EFFECTS OF SOCRATIC QUESTIONING ON STUDENTS' COMPUTATIONAL THINKING IN MATHEMATICS
Keywords:
Computational Thinking, Socratic Questioning, Mathematics Learning, Secondary Education, Quasi-Experimental DesignAbstract
Computational thinking (CT) is a crucial twenty-first-century competency that students must develop in mathematics learning. Preliminary observations and diagnostic assessments at SMA Negeri 3 Gunungsitoli revealed critically low CT ability: the mean pretest scores were 42.36 (experimental class) and 41.92 (control class), with abstraction as the weakest indicator. Students consistently selected formulas without analyzing problem structures. This study employed a quantitative approach using a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest control group design. The sample consisted of 36 students from Class X-1 as the experimental group and 36 students from Class X-2 as the control group. Computational Thinking (CT) was measured using a validated essay test (Aiken’s V = 0.88; α = 0.84) aligned with four key indicators: decomposition, pattern recognition, abstraction, and algorithmic thinking.Analysis included Shapiro-Wilk normality test, Levene homogeneity test, normalized gain (N-gain), independent-samples t-test, and Cohen’s d effect size.The experimental class achieved a medium N-gain (0.57) versus a low N-gain (0.26) for the control class, a significant t-test result (p < 0.001), and a very large effect size (Cohen’s d = 1.99). All four CT indicators improved substantially in the experimental class.Socratic Questioning is a statistically significant and practically meaningful pedagogical strategy for developing students’ CT in secondary mathematics classrooms without relying on digital infrastructure.
Downloads
References
Astuti, A., Suryawati, E., Suanto, E., Yuanita, P., & Noviana, E. (2025). Charting a course: Exploring computational thinking skills in statistics content among junior high school students. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 9(1), 182–202. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202531653
Bimantara, A. R., Sugiatno, S., & Kusumastuti, N. (2025). Cognitive structure of students through socratic questioning in algebra. Al-Jabar : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 16(1), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.24042/ajpm.v16i1.25657
Dalim, S. F., Ishak, A. S., & Hamzah, L. M. (2022). Promoting Students’ Critical Thinking through Socratic Method: Views and Challenges. Asian Journal of University Education, 18(4), 1034–1047. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v18i4.20012
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Kallia, M., van Borkulo, S. P., Drijvers, P., Barendsen, E., & Tolboom, J. (2021). Characterising computational thinking in mathematics education: a literature-informed Delphi study. Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 159–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2020.1852104
Li, Y., Schoenfeld, A. H., diSessa, A. A., Graesser, A. C., Benson, L. C., English, L. D., & Duschl, R. A. (2020). On Computational Thinking and STEM Education. Journal for STEM Education Research, 3(2), 147–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-020-00044-w
Lintangsari, A. P., Emaliana, I., & Kusumawardani, I. N. (2022). Improving Learners’ Critical Thinking and Learning Engagement through Socratic Questioning in Nominal Group Technique. Studies in English Language and Education, 9(2), 705–723. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v9i2.22352
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results. In Factsheets: I. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/educstion/pisa-2022-results-volume-i_53f23881-en
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2007). Critical thinking: The art of Socratic questioning. Journal of Developmental Education, 31(1), 36–37.
Ramaila, S., & Shilenge, H. (2023). Integration of computational thinking activities in Grade 10 mathematics learning. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147- 4478), 12(2), 458–471. https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v12i2.2372
Rich, K. M., Yadav, A., & Fessler, C. J. (2024). Computational thinking practices as tools for creating high cognitive demand mathematics instruction. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 27(2), 235–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-022-09562-3
Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, (22), 142-158 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.0.
Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers and Education, 148, 103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798
Weintrop, D., Beheshti, E., Horn, M., Orton, K., Jona, K., Trouille, L., & Wilensky, U. (2016). Defining Computational Thinking for Mathematics and Science Classrooms. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(1), 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9581-5
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.
Wu, W. R., & Yang, K. L. (2022). The relationships between computational and mathematical thinking: A review study on tasks. Cogent Education, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2098929
Yeni, S., Nijenhuis-voogt, J., Saeli, M., Barendsen, E., & Hermans, F. (2026). Computational thinking integrated in school subjects – A cross-case analysis of students ’ experiences Doi link to publisher : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100696 Version of the following full text : Publisher ’ s version Downloaded from : https:/. (2024), 1–13.
Zeng, Y., Yang, W., & Bautista, A. (2023). Computational thinking in early childhood education: Reviewing the literature and redeveloping the three-dimensional framework. Educational Research Review, 39(February). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100520
Downloads
Published
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
