International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12

line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 12, Issue 6 (June 2025), Pages: 169-181

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

Developing a remediation tool to address learning gaps in numbers and number sense

 Author(s): 

 Dante C. Cara 1, Analyn M. Gamit 2, *, Angelo R. Santos 2

 Affiliation(s):

 1Mathematics Department, Umangan National High School, Aliaga, Nueva Ecija, Philippines
  2Graduate School, Nueva Ecija University of Science and Technology, Cabanatuan City, Philippines

 Full text

    Full Text - PDF

 * Corresponding Author. 

   Corresponding author's ORCID profile:  https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4266-0851

 Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2025.06.016

 Abstract

This study aimed to develop a remedial learning tool called the Learner's Packet for Grade 7 Mathematics, specifically to support students who have difficulty with Numbers and Number Sense. Using the ADDIE model (Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation), the researchers identified learning gaps and created a structured material to address these weaknesses. The tool was reviewed by experts and tested using a pretest-posttest method, showing that most students improved from Low Mastery to Average Mastery in six out of seven skill areas. Although the results did not meet the Department of Education’s official passing rate, students found the tool to be useful, engaging, and suitable for their needs. The study recommends improving the tool’s usability, developing similar materials for other math topics, and conducting long-term research to support better learning outcomes.

 © 2025 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords

 Learner's packet, Grade 7 mathematics, Numbers and number sense, Remedial tool, Student performance

 Article history

 Received 12 January 2025, Received in revised form 25 May 2025, Accepted 31 May 2025

 Acknowledgment

The authors express their gratitude to the administration, faculty, and staff of Umangan National High School for their invaluable support and cooperation during the conduct of the study. Special thanks are extended to the mathematics experts who provided critical insights and feedback for the development and validation of the remediation tool. The authors also acknowledge the students who participated in the study for their active engagement and constructive feedback. 

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Ethical considerations

The study adhered to ethical research standards to ensure the integrity of the process and the welfare of participants. Information consent was obtained from all participants, including the students and their parents, as well as the expert validators. The purpose of the research, along with its potential benefits and risks, was clearly explained to all stakeholders. Confidentiality and anonymity were maintained throughout the study, with participants' identities protected in all reports and publications. The research complied with the ethical guidelines outlined by the institution and relevant governing bodies.

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Cara DC, Gamit AM, and Santos AR (2025). Developing a remediation tool to address learning gaps in numbers and number sense. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 12(6): 169-181

  Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

  No Figure 

 Tables

  Table 1  Table 2  

----------------------------------------------   

 References (40)

  1. Abrami PC, Bernard RM, Borokhovski E, Waddington DI, Wade CA, and Persson T (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2): 275-314.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ajimudin F and Mukuna K (2024). Psychosocial factors influencing grade 7 learners’ performance in mathematics classes: A focus on primary schools in the Northern Cape, South Africa. E-Journal of Humanities Arts and Social Sciences, 5(7): 1071-1086.  https://doi.org/10.38159/ehass.2024572    [Google Scholar]
  3. Angraini LM, Kania N, and Gürbüz F (2024). Students' proficiency in computational thinking through constructivist learning theory. International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematics Education, 2(1): 45-59.  https://doi.org/10.56855/ijmme.v2i1.963    [Google Scholar]
  4. Atteh E (2022). Exploring the effect of constructivist learning approach on pre-service teachers problem solving skills in mathematics at Wiawso College of Education. Asian Research Journal of Arts and Social Sciences, 18(4): 174-185.  https://doi.org/10.9734/arjass/2022/v18i4414    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cantor MR (2019). Retention of Long Island millennials at a suburban community college: Are they college ready? Journal for Leadership and Instruction, 18(1): 36-41.    [Google Scholar]
  6. Da NT (2023). The effect of realistic mathematics education on the problem-solving competency of high school students through learning calculus topics. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 4(1): ep23013.  https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/13041    [Google Scholar]
  7. Davis EK and Abass AT (2023). The attributes senior high school mathematics teachers and their students value in mathematics learning. Asian Journal for Mathematics Education, 2(2): 183-203.  https://doi.org/10.1177/27527263231179745    [Google Scholar]
  8. Douglas D, Logue AW, and Watanabe-Rose M (2023). The long-term impacts of corequisite mathematics remediation with statistics: Degree completion and wage outcomes. Educational Researcher, 52(1): 7-15.  https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X221138848    [Google Scholar]
  9. Du K and Lipscomb TJ (2023). The effects of a mathematics remedial program on mathematics success and achievement among beginning mathematics major students: A regression discontinuity analysis. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 6(1): 21-39.  https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.613    [Google Scholar]
  10. Gómez-García G, Hinojo-Lucena FJ, Alonso-García S, and Romero-Rodríguez JM (2021). Mobile learning in pre-service teacher education: Perceived usefulness of AR technology in primary education. Education Sciences, 11(6): 275.  https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11060275    [Google Scholar]
  11. Jamandron HE and Comighud SM (2020). Teacher-made science strategic intervention materials: A tool for remediation. Journal of Educational Research, 5(8): 1-15.    [Google Scholar]
  12. Jolejole-Caube C, Dumlao AB, and Abocejo FT (2019). Anxiety towards mathematics and mathematics performance of grade 7 learners. European Journal of Education Studies, 6(1): 335–356.    [Google Scholar]
  13. Khanal B (2022). Approaches for enhancing mathematics learning of students with learning difficulties. The Educator Journal, 10(1): 88-92.  https://doi.org/10.3126/tej.v10i1.46731    [Google Scholar]
  14. Khasawneh AA, Al-Barakat AA, and Almahmoud SA (2022). The effect of error analysis-based learning on proportional reasoning ability of seventh-grade students. Frontiers in Education, 7: 899288.  https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.899288    [Google Scholar]
  15. Khatri D (2011). Math remediation for the college bound: Homework, sample tests, and answer keys. R&L Education, Lancashire, UK.  https://doi.org/10.5771/9781610483797    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kim D, Jung E, Yoon M, Chang Y, Park S, Kim D, and Demir F (2021). Exploring the structural relationships between course design factors, learner commitment, self-directed learning, and intentions for further learning in a self-paced MOOC. Computers & Education, 166: 104171.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104171    [Google Scholar]
  17. Kozulin A (2003). Vygotsky's educational theory in cultural context. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, USA.  https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840975    [Google Scholar]
  18. Lee Y, Jonson PH, Sarparanta J, Palmio J et al. (2018).  TIA1 variant drives myodegeneration in multisystem proteinopathy with SQSTM1 mutations. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 128(3): 1164-1177.  https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI97103    [Google Scholar] PMid:29457785 PMCid:PMC5824866
  19. Lu J, Schmidt M, Lee M, and Huang R (2022). Usability research in educational technology: A state-of-the-art systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 70(6): 1951-1992.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-022-10152-6    [Google Scholar]
  20. Magayon VC and Tan EB (2016). Learning mathematics and differentiated instruction in the Philippines: A phenomenographical study on struggles and successes of grade 7 students. International Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics, 3(3): 1-14.    [Google Scholar]
  21. Maruyama T and Kurosaki T (2021). Do remedial activities using math workbooks improve student learning? Empirical evidence from scaled-up interventions in Niger. World Development, 148: 105659.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105659    [Google Scholar]
  22. Masengesho D and Andala H (2024). The effect of remedial program practices on the academic performance of slow learners in mathematics subject in public lower-day secondary school in Rwanda: A case of Kirehe District. African Journal of Empirical Research, 5(4): 945-956.  https://doi.org/10.51867/ajernet.5.4.77    [Google Scholar]
  23. Morrison GR, Ross SM, and Kemp JE (2019). Designing effective instruction. Wiley, Hoboken, USA.    [Google Scholar]
  24. Mousavi SY, Low R, and Sweller J (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2): 319–334.  https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.87.2.319    [Google Scholar]
  25. Murtiyasa B and Lathifah AHN (2023). Mathematics learning difficulties in distance learning. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning, 8(1): 51-56.  https://doi.org/10.26737/jetl.v8i1.3433    [Google Scholar]
  26. OECD (2023). PISA 2022 results (volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, France.  https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en    [Google Scholar]
  27. Panjaitan MA and Juandi D (2024). Analysis of problems in learning mathematics based on difficulties, errors, and misconceptions in the material of equations and inequality absolute values of one variable: Systematic literature review. KnE Social Sciences, 9(13): 316-324.  https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v9i13.15932    [Google Scholar]
  28. Popova Y, Abdualiyeva M, Torebek Y, Yelshibekov N, and Omashova G (2022). Improving the effectiveness of senior graders’ education based on the development of mathematical intuition and logic: Kazakhstan’s experience. Frontiers in Education, 7: 986093.  https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.986093    [Google Scholar]
  29. Putra JD, Suryadi D, and Juandi D (2022). Integration of principles of education for sustainable development in mathematics learning to improve student’s mathematical problem-solving ability. IndoMath: Indonesia Mathematics Education, 5(1): 34-41.  https://doi.org/10.30738/indomath.v5i1.20    [Google Scholar]
  30. Ran FX and Lin Y (2022). The effects of corequisite remediation: Evidence from a statewide reform in Tennessee. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 44(3): 458-484.  https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737211070836    [Google Scholar]
  31. Reiser RA and Dempsey JV (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology. Pearson, Boston, USA.    [Google Scholar]
  32. Richey RC and Klein JD (2013). Design and development research: Methods, strategies, and issues. 1st Edition, Routledge, New York, USA.  https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203826034    [Google Scholar]
  33. Soboleva EV, Zhumakulov KK, Umurkulov KP, Ibragimov GI, Kochneva LV, and Timofeeva MO (2022). Developing a personalised learning model based on interactive novels to improve the quality of mathematics education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(2): em2078.  https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11590    [Google Scholar]
  34. Sun X (2023). Investigating mathematical anxiety among school students: A discussion on different quantitative empirical procedures. International Journal of New Developments in Education, 5(18): 23-32.  https://doi.org/10.25236/IJNDE.2023.051805    [Google Scholar]
  35. Sweller J (2011). Cognitive load theory. In: Spence KW and Spence JT (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation: 37-76. Academic Press, Cambridge, USA.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4    [Google Scholar]
  36. Telaumbanua YN, Dewi I, and Simamora E (2023). Philosophy perspective of mathematics education as a field of knowledge. EDUTEC: Journal of Education and Technology, 6(3): 703-710.  https://doi.org/10.29062/edu.v6i3.479    [Google Scholar]
  37. Thapa D (2023). A review on teachers and students engagement in mathematics learning: A critical reflection on Nepalese context. Dhaulagiri Journal of Contemporary Issues, 1(1): 34-39.  https://doi.org/10.3126/djci.v1i1.58624    [Google Scholar]
  38. Wang YS, Chen CM, Hong CM, and Tsai YN (2013). Interactive augmented reality game for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. In the IEEE 37th Annual Computer Software and Applications Conference Workshops, IEEE, Kyoto, Japan: 391-396.  https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSACW.2013.128    [Google Scholar]
  39. Wentzel KR and Miele DB (2009). Handbook of motivation at school. Routledge, New York, USA.  https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203879498    [Google Scholar]
  40. Yoong SM and Hoe FS (2022). Teachers’ efficacy to teach students with mathematics learning difficulties. Journal of Mathematics Instruction, Social Research and Opinion, 1(3): 117-130.  https://doi.org/10.58421/misro.v1i3.29    [Google Scholar]