The effect of geoboard media on elementary students' learning outcomes in plane geometry

Nur Shinta Kurnia; Elce Purwandari

doi:10.58524/jasme.v6i4.1519

Authors

Nur Shinta Kurnia Universitas Islam Nusantara Al-Azhaar Lubuklinggau, Indonesia
Elce Purwandari Universitas Islam Nusantara Al-Azhaar Lubuklinggau, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58524/jasme.v6i4.1519

Keywords:

Geoboard Media, Mathematics Learning Outcomes, Plane Geometry

Abstract

Background: Elementary students frequently encounter difficulties understanding abstract geometric concepts, particularly when instruction relies on verbal explanations and memorization. Concrete manipulatives, such as geoboards, offer opportunities to explore geometric properties through hands-on learning.

Aims: This study aims to examine changes in second-grade students’ mathematics learning outcomes following geoboard-assisted instruction in plane geometry.

Method: A quantitative pre-experimental study employing a one-group pretest–posttest design involved 17 second-grade students at MI Fathul Huda Singkut, Indonesia, selected through total sampling. Data were collected using achievement tests and analyzed through descriptive statistics and the Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test.

Results: The mean achievement score increased from 69.12 to 93.18, while learning mastery improved from 52.94% to 100%. The Wilcoxon test revealed a statistically significant pretest–posttest difference (Z = −2.925, p = 0.003), with a large effect size (r = 0.731).

Conclusion: Geoboard-assisted instruction was associated with significant improvements in students’ mathematics achievement. However, the absence of a control group and limited sample size prevent causal conclusions, highlighting the need for further controlled investigations.

References

Alabdulaziz, M. S., Aldossary, S. M., Alyahya, S. A., & Althubiti, H. M. (2021). The effectiveness of the GeoGebra programme in the development of academic achievement and survival of the learning impact of the mathematics among secondary stage students. Education and Information Technologies, 26(3), 2685–2713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10371-5

Andini, I., & Cahyaningsih, U. (2024). An analysis of students' learning difficulties in solving plane geometry problems among seventh-grade students. International Journal of Advance Research in Mathematics Education, 2(2), 110–121. https://doi.org/10.56916/ijr.v2i2.2657

Ariani, D. N. (2015). Hubungan antara Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge dengan Technology Integration Self Efficacy guru matematika di sekolah dasar. Muallimuna : Jurnal Madrasah Ibtidaiyah, 1(1), 79–91. https://doi.org/10.31602/muallimuna.v1i1.277

Berlin, E., Yegya-Raman, N., Hollawell, C., Haertter, A., Fosnot, J., Rhodes, S., Seol, S. W., Gentile, M., Li, T., Freedman, G. M., & Taunk, N. K. (2024). Breast reconstruction complications after postmastectomy proton radiation therapy for breast cancer. Advances in Radiation Oncology, 9(3), 101385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2023.101385

Brookhart, S. M. (2023). Classroom assessment essentials. ASCD.

Cahyani, H., & Setyawati, R. W. (2017). Pentingnya peningkatan kemampuan pemecahan masalah melalui PBL untuk mempersiapkan generasi unggul menghadapi MEA. PRISMA, Prosiding Seminar Nasional Matematika, 151-160.

Carbonneau, K. J., Marley, S. C., & Selig, J. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031084

Çelik, H. C., & Özdemir, F. (2020). Mathematical thinking as a predictor of critical thinking dispositions of pre-service Mathematics teachers. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16(4), 81. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2020.268.6

Chumnaul, J., Sarong, T., & Promruangchot, A. (2026). Parametric versus non-parametric statistics: A case study in traditional and alternative medicine research with the development of SDA4AMR web application. European Journal of Statistics, 6, 8–8. https://doi.org/10.28924/ada/stat.6.8

Cobb, P., Zhao, Q., & Visnovska, J. (2008). Learning from and adapting the theory of Realistic Mathematics education. Éducation et Didactique, (2-1), Article 2-1. https://doi.org/10.4000/educationdidactique.276

Constructivism Learning Theory in Education: Characteristics, Steps and Learning Models. (2023). Research in education and rehabilitation, 6(2), 234-242. https://doi.org/10.51558/2744-1555.2023.6.2.234](https://doi.org/10.51558/2744-1555.2023.6.2.234)

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications.

Dolapcioglu, S., & Doğanay, A. (2022). Development of critical thinking in mathematics classes via authentic learning: An action research. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(6), 1363–1386. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1819573

Etikan, I., & Bala, K. (2017). Sampling and sampling methods. Biometrics & Biostatistics International Journal, 5(6), 62–65. https://doi.org/10.15406/bbij.2017.05.00149

Fauzan, A., Harisman, Y., Yerizon, Y., Suherman, S., Tasman, F., Nisa, S., Sumarwati, S., Hafizatunnisa, H., & Syaputra, H. (2024). Realistic mathematics education (RME) to improve literacy and numeracy skills of elementary school students based on teachers' experience. Infinity Journal, 13(2), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v13i2.p301-316

Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. SAGE Publications.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1990). How to design and evaluate research in education. Order Department, McGraw Hill Publishing Co.

Furner, J. M., & Marinas, C. A. (2007). Geometry sketching software for elementary children: Easy as 1, 2, 3. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(1), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75376

Helena, P., & Perbowo, K. S. (2026). Mathematical representation abilities in Bruner's representation stages: A phenomenological study of high school students. (JIML) JOURNAL OF INNOVATIVE MATHEMATICS LEARNING, 9(2), 427–450. https://doi.org/10.22460/jiml.v9i2.31378

Huang, H.-M. E. (2017). Curriculum interventions for area measurement instruction to enhance children's conceptual understanding. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(7), 1323–1341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9745-7

Jinzhi, H., & Xuejun, B. (2024). Bruner's three models of presentation theory. In The ECPH Encyclopedia of Psychology (pp. 167-170). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7874-4_172

Kearns, D. M., & Fuchs, D. (2013). Does cognitively focused instruction improve the academic performance of low-achieving students? exceptional children, 79(3), 263-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900200

Kesgin, T., & İlayda, R. (2025). Revisiting trend stability using Mann-Kendall and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests through innovative method comparisons. Sustainability, 17(23), 10454. https://doi.org/10.3390/su172310454

Kholil, M., & Zulfiani, S. (2020). Faktor-faktor kesulitan belajar matematika siswa madrasah ibtidaiyah da'watul falah kecamatan tegaldlimo kabupaten banyuwangi. EDUCARE Journal of Primary Education, 1(2), 151–168. https://doi.org/10.35719/educare.v1i2.14

Lavayette, V. R., Rohimah, S. M., & Nurhadi, M. (2026). Pengaruh pendekatan Realistic Mathematics education berbantuan media Scratch untuk meningkatkan kemampuan pemahaman konsep matematis siswa SD. FONDATIA, 10(2), 436–447. https://doi.org/10.36088/fondatia.v10i2.6315

Liangshi, Y. (2024). Constructivism learning theory. In The ECPH Encyclopedia of Psychology (pp. 311-313). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7874-4_1077

Liburd, K. K. D., & Jen, H.-Y. (2021). Investigating the effectiveness of using a Technological approach on students' achievement in mathematics-case study of a high school in a caribbean country. Sustainability, 13(10), 5586. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13105586

Majid, A. (2019). Implementasi pendekatan matematika realistik dalam pembelajaran matematika di sekolah dasar (SD) atau madrasah ibtidaiyah (MI). Didaktika: Jurnal Kependidikan, 8(1), 17–24. https://doi.org/10.58230/27454312.64

Novitasari, D., Soeprianto, H., Kurniati, N., Junaidi, J., Tyaningsih, R. Y., & Agustina, A. (2025). Empowering elementary teachers: Digital mathematics learning resource training center for enhanced classroom instruction. Rengganis Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 5(1), 192–201. https://doi.org/10.29303/rengganis.v5i1.560

Okoye, K., & Hosseini, S. (2024). Wilcoxon statistics in R: Signed-rank test and rank-sum test. In K. Okoye & S. Hosseini (Eds), R Programming: Statistical Data Analysis in Research (pp. 279-303). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-3385-9_13

Peng, J., Sun, M., Yuan, B., Lim, C. P., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Wang, M. (2024). Visible thinking to support online project-based learning: Narrowing the achievement gap between high- and low-achieving students. Education and Information Technologies, 29(2), 2329–2363. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11896-1

Popescu, A. M., & Ṭîrlea, M. R. (2022). Theoretical and practical study on value added tax at national and community level (First part). RAIS Conference Proceedings 2022-2023, Article 0248.

Pratiwi, A. F., & Imami, A. I. (2022). Analisis self-efficacy dalam pembelajaran matematika pada siswa smp. AKSIOMA : Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 13(3), 403–410. https://doi.org/10.26877/aks.v13i3.13973

Puspita, N. A. (2024). The effect of probing prompting learning model with geoboard media on fourth-grade Mathematics learning outcomes. International Journal of Elementary Education, 8(4), 726–733. https://doi.org/10.23887/ijee.v8i4.91665

Rojas, E., & Benakli, N. (2020). Mathematical literacy and critical thinking. In J. C. But (Ed.), Teaching College-Level Disciplinary Literacy: Strategies and Practices in STEM and Professional Studies (pp. 197-226). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39804-0_8

Romero, A. A., Silva, F. E. R., Espinoza, A. S., Quispe, J. T., Castillo, A. C. L., & Huarcaya, F. D. B. (2024). Hans Freudenthal: Perspectives in Mathematics education and phenomenological analysis. Online Submission.

Santos, D. F. D., Silva, G. D. S. E., & Miguel, J. C. (2024). Theory OF STUDY activity AND realistic mathematics education: Articulation AND possibilities. Educação Em Revista, 40, e39763. https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-469839763t

Schoenfeld, A. H. (2016). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in Mathematics (Reprint). Journal of Education, 196(2), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741619600202

Sibiya, M. R., Roux, A., & Kloppers, M. (2025). An introduction of a CIRGON geoboard as a manipulative for teaching geometry in K-12 Mathematics. Studies in Learning and Teaching, 6(3), 730–742. https://doi.org/10.46627/silet.v6i3.585

Su, H. F. H., Ricci, F. A., & Mnatsakanian, M. (2016). Mathematical teaching strategies: Pathways to critical thinking and metacognition. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 2(1), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.57796](https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.57796)

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

Yeager, D. S., Hanselman, P., Walton, G. M., Murray, J. S., Crosnoe, R., Muller, C., Tipton, E., Schneider, B., Hulleman, C. S., Hinojosa, C. P., Paunesku, D., Romero, C., Flint, K., Roberts, A., Trott, J., Iachan, R., Buontempo, J., Yang, S. M., Carvalho, C. M., … Dweck, C. S. (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573(7774), 364–369. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1466-y

Žakelj, A., & Klančar, A. (2022). The role of visual representations in geometry learning. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(3), 1393–1411. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.3.1393

Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? journal of the learning sciences, 12(2), 145-181. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1202_1