Enhancing Creative Mathematical Thinking with GeoGebra : A Comparative Study of Secondary School Students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56294/saludcyt20251435Keywords:
Creative Thinking, Comparative Study, GeoGebra, Mathematical LearningAbstract
Developing students' creative mathematical thinking skills is essential for problem-solving and innovation in mathematics education. GeoGebra, as a dynamic geometry software, has been widely used to support conceptual understanding and visualization. However, limited studies have explored its impact on creative mathematical thinking in schools with different characteristics. This study aims to analyze and provide an overview of the improvement in students’ creative mathematical thinking skills using GeoGebra software in schools with different characteristics. This research uses a quasi-experimental method with a pre-test and post-test design without a control group. The sample consists of 90 eleventh-grade students from three high schools in Padang City. Data were collected through tests of creative mathematical thinking skills and classroom observations. Statistical analyses, including Wilcoxon and t-tests, were conducted to measure the significance of changes in students' creative thinking skills. The results indicate that most aspects of creative thinking skills showed significant improvement, particularly in originality and flexibility, although there was a decline in some aspects, namely fluency and elaboration, in these schools. The Wilcoxon and t-test analyses showed a significant difference (p < 0.05) between students' pre-test and post-test creative mathematical thinking scores. Therefore, there is an improvement in students’ creative mathematical thinking skills after learning using GeoGebra. This study demonstrates that integrating GeoGebra into mathematics instruction enhances students’ creative mathematical thinking. The results suggest that GeoGebra can be an effective tool for fostering creativity in mathematics education. Future research should focus on addressing the decline in fluency and elaboration to optimize its implementation.
References
1. Supena I, Darmuki A, Hariyadi A. The influence of 4C (constructive, critical, creativity, collaborative) learning model on students’ learning outcomes. Int J Instr. 2021;14(3):873–92.
2. Sriraman B. Mathematical Creativity: Psychology, Progress and Caveats. ZDM-Mathematics Education. ZDM-Mathematics Educ. 2017;49(7):971–5.
3. Nurjanah N, Herlambang YT, Hendrawan B, Gandana G. Regional Language Education in the Era of the Industrial Revolution Era 4.0: An Idea about Education in the Techno-pedagogy Perspective. J Phys Conf Ser. 2020;1477(4):0–5.
4. Joklitschke J, Rott B, Schindler M. Theories about mathematical creativity in contemporary research : a literature review. Pme [Internet]. 2018;3(July):99–106. Available from: https://weizmann.esploro.exlibrisgroup.com/esploro/outputs/conferenceProceeding/What-do-mathematicians-wish-to-teach/993336213403596%0Ahttps://weizmann.esploro.exlibrisgroup.com/esploro/fulltext/conferenceProceeding/What-do-mathematicians-wish-to-teach/99
5. Wahyudi, W., Suyitno, H., and Isnarto M. Effectiveness of Problem Based Blended Learning (PB2L)Model with Blended Learning on Improving Creative Thinking Ability in Mathematical Problem Solving. In: International Conference on Science and Education and Technology. Atlantis Press; 2018.
6. Wahyudi, W., Waluya, B., Suyitno, H., Sutriyino & Anugraheni I. Development of Problem-based Blended Learning (PB2L) model to increase pre-service primary teacher’s creative thinking skill. J Educ Learn. 2019;13(2):324–34.
7. Iskandar RSF, Juandi D. Study Literature Review: Realistic Mathematics Education Learning on Students’ Mathematical Creative Thinking Ability. SJME (Supremum J Math Educ. 2022;6(1):35–42.
8. Kholid, Muhammad Noor; Mahmudah, Mutiara Hisda; Ishartono, Naufal; Putra, Fredi Ganda; Forthmann B. Classification of students’ creative thinking for non-routine mathematical problems. Cogent Educ. 2024;11(1):2394738.
9. Education GPS O. Indonesia Student performance (PISA 2022). In. Available from: https://gpseducation.oecd.org/CountryProfile?primaryCountry=IDN&treshold=10&topic=PI
10. OECD. Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) Results From PISA 2018. In OECD; 2022. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1787/888934028140
11. Ministry of Education Singapore. ). 21st Century Competencies and Student Outcomes Framework. Singapore. 2020;
12. National Board of Education F (2016). National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2014. In Finnish National Agency for Education; Available from: https://www.oph.fi/en
13. MEXT (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and T japan). The Course of Study for Lower Secondary Schools: Mathematics. In Ministry of education Japan; 2017.
14. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein B. TIMSS 2019 International Results in Mathematics and Science. In Retrieved from Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center; 2019. Available from: https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/international-results/
15. ADB. Basic 2021 Statistics : Statistics and Data Innovation Unit. Manila: Asian Development Bank; 2021.
16. World Economic Forum. WEF. The global risks report 2020. In In World Economic Forum, Davos.; 2020.
17. Tirri K, Cho S, Ahn D, Campbell JR. Editorial : Education for Creativity and Talent Development in the 21st Century Education for Creativity and Talent Development in the 21st Century. 2017;
18. Hamidah, Kusuma JW, Auliana S. Development of Discovery-Based Etnobra (Ethnomathematics Geogebra) Geometry Learning Model to Improve Geometric Skills in Terms of Student Learning Styles and Domicile. Math Teaching-Research J. 2024;16(3):25–57.
19. Yusri Wahyuni, Jamaris, Solfema. Integration Of Digital Technology In Mathematics Learning. Int J Humanit Educ Soc Sci. 2021;1(3):144–51.
20. Hohenwarter M, Jarvis D, Lavicza Z. Linking Geometry, Algebra and Mathematics Teachers: GeoGebra Software and the Establishment of the International GeoGebra Institute. Int J Technol Math Educ. 2009;16(2):83–7.
21. Zulnaidi H, Oktavika E, Hidayat R. Effect of use of GeoGebra on achievement of high school mathematics students. Educ Inf Technol. 2020;25(1):51–72.
22. Özçakır, B., Özdemir, D., & Kıymaz Y. Effects of dynamic geometry software on students’ geometric thinking regarding probability of giftedness in mathematics. 2020. p. 48–61.
23. Adelabu FM, Marange IY, Alex J. GeoGebra software to Teach and Learn Circle Geometry: Academic Achievement of Grade 11 Students. Math Teaching-Research J. 2022;14(3):2–16.
24. Yimer ST. Effective Instruction for Calculus Learning Outcomes through Blending co-operative Learning and Geogebra. 2022;(October).
25. Yerizon, Fatimah S, Tasman F. Development of a geogebra-assisted calculus worksheet to enhance students’ understanding. Int J Inf Educ Technol. 2021;11(10):456–63.
26. Santos-Trigo M. Mathematical Problem Solving and the Use of Digital Technologies. Math Probl Solving. 2019;63–89.
27. Lin CY. Threshold Effects of Creative Problem‐Solving Attributes on Creativity in the Math Abilities of Taiwanese Upper Elementary Students. Educ Res Int. 2017;2017(1).
28. Wahyuni Y, Fauzan A, Yerizon Y, Musdi E. Analisis Literasi Digital Mahasiswa dalam Pembelajaran Matematika Berbasis Geogebra. J Cendekia J Pendidik Mat. 2022;6(3):3358–71.
29. Philemon NM, Chibisa A, Mabusela MS. Acceptance of the GeoGebra Application in Learning Circle Theorems. Int J Learn Teach Educ Res. 2022;21(12):1–20.
30. Zainuddin, Z., Shujahat, M., Haruna, H., & Chu SKW. The role of gamified e-quizzes on student learning and engagement: An interactive gamification solution for a formative assessment system. Comput Educ. 2020;145:103729.
31. Saad MRM, Mamat S, Hidayat R, Othman AJ. Integrating Technology-Based Instruction and Mathematical Modelling for STEAM-Based Language Learning: A Sociocultural and Self-Determination Theory Perspective. Int J Interact Mob Technol. 2023;17(14):55–80.
32. Wahyuni, Yusri., Fauziah., Amelia, Riska., & Friska MKL. Development of Project-Based Worksheets integrated with Geogebra. JPMIPA. 2023;23(3):699–709.
33. Zulnaidi H. The Effectiveness of the GeoGebra Software : The Intermediary Role of Procedural Knowledge On Students ’ Conceptual Knowledge and Their Achievement in Mathematics. 2017;8223(6):2155–80.
34. Weinhandl R, Lavicza Z, Hohenwarter M, Enhancing S, Weinhandl R, Lavicza Z, et al. Enhancing Flipped Mathematics Education by Utilising GeoGebra To cite this article : Enhancing Flipped Mathematics Education by Utilising GeoGebra. 2020;
35. Zainuddin Z, Shujahat M, Haruna H, Chu SKW. The role of gamified e-quizzes on student learning and engagement: An interactive gamification solution for a formative assessment system. Comput Educ [Internet]. 2020;145:103729. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103729
36. Hidayat, Riyan. & Wardat Y. A systematic review of Augmented Reality in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics education. Edication Inf Technol. 2023;29:9257–82.
37. Malatjie F, Machaba F. Exploring Mathematics Learners ’ Conceptual Understanding of Coordinates and Transformation Geometry through Concept Mapping Definition of a Concept Map. 2019;15(12).
38. Guilford J. Creativity. Am Psychol. 1950;5(9):444–54.
39. Torrance EP. Torrance tests of creative thinking : norms-technical manual. Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Services; 1966.
40. Hohenwarter M, Jones K. Ways of linking geometry and algebra: the case of GeoGebra. Proc Br Soc Res into Learn Math [Internet]. 2007;27(3):126–131. Available from: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/50742/
41. Birgin, Osman., & Yazici KU. The Effect of GeoGebra Sofware-Supported Mathematics Instruction on Eighth-Grade Students’ Conceptual Unsderstanding and Retention. J Comput Assist Learn. 2021;37(4):925–39.
42. Hidayat W, Widodo SA, Syahrizal T. The statistical thinking skill and adversity quotient of English pre-service teacher. Int J Eval Res Educ. 2023;12(1):421–32.
43. Hamzah NAH, Hidayat R. Peranan Perisian Geogebra dalam Pendidikan Matematik : Sorotan Literatur Bersistematik. J Pendidik Sains dan Mat Malaysia. 2022;12(2):24–38.
44. Denhere C, Chinyoka K, Mambeu J. Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development Theory: What are its Implications for Mathematical Teaching? Greener J Soc Sci. 2013;3(7):371–7.
45. Freeman B, Higgins KN, Horney M. How Students Communicate Mathematical Ideas: An Examination of Multimodal Writing Using Digital Technologies. Contemp Educ Technol. 2020;7(4):281–313.
46. Mujiasih M, Waluya B, Kartono K, Mariani S. The students’ mathematics communication skill performance after geogebra-assisted EPIC-R learning implementation. Int J Learn Teach Educ Res. 2021;20(10):256–73.
47. Yohannes, A., & Chen HL. GeoGebra in mathematics education: a systematic review of journal articles published from 2010 to 2020. Interact Learn Environ. 2023;31(9):5682–97.
48. Seri S, Mohd K, Zulnaidi H. Effects of Brain-Based Teaching Approach Integrated with GeoGebra ( B-Geo Module ) on Students ’ Conceptual Understanding Effects of Brain-Based Teaching Approach Integrated with GeoGebra ( B-. 2022;(March 2023).
49. Septian A, Sugiarni R, Monariska E. The Application of Android-based GeoGebra on Quadratic Equations Material toward Mathematical Creative Thinking ability. Al-Jabar J Pendidik Mat. 2020;11(2):261–72.
50. Santiago PV da S, Alves FRV. Affine Functions Using GeoGebra: An Investigation From the Perspective of Conceptual Fields Theory. Contemp Math Sci Educ. 2022;3(2):ep22013.
51. Groening, Christoper., & Binnewies C. “Achievement unlocked!” - The impact of digital achievements as a gamification element on motivation and performance. Comput Human Behav. 2019;97(2):151–66.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yusri Wahyuni, Ahmad Fauzan, Yerizon, I Made Arnawa, Dedy Irfan, Amran Rasli (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Unless otherwise stated, associated published material is distributed under the same licence.
