Comparative textbook analysis reveals limited high-level spatial reasoning in elementary curricula, indicating a persistent reliance on closed-ended, low-demand mathematical tasks.
This study examines the role of textbooks in implementing curricula, particularly focusing on their use in mathematics education. Textbooks are key tools linking curriculum goals with classroom instruction, serving as a primary resource for teachers in various countries. By comparing mathematics textbooks from Southeast Asian countries – Indonesia, Brunei and Singapore – this study aims to highlight differences and similarities in how spatial reasoning skills are addressed. Using a textbook research method, the research compares Indonesia's elementary mathematics textbooks with those used in Brunei and Singapore. Horizontal analysis helps clarify the textbooks’ structure, while vertical analysis delves into spatial reasoning content. Findings reveal that Singaporean textbooks are more comprehensive in addressing proportional spatial reasoning, covering all three constructs. However, the mathematical tasks of the three books are still dominant: low cognitive demand, closed-ended and non-application.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Purnomo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: