Grade 10 learners’ experiences using a mobile technology–based instructional module to learn functions
Barra lateral del artículo
Contenido principal del artículo
Resumen
Mobile learning is becoming more popular in today's technological era. The quantitative case study seeks to understand learners’ experiences with the Mobile Learning Technology-Based Instruction (MLTBI) Module in learning Linear, Exponential, and Quadratic Functions (LEQF and related concepts). The current study adopts Piaget’s Constructivist theory as its theoretical framework. Thirty-nine participants were used to collect data on their experiences when learning Functions and related concepts with MLTBI Module. The sample was purposively selected from Grade 10 Mathematics classes at one selected Senior Secondary School where one of the researchers worked. A case study research design and a survey were used to collect data. Microsoft Excel was used to present and analyse the data. The study found that most respondents corroborated the user-friendliness of the MLTBI application in mastering LEQF and related concepts. Another finding was that most respondents upheld that MLTBI facilitated conceptual understanding of Mathematics. The study concluded that the application used in MLTBI enhanced their conceptual understanding of LEQF and related concepts. The study recommends the use of mobile learning technology in other content areas of Mathematics, as it was most preferred by participants.
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.displayStats.downloads##
Detalles del artículo
Sección
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Referencias
Abubakar, U., Ogunlade, O. O., & Ibrahim, H. A. (2024). The influence of technology-integrated
curriculum resources on student engagement and academic achievement in higher education. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 4(2), 1208-1223.https://doi.org/10.25082/amler.2024.02.014
Adelabu, F. M., Makgato, M. & Ramaligela, M. S. (2019). The importance of dynamic geometry computer software on learners’ performance in geometry. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 17, pp52‑63-pp52‑63.
Allen, A. (2022). An introduction to constructivism: Its theoretical roots and impact on contemporary education. Journal of Learning Design and Leadership, 1(1), 1-11.
Ali, M. S. B., Yasmeen, R., & Munawar, Z. (2023). The impact of technology integration on student engagement and achievement in mathematics education: A systematic review. International journal of computer integrated manufacturing, 6(3), 222-232.
Avci, H. & Adiguzel, T. (2017). A case study on mobile-blended collaborative learning in an English as a foreign language (EFL) context. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18.
Barak, M. (2017). Science teacher education in the twenty-first century: A pedagogical framework for technology-integrated social constructivism. Research in Science Education, 47, 283-303.
Bergdahl, N., Nouri, J., Fors, U. & Knutsson, O. (2020). Engagement, disengagement and performance when learning with technologies in upper secondary school. Computers & Education, 149, 103783.
Bernstein, B. (2018). On the classification and framing of educational knowledge. Knowledge, education, and cultural change. Routledge.
Bhaw, N. & Kriek, J. (2020). The alignment of the Grade 12 physics examination with the CAPS curriculum:(November 2014–March 2018). South African Journal of Education, 40.
Brady, M., Devitt, A., & Kiersey, R. (2019). Academic staff perspectives on technology for
assessment (tfa) in higher education: a systematic literature review. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3080-3098. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12742
Cakir, M. (2022). Constructivist approaches to learning in science and their implications for
science pedagogy: A literature review. International journal of environmental and science education.
Chen, Y. (2019). Effect of mobile augmented reality on learning performance, motivation, and
math anxiety in a math course. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(7), 1695-1722. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119854036
Cochrane, T., Smart, F., & Narayan, V. (2018). Special issue on mobile mixed reality. Research
in Learning Technology, 26(0). https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v26.2195
Coffman, J. L., Grammer, J. K., Hudson, K. N., Thomas, T. E., Villwock, D. & Ornstein, P. A. (2019). Relating children’s early elementary classroom experiences to later skilled remembering and study skills. Journal of Cognition and Development, 20, 203-221.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
Devellis, R. F. & Thorpe, C. T. (2021). Scale development: Theory and applications, Sage publications.
Dimmock, C., & Lam, M. (2012). Grounded theory research. Research methods in educational leadership & management, 188-204.https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957695.n13
Fonseca, D. & García-Peñalvo, F. J. (2019). Interactive and collaborative technological ecosystems for improving academic motivation and engagement. Universal Access in the Information Society, 18, 423-430.
Ghoulam, K., Bouikhalene, B., Babori, A., & Falih, N. (2024). Exploring the impact of mobile devices in electronics e-learning: A case study evaluating the effectiveness of mobile learning applications in the field of electronics and sensors. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 4(2), 1058-1072.https://doi.org/10.25082/amler.2024.02.001
Harju, V., Koskinen, A., & Pehkonen, L. (2019). An exploration of longitudinal studies of
digital learning. Educational Research, 61(4), 388-407. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2019.1660586
Hendikawati, P., Zahid, M. Z. & Arifudin, R. (2019). Android-based computer assisted instruction development as a learning resource for supporting self-regulated learning. International Journal of Instruction, 12, 389-404.
Howie, D. R. 2019. Thinking about the teaching of thinking: The Feuerstein approach, Routledge.
Ibrahim, A. M. (2023). EFFECT OF TELEGRAM AND WHATSAPP-ENHANCED INSTRUCTIONS IN COLLABORATIVE LEARNING SETTINGS ON LEARNING OUTCOMES IN MICRO-TEACHING AMONG UNDERGRADUATES IN GOMBE STATE (Doctoral dissertation).https://doi.org/10.30935/mjosbr/13665
Jantjies, M., Moodley, T., & Maart, R. (2018). Experiential learning through virtual and
augmented reality in higher education. https://doi.org/10.1145/3300942.3300956
Jeong, K. (2022). Facilitating sustainable self-directed learning experience with the use of
mobile-assisted language learning. Sustainability, 14(5), 2894. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052894
Kadirhan, Z., & Yildirim, S. (2025, December). The educational use of Facebook: a
phenomenological exploration of faculty members’ and students’ lived experiences. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 10, p. 1719345). Frontiers Media SA.https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1719345
Karabatzaki, Z., Stathopoulou, A., Kokkalia, G., Dimitriou, E., Loukeri, P. I., Economou, A. & Drigas, A. (2018). Mobile Application Tools for Students in Secondary Education. An Evaluation Study. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 12.
Kumari, G., & Kumar, N. (2022). Constructivism in learning. Educational Quest: An International Journal of Education and Applied Social Sciences, 13(3), 207-213.https://doi.org/10.30954/2230-7311.3.2022.5
Lam, R. (2012). Depression. https://doi.org/10.1093/med/9780199692736.001.0001
Lo, W. Y. (2021). Pre-Service Teachers' Prior Learning Experiences of Mathematics and the Influences on Their Beliefs about Mathematics Teaching. International Journal of Instruction, 14, 795-812.
Mabena, N., MokgosI, P. N. & Ramapela, S. S. (2021). Factors contributing to poor learner performance in mathematics: A case of selected schools in Mpumalanga province, South Africa. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 79, 451.
Merriam, S. B. (1985). The case study in educational research: A review of selected
literature. The Journal of Educational Thought (JET)/Revue de la Pensée Educative, 204 217.https://doi.org/10.55016/ojs/jet.v19i3.44167
Mohammed, S. H., & Kinyo, L. (2020). The role of constructivism in the enhancement of
social studies education. Journal of critical reviews, 7(7), 249-256.https://doi.org/10.31838/jcr.07.07.41
Muthmainnah, M. (2023). Expanding on the use of YouMiMe as technology instructional design in learning. Pegem Journal of Education and Instruction, 13, 367-378.
Obilor, E. I. (2023). Convenience and purposive sampling techniques: Are they the same. International Journal of Innovative Social & Science Education Research, 11, 1-7.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N. & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and policy in mental health and mental health services research, 42, 533-544.
Paul, M. W. (2021). Mobile Technology Pedagogy: Improved Student Engagement for Improved Self-Assessment. International Journal of Technology in Education, 4, 695-707.
Park, W., & Kwon, H. (2024). Implementing artificial intelligence education for middle school technology education in Republic of Korea. International journal of technology and design education, 34(1), 109-135.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09812-2
Poçan, S., Altay, B., & Yaşaroğlu, C. (2023). The effects of mobile technology on learning performance and motivation in mathematics education. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 683-712.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11166-6
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2024). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Sage publications.
Refat, N., Kassim, H., Rahman, M. A. & Razali, R. B. (2020). Measuring student motivation on the use of a mobile-assisted grammar learning tool. PloS one, 15, e0236862.
Ruggiero, D. & Mong, C. J. (2015). The teacher technology integration experience: Practice and reflection in the classroom. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14.
Sabri, S., Gani, A., Yadegaridehkordi, E., Othman, S., Miserom, F., & Shuib, L. (2022). A
framework for mobile learning acceptance amongst formal part-time learners: from the andragogy perspective. Ieee Access, 10, 61213-61227. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2022.3178718
Shatte, A. & Teague, S.( 2020). Microlearning for improved student outcomes in higher
education: a scoping review. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/fhu8n
Shalini Roy, S., & Gandhimathi, S. N. S. (2025, January). Self-directed learning for optimizing
sustainable language learning via mobile assisted language learning: a systematic review. In Frontiers in Education (Vol. 9, p. 1463721). Frontiers Media SA.https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1463721
Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond
quantitative analysis. Computers & Education, 46(1), 49-70.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.006
Shih, J., Hwang, G., Chu, Y., & Chuang, C. (2011). An investigation‐based learning model for
using digital libraries to support mobile learning activities. The Electronic Library, 29(4), 488-505. https://doi.org/10.1108/02640471111156759
Sincuba, M. C. & John, M. (2017). An exploration of learners’ attitudes towards mobile learning technology-based instruction module and its use in mathematics education. International electronic journal of mathematics education, 12, 845-858.
Su, C. & Cheng, C. (2014). A mobile gamification learning system for improving the learning
motivation and achievements. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(3), 268-286. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12088
Suliman, S. (2014). Learners' understanding of proportion: A case study from Grade 8 Mathematics.
Uwingabile, I. (2025). A Scoping Review of Multimedia Learning Theory in Teaching and Learning Quadratic Functions. Available at SSRN 5267416.https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5267416
Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in science education, 48, 1273-1296.
Wang, J., Wu, H., Chien, S., Hwang, F., & Hsu, Y. (2015). Designing applications for physics
learning: facilitating high school students' conceptual understanding by using tablet pcs. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51(4), 441-458. https://doi.org/10.2190/ec.51.4.d
Wilson, B. G., & Novak, K. (2024). Constructivism for active, authentic learning. In Trends and
issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 99-111). Routledge.
Yu, M. (2022). Technology‐Enhanced Education: Improving Students' Learning Experience in
the Higher Education Context. The Wiley handbook of sustainability in higher education learning and teaching, 133-151.https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119852858.ch7
Zhang, Y. (2022). The effect of educational technology on EFL learners’ self-efficacy.
Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 881301.
Zajda, J. (2021). Constructivist learning theory and creating effective learning environments.
In Globalisation and education reforms: Creating effective learning environments (pp. 35-50). Cham: Springer International Publishing.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71575-5_3
Zondo, S. S., & Adu, E. O. (2023). Information and communication technology use in the teaching and learning of high school economics: are we there yet?. International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education, 14(3-4), 283-296.https://doi.org/10.1504/ijpee.2023.138587