Manipulatives on Ghanaian Basic 8 Students' 3d Geometry Achievement
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/mej.v9i1.36915Abstract
This study examines the impact of manipulatives on Basic 8 students’ achievement in three-dimensional (3D) geometry using an experimental research design. A total of 154 students were sampled from a population of 665 using a G*Power software-based estimation, with participants randomly assigned to control (77 students) and experimental (77 students) groups. Data collection involved a pretest-posttest achievement test, questionnaires, and structured interviews. Statistical analysis was conducted using t-tests to compare mean achievement scores between groups, and thematic analysis was applied to qualitative responses. The results indicated that while traditional teaching methods improved students’ 3D geometry achievement, the use of manipulatives led to significantly higher gains. Additionally, there was no significant gender-based difference in achievement when manipulatives were used. Questionnaire responses revealed that students developed positive attitudes and perceptions towards 3D geometry when taught with manipulatives, and interview findings suggested an improvement in conceptual understanding. The study concludes that manipulatives are effective tools for enhancing students' comprehension of spatial relationships and recommends their systematic integration into the mathematics curriculum.
Downloads
References
Abrahamson, D., Tancredi, S., Chen, R. S., Flood, V. J., & Dutton, E. (2023). Embodied design of digital resources for mathematics education: Theory, methodology, and framework of a pedagogical research program. In Handbook of Digital Resources in Mathematics Education (pp. 1-34). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Ahmad, S., & Siller, H. S. (2024). Investigating the effect of manipulatives on mathematics achievement: The role of concrete and virtual manipulatives for diverse achievement level groups. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(3), 979-1002.
Ahmad, S. (2024). Effect of an Instructional Model “Utilizing Hands-on Learning Concrete and Virtual Manipulatives” on Fifth-Grade Students’ Academic Achievement in Mathematics (Doctoral dissertation, Universität Würzburg).
Almulla, M. A. (2023). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for students’ critical thinking, creativity, and problem solving to affect academic performance in higher education. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2172929.
Anamuah-Mensah, J., & Mereku, D. K. (2005). Ghanaian JSS2 students’ abysmal mathematics achievement in TIMSS 2003: A consequence of the basic school mathematics curriculum. Mathematics connection, 5(1), 1-13.
Alqahtani, M. M., & Powell, A. B. (2016). Instrumental Appropriation of a Collaborative, Dynamic-Geometry Environment and Geometrical Understanding. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 4(2), 72. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.38054
Baah-Duodu, S., Osei-Buabeng, V., Cornelius, E. F., & Hegan, J. E. (2020). Review of Literature on Teaching and Learning Geometry and Measurement: A Case of Ghanaian Standards Based Mathematics Curriculum. International Journal of Advances in Scientific Research and Engineering, 06(03), 103–124. https://doi.org/10.31695/ijasre.2020.33766
Chang, C. Y., Lee, D. C., Tang, K. Y., & Hwang, G. J. (2021). Effect sizes and research directions of peer assessments: From an integrated perspective of meta-analysis and co-citation network. Computers & Education, 164, 104123.
Chatima, S. (2021). Visualisation Processes in Teaching Patterns and Their Generalisation: Perceptions and Experiences from Senior Phase Mathematics Teachers. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 14(21), 136-152.
Chen, S. Y. (2022). To explore the impact of augmented reality digital picture books in environmental education courses on environmental attitudes and environmental behaviors of children from different cultures. Frontiers in Psychology, 13(December), 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1063659
Demir, M., & Kaya, M. (2022). Analysis of Constructivist Learning Model’s Effects on Student Outcomes: A Second Order Meta-Analysis Yapılandırmacı Öğrenme Modelinin Öğrenci Çıktılarına Etkisinin İncelenmesi: Second Order Meta -Analiz. Journal of Theoretical Educational Science, 15(October), 938–957.
Gargrish, S., Mantri, A., & Kaur, D. P. (2020). Augmented reality-based learning environment to enhance teaching-learning experience in geometry education. Procedia Computer Science, 172(2019), 1039–1046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2020.05.152
Goracke, M. A. (2009). The role of manipulatives in the eighth grade mathematics classroom.
Guan, H., Li, J., Rao, Y., Chen, R., & Xu, Z. (2024). Comparative effects of dynamic geometry system and physical manipulatives on Inquiry-based math learning for students in junior high school. Education and Information Technologies, 29(16), 21477-21499.
Harris, D., Lowrie, T., Logan, T., & Hegarty, M. (2021). Spatial reasoning, mathematics, and gender: Do spatial constructs differ in their contribution to performance?. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 409-441.
Hwang, W. Y., Su, J. H., Huang, Y. M., & Dong, J. J. (2009). A study of multi-representation of geometry problem solving with virtual manipulatives and whiteboard system. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12(3), 229-247.
Jafri, R., Aljuhani, A. M., & Ali, S. A. (2017). A tangible user interface-based application utilizing 3D-printed manipulatives for teaching tactual shape perception and spatial awareness sub-concepts to visually impaired children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 11, 3-11.
Jelatu, S. (2018). Effect of GeoGebra - Aided REACT Strategy on Understanding of Geometry Concepts. 11(4), 325–336.
Kadwa, M. S., & Alshenqeeti, H. (2020). International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation (IJLLT) The Impact of Students’ Proficiency in English on Science Courses in a Foundation Year Program. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Translation (IJLLT), 3(11), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt
Kerim, E. (2014). Effects of Using Manipulatives on Seventh Grade Students’ Achievement in Transformation Geometry and. April, 108. https://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12617286/index.pdf
Kondo, Y., Fujita, T., Kunimune, S., Jones, K., & Kumakura, H. (2014). THE INFLUENCE OF 3D REPRESENTATIONS ON S TUDENTS’ LEVEL OF 3D GEOMETRICAL THINKING. 4, 25–32.
Lafay, A., Osana, H. P., & Valat, M. (2019). Effects of Interventions with Manipulatives on Immediate Learning, Maintenance, and Transfer in Children with Mathematics Learning Disabilities: A Systematic Review. Education Research International, 20-32.
Liu, X., Zhang, Y., & Wang, Y. (2020). Reducing the gender gap in mathematics education: A meta-analysis of experimental studies. Educational Research Review, 31, 100342. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100342.
Lelinge, B., & Svensson, C. (2020). Teachers’ Awareness and Understanding of Students’ Content Knowledge of Geometric Shapes. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 78(5), 777–798. https://doi.org/10.33225/pec/20.78.777
Marougkas, A., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., & Sgouropoulou, C. (2023). Virtual Reality in Education: A Review of Learning Theories, Approaches and Methodologies for the Last Decade. Electronics (Switzerland), 12(13).
McClintock, E., Jiang, Z., & July, R. (2002). Students’ development of three-dimensional visualization in the geometer’s sketchpad environment. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 1–4, 2–17.
McRobbie, C., & Tobin, K. (1997). A social constructivist perspective on learning environments. International Journal of Science Education, 19(2), 193–208.
Mensah-Wonkyi, T., & Adu, E. (2016). Effect of the inquiry-based teaching approach on students’ understanding of circle theorems in plane geometry. African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences, 12, 61–73.
Ministry of Education. (2020). Mathematics Common Core Programme (CCP) Curriculum for JHS1 (B7)-JHS3 (B9) September, 2020. 1, i–259. www.nacca.gov.gh
Murat Kahveci. (2010). Students’ Perceptions To Use Technology For Learning: Measurement Integrity Of The Modified Fennema-Sherman. 9(1), 185–201.
Nielsen, W., Turney, A., Georgiou, H., & Jones, P. (2020). Working with multiple representations: preservice teachers’ decision-making to produce a digital explanation. Learning: Research and Practice, 6(1), 51–69.
Oldenburg, R. (2024). Reification, Curry-Howard correspondence, and didactical consequences.
Palmer, C. A., Bower, J. L., Cho, K. W., Clementi, M. A., Lau, S., Oosterhoff, B., & Alfano, C. A. (2024). Sleep loss and emotion: A systematic review and meta-analysis of over 50 years of experimental research. Psychological bulletin, 150(4), 440.
Pham, S. (2015). Teachers’ Perceptions on the Use of Math Manipulatives in Elementary Classrooms By Son Pham. April, 1–56.
Piaget, J. (1985). Computerized tomography in psychiatry. Harefuah, 108(3–4), 101–103. https://doi.org/10.3928/0048-5713-19850401-09
Ponte, R., Viseu, F., Neto, T. B., & Aires, A. P. (2023). Revisiting manipulatives in the learning of geometric figures. Frontiers in Education, 8(June), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1217680
Powell, K. C., & Kalina, C. J. (2009). Cognitive and social developing tools for an effective classrooom. Journal of Education, 130(2), 241–250. http://content.ebscohost.com.
Salehi, F., Pariafsai, F., & Dixit, M. K. (2023). The impact of misaligned idiotropic and visual axes on spatial ability under altered visuospatial conditions. Virtual Reality, 27(4), 3633-3647.
Shadaan, P., & Eu, L. K. (2013). Effectiveness of Using Geogebra on Students’ Understanding in Learning Circles. 1(4), 1–11.
Swoboda, E., & Vighi, P. (2016). Early Geometrical Thinking in the Environment of Patterns, Mosaics and Isometries. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44272-3_1
Uygun, T., & Güner, P. (2021). Van Hiele Levels of Geometric Thinking and Constructivist-Based Teaching Practices. Mersin Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(1), 22-40.
Van Compernolle, R. A. (2021). Sociocultural Theory. The Routledge Handbook of the Psychology of Language Learning and Teaching, 22–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193250002100201
Wang, M., Chen, X., Wang, S., & Shi, W. (2024). Three-dimensional geometry-based channel modeling and simulations for reconfigurable intelligent surface-assisted uav-to-ground MIMO communications. IET Communications, August 2023. https://doi.org/10.1049/cmu2.12724
Yasar, M. (2015). Short form of “mathematics attitude scale”: Its psychometric properties. Pakistan Journal of Statistics, 30(6), 1267–1277.
Yılmaz Zengin, E. T. (2017). International Forum of Educational Technology & Society Integrating Dynamic Mathematics Software into Cooperative Learning Environments in Mathematics Published by: International Forum of Educational Technology & Society Integrating Dynamic Mathematics S. 20(2), 74–88.
Zengin, Y., & Tatar, E. (2015). International Journal of Mathematical Education in The teaching of polar coordinates with dynamic mathematics software. 5211. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2014.904529.
Zhang, A., & Cutler, C. (2024). Using Manipulatives In Face-To-Face, Hybrid, And Virtual Early Childhood And Elementary Mathematics Methods. The AMTE Handbook of Mathematics Teacher Education: Reflection on Past, Present and Future–Paving the Way for the Future of Mathematics Teacher Education, Volume 5, 265.
Ziatdinov, R., & Valles Jr, J. R. (2022). Synthesis of modeling, visualization, and programming in GeoGebra as an effective approach for teaching and learning STEM topics. Mathematics, 10(3), 398.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Alhassan Baako Fuseini, Frank Gordon Joseph
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with MEJ (Mathematics Education Journal) agree to the following terms:
For all articles published in MEJ, copyright is retained by the authors. Authors give permission to the publisher to announce the work with conditions. When the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agree to automatic transfer of the publishing right to the publisher.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
