Profile of Meaningful Learning in Mathematics among Elementary School Students on Number and Operations Topics

Crossmark

Main Article Content


Abstract

Meaningful learning is a crucial aspect of elementary mathematics instruction, particularly in number and operations topics, which serve as the foundation for further mathematical understanding. However, mathematics learning in elementary schools still tends to emphasize procedural skills and provides limited opportunities for students to connect mathematical concepts with real-life contexts, resulting in less meaningful understanding. This study aims to analyze the profile of meaningful learning in mathematics among elementary school students on number and operations topics. A descriptive method with a qualitative approach supported by quantitative data was employed. The research was conducted at SDN 50 Bonto Panno, Pangkep Regency, during October–November 2025, involving 25 fifth-grade students as research subjects. Data were collected through contextual-based tests on number and operations, a meaningful learning questionnaire, classroom observations, and documentation of students’ work. Data were analyzed by categorizing students’ meaningful learning based on indicators of conceptual understanding, connections to real-life experiences, and the ability to explain and reflect on mathematical concepts. The findings indicate that students’ meaningful learning in mathematics was generally at a moderate level. Students demonstrated adequate procedural understanding of number operations but experienced difficulties in connecting mathematical concepts to contextual situations and verbally explaining the meaning of the concepts learned. These findings suggest that meaningful learning in elementary mathematics requires stronger integration of contextual, reflective, and student-centered instructional practices. This study contributes to elementary mathematics education by providing empirical insight into students’ meaningful learning profiles and highlighting the need to improve instructional strategies that support conceptual understanding in number and operations topics.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citation Metrics & Similar Scopus Articles

Data source Crossref
0
citations
Citation counts are source-specific and may differ because database coverage, reference matching, and update schedules are different. Counts are not added together. Crossref values represent citation links registered and matched by Crossref.
Check Secondary Documents in Scopus
Open this article in Scopus, then check the Secondary documents tab. Use Manual Citation Fallback only for counts you have verified manually.
Open in Scopus
Similar Scopus Articles
Scopus
  1. Irawati R. (2027)
    Enhancing accounting students’ writing performance through problem-based learning: Evidence from a vocational higher education context
    Multidisciplinary Science Journal, 9(1)
  2. Vural G. (2027)
    Determining the robust drivers of CO2 emissions in Africa: Machine learning and panel econometric evidence on the Environmental Kuznets Curve hypothesis
    Unconventional Resources, 17
  3. Kenzhaliyev B.K. (2027)
    Predicting Copper Production Cycles in Hydrometallurgy with Interpretable Machine Learning
    Kompleksnoe Ispolzovanie Mineralnogo Syra, 341(2), 5-15

Article Details

How to Cite
Pasinggi, Y. S. (2026). Profile of Meaningful Learning in Mathematics among Elementary School Students on Number and Operations Topics. International Journal of Education, Culture, and Society, 4(2), 359-376. https://doi.org/10.58578/ijecs.v4i2.9840

References

Andrews, P., Xenofontos, C., & Sayers, J. (2023). Developing conceptual understanding in mathematics education. Routledge.

Ausubel, D. P. (2000). The acquisition and retention of knowledge: A cognitive view. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9454-7

Bakker, A., Cai, J., Zenger, L., & Rasmussen, C. (2021). Meaningful learning in mathematics: A multidimensional perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 106(2), 213–234.

Can, D., & Yetkin Özdemir, İ. E. (2020). An examination of fourth-grade elementary school students’ number sense in context-based and non-context-based problems. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(7), 1333–1354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-10022-3

Chang, H., Yang, Y., & Li, X. (2020). Cross-national comparisons of primary grade mathematics performance. ZDM Mathematics Education, 52(6), 1123–1137.

Dewi, N. R., & Surya, E. (2021). Contextual mathematics learning to support students’ conceptual understanding. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1957(1), Article 012034.

Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2021). The role of conceptual understanding in mathematics learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 52(2), 121–145.

Islam, M. S., Rahman, M. M., & Rahman, M. A. (2024). Procedural fluency and conceptual understanding in elementary mathematics learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 121, Article 102196.

Keguruan, A., Suparno, D., & Hasan, M. (2022). Meaningful learning theory in elementary education: An Ausubelian perspective. International Journal of Instruction, 15(4), 921–936.

Kemendikbudristek. (2022). Kebijakan asesmen nasional dan Asesmen Kompetensi Minimum (AKM). Badan Standar, Kurikulum, dan Asesmen Pendidikan.

Majid, A., Rahman, A., & Nurhadi, M. (2020). Contextual mathematics learning to enhance conceptual understanding of elementary students. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(2), 295–308.

Novita, R., Zulkardi, Z., & Hartono, Y. (2021). Students’ difficulties in solving contextual mathematical problems. Journal on Mathematics Education, 12(2), 271–286.

Powell, A. B. (2023). Enhancing students’ fraction magnitude knowledge: A study with students in early elementary education. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 70, Article 101042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101042

Prastiyo, A., Zulkardi, & Putra, Z. H. (2024). A systematic literature review of contextual teaching and learning in mathematics education. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(1), 1–18.

Putra, Z. H., & Zulkardi. (2019). Designing contextual mathematics problems for improving students’ conceptual understanding. Journal on Mathematics Education, 10(3), 403–416.

Rasmini, N. P., & Antara, P. A. (2023). Learning process quality and its influence on students’ conceptual development in primary education. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 30(3), 201–214.

Rittle-Johnson, B., & Schneider, M. (2015). Developing conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics. In R. C. Kadosh & A. Dowker (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of numerical cognition (pp. 1102–1118). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642342.013.014

Sari, V. P., & Prabawanto, S. (2020). Students’ procedural and conceptual understanding of number concepts in elementary school. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1521(3), Article 032014.

Silviyanti, D., Kartikasari, D., & Widodo, A. (2023). Students’ difficulties in learning fractions: A conceptual and representational analysis. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), Article 58.

Sugiyono. (2020). Metode penelitian kualitatif, kuantitatif, dan R&D (2nd ed.). Alfabeta.

Suryadi, D., & Herman, T. (2018). Contextual mathematics learning and students’ cognitive engagement. Journal on Mathematics Education, 9(2), 187–198.

Tall, D. (2013). How humans learn to think mathematically: Exploring the three worlds of mathematics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139565202

Widodo, A., & Kartikasari, D. (2025). Contextual mathematics instruction and its effect on higher-order thinking skills. International Journal of STEM Education, 12(1), Article 45.

Yani, M., Bernard, M., & Senjayawati, E. (2025). Reflective contextual learning and its effect on sustainable conceptual understanding in mathematics. Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 9(1), 33–47.

Zulkardi, Putra, Z. H., & Hartono, Y. (2017). Developing mathematics teaching through contextual and realistic approaches. Journal on Mathematics Education, 8(1), 1–16.