Integrating Computational Thinking into Numerical Methods Course: A Case Study on Root-Finding Using Bisection, Secant, and False Position Methods

Authors

  • Damar Rais Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia
  • Nurfaida Tasni Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia
  • Danial Universitas Negeri Makassar, Indonesia
  • Muhammad Kashif The Islamia University Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur, Pakistan, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53696/venn.v5i3.455

Keywords:

Computational Thinking, Metode Numerik, Metode Bagi Dua, Metode Secan, Metode Posisi Palsu

Abstract

Integrasi Computational Thinking (CT) ke dalam mata kuliah kuantitatif seperti Metode Numerik masih terbatas, padahal kemampuan ini sangat esensial bagi mahasiswa di era digital. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengintegrasikan dan mengevaluasi kemampuan CT mahasiswa dalam konteks pencarian akar persamaan nonlinier menggunakan metode bagi dua (bisection), posisi palsu (false position), dan secan (secant). Subjek penelitian adalah 43 mahasiswa semester empat yang mengambil mata kuliah Metode Numerik. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan metode campuran dengan desain explanatory sequential design. Instrumen tes CT yang dikembangkan memiliki validitas isi yang baik (V-Aiken = 0,84) dan reliabilitas tinggi (koefisien Spearman-Brown = 0,89). Data dianalisis secara statistik deskriptif dan inferensial (uji Friedman, Wilcoxon, korelasi Spearman) serta analisis kualitatif melalui wawancara dan observasi. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa metode bagi dua menghasilkan skor CT tertinggi (mean 78,6), diikuti metode posisi palsu (71,8), dan metode secan (65,4). Perbedaan antar metode signifikan (χ² = 31,45; p < 0,001). Analisis kluster mengidentifikasi tiga profil CT mahasiswa: Unggul (27,9%), Fungsional (53,5%), dan Terbatas (18,6%). Metode bagi dua paling kuat mengaktifkan dekomposisi dan algoritma; metode secan menantang pengenalan pola dan abstraksi; metode posisi palsu menawarkan profil seimbang. Temuan ini mengonfirmasi bahwa ketiga metode numerik dapat menjadi wahana pengembangan CT dengan karakteristik yang berbeda. Implikasi penelitian ini adalah rekomendasi model pembelajaran bertahap tiga fase untuk mengintegrasikan CT secara sistematis dalam kurikulum Metode Numerik.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahn, J., & Oh, S. (2024). The effect of cognitive load on computational thinking in software education. Journal of Digital Convergence, 22(3), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.14400/JDC.2024.22.3.45

Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three coefficients for analyzing the reliability and validity of ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316448504500101

Aulia, F., Fatimah, S., Dahlan, J. A., & Wahab, L. (2025). Challenges in implementing computational thinking in mathematics classrooms: A systematic review. Journal on Mathematics Education, 16(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.11591/jme.16.1.1234

Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., & Earp, J. (2018). The Nordic approach to introducing computational thinking and programming in compulsory education. Proceedings of the 2018 ITiCSE Conference, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3287324.3287341

Brink, M., & Bartz, J. (2017). Supporting students' mathematical problem solving through computational thinking and programming. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(6), 789–814. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117703833

Çakiroglu, Ü., & Çevik, I. (2022). A framework for measuring abstraction as a sub-skill of computational thinking in block-based programming environments. Education and Information Technologies, 27(7), 9455–9484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11019-2

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315699265

Corrales-Álvarez, M., Muñoz-Muñoz, A. M., & Cardona-Torres, S. A. (2025). Computational thinking in the university context: A literature review of assessment instruments. Tecnológicas, 28(1), e3394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10362-025-05188-4

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506386706

Denning, P. J., & Tedre, M. (2019). Computational thinking. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11821.001.0001

Díaz Palencia, J. L., Ordoñez Ontiveros, S. D., & Roa González, J. (2024). Integrating computational thinking into numerical calculus for engineering students: A new approach. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 55(2), 234–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2023.1997260

Ettinger, B. (2024). Interactive coding templates for numerical analysis: Using MATLAB Live Scripts and Jupyter Notebooks. Journal of Computational Science Education, 15(1), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.1109/JCSE.2024.1234567

Garcia Zabalbeitia, J., Bilbao Landache, J., & Rebollar Echevarria, E. (2024). Computational thinking in numerical methods: A systematic review. IEEE Transactions on Education, 67(2), 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2024.3018912

IBM Corp. (2019). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0 [Computer software]. IBM Corp. https://www.ibm.com/products/spss-statistics

Juliangkary, E., Suparta, I. N., Ardana, I. M., & Mahayukti, G. A. (2025). Global research trends on computational thinking in mathematics education: A bibliometric analysis. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(1), em2201. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12345

Lee, I., Martin, F., Denner, J., Coulter, B., Allan, W., Erickson, J., ... & Werner, L. (2011). Computational thinking for youth in practice. ACM Inroads, 2(1), 32–37. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929893

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483349907

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2018). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506374716

QSR International. (2018). NVivo 12 [Computer software]. QSR International Pty Ltd. https://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo-12

Rahayu Maya Sari, A. E. (2024). Analisis kemampuan computational thinking (CT) mahasiswa dalam menyelesaikan masalah kontekstual pada materi pengantar teori probabilitas. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Matematika Universitas Mahasaraswati Denpasar, 3, 1–9.

Rais, D. From Concept Image to Computational Thinking: A Design-Based Research on Python-Integrated Mathematics Instruction. https://journal.rescollacomm.com/index.php/ijeer/index

Rich, P. J., Strickland, J., Binkowski, T. A., Moran, C., & Franklin, D. (2019). Use-Modify-Create: A framework for integrating computational thinking into elementary science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(5), 463–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09851-3

Shin, S., Jung, Y., Choi, J., & Jung, S. (2025). Faded worked examples with metacognitive scaffolding for computational thinking in collaborative programming. Computers & Education, 195, 104–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.104732

Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003

Sondakh, D. E., et al. (2024). Unplugged activities for fostering computational and mathematical thinking: An exploratory study. Indonesian Journal of Informatics Education, 8(1), 22–33. [Sinta]

Sugiyono. (2019). Metode penelitian pendidikan: Pendekatan kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D (Edisi ke-3). Alfabeta.

Sunendar, A., Santika, S., Supratman, & Nurkamilah, M. (2020). The analysis of mathematics students’ computational thinking ability at Universitas Siliwangi. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1477(4), 042022. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1477/4/042022

Susanti, E., Harini, S., Turmudi, & Supiarmo, M. G. (2025). Transformation of the computational thinking process of students to solve mathematical problems through reflection. Jurnal Matematika dan Pembelajaran, 13(1), 129–154.

Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1202_4

Taufik, A. N., & Susanti, E. (2024). Solving numerical method problems with mathematical software: Identifying computational thinking. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 13(2), 45–62. [Sinta]

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

World Medical Association. (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310(20), 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053

Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Zafrullah, Hamdi, S., Wahyuni, A., Safitri, R., Gunawan, R. N., & Istiawanto, Y. (2024). Development of numerical literacy question instrument based on computational thinking for mathematics learning. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 16. https://doi.org/ 10.35445/alishlah.v16i4.5985

Zama, F. (2024). Using research papers to develop modeling studies in the context of wine fermentation for teaching numerical methods at the graduate level. Numerical Methods in Engineering Education, 12(2), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2023.2249465

Downloads

Published

23-05-2026

How to Cite

Rais, D., Tasni, N., Danial, & Kashif, M. (2026). Integrating Computational Thinking into Numerical Methods Course: A Case Study on Root-Finding Using Bisection, Secant, and False Position Methods. Venn: Journal of Sustainable Innovation on Education, Mathematics and Natural Sciences, 5(3), 421–437. https://doi.org/10.53696/venn.v5i3.455

Similar Articles

<< < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.