DOI of the published article https://doi.org/10.30862/jhm.v8i1.848
Hypothetical Learning Trajectory On Cylinder with Blom’s Taxonomy Persepective
Lintasan Pembelajaran Hipotetis pada Tabung dengan Persepektif Taksonomi Bloom
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21070/ups.8627Keywords:
Hypothetical Learning Trajectory, Cylinder, Conceptual Understanding, Bloom’s taxonomyAbstract
This study addresses students' low conceptual understanding of tubes, particularly in spatial representation and recognizing relationships in tube nets, often caused by instruction focused on routine problems. The research aims to develop a Hypothetical Learning Trajectory (HLT) based on Bloom’s taxonomy to improve students’ understanding of 3D shapes, especially tubes. Using design research in three phases preliminary design, design experiment, and retrospective analysis the study involved 28 fifth-grade students. Data were collected through observations, worksheets, tests, and interviews, and analyzed qualitatively. Four learning activities were designed to guide students through modeling, identifying elements, drawing nets, and solving problems with tubes, corresponding to Bloom’s levels of remembering, understanding, and applying. While the first three activities showed promising results, difficulties emerged in the final task involving reasoning. This study suggests HLT based on Bloom's taxonomy can support structured, adaptive geometry teaching, with further research recommended across broader topics and student groups.
Downloads
References
R. C. Bangalan et al., “Promoting student conceptual understanding of mathematics in elementary classrooms,” Psychol. Educ. a Multidiscip. J., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 22–39, 2023, [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/364813755
B. Rittle-Johnson and R. S. Siegler, “The relation between conceptual and procedural knowledge in learning mathematics: A review,” Dev. Math. Ski., no. January 1998, pp. 75–110, 2021, doi: 10.4324/9781315784755-6.
D. P. N. Ningrum, B. Usodo, and S. Subanti, “Students ’ mathematic al conceptual understanding : what,” J. Univ. Siliwangi, vol. 2566, no. 1, p. 020017, 2023, [Online]. Available: https://jurnal.unsil.ac.id/index.php/jp3m/article/viewFile/JOK61/1032
T. M. P. Ho, “Measuring conceptual understanding, procedural fluency and integrating procedural and conceptual knowledge in mathematical problem solving,” Int. J. Sci. Res. Manag., vol. 8, no. 05, pp. 1334–1350, 2020, doi: 10.18535/ijsrm/v8i05.el02.
E. S. Magfirotin and M. F. Amir, “Elementary school students’ conceptual and procedural knowledge in solving fraction problems,” J. Mat. Kreat., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 109–122, 2024, [Online]. Available: https://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/kreano.
B. Rittle-Johnson and M. Schneider, “Developing conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics,” Oxford Handb. Numer. Cogn., pp. 1118–1134, 2014, doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642342.013.014.
W. Boles, D. Jayalath, and A. Goncher, “Categorising conceptual assessments under the framework of bloom’s taxonomy structured abstract background or context,” pp. 1–8, 2015, [Online]. Available: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/95630/21/95630.pdf
A. and Krathwohl, “( A revision of bloom’s taksonomy ) Sumber,” Theory Pract., vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 212–219, 2002.
J. T. Akinboboye and M. A. Ayanwale, “Bloom taxonomy usage and psychometric analysis of classroom teacher made test,” African Multidiscip. J. Dev., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 10–21, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://amjd.kiu.ac.ug/article-view.php?i=16&t=bloom-taxonomy-usage-and-psychometric-analysis-of-classroom-teacher-made-test
I. M. Arievitch, “Reprint of: The vision of developmental teaching and learning and bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives,” Learn. Cult. Soc. Interact., vol. 27, no. November, p. 100473, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2020.100473.
R. Çelik, G. Önal Karakoyun, and E. Asilturk, “Evaluation of middle school 7th grade science skill-based questions according to the revised bloom taxonomy,” Int. online J. Educ. Sci., vol. 2022, no. 3, pp. 705–716, 2022, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2022.03.008
A. Azis, I. T. Handayani, F. Ferniati, N. Anggriana, and A. Aisyah, “Analysis of students’ cognitive difficulties based on the revised Bloom’s taxonomy in solving mathematics problems,” J. Focus action Res. Math. (factor M), vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 117–138, 2023, doi: 10.30762/factor_m.v6i1.1057.
D. C. Kristidhika, W. Cendana, I. Felix-Otuorimuo, and C. Müller, “Contextual teaching and learning to improve conceptual understanding of primary students,” Teach. Educ. Res., vol. 2, no. 2, p. 71, 2020, doi: 10.33292/ter.v2i2.84.
R. Milinia and M. F. Amir, “The analysis of primary Students’ learning obstacles on plane figures’ perimeter and area using onto-semiotic approach,” Al Ibtida J. Pendidik. Guru MI, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 19, 2022, doi: 10.24235/al.ibtida.snj.v9i1.9958.
I. N. Ayuningtyas, M. F. Amir, and M. D. K. Wardana, “Elementary school students’ layers of understanding in solving literacy problems based on sidoarjo context,” Infin. J., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 157–174, 2024, doi: 10.22460/infinity.v13i1.p157-174.
P. H. Wilson, P. Sztajn, C. Edgington, and M. Myers, “Teachers’ uses of a learning trajectory in student-centered instructional practices,” J. Teach. Educ., vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 227–244, 2015, doi: 10.1177/0022487115574104.
A. Wijaya, Elmaini, and M. Doorman, “A learning trajectory for probability: A case of game-based learning,” J. Math. Educ., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.7.2.3538.57-72.
J. Amador and T. Lamberg, “Learning trajectories, lesson planning, affordances, and constraints in the design and enactment of mathematics teaching,” Math. Think. Learn., vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 146–170, 2013, doi: 10.1080/10986065.2013.770719.
M. A. Simon, “Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective,” J. Res. Math. Educ., vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 114–145, 2020, doi: 10.5951/jresematheduc.26.2.0114.
D. H. Clements and J. Sarama, Learning and teaching early math: the learning trajectories approach. Routledge, 2009. doi: 10.4324/9780203883389.
C. Ebby, “Teachers’ understanding of learning trajectories for formative assessment,” no. January 2019, 2022, doi: 10.3102/1437829.
R. V. Avenilde, Enclyclopedia of mathematics education, vol. 4, no. 3. 2015. doi: 10.17583/redimat.2015.1786.
M. A. Simon and R. Tzur, “Explicating the role of mathematical tasks in conceptual learning: an elaboration of the hypothetical learning trajectory,” Math. Think. Learn., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 91–104, 2004, doi: 10.1207/s15327833mtl0602_2.
B. Deciku, E. Musdi, I. M. Arnawa, and S. Suherman, “Hypothetical earning trajectory sistem persamaan linear dua variabel dengan pendekatan realistic mathematics education,” J. Cendekia J. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 185–196, 2022, doi: 10.31004/cendekia.v7i1.1781.
N. N. Ali, N. Ratnaningsih, and M. N. Prabawati, “Desain hypothetical learning trajectory pada materi persegi dan persegipanjang untuk mengatasi learning obstacle,” J. Ilm. Profesi Pendidik., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 1249–1254, 2024, [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.29303/jipp.v9i2.1399
S. Nurmatova and M. Altun, “A comprehensive review of bloom’s taxonomy integration to enhancing novice EFL educators’ pedagogical impact,” Arab World English J., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 380–388, 2023, doi: 10.24093/awej/vol14no3.24.
I. Magdalena et al., “Analisis taksonomi bloom dalam mengidentifikasi tingkat kesulitan pertanyaan soal dalam mata pelajaran matematika di sekolah dasar,” J. pendidikan, Bhs. dan budaya, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 141–150, 2023, doi: 10.55606/jpbb.v2i3.1988.
B. Murtiyasa and N. K. P. M. Sari, “Analisis kemampuan pemahaman konsep pada materi bilangan berdasarkan taksonomi bloom,” AKSIOMA J. Progr. Stud. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 11, no. 3, p. 2059, 2022, doi: 10.24127/ajpm.v11i3.5737.
V. F. Rodrigues, “Mathematical modeling & bloom’s taxonomy in the higher course of civil engineering,” a Look Dev., 2023, doi: 10.56238/alookdevelopv1-115.
J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, and N. Nieveen, “Educational design research,” Educ. Des. Res., pp. 1–164, 2006, doi: 10.4324/9780203088364.
K. Gravemeijer and P. Cobb, “Design research from a learning design perspective,” Educ. Des. Res., no. January 2006, pp. 17–51, 2006, doi: 10.4324/9780203088364-12.
M. S. Telaumbanua et al., “Evaluasi dan Penilaian pada Pembelajaran Matematika,” vol. 06, no. 01, pp. 4781–4792, 2023.
M. F. Amir and M. D. K. Wardana, “Pengembangan domino pecahan berbasis open ended untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir kreatif siswa SD,” Aksioma J. Progr. Stud. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 6, no. 2, p. 178, 2017, doi: 10.24127/ajpm.v6i2.1015.
L. P. Steffe, “On the construction of learning trajectories of children: the case of commensurate fractions,” Math. Think. Learn., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 129–162, 2004, doi: 10.1207/s15327833mtl0602_4.
L. M. Doorman and K. P. E. Gravemeijer, “Emergent modeling: Discrete graphs to support the understanding of change and velocity,” ZDM - Int. J. Math. Educ., vol. 41, no. 1–2, pp. 199–211, 2009, doi: 10.1007/s11858-008-0130-z.
N. O. Shanty, “Investigating students ’ development of learning,” J. Math. Educ., vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 57–72, 2016, doi: 10.22342/jme.7.2.3538.57-72.
Bakker, Design research in education, no. 68. 2018. doi: 10.1049/ic:19990398.
S. K. Sulfiah, Y. M. Cholily, and A. Subaidi, “Professional competency: Pre-service mathematics teachers’ understanding toward probability concept,” Jramathedu (Journal Res. Adv. Math. Educ., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 206–220, 2021, doi: 10.23917/jramathedu.v6i3.13779.
M. N. Kholid, A. Imawati, A. Swastika, S. Maharani, and L. N. Pradana, “How are students’ conceptual understanding for solving mathematical problem?,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 1776, no. 1, 2021, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/1776/1/012018.
Downloads
Additional Files
Posted
License
Copyright (c) 2025 UMSIDA Preprints Server
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
