Keywords
turtle graphics
polygons
quasi-experiment Logo programski jezik
kornjačina grafika
mnogokuti
kvazi-eksperiment
How to Cite
Abstract
The Logo programming language is one of the first programming languages designed for children, originating in 1966 primarily for teaching geometry. The logo is based on the concept of turtle graphics, which remains prevalent today in developing computational thinking and for initial programming education. It is clear that at the time of Logo's inception, the idea of personal computers was still in the realm of science fiction, as was computer science as an independent discipline. However, Seymour Papert's visionary outlook laid the foundation for computational thinking and programming education from an early age, which is ubiquitous today. As Papert was primarily a mathematician with a focus on mathematics education, Logo was developed specifically for teaching geometry and facilitating children's understanding of basic geometric concepts such as polygons. Nevertheless, there is limited research on the impact of Logo on the understanding of basic geometric concepts. This study aims to investigate the influence of using the Logo programming language in teaching geometry to eighth graders, with a focus on fundamental polygon concepts, identify common errors in learning polygons, and assess the effectiveness of the Logo program in promoting interactive geometry learning. This research utilized both qualitative and quantitative methods to provide a comprehensive insight into this topic. The study showed that the implementation of turtle graphics in the Logo programming language for teaching basic polygon concepts results in a better understanding of polygon concepts among students and encourages interactive geometry learning.References
Bahar, A., & Maker, J. C. (2015). Cognitive Backgrounds of Problem Solving: A Comparison of Open-ended vs. Closed Mathematics Problems. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 1531–1546.
Bailey, M. W. (2005). IronCode: Think-Twice, Code-Once Programming. SIGCSE ’05, 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1145/1047344.1047412
Baykul, Y. (2005). Lköğretimde Matematik Öğretimi. Pegema Yayıncılık.
Bhattacharyya, S. (2021). The Study of Basic Assumptions in Solid Geometry. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research Review, 03(11), 1282–1285.
Carlson, M. P., & Bloom, I. (2005). The cyclic nature of problem solving: An emergent multidimensional problem-solving framework. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58, 45–75.
Clements, D. (2003). Teaching and learning geometry (pp. 151–178).
French, D. (2004). Teaching and Learning Geometry: Issues and methods in mathematical education. Continuum International Publishing Group.
Gravemeijer, K., Figueiredo, N., Feijs, E., Galen, F. van, Keijzer, R., & Munk, F. (2016). Measurement and Geometry in Upper Primary School. Brill. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-746-7
Jablonski, S., & Ludwig, M. (2023). Teaching and Learning of Geometry—A Literature Review on Current Developments in Theory and Practice. Education Sciences, 13(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070682
Jones, K. (2000). Critical issues in the design of the school geometry curriculum. In Readings in Mathematics Education (pp. 75–90). University of Auckland.
Jones, K. (2002). Issues in the teaching and learning of geometry. In Aspects of Teaching Secondary Mathematics: Perspectives on Practice (pp. 121-).
Laurent, M., Crisci, R., Bressoux, P., Chaachoua, H., Nurra, C., De Vries, E., & Tchounikine, P. (2022). Impact of programming on primary mathematics learning. Learning and Instruction, 82, 101667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101667
Maier, P. (2001). How To Make Solid Geometry Solid? https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:167215443
Meelissen, M., Netten, A., Drent, M., Punter, R., Droop, M., & Verhoeven, L. (2012). PIRLS- en TIMSS-2011. Trends in achievement in reading, mathematics and science.
Ministarstvo znanosti i obrazovanja. (2019). Kurikulumi nastavnih predmeta Matematika za osnovne škole i gimnazije i Matematika za srednje strukovne škole na razini 4.2.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Book, Inc.
Riastuti, N., Mardiyana, & Pramudya, I. (2017). Analysis of students geometry skills viewed from spatial intelligence. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1913, 020024.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1983). The Wild, Wild, Wild, Wild, Wild World of Problem Solving (A Review of Sorts). For the Learning of Mathematics, 3(3), 40–47. JSTOR.
Schoevers, E. M., Kroesbergen, E. H., Moerbeek, M., & Leseman, P. P. M. (2022). The relation between creativity and students’ performance on different types of geometrical problems in elementary education. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 54(1), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01315-5
Serin, H. (2018). Perspectives on the Teaching of Geometry: Teaching and Learning Methods. Journal of Education and Training, 5, 1. https://doi.org/10.5296/jet.v5i1.12115
Silva, J. (2024). Geometry teaching from Babylon to the computer era. https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDB/00324/2020)
Solomon, C., Harvey, B., Kahn, K., Lieberman, H., Miller, M. L., Minsky, M., Papert, A., & Silverman, B. (2020). History of Logo. Proceedings of the ACM on Programming Languages, 4(HOPL), 1–66. https://doi.org/10.1145/3386329
Stein, M., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influence student learning. In Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the national council of teachers of mathematics (pp. 319–369).
van Zanten, M., & van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2018). Opportunity to learn problem solving in Dutch primary school mathematics textbooks. ZDM, 50(5), 827–838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0973-x
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2024 Array