Mohammad Faizal Amir


During this time students failed to understand the broad concept of the area because they did not have an intuitive understanding structured beforehand in early grade elementary school students. The research focuses on the strategies and intuitive development of students in measuring the area in 20 third grade students of elementary school. The research method used is descriptive qualitative. Students are given 3 assignments in different times and selected subjects based on different characteristics that appear each one for interviews. The findings of this research are 2 visual-concrete covering strategies and measurement estimation. As well as 6 levels of development of intuitive understanding namely level 0: incomplete covering, level 1: primitive covering, level 2: visual-concrete covering, level 3: covering array constructed from unit, level 4: covering constructed by measurement estimation, level 5: array Constructed constructed by measurement, level 6: array implied, solution by calculation

Full Text:



Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Facilitating meaningful verbal learning in the classroom. Arithmetic Teacher, 15, 126–132.

Baranes, R., Perry, M., & Stigler, J. W. (1989). No Title. Activation of Real-World Knowledge in the Solution of Word Problems. Cognition and Instruction, 6, 287–318.

Battista, M. T., Clements, D. H., Arnoff, J., Battista, K., & Borrow, C. V. A. (1998). Students’ Spatial Structuring of 2D Arrays of Squares. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(5), 503–532.

Bennett, A. B., Burton, L. J., & Nelson, L. T. (2012). Mathematics for Elementary Teachers: A Conceptual Approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Berenson, S. B., & Carter, G. S. (1995). Changing assessment practices in science and mathematics. Social Science and Mathematics, 95, 182–186.

Byers, V., & Herscovics, N. (1977). Understanding school mathematics. Mathematics Teaching, 81, 24–27.

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Boston, United States of America: Pearson Education.

Freudental, H. (1983). Didactical Phenomenology of Mathematical Structures. New York, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Hiebert, J. (1981). Units of Measure : Results and from Implications National Assessment. The Arithmetic Teacher, 28(6), 38–43.

Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. In Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.) (pp. 65–97). New York: Macmillan.

Hirstein, J. J., Lamb, C. E., & Osborne, A. (1978). Student misconceptions about area measure. Arithmetic Teacher, 25(5), 10–16.

Linchevski, L., & Kutscher, B. (1998). Tell me with whom you’re learning, and I’ll tell you how much you’ve learned: Mixed-ability versus same-ability grouping in mathematics. Some issues in the psychology of mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 533–554.

Lynne N, O., & Michael C, M. (2000). Young Children’s Intuitive Understanding of Rectangular Area Measurement Young Children ’ s Intuitive Understanding of Rectangular Area Measurement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 144–167.

NCTM. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston: VA: Author.

NCTM. (2010). Why is Teaching with Problem Solving Important to Student Learning? National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 13(12), 1–6.

Outhred, L., & Mitchelmore, M. (2004). Students’ Structuring of Rectangular Arrays. In Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 465–472).

Pirie, S. E. . (1988). Understanding: instrumental, relational, intuitive, constructed, formalised ...? How can we know? For the Learning of Mathematics, 8(3), 2–6.

Skemp, R. R. (1987). Psychology of Learning Mathematics. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

International Journal of Insight for Mathematics Teaching