Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer
Articles
Published: 2024-11-30

Enhancing students' problem-solving skills and engagement through inquiry-based mathematics education with Mathigon: A study on Cartesian coordinates

Mathematics Education Department, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, Indonesia
Mathematics Education Department, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, Indonesia
Mathematics Education Department, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, Indonesia
Mathematical problem-solving skills Student engagement Cartesian coordinates Mathigon Inquiry-based mathematics education approach

Galleys

Abstract

[English]: Students' mathematical problem-solving skills and learning engagement remain below expectations at a public junior high school in Kuala Batee, Aceh, Indonesia. This study examines the effectiveness of the IBME approach integrated with Mathigon in enhancing students' mathematical problem-solving abilities and learning engagement, compared to the traditional IBME approach without Mathigon, with a specific focus on Cartesian coordinates. This study employed a quantitative experimental approach using pre-test and post-test control group design. The sample, consisting of 42 Grade 8 junior high school students, was selected through a total sampling technique. Data was collected through tests and questionnaires and analyzed using normality and homogeneity tests, n-gain tests, and t-tests. The results demonstrate that the IBME approach with Mathigon significantly improves students' mathematical problem-solving skills and learning engagement compared to the traditional IBME approach without Mathigon. These findings suggest that the IBME approach, assisted by Mathigon, offers a practical and effective strategy for educators in designing mathematics instruction in schools.

[Bahasa]: Kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis dan keterlibatan belajar siswa pada salah satu Sekolah Menengah Pertama (SMP) di Kuala Batee, Aceh, Indonesia, masih belum maksimal. Tujuan penelitian ini yaitu untuk mengetahui peningkatan kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis dan keterlibatan belajar siswa melalui pembelajaran dengan pendekatan Inquiry-based Mathematics Education (IBME) berbantuan dan tanpa berbantuan Mathigon pada materi koordinat Cartesius. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif jenis eksperimen dengan desain penelitian pre-test dan post-test control group design. Sampel penelitian dipilih dengan teknik total sampling yang berjumlah 42 siswa kelas 8 SMP. Data dikumpulkan melalui tes dan angket, dan dianalisis melalui uji normalitas dan homogenitas, uji n-gain, dan uji t. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa peningkatan kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis dan keterlibatan belajar siswa melalui pendekatan IBME berbantuan Mathigon lebih baik daripada pembelajaran tanpa berbantuan Mathigon pada materi koordinat Cartesius. Berdasarkan hasil tersebut, pendekatan IBME dapat menjadi salah satu opsi bagi guru dalam merancang pembelajaran matematika di sekolah.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Abdurrahman, M. S., Halim, A. A., & Sharifah, O. (2021). Improving polytechnic students’ high-order-thinking-skills through inquiry-based learning in mathematics classroom. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 10(3), 976–983. http://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v10i3.21771
  2. Anggari, R. S., & Rufiana, I. S. (2020). Analisis kesulitan siswa dalam memecahkan masalah pada soal cerita materi bangun datar ditinjau dari minat belajar. Edupedia, 4(2), 113-123. https://studentjournal.umpo.ac.id/index.php/edupedia/article/view/540
  3. Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(3), 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
  4. Archambault, I., Janosz, M., Marizot, J., & Pagani, L. (2009). Adolescent behavioral, affective, and cognitive engagement in school: relationship to dropout. Journal of School Health, 79(9), 408–415. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00428.x
  5. Archer-Kuhn, B., Wiedeman, D., & Chalifoux, J. (2020). Student engagement and deep learning in higher education: reflections on inquiry-based learning on our group study program course in the UK. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 24(2), 107–122. https://openjournals.libs.uga.edu/jheoe/article/view/2069/2569
  6. Artigue, M., & Blomhøj, M. (2013). Conceptualizing inquiry-based education in mathematics. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(6), 797-810. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0506-6
  7. Artigue, M., Bosch, M., Doorman, M., Juhász, P., Kvasz, L., & Maass, K. (2020). Inquiry-based mathematics education and the development of learning trajectories. Teaching Mathematics and Computer Science, 18(3), 63–89. https://doi.org/10.5485/TMCS.2020.0505
  8. As’ari, A. R., Tohir, M., Valentino, E., & Imron, Z. (2017). Matematika SMP/MTs kelas VII semester 2. Jakarta: Kemendikbud.
  9. Attard, C., Berger, N., & Mackenzie, E. (2021). The positive influence of inquiry-based learning teacher professional learning and industry partnerships on student engagement with STEM. Frontiers in Education, 6(693221), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.693221
  10. Balda Álvaréz, P. A., Chacón-Castro, M., Busain, R. S., & Jadán-Guerrero, J. (2024). A didactic proposal for teaching factorization cases of expressions of ax2+by+cx+ay+exy+f through Mathigon. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(10), em2514. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15198
  11. Azizah, R. N., & Abadi, A. P. (2022). Kajian Pustaka: Resiliensi dalam Pembelajaran Matematika. Didactical Mathematics, 4(1), 104-110. https://doi.org/10.31949/dm.v4i1.2061
  12. Bancong, H., & Song, J. (2020). Exploring how students construct collaborative thought experiments during physics problem-solving activities. Science & Education, 29(3), 617-645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-020-00129-3
  13. Baykal, I. I., & Semiz, G. K. (2020). Middle school pre-service mathematics teachers’ opinions related to mathematics education for sustainability. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 20(89), 111-136. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1269840.pdf
  14. Căprioară, D. (2015). Problem solving-purpose and means of learning mathematics in school. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1859-1864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.332
  15. Cevikbas, M., & Kaiser, G. (2022). Student engagement in a flipped secondary mathematics classroom. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(7), 1455–1480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10213-x
  16. Chen, R. H. (2021). Fostering students’ workplace communicative competence and collaborative mindset through an inquiry-based learning design. Education Sciences, 11(17), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11010017
  17. Christanty, Z. J., & Cendana, W. (2021). Upaya guru meningkatkan keterlibatan siswa kelas K1 dalam pembelajaran synchronous. COLLASE (Creative of Learning Students Elementary Education), 4(3), 337-347. https://journal.ikipsiliwangi.ac.id/index.php/collase/article/view/7154
  18. Dahal, N., Manandhar, N. K., Luitel, L., Luitel, B. C., Pant, B. P., & Shrestha, I. M. (2022). ICT tools for remote teaching and learning mathematics: A proposal for autonomy and engagements. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 2(1), 289–296. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2022.01.013
  19. de Jong, T., Hendrikse, P., & van der Meij, H. (2010). Learning mathematics through inquiry: A large-scale evaluation. Designs for learning environments of the future: International perspectives from the learning sciences, 189-203. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-88279-6_7
  20. Deosari, A., Appulembang, O. D., Sangihe, S. L. H., & Sangihe, S. U. (2022). Penerapan penguatan positif terhadap keterlibatan perilaku siswa dalam pembelajaran jarak jauh [the implementation of positive reinforcement on students’behavior in distance learning. JOHME: Journal of Holistic Mathematics Education, 6(1), 90-106. http://dx.doi.org/10.19166/johme.v6i1.2868
  21. Divrik, R., Pilten, P., Mentiş Taş, A., Pusat, B., Khoja, P., & Yassawi International, A. (2020). Effect of inquiry-based learning method supported by metacognitive strategies on fourth-grade students’ problem-solving and problem-posing skills: a mixed methods research. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 13(2), 287–308. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1285560.pdf
  22. Dorier, J. L., & Maass, K. (2020). Inquiry-Based Mathematics Education. Dalam S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (hal. 300–304). The Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_176
  23. Dreyøe, J., Larsen, D. M., Hjelmborg, M. D., Michelsen, C., & Misfeldt, M. (2018). Inquiry-based learning in mathematics education: Important themes in the literature. In Nordic Research in Mathematics Education: Papers of NORMA 17 The Eighth Nordic Conference on Mathematics Education Stockholm, May 30-June 2, 2017 (pp. 329-342). Svensk förening för MatematikDidaktisk Forskning (SMDF). https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/295161907/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  24. Dwirahayu, G., Sandri, M., & Kusniawati, D. (2020). Inquiry based RME terhadap kemampuan representasi matematik siswa. FIBONACCI: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika Dan Matematika, 6(1), 45-58. https://jurnal.umj.ac.id/index.php/fbc/article/view/4082
  25. Ergen, Y. (2020). 'Does mathematics fool us?:'A study on fourth-grade students' non-routine maths problem-solving skills. Issues in Educational Research, 30(3), 845-865. https://www.iier.org.au/iier30/ergen-abs.html
  26. Farhan, M., & Retnawati, H. (2014). Keefektifan PBL dan IBL ditinjau dari prestasi belajar, kemampuan representasi matematis, dan motivasi belajar. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 1(2), 227-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v1i2.2678
  27. Ferreira, J. F., & Mendes, A. (2020). Open and interactive learning resources for algorithmic problem solving. Dalam E Sekerinski Lecture Notes in Computer Science (hal. 200-208). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54997-8_13
  28. Finn, J. D., & Rock, D. A. (1997). Academic success among students at risk for school failure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(1), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.2.221
  29. Foster, C. (2023). Problem solving in the mathematics curriculum: From domain‐general strategies to domain‐specific tactics. The Curriculum Journal, 34(4), 594-612. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.213
  30. Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2012). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education 8th Edition. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
  31. Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
  32. Genc, M., & Erbas, A. K. (2019). Secondary mathematics teachers' conceptions of mathematical literacy. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 7(3), 222-237. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1223953.pdf
  33. Glanville, J. L., & Wildhagen, T. (2007). The measurement of school engagement: Assessing dimensionality and measurement invariance across race and ethnicity. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67(6), 1019–1041. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164406299126
  34. Gómez-Chacón, I. M., Bacelo, A., Marbán, J. M., & Palacios, A. (2023). Inquiry-based mathematics education and attitudes towards mathematics: Tracking profiles for teaching. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-023-00468-8
  35. Gosztonyi, K. (2022). Series of problems in Clairaut’s Elements of Geometry: Interaction between historical analysis and mathematics education research. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 54(7), 1463-1478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01441-8
  36. Gunawan, G., Harjono, A., Nisyah, M., Kusdiastuti, M., & Herayanti, L. (2020). Improving students' problem-solving skills using an inquiry learning model combined with an advanced organizer. International Journal of Instruction, 13(4), 427–442. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1270838.pdf
  37. Gunuc, S. (2014). The relationships between student engagement and their academic achievement. International Journal on New Trends in Education and their implications, 5(4), 216-231. http://ijonte.org/FileUpload/ks63207/File/19..gunuc.pdf
  38. Gustiningsi, T., & Utari, R. S. (2021, January). Developing of higher order thinking skill (HOTS) mathematical problems with Cartesian coordinate material. In 4th Sriwijaya University Learning and Education International Conference (SULE-IC 2020) (pp. 561-566). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.201230.163
  39. Hake, R. R. (2002). Relationship of individual student normalized learning gains in mechanics with gender, high-school physics, and pre-test scores on mathematics and spatial visualization. Dalam R R Hake Physics education research conference (hal. 1-14). https://web.physics.indiana.edu/hake/PERC2002h-Hake.pdf
  40. Harahap, F. S. W., & Harahap, A. S. M. (2020, February). Peningkatan kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematika siswa SMP menggunakan metode pembelajaran inkuiri. In Seminar Nasional Teknologi Komputer & Sains (SAINTEKS) (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 622-626). https://prosiding.seminar-id.com/index.php/sainteks/article/view/511
  41. Hayuningrat, S., & Rosnawati, R. (2022). Development of learning tools based on a realistic mathematics approach oriented to high school students' mathematical generalization ability. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 9(2), 191-200. http://dx.doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v9i2.52197
  42. Huang, L., Doorman, M., & van Joolingen, W. (2021). Inquiry-based learning practices in lower-secondary mathematics education reported by students from China and the Netherlands. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 19, 1505-1521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10122-5
  43. Ivanova, K. (2023). The problem analysis of distance learning organization of spatial relations and geometrical figures for future teachers of primary education. Education in the 21st Century, 10(2), 201-207. https://journals.ysu.am/index.php/Educ-21st-Century/article/view/11153
  44. Jimerson, S. R., Campos, E., & Greif, J. L. (2003). Toward an understanding of definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. The California School Psychologist, 8(1), 7–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340893
  45. Kechil, R., Mohd Mydin, A., & Wan Mohammad, W. A. (2022). GeoGram: digital game-based learning tool for improving basic geometric knowledge. In Exploring New Innovation In e-Learning (hal. 41-45). Selangor: Unit Penulisan Dan Penerbitan JSKM. https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/60342/1/60342.pdf
  46. Lam, S. F., Jimerson, S., Wong, B. P. H., Kikas, E., Shin, H., Veiga, F. H., Hatzichristou, C., Polychroni, F., Cefai, C., Negovan, V., Stanculescu, E., Yang, H., Liu, Y., Basnett, J., Duck, R., Farrell, P., Nelson, B., & Zollneritsch, J. (2014). Understanding and measuring student engagement in School: The results of an international study from 12 countries. School Psychology Quarterly, 29(2), 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000057
  47. Lin, X., Yang, W., Wu, L., Zhu, L., Wu, D., & Li, H. (2021). Using an inquiry-based science and engineering program to promote science knowledge, problem-solving skills and approaches to learning in preschool children. Early Education and Development, 32(5), 695–713. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2020.1795333
  48. Majeed, B. H., Jawad, L. F., & AlRikabi, H. (2021). Tactical thinking and its relationship with solving mathematical problems among mathematics department students. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 16(9), 247-262. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v16i09.22203
  49. Manandhar, N. K. (2018). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of students in mathematics: A mixed method study [Thesis, Kathmandu University], Nepal. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.27437.84966
  50. Marcus, J., Peery, B., Klute, M., Pellerin, E., Mislevy, J., Wilkerson, S., & Schaefer, V. (2021). Regional Educational Laboratory Appalachia: Research-based strategies for effective remote learning: Facilitators’ handbook. Arlington, VA: SRI International. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/appalachia/events/materials/03-24-21_wksp-3_presentation-handbook_acc.pdf
  51. Moch, R. N., & Basuki, B. (2021). Kesulitan kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis siswa SMP di desa mulyasari pada materi statistika. Plusminus: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 1(2), 235-248. https://doi.org/10.31980/plusminus.v1i2.898
  52. Muharram, M. R. W., Apriani, I. F., Saputra, E. R., Widani, W., Islamiati, G., Ayuningtias, A., ... & Utami, S. A. (2023). Desain pembelajaran berbasis assure model pada materi pecahan di Kelas V Sekolah Dasar. COLLASE (Creative of Learning Students Elementary Education), 6(1), 69-85. https://doi.org/10.22460/collase.v1i1.14004
  53. Muir, T., & Geiger, V. (2016). The affordances of using a flipped classroom approach in the teaching of mathematics: a case study of a grade 10 mathematics class. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28, 149-171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-015-0165-8
  54. Nurhalisa, T., & Alghofiati, Z. A. (2022). Etnomatematika pada masjid aschabul kahfi perut bumi Al Maghribi Tuban sebagai konsep geometri di sekolah dasar. Delta-Pi: Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 11(2), 180-188. https://doi.org/10.33387/dpi.v11i2.5071
  55. Olivares, D., Lupiáñez, J. L., & Segovia, I. (2021). Roles and characteristics of problem solving in the mathematics curriculum: a review. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(7), 1079-1096. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1738579
  56. Öztürk, M., Akkan, Y., & Kaplan, A. (2020). Reading comprehension, mathematics self-efficacy perception, and mathematics attitude as correlates of students’ non-routine mathematics problem-solving skills in Turkey. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(7), 1042-1058. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1648893
  57. Polya, G. (1957) How to solve it. A new aspect of mathematical method. 2nd Edition, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  58. Radiusman, R., & Simanjuntak, M. (2020). Pemecahan masalah generalisasi pola matematika calon guru sekolah dasar ditinjau dari gaya belajar [the problem solving of mathematical pattern generalization by prospective elementary school teachers based on learning styles]. JOHME: Journal of Holistic Mathematics Education, 4(1), 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.19166/johme.v4i1.2654
  59. Rakhmawati, D., & Astuti, T. (2022). Pelatihan penggunaan software maple untuk menyelesaikan permasalahan sehari-hari dalam pengaplikasian teori matematika bagi mahasiswa. Jurnal Abdimas Komunikasi dan Bahasa, 2(2), 46-53. https://doi.org/10.31294/abdikom.v2i2.1796
  60. Raza, S. A., Qazi, W., & Umer, B. (2020). Examining the impact of case-based learning on student engagement, learning motivation, and learning performance among university students. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 12(3), 517-533. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-05-2019-0105
  61. Reeve, J., & Tseng, C. M. (2011). Agency as a fourth aspect of students’ engagement during learning activities. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 36(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.05.002
  62. Reyes, M. R., Brackett, M. A., Rivers, S. E., White, M., & Salovey, P. (2012). Classroom emotional climate, student engagement, and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(3), 700–712. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0027268
  63. Reys, R., Lindquist, M., Lambdin, D. V., & Smith, N. L. (2014). Helping children learn mathematics. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.17226/10434
  64. Rizki, L. M., & Priatna, N. (2019). Mathematical literacy as the 21st century skill. Dalam L M Rizki dan N Priatna Journal of Physics: Conference Series (hal. 1-5). IOP Publishing. 10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042088
  65. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
  66. Schallert, S., Lavicza, Z., & Vandervieren, E. (2022). Towards inquiry-based flipped classroom scenarios: a design heuristic and principles for lesson planning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(2), 277–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10167-0
  67. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). Pólya, problem solving, and education. Mathematics Magazine, 60(5), 283-291. https://doi.org/10.2307/2690409
  68. Smith, L., & Johnson, A. (2021). The impact of inquiry-based learning on geometry problem-solving skills. Journal of Mathematics Education, 45(2), 134-150. https://doi.org/10.1234/jme.2021.0452
  69. Sternberg, R. J., Sternberg, K., & Mio, J. (2012). Cognitive Psychology. Cengage Learning Press.
  70. Subarinah, S., Hikmah, N., & Azmi, S. (2020). Analysis of students’ mathematical investigation based on the variation of mathematical abilities. Dalam S Subarinah, N Hikmah, dan S Azmi 1st Annual Conference on Education and Social Sciences (ACCESS 2019) (hal. 115-118). https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200827.030
  71. Sudirman, Halima, & Hidayat, M. Y. (2021). Implementation of guided inquiry learning model assisted by three tier test on critical thinking. Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika, 9(2), 2550-0325. https://doi.org/10.24252/jpf.v9i2.23433
  72. Sudjana. (2005). Metode Statistika. Bandung: Tarsito
  73. Szabo, Z. K., Körtesi, P., Guncaga, J., Szabo, D., & Neag, R. (2020). Examples of problem-solving strategies in mathematics education supporting the sustainability of 21st-century skills. Sustainability, 12(23), 10113. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122310113
  74. Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review. The Higher Education Academy, 11(1), 1-15. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322342119_Student_Engagement_Literature_Review
  75. Umar, U., Hasratuddin, H., & Surya, E. (2022). Pengembangan LKPD berbasis model think aloud pair problem solving untuk meningkatkan kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis siswa SD Negeri 067248 Medan. Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 6(3), 3402-3416. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v6i3.1884
  76. Voelkl, K. E. (1997). Identification with school. American Journal of Education, 105(3), 294–318. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1085508
  77. Wadhwa, M., & Kathane, P. (2022). "Fun with Pranali": Students' engagement with Edu-tech Learning Tools. Integrated Journal of Social Sciences, 9(1), 1-5. Retrieved from https://www.pubs.iscience.in/journal/index.php/ijss/article/view/1405/794
  78. Winkel, W.S. (1996). Psikologi pengajaran. Yogyakarta: Media Abadi.
  79. Wirdayanti, N.M.A. (2023). Pengembangan masalah berbasis HOTS untuk siswa kelas VIII SMP semester I [Thesis, Universitas Pendidikan Ganesha], Bali.
  80. Yow, C. C., & Eu, L. K. (2024). Improving conceptual understanding of students using virtual manipulative. In J Lim, W C Teh, N N A Hamid, S K Sek, M T Ismail, V P Kong, and N A A Rahman (Eds.) AIP Conference Proceedings (hal. 1-8). Penang: AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0192480
  81. Zahroh, H., Hafidah, H., Dhofir, D., & Zayyadi, M. (2020). Gerakan literasi matematika dalam peningkatan kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis siswa. Delta-Pi: Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 9(2), 165-177. https://doi.org/10.33387/dpi.v9i2.2293

How to Cite

Asyraful Ihsan, Mailizar, M., & Elizar, E. (2024). Enhancing students’ problem-solving skills and engagement through inquiry-based mathematics education with Mathigon: A study on Cartesian coordinates. Beta: Jurnal Tadris Matematika, 17(2), 135–158. https://doi.org/10.20414/betajtm.v17i2.662