Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Mathematics education plays a crucial role in the cognitive and affective development of students, including self-confidence in understanding the material. This study aims to evaluate the impact of the Knisley learning model based on constructivism on students' self-confidence. The Knisley learning model provides direct experiences, group collaboration, and individual reflection, which is presumed to enhance students' self-confidence in mathematics learning. This research employs a quantitative approach with an experimental design. The study population consists of 34 fourth-semester students from IAIN Tadris Matematika, divided into two groups: experimental and control. The instrument used in this study is a self-confidence questionnaire. Data collected from the questionnaires distributed to both groups were analyzed to determine the difference in average self-confidence scores between the experimental group using the Knisley constructivism-based model and the control group not using this model. The results indicate that the experimental group had a higher average self-confidence score (45.52) compared to the control group (61.05). The significant value obtained from SPSS testing is 0.0000, which is smaller than the significance level (α = 0.05), indicating that H1 is accepted. Therefore, it can be concluded that students' self-confidence using the Knisley constructivism-based learning model is better than that of students not using the Knisley model, meaning there is an effect of implementing the Knisley constructivism-based learning model on the self-confidence of Tadris Mathematics students. The Knisley constructivism-based model in mathematics learning provides relevant learning contexts, encourages active interaction, and facilitates reflection that supports the development of self-confidence. Thus, the application of this learning model has proven to be effective in enhancing students' self-confidence in mathematics learning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sari et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: