Analyzing the level of interest of high school students in solving mathematical problems in the modular and face-to-face learning
Vol 9, Issue 4, 2024, Article identifier:
VIEWS - 616 (Abstract) 74 (PDF)
Abstract
As schools continue to adjust to changing circumstances, it is essential to use strategies that not only help students learn, but also interest and inspire them. More effective and engaging learning experiences can be created with the use of knowledge on how different strategies affect students’ levels of interest. This quantitative study aimed to analyze the interest levels of students in solving mathematical problems as mediated by different teaching ideas/strategies i.e., with gamification, with graphic and visuals, and with digital resources. Likert-scale was used to code and assign weight for the questionnaire. Findings indicated that interest levels of students were high during distance learning because they can access online resources (e.g., search engines, YouTube, e-books) to be used for independent learning. In face-to-face classes, students reported high level of interest in solving mathematical problems if there are learning aids (e.g., graphs, pictures, charts) presented to them and access to online resources. As suggested, teaching strategies require teachers to focus more on visual and online-assisted learning to make students feel interested in solving mathematical problems and in learning mathematical concepts. The findings offered teachers an opportunity to integrate more on innovative teaching through adapting to resources which their students have access to. Such instructional direction required in-depth assessment to establish some novel instructional strategies that stimulate students to learn more.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Wijaya H, Darmawan IPA, Setiana SC, et al. Active reconnecting learning strategies to increase student interest and active learning. Indonesian Journal of Instructional Media and Model. 2021, 3(1), 26-37.
2. Meke KDP, Jailani J, Wutsqa DU, Alfi HD. Problem based learning using manipulative materials to improve student interest of mathematics learning. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 2019, 1157, 032099.
3. Ainley M, Hillman K, Hidi S. Gender and interest processes in response to literary texts: situational and individual interest. Learning and Instruction. 2002, 12(4): 411-428. doi: 10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00008-1
4. Harackiewicz JM, Durik AM, Barron KE, et al. The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations between achievement goals, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2008, 100(1): 105-122. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.105
5. Kim SI, Jiang Y, Song J. The Effects of Interest and Utility Value on Mathematics Engagement and Achievement. Interest in Mathematics and Science Learning. Published online April 2015: 63-78. doi: 10.3102/978-0-935302-42-4_4
6. Leyva E, Walkington C, Perera H, Bernacki M. Making mathematics relevant: An examination of student interest in mathematics, interest in STEM careers, and perceived relevance. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. 2022, 8(3), 612-641.
7. Murayama K, Pekrun R, Lichtenfeld S, Vom Hofe R. Predicting long-term growth in students’ mathematics achievement: The unique contributions of motivation and cognitive strategies. Child Development. 2013, 84(4), 1475-1490.
8. Potvin P, Hasni A. Interest, motivation and attitude towards science and technology at K-12 levels: a systematic review of 12 years of educational research. Studies in Science Education. 2014, 50(1), 85-129.
9. Escarez Jr. YFD, Ching DA. Math Anxiety and Mathematical Representations of Grade 7 Students. International Journal of Educational Management and Development Studies. 2022, 3(1). doi: 10.53378/352868
10. Flowerday T, Shell DF. Disentangling the effects of interest and choice on learning, engagement, and attitude. Learning and Individual Differences. 2015, 40: 134-140. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2015.05.003
11. Linnenbrink-Garcia L, Patall EA, Messersmith EE. Antecedents and consequences of situational interest. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 2013, 83(4), 591-614.
12. Kumar P, Vrontis D, Pallonetto F. Cognitive engagement with AI‐enabled technologies and value creation in healthcare. Journal of Consumer Behaviour. 2023.
13. Liu Z, Zhang N, Peng X, et al. Students’ social-cognitive engagement in online discussions. Educational Technology & Society. 2023, 26(1), 1-15.
14. Rotgans JI, Schmidt HG. Cognitive engagement in the problem-based learning classroom. Advances in Health Sciences Education. 2011, 16(4): 465-479. doi: 10.1007/s10459-011-9272-9
15. Booth BM, Bosch N, D’Mello SK. Engagement Detection and Its Applications in Learning: A Tutorial and Selective Review. Proceedings of the IEEE. 2023, 111(10): 1398-1422. doi: 10.1109/jproc.2023.3309560
16. Tang Y, Hew KF. Effects of using mobile instant messaging on student behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement: a quasi-experimental study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2022, 19(1). doi: 10.1186/s41239-021-00306-6
17. Guo L, Du J, Zheng Q. Understanding the evolution of cognitive engagement with interaction levels in online learning environments: Insights from learning analytics and epistemic network analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. 2023, 39(3): 984-1001. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12781
18. Wang Z, Chen L, Anderson T. A framework for interaction and cognitive engagement in connectivist learning contexts. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning. 2014, 15(2). doi: 10.19173/irrodl.v15i2.1709
19. Trullàs JC, Blay C, Sarri E, et al. Effectiveness of problem-based learning methodology in undergraduate medical education: a scoping review. BMC Medical Education. 2022, 22(1). doi: 10.1186/s12909-022-03154-8
20. MacMath S, Wallace J, Chi X. What works? Research into Practice. 2009.
21. Sungur S, Tekkaya C. Effects of Problem-Based Learning and Traditional Instruction on Self-Regulated Learning. The Journal of Educational Research. 2006, 99(5): 307-320. doi: 10.3200/joer.99.5.307-320
22. Cope L. The Impact of Teachers’ Characteristics and Self-Reported Emphasis on Standards-Based Mathematics Practices on Students’ Algebra Achievement. Delta Journal of Education. 2015, 3(2), 1-15.
23. Kamina P, Iyer NN. From concrete to abstract: Teaching for transfer of learning when using manipulatives. NERA Conference Proceedings. 2009, 6, 1-8.
24. Harackiewicz JM, Hulleman CS. The Importance of Interest: The Role of Achievement Goals and Task Values in Promoting the Development of Interest. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2009, 4(1): 42-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1751-9004.2009.00207.x
25. Elliot SN. Kratochwill Th. R., Cook JL, Travers JF Educational Psychology: Effective Teaching, Effective Learning. Boston: Mc Grow-Hill; 2000.
26. Ormrod EJ. Educational psychology: Developing learners. 2006.
27. ten Hagen I, Lauermann F, Wigfield A, et al. Can I teach this student?: A multilevel analysis of the links between teachers’ perceived effectiveness, interest-supportive teaching, and student interest in math and reading. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 2022, 69: 102059. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2022.102059
28. Amany DAL, Puteri AAI, Karim S. Analysis of The Relationship Between Student Interest and Written Communication in Solving Realistic Mathematics Problems. Delta-Phi: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika. 2023, 1(1), 15-19.
29. Schraw G, Lehman S. Situational interest: A review of the literature and directions for future research. Educational Psychology Review. 2001, 13(1), 23-52.
30. Hidi S, Renninger K. The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist. 2006, 41(2), 111-127.
31. Linnenbrink-Garcia L, Durik AM, Conley AM, et al. Measuring Situational Interest in Academic Domains. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2010, 70(4): 647-671. doi: 10.1177/0013164409355699
32. Renninger KA, Su S. Interest and Its Development. The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation. Published online September 18, 2012: 167-188. doi: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195399820.013.0011
33. Wei L, Zhang W, Lin C. The study of the effectiveness of design-based engineering learning: the mediating role of cognitive engagement and the moderating role of modes of engagement. Frontiers in Psychology. 2023, 14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1151610
34. Lai C, Chen Q, Wang Y, et al. Individual interest, self‐regulation, and self‐directed language learning with technology beyond the classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology. Published online July 20, 2023. doi: 10.1111/bjet.13366
35. Damayanti M, Sadikin IS. Factors influencing students’ interest towards learning English as a foreign language. Eltin Journal: Journal of English Language Teaching in Indonesia. 2023, 11(2), 193-211.
36. Harefa D, Sarumaha M, Telaumbanua K, et al. Relationship Student Learning Interest to the Learning Outcomes of Natural Sciences. International Journal of Educational Research and Social Sciences (IJERSC). 2023, 4(2), 240-246.
37. Jaeger M, Adair D. The influence of students’ interest, ability and personal situation on students’ perception of a problem-based learning environment. European Journal of Engineering Education. 2013, 39(1): 84-96. doi: 10.1080/03043797.2013.833172
38. Wati L, Afifah S. The Effect of Learning Interest and Learning Environment on Student Learning Outcomes in History Class X IPS. Indonesian Journal of Education Research (IJoER). 2023, 4(2): 32-36. doi: 10.37251/ijoer.v4i2.579
39. Fennema E, Romberg TA, eds. Mathematics Classrooms That Promote Understanding. Routledge, 1999. doi: 10.4324/9781410602619
40. Liu Y, Pásztor A. Effects of problem-based learning instructional intervention on critical thinking in higher education: A meta-analysis. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2022, 45, 101069.
41. Posamentier AS, Smith BS, Stepelman J. Teaching secondary mathematics: Techniques and enrichment units. 2010.
42. Kelly CA. Using manipulatives in mathematical problem solving: A performance-based analysis. The Mathematics Enthusiast. 2006, 3(2), 184-193.
43. Blanco LJ, Garrote M. Difficulties in learning inequalities in students of the first year of pre-university education in Spain. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 2007, 3(3), 221-229.
44. Ryan V, Fitzmaurice O, O’Donoghue J. Student interest and engagement in mathematics after the first year of secondary education. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 2022, 10(4), 436-454.
45. Gao X, Wang L, Deng J, et al. The effect of the problem based learning teaching model combined with mind mapping on nursing teaching: A meta-analysis. Nurse Education Today. 2022, 111: 105306. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105306
46. Woolfolk A, Margetts K. Educational psychology Australian edition. Pearson Higher Education AU. 2012.
47. Kamid K, Rohati R, Hobri H, et al. Process Skill and Student’s Interest for Mathematics Learning: Playing a Traditional Games. International Journal of Instruction. 2022, 15(3), 967-988.
48. Maulidya E, Aryaningrum K, Fakhrudin A. The effectiveness of the use of quizizz-based gamification on students’ learning interest in 4th grade mathematics. JPsd (Jurnal Pendidikan Sekolah Dasar). 2022, 8(1), 49-62.
49. Behl A, Jayawardena N, Pereira V, et al. Gamification and e-learning for young learners: A systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis, and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 2022, 176: 121445. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121445
50. Limantara N, Gaol F, Prabowo H. Factors Influencing the Implementation of Gamification for Learning in Information Systems Education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET). 2022, 17(08): 32-41. doi: 10.3991/ijet.v17i08.29777
51. Sarifah I, Rohmaniar A, Marini A, et al. Development of Android Based Educational Games to Enhance Elementary School Student Interests in Learning Mathematics. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM). 2022, 16(18): 149-161. doi: 10.3991/ijim.v16i18.32949
52. Singhal S, Hough J, Cripps D. Twelve tips for incorporating gamification into medical education. MedEdPublish. 2019, 8: 216. doi: 10.15694/mep.2019.000216.1
53. Dichev C, Dicheva D. Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2017, 14(1). doi: 10.1186/s41239-017-0042-5
54. Xu J, Lio A, Dhaliwal H, et al. Psychological interventions of virtual gamification within academic intrinsic motivation: A systematic review. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2021, 293: 444-465. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2021.06.070
55. Chavez J, Lamorinas DD. Reconfiguring assessment practices and strategies in online education during the pandemic. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education. 2023, 10(1): 160-174. doi: 10.21449/ijate.1094589
56. Gong Z, Wang R, Xia G. Augmented reality (AR) as a tool for engaging museum experience: a case study on Chinese art pieces. Digital. 2022, 2(1), 33-45.
57. Shabiralyani G, Hasan KS, Hamad N, Iqbal N. Impact of visual aids in enhancing the learning process case research: District Dera Ghazi Khan. Journal of Education and Practice. 2015, 6(19), 226-233.
58. Kunari C. Methods of teaching educational Technology. New Delhi. 2006.
59. Lai B, Tan KH, He M, et al. The Roles of Non-Textual Elements in Sustaining ESL and EFL Learning: A Scoping Review. Sustainability. 2022, 14(16), 10292.
60. Burrow T. Horizons in human geography. 1986.
61. Muhammad I, Angraini LM, Darmayanti R, et al. Students’ Interest in Learning Mathematics Using Augmented Reality: Rasch Model Analysis. Edutechnium Journal of Educational Technology. 2018, 1(2), 89-99.
62. Shaojie T, Samad AA, Ismail L. Systematic literature review on audio-visual multimodal input in listening comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022, 13. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.980133
63. Duhaylungsod AV, Chavez JV. ChatGPT and other AI Users: Innovative and Creative Utilitarian Value and Mindset Shift. Journal of Namibian Studies. 2023, 33, 4367-4378. doi: 10.59670/jns.v33i.2791
64. Reitz JM. Electronic resource. Available online: https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_e.aspx (accessed on 28 January 2022).
65. Cheung LSN, Chiu DKW, Ho KKW. A quantitative study on utilizing electronic resources to engage children’s reading and learning: parents’ perspectives through the 5E instructional model. The Electronic Library. 2022, 40(6): 662-679. doi: 10.1108/el-09-2021-0179
66. Kenchakkanavar AY. Types of e-resources and its utilities in library. International Journal Of Information Sources And Services. 2014, 1(2), 97-104.
67. Ceneciro CC, Estoque MR, Chavez JV. Analysis of Debate Skills to the Learners’ Confidence and Anxiety in the Use of the English Language in Academic Engagements. Journal of Namibian Studies : History Politics Culture. 2023, 33: 4544-4569. doi: 10.59670/jns.v33i.2812
68. Chavez JV. Narratives of Bilingual Parents on the Real-Life Use of English Language: Materials for English Language Teaching Curriculum. Arab World English Journal. 2022, 13(3): 325-338. doi: 10.24093/awej/vol13no3.21
69. Chan VHY, Chiu DKW. Integrating the 6Cs Motivation Into Reading Promotion Curriculum for Disadvantaged Communities With Technology Tools. Adoption and Use of Technology Tools and Services by Economically Disadvantaged Communities. 2023: 158-181. doi: 10.4018/978-1-6684-5347-6.ch007
70. Korat O, Segal-Drori O. Electronic (E)-books as a support for young children’s language and early literacy. Technology in Early Childhood Education. 2016, 1-4.
71. Chavez JV. Academic and Health Insecurities of Indigent Students during Pandemic: Study on Adaptive Strategies under Learning Constraints. Journal of Multidisciplinary in Social Sciences. 2020, 16(3), 74-81.
72. Chavez JV, Adalia HG, Alberto JP. Parental support strategies and motivation in aiding their children learn the English language. Forum for Linguistic Studies. 2023, 5(2): 1541. doi: 10.59400/fls.v5i2.1541
73. Meşe C, Dursun ÖÖ. Influence of gamification elements on emotion, interest and online participation. 2018.
74. Sailer M, Hense J, Mandl H, Klevers M. Psychological perspectives on motivation through gamification. Ixd&a. 2013, 19(1), 28-37.
75. Aldalur I, Perez A. Gamification and discovery learning: Motivating and involving students in the learning process. Heliyon. 2023, 9(1): e13135. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13135
76. Agni R, Zainal S. Exploring the Relationship between Visual Learning Styles and Learning Outcomes in Limnology Course: A Quantitative Descriptive Study. Equator Science Journal. 2023, 1(1), 31-38.
77. Ho KC, Huang TS, Lin JC, Chiang HK. The online interactive visual learning improves learning effectiveness and satisfaction of physicians with postgraduate year during the COVID-19 pandemic in Taiwan. BMC Medical Education. 2023, 23(1), 713.
78. González-Beltrán BA, Figueroa-González J, Sánchez-Guerrero L, González-Brambila SB. Visual learning statistics, what can be learned from visualizing data in an educational environment? In: INTED2023 Proceedings. IATED. pp. 7930-7936.
79. Qureshi MA, Khaskheli A, Qureshi JA, et al. Factors affecting students’ learning performance through collaborative learning and engagement. Interactive Learning Environments. 2023, 31(4), 2371-2391.
80. Rojas JE, De La Ossa MA. Unlocking Engagement: A Conceptual Overview. University of Cordoba. 2023, 1-69.
81. Samosir CM, Muhammad I, Marchy F, et al. Research Trends in Problem Based Learning in Middle School (1998-2023): A Bibliometric Review. Sustainable Jurnal Kajian Mutu Pendidikan. 2023, 6(1): 46-58. doi: 10.32923/kjmp.v6i1.3237
82. Pitterson NP, Brown S, Pascoe J, et al. Measuring cognitive engagement through interactive, constructive, active and passive learning activities. 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). Published online October 2016. doi: 10.1109/fie.2016.7757733
83. Pohl AJ. Strategies and Interventions for Promoting Cognitive Engagement. Student Engagement. Published online 2020: 253-280. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-37285-9_14
84. Xu M, Tian Q, Yu SH, et al. Cognitive engagement of nursing undergraduates in blended learning: A parallel mixed method study. Nurse Education Today. 2023, 130: 105947. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2023.105947
85. Amer-Mestre J, Ayarza-Astigarraga A, Lopes MC. E-Learning Engagement Gap During School Closures: Differences by Academic Performance. SSRN Electronic Journal. Published online 2022. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4114408
86. Lin W, Zaman SI, Jamil S, Khan SA. Students engagement in distant learning: How much influence do the critical factors have for success in academic performance? Psychology in the Schools. 2023.
87. Elastika RW, Sukono S, Dewanto SP. Analysis of Factors Affecting Students’ Mathematics Learning Difficulties Using SEM as Information for Teaching Improvement. International Journal of Instruction. 2021, 14(4): 281-300. doi: 10.29333/iji.2021.14417a
88. Hashim S, Masek A, Mahthir BNSM, et al. Association of interest, attitude and learning habit in mathematics learning towards enhancing students’ achievement. Indonesian Journal of Science and Technology. 2021, 6(1), 113-122.
89. Pollock NB. Student performance and perceptions of anatomy and physiology across face-to-face, hybrid, and online teaching lab styles. Advances in Physiology Education. 2022, 46(3), 453-460.
90. Weimer M. Learner-Centred Teaching: Five Key Changes to Practice, San Francisco, USA: Jossey-Bass. 2002.
91. Asghar MZ, Afzaal MN, Iqbal J, et al. Analyzing an Appropriate Blend of Face-to-Face, Offline and Online Learning Approaches for the In-Service Vocational Teacher’s Training Program. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022, 19(17): 10668. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191710668
92. Atwa H, Shehata MH, Al-Ansari A, et al. Online, Face-to-Face, or Blended Learning? Faculty and Medical Students’ Perceptions During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Method Study. Frontiers in Medicine. 2022, 9. doi: 10.3389/fmed.2022.791352
DOI: https://doi.org/10.54517/esp.v9i4.2167
(616 Abstract Views, 74 PDF Downloads)
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Marcelino M. Espartero, Kier P. Dela Calzada, Rosalina T. Del Prado
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/