TINJAUAN SISTEMATIS: STRATEGIS SCAFFOLDING PADA PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA

Imam Kusmaryono*  -  Universitas Islam Sultan Agung, Indonesia
Dyana Wijayanti  -  Universitas Islam Sultan Agung, Indonesia

(*) Corresponding Author
DOI: 10.21580/phen.2020.10.1.6114

Supp. File(s): Research Instrument

This scientific article presents the results of a literature review on scaffolding strategies in mathematics education (2015-2020). The literature review was based on 32 scientific publications that met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis with a total sample size of 1368 students (participants). In theory, this literature research aims to provide an empirical picture of the latest literature on the application of scaffolding strategies and analyze teacher-student interaction patterns when scaffolding is implemented in mathematics learning. The results of this literature review indicate that the pattern of teacher-student interaction when scaffolding support follows an approach: one-to-one scaffolding, peer-scaffolding, and computer-based scaffolding. here are three categories of teacher tendencies in providing scaffolding support,  namely: cognitive scaffolding, affective scaffolding, and metacognitive scaffolding. The results of the literature review also concluded that the application of scaffolding strategies in mathematics learning was effective in terms of reducing mathematics anxiety, motivating and increasing student achievement

Supplement Files

Keywords: strategic; scaffolding; mathematics learning; review

  1. Anggadewi, B. E. T. (2017). Scaffolding : How It Works for Students With Learning Difficulties. In Proceedings The 2017 International Conference on Research in Education - Sanata Dharma University (pp. 210–218).
  2. Anwar; Yuwono, Ipung; Irawan, Edy B; As’ari, A. R. (2017). Investigation of Contingency Patterns of Teachers ’ Scaffolding in Teaching and Learning Mathematics. Journal on Mathematics Education, 8(1), 65–76.
  3. Azizah, U., Nasrudin, H., & Mitarlis. (2019). Metacognitive Skills: A Solution in Chemistry Problem Solving. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1417(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1417/1/012084
  4. Bakker, A., Smit, J., & Wegerif, R. (2015). Scaffolding and dialogic teaching in mathematics education: introduction and review. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 47(7), 1047–1065. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0738-8
  5. Belland, B. R., & Evidence, E. (2016). Instructional Scaffolding in STEM Education. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG Switzerland. https://doi.org/DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-02565-0
  6. Bikmaz, F. H., Çelebi, Ö., Ata, A., Özer, E., Soyak, Ö., & Reçber, H. (2016). Scaffolding Strategies Applied by Student Teachers to Teach Mathematics. Educational Research Association The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education The International Journal of Research in Teacher Education, 1(1), 25–36.
  7. Brower, R. L., Woods, C. S., Jones, T. B., Park, T. J., Hu, S., Tandberg, D. A., … Martindale, S. K. (2018). Scaffolding Mathematics Remediation for Academically At-Risk Students Following Developmental Education Reform in Florida. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 42(2), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2017.1279089
  8. Fauziyah, N., Lant, C. Le, Budayasa, I. K., & Juniati, D. (2019). Cognition processes of students with high functioning autism spectrum disorder in solving mathematical problems. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 457–478. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12130a
  9. Grothérus, A. (2015). Formative Scaffolding – How To Enhance Mathematical Proficiency , Prevent and Reduce Maths Anxiety. In CERME 9 - Ninth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Education; ERME, Feb 2015, Prague, Czech Republic. pp.1313-1314. ?hal- 01289262? HAL (Vol. 9, pp. 1313–1314).
  10. Haataja, E., Garcia Moreno-Esteva, E., Salonen, V., Laine, A., Toivanen, M., & Hannula, M. S. (2019). Teacher’s visual attention when scaffolding collaborative mathematical problem solving. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102877
  11. Haataja, E., Garcia Moreno-Esteva, E., Toivanen, M., & Hannula, M. S. (2018). Teacher’s gaze behavior when scaffolding peer interaction and mathematical thinking during collaborative problem-solving activity. In Proceedings of the 42nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Umeå, Sweden: PME International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Umeå, Sweden: PME International Group for the Psychology of Mathe (Vol. 2, pp. 475–482). Umeå, Sweden. Retrieved from https://researchportal.helsinki.fi/en/publications/teachers-gaze-behavior-when-scaffolding-peer-interaction-and-math
  12. Haataja, E., Toivanen, M., Laine, A., & Hannula, M. S. (2019). Teacher-student eye contact during scaffolding collaborative mathematical problem-solving. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education, 7(2), 9–26. https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.7.2.350
  13. Hermkes, R., Mach, H., & Minnameier, G. (2018). Interaction-based coding of scaffolding processes. Learning and Instruction, 54(4), 147–155. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.09.003
  14. Huang, K. (2019). Design and investigation of cooperative, scaffolded wiki learning activities in an online graduate-level course. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-0141-6
  15. Indrawati. (2017). Pengaruh Metode Scaffolding Berbasis Konstruktivisme Terhadap Hasil Belajar Matematikaa. Journal of Medives, 1(1), 9–16.
  16. Jančařík, A., Novotná, J., Jančařík, A., & Novotná, J. (2015). Scaffolding in e-learning course for gifted children. In CERME 9 - Ninth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Education; ERME, Feb 2015, Prague, Czech Republic. pp.2354-2360. ?hal- 01289262? HAL (pp. 2353–2360).
  17. Khalaf, B. K., & Zin, Z. B. M. (2018). Traditional and inquiry-based learning pedagogy: A systematic critical review. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 545–564. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11434a
  18. Kim, N. J., Belland, B. R., & Walker, A. E. (2018). Effectiveness of Computer-Based Scaffolding in the Context of Problem-Based Learning for Stem Education: Bayesian Meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 397–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9419-1
  19. Kusmaryono, I., Gufron, A. M., & Rusdiantoro, A. (2020). Effectiveness of Scaffolding Strategies in Learning Against Decrease in Mathematics Anxiety Level. Numerical: Jurnal Matematika Dan Pendidikan Matematikaatematika, 4(1), 13–22.
  20. Kusmaryono, I., & Suyitno, H. (2016). The Effect of Constructivist Learning Using Scientific Approach on Mathematical Power and Conceptual Understanding of Students Grade IV. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 693, 12019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/693/1/012019
  21. Kusmaryono, I., Suyitno, H., & Dwidayati, N. (2020). Deconstruction Mathematics Anxiety Into Motivation To Develop Mathematical Disposition. International Journal of Science & Technology Research, 9(4), 1923–1928.
  22. Kusmaryono, I., Suyitno, H., Dwijanto, D., & Dwidayati, N. (2018). Analysis of Abstract Reasoning from Grade 8 Students in Mathematical Problem Solving with SOLO Taxonomy Guide. Infinity Journal of Mathematics Education, 7(2), 69–82. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v7i2.p69-82
  23. Kusmaryono, I., Suyitno, H., Dwijanto, D., & Dwidayati, N. (2020). Deconstruction Mathematics Anxiety Into Motivation To Develop Mathematical Disposition. International Journal of Science Technologi and Researchsearch, 9(4), 1923–1928. https://doi.org/10.11120/ijstr.2020.06040019
  24. Kusumadewi, R. F., Kusmaryono, I., Jamallullail, I., & Saputro, B. A. (2019). Analisis Struktur Kognitif Siswa Kelas IV Sekolah Dasar dalam Menyelesaikan Masalah Pembagian Bilangan Bulat. Journal of Medives : Journal of Mathematics Education IKIP Veteran Semarang, 3(2), 251–259. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31331/medivesveteran.v3i12 e-ISSN: 2549-5070 p-ISSN: 2549-8231 Analisis
  25. Maharani, I. P., & Subanji, S. (2018). Scaffolding Based on Cognitive Conflict in Correcting the Students ’ Algebra Errors. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(2), 67–74. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.12973/iejme/2697
  26. Malik, S. A. (2017). Revisiting and re-representing scaffolding: The two gradient model. Cogent Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1331533
  27. Martins, L. E. G., & Gorschek, T. (2016). Requirements engineering for safety-critical systems: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 75, 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2016.04.002
  28. Northern Illinois University, F. D. and I. D. C. (2016). Instructional Scaffolding to Improve Learning.
  29. Nursolekah, S., & Suparman. (2019). Design of mathematics learning module based on problem based learning to improve critical thinking ability students. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 8(12), 2608–2616.
  30. Ormond, C. (2016). Scaffolding the mathematical “connections”: A new approach to preparing teachers for the teaching of lower secondary algebra. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(6), 122–164. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2016v41n6.8
  31. Padmadewi, N. N., & Artini, L. P. (2019). Using Scaffolding Strategies in Teaching Writing For Improving Student Literacy in Primary School. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 178(ICoIE 2018), 156–160. https://doi.org/10.2991/icoie-18.2019.36
  32. Pol, J. Van De, Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2015). Scaffolding in Teacher – Student Interaction : A Decade of Research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6
  33. Polly, D., Allman, B., Casto, A., & Norwood, J. (2017). Sociocultural Perspectives of Learning. In chapter 12. Sociocultural Perspectives of Learning. Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. Retrieved from https://lidtfoundations.pressbooks.com/chapter/sociocultural-learning/
  34. Prediger, S., & Pöhler, B. (2015). The interplay of micro- and macro-scaffolding : an empirical reconstruction for the case of an intervention on percentages. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(7), 1179–1194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0723-2
  35. Retnidari, W., Elbas, W. F., & Loviana, S. (2020). Scaffolding dalam Pembelajaran Matematika. Linear: Journal of Mathematics Education, 1(1), 15–21.
  36. Sari, N., & Surya, E. (2017). EFEKTIVITAS PENGGUNAAN TEKNIK SCAFFOLDING DALAM MENINGKATKAN HASIL BELAJAR MATEMATIKA PADA SISWA SMP SWASTA AL-WASHLIYAH MEDAN. Edumatica, 7(1), 1–10.
  37. Shabani, K. (2016). Applications of Vygotsky’s sociocultural approach for teachers’ professional development. Cogent Education, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1252177
  38. Shallard, S. D. (2016). Maths is challenge, struggleand mistakes will grow our brain. Victoria University of Wellington. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0c3f/9d0a5dae841ceb8fb071a2c20fecc7a09bed.pdf
  39. Tsankov, N. (2018). THE TRANSVERSAL COMPETENCE FOR PROBLEM-SOLVING IN COGNITIVE LEARNING. International Journal of Cognitive Research in Science, Engineering and Education (IJCRSEE), 6(3), 67–82. https://doi.org/doi:10.5937/ijcrsee1803067T
  40. Ubaidah, N., & Aminudin, M. (2019). Development of learning tools: Learning constructivist mathematics to improve creative thinking ability. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1188(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1188/1/012071
  41. van de Pol, J., Mercer, N., & Volman, M. (2019). Scaffolding Student Understanding in Small-Group Work: Students’ Uptake of Teacher Support in Subsequent Small-Group Interaction. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(2), 206–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1522258
  42. van de Pol, J., Volman, M., Oort, F., & Beishuizen, J. (2015a). The effects of scaffolding in the classroom : support contingency and student independent working time. Instructional Science, 43(5), 615–641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9351-z
  43. van de Pol, J., Volman, M., Oort, F., & Beishuizen, J. (2015b). The effects of scaffolding in the classroom: support contingency and student independent working time in relation to student achievement, task effort and appreciation of support. Instructional Science, 43(5), 615–641. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9351-z
  44. Wibawa, K. A., Nusantara, T., Subanji, & Parta, I. N. (2018). Defragmentation of Student ’ s Thinking Structures in Solving Mathematical Problems based on CRA Framework. Journal of Physics: Conf. Series, 1028(12150), 1–8. Retrieved from iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/.../012150
  45. Zheng, L. (2016). The effectiveness of self-regulated learning scaffolds on academic performance in computer-based learning environments: a meta-analysis. Asia Pacific Education Review, 17(2), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-016-9426-9

Open Access Copyright (c) 2020 Phenomenon : Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Phenomenon: Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA
Published by Faculty of Science and Technology UIN Walisongo Semarang
Jl Prof. Dr. Hamka Kampus III Ngaliyan Semarang 50185
Phone: +62 815-7502-8676
Website: https://fst.walisongo.ac.id/
Email: phenomenon@walisongo.ac.id


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

apps