Android-Based Pisa-Type Questions in The Ramadhan Context to Know Students' Mathematical Thinking Abilities

Suci Indah Pratiwi 1 Indonesia , Ratu Ilma Indra Putri 1 Indonesia , Somakim 1 Indonesia
1 Department of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Sriwijaya
Link Copied!
Published 2025-12-31
Vol. 5 No. 4 (2025) PAGES 1788 - 1804
DOI 10.51574/kognitif.v5i4.4442
Views / Downloads 125 181

The increasing demand for assessing students’ mathematical thinking skills in authentic and meaningful contexts, as emphasized by international assessments such as PISA, highlights the urgent need for context-based assessment instruments that are relevant to students’ everyday experiences. In response to this gap, this study aimed to develop and examine the effectiveness of a PISA-type mathematics test set grounded in a real-world context, namely Ramadan, to assess junior high school students’ mathematical thinking skills. This study employed design research in the form of a development study using Tessmer’s formative evaluation model, which included expert review, one-to-one trials, and small-group trials. The research participants were eighth-grade students at SMP IT Al-Furqon Palembang. The developed assessment package consisted of 15 PISA-type mathematics items, test blueprints, item cards, and analytic scoring rubrics. Content, construct, and language validity were evaluated through expert reviews, while clarity and comprehensibility were examined through one-to-one trials with students. Practicality was assessed using a student questionnaire administered during the small-group trial. The results indicate that the developed test items achieved a high level of validity based on expert judgments and were considered practical, easy to understand, and effective to use by students. These findings suggest that the Ramadan-contextualized PISA-type test set is suitable for use as an assessment tool to support mathematics learning and evaluation at the junior high school level. The novelty of this study lies in the integration of a culturally meaningful religious context into PISA-type mathematics assessment, demonstrating how local and contextual values can be systematically embedded to enhance the relevance, validity, and pedagogical potential of mathematical thinking assessments.

Pratiwi, S. I., Putri, R. I. I., & Somakim, S. (2025). Android-Based Pisa-Type Questions in The Ramadhan Context to Know Students’ Mathematical Thinking Abilities. Kognitif: Jurnal Riset HOTS Pendidikan Matematika, 5(4), 1788–1804. https://doi.org/10.51574/kognitif.v5i4.4442
More Citation Formats
Download Citation

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
  1. Ahmadpour, F., Reid, D., & Fadaee, M. R. (2019). Students ’ ways of understanding a proof. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 21(02), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2019.1570833
  2. Armiati, Fauzan, A., Harisman, Y., & Sya’Bani, F. (2022). Local instructional theory of probability topics based on realistic mathematics education for eight-grade students. Journal on Mathematics Education, 13(4), 703–722. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v13i4.pp703-722
  3. Brown, R. E., Weiland, T., & Orrill, C. H. (2020). Mathematics Teachers’ Use of Knowledge Resources When Identifying Proportional Reasoning Situations. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(6), 1085–1104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10006-3
  4. Callingham, R., & Siemon, D. (2021). Connecting multiplicative thinking and mathematical reasoning in the middle years. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 61(December 2020), 100837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2020.100837
  5. Charitas, R., Prahmana, I., Arnal-palacián, M., & Risdiyanti, I. (2023). Trivium curriculum in Ethno-RME approach : An impactful insight from ethnomathematics and realistic mathematics education. Jurnal Elemen, 9(January), 298–316.
  6. Chorney, S., Evans, K. R., & Staples, M. (2024). Conceptualizing reasoning practices in the context of sociomathematical issues. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2024.101124
  7. Ekowati, D. W., Azzahra, F. Z., Saputra, S. Y., & Suwandayani, B. I. (2021). Realistic mathematics education (RME) approach for primary school students’ reasoning ability. Premiere Educandum : Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Dan Pembelajaran, 11(2), 269. https://doi.org/10.25273/pe.v11i2.8397
  8. Habibi, H., & Suparman, S. (2020). Literasi Matematika dalam Menyambut PISA 2021 Berdasarkan Kecakapan Abad 21. JKPM (Jurnal Kajian Pendidikan Matematika), 6(1), 57. https://doi.org/10.30998/jkpm.v6i1.8177
  9. Habsyi, R., R. M. Saleh, R., & Isman M. Nur. (2022). Pengembangan E-LKPD Berbasis Guided Dicovery Learning untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Berpikir Kritis Siswa. Kognitif: Jurnal Riset HOTS Pendidikan Matematika, 2(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.51574/kognitif.v2i1.385
  10. Hackenberg, A. J., Aydeniz, F., & Jones, R. (2021). Middle school students ’ construction of quantitative unknowns ⋆. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 61(December 2020), 100832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2020.100832
  11. Hartmann, L. M., Schukajlow, S., Niss, M., & Jankvist, U. T. (2024). Preservice teachers’ metacognitive process variables in modeling-related problem posing. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 76(September), 101195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2024.101195
  12. Heyd-Metzuyanim, E., Sharon, A. J., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2021). Mathematical media literacy in the COVID-19 pandemic and its relation to school mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(1–2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10075-8
  13. Hsieh, F. J., Wang, T. Y., Hsieh, C. J., & Chu, C. T. (2025). The relationships of preservice teachers’ dispositions and noticing of technology-integrated mathematics teaching activities. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 57(6), 1139–1152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-025-01727-7
  14. Ilyas, M., Ma’Rufi, & Basir, F. (2019). Students metacognitive skill in learning mathematics through cooperative based emotional intelligence. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1397(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1397/1/012089
  15. Jäder, J., Lithner, J., & Sidenvall, J. (2020). Mathematical problem solving in textbooks from twelve countries. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(7), 1120–1136. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1656826
  16. Kafetzopoulos, G. I., & Psycharis, G. (2022). Conceptualization of function as a covariational relationship between two quantities through modeling tasks. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 67(July), 100993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2022.100993
  17. Kärki, T., McMullen, J., & Lehtinen, E. (2022). Improving rational number knowledge using the NanoRoboMath digital game. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 110(1), 101–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10120-6
  18. Kuper, E., & Carlson, M. (2020). Foundational ways of thinking for understanding the idea of logarithm. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 57(January 2019), 100740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.100740
  19. Kurniasih, S., Darwan, D., & Muchyidin, A. (2020). Menumbuhkan Kemandirian Belajar Matematika Siswa Melalui Mobile Learning Berbasis Android. Jurnal Edukasi Matematika Dan Sains, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.25273/jems.v8i2.7041
  20. Mkhatshwa, T. P. (2020). Calculus students’ quantitative reasoning in the context of solving related rates of change problems. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 22(2), 139–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2019.1658055
  21. Muslimin, Indra Putri, R. I., Zulkardi, & Aisyah, N. (2020). Learning integers with realistic mathematics education approach based on islamic values. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(3), 363–384. https://doi.org/10.22342/JME.11.3.11721.363-384
  22. Nisa, M. A., & Susanto, R. (2022). Pengaruh Penggunaan Game Edukasi Berbasis Wordwall Dalam Pembelajaran Matematika Terhadap Motivasi Belajar. JPGI (Jurnal Penelitian Guru Indonesia), 7(1). https://doi.org/10.29210/022035jpgi0005
  23. Nolaputra, A. P., Wardono, & Supriyono. (2018). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematika pada Pembelajaran PBL Pendekatan RME Berbantuan Schoology Siswa SMP. Prisma, Prosiding Seminar Nasional Matematika, 1.
  24. OECD. (2018). Programme for International Students Assesment (PISA) Result From PISA 2018.
  25. Planas, N. (2020). How specific can language as resource become for the teaching of algebraic concepts? ZDM - Mathematics Education, 53(2), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01190-6
  26. Purnomo, Y. W., Pasri, Aziz, T. A., Shahrill, M., & Prananto, I. W. (2022). Students’ failure to understand fraction multiplication as part of a quantity. Journal on Mathematics Education, 13(4), 681–702. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v13i4.pp681-702
  27. Putranto, S., & Marsigit, M. (2018). Is it Effective using Peer Tutoring with Realistic Mathematics Education Approach to Improve Slow Learners’ Mathematics Attitudes? International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.12928/ijeme.v2i2.10487
  28. Putri, N. S., Juandi, D., & Jupri, A. (2022). The implementation effect of realistic mathematics education and contextual teaching and learning approaches on the students’ mathematical communication ability: A meta-analysis. Al-Jabar : Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.24042/ajpm.v13i2.13562
  29. Qadry, I. K., Dessa, A., & Aynul, N. (2022). Analisis Kemampuan Literasi Matematika Siswa Dalam Menyelesaikan Soal Pisa Konten Space and Shape Pada Kelas IX SMP Negeri 13 Makassar. Jurnal Matematika Dan Aplikasinya, 2(2).
  30. Rezat, S., Fan, L., & Pepin, B. (2021). Mathematics textbooks and curriculum resources as instruments for change. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 53(6), 1189–1206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01309-3
  31. Rich, K. M., Yadav, A., & Schwarz, C. V. (2019). Computational thinking, mathematics, and science: Elementary teachers’ perspectives on integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 27(2), 165–205.
  32. Safrudiannur, & Rott, B. (2019). The different mathematics performances in PISA 2012 and a curricula comparison: enriching the comparison by an analysis of the role of problem solving in intended learning processes. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31(2), 175–195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0248-4
  33. Sevimli, E. (2018). Understanding students’ hierarchical thinking: A view from continuity, differentiability and integrability. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 37(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrw028
  34. Sievert, H., van den Ham, A. K., & Heinze, A. (2021). The role of textbook quality in first graders’ ability to solve quantitative comparisons: a multilevel analysis. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 53(6), 1417–1431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01266-x
  35. Susanta, A., Sumardi, H., Susanto, E., & Retnawati, H. (2023). Mathematics literacy task on number pattern using Bengkulu context for junior high school students. Journal on Mathematics Education, 14(1), 85–102. https://doi.org/10.22342/JME.V14I1.PP85-102
  36. Tohir, M. (2019). Hasil PISA Indonesia Tahun 2018 Turun Dibanding Tahun 2015 (Indonesia’s PISA Results in 2018 are Lower than 2015). Open Science Framework, 2.
  37. Utama, F. F., Rais, W. A., & -, S. (2019). An Ethnolinguistic Study in the Names of Salt Farming Tools in Rembang District. Humaniora, 10(2), 167. https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v10i2.5623
  38. Utami, T. N., Jatmiko, A., & Suherman, S. (2018). Pengembangan Modul Matematika dengan Pendekatan Science, Technology, Engineering, And Mathematics (STEM) pada Materi Segiempat. Desimal: Jurnal Matematika, 1(2), 165. https://doi.org/10.24042/djm.v1i2.2388
  39. Voigt, M., Fredriksen, H., & Rasmussen, C. (2020). Leveraging the design heuristics of realistic mathematics education and culturally responsive pedagogy to create a richer flipped classroom calculus curriculum. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 52(5), 1051–1062. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01124-x
  40. Wilkie, K. J. (2025). ‘Things haven’t gone the way I thought they’d go’: secondary mathematics teachers talk about trialling a problem-solving pedagogy. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-025-09709-y
  41. Yilmaz, R. (2020). Prospective Mathematics Teachers ’ Cognitive Competencies on Realistic Mathematics Education. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(1), 17–44.
  42. Zambak, V. S., & Tyminski, A. M. (2020). Examining mathematical technological knowledge of pre-service middle grades teachers with Geometer’s Sketchpad in a geometry course. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(2), 183–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1650302
  43. Zulkardi, Meryansumayeka, Putri, R. I. I., Alwi, Z., Nusantara, D. S., Ambarita, S. M., Maharani, Y., & Puspitasari, L. (2020). How students work with pisa-like mathematical tasks using covid-19 context. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(3), 405–416. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.11.3.12915.405-416

Copyright (c) 2025 Suci Indah Pratiwi, Ratu Ilma Indra Putri, Somakim

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Education and Talent Development Center of Indonesia (ETDC Indonesia)
e-mail: kognitif@gmail.com, website : https://etdc-indonesia.com

Creative Commons License
Kognitif: Jurnal Riset HOTS Pendidikan Matematika dengan Situs: https://etdci.org/journal/kognitif  berlisensi  Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

p-ISSN 2776-9984, e-ISSN 2776-9704 

Dimension Badge

Downloads

Downloads
Crossmark Badge
Crossmark Badge
Section
Articles
Keywords
Research and Development PISA Type Questions Mathematical Thinking Game Based Quantity Material