PENALARAN PADA PEMECAHAN AKAR NON-LINEAR

REVIEW INTEGRATIF LITERASI ALGORITMIK DAN BERPIKIR KRITIS

https://doi.org/10.30605/pedagogy.v10i4.7227

Authors

  • Khadijah Universitas Negeri Makassar
  • Suradi Universitas Negeri Makassar

Keywords:

Solusi Akar Non-Linear, Literasi Algoritmik, Berpikir Kritis

Abstract

Kemampuan menyelesaikan akar non-linear menuntut literasi algoritmik dan berpikir kritis. Pentingnya kebutuhan memahami bagaimana mahasiswa mengambil keputusan saat menyelesaikan akar non-linear, kajian ini memetakan profil literasi algoritmik dan kemampuan berpikir kritis berdasarkan kajian publikasi-publikasi Internasioal dan nasional. Kajian ini bertujuan untuk mengidentifikasi ruang kebaruan bagi studi selanjutnya. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu metode PRISMA dengan literature review naratif–integratif atas 112 artikel menjadi 37 artikel (30 internasional dan 7 nasional) dengan penelusuran terbatas (Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, DOAJ, Google Scholar), dan snowballing sitasi. Kriteria inklusi dalam kajian ini yaitu pendidikan matematika; komputasi (sekolah/perguruan tinggi); Critical thinking, Communication, Collaboration, Creativity (4C); berpikir kritis; Computational Thinking (CT); literasi algoritmik, peer-review, teks penuh. Seleksi dua tahap (screening judul dan abstrak kemudian membaca penuh) dengan deduplikasi dan analisis reliabilitas. Data diekstrak sesuai jenjang, fokus 4C, indikator algoritmik, domain akar non-linear, desain/asesmen, dan keterbatasan. Analisis sintesis deskriptif (frekuensi/proporsi) dan tematik. Hasil kajian diperoleh bahwa sebagian besar artikel membahas lebih dari satu komponen dalam 4C, sebagian kecil mengulas literasi algoritmik secara eksplisit, berfokus pada perguruan tinggi, dan belum ada yang menjadikan strategi akar non-linear sebagai konteks utama. Mayoritas menilai produk, bukan proses pembelajaran. Berdasarkan hasil kajian, ditemukan bahwa terdapat ruang kebaruan kuat untuk studi mendalam terkait proses literasi algoritmik dan berpikir kritis pada solusi akar non-linear. Implikasi bagi pengajaran berupa arahan adanya literasi algoritmik tertulis, menilai proses dan produk pembelajaran, dan menggunakan rubrik proses yang menautkan bukti produk pembelajaran.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Burden, R. L., & Faires, J. D. (2011). Numerical Analysis (9th ed.). Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.

Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing Grounded Theory (2nd ed.). Sage.

Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond PICO: The SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1435–1443. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452938

Denning, P. J., & Tedre, M. (2019). Computational Thinking. Computational Thinking, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11740.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11740.001.0001

Ennis, R. H. (2011). The Nature of Critical Thinking: An Outline of Critical Thinking Dispositions and Abilities. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/inquiryctnews20112613

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction (The Delphi Report).

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Nuryanti, L. S. Z. M. D. (2018). No Title. Jurnal Pendidikan, 3(2), 155–158. http://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:GPjPrcJMquUJ:scholar.google.com/+Analisis+Kemampuan+Berpikir+Kritis+Siswa+SMP&hl=id&as_sdt=0,5

OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results. In Factsheets: Vol. I. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2022-results-volume-i_53f23881-en%0Ahttps://www.oecd.org/publication/pisa-2022-results/country-notes/germany-1a2cf137/

OECD 2023. (2022). PISA PISA 2022 Results Malaysia. Journal Pendidikan, 10. https://www.oecd.org/publication/pisa-2022-results/country-notes/malaysia-1dbe2061/

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., & others. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement. BMJ, 372, n71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Reserved, A. R. (2021). 21st Century Learning. 19–33. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-4102-9.ch002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-4102-9.ch002

Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying Computational Thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 74–100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Utami, B., Probosari, R. M., Saputro, S., Ashadi, & Masykuri, M. (2019). Empowering critical thinking skills with problem solving in higher education. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1280(3). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1280/3/032047 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1280/3/032047

Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, & Al, M. et. (2016). Defining computational thinking for mathematics and science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 127–147. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5?utm_source=chatgpt.com#citeas DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5

Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x

Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational Thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215

Downloads

Published

2025-11-09

How to Cite

Khadijah, K., & Suradi, S. (2025). PENALARAN PADA PEMECAHAN AKAR NON-LINEAR: REVIEW INTEGRATIF LITERASI ALGORITMIK DAN BERPIKIR KRITIS. Pedagogy: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 10(4), 1742–1758. https://doi.org/10.30605/pedagogy.v10i4.7227

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 4 (2025): Pedagogy : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Pedagogy : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
  • That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
  • That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
  • They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  • They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.

License and Copyright Agreement

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. 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.
  3. 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, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

Most read articles by the same author(s)