PERAN CASE METHOD DALAM MENDUKUNG KREATIVITAS MATEMATIS CALON GURU PADA PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA

Emy Sohilait; Masnia Masnia; Anis Shobikha; Sri Lestari; Mursaid Dahlan

PERAN CASE METHOD DALAM MENDUKUNG KREATIVITAS MATEMATIS CALON GURU PADA PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA

Emy Sohilait, Masnia Masnia, Anis Shobikha, Sri Lestari, Mursaid Dahlan

Abstract

Kreativitas matematis merupakan salah satu kompetensi esensial yang harus dimiliki oleh calon guru matematika guna mempersiapkan peserta didik menghadapi tantangan abad ke-21. Realitas di lapangan menunjukkan bahwa pembelajaran di perguruan tinggi masih didominasi pendekatan konvensional yang kurang memberikan ruang bagi pengembangan kreativitas. Case method hadir sebagai alternatif pembelajaran aktif yang mendorong mahasiswa menganalisis, memecahkan, dan merefleksikan situasi masalah autentik secara kolaboratif. Penelitian ini mengkaji secara mendalam peran case method dalam mendukung kreativitas matematis calon guru melalui kajian literatur sistematis (systematic literature review/SLR) terhadap 42 artikel ilmiah yang dipublikasikan pada rentang 2014 - 2024 dari basis data Scopus, ERIC, dan Google Scholar. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa case method secara signifikan meningkatkan tiga dimensi kreativitas matematis kefasihan (fluency), fleksibilitas (flexibility), dan kebaruan (originality) dengan ukuran efek sedang hingga besar (d = 0,41–0,82). Lima mekanisme pengaruh teridentifikasi: aktivasi berpikir divergen, stimulasi metakognisi, pembangunan self-efficacy, pengembangan toleransi ambiguitas, dan pemodelan berpikir kreatif. Kajian juga mengidentifikasi gap penelitian yang eksplisit berupa minimnya studi longitudinal, ketiadaan instrumen penilaian kreativitas yang kontekstual untuk LPTK Indonesia, serta kurangnya penelitian yang menghubungkan kreativitas matematis calon guru dengan kreativitas pedagogis. Implikasi praktis dan keterbatasan penelitian dipaparkan secara rinci sebagai panduan penelitian dan praktik selanjutnya.

Keywords

case method, kreativitas matematis, calon guru matematika, pembelajaran aktif, systematic literature review.

Full Text:

PDF

References

Amiripour, P., Amir-Mofidi, S., & Shahvarani, A. (2022). Scaffolding as effective method for mathematical learning. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 5(9), 3328–3331. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2022.v5i9.7892

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.

Barnes, L. B., Christensen, C. R., & Hansen, A. J. (1994). Teaching and the case method: Text, cases, and readings (3rd ed.). Harvard Business School Press.

Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2014). Classroom contexts for creativity. High Ability Studies, 25(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2014.905247

Bolden, D. S., Harries, T. V., & Newton, D. P. (2010). Pre-service primary teachers' conceptions of creativity in mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 73(2), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-009-9207-z

Christou, C., Mousoulides, N., Pittalis, M., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Sriraman, B. (2020). An empirical taxonomy of problem posing processes. ZDM Mathematics Education, 37(3), 149–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-0004-6

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The 'what' and 'why' of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.2307/2666999

Erskine, J. A., Leenders, M. R., & Mauffette-Leenders, L. A. (2011). Teaching with cases (4th ed.). Ivey Publishing.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

Freudenthal, H. (2002). Revisiting mathematics education: China lectures. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. (2023). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective revisited. Teachers College Record, 125(4), 1–48.

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. McGraw-Hill.

Hadamard, J. (1945). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton University Press.

Hendriana, H., & Soemarmo, U. (2020). Penilaian pembelajaran matematika (Edisi ke-3). Refika Aditama.

Hidayat, W., & Sariningsih, R. (2023). Kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis dan adversity quotient mahasiswa calon guru melalui pembelajaran open-ended. JNPM: Jurnal Nasional Pendidikan Matematika, 7(1), 12–27. https://doi.org/10.33603/jnpm.v7i1.7234

Kattou, M., Kontoyianni, K., & Christou, C. (2021). Mathematical creativity or general creativity? In Proceedings of the 7th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 1056–1065). CERME.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.

Kontorovich, I., & Koichu, B. (2016). A case study of an expert problem poser for mathematics competitions. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(1), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9467-z

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

Leikin, R. (2009). Exploring mathematical creativity using multiple solution tasks. In R. Leikin, A. Berman, & B. Koichu (Eds.), Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students (pp. 129–145). Sense Publishers.

Leikin, R., & Lev, M. (2013). Mathematical creativity in generally gifted and mathematically excelling adolescents: What makes the difference? ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(2), 183–197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0460-8

Leikin, R., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2013). Creativity and mathematics education: The state of the art. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(2), 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0459-1

Leikin, R., & Sriraman, B. (Eds.). (2017). Creativity and giftedness: Interdisciplinary perspectives from mathematics and beyond. Springer.

Levav-Waynberg, A., & Leikin, R. (2020). The role of multiple solution tasks in developing knowledge and creativity in geometry. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.12.001

Mann, E. L. (2006). Creativity: The essence of mathematics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 30(2), 236–260. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2006-264

Merseth, K. K. (1996). Cases and case methods in teacher education. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 722–744). Macmillan.

Merseth, K. K. (1999). A rationale for case-based pedagogy in teacher education. In M. A. Lundeberg, B. B. Levin, & H. L. Harrington (Eds.), Who learns what from cases and how? (pp. 1–7). Lawrence Erlbaum.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLOS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

Nitko, A. J. (2004). Educational assessment of students (4th ed.). Pearson Education.

OECD. (2022). PISA 2022 results: Factsheets. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Pehkonen, E. (1997). The state-of-art in mathematical creativity. ZDM Mathematics Education, 29(3), 63–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-997-0001-z

Piaget, J. (1970). Piaget's theory. In P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Carmichael's handbook of child psychology (Vol. 1, 3rd ed., pp. 703–732). Wiley.

Ponte, J. P., & Santos, L. (2024). Mathematics teachers' professional knowledge revisited: From cases to practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 115(2), 211–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10291-w

Runco, M. A. (2014). Creativity: Theories and themes: Research, development, and practice (2nd ed.). Elsevier.

Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. H. Shulman (Ed.), Case methods in teacher education (pp. 1–30). Teachers College Press.

Silver, E. A. (1997). Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing. ZDM Mathematics Education, 29(3), 75–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-997-0003-x

Simon, H. A. (1973). The structure of ill structured problems. Artificial Intelligence, 4(3–4), 181–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(73)90011-8

Sriraman, B. (2005). Are giftedness and creativity synonyms in mathematics? Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 17(1), 20–36. https://doi.org/10.4219/jsge-2005-389

Sumarmo, U., Hidayat, W., Zukarnaen, R., Hamidah, M., & Sariningsih, R. (2019). Kemampuan dan disposisi berpikir logis, kritis, dan kreatif matematik: Eksperimen terhadap mahasiswa calon guru matematika. Jurnal Pengajaran MIPA, 17(1), 17–33. https://doi.org/10.18269/jpmipa.v17i1

Sykes, G., & Bird, T. (1992). Teacher education and the case idea. Review of Research in Education, 18(1), 457–521. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X018001457

UNESCO. (2021). Reimagining our futures together: A new social contract for education. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Yaftian, N. (2015). The outlook of the mathematicians' creative processes. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 2519–2525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.617

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.

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

Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika

Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan

Universitas Galuh

Username
Password
Remember me