Keywords
Kolb’s experiential learning
learning styles
linear programming
How to Cite
Abstract
This study was conducted to investigate the characteristics of vocational high school students' conceptual understanding of linear programming across Kolb's four learning styles: diverging, assimilating, converging, and accommodating. A descriptive qualitative approach was employed involving eight eleventh-grade students selected through purposive sampling, with two participants representing each learning style. Data were collected using the Kolb Learning Style Inventory, a conceptual understanding test on linear programming, and semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed using an interactive analysis model consisting of data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing, while the credibility of the findings was ensured through methodological triangulation. The results revealed that students with the assimilating learning style demonstrated the most comprehensive conceptual understanding by fulfilling nearly all conceptual understanding indicators, including explaining concepts, representing concepts mathematically, applying appropriate solution procedures, using concepts to solve problems, and interpreting the obtained results. Students with the diverging learning style excelled in identifying relevant information and constructing mathematical models but experienced difficulties in visual representation and determining the feasible region. Meanwhile, students with the converging and accommodating learning styles demonstrated strong procedural competence in obtaining optimal solutions; however, they remained limited in visual representation and interpreting solutions within the given problem context. These findings indicate that each of Kolb's learning styles is associated with distinctive characteristics of conceptual understanding. The findings provide empirical insights that can support mathematics teachers in designing more adaptive instructional strategies to accommodate students' diverse learning characteristics.
References
Amalia, Z., Sudirman, & Chandra, T. D. (2023). Proses pemodelan matematis siswa dalam memecahkan masalah program linear. Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 07(5), 2595–2604. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v7i3.2675
Anggara, B., Wahyudi, W., Rizqi, F., Maulana, D. F., Rachmaningsih, S., & Adhitya, S. (2021). Implementasi desain didaktis konsep program linear dalam mengatasi kesulitan belajar siswa. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 9(4), 427–441. https://doi.org/10.23960/mtk/v9i4.pp427-441
Caesarani, S., Nasrullah, A., & Mubarika, M. P. (2022). Pengaruh ketahanmalangan dan motivasi belajar terhadap pemahaman konsep matematis siswa SMP pada pelajaran matematika. Prima, 11(2), 515–525. https://doi.org/10.35194/jp.v11i2.2498
Creswell, D., & Creswell, J. W. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd.
Fadli, M. R. (2021). Memahami desain metode penelitian kualitatif. Humanika: Kajian Ilmiah Mata Kuliah Umum, 21(1), 33–54. https://doi.org/10.21831/hum.v21i1.38075
Gencel, İ. E., & Erdoğan, M. (2022). A study on Kolb’s revised learning style classification. Journal of Education for Life, 36(3), 813–833. https://doi.org/10.33308/26674874.2022363492
Hechter, J., Stols, G., & Combrinck, C. (2022). The reciprocal relationship between conceptual and procedural knowledge—A case study of two calculus problems. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 26(2), 111–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2022.2101271
Kholid, M. N., Imawati, A., Swastika, A., Maharani, S., & Pradana, L. N. (2021). How are students’ conceptual understanding for solving mathematical problem? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1776(1), 012018. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1776/1/012018
Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2017). Experiential learning theory as a guide for experiential educators in higher education. Experiential Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1(1), 7–44. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/elthe/vol1/iss1/7
Liang, C.-P., & She, H.-C. (2021). Investigate the effectiveness of single and multiple representational scaffolds on mathematics problem solving: Evidence from eye movements. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(6), 3882–3897. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1943692
Lusiana, Armiati, & Yerizon. (2022). Kemandirian belajar dan persepsi siswa mengenai guru terhadap kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis siswa SMK. Mosharafa: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 11(1), 155–166. https://doi.org/10.31980/mosharafa.v11i1.695
Marlina, M., Junedi, B., Kiawati, E. S., & Setianti, S. (2023). Analisis rendahnya pemahaman matematis siswa ditinjau dari self-regulated learning pada masa pandemi COVID-19. Prisma, 12(1), 189–198. https://doi.org/10.35194/jp.v12i1.2588
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Nurcahyandi, Z. R., & Purwaningrum, J. P. (2022). Penerapan teori belajar David Kolb dalam pembelajaran matematika materi koordinat kartesius. SIGMA: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 14(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.26618/sigma.v14i1.6888
Nurhaswinda, & Parisu, C. Z. L. (2025). Kesulitan belajar matematika di Sekolah Dasar dan solusinya. Jurnal Pendidikan Multidisiplin, 1(1), 50–58. https://doi.org/10.54297/jpmd.v1i1.884
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 assessment and analytical framework. OECD Publishing.
Putri, A. R. (2024). Pengaruh kemandirian belajar peserta didik terhadap pemahaman konsep matematika di SMK Bhakti Insani. EDUCATOR: Jurnal Inovasi Tenaga Pendidik Dan Kependidikan Vol., 4(3), 142–159. https://doi.org/10.51878/educator.v4i3.4039
Septi, D., Afifah, N., Marsalina, L., Sarjono, B., Listiawan, T., & Putri, I. M. (2020). Kesalahan siswa SMK dalam menyelesaikan soal program linier ditinjau dari pemahaman konseptual dan prosedural. Jurnal Tadris Matematika, 3(1), 55–66. https://doi.org/10.21274/jtm.2020.3.1.55-66
Uegatani, Y., Otani, H., Shirakawa, S., & Ito, R. (2024). Real and illusionary difficulties in conceptual learning in mathematics: Comparison between constructivist and inferentialist perspectives. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 36(4), 895–915. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13394-023-00478-6
Umbara, F. D. A. D., & Herman, T. (2023). Kemampuan berpikir reflektif matematis siswa dalam menyelesaikan masalah matematis terbuka ditinjau dari gaya belajar. Aksioma: Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Matematika, 12(1), 1273–1285. https://doi.org/10.24127/ajpm.v12i1.6807
Wahyu, R. (2021). Teknik Polya dalam penyelesaian masalah geometri. Jurnal SIGMA, 6(2), 114–123. https://doi.org/10.36513/sigma.v6i2.1001
Wahyu, R. (2026). Teori berpikir degeneratif: Kecenderungan overgeneralisasi penyelesaian masalah matematika (1st ed.). Karya Bakti Makmur (KBM) Indonesia.
Winarso, W., & Toheri, T. (2021). An analysis of students’ error in learning mathematical problem solving: The perspective of David Kolb’s theory. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(1), 139–150. https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.753899
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2026 Jurnal Tadris Matematika