The Role of Innovative Learning Environment in Improving Students’ Mathematics Learning Outcomes: A Systematic Review
Abstract
A good mathematics learning outcome can reflect a good quality of Education. However, factual conditions about Indonesian students' mathematics learning outcomes still need to be more hopeful. Because of that, this systematic review aims to analyze previous studies about the role of innovative learning environment (ILE) in increasing students' mathematics learning outcomes as a beginning step for increasing Indonesian students' mathematics learning outcomes. To reach the objective, we defined inclusion and exclusion criteria to collect articles from other countries about ILE in mathematics over the last six years, from 2018 to 2023, using Google Scholar. After that, we systematically analyzed the selected articles and described them in a three-point discussion to answer research questions, namely: (1) The definition and characteristics of ILE; (2) The definition of mathematics learning outcomes which developed through ILE; and (3) The role of ILE in increased students' mathematics learning outcomes. The result showed that ILE was proven to play a role in improving student mathematics learning outcomes, and results were best when learning focused on collaborative aspects. Thus, applying ILE can be one solution to fix the low students' mathematics learning outcomes.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abrahamson, D., Nathan, M. J., Williams-Pierce, C., Walkington, C., Ottmar, E. R., Soto, H., & Alibali, M. W. (2020). The Future of Embodied Design for Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Frontiers in Education, 5(August), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2020.00147
Apriliana, L. P., Handayani, I., & Awalludin, S. A. (2019). The Effect of a Problem Centered Learning on Student’s Mathematical Critical Thinking. JRAMathEdu (Journal of Research and Advances in Mathematics Education), 4(2), 124–133. https://doi.org/10.23917/jramathedu.v4i2.8386
Baroody, A. J., & Dowker, A. (2009). The Development of Arithmetic Concepts and Skills: Constructive Adaptive Expertise. Taylor & Francis e-Library. https://books.google.co.id/books?hl=id&lr=&id=3RB6Z9-usfoC&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Baroody,+A.+J.,+%26+Dowker,+A.+(Eds.).+(2013).+The+development+of+arithmetic+concepts+and+skills:+Constructive+adaptive+expertise.+Routledge&ots=G8sIx4ar94&sig=o3zzOdCwKitM6q9j1AQ
Blackmore, J., Bateman, D., Loughlin, J., O’Mara, J., & Aranda, G. (2011). Research into the connection between built learning spaces and student outcomes: Literature review. http://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/publ/research/%0Apubl/blackmore_learning_spaces.pdf
Boekaerts, M. (1996). Self-regulated Learning at the Junction of Cognition and Motivation. European Psychologist, 1(2), 100–112. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.1.2.100
Bolhuis, S., & Voeten, M. J. M. (2001). Toward self-directed learning in secondary schools: what do teachers do? Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(7), 837–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00034-8
Brooks, D. C. (2011). Space matters: The impact of formal learning environments on student learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(5), 719–726. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-8535.2010.01098.X
Byers, T., Imms, W., & Hartnell-Young, E. (2018a). Comparative analysis of the impact of traditional versus innovative learning environment on student attitudes and learning outcomes. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58(July), 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.003
Byers, T., Imms, W., & Hartnell-Young, E. (2018b). Evaluating teacher and student spatial transition from a traditional classroom to an innovative learning environment. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58(July), 156–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.004
Campbell, L. (2020). Teaching in an Inspiring Learning Space: an investigation of the extent to which one school’s innovative learning environment has impacted on teachers’ pedagogy and practice. Research Papers in Education, 35(2), 185–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1568526
Cavadas, B., & Correia, M. (2022). Students’ perceptions of an innovative learning environment in higher education: an exploratory analysis. Cuadernos de Psicología Del Deporte, 22(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.6018/cpd.468741
De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Masui, C. (2004). The CLIA-model: A framework for designing powerful learning environments for thinking and problem solving. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19(4), 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173216/METRICS
De Kock, A., Sleegers, P., & Voeten, M. J. (2004). New learning and the classification of learning environments in secondary education. Review of educational research, 74(2), 141-170..
Deppeler, J., Corrigan, D., Macaulay, L., & Aikens, K. (2021). Innovation and risk in an innovative learning environment: A Private Public Partnership in Australia. 21(4), 602–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041211030400
Dovey, K., & Fisher, K. (2014). Designing for adaptation: the school as socio-spatial assemblage. Http://Dx.Doi.Org/10.1080/13602365.2014.882376, 19(1), 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602365.2014.882376
El Islami, R. A. Z., Anantanukulwong, R., & Faikhamta, C. (2022). Trends of Teacher Professional Development Strategies: A Systematic Review. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 10(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v10i2.4628
Fardah, D. K., Wijayanti, P., Ismail, Susanah, & Masriyah. (2021). E-Learning-Based Task Design for Developing Mathematics Instructional Tools Containing 4C Skills. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Mathematics and Mathematics Education (ICMMEd 2020), 550(Icmmed 2020), 136–142. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210508.055
Fenwick, T. J. (2016). Professional responsibility and professionalism : a sociomaterial examination. Routledge.
Gatti, L., Ulrich, M., & Seele, P. (2019). Education for sustainable development through business simulation games: An exploratory study of sustainability gamification and its effects on students’ learning outcomes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 207, 667–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCLEPRO.2018.09.130
Gijbels, D., Van De Watering, G., Dochy, F., & Van Den Bossche, P. (2006). New Learning Environments and Constructivism: The Students’ Perspective. Instructional Science, 34(3), 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11251-005-3347-Z
Groff, J. (2013). Technology-rich innovative learning environments. Oecd.Org, 1–30.
Hornstra, L., van der Veen, I., Peetsma, T., & Volman, M. (2015). Innovative learning and developments in motivation and achievement in upper primary school. Educational Psychology, 35(5), 598–633. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.922164
Imms, W., & Byers, T. (2017). Impact of classroom design on teacher pedagogy and student engagement and performance in mathematics. Learning Environments Research, 20(1), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-016-9210-0
Istance, D. (2011). Environments : An international (Issue December). Centre for Strategic Education.
Kivunja, C. (2014). Innovative Pedagogies in Higher Education to Become Effective Teachers of 21st Century Skills: Unpacking the Learning and Innovations Skills Domain of the New Learning Paradigm. International Journal of Higher Education, 3(4), 37–48. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v3n4p37
Ministry of Education and Culture. (2018). Muatan HOTS pada Pembelajaran Kurikulum 2013 Pendidikan Dasar.
Muhali, M. (2019). Pembelajaran Inovatif Abad Ke-21. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengkajian Ilmu Pendidikan: E-Saintika, 3(2), 25. https://doi.org/10.36312/e-saintika.v3i2.126
Mulcahy, D., Cleveland, B., & Aberton, H. (2015). Learning spaces and pedagogic change: envisioned, enacted and experienced. Culture & Society, 23(4), 575–595. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2015.1055128
Mulcahy, D., & Morrison, C. (2017). Re/assembling ‘innovative’ learning environments: Affective practice and its politics. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(8), 749–758. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2016.1278354
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Volume I): Excellence and Equity in Education, PISA. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-5-en
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do, PISA. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5F07C754-EN
Ministry of Education and Culture (2016). Permendikbud No. 21 Tahun 2016 Tentang Standar Isi Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah. Ministry of Education and Culture
Saastamoinen, U., Eronen, L., Juvonen, A., & Vahimaa, P. (2023). Wellbeing at the 21st century innovative learning environment called learning ground. Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching and Learning, ahead-of-p(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-03-2022-0012/FULL/PDF
Sasson, I., Yehuda, I., Miedijensky, S., & Malkinson, N. (2021). Designing new learning environments: An innovative pedagogical perspective. Curriculum Journal, July, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.125
Schuitema, J., Peetsma, T., & van der Veen, I. (2012). Self-regulated learning and students’ perceptions of innovative and traditional learning environments: A longitudinal study in secondary education. Educational Studies, 38(4), 397–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2011.643105
Sumaryanta, S., Priatna, N., & Sugiman, S. (2019). Pemetaan Hasil Ujian Nasional Matematika. Idealmathedu: Indonesian Digital Journal of Mathematics and Education, 6(1), 543–557. https://doi.org/10.53717/idealmathedu.v6i1.38
Supena, I., Darmuki, A., & Hariyadi, A. (2021). The influence of 4C (constructive, critical, creativity, collaborative) learning model on students’ learning outcomes. International Journal of Instruction, 14(3), 873–892. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14351a
Suyitno, A., Suyitno, H., & Sugiharti, E. (2021). Integration of 4C competencies in online mathematics learning in junior high schools during the covid-19 pandemic. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1918(4). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1918/4/042083
Triana, D., Anggraito, Y. U., & Ridlo, S. (2020). Effectiveness of Environmental Change Learning Tools Based on STEM-PjBL Towards 4C Skills of Students. Jise, 9(2), 181–187.
Wilson, V. (2013). Research methods: Systematic reviews. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 8(3), 83–84. https://doi.org/10.18438/B8CP5Z
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.30870/gpi.v4i1.19412
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2023 Gagasan Pendidikan Indonesia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.