Mathematics Recovery Mapping for Persistent Problem-Solving Gaps in Secondary Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22934488Keywords:
differentiated intervention, learning recovery, mathematics intervention, problem solving, recovery mapping, secondary educationAbstract
This study investigated mathematics recovery patterns among secondary learners experiencing persistent problem-solving difficulties after participation in Mathematics intervention. Conducted in Tumauini, Isabela, the research used a repeated-measures diagnostic recovery-mapping design involving 70 Grade 10 learners selected through criterion-based total enumeration. Data were gathered using a Mathematics Problem-Solving Recovery Assessment covering problem understanding, solution planning, solution execution, and solution evaluation. Performance patterns were analyzed through residual gap scores, generalized linear mixed-effects modeling, and Ward’s hierarchical agglomerative clustering. Results showed that overall problem-solving performance increased from 47.28 to 63.70, representing a mean gain of 16.42 points. Execution of solutions demonstrated the strongest improvement, while solution evaluation retained the largest residual gap at 44.20 points. Mixed-effects analysis confirmed a significant post-intervention improvement, although recovery varied considerably among learners. Cluster analysis identified three recovery groups: Broad Recovery, Strategy-Planning Persistence, and Multi-Process Persistence. The largest cluster consisted of learners whose difficulties remained concentrated in planning and evaluating solutions, while more than one-fourth displayed persistent gaps across the full problem-solving cycle. The findings indicate that mathematics recovery is not uniform and that average achievement gains may conceal substantial unresolved difficulties. Recovery mapping is therefore recommended as a basis for differentiated intervention, targeted strategy instruction, systematic progress monitoring, and intensified support for learners with persistent multi-process difficulties.
Downloads
References
Barcelo, L. R., Duliente, C. S., Gamaru, J. D., Madday, M. S., Villamor, P. S., & Rosario, J. B. (2025). Enhancing students’ mathematics performance through contextualized instruction and technology integration. Isabela State University Linker: Journal of Education, Social Sciences and Allied Health, 2(2), 98–108.
Carbonari, M. V., DeArmond, M., Dewey, D., Dizon-Ross, E., Goldhaber, D., Kane, T. J., McDonald, A., McEachin, A., Morton, E., Muroga, A., Salazar, A., & Staiger, D. O. (2026). Impacts of academic recovery interventions on student achievement in 2022 to 2023. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. Advance online publication.
Carotenuto, G., Di Martino, P., & Lemmi, M. (2021). Students’ suspension of sense making in problem solving. ZDM Mathematics Education, 53(4), 817–830.
Fülöp, É. (2021). Developing problem-solving abilities by learning problem-solving strategies: An exploration of teaching intervention in authentic mathematics classes. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(7), 1309–1326.
Hadi, W., & Csíkos, C. (2026). Adapting and measuring mathematical problem-solving ability among secondary school students: A Rasch model analysis. Frontiers in Education, 11, 1900403.
Kusaka, S., & Ndihokubwayo, K. (2022). Metacognitive strategies in solving mathematical word problems: A case of Rwandan primary school learners. SN Social Sciences, 2, 186.
Kyaruzi, F., Strijbos, J. W., Ufer, S., & Brown, G. T. L. (2019). Students’ formative assessment perceptions, feedback use and mathematics performance in secondary schools in Tanzania. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 26(3), 278–302.
Myers, J. A., Hughes, E. M., Witzel, B. S., Anderson, R. D., & Owens, J. (2023). A meta-analysis of mathematical interventions for increasing the word problem solving performance of upper elementary and secondary students with mathematics difficulties. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 16(1), 1–35.
Myers, J. A., Hughes, E. M., Witzel, B. S., Anderson, R. D., & Owens, J. (2021). Mathematics interventions for adolescents with mathematics difficulties: A meta-analysis. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 36(2), 145–166.
Nickow, A., Oreopoulos, P., & Quan, V. (2024). The promise of tutoring for PreK–12 learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. American Educational Research Journal, 61(1), 74–107.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volumes I and II): Country note, Philippines. OECD Publishing.
Pinger, P., Rakoczy, K., Besser, M., & Klieme, E. (2018). Implementation of formative assessment: Effects of quality of programme delivery on students’ mathematics achievement and interest. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(2), 160–182.
Pongsakdi, N., Kajamies, A., Veermans, K., Lertola, K., Vauras, M., & Lehtinen, E. (2020). What makes mathematical word problem solving challenging? Exploring the roles of word problem characteristics, text comprehension, and arithmetic skills. ZDM Mathematics Education, 52, 33–44.
Powell, S. R., Mason, E. N., Bos, S. E., Hirt, S., Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., & Lembke, E. S. (2021). A systematic review of mathematics interventions for middle-school students experiencing mathematics difficulty. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 36(4), 295–329.
UNESCO, UNICEF, & World Bank. (2022). Where are we on education recovery? Taking the global pulse of a RAPID response. UNICEF.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
