Effectiveness of Contextual Teaching and Learning with Inductive Thinking Model on Mathematics Mastery and Student Interest
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1234/akademia.v1i1.46Keywords:
Contextual Teaching and Learning, Inductive Thinking Model, Mathematics Mastery, Student Interest, Mathematics Education, Pembelajaran Kontekstual, Model Berpikir Induktif, Penguasaan Matematika, Minat Belajar, Pendidikan MatematikaAbstract
Background: Mathematics achievement in Indonesia remains below international benchmarks, and many students perceive the subject as difficult and irrelevant, reducing motivation and hindering mastery. This study examined whether Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) combined with an inductive thinking model improves mathematics mastery and student interest compared with conventional instruction.
Methods: A quasi-experimental, posttest-only control group design was implemented at SMP Negeri 1 Ngemplak with 64 eighth-grade students randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. Mastery was measured using an achievement test and interest with a validated questionnaire. After normality and homogeneity checks, independent-samples t-tests and descriptive statistics were applied.
Results: The experimental class achieved 87.1% mastery versus 23.3% in the control group; the difference was statistically significant with a very large effect (Cohen’s d = 2.06, p < .001). Student interest was also significantly higher in the experimental class (d = 1.99, p < .001).
Conclusions: CTL integrated with an inductive thinking model was more effective than conventional teaching for improving both mastery and student interest in lower-secondary mathematics.
Downloads
References
American Educational Research Association. (2011). Code of ethics. Educational Researcher, 40(3), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11410403
Aini, N., Rahman, A., & Fitri, L. (2019). The effectiveness of inductive learning in improving mathematical reasoning ability. Journal on Mathematics Education, 10(3), 421–432.
Amidi, K., Kartono, M., & Pudjiastuti, E. (2025). The effectiveness of contextual teaching and learning with Articulate Storyline in improving mathematical literacy: A perspective of high self-confidence students. EDU-Psyche (EDUPIJ), 16(1), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.16.233
Bloom, B. S. (1984). The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Leadership, 41(8), 4–17.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
British Educational Research Association. (2018). Ethical guidelines for educational research (4th ed.). BERA.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). SAGE.
Guskey, T. R. (2018). Success for all students: Mastery learning revisited. Educational Leadership, 75(5), 24–30.
Haynes, S. N., Richard, D. C. S., & Kubany, E. S. (1995). Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.238
Johnson, E. B. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: What it is and why it’s here to stay. Corwin Press.
Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2015). Models of teaching (9th ed.). Pearson.
Kaiser, B. N., & Hennink, M. M. (2022). Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review. PLOS ONE, 17(2), e0265520. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265520
Krosnick, J. A., & Presser, S. (2010). Question and questionnaire design. In Handbook of survey research (2nd ed., pp. 263–313). Emerald.
Lestari, F. P., Ahmadi, F., & Rochmad, R. (2021). The implementation of mathematics comic through contextual teaching and learning to improve critical thinking ability and character. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(1), 497–508. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.10.1.497
Mahmuti, A., Hamzić, D. K., & Thaqi, X. (2025). The impact of contextual teaching and learning on improving student achievement in economic mathematics. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 20(3), em0833. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/16233
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. IEA. https://timss2019.org/reports/
Nurjanah, N., Supriyadi, T., & Hidayat, W. (2020). The implementation of contextual teaching and learning approach to improve students’ mathematical communication. Infinity Journal, 9(2), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v9i2.4500
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/publications/pisa-2018-results.htm
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2021). 21st-century readers: Developing literacy skills in a digital world. OECD Publishing.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
Pallant, J. (2020). SPSS survival manual (7th ed.). Open University Press.
Pratiwi, K. H., Situmorang, R., & Iriani, T. (2024). Interactive multimedia with contextual teaching and learning: A systematic literature review. Jurnal EDUCATIO, 10(2), 69–77.
Putra, H., Abidin, Z., & Rahayu, R. (2022). The effect of mastery learning on students’ mathematics anxiety and performance. Journal of Educational Research and Evaluation, 6(2), 89–100.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.
Sosa-Moguel, L., & Aparicio-Landa, E. (2021). Secondary school teachers’ perceptions about inductive reasoning and their interpretation in teaching. Journal on Mathematics Education, 12(2), 239–256. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.12.2.12863.239-256
Suryadi, D., & Santoso, H. (2021). Students’ perception of mathematics: Challenges for teachers in creating meaningful learning. Indonesian Journal of Educational Research, 6(1), 45–53.
Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education, 2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd
Trianto. (2010). Mendesain model pembelajaran inovatif-progresif: Konsep, landasan, dan implementasinya pada KTSP. Kencana.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Yuliani, F., & Fitriani, D. (2021). Improving students’ mathematics motivation through contextual teaching and learning. International Journal of Instruction, 14(3), 567–582. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14333a
Tambahan (sesuai temuan dan sudah dipakai di diskusi hasil):
Kholid, M. N., & Syafif, I. A. (2025). Classification of inductive thinking in mathematical problem solving. Journal on Mathematics Education, 16(2), 633–650. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v16i2.pp633-650
Sunzuma, G., & Umbara, U. (2025). Ethnomathematics-based technology in Indonesia: A systematic review. Asian Journal for Mathematics Education. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/27527263241305812
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The data supporting the findings of this study consist of student assessment scores and questionnaire responses that are subject to ethical and privacy restrictions. De-identified datasets, the instrument package, and analysis code are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request for bona fide research purposes, contingent on approval by the author’s institution and the participating school and in accordance with the ethical guidelines cited in the manuscript.
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Widya Prasanti
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
