Evaluating Ethnomathematics-Based RME for Students' Mathematical Conceptual Understanding and Mathematical Literacy Using the CIPP Model
DOI:
10.29303/jm.v8i3.13020Published:
2026-09-30Downloads
Abstract
Contextual and meaningful mathematics learning is essential for supporting students’ conceptual
understanding and mathematical literacy. However, a comprehensive evaluation of the
implementation of ethnomathematics-based Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) is still
needed to examine the alignment between instructional planning, classroom implementation, and
learning outcomes. This study evaluates the implementation of the ethnomathematics-based
Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) approach using the CIPP evaluation model, which
encompasses context, input, process, and product. This study employs an evaluative approach,
with data drawn from documentation, observations, and interviews conducted in two eighth-grade
classes at a public junior high school in Yogyakarta. The data were analysed descriptively
according to the alignment of each evaluation component. The results showed that the context
evaluation achieved a 100% alignment rate, input 90%, process 94.12%, and product 100%, all
falling into the “very good” category. The evaluation results also showed an increase in students’
conceptual understanding and mathematical literacy from the pretest to the posttest, as well as
average learning outcomes in line with the KKTP. Thus, the implementation of ethnomathematics
based RME can be deemed very effective in supporting active, contextual, and meaningful
mathematics learning.
Keywords:
CIPP evaluation Conceptual understanding Ethnomathematics Mathematical literacy Realistic Mathematics EducationReferences
Ausubel, D. (2010). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive view.
Bishop, A. J. (1989). Mathematical Enculturation: A Cultural Perspective on Mathematics Education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(4), 367–370.
Bruner, J. S. (1974). Toward a theory of instruction. Harvard university press.
Burkhardt, H., Pead, D., & Stacey, K. (2024). Learning and teaching for mathematical literacy: Making mathematics useful for everyone. Routledge.
Christie, C. A., & Fierro, L. A. (2009). Program Evaluation. In International Encyclopedia of Education, Third Edition (pp. 706–712). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.01618-3
d’Ambrosio, U. (1985). Ethnomathematics and its place in the history and pedagogy of mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 5(1), 44–48.
D’Ambrósio, U. (2006). Ethnomathematics: Link between traditions and modernity. Brill.
Fauzan, A., Harisman, Y., Yerizon, Y., Suherman, S., Tasman, F., Nisa, S., Sumarwati, S., Hafizatunnisa, H., & Syaputra, H. (2024). Realistic mathematics education (RME) to improve literacy and numeracy skills of elementary school students based on teachers’ experience. Infinity Journal, 13(2), 301–316. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v13i2.p301-316
Fikri, D., Hartono, H., & Arliani, E. (2025). The Effectiveness of Website-Assisted Ethnomathematics-Based RME on Junior High School Students’ Understanding of Mathematics.
Findell, B., Swafford, J., & Kilpatrick, J. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academies Press.
Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Reidel Pubishing Company.
Freudenthal, H. (2002). Revisiting Mathematics Education.
Gerdes, P. (1999). Geometry from Africa: Mathematical and educational explorations (Vol. 10). American Mathematical Soc.
Gravemeijer, K. P. E. (1994). Developing realistic mathematics education.
Hevardani, K. A. (2025). Evaluation of the Implementation of GeoGebra-assisted Advanced Calculus Courses Using the CIPP Model. Rangkiang Mathematics Journal, 4(1), 32–41.
Isnaeni, N., Apriliani, D., & Habibi, B. (2024). Evaluasi Program Literasi Sekolah Menggunakan Model Context Input Process dan Product (CIPP) pada SMA. Journal of Education Research, 5(3), 3245–3252.
Johar, R., Fauzan, A., Sugiman, S., Anwar, L., Sa’dijah, C., & Khairunnisak, C. (2025). Developing local instruction theory through ethnomathematics and technological-based realistic mathematics education to support students’ spatial ability. Asian Journal for Mathematics Education, 4(4), 553–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/27527263251383572
Ke, X., & Newton, K. J. (2024). English learners learn from worked example comparison in algebra. Instructional Science, 52(5), 831–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-024-09668-6
Kesuma, A. P. P., & Marsigit, M. (2025). The Effectiveness of Culturally-Integrated RME with Liveworksheets in Improving Junior High School Students’ Mathematical Literacy. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding.
Laurens, T., Batlolona, F. A., Batlolona, J. R., & Leasa, M. (2017). How Does Realistic Mathematics Education (RME) Improve Students’ Mathematics Cognitive Achievement? EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/76959
Marsigit, M. (2016). Pembelajaran matematika dalam perspektif kekinian. Math Didactic: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 2(3), 132–141.
Mok, S. Y., Hämmerle, C. S., Rüede, C., & Staub, F. C. (2022). How do professional development programs on comparing solution methods and classroom discourse affect students’ achievement in mathematics? The mediating role of students’ subject matter justifications. Learning and Instruction, 82, 101668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101668
Mulyawan, M. I., & Rusman, R. (2025). Evaluation of Project-Based Learning (PjBL) implementation in Mathematics using the CIPP model. Curricula: Journal of Curriculum Development, 4(2), 1719–1704.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (Ed.). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics (4. print). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Nursyahidah, F., Wardono, W., Mariani, S., & Wijayanti, K. (2025). Integrating technology, ethnomathematics, and realistic mathematics education in learning statistics: A learning trajectory. Infinity Journal, 14(3), 633–654. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v14i3.p633-654
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Assessment and Analytical Framework. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en
Palinussa, A. L., Tupamahu, P. Z., Sabandar, V. P., Makaruku, Y. H., & Sabandar, J. (2024). Realistic mathematics education: Mathematics e-modules in improving student learning outcomes. Infinity Journal, 14(1), 45–64. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v14i1.p45-64
Pratama, R. A., & Yelken, T. Y. (2024). Effectiveness of ethnomathematics-based learning on students’ mathematical literacy: A meta-analysis study. Discover Education, 3(1), 202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-024-00309-1
Pucilowski, M. (2016). From Evidence to Action: Stakeholder Coordination as a Determinant of Evaluation Use. In Assessing the Impact of Foreign Aid: Value for Money and Aid for Trade (pp. 137–147). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-803660-0.00010-6
Qadriah, L., Wicaksono, B., Somadiyono, S., & Nindiasari, H. (2022). CIPP model as a mathematics learning evaluation model in elementary school. International Journal of Science and Society, 4(3), 435–444.
Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2009). Compared with what? The effects of different comparisons on conceptual knowledge and procedural flexibility for equation solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(3), 529–544. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014224
Saewert, K. J. (2021). Program evaluation. In Research for Advanced Practice Nurses, Fourth Edition: From Evidence to Practice (pp. 275–300). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826151339.0015
Sankaran, S., & Saad, N. (2022). Evaluating the Bachelor of Education Program Based on the Context, Input, Process, and Product Model. Frontiers in Education, 7, 924374. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.924374
Skemp, R. R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics Teaching, 77(1), 20–26.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1971). The relevance of the CIPP evaluation model for educational accountability.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2000). The CIPP model for evaluation. In Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (pp. 279–317). Springer.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Coryn, C. L. (2014). Evaluation theory, models, and applications. John Wiley & Sons.
Sunzuma, G., Zezekwa, N., Gwizangwe, I., & Zinyeka, G. (2021). A Comparison of the Effectiveness of Ethnomathematics and Traditional Lecture Approaches in Teaching Consumer Arithmetic: Learners’ Achievement and Teachers’ Views. Pedagogical Research, 6(4).
Suryanto, A., Aman, A., Yuliana, L., Purwanto, N. A., Firdaus, F. M., & Fadhli, R. (2024). Context input process product evaluation of hybrid learning practices in Indonesian universities. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education (IJERE), 13(1), 475. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v13i1.26588
Susanta, A., Sumardi, H., Susanto, E., & Retnawati, H. (2023). Mathematics literacy task on number pattern using Bengkulu context for junior high school students. Journal on Mathematics Education, 14(1), 85–102. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v14i1.pp85-102
Sutarni, S., Sutama, S., Prayitno, H. J., Sutopo, A., & Laksmiwati, P. A. (2024). The development of realistic mathematics education-based student worksheets to enhance higher-order thinking skills and mathematical ability. Infinity Journal, 13(2), 285–300. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v13i2.p285-300
Turgut, M. (2022). Reinventing Geometric Linear Transformations in a Dynamic Geometry Environment: Multimodal Analysis of Student Reasoning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(6), 1203–1223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10185-y
Utami, A. N., Nurhasanah, F., Triyanto, & Dolk, M. (2024). Constructing slope conceptualizations: Physical, geometrical, and algebraic. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(4), 1433–1452. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v15i4.pp1433-1452
Van de Walle, J. A., Lovin, L. H., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2006). Teaching student-centered mathematics. Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Walsh, M., & Allison, A. (2024). Bringing It All Together: Effective Program Evaluation. In Making Research Relevant: Applied Research Designs for the Mental Health Practitioner, Second Edition (pp. 197–220). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781032706139-15
Zhang, G., Zeller, N., Griffith, R., Metcalf, D., Williams, J., Shea, C., & Misulis, K. (2011). Using the Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model (CIPP) as a Comprehensive Framework to Guide the Planning, Implementation, and Assessment of Service-learning Programs.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Katwan Nurwahyuni
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
