Analysis of Elementary School Students' Creative Thinking in Solving Mathematical Problems Based on Level of Mathematical Understanding

Ismail Nur 1 Indonesia , Muhammad Ilyas 1 Indonesia , Taufiq 1 Indonesia , Patmaniar 1 Indonesia
1 Department of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Cokroaminoto Palopo
Link Copied!
Published 2026-09-28
Vol. 6 No. 3 (2026) PAGES 1534 - 1555
DOI 10.51574/kognitif.v6i3.5863
Views / Downloads 56 0

Creative thinking is an essential mathematics competency, supporting idea generation, strategy selection, and non-routine problem solving. At the elementary level, it must be developed systematically so students move beyond routine procedures toward flexible, logical, reflective thinking. This study describes sixth-grade students' creative thinking in solving data-handling problems by level of mathematical understanding. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, three sixth-grade students at UPT SD Negeri 099 Masamba were purposively selected for high, moderate, and low understanding levels. Data were collected through a creative-thinking test and semi-structured interviews, analyzed using fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration indicators. Credibility was strengthened through triangulation of written responses and interviews; data were processed through reduction, display, verification, and conclusion drawing. The high-ability student displayed all four indicators strongly and consistently, proposing alternative strategies, adjusting solution steps, developing logical plans, and re-checking solutions. The moderate-ability student showed all indicators but was inconsistent in exploring ideas, developing solutions, and evaluating answers. The low-ability student showed limitations in independently generating strategies, developing solutions, and explaining reasoning in detail. These findings show that understanding level relates to differences in students' creative-thinking characteristics in problem solving. Instruction should therefore give students room to explore strategies, explain reasoning, and reflect on solutions.

Nur, I., Ilyas, M., Taufiq, T., & Patmaniar, P. (2026). Analysis of Elementary School Students’ Creative Thinking in Solving Mathematical Problems Based on Level of Mathematical Understanding. Kognitif: Jurnal Riset HOTS Pendidikan Matematika, 6(3), 1534–1555. https://doi.org/10.51574/kognitif.v6i3.5863
More Citation Formats
Download Citation

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
  1. Abdul-Rahman, M. A. M. M. (2020). Effectiveness of learner control and program control strategies in developing mathematical thinking for slow learners in mathematics. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 13(1). https://www.ijicc.net/images/vol12/iss12/121264_Rahman_2020_E_R.pdf
  2. Chorney, S., Evans, K. R., & Staples, M. (2024). Conceptualizing reasoning practices in the context of sociomathematical issues. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2024.101124
  3. Confrey, J., & Shah, M. (2021). Examining instructional change at scale using data from diagnostic assessments built on learning trajectories. ZDM – Mathematics Education, (3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01259-w
  4. Dwi Ferdiani, R., Manuharawati, & Khabibah, S. (2022). Activist learners’ creative thinking processes in posing and solving geometry problem. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(1), 117–126. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.1.117
  5. Ferdiani, R. D., & Harianto, W. (2024). Honey and Mumford learning style: creative thinking process in solving statistical problems. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education , 13(1), 496–502. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v13i1.25347
  6. Finesilver, C. (2022). Beyond categories: dynamic qualitative analysis of visuospatial representation in arithmetic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 110(2), 271–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10123-3
  7. Granberg, C., & Olsson, J. (2015). ICT-supported problem solving and collaborative creative reasoning: Exploring linear functions using dynamic mathematics software. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 37, 48–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2014.11.001
  8. Habibi, H., & Suparman, S. (2020). Literasi Matematika dalam Menyambut PISA 2021 Berdasarkan Kecakapan Abad 21. JKPM (Jurnal Kajian Pendidikan Matematika), 6(1), 57. https://doi.org/10.30998/jkpm.v6i1.8177
  9. Hakamata, R., Uegatani, Y., & Hayata, T. (2023). How do open-ended problems promote indirect argumentation? Conceptual replications in a Japanese secondary school. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 70(December 2022), 101026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2022.101026
  10. Hobri, Sahnawi, Susanto, & Ridlo, Z. R. (2021). The impact of implementing auditory intellectually repetition (air) learning model based on learning community for students’ creative thinking skills. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1832(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1832/1/012035
  11. Hu, A., Hatfield, N. J., & Beckman, M. D. (2025). Exploring individuals’ computational thinking with data. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 57(1), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-025-01669-0
  12. Jones, R. S., & Rosenberg, J. M. (2022). Characterizing whole class discussions about data and statistics with conversation profile analysis. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2022.100996
  13. Jones, S. R. (2019). Students’ Application of Concavity and Inflection Points to Real-World Contexts. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(3), 523–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9876-5
  14. Kafetzopoulos, G. I., & Psycharis, G. (2022). Conceptualization of function as a covariational relationship between two quantities through modeling tasks. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 67(July), 100993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2022.100993
  15. Kosko, K. W. (2020). The multiplicative meaning conveyed by visual representations. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 60(January), 100800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2020.100800
  16. Kotto, M. A., Babys, U., & Gella, N. J. M. (2022). Meningkatkan Kemampuan Penalaran Matematika Siswa Melalui Model PBL (Problem Based Learning). Jurnal Sains Dan Edukasi Sains, 5(1), 24–27. https://doi.org/10.24246/juses.v5i1p24-27
  17. Leiss, D., Plath, J., & Schwippert, K. (2019). Language and Mathematics - Key Factors influencing the Comprehension Process in reality-based Tasks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 21(2), 131–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2019.1570835
  18. Lithner, J. (2017). Principles for designing mathematical tasks that enhance imitative and creative reasoning. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 49(6), 937–949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0867-3
  19. Luria, S. R., Sriraman, B., & Kaufman, J. C. (2017). Enhancing equity in the classroom by teaching for mathematical creativity. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 49(7), 1033–1039. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0892-2
  20. Morrison, J., Frost, J., Gotch, C., McDuffie, A. R., Austin, B., & French, B. (2020). Teachers’ Role in Students’ Learning at a Project-Based STEM High School: Implications for Teacher Education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-020-10108-3
  21. Norqvist, M., Jonsson, B., Lithner, J., Qwillbard, T., & Holm, L. (2019). Investigating algorithmic and creative reasoning strategies by eye tracking. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 55(April 2018), 0–1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.03.008
  22. Öçal, M. F., Şen, C., Güler, G., & Kar, T. (2020). The investigation of prospective mathematics teachers’ non-algebraic solution strategies for word problems. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(4), 563–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1597936
  23. OECD. (2018). Programme for International Students Assesment (PISA) Result From PISA 2018.
  24. Rachman, A., & Rosnawati, R. (2021). Efektivitas model pembelajaran creative problem solving ditinjau dari kemampuan penalaran, komunikasi, dan self esteem. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 8(2), 231–243. https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v8i2.34420
  25. Rahmayani, S., Afnaria, A., & Azis, Z. (2025). Development of Learning Materials Based on the MURDER Collaborative Learning Model to Enhance Students’ Conceptual Understanding of Mathematics. Kognitif: Jurnal Riset HOTS Pendidikan Matematika, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.51574/kognitif.v5i4.2422
  26. Schulz, A. (2023). Assessing student teachers’ procedural fluency and strategic competence in operating and mathematizing with natural and rational numbers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 27(6), 981–1008. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-023-09590-7
  27. Setiawan, E. P., Kismiantini, K., & Montesinos- López, O. A. (2024). How Economics-Socio-Cultural Status affect Indonesian Students’ Performance in Mathematics? an Insight from PISA 2012-2022. Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif, 14(3). https://doi.org/10.23960/jpp.v14.i3.2024122
  28. Singer, F. M., Voica, C., & Pelczer, I. (2017). Cognitive styles in posing geometry problems: implications for assessment of mathematical creativity. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 49(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-016-0820-x
  29. Utami, A. M., Adelia, R., Kurniawati, I., Damayanti, E., & Damara, T. D. (2024). Implementasi Permainan Tic-Tac-Toe sebagai Konteks Pembelajaran Matematika pada Materi Keliling Bangun Datar dalam Menanamkan Kemampuan Pemecahan Masalah Siswa Sekolah Dasar. 08(December 2023), 180–188. https://doi.org/10.31004/cendekia.v8i1.3036
  30. Voigt, M., Fredriksen, H., & Rasmussen, C. (2020). Leveraging the design heuristics of realistic mathematics education and culturally responsive pedagogy to create a richer flipped classroom calculus curriculum. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 52(5), 1051–1062. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01124-x
  31. Waluya, M. S. B., Dwijanto, & Kharisudin, I. (2025). Analysis of Honey Mumford Learning Styles and Their Implications for Algebraic Thinking Abilities. ASM Science Journal, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.32802/asmscj.2025.1973
  32. Xu, X., Chen, C., Ma, J., Zhao, X., Jiao, M., & Xin, Z. (2020). The Use of a Novel Term Helps Preschoolers Learn the Concept of Angle: An Intervention Study With Chinese Preschool Children. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.568388
  33. Yao, X. (2022). Representation transformations in transition from empirical to structural generalization. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 66(April), 100964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2022.100964
  34. Yigiter, M. S. (2025). The effect of socioeconomic status on academic achievement: A big data study across countries and time with integrative data analysis. PLOS ONE, 20(10 October). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0335485

Copyright (c) 2026 This is an open-access under the CC-BY-SA license  

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Education and Talent Development Center of Indonesia (ETDC Indonesia)
e-mail: kognitif@etdc.org, website : https://etdc-indonesia.com

Creative Commons License
Kognitif: Jurnal Riset HOTS Pendidikan Matematika dengan Situs: https://etdci.org/journal/kognitif  berlisensi  Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

p-ISSN 2776-9984, e-ISSN 2776-9704 

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Dimension Badge

Downloads

Downloads
Crossmark Badge
Crossmark Badge
Section
Articles
Keywords
Creative Thinking Data Handling Elementary School Students Mathematical Problem Solving Mathematical Understanding