Home⇛Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal⇛vol. 36 no. 8 (2025)

Students’ and Teachers’ Beliefs on the Use of Technology and its Impact on Mathematics Achievement in Senior High School

Marlon Flores

Discipline: Education

 

Abstract:

The aim of the study as educators, we need to investigate our classroom instruction in considering ways and how far where it goes beyond on making use of the technology for educational purpose, by doing it, as this paper is exploiting the possible investigatory inquiry of students’ and teachers’ beliefs on the use of technology and its impact on mathematics achievement. the study deals with these beliefs and technology used along the way to carry out the exploration, we rely on an analysis of questionnaires and assessment which has been conducted in Bataraza National High School, Senior High School Department (Academic Strand: STEM), where use of ICT is now essential in the mathematics lessons. The objectives of the study are intended to help inform the development of a technology used, innovation, intervention, adaptation and or strategies for digitally technology mathematics teaching and learning. The vital function of a digital technology for classroom instructions with mathematics is for raising up on the students’ academic achievement where to provide with the solid foundation of 21st century technology skill and motivation on an experience learning progression. Technology can subsequently support accomplish this interventional goal, it engages students and brought to flame their digital inspiration, it provides for the teachers to stimulate young minds that made a profound and lasting difference in their academic achievement. Cathy Adams (2006) wrote: “The technological milieu (environment) is shaping substantially-insinuating itself, habituating us, and simultaneously reinterpreting -how we act in and perceive the world “ .The study was able to determine first the observe influential variables related to technology best predicts a mathematics teacher’s beliefs and students about the technology adoption/use for mathematics classroom, uncover aspects of teachers’ beliefs about 0n the use of technology teaching and learning of mathematics.



References:

  1. Abril, A., Ariza, M., Quesada, A., & García, J. (2013). Creencias del profesorado en ejercicio y en formación sobre el aprendizaje por investigación. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 11(1), 22-33.
  2. Abramovich, S., Burns, J., Campbell, S., & Grinshpan, A. Z. (2016). STEM education: action learning in primary, secondary, and post-secondary mathematics.Imvi-Open Mathematical Education Notes,6(2).Retrieved from https://doisrpska.nub.rs
  3. Aldon, G., Hitt, F., Bazzini, L., & Gellert, U. (2017).Mathematics and technology. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51380-5.
  4. Aydın, N., Camus, A., & Kaya, M. (2018). Ortaöğretim Matematik 10 Ders Kitabı. Aydın Yayıncılık Ankara.
  5. Ball, L., & Barzel, B. (2018). Communication when learning and teaching mathematics with technology. InL. Ball, P.Drijvers, S.Ladel, H. S. Siller, M.Tabach & C. Vale (Eds.), Uses of Technology in Primary and Secondary Mathematics Education (pp. 227-243). Springer, Cham.https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-76575-4_12
  6. Bastidas, V. (2013). Aprendizaje Basado en Investigación. Retrieved from:
  7. http://sitios.itesm.mx/va/dide2/tecnicas_didacticas/abi/abi.htm
  8. Brew, A. (2013). Understanding the scope of undergraduate research: A framework for curricular and pedagogical decision-making. Higher Education, (66), 603-618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9624-xBond, V. (2016). Using online professional learningcommunities to encourage dialogue in university/college mathematics.The International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education,23(2), 87-91.Retrieved from https://go.gale.com/ps/
  9. Buch, G. R., & Warren, C. B. (2017). The Flipped Classroom: Implementing Technology to Aid in College Mathematics Student's Success.Contemporary Issues in Education Research,10(2), 109-116.https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v10i2.9921
  10. Buteau, C., & Muller, E. (2017). Assessment in undergraduate programming-based mathematics courses.Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education,3(2), 97-114.https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v10i2.9921
  11. Canbazoglu Bilici, S., Guzey, S. S., & Yamak, H. (2016). Assessing pre-service science teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) through observations and lesson plans. Research in Science & Technological Education, 34(2), 237-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2016.1144050
  12. Charmaz, K. (2015). Gömülü(grounded) teori yapılandırması (R. Hoş Ed. Vol. 2. Ed.). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  13. Chen, C. L., & Wu, C. C. (2020). Students’ behavioral intention to use and achievements in ICT-Integrated mathematics remedial instruction: Case study of a calculus course.Computers & Education,145, 103740.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103740
  14. Cheung, A. C. K., & Slavin, R. E. (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9(0), 88-113.
  15. Chávez, G. (2013). La investigación formativa en la universidad. Proyecto de investigación del Cuerpo Académico “Cambio educativo: discursos, actores y prácticas”. México: Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León.
  16. Conklin, T. A. (2013). Making It Personal: The Importance of Student Experience in Creating Autonomy-Supportive Classrooms for Millennial Learners. [Article]. Journal of Management Education, 37(4), 499-538.
  17. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Nitel, nicel ve karma yöntem yaklaşımları araştırma deseni (S. B. Demir Ed.). Ankara: Eğiten Kitap.
  18. Davison, C. B., & Lazaros, E. J. (2015). Adopting mobile technology in the higher education classroom.Journal of Technology Studies,41(1), 30-39.https://doi.org/10.21061/jots.v41i1.a.4
  19. de Araujo, Z., Otten, S., & Birisci, S. (2017). Mathematics teachers' motivations for, conceptions of, and experiences with flipped instruction.Teaching and Teacher Education,62, 60-70.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.11.006
  20. Drijvers, P. (2020). Digital tools in Dutch mathematics education: A dialectic relationship. In National Reflections on the Netherlands Didactics of Mathematics (pp. 177-195): Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33824-4_10
  21. Driskell, S. O., Bush, S. B., Ronau, R. N., Niess, M. L., Rakes, C. R., & Pugalee, D. K. (2018). Mathematics Education Technology Professional Development: Changes Over Several Decades. In I. Management Association(Ed.), Teacher Training and Professional Development: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 115-144). IGI Global. http://doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-5631-2.ch006
  22. Dani, A., & Nasser, R. (2016). Use of Intelligent Tutor in Post-Secondary Mathematics Education in the United Arab Emirates.Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET,15(4), 152-162.Retrieved from http://www.tojet.net.
  23. Durmuş, A. (2019). Endüstri 4.0 Eğitim 4.0 Liderlik 4.0 toplum 5.0. Ankara: Efeakademi yayıncılık.
  24. Esteves, M., Pereira, A., Veiga, N., Vasco, R., & Veiga, A. (2017, September). The use of newlearning technologies in higher education classroom: A case study. International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning, Springer, Cham.pp. 499-506. 
  25. Erduran, A., & Ince, B. (2018). Identifying mathematics teachers’ difficulties in technology integration in terms of technological pedagogical content knowledge (tpck). International Journal of Research in Education Science, 4(2), 555-576. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.428955
  26. EU Schoolnet (2010). Summary: Netbook pre-pilot evaluation for teachers. In press.
  27. Garcia, E., Moizer, J., Wilkins, S., & Haddoud, M. Y. (2019). Student learning in higher education through blogging in the classroom.Computers & Education,136, 61-74.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.03.011
  28. Garrett, L., Guest, K., Shannon, D., Lee, B., Huang, L., Charleton, M. C., ...Kim, Y. (2020). Personalizing college mathematics with technology.Journal of Research on Technology in Education,52(3), 403-428.https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1734507
  29. Haber, K. (Producer). (2013). Poll: Schools using technology to improve math outcomes. SMARTblog: SMARTBrief.
  30. Günüç, S. (2017). Egitimde teknoloji entegrasyonunun kuramsal temelleri. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
  31. Holzberger, D., Reinhold, S., Lüdtke, O., & Seidel, T. (2020). A meta-analysis on the relationship between school characteristicsand student outcomes in science and maths–evidence from large-scale studies.Studies in Science Education,56(1), 1-34.https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1735758
  32. International Society for Technology in Education [ISTE]. (2000). National educational technology standards for students: connecting curriculum and technology. In: International Society for Technology in Education.
  33. International Technology Education Association (ITEA) (2000). Standards for Technological Literacy: Content for the study of technology. Retrieved December17, 2006, from:  http://www.iteaconnect.org/TAA/Publications/TAA_Publications.html
  34. ISTE Nets Project, (2000-2002). Essential Conditions for Teacher Preparation.Retrieved June 21, 2006 from http://cnets.org/teachers/t_esscond.html
  35. ICT Strategy Group report. (2008-2013).Investing Effectively in Information and Communications
  36. Technology in Schools. Retrieved Nov 8, 2011 from http://www.ncte.ie/media/Final%20ICT%20Strategy_group_report.pdf.
  37. Kılınc, E., Tarman, B., & Aydin, H. (2018). Examining turkish social studies teachers’ beliefs about barriers toTechnology integration. TechTrends, 62(3), 221-223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-018-0280-y
  38. Kumar, J. A., & Bervell, B. (2019).Google Classroom for mobile learning in higher education: Modelling the initial perceptions of students.Education and Information Technologies,24(2), 1793-1817.https://doi.org//10.1007/s10639-018-09858-z
  39. Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology Teacher Education, 9(1), 60-70. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/29544/
  40. Kolb, S. M. (2012). Grounded theory and the constant comparative method: Valid research strategies for educators. Journal Of Emerging Trends In Educational Research Policy Studies, 3(1), 83-86. Retrieved from http://jeteraps.scholarlinkresearch.com/ articles/Grounded%20Theory%20and%20the%20Constant%20Comparative%20Method.pdf
  41. Korkmaz, U., & Avcı, Z. Y. (2016). Turkish pre-service teachers’ experiences with contemporary technology games and perceptions about teaching with instructional games. Research in Social Sciences Technology, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.01.01.5
  42. LevI, I., ChahIne, I., Garrett, L., & Wang, H. (2016). Technology, active learning, and retention in general education mathematics.Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching,35(1), 81-105.Retrieved fromhttps://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/147417/
  43. Marinagi, C., Skourlas, C., & Belsis, P. (2013). Employing ubiquitous computing devices and technologies in the higher education classroom of the future.Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,73, 487-494.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.02.081
  44. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018a). Fatih projesi eğitimlerinin okullardaki yansıması.
  45. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018b). Ortaöğretim matematik dersi öğretim programı.
  46. NCTM. (2012). National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education standards Secondary. Reston, VA: NCTM.
  47. National Center for Education Statistics [NCES]. (2002). Technology in schools: suggestions, tools, and guidelines for assessing technology in elementary and secondary education. Washington DC: U.S. Department Of Education. Washington DC. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2003313
  48. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2008). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Retrieved from Reston, VA: Author.
  49. Nazarenko, M. A., & Khronusova, T. V. (2017, September). Big data in modern higher education. Benefits and criticism.2017 International Conference" Quality Management, Transport and Information Security, Information Technologies"(IT&QM&IS).IEEE.pp. 676-679. https://doi.org/10.1109/ITMQIS.2017.8085914
  50. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2008). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Retrieved from Reston, VA: Author.
  51. Ozmen, B., Koçak-Usluel, Y., & Çelen, F. (2014). Araştırmalarda bilgi ve iletişim teknolojilerinin öğrenme-öğretme sürecine entegrasyonu konusunda var olan durum ve yönelimler. Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 10(5), 1224-1253. Retrieved from https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/63442
  52. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage publications.
  53. Pierce, R., & Stacey, K. (2013). Teaching with new technology: four ‘early majority’teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 16(5), 323-347. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-012-9227-y
  54. Prasojo, L. D., Habibi, A., Yaakob, M. F. M., Mukminin, A., Haswindy, S., & Sofwan, M. (2019). An explanatory sequential study on indonesian principals’ perceptions on ict integration barriers. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 17(1), 1-10. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1213053.pdf
  55. Saldana, J. (2019). Nitel araştırmacılar için kodlama el kitabı (S. Şad Ed.). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
  56. Sivakova, D., Kochoska, J., Ristevska, M., & Gramatkovski, B. (2017). ICT-The Educational programs in teaching mathematics. Journal Technology, Education, Management, Informatics, 6(3), 469-478. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM63-06
  57. Oxford University Press. (2013). Oxford Dictionary Retrieved from www.oxforddictionaries.com/technology .
  58. Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2008).Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. John Wiley & Sons.
  59. Project Tomorrow. (2012). Personalizing the classroom experience: Teachers, librarians and administrators connecting the dots with digital learning The Speak Up National Research Project. Irvine, CA: Project Tomorrow.
  60. Rojas, M., & Méndez, R. (2013). Cómo enseñar a investigar. Un reto para la pedagogía universitaria. Educ., 1(16), 95-108.
  61. Tobin, P. C., & Weiss, V. (2016). Teaching Undergraduate Mathematics using CAS Technology: Issues and Prospects.International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education,23(1).Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/195007/
  62. Torio, H. (2019). Teaching as coaching: Experiences with a video-based flipped classroom combined with project-based approach in technology and physics higher education.Journal of Technology and Science Education,9(3), 404.http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.55
  63. Ralph, R. A. (2016). Post secondary project-based learning in science, technology, engineering and mathematics.Journal of Technology and Science Education,6(1), 26-35.http://dx.doi.org/10.3926/jotse.155
  64. Rogers, D. L. (2000). A paradigm shift: Technology integration for higher educaiton in the new millennium. Educational Technology Review, 19-33.
  65. Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press
  66. Twigg, C. A. (2011). The math emporium: A silver bullet for higher education.Change: The magazine of higher learning,43(3), 25-34.https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2011.56924
  67. Wade, W. Y., Rasmussen, K. L., & Fox-Turnbull, W. (2013). Can Technology Be a Transformative Force in Education? Preventing School Failure, 57(3), 162-170.
  68. Walden University. (2010). Educators, technology and 21st century skills: Dispelling five myths: Retrieved from: www.waldenu.edu/Documents/Degree-Programs/Full_Report_-_Dispelling_Five_Myths.pdf.
  69. Richardson, J. (2000). ICT Implementation in Education: an Analysis of Implementation Strategies in Australia, Canada, Finland and Israel. Ministry of Education, Luxembourg. U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Teachers’ tools for the 21st Century: A Report on teachers’ use of technology. NECS 2000-102 by
  70. Young, J. R. (2017). Technology integration in mathematics education: Examining the quality of meta-analytic research. International Journal on Emerging Mathematics Education,1(1), 71-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.12928/ijeme.v1i1.5713

Tools


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