Relational reasoning in understanding mathematics concepts through local culture and learning styles
Mohammad Ridho'i, Ana Rokhmawati, Moch Fauzi, Adinda Laili Yuli Andira
Source record
Source: Crossref
Published: Aug 30, 2026
DOI: 10.12928/ijeme.v10i1.31423
Open original source ↗Source abstract
Students’ prior knowledge is shaped by their cultural environment before entering formal education. However, the utilization of local culture in class remains underexplored. This study analyzes students’ relational reasoning in understanding mathematics concepts based on local culture and different learning styles using an exploratory qualitative approach. The participants were initially engaged in observing ethnomathematical objects at Pura Mandara Giri Semeru Agung in Lumajang, completing a learning style questionnaire and a relational reasoning test, and representing the identified objects using GeoGebra 3D. Three students who identified more ethnomathematical objects and represented them accurately in GeoGebra 3D were selected as the research participants based on their learning styles. The visual learner consistently connected visual representations with mathematical concepts, enabling them to complete all stages of relational reasoning and revise their initial errors. The auditory learner was able to explain conceptual relationships verbally but encountered difficulties when translating these relationships into mathematical procedures and calculations. The kinesthetic learner relied primarily on direct observation of cultural objects but encountered challenges in transforming concrete experiences into complete mathematical models, resulting in incomplete solution procedures. These findings indicate that learning styles influence not only students’ performance but also the way they construct relationships among mathematical concepts in ethnomathematics-based problem solving.
Evidence graph
No public relationships recorded yet.
Integrity note: This page is a factual metadata record created by deterministic ingestion. It is not a claim that the work moves a mathematical frontier or has been independently verified.