Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 3 no. 3 (2025)

Progressivism-Based Instruction in Mathematics: A Review of Effects on Conceptual Understanding, Procedural Knowledge, and Student Attitudes

Joni Mitchel D. Mallari

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

This narrative review examines the application and impact of progressivism-based instruction in mathematics, focusing on conceptual understanding, procedural knowledge, and student attitudes. Drawing on foundational works by John Dewey, Jean Piaget, and other progressive theorists, the review highlights the key tenets of progressivism, including student-centered learning, inquiry-driven activities, and collaborative problem-solving. Empirical studies suggest that adopting progressivist strategies can deepen students’ conceptual comprehension and enhance their motivation and confidence in mathematics. Despite these benefits, questions persist about maintaining sufficient attention to procedural fluency—an area where traditional approaches are often more explicit. Some research indicates that students may develop strong conceptual frameworks under progressive methods but may not always receive the systematic practice needed for computational efficiency or high-stakes examinations. Consequently, certain studies advocate blended pedagogies that incorporate progressive and explicit procedural strategies to balance deeper cognitive engagement and mastery of essential skills. Overall, this review underscores the transformative potential of progressivism in mathematics education while identifying gaps in research on how best to harmonize conceptual rigor with procedural fluency, thus guiding future inquiries and instructional design.



References:

  1. Andal, S.B., & Andrade, R.R. (2022). Exploring students’ procedural fluency and written adaptive reasoning skills in solving open-ended problems, International Journal of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics, 2(1), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.53378/352872
  2. Anderson, W. G. (1973). Progressivism: An historiographical essay. The History Teacher, 6(3), 427-452. https://www.jstor.org/stable/492218
  3. Asmida, A., Sakidin, S., & Hartoyo, A. (2018). Developing the mathematics conceptual understanding and procedural fluency through didactical anticipatory approach equipped with teaching AIDS. Journal Of Education Teaching and Learning, 3(2), 367. http://dx.doi.org/10.26737/jetl.v3i2.796
  4. Bardina, S. (2017). Reconciliation of natural and social: Rethinking Rousseau’s educational theory. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 49(14), 1381-1391. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23767449
  5. Bell, R., & Cui, J. (2023). Addressing progressive educational reforms: Fusing acquisition approaches and participation in Chinese entrepreneurship education. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(1), 100748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100748
  6. Bisai, S., & Singh, S. (2020). Towards a Holistic and Inclusive Pedagogy for Students from Diverse Linguistic Backgrounds. TEFLIN Journal: A Publication on the Teaching & Learning of English, 31(1), 139-161. http://dx.doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v31i1/139-161
  7. Braithwaite, D. W., & Sprague, L. (2021). Conceptual Knowledge, Procedural Knowledge, and Metacognition in Routine and Nonroutine Problem Solving. Cognitive Science, 45(10), e13048. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.13048
  8. Bucella, A. (2022). How to help students build deep understanding of math concepts. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/35f3dj7r
  9. Bui, P.U., Duong, H.T., Nguyen, P.L., & Le Nguyen, P.T. (2021). The effectiveness of applying realistic mathematics education approach in teaching statistics in grade 7 to students’ mathematical skills. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 8(2), 185-197. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2021.82.185.197
  10. Capuno, R., Revalde, H., Etcuban, J.O., Aventuna, M., Medio, G., Demeterio, R.A. (2019). Facilitating learning Mathematics through the use of instructional media. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(3), 677-688. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5785
  11. Chigonga, B. (2020). Formative Assessment in Mathematics Education in the Twenty-First Century. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.88996
  12. Danquah, P.A. (2017). Conceptual and procedural instruction: Mathematical teaching approaches and strategies in an urban middle school. All Theses and Dissertations, 101. https://dune.une.edu/theses/101
  13. Dekker, T. J. (2020). Teaching critical thinking through engagement with multiplicity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, 100701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100701
  14. Demosthenous, E., & Christou, C. (2021). Mathematics Classroom Assessment: A Framework for Designing Assessment Tasks and Interpreting Students’ Responses. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 11(3), 1088-1106. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe11030081
  15. Dewey, J. (1930). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan.
  16. Dewey, J. (1938). The determination of ultimate values or aims through antecedent or a priori speculation or through pragmatic or empirical inquiry. Teachers College Record, 39(10), 471-485. https://doi.org/10.1177/0161468138039010
  17. Ebby, C.B., Hess, B., Pecora, L., & Valerio, J. (2024). Facilitating collaborative inquiry into practice around artifacts of mathematics teaching, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-024-09649-z
  18. Evans, T., & Dietrich, H. (2022). Inquiry-based mathematics education: a call for reform in tertiary education seems unjustified. STEM Education, 2(3), 221-244. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2022014
  19. Flemig, S., & McNair, L. (2022). Nature, Nurture and the Space Between: Lessons from Froebel for the Early Years. Global Education Review, 9(2), 51-66. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1353648
  20. Garrett, T. (2008). Student-centered classroom management: A case study of three elementary teachers. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 43(1), 34-47. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ829018.pdf
  21. Gay, E. (2022). Project-based learning in the mathematics classroom. Honors Theses, 109. https://digitalcommons.assumption.edu/honorstheses/101/
  22. Gillett-Swan, J. (2017). The challenges of online learning: Supporting and engaging the isolated learner. Journal of Learning Design, 10(1), 20-30. https://doi.org/10.5204/jld.v9i3.293
  23. Hwang, S., & Son, T. (2021). Students’ attitude toward mathematics and its relationship with mathematics achievement. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 8(3), 272-280. https://doi.org/10.20448/journal.509.2021.83.272.280
  24. Kang, S. (2016). Spaced repetition promotes efficient and effective learning: Policy implications for instruction, Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2372732215624708
  25. Karaman, P. (2021). The effect of formative assessment practices on student learning: A meta-analysis study. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 8(4), 801-817. https://doi.org/10.21449/ijate.870300
  26. Kaur, T., & Prendergast, M. (2022). Students’ perceptions of mathematics writing and its impact on their enjoyment and self-confidence. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 41(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrab008
  27. Khadim, M., Afzal, A., & Rafiq, S. (2023). Aligning curriculum with the philosophy of progressivism: A comprehensive analysis. Journal of Social Sciences Development, 2(2), 2959-4405. http://dx.doi.org/10.53664/JSSD/02-02-2023-03-152-162
  28. Labaree, D. F. (2005). Progressivism, schools and schools of education: An American romance. Paedagogica historica, 41(1-2), 275-288. https://doi.org/10.1080/0030923042000335583
  29. Lillard, A. S. (2020). Montessori as an alternative early childhood education. Early Child Development and Care, 191(7–8), 1196–1206. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2020.1832998
  30. Lin, C., & Chang, Y. (2021). A Progressive Three-Stage Teaching Method Using Interactive Classroom Activities to Improve Learning Motivation in Computer Networking Courses. Sustainability, 14(9), 5191. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095191
  31. Manandhar, N.K., Pant, B.P., & Dawadi, S.D. (2022). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of students of Nepal in Algebra: A mixed method study. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 3(1), ep22005. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/11723
  32. Mat, N.C., & Jamaludin, K. (2024). Effectiveness of practices and applications of student-centered teaching and learning in primary schools: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 13(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v13-i3/21733
  33. McDowell, M. (2023). Blending direct instruction and inquiry-based learning. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/ye59hm79
  34. McNair, L. J., & Powell, S. (2021). Friedrich Froebel: a path least trodden. Early Child Development and Care, 191(7-8), 1175-1185. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2020.1803299
  35. Niu, W., Cheng, L., Duan, D., & Zhang, Q. (2022). Impact of Perceived Supportive Learning Environment on Mathematical Achievement: The Mediating Roles of Autonomous Self-Regulation and Creative Thinking. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 781594. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.781594
  36. Noreen, R., & Rana, A.M.K. (2019). Activity-based teaching versus traditional method of teaching in mathematics at elementary level. Bulletin of Education and Research, 41(2), 145-159. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1229426.pdf
  37. Pakpahan, F. H., & Saragih, M. (2022). Theory of cognitive development by jean Piaget. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 55-60. https://doi.org/10.52622/joal.v2i2.79
  38. Park, J. (2022). Pre-Service Teachers’ Project-Based Instruction with Mathematics Problem-Solving. Education Sciences, 12(8), 526. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12080526
  39. Pokhrel, T. (2018). Activity based mathematics instruction: Experiences in addressing the 21st-century skills. Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(1), 46-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.26711/007577152790020
  40. Siller, H., & Ahmad, S. (2024). Analyzing the impact of collaborative learning approach on grade six students’ mathematics achievement and attitude towards mathematics, EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(2), em2395. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14153
  41. Singh, A. (2023). Blended learning vs. traditional learning: A detailed overview of the two approaches. Retrieved from https://tinyurl.com/9s7rjuku
  42. Sta, P. (2021). The Critique of the Critical Critique of Critical Pedagogy: Freire, Suchodolski and the materialist pedagogy of emancipation. Critical Education, 12(4). https://doi.org/10.14288/ce.v12i4.186502
  43. Tippett, T.P., & Lee, J.J. (2019). Looking back to move forward: Understanding progressive education in the 21st century. Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education, 79-98. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1285555.pdf
  44. Williams, M. K. (2017). John Dewey in the 21st century. Journal of Inquiry and Action in Education, 9(1), 7. https://digitalcommons.buffalostate.edu/jiae/vol9/iss1/7/

Tools


Copyright © 2025  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic