A Review of Pedagogical Approaches for Improved Engagement and Learning Outcomes in Mathematics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47611/jsrhs.v12i3.5021Keywords:
Traditional Lecture Based, Inquiry Based Learning, Collaborative Learning, Flipped Classroom, Pedagogical Methods, Mathematics, MetacognitionAbstract
The traditional, lecture-based teaching approach in mathematics education has tended towards being a more standardized and passive learning environment, often failing to cater to diverse learning styles and needs. The consequence of this approach is the lack of engagement and understanding among students, a phenomenon prevalent in many classrooms worldwide. Indeed, student disengagement and a lack of critical thinking skills in mathematics are major concerns. Innovative pedagogical methodologies, such as Inquiry-Based Learning (IBL), Collaborative Learning, and the Flipped Classroom Model, have emerged as potential remedies to this issue. Still, their implementation faces challenges related to teacher preparation, technology dependence, and individual motivation. Despite these challenges, these methods have demonstrated significant potential to improve student outcomes. Evidence suggests IBL fosters critical thinking, collaborative learning enhances interpersonal skills, and the flipped classroom approach promotes personalized instruction and increased engagement. Improvements in student test scores ranging from 5% to 30% have been reported across different studies employing these innovative teaching methods. These methods have profound effects despite minimal funding. Combining these strategies, tailored to cater to diverse student needs, can create an effective and efficient learning environment. It can foster a deeper understanding and enjoyment of mathematics, thereby stimulating greater engagement and overall improved learning outcomes.
Downloads
References or Bibliography
Artigue, M., Blomhøj, M. Conceptualizing inquiry-based education in mathematics. ZDM Mathematics Education 45, 797–810 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0506-6
Bishop, J., & Verleger, M. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--22585
Blum, W. (2011). Can modeling be taught and learned? some answers from empirical research. International Perspectives on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematical Modelling, 15–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0910-2_3
Fernández-Martín, F., Romero-Rodríguez, J., Gómez-García, G., & Ramos Navas-Parejo, M. (2020). Impact of the Flipped Classroom Method in the Mathematical Area: A Systematic Review. Mathematics, 8, 2162. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8122162
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and Mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
Fukawa-Connelly, T.P. A case study of one instructor’s lecture-based teaching of proof in abstract algebra: making sense of her pedagogical moves. Educ Stud Math 81, 325–345 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9407-9
Gao, J., Yang, L., Zhao, J., Wang, L., Zou, J., Wang, C., & Fan, X. (2020). Comparison of problem-based learning and traditional teaching methods in medical psychology education in China: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One, 15(12), e0243897. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243897
Gillies, R. M., & Haynes, M. (2011). Increasing explanatory behaviour, problem-solving, and reasoning within classes using cooperative group work. Instructional Science, 39(3), 349–366. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23882806
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An Educational Psychology Success Story: Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057
Keziah, A. (2010). A comparative study of problem-based and lecture-based learning in secondary school students’ motivation to learn science.https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:73599714?utm_source=wikipedia
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Kwon, O.N., Park, J.H. & Park, J.S. Cultivating divergent thinking in mathematics through an open-ended approach. Asia Pacific Educ. Rev. 7, 51–61 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03036784
Lo, C.K., Hew, K.F. A critical review of flipped classroom challenges in K-12 education: possible solutions and recommendations for future research. RPTEL 12, 4 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-016-0044-2
Lou, Y., Abrami, P. C., & d’Apollonia, S. (2001). Small Group and Individual Learning with Technology: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 71(3), 449–521. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543071003449
Martínez, T., Díaz, I., Rodríguez, J., & Rodríguez-García, A. (2018). Eficacia del Método Flipped Classroom en la Universidad: Meta-Análisis de la Producción Científica de Impacto. REICE. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación.
Oecd. (2018). Pisa 2018 results - OECD. OECD.org. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/Combined_Executive_Summaries_PISA_2018.pdf
Savasci, F., & Berlin, D. F. (2012). Science teacher beliefs and classroom practice related to constructivism in different school settings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(1), 65–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9262-z
Slavin, R. E. (2014). Making cooperative learning powerful. Educational Leadership, 72(2), 22-26.
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. (1990–2022). National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), Mathematics Assessments. Retrieved from https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/mathematics/?grade=8
Webb, N. M., Nemer, K. M., & Zuniga, S. (2002). Short Circuits or Superconductors? Effects of Group Composition on High-Achieving Students’ Science Assessment Performance. American Educational Research Journal, 39(4), 943–989. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3202451
Zainuddin, Z., Haruna, H., Li, X., Zhang, Y., & Chu, S. (2019). A systematic review of flipped classroom empirical evidence from different fields: what are the gaps and future trends? On the Horizon. https://doi.org/10.1108/OTH-09-2018-0027
Zuber, W.J. (2016), "The flipped classroom, a review of the literature", Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 97-103. https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-05-2015-0039
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2023 Junho Lee; Nicholas Paul
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright holder(s) granted JSR a perpetual, non-exclusive license to distriute & display this article.
