Development and Preliminary Evaluation of a Dayak Paser Culture-Contextualized Mathematics Chatbot for Fraction Learning among Elementary School Students in Balikpapan
Pengembangan dan Evaluasi Awal Chatbot Matematika Berkonteks Budaya Dayak Paser untuk Pembelajaran Pecahan Siswa Sekolah Dasar di Balikpapan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24903/bej.v8i2.2490Keywords:
artificial intelligence, chatbot, ethnomathematics, Dayak Paser, fractions, elementary education, preliminary evaluationAbstract
Fraction concepts are challenging for many elementary school students because they require coordination among symbolic, visual, and contextual representations. This study developed and conducted a preliminary evaluation of a large-language-model-based mathematics chatbot that incorporates selected Dayak Paser cultural contexts for fraction learning in Balikpapan. The study used a Research and Development approach organized with the ADDIE framework and a one-group pretest-posttest evaluation involving 60 fourth-grade students. Evidence comprised expert product validation, student responses, pretest-posttest scores, the System Usability Scale (SUS), a descriptive review of 120 chatbot answers, and latency records from 100 interactions. The product-validation dimensions were rated 92%-94%, with an overall score of 93.4%. Positive student-response percentages ranged from 92% to 95%, and the SUS score was 87.6. Mean test scores were 55.3 before and 84.7 after use, a within-group difference of 29.4 points. The normalized gain calculated from the reported group means was 0.66 (moderate). The reported paired-samples result was t(59)=18.93, p<.001; the corresponding paired standardized change was dz=2.44 and the reconstructed 95% confidence interval for the mean difference was 26.29-32.51. These findings describe a substantial pre-post change but do not establish that the chatbot caused it because the design did not include a comparison group, randomization, a retention test, or a documented intervention dose. The study therefore supports product feasibility and warrants a controlled follow-up, while making no empirical claim regarding adaptive learning, increased motivation, cultural preservation, or retrieval-augmented generation
References
Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6
Chiu, T. K. F., Xia, Q., Zhou, X., Chai, C. S., & Cheng, M. (2023). Systematic literature review on opportunities, challenges, and future research recommendations of artificial intelligence in education. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4, 100118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100118
Kasneci, E., Sessler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeiffer, F., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., ... Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274
Kestin, G., Miller, K., Klales, A., Milbourne, T., & Ponti, G. (2025). AI tutoring outperforms in-class active learning: An RCT introducing a novel research-based design in an authentic educational setting. Scientific Reports, 15, 17458. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-97652-6
Létourneau, A., Deslandes Martineau, M., Charland, P., Karran, J. A., Boasen, J., & Léger, P. M. (2025). A systematic review of AI-driven intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) in K-12 education. npj Science of Learning, 10, 29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00320-7
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Lo, C. K. (2023). What is the impact of ChatGPT on education? A rapid review of the literature. Interactive Learning Environments. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2253852
Okonkwo, C. W., & Ade-Ibijola, A. (2021). Chatbots applications in education: A systematic review. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 2, 100033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100033
Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.
Rosa, M., & Orey, D. C. (2020). Ethnomathematics and its diverse approaches for mathematics education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37697-2
Rosa, M., & Orey, D. C. (2022). Ethnomathematics and culturally relevant mathematics education: An ethnomodelling perspective. Journal of Mathematics and Culture, 16(1), 1-24.
Thesen, T., & Park, S. H. (2025). A generative AI teaching assistant for personalized learning in medical education. npj Digital Medicine, 8, 627. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-025-02022-1
Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart Learning Environments, 10, 15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00237-x
UNESCO. (2023). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386693
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Junaldelvia Tandungan, Irma Soleha
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
