Contextual problem solving through mathematical modeling: effects on critical thinking and cognitive transfer
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64747/dj2m7h71Keywords:
mathematical modeling, contextual problem solving, critical thinking, cognitive transfer, lower secondary educationAbstract
We evaluated the effect of a classroom intervention grounded in contextual problem solving through mathematical modeling on critical thinking and cognitive transfer among lower‑secondary students in Nueva Loja, Ecuador. A quasi‑experimental pretest–posttest design with a comparison group was implemented over eight weeks, using authentic local scenarios (logistics, streamflow, costs) and explicit scaffolds for representation and validation. Results indicate significant gains in critical thinking and both near and far transfer, with small‑to‑moderate effect sizes after covariate adjustment. Modeling quality (R‑MM rubric) correlated positively with critical‑thinking performance, suggesting that articulating assumptions and validating models strengthens critical judgement. Public INEVAL microdata and reports (Ser Estudiante 2018–2019, Amazonía) were used to contextualize and benchmark the classroom outcomes against subnational distributions. The study aligns with the PISA 2022 framework and editorial standards (COPE) and provides reproducible materials (rubrics, instruments, scripts) to facilitate scaling across Ecuador’s northern Amazon
References
Beccuti, F., & Gadanidis, G. (2024). Meaning and subjectivity in the PISA mathematics frameworks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108, 511–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-023-10296-z
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 57(1), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
Bravo Soria, H. D., Brito Solórzano, C. F., Cevallos Martínez, C. E., & Guerra Balseca, E. T. (2025). Ética en el uso de la inteligencia artificial: desafíos y buenas prácticas para el desarrollo educativo en Ecuador. Horizonte Cientifico International Journal, 3(2), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.64747/b03qch53
Cevikbas, M., & Kaiser, G. (2021). A systematic literature review of mathematical modelling competencies. ZDM Mathematics Education, 53, 159–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01250-3
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.‑G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
Greefrath, G., Borromeo Ferri, R., Leuders, T., & Stillman, G. (Eds.). (2018). Mathematical Modelling in Education Research and Practice. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-96522-8
Harris, C. R., et al. (2020). Array programming with NumPy. Nature, 585, 357–362. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2
Jablonski, S., Schüler, M., & Ludwig, M. (2023). How digital tools support the validation of outdoor mathematics modelling activities. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1145588. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1145588
JASP Team. (2019). JASP (Version 0.14) [Computer software]. Journal of Open Source Software, 4(43), 1546. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01546
Lakens, D. (2017). Equivalence tests. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8(4), 355–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617697177
McKinney, W. (2010). Data structures for statistical computing in Python. Proceedings of the 9th Python in Science Conference, 56–61. https://doi.org/10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-00a
Morris, S. B. (2008). Estimating effect sizes from pretest–posttest–control group designs. Psychological Methods, 13(3), 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.13.3.277
Niss, M., & Blum, W. (2020). The concept of mathematical modelling competencies revisited. In G. Stillman & J. Brown (Eds.), Lines of Inquiry in Mathematical Modelling Research in Education (pp. 63–84). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37673-4_4
OECD. (2023a). PISA 2022 assessment and analytical framework. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a124aec8-en
OECD. (2023b). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 Assessment and Analytical Framework. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
Orón Semper, J. V., & Ritchhart, R. (2023). Achieving transfer from mathematics learning. Education Sciences, 13(2), 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020161
Schukajlow, S., & Krug, A. (2014). Do multiple solutions matter? ZDM Mathematics Education, 46, 135–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0540-4
Seabold, S., & Perktold, J. (2010). Statsmodels: Econometric and statistical modeling with Python. Proceedings of SciPy 2010. https://doi.org/10.25080/Majora-92bf1922-011
Virtanen, P., et al. (2020). SciPy 1.0: fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python. Nature Methods, 17, 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0686-2
Bedoya Navas, M. G., Caiza Caiza, M. P., Marcos Muñoz, I. C., & Maroto Balseca, E. S. (2025). Modelos pedagógicos activos y su incidencia en el pensamiento lógico‑matemático. Horizonte Cientifico International Journal, 3(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.64747/960dhs14
Becker, L. A. (2000). Effect size (ES). UC Boulder. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12069.83680
