GEOGEBRA VIA MOOC APPLICATION IN MATHEMATICAL PERSONALIZED LEARNING TO IMPROVE STUDENTS GEOMETRIC THINKING THROUGH VAN HIELE MODEL

 ABSTRACT 

After getting a low score on the 2018 PISA Result in mathematics, Indonesia faced a significant crisis in 2018. Geometry, which is one of the core principles of studying mathematics and the relationship between studies and daily life, is one of the sources of student challenges. Furthermore, Van Hiele is mentioned as having the greatest influence on geometric thinking, yet this would make it difficult for each student in a diverse class to change their comprehension. Through the Van Hiele Model, this study intends to provide an alternative to improve Indonesian students' geometry thinking. The PRISMA technique is used to conduct systematic literature reviews on 10 primary and some supplementary publications in four stages: identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion and exclusion criteria. The gathered data is then analyzed and classified into two categories: personalized learning to improve students' geometric thinking and Geogebra via MOOC to support effective geometry learning. Finally, the data analysis results highlight the possibilities of personalized learning by using Geogebra via MOOCs to improve Indonesian students' geometry thinking using the Van Hiele Model. 

Keywords: Personalized Learning, Van Hiele Model, Geogebra via MOOC


INTRODUCTION 

Indonesia faced a severe crisis in mathematics in 2018 after receiving a low score on the 2018 Programme For International Student Assessment (PISA) Result in mathematics (OECD, 2018). One of the sources of student difficulties is Geometry, a topic in mathematics with conceptual learning (Faruk Tutkun & Ozturk, 2013; Hutkemri, 2014). Whereas, one of the fundamental concepts of learning mathematics is the relationship between subjects and daily life (Faruk Tutkun & Ozturk, 2013).

According to (S. et al., 2022), the ability to think geometrically is one factor contributing to geometry's success. Furthermore, Van Hiele indicated that geometric thinking level is influenced by geometry instruction, although grade level and biological maturity have less of an impact. (Škrbec & Čadež, 2015). Van Hiele's model is one of the mathematical learning models with five geometry stages to acquire knowledge and progress to the next level (Kandaga et al., 2022). The stages start from level 1, namely visualization; level 2, namely analysis; level 3, namely abstraction; level 4, namely deduction; and the last stage, namely Rigor. On the other hand, the difference in levels would make it difficult for each student in a heterogeneous class to alter their comprehension. According to (Abu & Abidin, 2013), lower-level students still need to establish critical reasoning for a higher thinking process. In contrast, a higher-level student would challenge to express their ideas effectively in lower-level terms. Students in Indonesia scored lower than the OECD average in mathematics, with 28% scoring at Level 5 or higher (PISA, 2018). 

As a result, this study attempts to address the alternative to improving Indonesian students' geometry thinking by utilizing the Van Hiele Model, emphasizing the possibilities of personalized learning and Geogebra via MOOCs applied in geometry learning. To achieve these goals, the current systematic review must examine literature that discusses the Van Hiele Model, Personalized Learning Implementation, and Geogebra through MOOC Application. 

Research Questions 

This study investigated the alternative to improve Indonesian Students’ Geometry Thinking Through Van Hiele Model to address the major question, “How to improve Indonesian students’ geometry thinking?” In order to provide an answer to the main research question, the main question is divided into three subquestions is: 

1. How does personalized learning improve students’ geometry thinking through Van Hiele Model? 

2. How is Geogebra via MOOC can support effective geometry learning? 

3. How is the application of using Geogebra via MOOC in personalized learning through the Van Hiele Model? 

Objectives 

The objective of this study is to provide an alternative to improve Indonesian students’ geometry thinking in three stages: 

1. To investigate the implementation of personalized learning in improving students’ geometry thinking through the Van Hiele Model. 

2. To investigate the application of Geogebra in geometry class. 

3. To describe the application of Geogebra via MOOC in personalized learning through the Van Hiele Model.

Benefits 

This study offers several benefits for Indonesian students to improve their geometry thinking, as follows: 

1. To guide Indonesian teachers and students implemented personalized learning to improve students’ geometry thinking. 

2. To guide Indonesian teachers and students using Geogebra via MOOC to support personalized learning in GeoGebra learning 

3. Geogebra via MOOC to support personalized learning in GeoGebra learning 

4. To provide a reference for further researchers in developing Geogebra via MOOC to improve students’ geometry thinking 

METHOD 

This qualitative study aims to provide an alternative to improve Indonesian students' geometry thinking by presenting evidence of Geogebra via MOOC in personalized learning that can successfully contribute to students' geometry thinking improvement. Therefore, following (Serhan & Yahaya, 2022), a systematic literature review (SLR) is conducted in this study to discuss the implementation of the alternative in improving students' geometric thinking. This review typically covers the above-mentioned specific research questions using evidence from the studies.

Data Source and Search Strategy 

Data used for this study were acquired from two sorts of sources: primary and secondary, which were found on Google Scholar using a combination of search terms such as "Students' Geometry Thinking", "Mathematics Personal Learning", and "The Application of Geogebra." This analysis only looked at literature between the years of 2012 and 2022; no older literature was considered. 

The selected literature was assessed applying the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) technique. PRISMA creates a standardized, peer-reviewed technique that includes guideline checklists to contribute to the quality assurance and replicability of the revision process (Conde et al., 2020). PRISMA has four stages: identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. This study might accurately search for the best-personalized learning practices using Geogebra via MOOC to improve Indonesian students' geometry thinking by adhering to PRISMA principles (Mohamed et al., 2022). Figure 2 represents the PRISMA flow chart used in this investigation, which was developed and modified by Mohamed et al (2022).

Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart

Table 1. Inclusion and Exclusion Crieteria

--

Systematics Review Process 
Identification
Google Scholar was used for the search. We developed two main search terms based on our primary research areas: Van Hiele Model, Personalized Learning, and Geogebra through MOOC. As a result, the search phrases and tactics are broadened to include as much relevant research as possible. This study searched using the following key terms: "Students' Geometry Thinking," "Mathematics Personal Learning," and "The Application of Geogebra." As a result, at this point in the process, 2980 journal articles were categorized. 
Screening 
The PRISMA principles were followed during the selection process, as shown in Figure 1 (Mohamed et al., 2022). In this method, this study used a range of inclusion and exclusion criteria. There were no non-Indexed literature or article reviews, and focusing solely on English-language literature articles reduced the likelihood of translations that are complicated or uncertain being necessary. Then this study looked at articles from the prior one decade (between 2012 and 2022). This study focused on publications with at least one reference to mathematics in the final step of the screening process. After the screening stage, 150 publications were determined to be non-compliant with the study's requirements 2830 articles were left. 
Eligibility 
The eligibility phase was caused by incomplete articles, as seen in Figure 1. First, any book that did not match the requirements for improving students' geometry thinking using the Van Hiele Model was discarded. The title, abstract, technique, findings, and discussion of each of the 150 works of literature were then thoroughly assessed to ensure they satisfied entry requirements and goals for the study. Currently, 123 articles have been rejected because they need to adequately describe the improvement in Students' Geometry Thinking through Van Hiele Model or clearly describe and review the study findings data. As a result, in the final stage of the review process, 17 articles were chosen for publication.
Inclusion and Exclusion
Criteria After obtaining all of the information from all recognized sources, this study used filtering factors such as timeframe, document type, language, and subject area to eliminate extraneous articles. The inclusion and exclusion criteria must be explicitly established when picking items for inclusion and exclusion to guarantee that the studies selected are pertinent to the primary research goal. The inclusion and exclusion criteria for this review study, as well as the research findings, are summarized in Table 1. The significance of 17 papers was established, and fulltext articles from these publications were obtained.
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The Implementation Of Personalized Learning In Improving Students’ Geometry Thinking Through Van Hiele Model
The van Hiele concept has been proposed as the best and most well-defined explanation for students' geometry-level thinking levels (Alex & Mammen, 2016). he model's basis is based on students' engagement in activities identified to attain the intended goals and discovering aspects connected to geometric ideas that consist of thinking levels that describes the students' geometric thinking styles (Faruk Tutkun & Ozturk, 2013). The transition from one level to the next is the most crucial point in the Van Hiele paradigm. This critical point's advancement depends on the quality of education supplied. 
Hohol (2019) detailed the degrees of geometric thinking were divided into five stages. The first stage is visual whereby students understand geometric shapes as gestalt primarily visually, without taking into account components, sections, and geometric characteristics. The level after that is description or analytic. Children may visually recognize not only their design and identity, but also their merge with essence and the relationships between them. The abstract or relational level is defined by students' grasp of the hierarchical link between geometric qualities and geometric conceptions relating to sufficient and necessary circumstances. The next level is standard deduction, where students get definitions, axioms, theorems, and proofs. The meta-mathematical level is the most significant.
However, gaps in the learning process in the classroom cannot be avoided in this model (Abdullah & Zakaria, 2013; Abu & Abidin, 2013). Each student will struggle to share levels in order to comprehend one another. Students at higher levels will need help to express themselves appropriately in lower-level vocabulary. On the other hand, students at lesser levels have not yet mastered critical reasoning for higher cognitive processes. Personalized education in the present study is considered an educational approach using individual educational trajectories. Eventually, teachers have issues effectively personalizing and individualizing learning for each student in the class when they have students with varying levels of preparation (Dixon et al., 2014; Goddard et al., 2015).
To address this issue, (Thai et al., 2022) have attempted to address this issue by operationalizing personalized learning based on mastery as an adaptation of the difficulty level to each student's capability to grasp the subject at a studentfriendly speed. The study discovered that one-on-one tutoring delivers the most significant learning increases when teachers change the instruction to maintain the adapted learning to the individual student's level demands. In addition, teachers expressed a favorable opinion of the systems’ flexibility to distinguish instruction and address the needs of students where they were at in their comprehension. It highlights the necessity of individualized mathematical learning, which can provide more complex information for students who are prepared for the high level, students may be overlooked by teachers whose time and focus are needed by students who are failing to master the fundamental levels.
Geogebra to Support Effective Geometry Learning
GeoGebra is a dynamic public software for teaching and learning mathematics that includes features appropriate for courses such as geometry and algebra by simply downloading the software from its website www.geogebra.org (Azizul, 2016). GeoGebra software, which includes mathematical features such as symbols and graphs, can also assist teachers in improving students' grasp of mathematical ideas and methods (Hutkemri, 2014).
Previous research conducted by (Faruk Tutkun & Ozturk, 2013) has demonstrated GeoGebra's effectiveness in improving students' geometric understanding. The study focused on the role of GeoGebra mathematics software on scholastic achievement and Van Hiele's geometric thinking. The findings revealed that students utilized dynamic geometry software outperformed students who learned without GeoGebra. The study also recognized that technology-based applications, particularly GeoGebra, aid in successful teaching and learning. Meanwhile, Wan Salleh and Sulaiman (2013) examined the efficiency of GeoGebra application on instructors' conceptual and procedural mathematics expertise. The topics covered included the use of differentiation and integration. The results showed that using GeoGebra increased conceptual knowledge. Aside from that, the use of technology, particularly GeoGebra, may aid in improving and stabilizing information for lecturers in the areas of differentiation and integration application.
The Application Of Using Geogebra Via MOOC In Personalized Learning Through Van Hiele Model
In order to meet the demands of personalized learning to improve students' geometry thinking, the most significant online public class, a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) using the OpenLearning platform, is considered. A MOOC is a global online learning platform that can handle many learners while offering various courses tailored to individual needs (Weller & Anderson, 2013). A program integrated into the teaching and study of mathematics via MOOC can develop a generation of tech-savvy and open-minded users. It is because GeoGebra is not only a dynamic software that fosters constructive abilities but also individual originality (Erlina & Zakaria, 2014; Syairatul, 2014 Furthermore, MOOCs are participatory, allowing learners to share their perspectives and improve software-related activities as time passes (Weller & Anderson, 2013; Baturay, 2015). Therefore, learning Geometry with GeoGebra via MOOC fosters If teachers provide personalized learning for their students by strategically change the atmosphere and environment to suit the student's needs level needs in geometry thinking through Van Hiele Model.

CONCLUSION
After getting a low score on the 2018 PISA Result in mathematics, particularly geometry, Indonesia faced a major crisis in mathematics in 2018. The ability to think geometrically, which is separated into five stages called Van Hiele's Model, is one component contributing to geometry's success. Van Hiele's Model phases are a five-level aim of obtaining information that begins with level 1, which is visualization; level 2, which is analysis; level 3, which is abstraction; level 4, which is deduction; and the final stage, which is rigor. Personalized Learning becomes an option to improve students' geometry thinking by adjusting the level of each student's thinking to handle the topic at a student-friendly pace to maximize the implementation of the Van Hiele Model in Geometry class. Teachers can benefit from the program's flexibility to differentiate instruction and meet students where they were in their comprehension by incorporating personalized learning in the Van Hiele Model. 
Furthermore, GeoGebra has been demonstrated to be an effective software for improving students' geometric understanding. GeoGebra can help Mathematics concepts be accepted and applied systematically. As a result, in order to meet the need for personalized learning and Geogebra application in implementing the Van Hiele Model, the Massive Open Online Course has been modified to improve students' geometry thinking. Due to the study's entirely theoretical nature, additional research, including the development of Geogebra via MOOC, as well as the effectiveness of the application towards users, is advised.

REFERENCES 
Abdullah, A. H., & Zakaria, E. (2013). The Effects of Van Hiele’s Phases of Learning Geometry on Students’ Degree of Acquisition of Van Hiele Levels. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 102, 251–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.740 
Abu, Mohd. S., & Abidin, Z. Z. (2013). Improving the Levels of Geometric Thinking of Secondary School Students Using Geometry Learning Video based on Van Hiele Theory. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 2(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v2i2.1935
Alex, J. K., & Mammen, K. J. (2016). Lessons Learnt From Employing van Hiele Theory Based Instruction In Senior Secondary School Geometry Classrooms. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(8). https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1228a
Azizul, S. M. J. (2016). TEACHING AND LEARNING GEOMETRY USING GEOGEBRA SOFTWARE VIA MOOC. 12.
Conde, M. A., Sedano, F. J. R., Fernandez-Llamas, C., Goncalves, J., Lima, J., & Garcia-Penalvo, F. J. (2020). RoboSTEAM Project Systematic Mapping: Challenge Based Learning and Robotics. 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON45650.2020.9125103
Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated Instruction, Professional Development, and Teacher Efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353214529042
Faruk Tutkun, O., & Ozturk, B. (2013). The effect of GeoGebra mathematical software to the academic success and the level of Van Hiele geometrical thinking. International Journal of Academic Research, 5(4), 22–28. https://doi.org/10.7813/2075-4124.2013/5-4/B.3 Goddard, Y., Goddard, R., & Kim, M. (2015). School Instructional Climate and Student Achievement: An Examination of Group Norms for Differentiated Instruction. American Journal of Education, 122(1), 111–131. https://doi.org/10.1086/683293 Hohol, M. (2019). Foundations of Geometric Cognition (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429056291 Hutkemri, E. Z. (2014). Impact of using Geogebra on Students’ Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge of Limit Function. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n23p873
Kandaga, T., Rosjanuardi, R., & Juandi, D. (2022). Epistemological Obstacle in Transformation Geometry Based on van Hiele’s Level. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(4), em2096. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11914
Mohamed, M. Z. bin, Hidayat, R., Suhaizi, N. N. binti, Sabri, N. binti M., Mahmud, M. K. H. bin, & Baharuddin, S. N. binti. (2022). Artificial intelligence in mathematics education: A systematic literature review. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 17(3), em0694. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/12132 OECD. 2018. Programme For International Student Assessment (PISA) Result from PISA 2018.
S., T., B., S., L., Y., & Kharisudin, I. (2022). A Systematic Review on Geometric Thinking: A Review Research Between 2017-2021. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(3), 1535–1552. https://doi.org/10.12973/eujer.11.3.1535 
Serhan, S. A. L., & Yahaya, N. (2022). A Systematic Review and Trend Analysis of Personal Learning Environments Research. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 12(1), 43–53. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2022.12.1.1585 
Škrbec, M., & Čadež, T. H. (2015). Identifying and Fostering Higher Levels of Geometric Thinking. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1339a 
Thai, K.-P., Bang, H. J., & Li, L. (2022). Accelerating Early Math Learning with Research-Based Personalized Learning Games: A Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 15(1), 28–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2021.1969710

Comments