MODEL PENGEMBANGAN DESAIN DIDAKTIS SUBJECT SPECIFIC PEDAGOGY BIDANG MATEMATIKA MELALUI PROGRAM PENDIDIKAN PROFESI GURU

Endang Mulyana, Turmudi Turmudi, Dadang Juandi

Abstract


ABSTRAK

Salah satu kompetensi inti sebagai guru matematika adalah kompetensi pedagogi yaitu mengembangkan kurikulum (enacted curriculum) dalam mata pelajaran matematika. Dalam Pendidikan Profesi Guru (PPG) Matematika di Universitas Pendidikan Bandung (UPI), kemampuan pedagogi ini dilatih melalui workshop yang disebut subject specific pedagogy (SSP). Tujuan dari kajian ini adalah mengembangkan suatu model/prosedur workshop yang efektif dalam mendorong peserta PPG untuk meningkatkan kompetensi pedagoginya. Model ini dikembangkan atas dasar teori segitiga didaktik antara siswa, guru dan materi yang meliputi Hubungan Didaktik (HD), Hubungan Pedagogik (HP) dan Antisipasi Didaktik-Pedagogik (ADP). Dengan mengikuti prosedur workshop yang telah ditetapkan ini, diperoleh desain pembelajaran matematika yang baru dan efektif. Hal ini menunjukkan adanya peningkatan kompetensi pedagogik para peserta PPG. Kelemahan peserta akan penguasaan materi dapat diatasi melalui pendalaman kembali (repersonalisasi) sebagai tugas mandiri, sedangkan kelemahan dalam memprediksi respon siswa dapat diatasi dengan memberikan para peserta pengalaman dalam mengobservasi dan refleksi.

ABSTRACT

One of the core competencies as a mathematics teacher is pedagogy competency, i.e competency to develops curriculum competencies (enacted curriculum) in mathematics. In Mathematics Professional Teacher Education (PPG) in UPI Bandung, this pedagogy ability are trained through the workshop called the Subject-Specific Pedagogy (SSP). The purpose of this study was to develop a workshop model that are expected to be effective in encouraging PPG participants to improve pedagogic competence. This model was developed based on the theory of didactic triangle between students, teachers and course material that covers the didactic relationship (HD), the pedagogy relationship (HP) and didactic-pedagogic anticipation (ADP). By following the established procedure of this workshop, some new math learning designs produced were more effective. This shows an increase in pedagogical competence of the PPG participants. Participants weakness in terms of their material mastery can be overcome through repersonalization as an independent task, while weakness concerning their ability to predict student response can be overcome by giving participants experience in observing and reflecting.


Keywords


antisipasi didaktik-pedagogik; desain didaktis; hubungan didaktik; hubungan pedagogik; subject specific pedagogy; didactic design; didactic-pedagogic anticipation; didactic relationship; pedagogic relationship

Full Text:

PDF

References


Al Jupri, (2008). Computational estimation in grade four and five: Design research in Indonesia. (Tesis). Utrecht University, Utrecht.

Bacher, J.M. (1991). Subject Specific Pedagogy: Are we ready to change our vision of teaching. Pennsylvania: Edinboro University of Pennsylvania.

Day, R. (1996). Case studies of preservice secondary mathematics teacher’s beliefs: Emerging and Evolving themes. Mathematics Educational Research Journal, 8(1), 5-22.

Departemen Pendidikan Nasional. (2007). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Nasional Republik Indonesia No. 16 Tahun 2007 tentang Standar Kualifikasi Akademik dan Kompetensi Guru. Jakarta: BSNP

Gravemeijer, K.P.E. (1994). Developing realistic mathematics education. Utrecht: CD  Press.

Kilpatrick, J.,Swafford, J.,& Findell, B. (2001). Adding It Up: Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

Remillard, J., and Heck, D. (2010). Influences on the Enacted Curriculum. [Online]. Diakses dari http://mathcurriculumcenter.org/PDFS/RemillardHeck.pdf.

Romberg, A., T. (1992). Perspectives on Scholarship and Research Methods. Dalam D. A. Grouws (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, hlm. 49-64. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Simon, A. Martin (1995). Reconstructing Mathematics Pedagogy from Constructivist Perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114 -145.

Superfine, C., A. (2008). Planning for Mathematics Instructions: A Model of Experienced Teachers’ Planning Processes in the Context of a Reform Mathematics Curriculum. The Mathematics Educator 2008,18(2), 11-22.

Suryadi, D. (2010). “Metapedadidaktik dan Didactical Design Research (DDR): Sintesis Hasil Pemikiran Berdasarkan Lesson Study”. Dalam Hidayat, T. Dkk (Ed). Teori, Paradigma, Prinsip, dan Pendekatan Pembelajaran Mipa dalam konteks Indonesia, hlm. 25-75. Bandung: FPMIPA UPI.

Thompson, G. A. (1992). Teachers’ Beliefs and Conceptions: A Synthesis Of the Research. Dalam D. A. Grouws (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, hlm. 65-100. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.18269/jpmipa.v19i2.36173

DOI (PDF): https://doi.org/10.18269/jpmipa.v19i2.36173.g15553

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 Jurnal Pengajaran MIPA

JPMIPA http://ejournal.upi.edu/index.php/jpmipa/index is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

Jurnal Pengajaran Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam (JPMIPA) or Journal of Mathematics and Science Teaching 

All rights reserverd. pISSN 1412-0917 eISSN 2443-3616

Copyright © Faculty of Mathematics and Science Education (FPMIPA) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia (UPI)

 

View JPMIPA Stats