Instruction Modalities in the Students’ Academic Performance in Mathematics: Students’ Challenges and Teaching Strategies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.48017/dj.v10i4.3570Keywords:
Instruction Modalities , Academic Performance , Students’ Challenges , Teaching Strategies, Mixed-Methods ApproachAbstract
Adoption of different teaching modes to maintain mathematical learning was spurred by the COVID-19 epidemic. In order to investigate the disparities in mathematics performance between online, hybrid, and in-person classes, as well as the learning difficulties and instructional tactics of the teachers, this study used a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design that integrated quantitative and qualitative analyses. Official grades in three mathematics courses taken by the same group of 44 Bachelor of Science in Computer Science students over the course of three semesters served as the quantitative data. Friedman test results with post hoc test revealed that performance varied significantly between modalities, with face-to-face classes yielding the best results. The qualitative phase revealed recurring issues such erratic internet availability, restricted device use, and trouble adjusting to different class schedules. Mathematics teachers addressed these with flexible time of submission procedures, digital resources, and lecture recordings. The study concluded that although a variety of modalities can enhance mathematics learning, face-to-face education is still the most effective since it allows for fuller interaction and instant feedback. This conclusion is supported by the Community of Inquiry and Constructivist Learning frameworks. The findings recommend of creating proven tools to measure students' difficulties and link them to academic achievement, as well as provide ideas for creating adaptable learning environments.
Metrics
References
Adarkwah, M. A. (2021). I’m not against online teaching, but what about us? ICT teachers’ concerns during COVID-19. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7579–7598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10772-8
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2017). “Digital Learning Compass: Distance Education Enrollment Report 2017”. Babson Survey Research Group.
Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554
Biehler, R. (2024). New trends in didactic research in university mathematics education. Research in Mathematics Education, 26(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01643-2
Bringula, R., Reguyal, J.J., Tan, D.D., & Ulfa, S. (2021). Mathematics Self-concept and Challenges of Learners in an online learning environment during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Smart Learn. Environ. 8, 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-021-00168-5.
Boholano, G. S. (2021). Technology-based teaching and learning in junior high school. International Studies in Educational Administration, 49(1), 98–112. https://doi.org/10.5937/IstrPed2101098B
Burns, K., Duncan, M. Sweeney II, D. C., North, J. W., & Ellegood, W. A. (2013). A longitudinal comparison of course delivery modes of an introductory Information Systems Course and their impact on a subsequent Information Systems course. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(4), 453‐ 467.Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no4/burns_1213.pd
Dela Cruz, M. T., & Lapinid, R. L. (2023). Video lessons via YouTube channel as mathematics interventions in modular distance learning. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 3(1), ep22001. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/11468
Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5–22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018
Dietrich, H., & Evans, T. (2022). Traditional lectures versus active learning – A false dichotomy? STEM Education, 2(4), 275–292. https://doi.org/10.3934/steme.2022017
Ferri, F., Grifoni, P., & Guzzo, T. (2023). Lessons learned during COVID-19 and future perspectives for emerging technology in education. Sustainability, 15(14), 10747. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151410747
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95-105.
Hodges CB, Moore S, Lockee BB, Trust T, Bond MA (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review 7:1–12
J. Umoh and E. Akpan (2014). Challenges of Blended E-Learning Tools in Mathematics: Students’ Perspectives University of Uyo. Journal of Education and Learning, 3.
Keese J, McIntosh. K, & Waxman, H., (2022). Teaching through a crisis: the remote education experiences of PK–12 teachers during COVID-19 campus closures. Technol Pedagogy Educ 31:1–17
Kraft MA, Simon NS, Lyon MA (2020). Sustaining a sense of success: the importance of teacher working conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Working Paper: 20-279. Annenberg Institute at Brown University
Kuhfeld M, Tarasawa B (2020). The COVID-19 slide: What summer learning loss can tell us about the potential impact of school closures on student academic achievement. NWEA. https://www.nwea. org/content/uploads/2020/05/Collaborative-Brief_Covid19-Slide-APR20.pdf
Li, K. C., Wong, B. T. M., Kwan, R., Chan, H. T., Wu, M. M. F., & Cheung, S. K. S. (2023). Evaluation of hybrid learning and teaching practices: The perspective of academics. Sustainability, 15(8), 6780. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15086780
Li, Q. (2025). Factors influencing positive perceptions of hybrid teaching in higher education. Educational Technology & Online Learning, 8(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-025-00521-5
Li, K., Uvah, J., & Amin, R. (2012). Predicting Students' Performance in Elements of Statistics. US-China Education Review, 10, 875-884. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED537981.pdf
Liang, L. (2025). Application of mixed teaching method to enhance student engagement. ScienceDirect, 15(4), 234–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciedu.2025.04.005
Mseleku, Z. (2022). A systematic review of online teaching and learning of mathematics during the COVID-19 pandemic. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 4155–4182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11065-4
Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-6.
Ocak, M. (2020). What do we learn about distance education during COVID-19? EPALE–Electronic platform for adult learning in Europe. https://epale.ec.europa.eu/en/blog/what-we-learned-about-distanceeducation-during-covid-19 (accessed on 2 July 2021).
Qin, Y. (2025). A long-term study on the effectiveness and essence of hybrid learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Online Learning, 3(2), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2554314
Rapanta, C., Botturi, L., Goodyear, P., & Guardia, L. (2021). Online university teaching during and after the COVID-19 crisis: Refocusing teacher presence and learning activity. Postdigital Science and Education, 3(2), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42438-021-00223-7
Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to Differentiate Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Voon, BWN., Wong, LS., Razali, SMb, (2014). Online Mathematics Learning in Tertiary Education: A Study on Students’ Behavior. Academic Research International Vol. 5(5). ISSN: 2223-9944.
Zhang, X. (2023). Student-centered case-based teaching and online–offline hybrid learning. Educational Technology & Online Learning, 6(2), 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00374-2
Zielinski, M. (2023). University mathematics lecturing as modelling mathematical discourse. Research in Mathematics Education, 25(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-021-00137-w
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Robert Jan Bayan
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The Diversitas Journal expresses that the articles are the sole responsibility of the Authors, who are familiar with Brazilian and international legislation.
Articles are peer-reviewed and care should be taken to warn of the possible incidence of plagiarism. However, plagiarism is an indisputable action by the authors.
The violation of copyright is a crime, provided for in article 184 of the Brazilian Penal Code: “Art. 184 Violating copyright and related rights: Penalty - detention, from 3 (three) months to 1 (one) year, or fine. § 1 If the violation consists of total or partial reproduction, for the purpose of direct or indirect profit, by any means or process, of intellectual work, interpretation, performance or phonogram, without the express authorization of the author, the performer, the producer , as the case may be, or whoever represents them: Penalty - imprisonment, from 2 (two) to 4 (four) years, and a fine. ”
