Preparing In-Service Teacher Using Dynamic Geometry Software


  • Fariz Setyawan
  • Yosep Dwi Kristanto
  • Naufal Ishartono





DGS, Geometric Figures, Geometrical Shapes, In-Service Teachers, Perceptions


The use of technology is essential in teaching and learning process. Many researchers have already been implemented Dynamic Geometry Software (DGS) in teaching and learning process. Given the importance of DGS, it is necessary for in-service teachers to use the software in their teaching and learning. Hence, it is important to prepare in-service teacher in utilizing DGS through the professional development program. This is a qualitative research which describes a professional development program to facilitate in-service teachers in utilizing DGS. Both questionnaire and review measured in-service teachers’ perceptions, knowledge and skills transfer, and impact for their practice. From the findings, four of five in-service teachers recognized that they can interact with geometric figures to move on to the next level by using DGS. The teachers felt that DGS has helped them to understand the mathematics concept and demonstrate their understanding in front of the class. Besides, DGS does not only offer opportunities for teachers and students to use them both at home and in the classroom, but they also provide a means for developing support and user communities reaching across borders especially in understanding of geometrical transformation. It has contributed that the teachers easily recognize the geometrical shapes interpretations dynamically on DGS.


[1] Bozkurt A (2018), Examining the accuracy and justification of geometric constructions made by pre-service teachers with dynamic geometry software and the awareness they gained throughout the process. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 4(1), 304-313. doi:10.21890/ijres.383197.

[2] Christou C, Mousoulides N, Pittalis M & Pitta-Pantazi D (2004), Proofs through exploration in dynamic geometry environments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 2, 339-352.

[3] Caglayan G (2016), Mathematics Teachers' Visualization of Complex Number Multiplication and the Roots of Unity in a Dynamic Geometry Environment. Computers in the Schools, 33(3), 187-209.

[4] Harter C A & Ku H (2008), The effects of spatial contiguity within computer-based instruction of group personalized two-step mathematics word problems. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1668-1685.

[5] Hazzan O & Goldenberg EP (1997), Students' understanding of the notion of function in dynamic geometry environments. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1(3), 263-291.

[6] Jones K (2000), Providing a foundation for deductive reasoning: Students' interpretations when using dynamic geometry software and their evolving mathematical explanations. Educational studies in mathematics, 44(1-2), 55-85.

[7] Isiksal M & Askar P (2005), The effect of spreadsheet and dynamic geometry software on the achievement and self-efficacy of 7th-grade students. Educational Research, 47(3), 333-350.

[8] Baki A, Kosa T & Guven B (2011), A comparative study of the effects of using dynamic geometry software and physical manipulatives on the spatial visualisation skills of preâ€service mathematics teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 291-310.

[9] Güven B & Kosa T (2008), The effect of dynamic geometry software on student mathematics teachers' spatial visualization skills. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 7(4), 100-107.

[10] Van Garderen D (2006), Spatial visualization, visual imagery, and mathematical problem solving of students with varying abilities. Journal of learning disabilities, 39(6), 496-506.

[11] Porter AC, Garet MS, Desimone L, Yoon KS & Birman BF (2000) Does professional development change teaching practice? Results from a three-year study.

[12] Harland J & Kinder K (1997), Teachers' continuing professional development: framing a model of outcomes. British journal of in-service education, 23(1), 71-84.

[13] Driscoll M, Wing DiMatteo R, Nikula J & Egan M (2007), Fostering Geometric Thinking: A Guide For Teachers, Grades 5-10. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

[14] Hohenwarter M, Hohenwarter J, Kreis Y & Lavicza Z (2008), Teaching and Learning Calculus with Free Dynamic Mathematics Software Geogebra Calculus with GeoGebra. In Proceedings of the International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics - TSG 16 (pp. 1–9).

[15] Bokosmaty S, Mavilidi M & Paas F (2017), Making versus observing manipulations of geometric properties of triangles to learn geometry using dynamic geometry software. Computers and Education, 113, 313-326.

[16] Ware J & Stein S (2014), Teachers’ critical evaluations of dynamic geometry software implementation in 1: classrooms. Computers in the Schools, 31(3), 134-153.

[17] Kaur H (2015), Two aspects of young children’s thinking about different types of dynamic triangles: prototypicality and inclusion. ZDM, 47(3), 407-420.

[18] Yuan-Hsuan L, Waxman H, Wu JY, Michko G & Lin G (2013), Revisit the effect of teaching and learning with technology. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 133.

[19] Ismail Z & Rahman SNA (2017), Learning 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional geometry with Geogebra: Which would students do better? International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education 1 121.

[20] Setyawan F, Prahmana RCI, Istiandaru A, Hendroanto A (2017), Visualizer’s representation in functions. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 943 012004

[21] Fathurrohman M, Porter AL & Worthy AL (2017), Teachers’ real and perceived of ICT supported-situation for mathematics teaching and learning. International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education 1 11.

View Full Article: