Call for Paper

CAE solicits original research papers for the July 2021 Edition. Last date of manuscript submission is June 30, 2021.

Read More

Numeracy Culture among Primary School Pupil

Siti Rahaimah Ali. Published in Information Sciences.

Communications on Applied Electronics
Year of Publication: 2017
Publisher: Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Authors: Siti Rahaimah Ali

Siti Rahaimah Ali. Numeracy Culture among Primary School Pupil. Communications on Applied Electronics 7(9):1-7, November 2017. BibTeX

	author = {Siti Rahaimah Ali},
	title = {Numeracy Culture among Primary School Pupil},
	journal = {Communications on Applied Electronics},
	issue_date = {November 2017},
	volume = {7},
	number = {9},
	month = {Nov},
	year = {2017},
	issn = {2394-4714},
	pages = {1-7},
	numpages = {7},
	url = {},
	doi = {10.5120/cae2017652636},
	publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
	address = {New York, USA}


Numeracy culture is a part of mathematics and intertwined with each other. In particular, numeracy is the ability to perform basic mathematical operations and understand simple mathematical ideas and apply knowledge and skills of mathematics in everyday life. Numeracy knowledge is very important to learn from an early stage as numeracy encompasses recognize numbers, basic computation, measurement, geometry, probability and statistics. This article will discuss the culture of numeracy in primary schools. Mental visualisation are used to seeing cultural numeracy among primary school pupil. Through a culture of student mental picture can be seen by their existing knowledge of a particular topic. Culture numeracy in primary schools ensuring excellence at a higher level again. This is because the culture of numeracy in the classroom, students can apply knowledge of numeracy in everyday life. Culture numeracy from an early stage can help students give correct answers by linking basic questions numeracy. Culture numeracy in primary schools is very important for students to understand because every topic related to each other. The word 'culture' is something that is complex and can take a variety of meanings, especially in numeracy. Culture depends on the context numeracy and what is expected of students. Therefore to know what students actually understand about the culture, a lot depends on how teachers identify, collect, and interpret the evidence. When a topic or concept that has been studied, it does not necessarily change when a new or different information found. Being able to obtain new information or knowledge does not entitle a student a full understanding. A student who gains full understanding will be able to express it verbally or simply displaying his skill.


  1. Amin Salleh, M. A. (2001). Laporan Pembelajaran. Kuala Lumpur: Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan, Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
  2. Askew, M. B. (1997). Effective teachers of numeracy. London School of Educational .
  3. Ball, D. L. (1993). Halves pieces and twoths: constructing and using representational contexts in teaching fraction. In E. F. T.P Carpenter, Rational numbers: an intergration of research (pp. 157-195). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  4. Ball, D. (2002). Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education. RAND Education/Science and Teknology Policy Institute.
  5. Ball, D. (2003). What mathematical knowledge is necessary for teaching mathematics. USA: US Department of Education.
  6. Bass, H. (2005). Mathematics, Mathematicians and Mathematics Education. Bulletin of the American Mathematics Sociaty 42 (14) , 417-430.
  7. Behr, M. H. (1992). Rational number, ratio and proportion. Dlm D.A Grouws (Ed). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathmematics . 209-333.
  8. Bobies, J. C. (2005). Supporting teachers in the development of young children's mathematical thinking:Three Large scale cases . Mathematics Education Research Journal 16(3) , 27-57.
  9. Bogdan, R. &. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4 ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  10. Brown, M. A. (2003). The key role of educational research in the development and evaluation of the National Numeracy Strategy. British Educational Research Journal 29(5) , 663-680.
  11. Carol Murphy (2004). How the Children come to use a taught mental calculation strategy? Educational Studies in Mathematics 56(1) , 3-18.
  12. Carlson, R. (1990). Ssessing teachers' pedagogical content knowledge: Item development issues. Journal of Personal Evaluation in Education,4 , 157-173.
  13. Clandinim, D. J. (2005). Personal Practices knowledge: A study of teachers'classroom images. Curriculum Inquiry 15 (4) , 362-385.
  14. Clarke, D (2004). Mathematics teaching in Grades K-2: Painting a picture of challenging, supportive and effective classrooms. In R.N Rubenstien & G.W Bright (Eds). Perspectives on the teaching of mathematics (66th Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Reston,VA:NCTM.
  15. Clarke, D (2006) Proceedings of the 24th Annual Confeernce ot the Mathematics Education Research group of Australasia, Vol 1). Understanding assessing and developing young children's mathematical thinking: Research as powerful tool for profesional growth. In J. Bobis, B Perry & M. Mitchelmore (Eds). 9-26.
  16. Coles, D. &. (2002). Numeracy and mathematics across the primary curriculum. London: Fulton.
  17. Doig, B. M. (2003, january 31). A good start to numeracy: Effective numeracy strategies from research and practice in early chilhood. Retrieved Februari 17, 2012, from start.pdf
  18. Fosnot, C. &. (2007). Mini lessons for extending addition and subtractions a yearlong resource, contexts for learning, k-3. Portsmounth: Nh:Heinemann.
  19. Fuson, K. &. (1990). Using a base-ten bloks learning/teaching approach for first and second-grade place value and multi-digit addition and subtraction . Journal for research in mathematics education 21 , 180-206.
  20. Fuson, K. (2003). Developing mathematical power in whole number operation. In J. kilpatrick w.g. Martin and D. Schiffer. A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics , 68-98.
  21. Geary, D. (2000). The development of numerical and arithmetical cognitif: A longitudinal study of process and concept deficits in children with learning disability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77 , 236-263.
  22. Munirah Ghazali, (2000). Kajian Kepekaan nombor murid tahun lima. tesis Phd. tidak diterbitkan. Johor: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
  23. Ginsburg, L. (2000). Instructional straregies for adult numeracy education. Adult numeracy development:Theory, research. practise , 89-114.
  24. Van Glaserfeld, V. (1987b). Preliminaries to any theory of representation. Dlm C. Janvier (ed), Problems of representation in the teaching and learningof mathematics . 215-225.
  25. Van Glaserfeld (2007). Radical Constructic. London: The falmer.
  26. Van Glaserfeld (2006). You Have to be two to start: Rational Thoughts About Love. Contructivist Foundations 2 , 1-5.
  27. Van Glasersfeid (1995). Radical Contructivisim: A Way of knowing and leraning. Hog Kong: The Falmer.
  28. Van Glasersfeld (2005). Thirty Years Radical Contructivism. Constructivist Foundations 1 (1) , 9-12.
  29. Van Glasesrfeld (2001). The radical constructivisme view of science, foundation of science 6. 31-43.
  30. Graeber. (1999). Forms of knowing mathematics: what preservice teachers should learn . educational studies in mathematics, 38 (1-3) , 189-208.
  31. H Wu (2005). Mathematic, mathematician and mathematics education. Bulletin (New Series) of the American Mathematical Society 424 , 417-430.
  32. Russell, & Martin (2001). Teacher's knowledge and how it develops. In V. richardson (ed). Handbook of research on teaching , 433-436.
  33. Heather C Hill & Brian Rowan (2005). Effects of teachers mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American educational Research Journal 42 (2), 371-406.
  34. Heaton, R. (2000). Teaching Mathematics to the new standards: relearning . New York: College Press.
  35. Higgin, J. (2001). An evaluation of the advanced numeracy project . New Zealand: Wllington, Ministry of Education.
  36. Higgin, J. (2002). An evaluation of the advanced Numeracy Project. New Zealand: Wwllington, Ministry of Education.
  37. Hill, H. Rowan (2005). Effects of Teachers' Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching on Student Achievement. America Educational Research Journal42(2) , 371-406.
  38. Hogan, J. (2000). Numeracy across the curiculum? Autralian Mathematics Teachers Association Journal 56(3) , 17-20.
  39. Noraini Idris (2000). Linguistik aspects of mathematical education: How precise do teachers need to be? In Cultural and Language Aspects of Science,Mathematics and TechnicalEducation. Universiti Brunai Darulsalam.
  40. Noraini Idris (2004). Mathematics learning in English as a second language. Diges Pendidik, 4(1) , 64-72.
  41. Noraini Idris(1994). Pengajaran dan pembelajaran matematik untuk sekolah rendah. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
  42. Noraini Idris (2009). Penyelesaian masalah daya penggerak dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran. Persidangan Kebangsaan Pendidikan Matematik. Sungai Petani: Institut Pendidikan Guru Malaysia.
  43. Kilpatrick, J. S. (2001). All adding it up: Helping children learnmathematics. Whingston Dc: Nasional Academic Press.
  44. Margaret Brown (2000). What kinds of teaching and what other factors accelerate promary pupil's progress in acquiring numeracy? ACER Research.
  45. Heaton R.M (2000). Teaching Mathematics to the new standard: Re learning to dance. New York: Teaching College Press.
  46. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (2010). Bengkel Kajian Semula Pelan Induk Pembangunan Pendidikan . Teks Ucapan .
  47. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia (2009). Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Matematik Tahun 4. Kuala Lumpur: Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.
  48. Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia Malaysia, K. P. (2003). Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Rendah: Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Matematik Tahun 4. Kuala Lumpur: Pusat Perkembangan Kurikulum.
  49. Lembaga Peperiksaan Malaysia (2011). Analisa prestasi dan gred purata matematik. Kuala Lumpur: Lembaga Peperikasaan Malaysia.
  50. Matthijsse, W. (2000). Adult numeracy at the elementary level: Addition and subtraction up to 100. In G. Iddo, Adult Numeracy Development: Theory,research, practise (pp. 133-155). UK.
  51. Muir, T. (2008). Describing effective teachig of numeracy links between principles of practice and teachers actions. 11th International Conference on Mathematics Education (ICMG-11) for study group2 New development and trends in mathematics education of primary level. Monterry, Mexico.
  52. Munirah, G. (2000). Kajian Kepekaan Nombor Murid Tahun LIma. Johor: UTM.
  53. Munirah, G (2003). Development of a framework to assess primary students number sense in Malaysia: Counting. SEMT, International Senior For Elementary Mathematics. Repbuplic Czes: Charles University.
  54. NCTM. (2000). Principles and standard for school mathematics. USA: Reston, Va Author.
  55. O'Donoghue, J. (2002). Numeracy and Mathematics. Math. Soc. Bulletin 48 , 47-55.
  56. Perry, M. (2000). Explanations of mathematicsal concepts in Japanese, Chinese, and U>S first and fifth-grade classrooms. Cognition and Instruction, 18 , 181-207.
  57. Reys, R. (2007). Helping children learn mathematics (9ed). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  58. Reys, R. L. (2006). Helping children lear mathematics (6 ed). . New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  59. Department of skill (2011). Literacy And Numeracy. Dublin: Department of Education and Skill.
  60. Steen, L. A. (1999). Numeracy: The New Literacy for a Data-Drenchea Sociaty. Educational Leadership , Volume 57, number 2.
  61. Steen, L. (2007). Every teacher is a teacher of mathematics. Principlsl Leadership,7,5 , 16-20.
  62. Steffe L.P & Thompsom, P. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: underlying principles and essencial elements in R. Lesh & A.E Kelly (Eds). Research design in mathematics and science education , 267-307.
  63. Strategy Numerasi Kebangsaan. (2011). Primary framework for literacy and mathematics. Department of eductional and skill.
  64. Thomas, G. a. (2008). What do the 2002 school entrants know now?. In finding from the numeracy development project 2007. Wellington: Learning Media.
  65. Thompson, I. (2000). Teaching Place Value in the UK: Time for reappraisal? Educational Review. 52(3) , 291-298.
  66. TIMSS. (2011). Assessment Frameworks. TIMSS.
  67. Curriculum Development and Planning (2001). Count Me in Too: Profesional development package. Sydney: NSW Department of education & Training Curriculum Directorate.
  68. Von Glasersfeld & Larochelle, M (2007). Key works in radical constructivism. New York: Sense Publishers.
  69. Wallance.D. (2000). The many needs to numeracy. In M.J Burk & F.R curcio (Eds) learning mathematics for a new centry. Reston.
  70. Westwood, P. (2008). What teachers need to know about numeracy. Australia: ACER press.
  71. Wikipedia. (2011, Disember 6). Retrieved Disember 6, 2011, from ht://
  72. Wright, B. M. (2002). Teaching number advancing children's skills and strategies. London: Paul Chapman.
  73. Wright, R. M. (2000). Early numeracy: Assessment for teaching and intervention. London: Chapman.
  74. Yackel, E. (2002). The Teacher's role in collective argumentation. Journal of mathematics Behevior , 423-440.
  75. Zevenbergen, R. W. (2004). Teaching mathematics in primary school. Crows nest- allen & Unwin.


Culture numeracy, pupils, primary school, numeracy