Home⇛Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives⇛vol. 4 no. 4 (2026)

Development and Validation of Learning Intervention Material in Adding and Subtracting Integers Using Modified ADDIE Model

Josua B. Corpuz | Sheryl Irene Manaligod

Discipline: Teacher Training

 

Abstract:

Persistent challenges in learning integer operations continue to hinder foundational numeracy among Filipino learners, as evidenced in both classroom assessments and national learning indicators. While several instructional programs exist, there remains a lack of systematically designed and validated intervention materials that directly address the most common misconceptions in integer addition and subtraction. This gap limits teachers’ ability to remediate conceptual errors using evidence-based tools. The present study aimed to develop, validate, and evaluate a contextualized learning intervention material—the COCO-Abacus—to strengthen Grade 7 learners’ understanding of integer operations. Guided by a modified ADDIE model, the study employed a developmental research design integrating needs analysis, expert validation, classroom implementation, and evaluation. Data collection involved an established integer operations test, a content validation instrument, and a learner motivation survey. Through this process, the intervention was refined and implemented to assess its effectiveness and acceptability. Findings indicated that the COCO-Abacus effectively addressed key misconceptions involving signs, directionality, and zero-pair reasoning. Learners demonstrated improved conceptual understanding and procedural fluency, while experts affirmed the material’s clarity, accuracy, and pedagogical soundness. Learners also reported strong engagement and perceived the material as useful. The study concludes that a representation-rich, manipulative-based approach can meaningfully enhance students’ mastery of integer operations. It is recommended that similar evidence-based materials be integrated into mathematics instruction to strengthen foundational numeracy and support diverse learning needs.



References:

  1. American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0000165-000
  2. Berkseth, H. (2013). The effectiveness of manipulatives in the elementary school classroom. Wayne State University. https://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/honorstheses/10
  3. Bouchrika, I. (2026). The ADDIE model explained: Evolution, steps, and applications for 2026. Research.com. https://research.com/education/the-addie-model
  4. Branch, R.M. (2009). Instructional design: The ADDIE approach. Springer.
  5. Carbonneau, K.J., Marley, S.C., & Selig, J.P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching Mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031084
  6. Cook, D., & Pankratz, V.S. (2024). Validation of the Instructional Materials Motivation Survey among medicine resident physicians [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 1 approved with reservations]. MedEdPublish, 14(58). https://doi.org/10.12688/mep.20408.1
  7. Field, A.P. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage.
  8. Gersten, R., Chard, D., Jayanthi, M., Baker, S., Morphy, P., & Flojo, J. (2009). A meta-analysis of mathematics instructional interventions for students with learning disabilities: A technical report. Los Alamitos, CA: Instructional Research Group.
  9. Keller, J. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1250-3
  10. Khalid, M., & Embong, Z. (2019). Sources and possible causes of errors and misconceptions in operations of integers. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15.
  11. https://tinyurl.com/yn3hw6tb
  12. Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
  13. Lasky, J. (2024). ADDIE model. Retrieved February 9, 2026, from EBSCO Research Starters: Education. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/education/addie-model
  14. Loorbach, N., Peters, O., Karreman, J., & Steehouder, M. (2014). Validation of the Instructional Materials Motivation Survey (IMMS) in a self-directed instructional setting aimed at working with technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(1), 204–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12138
  15. Manaligod, S.I. (2023). The quality elements of flexible learning: Basis for localized modular development for teachers and students. Journal for Educators, Teachers and Trainers, 14(2), 510– 540. http://dx.doi.org/10.47750/jett.2023.14.02.047
  16. McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2025). Educational design research for relevant & robust scholarship. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 37(2), 614–638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528- 025-09456-2
  17. Molenda, M. (2003). In search of the elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement, 42(5), 34–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4930420508
  18. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. https://tinyurl.com/5d7kect8
  19. Nurnberger-Haag, J., Kratky, J., & Karpinski, A. (2022). The Integer Test of Primary Operations: A practical and validated. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/11471
  20. OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume 1): The state of learning outcomes. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
  21. Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education. Grossman Publishers.
  22. Polit, D., & Beck, C. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing and Health, 29(5), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
  23. Rosyidah, A.N., Maulyda, M.A., Jiwandono, I.S., Oktaviyanti, I., & Gunawan, G. (2021). Misconceptions and errors in integer operations: A study in preservice elementary school teachers (PGSD). Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1779(1). doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1779/1/012078
  24. Sahat, N., Tengah, K.A., & Prahmana, R.C.I. (2018). The teaching and learning of addition and subtraction of integers through manipulative in Brunei Darussalam. The 6th South East Asia Design Research International Conference, 1088(1). doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1088/1/012024
  25. Seigler, R.S., & Lortie-Forgues, H. (2015). Conceptual knowledge of fraction arithmetic. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(2), 909–918. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000025
  26. von Davier, M., Kennedy, A., Reynolds, K., Fishbein, B., Khorramdel, L., Aldrich, C., Bookbinder, A., Ummugal, B., & Yin, L. (2024). TIMSS 2023 international results in Mathematics and Science. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). https://tinyurl.com/4bkmp2p2
  27. Witzel, B., Mercer, C., & Miller, M.D. (2003). Teaching algebra to students with learning difficulties: An investigation of an explicit instruction model. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(2), 121–131. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1111/1540-5826.00068
  28. Witzel, B., Riccomini, P., & Schneider, E. (2008). Implementing CRA with secondary students with learning disabilities in mathematics. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(5), 270–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451208314734

Tools


Copyright © 2026  KITE Digital Educational Solutions |  Exclusively distributed by CE-Logic