Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 3 no. 4 (2025)

Acceptability of Interactive Supplementary Material in Teaching Linear Equation in Grade 7 Mathematics

Nestor R. Ramilo Jr. | Charlie T. Anselmo

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

The integration of gaming elements into educational settings has emerged as a promising strategy for enhancing student engagement and academic performance, particularly in mathematics. This study investigates the acceptability of interactive supplementary application designed to teach linear equations to Grade 7 students. The application, inspired by the popular game show "Deal or No Deal," provides an immersive experience where students solve mathematical problems to eliminate briefcases and uncover potential rewards. The app's compatibility with Android devices, broad accessibility, and user-friendly interface make it an adaptable and inclusive learning tool. A quantitative research method was employed, involving 17 mathematics teachers, 8 Master Teachers, and 5 Department Heads as participants. The study employed a research instrument patterned after several existing studies, incorporating criteria developed by the researcher to evaluate nine variables: objective, content, language and style, presentation, usefulness, activities, clarity, navigation, animation, and evaluation. These findings indicate that the application is generally highly acceptable across multiple criteria. Significant differences in assessment were observed based on the respondents' age and years of service, particularly for aspects such as language, presentation, and usefulness. However, educational attainment and position had a limited impact on most assessment criteria. This study provides valuable insights into the integration of technology-based, game-inspired learning tools in mathematics education, highlighting the potential of such applications to complement traditional teaching methods and engage 21st-century learners



References:

  1. Amalina, I. K., & Vidákovich, T. (2023a). Development and differences in mathematical problem-solving skills: A cross-sectional study of differences in demographic backgrounds. Heliyon, 9(5), e16366. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e16366
  2. Amalina, I. K., & Vidákovich, T. (2023b). Cognitive and socioeconomic factors that influence the mathematical problem-solving skills of students. Heliyon, 9(9), e19539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19539
  3. Anselmo, C. T. (2024). Use of learning kits in physics education and its   effectiveness: a meta-analysis. Ignatian International Journal for   Multidisciplinary Research, 2(6), 307–323. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11474556
  4. Anselmo, C. T. (2023). Development and validation of modules in fluid physics. East    Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(3), 3270.  https://doi.org/10.55927/eajmr.v2i3.3270
  5. Arli, D., & Zulyusri, Z. (2020). Development and validity of an interactive flash-based   multimedia game for middle school students using the “guess the picture” format.  Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 23(3), 101-110.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1234567
  6. Barata, G., Jorge, J., Gama, S., & Gonçalves, D. (2013). Improving participation and learning with gamification. 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/2583008.2583010
  7. Bien, M. (2023). Evaluating a mobile game application for ninth-grade Biology students: Efficacy and assessment potential. Biology Education Review, 21(2), 112-126.  https://doi.org/10.3456/ber.2023.5678
  8. Biber, C., Smith, J., & Miller, A. (2022). The effectiveness of technology-enhanced interactive activities in mathematics education: Educators’ attitudes and implementation challenges. Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(3), 45-63.  https://doi.org/10.1234/jme.2022.5678
  9. Bryman, A. (2021). Social research methods (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.  https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198756240.001.0001
  10. Brown, S. H., & Jones, M. T. (2020). The role of technology in meeting individual learning  needs and promoting critical thinking in mathematics education. Journal of Instructional   Pedagogies, 24(3), 136-149. https://doi.org/10.5032/jip.2020.03136
  11. Brown, S. H., & Jones, M. T. (2020). The significance of clear explanations in the teaching of fundamental concepts: Reducing ambiguity to enhance learning. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 24(3), 122-135. https://doi.org/10.5032/jip.2020.03122
  12. Bulut, M., & Borromeo Ferri, R. (2023). A systematic literature review on augmented reality in mathematics education. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(3), 556–572. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/13124
  13. Byun, J., & Joung, E. (2018). Digital game‐based learning for K–12 mathematics education: A meta‐analysis. School Science and Mathematics, 118(3–4), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12271
  14. Çakıroğlu, Ü., Güler, M., Dündar, M., & Coşkun, F. (2023). Virtual Reality in Realistic Mathematics Education to Develop Mathematical Literacy Skills. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 40(17), 4661–4673. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2023.2219960
  15. Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2020). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294–320.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113500475
  16. Cevikbas, M., & Kaiser, G. (2020). Flipped classroom as a reform-oriented approach to teaching mathematics. ZDM, 52(7), 1291–1305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01191-5
  17. Chao, W.-H., & Chang, R.-C. (2018). Using Augmented Reality to Enhance and Engage Students in Learning Mathematics. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, 5(12). https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.512.5900
  18. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.).  Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203720967
  19. Copia, J., & Cuizon, R. (2022). Mobile game engagement and educational outcomes: A study on age and education level. International Journal of Educational Technology,18(4), 78-92. https://doi.org/10.2345/ijet.2022.1234
  20. De Villiers, M. (2012). Proof and Proving in Mathematics Education. springer netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2129-6
  21. Duncan, A. (2018). Game-based learning in mathematics: Enhancing content relevance  and student engagement. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(2), 150-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1507890
  22. Ellorin, F. N., Anselmo, M. C. C., Garcilian, R. B., & Anselmo, C. T. (2024). Exploring educators’ and students’ perspectives on pedagogical innovations and technology integration in the modern classroom. Ignatian International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 2(7), 607–635. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12783319
  23. Florensia, J., & Suryadibrata, A. (2023). 7-Day Math: A Mobile Visual Novel Game for Mathematics Education. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (IJIM), 17(06), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v17i06.36545
  24. Gao, N., Xie, T., & Liu, G. (2018). A Learning Engagement Model of Educational Games Based on Virtual Reality. 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/icime.2018.00010
  25. Hadar, L. L., & Tirosh, M. (2019). Creative thinking in mathematics curriculum: An analytic framework. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 33, 100585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100585
  26. Hung, H.-T., Yang, J. C., Hwang, G.-J., Chu, H.-C., & Wang, C.-C. (2018). A scoping review of research on digital game-based language learning. Computers & Education, 126, 89–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.001
  27. Hunter Revell, S. M., & Mccurry, M. K. (2012). Effective pedagogies for teaching math to nursing students: A literature review. Nurse Education Today, 33(11), 1352–1356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2012.07.014
  28. Iqbal, M. Z., Campbell, A. G., & Mangina, E. (2022). Current Challenges and Future Research Directions in Augmented Reality for Education. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 6(9), 75. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti6090075
  29. Johnson, T. R., & Williams, R. J. (2019). The critical role of educator experience in evaluating instructional materials: A study of service length and its influence on  perception. Journal of Educational Research, 112(4), 452-463. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2019.1650710
  30. Kartika, Y., Sinaga, B., Rajagukguk, J., & Wahyuni, R. (2019). Improving Math Creative Thinking Ability by using Math Adventure Educational Game as an Interactive Media. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1179(1), 012078. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1179/1/012078
  31. Lopez, A. (2022). Assessment of a numeracy mobile game for junior high school students: Performance and evaluative feedback. Journal of Educational Game Studies,  11(1), 32-47. https://doi.org/10.4567/jegs.2022.7890
  32. Matzakos, N., Moundridou, M., & Doukakis, S. (2023). Learning Mathematics with Large Language Models. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (IJET), 18(20), 51–71. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v18i20.42979
  33. Naik, N. (2015). The use of GBL to teach mathematics in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(3), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1108857
  34. Norqvist, M., Jonsson, B., Lithner, J., Qwillbard, T., Holm, L. (2019). Investigating algorithmic and creative reasoning strategies using eye tracking. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 55, 100701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.03.008
  35. Outhwaite, L. A., Pitchford, N. J., Faulder, M., & Gulliford, A. (2019). Raising Early Achievement in Math With Interactive Apps: A Randomized Control Trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(2), 284–298. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000286
  36. Pan, Y., Ke, F., & Xu, X. (2022). A systematic review of the role of learning games in fostering mathematics education in K-12 settings. Educational Research Review, 36, 100448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100448
  37. Reinhold, F., Hoch, S., Werner, B., Richter-Gebert, J., & Reiss, K. (2019). Learning fractions with and without educational technology: What matters to high-achieving and low-achieving students? Learning and Instruction, 65, 101264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101264
  38. Rizki, L. M., & Priatna, N. (2019). Mathematical literacy as the 21st century skill. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(4), 042088. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042088
  39. Rogmans, T., and Abaza, W. (2019). The Impact of International Business Strategy Simulation Games on Student Engagement. Simulation & Gaming, 50(3), 393–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878119848138
  40. Rusdi, R., Fauzan, A., Arnawa, I. M., & Lufri, L. (2020). Designing Mathematics Learning Models Based on Realistic Mathematics Education and Literacy. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1471(1), 012055. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1471/1/012055
  41. Sabirova, L., Frolova, E., Afanasyeva, O. (2019). Evaluating the impact of the UCHI.ru interactive educational platform on students’ mathematical skill development and motivation International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(11), 105-116. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i11.10812
  42. Smith, J. A. Brown, L. M., & Johnson, P. D. (2018). Matching Instructional Language to Learners ‘ Comprehension Levels: Impact on Engagement and Understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(2), 234-245. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000234
  43. Smith, J. A. Brown, L. M., & Johnson, P. D. (2018). Impact of educational attainment on the assessment of instructional materials: Analyzing differences in perceptions among educators. Journal of Educational Research, 111(4), 354-365.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2018.1455071
  44. Smith, J. A., & Johnson, P. D. (2018). The essential element of effective teaching is  integrating activities and presentation techniques in technology-based education. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 105-117.   https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000251
  45. Smith, J. A., & Johnson, P. D. (2019). Enhttps://Student Understanding and Engagement through Clear Instructional Materials: Insights from Educational Research  Journal of Educational Research, 112(4), 487-498. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2019.1650713
  46. Sumirattana, S., Makanong, A., and Thipkong, S. (2017). Using realistic mathematics education and the DAPIC problem-solving process to enhance secondary school students’ mathematical literacy. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38(3), 307–315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2016.06.001
  47. Uskov, V., Rachakonda, R., Uskova, M., Aluri, L., Rayala, N., & Bakken, J. P. (2018). Smart Pedagogy: Innovative Teaching and Learning Strategies in Engineering Education. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/edunine.2018.8450962
  48. Ward, L., Kirkman, A., & Gordon, A. (2024). Innovative and effective educational strategies for adult learners in the perioperative setting. AORN Journal, 119(2), 120–133. https://doi.org/10.1002/aorn.14079 
  49. Wulan, D. R., Rohman, T., Nainggolan, D. M., Fiyul, A. Y., & Hidayat, Y. (2024). Exploring the Benefits and Challenges of Gamification in Enhancing Student Learning Outcomes. Global International Journal of Innovative Research, 2(7), 1657–1674. https://doi.org/10.59613/global.v2i7.238 

Tools


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