Mathematical problem-solving ability of junior high school students through the contextual teaching and learning model assisted by Wayground
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study responds to a persistent gap between students' actual problem-solving performance and the standards set by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) and the Kurikulum Merdeka, and draws its theoretical framework from Polya's four problem-solving stages and CTL's seven instructional components. The study analyzed whether Grade VII students receiving the Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) model assisted by Wayground achieved better mathematical problem-solving ability than students receiving conventional instruction. Using a posttest-only control group design, 62 seventh-grade students from a private junior high school in Bandung, Indonesia were assigned through purposive sampling to an experimental class (n=31) and a control class (n=31). Hypothesis testing used an independent-samples t-test in IBM SPSS 23.0. The experimental class's posttest mean (62.23) significantly exceeded the control class's mean (57.58), one-tailed t(60)=3.559, p=0.0005<0.05=α. This advantage reflects CTL's capacity to train students to work through a problem step by step, reinforced by Wayground's automatic feedback and leaderboard, which sustain engagement during the reflection stage of problem-solving. The findings offer mathematics educators a concrete reference for pairing contextual instruction with interactive technology to strengthen junior high school students' problem-solving ability.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors agree that this article remains permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
References
D. Olivares, J. L. Lupiáñez, and I. Segovia, “Roles and characteristics of problem solving in the mathematics curriculum: a review,” Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol., vol. 52, no. 7, pp. 1079–1096, Aug. 2021, doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2020.1738579.
M. N. Kholid et al., “A systematic literature review of Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) in mathematics education: Future challenges for educational practice and research,” Cogent Educ., vol. 10, no. 2, p. 2269047, Dec. 2023, doi: 10.1080/2331186X.2023.2269047.
D. Kusnirova, I. Scholtzova, and J. Kresila, “A systematic review into the approach of contextual teaching and learning in mathematics education,” Eur. J. Sci. Math. Educ., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 379–394, May 2026, doi: 10.30935/scimath/18575.
OECD, PISA 2022 Results (Volume I). in PISA. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2023. doi: 10.1787/53f23881-en.
T. T. Wijaya, W. Hidayat, N. Hermita, J. A. Alim, and C. A. Talib, “Exploring contributing factors to PISA 2022 mathematics achievement: Insights from Indonesian teachers,” Infin. J., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 139–156, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.22460/infinity.v13i1.p139-156.
X. S. Wang, L. B. Perry, A. Malpique, and T. Ide, “Factors predicting mathematics achievement in PISA: a systematic review,” Large-scale Assessments Educ., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 24, Jun. 2023, doi: 10.1186/s40536-023-00174-8.
P. Sahri, J. Sabandar, and A. Y. Fitrianna, “Analisis kemampuan pemecahan masalah matematis siswa SMP berdasarkan indikator Polya,” JPMI (Jurnal Pembelajaran Mat. Inov. 6(3), 1187-1196., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 1187–1196, 2023, doi: 10.22460/jpmi.v6i3.17251.
A. Agustin, E. Retnowati, and K. T. Ng, “The Transferability Level of Junior High School Students in Solving Geometry Problems,” J. Innov. Educ. Cult. Res., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 59–69, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.46843/jiecr.v3i1.57.
D. Fisher, Y. S. Kusumah, and J. A. Dahlan, “The Achievement of Middle School Students’ Mathematical Problem Solving Abilities through Project-Based Learning Models,” Al-Jabar J. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 185–192, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.24042/ajpm.v12i1.8858.
I. Zakiah, H. Hendriana, and W. Hidayat, “The Effect of Contextual Learning Trough Teaching Materials Application-Based on Problem Solving Ability,” Eduma Math. Educ. Learn. Teach., vol. 11, no. 1, p. 20, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.24235/eduma.v11i1.9604.
Trianto, Mendesain Model Pembelajaran Inovatif-Progresif: Konsep, Landasan, dan Implementasinya pada KTSP. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, 2010.
G. Polya, How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton University Press, 1973.
A. Durgungoz and F. C. Durgungoz, “Exploring effortless AI-generated gamified quizzes in an online special education module: evaluating question quality, student engagement, and its potential to identify at-risk students,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 30, no. 17, pp. 25335–25357, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.1007/s10639-025-13765-5.
Z. Aswad, Mahsup, Abdillah, Syaharuddin, and W. Raza, “Bridging Gaps in Students’ Numeracy and Critical Thinking: Is Wayground the Future of Interactive Digital Learning?,” J. Educ. Res. Eval., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 50–64, Feb. 2026, doi: 10.23887/jere.v10i1.107264.
B. Ovan, M. T., Y. Fuad, and M. B. Mutammam, “Effectiveness of the problem based learning model to improve self-regulation and geometry problem-solving abilities of junior high school students,” Eur. J. Math. Sci. Educ., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 135–145, 2024, doi: 10.12973/ejmse.5.3.135.
D. Rohimatunisa and S. Sudianto, “Improving mathematical problem-solving junior high school through contextual teaching and learning,” Int. J. Adv. Res. Math. Educ., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 19–25, 2023, doi: 10.56916/ijr.v1i1.464.
D. Fisher, J. A. Dahlan, and B. Y. G. Putra, “Mathematical self-esteem ability of junior high school students in project-based learning,” Infin. J., vol. 11, no. 2, p. 273, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.22460/infinity.v11i2.p273-284.
D. T. Campbell and J. C. Stanley, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963.
E. T. Russeffendi, Dasar-Dasar Penelitian Pendidikan dan Bidang Non-Eksakta Lainnya. Bandung: Tarsito, 2010.
E. Ahdhianto, M. Marsigit, H. Haryanto, and N. N. Santi, “The Effect of Metacognitive-Based Contextual Learning Model on Fifth-Grade Students’ Problem-Solving and Mathematical Communication Skills,” Eur. J. Educ. Res., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 753–764, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.12973/eu-jer.9.2.753.
N. N. Muslihah and E. F. Suryaningrat, “Model Pembelajaran Contextual Teaching and Learning terhadap Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Matematis,” Plusminus J. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 553–564, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.31980/plusminus.v1i3.963.
M. Y. Kurniansyah, W. Hidayat, and E. E. Rohaeti, “Development of combined module using contextual scientific approach to enhance students’ cognitive and affective,” Infin. J., vol. 11, no. 2, p. 349, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.22460/infinity.v11i2.p349-366.
C. M. Pertiwi, E. E. Rohaeti, and W. Hidayat, “The students’ mathematical problem-solving abilities, self-regulated learning, and VBA microsoft word in new normal: A development of teaching materials,” Infin. J., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 17, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.22460/infinity.v10i1.p17-30.
R. Hidayat, Z. Zainuddin, and N. H. Mazlan, “The relationship between technological pedagogical content knowledge and belief among preservice mathematics teachers,” Acta Psychol. (Amst)., vol. 249, p. 104432, Sep. 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104432.
T. T. Wijaya, I. F. Rahmadi, S. Chotimah, J. Jailani, and D. U. Wutsqa, “A Case Study of Factors That Affect Secondary School Mathematics Achievement: Teacher-Parent Support, Stress Levels, and Students’ Well-Being,” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, vol. 19, no. 23, p. 16247, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.3390/ijerph192316247.