi: 10.3390/su132413848.
Z. Kohen and D. Orenstein, “Mathematical modeling of tech-related real-world problems for secondary school-level mathematics,” Educ. Stud. Math., vol. 107, no. 1, pp. 71–91, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10649-020-10020-1.
Á. Alsina and M. Salgado, “Understanding Early Mathematical Modelling: First Steps in the Process of Translation Between Real-world Contexts and Mathematics,” Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 1719–1742, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10763-021-10232-8.
A. Bicer, “A systematic literature review: Discipline-specific and general instructional practices fostering the mathematical creativity of students,” Int. J. Educ. Math. Sci. Technol., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 252–281, 2021, doi: 10.46328/IJEMST.1254.
M. Stella, A. Kapuza, C. Cramer, and S. Uzzo, “Mapping computational thinking mindsets between educational levels with cognitive network science,” J. Complex Networks, vol. 9, no. 6, 2021, doi: 10.1093/comnet/cnab020.
C. H. Liao, C. T. Chiang, I. C. Chen, and K. R. Parker, “Exploring the relationship between computational thinking and learning satisfaction for non-STEM college students,” Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ., vol. 19, no. 1, 2022, doi: 10.1186/s41239-022-00347-5.
B. Muchsini, Siswandari, Gunarhadi, and Wiranto, “Behavioural Dimensions of College Students’ Intention to Implement Computational Thinking in Designing Spreadsheets for Accounting,” Pegem Egit. ve Ogr. Derg., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 241–252, 2022, doi: 10.47750/pegegog.12.04.25.
H. Belmar, “Review on the teaching of programming and computational thinking in the world,” Front. Comput. Sci., vol. 4, no. 997222, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fcomp.2022.997222.
I. Lee and J. Malyn-Smith, “Computational Thinking Integration Patterns Along the Framework Defining Computational Thinking from a Disciplinary Perspective,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 9–18, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10956-019-09802-x.
D. F. Rosali and D. Suryadi, “An Analysis of Students’ Computational Thinking Skills on The Number Patterns Lesson during The Covid-19 Pandemic,” Form. J. Ilm. Pendidik. MIPA, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 217–232, 2021, doi: 10.30998/formatif.v11i2.9905.
N. Markandan, K. Osman, and L. Halim, “Integrating Computational Thinking and Empowering Metacognitive Awareness in Stem Education,” Front. Psychol., vol. 13, no. June, pp. 1–18, 2022, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.872593.
C. Tripon, “Supporting Future Teachers to Promote Computational Thinking Skills in Teaching STEM—A Case Study,” Sustain., vol. 14, no. 19, 2022, doi: 10.3390/su141912663.
K. Hava and Z. Koyunlu Ünlü, “Investigation of the Relationship Between Middle School Students’ Computational Thinking Skills and their STEM Career Interest and Attitudes Toward Inquiry,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 484–495, 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10956-020-09892-y.
Q. Li, “Computational thinking and teacher education: An expert interview study,” Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 324–338, 2021, doi: 10.1002/hbe2.224.
H. J. So, M. S. Y. Jong, and C. C. Liu, “Computational Thinking Education in the Asian Pacific Region,” Asia-Pacific Educ. Res., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s40299-019-00494-w.
R. Jocius, W. I. O’Byrne, J. Albert, D. Joshi, R. Robinson, and A. Andrews, “Infusing Computational Thinking into STEM Teaching: From Professional Development to Classroom Practice,” Educ. Technol. Soc., vol. 24, no. 4, pp. 166–179, 2021.
A. Abassian, F. Safi, S. Bush, and J. Bostic, “Five different perspectives on mathematical modeling in mathematics education,” Investig. Math. Learn., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 53–65, 2020, doi: 10.1080/19477503.2019.1595360.
A. N. Cahyono, Y. L. Sukestiyarno, M. Asikin, Miftahudin, M. G. K. Ahsan, and M. Ludwig, “Learning mathematical modelling with augmented reality mobile math trails program: How can it work?,” J. Math. Educ., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 181–192, 2020, doi: 10.22342/jme.11.2.10729.181-192.
M. Cevikbas, G. Kaiser, and S. Schukajlow, A systematic literature review of the current discussion on mathematical modelling competencies: state-of-the-art developments in conceptualizing, measuring, and fostering, vol. 109, no. 2. Springer Netherlands, 2022. doi: 10.1007/s10649-021-10104-6.
A. Leung, “Boundary crossing pedagogy in STEM education,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 7, no. 15, pp. 1–11, 2020, doi: 10.1186/s40594-020-00212-9.
L. F. Jawad, B. H. Majeed, and H. T. S. Alrikabi, “The Impact of Teaching by Using STEM Approach in The Development of Creative Thinking and Mathematical Achievement Among the Students of The Fourth Scientific Class,” Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol., vol. 15, no. 13, pp. 172–188, 2021, doi: 10.3991/ijim.v15i13.24185.
R. Ziatdinov and J. R. Valles, “Synthesis of Modeling, Visualization, and Programming in GeoGebra as an Effective Approach for Teaching and Learning STEM Topics,” Mathematics, vol. 10, no. 3, 2022, doi: 10.3390/math10030398.
S. Eliseeva, E. Fedinishina, and N. Kushcheva, “Effect of Secondary Food Resources in the Formation of the Quality of Flour Confectionery,” J. Hyg. Eng. Des., vol. 36, pp. 37–42, 2021.
L. Maybury, P. Corcoran, and L. Cipcigan, “Mathematical modelling of electric vehicle adoption: A systematic literature review,” Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ., vol. 107, no. May, p. 103278, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2022.103278.
Y. Pan et al., “Building energy simulation and its application for building performance optimization: A review of methods, tools, and case studies,” Adv. Appl. Energy, vol. 10, no. December 2022, p. 100135, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.adapen.2023.100135.
I. Lee, S. Grover, F. Martin, S. Pillai, and J. Malyn-Smith, “Computational Thinking from a Disciplinary Perspective: Integrating Computational Thinking in K-12 Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 1–8, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10956-019-09803-w.
H. Ye, B. Liang, O. L. Ng, and C. S. Chai, “Integration of computational thinking in K-12 mathematics education: a systematic review on CT-based mathematics instruction and student learning,” Int. J. STEM Educ., vol. 10, no. 1, 2023, doi: 10.1186/s40594-023-00396-w.
K. P. Waterman, L. Goldsmith, and M. Pasquale, “Integrating Computational Thinking into Elementary Science Curriculum: an Examination of Activities that Support Students’ Computational Thinking in the Service of Disciplinary Learning,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 53–64, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10956-019-09801-y.
T. P. L. Nguyen, T. H. Nguyen, and T. K. Tran, “STEM education in secondary schools: Teachers’ perspective towards sustainable development,” Sustain., vol. 12, no. 21, pp. 1–16, 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12218865.
N. M. Tri, P. D. Hoang, and N. T. Dung, “Impact of the industrial revolution 4.0 on higher education in Vietnam: challenges and opportunities,” Linguist. Cult. Rev., vol. 5, no. S3, pp. 1–15, 2021, doi: 10.21744/lingcure.v5ns3.1350.
Y. Li et al., “Computational Thinking Is More about Thinking than Computing,” J. STEM Educ. Res., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 1–18, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s41979-020-00030-2.
S. Inganah, R. Darmayanti, and N. Rizki, “Problems, Solutions, and Expectations: 6C Integration of 21 st Century Education into Learning Mathematics,” JEMS (Journal Math. Sci. Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 220–238, 2023.
C. Wang, J. Shen, and J. Chao, “Integrating Computational Thinking in STEM Education: A Literature Review,” Int. J. Math. Sci. Educ., vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 1949–1972, 2021.
W. Sung and J. B. Black, “Factors to consider when designing effective learning: Infusing computational thinking in mathematics to support thinking-doing,” J. Res. Technol. Educ., vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 404–426, 2020, doi: 10.1080/15391523.2020.1784066.
T. Palts and M. Pedaste, “A model for developing computational thinking skills,” Informatics Educ., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 113–128, 2020, doi: 10.15388/INFEDU.2020.06.
H. Taherdoost, “What are Different Research Approaches? Comprehensive Review of Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Research, Their Applications, Types, and Limitations,” J. Manag. Sci. Eng. Res., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 53–63, 2022, doi: 10.30564/jmser.v5i1.4538.
H. Taherdoost, “Data Collection Methods and Tools for Research; A Step-by-Step Guide to Choose Data Collection Technique for Academic and Business Research Projects Hamed Taherdoost. Data Collection Methods and Tools for Research; A Step-by-Step Guide to Choose Data Collection Technique for Academic Data Collection Methods and Tools for Research; A Step-by-Step Guide to Choose Data Collection Technique for Academic and Business Research Projects,” Int. J. Acad. Res. Manag., vol. 2021, no. 1, pp. 10–38, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://hal.science/hal-03741847
H. R. Ganesha and P. S. Aithal, “How to choose an appropriate research data collection method and method choice among various research data collection methods and method choices during Ph. D. program in India?,” Int. J. Manag. Technol. Soc. Sci., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 455–489, 2022.
S. Baltes and P. Ralph, “Sampling in software engineering research: a critical review and guidelines,” Empir. Softw. Eng., vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 1–38, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s10664-021-10072-8.
M. M. Rahman, M. I. Tabash, A. Salamzadeh, S. Abduli, and M. S. Rahaman, “Sampling Techniques (Probability) for Quantitative Social Science Researchers: A Conceptual Guidelines with Examples,” SEEU Rev., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 42–51, 2022, doi: 10.2478/seeur-2022-0023.
G. K. Mweshi and K. Sakyi, “Application of sampling methods for the research design,” Arch. Bus. Res., vol. 8, no. 11, pp. 180–193, 2020, doi: 10.14738/abr.811.9042.
S. Raifman, M. A. DeVost, J. C. Digitale, Y.-H. Chen, and M. D. Morris, “Respondent-Driven Sampling: a Sampling Method for Hard-to-Reach Populations and Beyond,” Curr. Epidemiol. Reports, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 38–47, 2022, doi: 10.1007/s40471-022-00287-8.
J. Golzar and S. Noor, “Defining Convenience Sampling in a Scientific Research,” Int. J. Educ. Lang. Stud., vol. 1, no. November, pp. 72–77, 2022.
A. Ariffin, “Effects of Student Collaboration on ESL Learners’ Vocabulary Development,” Asian J. Univ. Educ., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 177–191, 2021, doi: 10.24191/ajue.v17i1.12627.
S. Afifah, A. Mudzakir, and A. B. D. Nandiyanto, “How to Calculate Paired Sample t-Test using SPSS Software: From Step-by-Step Processing for Users to the Practical Examples in the Analysis of the Effect of Application Anti-Fire Bamboo Teaching Materials on Student Learning Outcomes,” Indones. J. Teach. Sci., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 81–92, 2022, doi: 10.17509/ijotis.v2i1.45895.
J. W. Oh and J. E. Kim, “Effectiveness of a virtual reality application-based education programme on patient safety management for nursing students: A pre-test–post-test study,” Nurs. Open, vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 7622–7630, 2023, doi: 10.1002/nop2.2001.
S. Movva, P. R. Alapati, P. Veliventi, and M. G, “The Effect of Pre , While , and Post Listening Activities on Developing EFL Students ’ Listening Skills,” Theory Pract. Lang. Stud., vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 1500–1507, 2022, doi: 10.17507/tpls.1208.05.
G. Jariono, H. Nugroho, I. Hermawan, F. Fachrezzy, and U. Maslikah, “The Effect of Circuit Learning on Improving The Physical Fitness of Elementary School Students,” Int. J. Educ. Res. Soc. Sci., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 59–68, 2021, doi: 10.51601/ijersc.v2i1.22.
R. Parekh, “Comparison Analysis of Construction Costs according to LEED and non-LEED Certified Educational Buildings,” J. Emerg. Technol. Innov. Res., vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 1–8, 2024.
S. K. Kwak and J. Kim, “Transparency considerations for describing statistical analyses in research,” Korean J. Anesthesiol., vol. 74, no. 6, pp. 488–495, 2021, doi: 10.4097/kja.21203.
F. Kardaş, “The fear of COVID-19 raises the level of depression, anxiety and stress through the mediating role of intolerance of uncertainty,” Stud. Psychol. (Bratisl)., vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 291–306, 2021, doi: 10.31577/SP.2021.03.828.
L. Surucu and A. Maslakci, “Business & Management Studies :,” Bus. Manag. Stud. An Int. J., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 2694–2726, 2020.
A. E. Pierson and C. E. Brady, “Expanding opportunities for systems thinking, conceptual learning, and participation through embodied and computational modeling,” Systems, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1–31, 2020, doi: 10.3390/systems8040048.
F. Del Cerro Velázquez and G. M. Méndez, “Application in augmented reality for learning mathematical functions: A study for the development of spatial intelligence in secondary education students,” Mathematics, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 1–19, 2021, doi: 10.3390/math9040369.
M. A. S. Sulistiyo and A. Wijaya, “The effectiveness of inquiry-based learning on computational thinking skills and self-efficacy of high school students,” in Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2020, pp. 1–10. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1581/1/012046.
H. Lei, M. M. Chiu, F. Li, X. Wang, and Y. jing Geng, “Computational thinking and academic achievement: A meta-analysis among students,” Child. Youth Serv. Rev., vol. 118, no. September, p. 105439, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105439.
F. Alatas and N. A. Yakin, “The Effect of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Learning on Students’ Problem Solving Skill,” JIPF (Jurnal Ilmu Pendidik. Fis., vol. 6, no. 1, p. 1, 2021, doi: 10.26737/jipf.v6i1.1829.
Copyright (c) 2024 Fifi Fitriani, Triandafillos Triandafillidis, Le Phuong Thao
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and acknowledge that the Interval: Indonesian Journal of Mathematical Education is the first publisher licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors are 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 an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their 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 and earlier and greater citation of published work.
