Effects of STEMEN Teaching Models on Mathematical Literacy and Mathematical Problem-Solving
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2024.21.2.4Keywords:
STEM education, educational neuroscience, STEMEN teaching model, mathematical literacy, mathematical problem-solvingAbstract
Purpose - Mathematical literacy and mathematical problemsolving are crucial abilities that link mathematics content to real life applications, facilitating both mathematics understanding and mathematical processes. The present study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the STEMEN (STEM and educational neuroscience) teaching model in enhancing mathematical literacy and problem-solving skills.
Methodology - This study adopted a pre-test and post-test control group design. Among 156 Grade 9 students from a secondary school in Phayao, Thailand, 70 were randomly selected. The STEMEN teaching model was implemented in the experimental group, while the 5E teaching model, typically used in a normal classroom was employed in the control group. Two types of tests, namely the mathematical literacy test and the mathematical problem-solving test, were used as research instruments. Pre and post-data were collected from both the experimental and control groups. Repeated measures ANOVA with Wilks’ lambda was employed to analyze the mean comparison for mathematical literacy and mathematical problem-solving.
Findings - The findings revealed that the mean scores for mathematical literacy and mathematical problem-solving were relatively higher in the STEMEN teaching model group compared to the 5E teaching model group. These results provide insights into the effectiveness of the STEMEN teaching model in enhancing learning outcomes, particularly mathematical literacy and problem-solving in mathematics.
Significance – The results of this study showed that the STEMEN teaching model was effective in increasing learning outcomes, including mathematical literacy and problem-solving. These outcomes should enable teachers to design effective and efficient instructional strategies for enhancing mathematical literacy and problem-solving in classrooms.
References
Amara, N. (2018). The construction of mathematical problem-solving process test for student grade 9 in the office of provincial education Chonburi. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Burapa University: Thailand.
Bolstad, O. H. (2020). Secondary teachers’ operationalisation of mathematical literacy. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 115-135. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9551
Bowers, J. S. (2016). The practical and principled problems with educational neuroscience. Psychological Review, 123(5), 600-612. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000025
Brookman, A. (2016). Learning from educational neuroscience. Psychologist, 29(10), 766–769. https://doi.org/09528229
Brookman-Byrne, A., & Commissar, L. (2019). Future avenues for educational neuroscience from the perspective of EARLI SIG 22 Conference attendees. Mind, Brain, and Education, 13(3), 176-183. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12211
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032
Bybee, R. W. (2010). What is STEM education? Science, 329(5995), 996. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194998
Byrnes, J., & Vu, L. T. (2015). Educational neuroscience: Definitional, methodological, and interpretive issues. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 6(3), 221-234. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1345
Chen, Y., So, W. M. W., Zhu, J., & Chiu, S. W. K. (2024). STEM learning opportunities and career aspirations: The interactive effect of students’ self-concept and perceptions of STEM professionals. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00466-7
Colón-Rodríguez, A., Tiernan, C. T., Rodriguez-Tapia, E., & Atchison, W. D. (2019). Bridge to neuroscience workshop: An effective educational tool to introduce principles of neuroscience to Hispanics students. PLoS ONE, 14(12), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0225116
Corlu, M. S., Capraro, P. R. B., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Introducing STEM education: Implications for educating our teachers for the age of innovation. Egitim ve Bilim, 39(171), 74-85. https://doi.org/13001337
Cuevas, J. A., Childers, G., & Dawson, B. L. (2023). A rationale for promoting cognitive science in teacher education: Deconstructing prevailing learning myths and advancing research-based practices. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 33, 100209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2023.100209
Demir, F., & Altun, M. (2018). Development of mathematical literacy question writing process and skills. Egitim ve Bilim, 43(194), 19-41. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2018.7111
Edelenbosch, R., Kupper, F., Krabbendam, L., & Broerse, J. E. W. (2015). Brain-based learning and educational neuroscience: Boundary work. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9(1), 40-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12066
Feiler, J. B., & Stabio, M. E. (2018). Three pillars of educational neuroscience from three decades of literature. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 13, 17-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2018.11.001
Göktaş, O., & Yazıcı, E. (2020). Effectiveness of teaching mathematical problem-solving strategies to students with mild intellectual disabilities. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 361-85. https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.662461
Gola, G., Angioletti, L., Cassioli, F., & Balconi, M. (2022). The teaching brain: Beyond the science of teaching and educational neuroscience. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-5. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.823832
Goswami, U. (2016). Educational neuroscience: Neural structure-mapping and the promise of oscillations. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 10, 89-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cobeha.2016.05.011
Gül, K., & Taşar, M. F. (2020). A review of researches on STEM in preservice teacher education. Elementary Education Online, 19(2), 515-539. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2020.689682
Hachem M., Daignault, K., & Wilcox, G. (2022).Impact of educational neuroscience teacher professional development: Perceptions of school personnel. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.912827
Hardiman, M. (2012). The brain-targeted teaching model for 21st -century school. Corwin. Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology. (2012). Science measurement and assessment. V. Print Co., Ltd. The Thai PISA National Center, Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology. (2021). The PISA 2018 Report on reading, mathematics, and science. Institute for the Promotion of Teaching Science and Technology. Retrieved from https://pisathailand.ipst.ac.th/pisa2018-fullreport/
Jamaludin, A., Henik, A., & Hale, J. B. (2019). Educational neuroscience: Bridging theory and practice. Learning: Research and Practice, 5(2), 93-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2 019.1685027
Kalbfleisch, M. L. (2015). Educational neuroscience, constructivism, and the mediation of learning and creativity in the 21st century. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(FEB), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpsyg.2015.00133
Karmiloff-Smith, A. (2009). Preaching to the converted? From constructivism to neuroconstructivism. Child Development Perspectives, 3(2), 99-102. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2009.00086.x
Kelly, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
Khwannan, J. (2014). Development of mathematical literacy evaluation model. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Naresuan University.
Kummod, A., & Art-In, S. (2019). The development of mathematical problem solving ability for grade 12 students through open approach with Polya’s problem solving process. Journal of Education Graduate Studies Research, KKU, 13(2), 95-105. Retrieved from https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/ EDGKKUJ/article/view/216861
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
Lee, K., & Bull, R. (2016). Developmental changes in working memory, updating, and math achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 869–882. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000090
Leung, A. (2020). Boundary crossing pedagogy in STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00212-9
Li, L., & Disney, L. (2021). Young children’s mathematical problem solving and thinking in a playworld. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 35(1), 23-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s13394-021-00373-y
Li, Y., Wang, K., Xiao, Y., & Froyd, J. E. (2020). Research and trends in STEM education: A systematic review of journal publications. International Journal of STEM Education, 7(11), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00207-6
Luque-Rojas, M., Blanco Calvo, E., & Martín-Aragoneses, M. T. (2022). Editorial: Neuroscience, learning, and educational psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1-3. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.928054
Margot, K., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0151-2
Martín-Páez, T., Aguilera, D., Perales-Palacios, F. J., & Vílchez-González, J. M. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A review of literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799-822. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21522
Maryani N., & Widjajanti D. B. (2020). Mathematical literacy: How to improve it using contextual teaching and learning method? Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1581(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1581/1/012044
Mola, S., Treepiboon, K., & Chaturanon, W. (2020). Mathematical problem solving ability achievement and attitude toward mathematics of mathayomsuksa I students learning by inquiry cycle (5Es) and Polya’s problem solving process. Journal of Education Naresuan University, 22(3), 262-274. https://so06. tci-thaijo.org/index.php/edujournal_nu/article/view/103471
Napaphun, V. (2018). The development of a learning management model to promote mathematical problem solving skills. ASEAN Journal of Scientific and Technological Reports, 21(3), 249-258.https://ph02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/tsujournal/article/ view/151813
Norwich, B. (2015). Educational psychology, neuroscience and lesson study: Translating research knowledge into practice requires teacher research. Knowledge Cultures, 3(2), 172-190. https://doi.org/23275731 The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2004). Learning for tomorrow’s world-First results from PISA 2003. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264006416-en
OECD. (2007). PISA 2006: Science competencies for tomorrow’s world (executive summary). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264040014-en
OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in reading, mathematics and science (Vol. I). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264091450-en
OECD. (2016). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework. Science, reading, mathematics and financial literacy. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264255425-en Özcan, Z. Ç., & Eren Gümüş, A. (2019). A modeling study to explain mathematical problem-solving performance through metacognition, self-efficacy, motivation, and anxiety. Australian Journal of Education, 63(1), 116-134. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004944119840073
Penprase, B. E. (2020). STEM education for the 21st century. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-41633-1
Phetthai, C., & Poonpaiboonpipat, W. (2020). The effects of learning activities based on STEM education on mathematical literacy in the topic of calculation area for grade 9 students. Journal of Education Naresuan University, 22(4), 146-160. https://so06. tci-thaijo.org/index.php/edujournal_nu/article/view/241573
Piñeiro, J. L., Castro-Rodríguez, E., & Castro, E. (2021). Mathematical problem-solving in two teachers’ knowledge models: A critical analysis. Mathematics Teaching-Research Journal, 13(1), 71-93.
Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Doubleday and Co.
Posamentier, A. S., & Krulik, S. (1998). Problem-solving strategies for efficient and elegant solutions: A resource for the mathematics teacher. Corwin Press, Inc.
Putnam, R., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X029001004
Retnawati, H., & Wulandari, N.E. (2019). The development of students’ mathematical literacy proficiency. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 77(4), 502-514. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/19.77.502
Rizki L. M., & Priatna N. (2019). Mathematical literacy as the 21st century skill. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1157(4), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1157/4/042088
Runganurak, W., Bunterm, T., Uopasai, S., & Tang, K. N. (2022). The effect of design-based learning integrated with educational neuroscience instructional model on students’ learning outcomes, executive functions, and learning stress. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 30(2), 813-834. https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.30.2.21
Simoniello, C., & Watson, S. (2018). Stem education in gulf coast schools: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for our culturally, racially, and economically diverse community. Marine Technology Society Journal, 52(1), 54-65. https://doi.org/10.4031/MTSJ.52.1.8
Sousa, D.A. (2006). How the brain learns. Corwin.
Sperling, J., Mburi, M., Gray, M., Schmid, L., & Saterbak, A. (2024). Effects of a first-year undergraduate engineering design course: Survey study of implications for student self-efficacy and professional skills, with focus on gender/sex and race/ethnicity. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-024-00467-6
Srikoon, S. (2020). Development of teaching model with working memory training based on educational neuroscience to enhance cognitive function and mathematics achievement of students. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Nakhon Phanom University, 10(3), 105-114. https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index. php/npuj/article/view/235325
Srikoon, S. (2021a). Effects of research-based learning integrated with cognitive training for enhance research characteristics in phayamengrai school. Social Science Asia, 7(2), 42-51. Retrieved from https://socialscienceasia.nrct.go.th/index.php/ SSAsia/article/view/239
Srikoon, S. (2021b). The investigation of working memory influencing on mathematics problem solving skill. Journal of Education Khon Kaen University, 44(1), 77-88. https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/ index.php/EDKKUJ/article/view/247188
Srikoon, S. (2023). Educational Neuroscience: Definition, Scope, and Neuroimaging. Trends of Humanities and Social Sciences Research, 12(1), 1–26. https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/ Humanties-up/article/view/258998
Srikoon, S., & Punsrigate Khonjaroen, K. (2020). The investigation of working memory influencing on mathematics achievement. Journal of Arts Management, 4(1), 140–151. https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/jam/article/view/240312
Srikoon, S., & Tippala, S. (2022). Effects of open-approach integrated with cognitive training learning activity for enhancing analytical thinking of matthayomsuksa 3 students, Wang Nue Wittaya School, Lampang Province. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences University of Phayao, 10(1), 61–85. Retrieved from https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/Humanties-up/article/ view/254285
Srikoon, S., Bunterm, T., & Ngang, T.K. (2017). A comparative study of the effects of the neurocognitive-based model and the conventional model on learner attention, working memory and mood. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 83-110. https://doi.org/10.32890/mjli2017.14.1.4
Sumirattana, S., Makanong, A., & Thipkong, S. (2017). Using realistic mathematics education and the DAPIC problem-solving process to enhance secondary school students’ mathematical literacy. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 38(3), 307-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2016.06.001
Surawanichakun, W., & Thongmoon, M. (2019). Development of mathematics problem solving ability by organizing learning activities using Polya’s problem solving process for grade 10 students. Journal of Educational Measurement Mahasarakham University, 25(2), 226-238. https://so02.tci-thaijo.org/index. php/jemmsu/article/view/232254
Sweatt, J. D. (2010). Mechanisms of memory: Introduction the basic of psychological learning and memory theory. Elsevier.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate analysis. Harper Collins.
Takeuchi, M. A., Sengupta, P., Shanahan, M-C., Adams, J. D., & Hachem, M. (2020). Transdisciplinarity in STEM education: A critical review. Studies in Science Education, 56(2), 213-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1755802
Tandon P. N., & Singh, N. C. (2016). Educational neuroscience: Challenges and opportunities. Annals of Neurosciences, 23(2), 63-65. https://doi.org/10.1159/000443560 The National Institute of Educational Testing Service, Thailand. (2010). O-NET test results during 2007e2009 of grade 9 students. Retrieved from http://www.niets.or.th/index.php/ research_th/view/8.
Thomas, M. S. C., Ansari, D., & Knowland, V. C. P. (2018). Annual research review: Educational neuroscience: progress and prospects. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 60(4), 477-492. https://doi.org/10.1111/ jcpp.12973
Uttal, D. H., & Cohen, C. A. (2012). Spatial Thinking and STEM Education. When, Why, and How? Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 57, 147-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394293-7.00004-2 van Der Meulen, A., Krabbendam, L., & de Ruyter, D. (2015). Educational neuroscience: Its position, aims and expectations. British Journal of Educational Studies, 63(2), 229-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2015.1036836
Westermann, G., Mareschal, D., Johnson, M. H., Sirois, S., Spratling, M. W., & Thomas, M. S. C. (2007). Neuroconstructivism. Developmental Science, 10(1), 75-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.1467-7687.2007.00567.x
Published
Issue
Section
How to Cite
Research impact
Harvested 2026-09-20Counts differ between services because each indexes a different body of literature. None of them is the whole picture.
