Article Sidebar

Download
Statistic
Read Counter : 0

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

Representation plays a central role in mathematical problem solving, serving as a cognitive bridge between abstract concepts and concrete understanding. However, while prior studies have examined the effects of scaffolding in mathematics learning, limited attention has been given to the comparative impact of single versus multiple online representations, particularly in relation to students’ cognitive processes such as eye movement behavior. This study addresses this gap by investigating the effectiveness of online single and multiple representation scaffolding in enhancing students’ mathematical concept mastery, problem-solving performance, and eye movement patterns during problem-solving tasks. A quasi-experimental design was employed involving 300 high school students, randomly assigned to either a multiple representation scaffolding group (n = 150) or a single representation scaffolding group (n = 150). Data were analyzed using one-way MANCOVA, ANCOVA, MANOVA, and ANOVA tests. The results revealed that students who received multiple representation scaffolding outperformed their peers in mastering mathematical concepts, solving complex problems—including advanced-level tasks—and demonstrating more efficient visual processing, indicated by shorter fixation durations and rereading times. Furthermore, these students exhibited more adaptive strategies across varying question types (basic, combination, and advanced). The findings highlight the pedagogical advantage of using multiple representation scaffolding in online mathematics instruction, suggesting that it offers more comprehensive cognitive support and promotes deeper conceptual understanding. This study contributes to the growing body of research on digital scaffolding by evidencing the cognitive and performance-related benefits of multimodal representation and underscores its potential to inform the design of technology-enhanced mathematics learning environments.

Keywords

Mathematical Conception Mathematical Problem Solving Multiple Representation Scaffolding Online Scaffolding Single Representation Scaffolding

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Fitria, W., Susilana, R., Supriatna, N., & Rusman. (2025). Investigation of the impact online single and multiple representation scaffolding on mathematical concept mastery and mathematical problem-solving skill. Journal on Mathematics Education, 16(2), 709–728. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v16i2.pp709-728
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Avcı, C., & Deniz, M. N. (2022). Computational thinking: early childhood teachers’ and prospective teachers’ preconceptions and self-efficacy. Education and Information Technologies, 27(8), 11689–11713. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11078-5
  2. Bliss, K. M., Galluzzo, B. J., Kavanagh, K. R., & Skufa, J. D. (2019). Incorporating Mathematical Modeling into the Undergraduate Curriculum: What the GAIMME Report Offers Faculty. Primus, 29(10), 1101–1118. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2018.1488787
  3. Borchers, C., Fleischer, H., Yaron, D. J., McLaren, B. M., Scheiter, K., Aleven, V., & Schanze, S. (2025). Problem-Solving Strategies in Stoichiometry Across Two Intelligent Tutoring Systems: A Cross-National Study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10197-7
  4. Brandsæter, A., & Berge, R. L. (2025). Promoting mathematical competence development through programming activities. Educational Studies in Mathematics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10380-y
  5. Calor, S. M., Dekker, R., van Drie, J. P., & Volman, M. L. L. (2022). Scaffolding small groups at the group level: Improving the scaffolding behavior of mathematics teachers during mathematical discussions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 31(3), 369–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2021.2024834
  6. Capone, R. (2022). Blended Learning and Student-centered Active Learning Environment: a Case Study with STEM Undergraduate Students. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 22(1), 210–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42330-022-00195-5
  7. Capone, R., Adesso, M. G., Del Regno, F., Lombardi, L., & Tortoriello, F. S. (2021). Mathematical competencies: a case study on semiotic systems and argumentation in an Italian High School. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(6), 896–911. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1726517
  8. Chinofunga, M. D., Chigeza, P., & Taylor, S. (2024). How can procedural flowcharts support the development of mathematics problem-solving skills? In Mathematics Education Research Journal (Issue 0123456789). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-024-00483-3
  9. Doruk, M., & Doruk, G. (2022). Students’ ability to determine the truth value of mathematical propositions in the context of operation meanings. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(4), 753–786. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1782494
  10. Faulkner, F., Breen, C., Prendergast, M., & Carr, M. (2023). Profiling mathematical procedural and problem-solving skills of undergraduate students following a new mathematics curriculum. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 54(2), 220–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1953625
  11. Fitzsimons, A., & Ní Fhloinn, E. (2023). The cops model for collaborative problem-solving in mathematics. Irish Educational Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2023.2189137
  12. Geraniou, E., Jankvist, U. T., Elicer, R., Tamborg, A. L., & Misfeldt, M. (2024). Towards a definition of “mathematical digital competency for teaching.” ZDM - Mathematics Education, 56(4), 625–637. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01585-9
  13. Haataja, E. S. H., Koskinen-Salmia, A., Salonen, V., Toivanen, M., & Hannula, M. S. (2024). Student visual attention during group instruction phases in collaborative geometry problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10337-1
  14. Herold-blasius, R. (2024). Investigations in Mathematics Learning The role of strategy keys in enhancing heuristics and self-regulation in mathematical problem-solving : A qualitative , explorative , and type-building study with primary school students. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 00(00), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/19477503.2024.2430135
  15. Hidajat, F. A. (2023). Augmented reality applications for mathematical creativity: a systematic review. In Journal of Computers in Education (Vol. 11, Issue 4). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-023-00287-7
  16. Hinton, V. M., & Flores, M. M. (2019). The Effects of the Concrete-Representational-Abstract Sequence for Students at Risk for Mathematics Failure. Journal of Behavioral Education, 28(4), 493–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10864-018-09316-3
  17. Huang, X., Lo, C. K., He, J., & Xu, S. (2024). Scaffolding ‑ informed design of open educational resources in Chinese secondary school mathematics : insights from multi ‑ cycle formative evaluation. Smart Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00337-2
  18. Iwuanyanwu, P. N., & Ogunniyi, M. B. (2020). Effects of Dialogical Argumentation Instructional Model on Pre-service Teachers’ Ability to Solve Conceptual Mathematical Problems in Physics. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 24(1), 129–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2020.1748325
  19. Kohen, Z. (2019). Informed integration of IWB technology, incorporated with exposure to varied mathematics problem-solving skills: its effect on students’ real-time emotions. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(8), 1128–1151. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1562119
  20. Kohen, Z. (2025). Structured mathematical modelling in an authentic scientific-engineering context. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-025-01654-7
  21. Leitner, A., & Gabel, M. (2024). Students’ Self-work During Lectures in Calculus Courses – Cognitive and Affective Effects of a Small Intervention. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-024-00249-z
  22. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38 (1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3801_6
  23. Martinez, B. L., Sweeder, R. D., VandenPlas, J. R., & Herrington, D. G. (2021). Improving conceptual understanding of gas behavior through the use of screencasts and simulations. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00261-0
  24. Nückles, M. (2021). Investigating Visual Perception in Teaching and Learning with Advanced Eye-Tracking Methodologies: Rewards and Challenges of an Innovative Research Paradigm. Educational Psychology Review, 33(1), 149–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09567-5
  25. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372.
  26. Partanen, P., Jansson, B., & Sundin, Ö. (2020). Fluid reasoning, working memory and planning ability in assessment of risk for mathematical difficulties. Educational Psychology in Practice, 36(3), 229–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2020.1736518
  27. Pereda, Á., José, L., & González, A. (2025). Enhancing mathematics performance in primary education : The impact of personalized learning on fractions and decimal numbers. In Education and Information Technologies (Issue 0123456789). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13428-5
  28. Peretz, R., Tal, M., Akiri, E., Dori, D., & Dori, Y. J. (2023). Fostering engineering and science students’ and teachers’ systems thinking and conceptual modeling skills. In Instructional Science (Vol. 51, Issue 3). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09625-9
  29. Rezat, S., Malik, S., & Leifeld, M. (2022). Scaffolding Close Reading of Mathematical Text in Pre-service Primary Teacher Education at the Tertiary Level: Design and Evaluation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20, 215–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-022-10309-y
  30. Rodríguez-Nieto, C. A., Font Moll, V., Borji, V., & Rodríguez-Vásquez, F. M. (2022). Mathematical connections from a networking of theories between extended theory of mathematical connections and onto-semiotic approach. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(9), 2364–2390. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1875071
  31. Rohde Poole, S. B. (2022). Designing and Teaching an Undergraduate Mathematical Modeling Course for Mathematics Majors and Minors. Primus, 32(7), 764–784. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2021.1931995
  32. Sidenvall, J., Granberg, C., Lithner, J., & Palmberg, B. (2022). Supporting teachers in supporting students’ mathematical problem solving. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2022.2151067
  33. Siller, H. S., Nitzan-Tamar, O., & Kohen, Z. (2023). Scaffolding practices for modelling instruction in STEM-related contexts: insights from expert and novice teachers. ZDM - Mathematics Education, 55(7), 1351–1364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01529-9
  34. Smit, R., Dober, H., Hess, K., Bachmann, P., & Birri, T. (2023). Supporting primary students’ mathematical reasoning practice: the effects of formative feedback and the mediating role of self-efficacy. Research in Mathematics Education, 25(3), 277–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2022.2062780
  35. Smith, J. M., & Mancy, R. (2018). Exploring the relationship between metacognitive and collaborative talk during group mathematical problem-solving–what do we mean by collaborative metacognition? Research in Mathematics Education, 20(1), 14–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2017.1410215
  36. Sui, C. J., Yen, M. H., & Chang, C. Y. (2024). Teachers’ perceptions of teaching science with technology-enhanced self-regulated learning strategies through the DECODE model. Education and Information Technologies, 22813–22839. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12715-x
  37. Suwarto, S., Hidayah, I., Rochmad, R., & Masrukan, M. (2023). Intuitive thinking: Perspectives on intuitive thinking processes in mathematical problem solving through a literature review. Cogent Education, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2243119
  38. Tesfaw, B. K., Ayele, M. A., & Wondimuneh, T. E. (2024). Context-based problem-posing and solving instructional approach and students’ engagement in learning data handling. Cogent Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2389486
  39. Tinungki, G. M., Hartono, P. G., Nurwahyu, B., Islamiyati, A., Robiyanto, R., Hartono, A. B., & Raya, M. Y. (2024). Exploring the team-assisted individualization cooperative learning to enhance mathematical problem solving, communication and self-proficiency in teaching non-parametric statistics. Cogent Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2381333
  40. Toikka, S., Eronen, L., Atjonen, P., & Havu-Nuutinen, S. (2024). Combined conceptualisations of metacognitive knowledge to understand students’ mathematical problem-solving. Cogent Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2357901
  41. Vogel, F., Kollar, I., Fischer, F., Reiss, K., & Ufer, S. (2022). Adaptable scaffolding of mathematical argumentation skills: The role of self-regulation when scaffolded with CSCL scripts and heuristic worked examples. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 17(1), 39–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-022-09363-z
  42. Zhang, L., Stylianides, G. J., & Stylianides, A. J. (2024). Enhancing mathematical problem posing competence: a meta-analysis of intervention studies. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00507-1