Improving Trigonometry Concept Through STEM (Science,

Technology, Engineering, And Mathematics) Learning

Suherman1, Komarudin2, Abdul Rosyid3, Sinta Aryanita4, Doni Asriyanto5,

Thofan Aradika Putra6, Tri Anggoro7
1,2,3,4,5,6,7
Mathematics Education Department, UIN Raden Intan. Indonesia
Email: suherman@radenintan.ac.id

Abstract This research aims to find out the increased comprehension of trigonometry
concept between the students who received STEM learning and the students who
received conventional learning. This study is quasi-experimental research with
nonequivalent pre-test-post-test control group design. The population is all of the
ninth grade students in SMA Negeri 12 Bandar Lampung, Indonesia, and the sample is
the ninth graders that are divided into two classes, namely experimental class and
control class. The instrument used is the instrument test. The results showed that the
increased comprehension of the student’s trigonometry concept who received STEM
learning is in the high category with an average of Gain 0,54 and the students who
received conventional learning are in the medium category with an average of Gain
0,42. Based on the results of the research has been conducted, it can be concluded that
the increased comprehension of the student’s trigonometry concept who gained STEM
learning is better than the student who gained conventional learning.

Keywords: Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics; Understanding

Concepts; Trigonometry

INTRODUCTION
Mathematics is a science that has a concept that is arranged systematically, ranging from a
simple concept to a very complex concept [1]. The ability of conceptual comprehension is an
important competency to be achieved in mathematics learning [2-4]. The purpose of studying various
mathematical concepts is to solve the problems [5]. Because through conceptual understanding,
students will be helped to develop, improve and facilitate other skills such as problem-solving,
reasoning, connection, representation, and communication [5]. However, in fact, one of the things that
affect the ability to understand the concept of students is the low level of student performance itself [6-
8] so that students often fail to improve understanding of concepts. Based on research reporting that
students are academically successful in learning in accordance with the objectives of the applied
strategy [9,10].
One of the most important materials in mathematics is Trigonometry [9]. Trigonometry is one of
the branches of science in mathematics that has a working object in the form of triangular elements
such as the three angles of triangle and third side of triangle, and using trigonometric functions such as
sinus, cosine, tangent, secant, cosecant, and cotangent, along with its application [11]. Trigonometry is
the subject matter of mathematics known students in high school, and understanding of trigonometry
in high school is still limited to basic concepts are still shallow [12]. This limitation is caused by the

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
tendency of students who only memorize the formulas in Trigonometry learning is one of the causes of
low student learning in that material [13].
Thus a varied and interesting approach for learning is needed, to embellish conventional
learning on this important abstract subject [14,15], and encourage students to do many experiments
that allow them through the level of abstraction so that it can improve conceptual understanding [16-
18]
The STEM is an acronym for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics [19], which is
an important issue in education trend today [20] and recognized international skills needed to advance
society in the 21st century as well as the foundation of economic growth [21,22]. The STEM approach
is a learning approach that integrates two or more disciplines contained in the STEM or among the
disciplines contained in the STEM with one or more other subjects [23].
Previous research describes the integration of the STEM learning to increase student
performance in algebra, geometry, and opportunities [24], increasing the literacy of science,
mathematics, technology-engineering [25,26], train causal reasoning and improve creative thinking
ability [27]. Different from this research with previous research that is, the researcher will see the
difference of increasing understanding of trigonometric concept between students who get the STEM
learning and students who get conventional learning, and also school condition that differentiates this
research with the previous the researcher. The researchers previously using the STEM learning to see
the impact of learning on student achievement, literacy the STEM, causal reasoning and creative
thinking abilities [28,29,4].

RESEARCH METHODS

a. The General background of research

This study is a quasi-experimental study, with the design of the Nonequivalent Groups Pre-test-
Post-test Design [30]. The research design is in the form of:

Group Pre-test Treatment Post-test

A O1 X O2

B O1 O2

Information :
A : Experiment Class
B : Control Class
O1 : Pre-test comprehension trigonometry concept
O2 : Post-test comprehension trigonometry concept
X : The treatment of the mathematics learning using STEM approach
b. Sample Research
The population in this study is all of the students in SMA Negeri 12 Bandar Lampung and the
sample is 86 ninth grade students that are divided into two classes, namely experimental class and
control class.
c. Instrument
The instrument test used is a conceptual comprehension test that can be used to collect data on
conceptual understanding. Here is a scoring rubric of conceptual ability:

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
 Table 1. Default Understanding Concept Mapping Rubric [5]

No. Indicator Assessment rubric Score

1. Redefine a concept a. No answer 0
b. Redefining a concept but wrong 1
c. Redefine a concept correctly 2
2. Classify objects according to a. No answer 0
certain traits according to their b. Classify objects according to certain traits
1
concepts but not in accordance with the concept
c. Classify objects according to certain traits
2
according to their concepts
3. Give examples and non-examples a. No answer 0
of concepts b. Give example and non-example but wrong 1
c. Give examples and non-example correctly 2
4. Presents concepts in various a. No answer 0
forms of mathematical b. Present the concept in various forms of
1
representation mathematical representation but wrong
c. Present the concept in various forms of
2
mathematical representation correctly
5. Developing necessary terms and a. No answer 0
requirements is quite a concept b. Carrying out the necessary terms and
1
conditions but wrong
c. Establish the necessary terms and
2
conditions correctly
6. Make use of, and choose a a. No answer 0
particular procedure or operation. b. Use, utilize, and choose a particular
1
procedure or operation but is false
c. Use, utilize, and select a particular
2
procedure or operation correctly
7. Apply concepts or algorithms to a. No answer 0
problem-solving b. Apply concept or logarithm to problem-
1
solving but wrong
c. Apply concepts or logarithms to problem-
2
solving correctly.

d. Data analysis
The population in this study is all of the ninth grade students in SMA Negeri 12 Bandar
Lampung and the sample is the ninth graders that are divided into two classes, namely experimental
class (XI-A) and control class (XI-B). The instrument used is the ability to comprehend the
trigonometry concept. To know the different comprehension of trigonometry concepts between
experimental class and control class after obtaining learning done the calculation with Gain formula as
follows.

(1)

The Gain calculation results are then interpreted by using the classification in Table 2.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
 Table 2. Gain Clarification [31]

Average Gain normalized Clarification

High
Medium
Low

Hypothesis testing is done by Independent Samples Test to know the difference of average
between experimental class using STEM learning and control class using conventional learning, Basic
decision-making based on probability value, if sig >0.05 then H0 accepted, but if sig <0.05 then H0 is
rejected. Prior to the average difference test, normality and homogeneity tests were performed as a
prerequisite test.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The resulting test of the concept comprehension ability on the application of the approach
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) and Conventional models. The results of
the descriptive data of concept comprehension concept test are presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Descriptive Result of Understanding Data of Trigonometric Concepts
The
Trigonometric Score Pre-test Post-test
Concept N
Ideal Value Value Value Value
Understanding Average Average
Test Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
Experiment 32 100 24.33 44.33 32,74 50.00 84.33 67.78
Control 32 100 20.00 40.00 31.37 47.67 67.67 60.37

Based on the table above, it can be seen that pre-test value of experiment class has minimum
value 24.33, maximum value 44.33 and mean of 32.74 and control class have minimum value 20.00,
maximum value 40.00 and average 31.37. For mean post-test of experiment class 67.78 and control
60.37.
Furthermore, based on the data in the table of descriptive results the understanding of
trigonometric concepts is calculated to find the N- Gain value. The N- Gain calculations are presented
in Table 4.
Table 4. Recapitulation of N- Gain Results

The Trigonometric Value

Score
Concept Understanding n
Ideal Value Value
Test Average
Minimum Maximum
Experiment 32 100 0.29 0.72 0.54
Control 32 100 0.24 0.69 0.42

Based on the data obtained in the table above can be seen the minimum value, maximum value
and average N- Gain experiment class higher than the control class, where the minimum value in the

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
experimental class is 0.29. The maximum value in the experimental class is 0.72 while in the control
class is 0.69. The average value of N- Gain in the experimental class is 0.54 while in the control class
is 0.42. Then it can be concluded that N- Gain in the experimental class is higher than the N- Gain in
the control class.
The N- Gain data of control class and experiment class were then analyzed by performing a
normality test, homogeneity test, and further test. If the data is normally distributed and homogeneous
then the comparative hypothesis test using a parametric statistic is by using the t-test, but if the data is
not normally distributed and homogeneous, then used nonparametric statistics.
To test the normality of the data should be tested normality which is one of the requirements to
determine the advanced test using parametric statistic. The following is the normality test table N-
Gain experimental class and control class.
Table 5. Recpitulation of Normality Test of N- Gain Data

Asym.sig (2-
Class Decision Information
tailed)
Experiment 0.678 0.05 Accept H0 Normal
Control 0.621 0.05 Accept H0 Normal

Based on Table 5 above the normality test of N- Gain with a confidence level of 5% (α 0.05)
obtained Asym values. Sig (2-tailed) for the control class is 0.621 while in the experimental class is
0.678. For the control class obtained the decision receives H0 because of the value of Asym. Sig (2-
tailed) 0.621 > 0.05 and for experiment class also obtained decision accept H0 because of Asymp. Sig
(2-tailed) 0.678>0.05. This matter means the data in the control class and the normally distributed
experiment class.
Next researchers to test the homogeneity of the data N- Gain. This homogeneity test is used to
test the homogeneity of the data. The homogeneity test results of the experimental class bag and
control class can be seen in the table below:
Table 6. Recapitulation of Homogeneity Test of N- Gain Data

Based on the
Data Type Accept Information
trimmed mean
N-Gain 0.087 0.05 Accept H0 Homogeneous

Based on Table 6 above the homogeneity test of N- Gain data with 5% confidence level (α 0.05)
obtained value Based on trimmed mean 0,078. The decision obtained is H0 accepted because of the
value of Based on trimmed mean 0.078 < 0.05. It can be said that the N- Gain data of the control class
and the experimental class are derived from a homogeneous variant.
After the N- Gain data of the experimental class and control class is known 0.078 it can be
decided to conduct the further test. The advanced test used is the t-test to know whether the data is
significantly different or not. Analysis of this t-test data that is seen is the value of Asymp Sig. (2-
tailed) compared to a significant level of 0.05. If the value of Asymp Sig. (2-tailed) <0.05 then the data
is significantly different if the value of Asymp Sig. (2-tailed) > 0.05 then the data is not significantly
different. The result of a t-test of N- Gain data as in the following table:

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
 Table 6. Recapitulation of T-Test Result of N- Gain Data

ASymp Sig. (2-

Data Type Decision Information
tailed)
Significantly
N- Gain 0.087 0.05 H0 is accepted
different

From the table, above can be seen t-test results for N- Gain data control class and experiment
class with 5% confidence level ( 0.05), obtained by Asymp sig value (2-tailed) 0.001 < 0.05,
significantly different. This means that the students in the control class and the experimental class
have different learning outcomes for trigonometry.
The increase of N- Gain value in Table 6. shows that the improvement of understanding of
students' trigonometry concepts with STEM learning is better than those who learn conventional
learning. It is because STEM learning is a learning approach that emphasizes experimentation to solve
problems by reconstructing its own knowledge. Some results of students' answers using STEM
learning can be seen in Figure 1, whereas without STEM learning in Figure 2.

Figure 1. STEM Learning Figure 2. Conventional Learning

Majority students who get conventional learning are only able to solve the answers with one
concept approach only, do not use another conceptual approach, the answer given is not detailed and
not according to the concept of trigonometry. In contrast to the results of students who get STEM
learning, which can solve the problem based on understanding the concept that has been owned.
Learning that integrates the STEM approach enables students to experience their learning
process, the knowledge they can absorb and store for longer in memory, knowledge, and
understanding of students is more meaningful because the findings themselves and not just receive

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
information. With STEM approach the students can understand the trigonometry concept because the
learning process provides an opportunity for students to construct mathematical concepts and is
associated with the real relationship so that students are not only crammed with abstract mathematical
material that makes it difficult for students to understand math lessons. It is in accordance with the
research [32] which states that STEM learning can develop when associated with the environment so
that a learning experience of students in everyday life. Based on the results of this research, the
increased comprehension of the student’s trigonometry concepts in the experimental class is better
than students who gained conventional learning.

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

The results showed that the increased comprehension of the student’s trigonometry concept who
received STEM learning was in the high category with an average N- Gain of 0.54 and the students
who received conventional learning were in the moderate category with an average N- Gain of 0.42.
Based on the results of research has been conducted, it can be concluded that the increased
comprehension of the student’s trigonometry concept who gained STEM learning is better than
students who were receiving conventional learning.
Mature planning is necessary for STEM learning, tools and materials that students will use when
an experiment or design products adapted to the given material, preferably adapted to the cognitive
abilities and characteristics of students, so that the time available becomes more effective. The
researcher realized that this paper was limited and the material specific to take the material plane
figure. Therefore, there is a further study of STEM learning on other materials.
REFERENCES
[1] Suherman, S. (2015). Kreativitas Siswa dalam Memecahkan Masalah Matematika Materi Pola
Bilangan dengan Pendekatan Matematika Realistik (PMR). Al-Jabar: Jurnal Pendidikan
Matematika, 6(1), 81–90.
[2] Cazden, C. B., & Beck, S. W. (2003). Classroom discourse. Handbook of Discourse Processes,
165–197.
[3] Jung, M., Hartman, P., Smith, T., & Wallace, S. (2013). The Effectiveness of Teaching Number
Relationships in Preschool. Online Submission, 6(1), 165–178.
[4] Rakhmawati, R. (2016). Aktivitas Matematika Berbasis Budaya pada Masyarakat Lampung. Al-
Jabar: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 7(2), 221–230.
[5] Minarni, A., Napitupulu, E., & Husein, R. (2016). Mathematical understanding and
representation ability of public junior high school in north sumatra. Journal on Mathematics
Education, 7(1), 43–56.
[6] Rytkönen, K., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2007). Do parents’ causal attributions predict the
accuracy and bias in their children’s self-concept of maths ability? A longitudinal study.
Educational Psychology, 27(6), 771–788.
[7] Sáinz, M., & Upadyaya, K. (2016). Accuracy and bias in Spanish secondary school students’
self-concept of math ability: The influence of gender and parental educational level.
International Journal of Educational Research, 77, 26–36.
[8] Sheldrake, R., Mujtaba, T., & Reiss, M. J. (2014). Calibration of self-evaluations of
mathematical ability for students in England aged 13 and 15, and their intentions to study non-
compulsory mathematics after age 16. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 49–61.
[9] Kamandoko, K., & Suherman, S. (2017). Profil Intuisi Matematis Siswa dalam Pemecahan
Masalah Matematika Ditinjau dari Gaya Kognitif Field Independent dan Field Dependent.
Jurnal Penelitian LPPM (Lembaga Penelitian Dan Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat) IKIP PGRI
MADIUN, 5(1), 1–8.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
[10] 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), 165–172.
[11] Mulyawati, C., Salmawati, S., Subianto, M., & Wafdan, R. (2017). Teaching Media
Development of Mathematic in the Materials Trigonometry Sum and Two Angles Difference by
Using Gui Matlab. Jurnal Natural, 17(2), 69–76.
[12] Manalu, M. A., Hartono, Y., & Aisyah, N. (2017). Pengembangan Media Komik Matematika
Berbasis Nilai Karakter pada Materi Trigonometri di Kelas X SMA Negeri 1 Indralaya Utara.
Jurnal Elemen, 3(1), 35–48.
[13] Khotimah, K., Yuwono, I., & Rahardjo, S. (2016). Penerapan Pembelajaran Inkuiri Untuk
Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Trigonometri Pada Siswa Kelas X. Jurnal Pendidikan: Teori,
Penelitian, Dan Pengembangan, 1(11), 2158–2162.
[14] Department of Mathematics Education, University of Jember, Indonesia. (2017). Spatial
Intelligence on Solving Three Dimensional Geometry Object Through Project Based Learning.
The International Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Invention, 4(8).
https://doi.org/10.18535/ijsshi/v4i8.20
[15] Kariyana, I., & A. Sonn, R. (2016). Teaching Methods and Learners’ Concept Formation,
Development and Integration in Geometry: Assessing the Relationship. International Journal of
Educational Sciences, 12(1), 75–88.
[16] Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2003). The place of experimental tasks in geometry teaching: learning
from the textbook designs of the early 20th century. Research in Mathematics Education, 5(1),
47–62.
[17] Horzum, T., & Ertekin, E. (2018). Prospective mathematics teachers’ understanding of the base
concept. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(2),
176–199.
[18] Patkin, D. (2015). Various ways of inculcating new solid geometry concepts. International
Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(2), 140–154.
[19] Chen, X. (2009). Students Who Study Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics
(STEM) in Postsecondary Education. Stats in Brief. NCES 2009-161. National Center for
Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED506035
[20] Becker, K., & Park, K. (2011). Effects of integrative approaches among science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM) subjects on students’ learning: A preliminary meta-
analysis. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 12.
[21] Council, T. A., & Council, N. R. (2014). STEM learning is everywhere: Summary of a
convocation on building learning systems. National Academies Press.
[22] English, L. D., King, D., & Smeed, J. (2017). Advancing integrated STEM learning through
engineering design: Sixth-grade students’ design and construction of earthquake resistant
buildings. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 255–271.
[23] Sanders, M. E. (2008). STEM, STEM Education, STEMmania. Retrieved from
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/51616
[24] Tyson, W., Lee, R., Borman, K. M., & Hanson, M. A. (2007). Science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM) pathways: High school science and math coursework and
postsecondary degree attainment. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12(3), 243–
270.
[25] Atkinson, R., & Mayo, M. (2010). Refueling the US innovation economy: Fresh approaches to
science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education.
[26] Setati, M., & Adler, J. (2000). Between languages and discourses: Language practices in
primary multilingual mathematics classrooms in South Africa. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 43(3), 243–269.
[27] Basadur, M. I. N., Runco, M. A., & VEGAxy, L. A. (2000). Understanding how creative
thinking skills, attitudes and behaviors work together: A causal process model. The Journal of
Creative Behavior, 34(2), 77–100.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
[28] Anggoro, B. S. (2016). Analisis Persepsi Siswa SMP terhadap Pembelajaran Matematika
ditinjau dari Perbedaan Gender dan Disposisi Berpikir Kreatif Matematis. Al-Jabar: Jurnal
Pendidikan Matematika, 7(2), 153–166.
[29] Hamidah, K., & Suherman, S. (2016). Proses Berpikir Matematis Siswa dalam Menyelesaikan
Masalah Matematika di tinjau dari Tipe Kepribadian Keirsey. Al-Jabar: Jurnal Pendidikan
Matematika, 7(2), 231–248.
[30] Charles, C. M. (1998). Introduction to Educational Research. Third Edition. Addison Wesley
Longman, Inc.
[31] Meltzer, D. E. (2002). The relationship between mathematics preparation and conceptual
learning gains in physics: A possible “hidden variable” in diagnostic pre-test scores. American
Journal of Physics, 70(12), 1259–1268.
[32] Subramaniam, M. M., Ahn, J., Fleischmann, K. R., & Druin, A. (2012). Reimagining the role of
school libraries in STEM education: Creating hybrid spaces for exploration. The Library
Quarterly, 82(2), 161–182.

Electroniccopy
Electronic copy available
available at:
at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3248139