Comparison of Conventional and Contextual Mathematics Learning in Elementary Schools

Authors

  • Risza Presty Rumani Universitas Ahmad Dahlan Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62872/ynxwg244

Keywords:

CTL, Contextual Approach, Learning Strategy

Abstract

Mathematics learning at the elementary school level plays a strategic role in developing students' logical and critical thinking skills from an early age. However, the conventional approach still dominant in many schools tends to emphasize procedural solutions without building in-depth conceptual understanding. This approach risks separating mathematics from students' real-life contexts. As an alternative, the contextual teaching and learning (CTL) approach has emerged as a model that emphasizes the connection between material and students' everyday experiences. This study aims to compare the two approaches through a literature review method with a descriptive qualitative approach. Data were collected from various accredited academic sources over the past five years. The analysis results indicate that the conventional approach is effective in developing procedural skills, while the contextual approach excels in fostering conceptual understanding, learning motivation, and 21st-century skills. However, CTL requires teacher preparedness and adequate resources. This study recommends an adaptive integration of the two approaches to create more relevant, inclusive, and contextual mathematics learning strategies. The theoretical and practical implications point to the importance of constructivism as the primary foundation in developing meaningful mathematics teaching strategies in elementary schools.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Abdurashidovich, N. G. (2021). Theoretical Basis Of Development Of Cognitive Competence Of Students Of Higher Education Institutions In The Process Of Teaching Elementary Mathematics. European Journal of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, 8(1), 789-806.

2. Astini, N. W., & Purwati, N. K. R. (2020). Strategi pembelajaran matematika berdasarkan karakteristik siswa sekolah dasar. Emasains, 9(1), 1-8.

3. Ayuningsih, S., Purnomo, E. A., & Aziz, A. (2025). Model Pembelajaran Osborn dan Pendekatan Kontekstual terhadap Peningkatan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah: Systematic Literature Review. JURNAL RISET PEMBELAJARAN MATEMATIKA SEKOLAH, 9(1), 43-57.

4. Denaga, R. M., & Mendoza, R. V. (2025). A Comparative Study of Contextual and Traditional Teaching on General Mathematics Performance among Grade 11 EIM Students at Angelo L. Loyola Senior High School.

5. Dharmayanti, L. (2019). Penerapan Pendekatan Pembelajaran Kontekstual Untuk Meningkatkan Pemahaman Konsep Matematika Pada Siswa Sekolah dasar Kelas IV. COLLASE (Creative of Learning Students Elementary Education), 2(6), 240-244.

6. Fajariyah, A. (2025). Strategi Pembelajaran Interaktif untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Matematika di Kelas 1 di SDN Wonokusumo VI Surabaya. JDP (JURNAL DINAMIKA PENDIDIKAN), 11(3), 47-54.

7. Febrianti, M. D., & Mufidah, L. (2024). Pentingnya Konteks dalam Pengembangan Pembelajaran Matematika pada Anak Sekolah Dasar Kelas 2. SEMNASFIP.

8. Hajar, S., Risalahwati, D. S., & Muttaqin, M. S. (2024). Inovasi Blanded Learning Mengabungkan Pembelajaran Konvensional dan Teknologi Untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar. Novara: Nusantara Education and Innovation Journal, 1(2), 67-81.

9. Hidayana, R. A., & Lianingsih, N. (2025). Contextual Learning as a Means to Improve Elementary School Students' Mathematical Literacy Skills. International Journal of Ethno-Sciences and Education Research, 5(2), 46-50.

10. Khotimah, S. H., & Asâ, M. (2020). Pendekatan pendidikan matematika realistik terhadap hasil belajar matematika siswa sekolah dasar. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran, 4(3), 491-498.

11. Lestari, N. A. P. (2019). Pengaruh implementasi pembelajaran kontekstual terhadap hasil belajar matematika dengan kovariabel kemampuan numerik dan kemampuan verbal. Jurnal Pendidikan Dasar Nusantara, 5(1), 72-87.

12. Misqa, L., Oviana, W., Hayati, Z., & Jannah, M. (2024). Improving Student Learning Outcomes in Mathematics Learning through a Contextual Teaching and Learning Approach in Elementary Schools. Journal of Indonesian Primary School, 1(2), 19-26.

13. Prihatinia, S., & Zainil, M. (2020). Penerapan Pendekatan Pendidikan Matematika Realistik untuk Meningkatkan Hasil Belajar Matematika di Sekolah Dasar (Studi Literatur). Jurnal Pendidikan Tambusai, 4(2), 1511-1525.

14. Putri, L. I., Dwiningrum, S. I. A., Retnawati, H., Begimbetova, G. A., & Salem, S. (2025). How is The Impact of Applying Contextual Approach in Mathematics Learning?. Attadrib: Jurnal Pendidikan Guru Madrasah Ibtidaiyah, 8(1), 237-254.

15. Salsabila, Y. R., & Muqowim, M. (2024). Korelasi antara teori belajar konstruktivisme lev vygotsky dengan model pembelajaran problem based learning (pbl). LEARNING: Jurnal Inovasi Penelitian Pendidikan Dan Pembelajaran, 4(3), 813-827.

16. Sari, N. T., Ikhsan, M., & Hajidin, H. (2019). Implementasi pendekatan contextual teaching and learning (CTL) bernuansa pendidikan karakter untuk meningkatkan kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis siswa MTsN. Jurnal Didaktik Matematika, 1(1).

17. Sarnoko, S., Asrowi, A., Gunarhadi, G., & Usodo, B. (2024). An Analysis of The Application of Problem Based Learning (PBL) Model in Mathematics for Elementary School Students. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Terapan Universitas Jambi, 8(1), 188-202.

18. Trisnawati, D., & Hadi, M. S. (2025). Efektivitas Pendekatan Pendidikan Abad 21 terhadap Pengembangan Minat Membaca Siswa Sekolah Dasar. JIIP-Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Pendidikan, 8(2), 1889-1895.

19. Umbara, U. (2020). Psikologi Pembelajaran Matematika (melaksanakan pembelajaran matematika berdasarkan tinjauan psikologi). Deepublish.

20. Utami, N. D. (2024). Penerapan Pendekatan Kontekstual untuk Meningkatkan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis Siswa Sekolah Dasar. Jurnal Pendidikan Guru Sekolah Dasar, 1(2), 9-9.

Downloads

Published

2025-09-30

How to Cite

Comparison of Conventional and Contextual Mathematics Learning in Elementary Schools. (2025). Aksioma Education Journal, 2(3), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.62872/ynxwg244