Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 42 no. 2 (2025)

Learning Activity Sheet (LAS) on the Proficiency Level in Mathematical Reasoning of Grade 10 Students

Alyssa Marie Ibañez

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

Mathematical reasoning, the cognitive process of drawing logical conclusions and solving problems based on mathematical concepts, is fundamental for academic success and lifelong learning. This study investigated the proficiency levels in mathematical reasoning among Grade 10 students in a private secondary school in Bacolod City, Philippines. Focusing on four domains: algebraic, geometric, proportional, and statistical reasoning, the study employed a quasi-experimental, one-group pretest–posttest design. A total of 215 students initially participated in the pre-test, after which the section with the lowest average score underwent a two-week intervention using Learning Activity Sheets (LAS). The same assessment tool was administered as a post-test to measure improvements. Quantitative results revealed significant gains in algebraic, geometric, and proportional reasoning, with geometric reasoning showing the most notable improvement. Statistical reasoning improved modestly, remaining the most challenging domain for many students. Student feedback further supported the effectiveness of the LAS, highlighting improved comprehension, structured problem-solving, and better recall of key concepts. The study concluded that well-designed LAS interventions can effectively improve students’ reasoning skills and may serve as a model for classroom-based instructional strategies.



References:

  1. Abaño, J. T., Binondo, J. N., Fortuna, C. M., Guinang, H., Medora, J. C., & Puyod, S. J. (2024). Effectiveness of integrating real-life problems into mathematical concepts. International Multidisciplinary Journal of Research for Innovation, Sustainability, And Excellence (IMJRISE), 90–91. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11144435
  2. Acido, J., & Caballes, D. (2023). Assessing educational progress: a comparative analysis of pisa results (2018 vs. 2022) and hdi correlation in the philippines. In International Journal of Novel Research and Development, International Journal of Novel Research and Development (Vol. 8, Issue 12, p. d840) [Journal-article]. https://www.ijnrd.org/papers/IJNRD2312395.pdf
  3. Alabi, M. (2024, October 30). Visual Learning: The Power of Visual Aids and Multimedia. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/385662029
  4. Al-Omari, M., & Al-Jararha, A. (2024). Advancing survey sampling efficiency under stratified random sampling and post-stratification: leveraging symmetry for enhanced estimation accuracy in the prediction of exam scores. Symmetry, 16(5), 604. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16050604
  5. Anasagasti, J., Berciano, A., & Izagirre, A. (2023). A comparison of the effects of different methodologies on the statistics learning profiles of prospective primary education teachers from a gender perspective. Journal on Mathematics Education, 14(4), 741–756. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v14i4.pp741-756
  6. Azmay, N. a. M. N., Rosli, R., Maat, S. M., & Mahmud, M. S. (2023). Educational research trends on statistical reasoning and statistical thinking: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.6007/ijarped/v12-i2/16921
  7. Benedicto, P. N., & Andrade, R. (2022). Problem-based learning strategies and critical thinking skills among pre-service teachers. International Journal of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics, 2(2), 1–28.
  8. Ben-Zvi, D., & Garfield, J. (Eds.). (2004). The challenge of developing statistical literacy, reasoning and thinking. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  9. Ben-Zvi, D., University of Haifa, & University of Minnesota. (2011). Statistical reasoning learning environment. In Garfield & Ben-Zvi, EM TEIA Revista De Educação Matemática E Tecnológica Iberoamericana (Vol. 2, Issue 2).
  10. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2022). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE.
  11. Enoch, S. K., Derick, A. A., & Mahama, O. A. (2024). Exploring gender disparity in geometry learning using van hiele’s model: a quasi-experimental study of final year male and female students’ performance. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, VIII(III), 2452–2463. https://doi.org/10.47772/ijriss.2024.803205
  12. Fitriawan, D., Siregar, N., & Rifat, M. (2025). Gender differences in visual mathematical thinking: A case study on algebra problem solving and e-learning integration using edlink. Al-Jabar: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 16(1), 169-181. https://doi.org/10.24042/ajpm.v16i1.26768
  13. Fowler, F. J., Jr. (2023). Survey research methods (6th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  14. Etikan, I. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
  15. Gok, S., & Goldstone, R. L. (2024). How do students reason about statistical sampling with computer simulations? An integrative review from a grounded cognition perspective. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 9–33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-024-00561-x
  16. Han, D., Huang, Q., Wang, B., & Chen, G. (2023). Improving middle school students’ geometry problem solving ability through hands-on experience: An fNIRS study. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1126047. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1126047
  17. Harahap, P. A., Dahlan, J. A., Purniati, T., & Mathematics Education, FFMIPA, Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia. (2025). Mathematical critical thinking skills in terms of gender: a systematic literature review. In The Fourth International Conference on Government Education Management and Tourism (ICoGEMT-4) [Journal-article].
  18. Hariyanti, F., Budayasa, K., & Setianingsih, R. (2025). The role of AI in enhancing statistical literacy: A systematic review in education. Multidisciplinary Reviews, 8(1), e2025376. https://doi.org/10.31893/multirev.2025376
  19. Hofileña, E. A., & Bearneza, F. J. D. (2023). Reconstructed Learning Activity Sheets (LAS): Its effect on students’ performance in mathematics. Journal of Humanities and Education Development, 5(1), 25–30. https://doi.org/10.22161/jhed.5.1.5
  20. Insorio, A. O., Librada, A. R. P., San Pedro College of Business Administration/San Pedro Relocation Center National High School-Main Campus, & San Pedro Relocation Center National High School-Main Campus. (2024). Differentiated instruction in mathematics classes: increasing student’s mathematics performance and engagement in statistics and probability. Puissant, 5, 2047–2073. https://puissant.stepacademic.net
  21. Iqbal, K., Raza, S. M. M., Mahmood, T., & Riaz, M. (2024). Exploring mixture estimators in stratified random sampling. PLOS ONE, 19(9), e0307607. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307607
  22. Etikan, I. (2016b). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
  23. Ismail, R. N., & Arnawa, I. M. (2018). Improving students’ reasoning and communication mathematical ability by applying contextual approach of the 21st century at a junior high school in Padang. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Mathematics and Mathematics Education 2018 (ICM2E 2018) (pp. 158–161). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/icm2e-18.2018.34
  24. Kabinaa, S., Derick, A. A., & Mahama, O. A. (2024). Exploring gender disparity in geometry learning using van hiele’s model: a quasi-experimental study of final year male and female students’ performance. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 8(3), 2452–2463. https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.803205
  25. Khasawneh, A. A., Al-Barakat, A. A., & Almahmoud, S. A. (2022). The effect of error analysis-based learning on proportional reasoning ability of seventh-grade students. Frontiers in Education, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.899288
  26. Kurniyasih, N., & Nugraheni, E. A. (2023). Algebra reasoning ability viewed from student gender differences. Mathline Jurnal Matematika Dan Pendidikan Matematika, 8(3), 1091–1104. https://doi.org/10.31943/mathline.v8i3.476
  27. Mafada, A. A., Kusmayadi, T. A., & Fitriana, L. (2019). Identification of mathematical reasoning ability in solving higher order thinking skills problems.
  28. Mardika, F., & Mahmudi, A. (2021). An analysis of proportional reasoning ability of junior high school students. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 8(1), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.21831/jrpm.v8i1.14995
  29. Marsitin, R., Sa’dijah, C., Susiswo, S., & Chandra, T. D. (2022). Creative mathematical reasoning process of climber students in solving higher order thinking skills geometry problems. TEM Journal, 1877–1886. https://doi.org/10.18421/tem114-56
  30. Mbusi, N., & Luneta, K. (2023). Implementation of an intervention program to enhance student teachers’ active learning in transformation geometry. SAGE Open, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231179440
  31. Miller, C. L., & Manderfeld, M. (2021b, June 1). Constructivism. Pressbooks. https://mlpp.pressbooks.pub/mavlearn/chapter/constructivism/?utm_source
  32. Misnasanti, N., Utami, R. W., & Suwanto, F. R. (2017). Problem based learning to improve proportional reasoning of students in mathematics learning. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1868, 050002. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4995129
  33. Mukuka, A., Mutemwa, D. K., & Mulenga, H. M. (2023). Investigating the relationship between learners’ mathematical reasoning and conceptual understanding in algebra. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(4), em2252. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/110784
  34. Moukhliss, M., Khalil, Z. M., Latifi, M., Abouhanifa, S., & Achtaich, N. (2025). Analysis of students’ reasoning when solving an algebraic generalisation activity. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 14(2), 40. https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2025-0029
  35. Munda, N., Endrinal, J. R., & Nequinto, M. (2024). Effectiveness of project COUNTS in improving students’ numeracy skills. International Journal of Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics, 4(1), 22–41. https://doi.org/10.53378/353038
  36. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. In National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. https://www.nctm.org/uploadedFiles/Standards_and_Positions/PSSM_ExecutiveSummary.pdf
  37. Noves, J. R., & Palomares, N. R. (2024). Mathematical literacy and reasoning skills of            grade 10. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal.
  38. Nunes, Terezinha. (2009). Development of Math Capabilities and Confidence in Primary School. Dept. for Children, Schools and Families.
  39. Oco, R. M., Jade, S., & Sabasaje, N. (2023). Mathematical skills and performance. In International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Publications (IJMRAP) (Vol. 6, Issue 2). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373110709
  40. OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Assessment and Analytical Framework [Report]. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en
  41. Onoshakpokaiye, O. E. (2023). An overview of reasoning ability in mathematics and mathematics achievement of students in tertiary institution. IJIET (International Journal of Indonesian Education and Teaching), 7(2), 309–318.       https://doi.org/10.24071/ijiet.v7i2.5988
  42. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
  43. Oslington, G., Mulligan, J., Van Bergen, P., & The Author(s). (2023). Shifts in students’ predictive reasoning from data tables in years 3 and 4. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 36, 547–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-023-00460-2
  44. Palomares-Ruiz, A., & García-Perales, R. (2020). Math performance and sex: the predictive capacity of self-efficacy, interest and motivation for learning mathematics. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01879
  45. PISA 2022: Mathematics Framework. (n.d.). https://pisa2022-maths.oecd.org/ca/index.html
  46. PISA 2018 Results (Volume I) What Students Know and Can Do. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
  47. PISA 2022 Results Factsheets Philippines PUBE. (2023). https://oecdch.art/a40de1dbaf/C266.
  48. Prakash Chand, S. (2023). Constructivism in education: exploring the contributions of piaget, vygotsky, and bruner. International Journal of Science and Research   (IJSR), 12(7), 274–278. https://doi.org/10.21275/sr23630021800
  49. Putra, F. G., Saregar, A., Diani, R., Misbah, M., Widyawati, S., & Imama, K. (2024).  Enhancing mathematical reasoning: role of the search, solve, create, and share learning. Journal of Education and Learning, 18(3), 967–975.         https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v18i3.21399
  50. Ramadhani, R., Saragih, S., & Napitupulu, E. E. (2022). Exploration of students’ statistical reasoning ability in the context of ethnomathematics: a study of the rasch model. Mathematics Teaching Research Journal, 14(1), 138
  51. Rodríguez, S., Regueiro, B., Piñeiro, I., Estévez, I., & Valle, A. (2020). Gender differences in mathematics motivation: differential effects on performance in primary education. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03050
  52. Rozgonjuk, D., Kraav, T., Mikkor, K., Orav-Puurand, K., & Täht, K. (2020). Mathematics anxiety among STEM and social sciences students: the roles of mathematics self-efficacy, and deep and surface approach to learning. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00246-z
  53. Saguin, E. D., Inocian, R. B., & Un, J. L. B. (2020). Contextualized differentiated instruction in contemporary issues vis-à-vis the development of its COVID-19 model. Journal of Research Policy & Practice of Teachers & Teacher Education, 10(2), 18–31. https://doi.org/10.37134/jrpptte.vol10.2.2.2020
  54. Shi, L., Dong, L., Zhao, W., & Tan, D. (2023). Improving middle school students’ geometry problem solving ability through hands-on experience: An fNIRS study. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1126047 
  55. Sobita Devi, K., & Professor, A. (2019). Constructivist approach to learning based on the concepts of jean piaget and lev vygotsky an analytical overview.
  56. Svane, R. P., Willemsen, M. M., Bleses, D., Krøjgaard, P., Verner, M., & Nielsen, H. S. (2023). A systematic literature review of math interventions across educational settings from early childhood education to high school. Frontiers in Education, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1229849
  57. Sukirwan, Darhim, D., & Herman, T. (2018). Analysis of students’ mathematical reasoning. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 948(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/948/1/012036
  58. Tran Thuy, H., Le Phuoc, S., University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University, Hue City, Viet Nam, & University of Law, Hue University, Hue City, Viet Nam. (2023). Building framework for assessing students’ statistical reasoning in solving real-life medical problems. In Mathematics Teaching Research Journal (Vol. 15, Issue 4).

Tools


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