Model Konflik Kognitif Konseptual Berbasis Visualisasi Dinamis (Model KKVD) untuk Meningkatkan Pemahaman Konseptual Transformasi Geometri
DOI:
10.29303/jm.v8i2.12163Published:
2026-06-18Downloads
Abstract
This study develops and examines the initial effectiveness of the Conceptual Cognitive Conflict Model Based on Dynamic Visualization (KKVD Model) for improving students’ conceptual understanding of geometric transformations. Initial effectiveness is defined here as the model’s capacity to produce statistically and practically significant differences in learning outcomes during a small-scale field trial, prior to broader dissemination. Using a Research and Development (R&D) design adapted from Thiagarajan’s 4D model (limited to the Develop phase), followed by a quasi-experimental field trial, the KKVD Model was validated by three experts (mean score 87.7%, Very Valid). The experimental group (n = 20) and control group (n = 20) consisted of Grade XI students from SMK Widyagama Malang, selected through purposive sampling based on comparable prior achievement and class availability. The experimental group’s mean posttest score (81.46) significantly exceeded the control group (72.29), with N-Gain of 0.70 (high) versus 0.54 (medium), and a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.12; p < 0.001). The most substantial improvements occurred in the conceptual relations and generalization dimensions, reflecting deeper conceptual restructuring. The KKVD Model systematically integrates cognitive conflict, GeoGebra-based dynamic visualization, and conceptual reconstruction into a validated instructional syntax, offering a promising alternative for meaningful geometry transformation learning.
Keywords:
conceptual cognitive conflict dynamic visualization geometric transformation conceptual understanding conceptual changeReferences
Arikunto, S. (2013). Dasar-dasar evaluasi pendidikan (edisi ke-2). Bumi Aksara.
Arzarello, F., Bartolini Bussi, M. G., Leung, A. Y. L., Mariotti, M. A., & Stevenson, I. (2012). Experimental approaches to theoretical thinking: Artefacts and proofs. In G. Hanna & M. de Villiers (Eds.), Proof and proving in mathematics education (pp. 97–143). Springer.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Drijvers, P., Kodde-Buitenhuis, H., & Doorman, M. (2019). Assessing mathematical thinking as part of curriculum reform in the Netherlands. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 102(3), 435–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09905-7
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Hollebrands, K. F. (2003). High school students’ understandings of geometric transformations in the context of a technological environment. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(03)00004-X
Jupri, A., Gozali, S. M., & Usdiyana, D. (2020). An analysis of a linear algebra task: A case of translation and reflection. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 14(2), 131–146.
Lee, G., Kwon, J., Park, S.-S., Kim, J.-W., Kwon, H.-G., & Park, H.-K. (2003). Development of an instrument for measuring cognitive conflict in secondary-level science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(6), 585–603. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10099
Leikin, R., Zazkis, R., & Meller, M. (2018). Research mathematicians as teacher educators: Focusing on mathematics for secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 21(5), 451–473. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-017-9388-9
Leung, A., Baccaglini-Frank, A., & Mariotti, M. A. (2013). Discernment of invariants in dynamic geometry environments. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 84(3), 439–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9492-4
Limón, M. (2001). On the cognitive conflict as an instructional strategy for conceptual change: A critical appraisal. Learning and Instruction, 11(4–5), 357–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00037-2
Lisarini, N., Zulkardi, Z., & Putri, R. I. I. (2023). GeoGebra-assisted learning and its effect on students’ conceptual understanding in geometry. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 17(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.22342/jpm.17.1.19041.1-18
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Panorkou, N., & Kılıç, Ç. (2021). Examining students’ reasoning about geometric transformations. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 33(2), 269–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00296-z
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660207
Riduwan. (2013). Skala pengukuran variabel-variabel penelitian. Alfabeta.
Sinclair, N., Bussi, M. G. B., de Villiers, M., Jones, K., Kortenkamp, U., Leung, A., & Owens, K. (2016). Recent research on geometry education: An ICME-13 survey team report. ZDM Mathematics Education, 48(7), 691–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0796-6
Thiagarajan, S., Semmel, D. S., & Semmel, M. I. (1974). Instructional development for training teachers of exceptional children. National Center for Improvement of Educational Systems.
Tippett, C. D. (2010). Refutation text in science education: A review of two decades of research. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 951–970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9203-x
Trocki, A., & Hollebrands, K. (2018). The development of a framework for assessing dynamic geometry task quality. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 4(2–3), 110–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-018-0041-8
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Firdaus Adji Saputro, Ibrahim Sani Ali Manggala, Rosmaiyadi, Anwas Mashuri, Mohammad Nurwahid
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
