EPISTEMOLOGICAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL, AND

PEDAGOGICAL SOURCES OF DIFFICULTIES OF

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS ON
PROBLEM- SOLVING TASKS IN GENERAL
MATHEMATICS: BASIS FOR TEACHING
GUIDE RECOMMENDATIONS

PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION: A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL

2023
Volume: 12
Pages: 530-539
Document ID: 2023PEMJ1080
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.8260635
Manuscript Accepted: 2023-17-8
Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Epistemological, Psychological, and Pedagogical Sources of Difficulties of Senior High

School Students on Problem-Solving Tasks in General Mathematics:
Basis for Teaching Guide Recommendations
Gerome H. Bautista*, Analyn A. Guevara, Rowena A. Rivera
For affiliations and correspondence, see the last page.
Abstract
One of the major aims of mathematics education in the Philippines and abroad is to train students on
how to solve problems inside the mathematics classroom and in the real world. However, learners
encounter difficulties in problem-solving, and the sources of these difficulties are rarely studied. This
study then aimed to surface the sources of difficulties of senior high school students of Saint Mary’s
University on problem-solving tasks in General Mathematics by using a quantitative–qualitative
approach in describing the sources of difficulties of senior high school students in completing
mathematical tasks of problem solving, exploring epistemological, psychological and pedagogical
causes that could affect their success in mathematics. It was found out that the Grade 11 students
experience difficulty mainly because they perceive mathematics in general with too many
calculations, there is a need for them to visualize problems using figures or equations, and there is
little time given to solve a given problem. Overall, epistemological sources were found to have a
significantly greater cause of difficulty than psychological and pedagogical sources. It was then
recommended that the teaching guide for General Mathematics build on students’ self-confidence in
the nature of the subject by providing problems with a gradual increase of difficulty for students’
sense of achievement.

Keywords: obstacles of learning, nature of mathematics, psychology of learners, teacher and teaching
qualities

Introduction students’ sources of difficulties. It introduced those

Mathematics teaching, based on research, has been
continuously improved through the identification of
students’ difficulties in mathematical tasks. These
researches have recommended several teaching
preparations that consider the understanding of what
makes the topic easy or difficult (Bingolbali, Akkoç,
Ozmanta and Demir, 2011), skills where students need
to improve (Tambychik and Meerah, 2010), and
determination of conceptual basis that needs to be
clearly articulated before problem-solving (Yasin and
Enver, 2007). These instructional decisions were
influenced by the surfacing attitude of students
towards mathematics where students in all grade levels
find learning mathematics as a difficult obstacle they
have to escape from in schooling (Bingolbali, Akkoç,
Ozmanta, and Demir; White, Way, Perry, and
Southwell, 2006). At some point, if students find
difficulty in mathematics, problem-solving could also
suffer as mathematical tools are used in solving routine
and non-routine problems.
The study of Bingolbali, Akkoç, Ozmanta, and Demir
on Pre-service and In-service Teachers’ Views of the
Sources of Students’ Mathematical Difficulties used
the framework on “obstacles of learning” based on
research on several subject areas. The framework was
found to be effective in exploring and describing
difficulties in mathematics that can be attributed to
epistemological sources, psychological sources, and
pedagogical sources. Mathematical epistemology
refers to the nature of mathematics as a discipline and
as a subject in school. The epistemological sources cite
the difficult nature of mathematics based on content,
processes, utility, and enjoyment (Young – Loveridge,
Sharma, Taylor, and Hawera, 2006 as cited in
Grootenboer, Zevenbergen, and Chinnappan, 2006),
and the abstractness of its concepts. According to
Viholainen, Asikainen, and Hirvonen (2014), the view
of mathematics creates an impact on how the nature of
mathematics teaching and learning process is seen.
The authors also concluded that the inquiry into the
nature of the subject was difficult for most students.
This creates a learning gap between mathematics as a
discipline and as a part of their learning endeavors.
The psychological sources cite the difficulties that are
student-related based on the students’ personal
developments. These sources include but are not
limited to student’s strengths and weaknesses,
motivation, anxiety, abilities, prior knowledge and
experiences, and ways of thinking. According to
Newcombe, et al (2009) in their paper Psychology’s
Role in Mathematics and Science Education,
psychological aspects of learning mathematics must be
considered to bridge the gap between the cognitive

Bautista et al. 530/539

Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
processes in the students and the classroom
practices needed to address them. Students’
conceptual primitives or prior learning
experiences in mathematics define their
psychological capabilities and thus, create possible
sources of difficulties in learning the subject.
Lastly, the pedagogical sources cite the causes of the
result of the teaching process and the teacher. The
nature of the teaching creates an important aspect of
effecting the learning of the students. According to
Professor Anne Watson who led the project for the
Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education in
2011, teachers are the main instruments to help the
learners resolve their mathematical needs. She
furthered her report that qualities of effective teaching
would provide learners’ insights on into these needs
which are closely linked to their difficulties. Some of
the teacher qualities that could affect student learning
are linked to their knowledge and competencies,
attitude, preparation, and understanding of learners
(Bingolbali, Akkoç, Ozmanta, and Demir, 2011). It is
then important to consider and identify learners’
sources of difficulties in mathematical tasks as they
have ownership of the experience and greater
accountability for their learning in a learner-centered
classroom. With this, mathematical teaching should
primarily aim to enable learners to solve daily life
problems with the teachers’ and learners’ orientation
on the nature, psychology, and pedagogy of
mathematics education. Mathematics should become a
tool for learners for their training to solve real-life
problems through mathematical problem-solving
comprehension (Phonapichat, Wongwanich, and
Sujiva, 2013).
Yeo (2009) defined problem-solving in mathematics as
an intricate process for a problem solver engaged in
the mathematical task of organizing and dealing with
domain-specific and domain-general pieces of
mathematical knowledge. Lester and Kehle (2003, p.
510) emphasized that a successful problem solver
coordinates his previous experiences and knowledge
with the effort to construct new representations of the
problem and the original way of solving it. Therefore,
difficulties in mathematical tasks could hinder the
development of critical thinking and creative thinking
skills which are prerequisites for higher mathematics.
It is in this manner that teachers need to identify
teaching and learning activities that could make
problem-solving easy and enjoyable for the students.
However, more appropriate instructional interventions
in the mathematics classroom can only be made if the
teachers are able to surface not only the difficulties but
also the sources of their students’ difficulties.
Bautista et al.
Tambychik and Meera (2010) mentioned that students’
views on their difficulties can be a guideline in
mathematics assessment preparation and study
programs to assist different groups of students. This is
deemed to be crucial in instructional decisions as
attention to such could lead to more meaningful
teaching and learning processes. Yasin and Enver
(2007) also emphasized that to be able to succeed in
the mathematics teaching and learning process, it is
very important to determine special difficulties in a
particular subject.
In the Philippines, the senior high school mathematics
curriculum is new and since its conception, it has been
undergoing reconstruction through feedback from its
first year of implementation last school year
2016-2017. This is to improve the curriculum,
instruction, and assessment, and better address the
needs of Filipino learners. At Saint Mary’s University,
the senior high school mathematics teachers had
prepared teaching guides for General Mathematics,
Statistics and Probability, Pre-calculus, and Basic
Calculus. In preparing the teaching guides, which are
similar to lesson/learning plan, there is a need to
consider every student. Their sources of difficulty can
be a rich basis of possible learner-centered
activities/interventions to be included in the teaching
guide. Also, it is a must in curriculum (curriculum
guide, and syllabus or learning plan) development that
curriculum planners first consider the nature of the
learners to create relevant and responsive, engaging
and interactive teaching and learning activities to be
implemented. Thus, this study aimed to determine the
Saint Mary’s University Senior High School (SMU-
SHS) students’ sources of difficulties in their
mathematical problem-solving tasks in General
Mathematics.
Research Questions
Specifically, this study aimed at giving light to these
questions:
1. What are the senior high school students’ sources of
difficulties in mathematical problem-solving tasks in
terms of:
1.1 Epistemological Causes;
1.2 Psychological Causes; and
1.3 Pedagogical Causes?
2. Is there a significant difference among the senior
high school students’ sources of difficulties in
mathematical problem-solving tasks?
3. What recommendations can be proposed to improve
the teaching guide for General Mathematics prepared
by the SMU-SHS mathematics teachers?
531/539
Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

the Focus Group Discussion with the senior high

school mathematics teachers.
Methodology

Results and Discussion

Research Design. The study used the descriptive-
comparative research design with quantitative and
qualitative approaches in surfacing senior high school Sources of Difficulties in Mathematical Problem-
students’ sources of difficulties in completing Solving Tasks
mathematical problem-solving tasks.
Table 2. Epistemological Sources of Difficulties in
Research Environment. The study was conducted Mathematical Problem-Solving Tasks
during the School Year 2017-2018 at Saint Mary’s
University – Senior High School (SMU-SHS)
Department offering three tracks – Academic, Arts and
Design, and Technical-Vocational and Livelihood
Tracks.

Research Respondents. There were 468 Grade 11

students chosen from 12 sections of the SMU-SHS
through non-random cluster sampling, and four (4)
senior high school mathematics teachers who taught
General Mathematics.

Research Instrument. This study used a researcher-

made questionnaire with three parts – Part I contains
demographic profile, Part II contains the items for
sources of difficulties, and Part III contains an open-
ended question. The questionnaire was found to be
highly acceptable reliability coefficient with
Cronbach’s alpha equal to 0.942. A semi-structure
interview was also used for the Focus Group
Discussion with the senior high school mathematics
teachers.

Treatment of Data. The study used means and

standard deviation to describe the different sources of
difficulties using the mean ranges in Table 1.
Table 1. Qualitative Descriptions for the Mean Ranges
Also, Repeated Measures Analysis of Variance was
used to determine any significant difference among the
three sources. And the qualitative data from the
respondents was used to support quantitative findings.
Thematic analysis was used to analyze the results of
As seen in Table 2, the respondent’s answer to the
item “Mathematics has too many calculations.”
resulted to the highest mean of 3.35 (s=.662) which
means that among the items under the epistemological
sources, this is rated to be the top source of their
difficulty in problem-solving tasks. It is followed by
the item, “Mathematics is very challenging to learn.”
with a mean of 3.33 (s=.669). On the other hand, the
lowest source of their difficulty is from the item,
“Mathematics has limited or no use at all for my
future.” with a mean of 1.87 (s=.840).
Generally, the epistemological aspect of mathematics
as a subject turned out to be a moderate cause of
difficulty for the respondents in their mathematical
problem-solving tasks, M=2.7238, s=.33804.

Bautista et al. 532/539

Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Table 3. Distribution of Responses Categorized as
Epistemological Sources of Difficulty
emphasized that this kind of belief towards the subject
can have a profound effect on the learning process
with a primary effect on the relevant behavior of the
learners. This behavior in the study is based on the
evidence that some students feel dizzy when
confronted with numerous formulas or solutions. It can
also be seen in Table 3 that the respondents experience
difficulty in problem-solving tasks in General
Mathematics because of their notion that mathematics
is difficult (2.1%) and that math is complex (0.6%).
One respondent also reiterated in his answer that math
is very challenging to learn which, based on Table 2,
has the second highest mean.

Table 4. Psychological Sources of Difficulties in

Mathematical Problem Solving Tasks

Table 3 above shows the distribution of answers

provided by the respondents to the open-ended
question. When the respondents were asked what
makes problem-solving in General Mathematics
difficult, 82 of their responses included causes rooted
in the epistemological nature of the subject or
mathematics in general. Out of 468 respondents, 59
(12.6%) mentioned that their subject General
Mathematics contains too many and too long formula,
including long solutions and many numbers. This is
reflective of the statement in Table 4 with the highest
mean where the topmost cause under epistemological
causes is rooted in mathematics having too many
calculations. This suggests that the load of formulas
and topics included in the subject makes problem
solving difficult. Indeed, the subject includes many
formulas, most especially for the chapters on Business
Mathematics. More formulas cause difficulty in
memorization; and consequently, if the formula is
forgotten, the student cannot answer the problem
anymore. This kind of impact mathematics has on
learning the subject has been identified by Viholainen,
Asikainen, and Hirvonen (2014) which causes learning
gaps between the learners and the discipline itself.

Also, some respondents said that the numbers in the As seen from Table 4, among the different
subject make them dizzy just by looking at it. The
psychological sources of difficulties, the statement
cause of difficulty then can be attributed to the nature
“ The problems need visualization through
of mathematics. This could be considered as an
figures/modelling through equations.” had the highest
implied result of the respondents having trouble being
mean of 2.95 (s=.640) which puts it on top as a
introduced to numerous formulas in the study of
psychological source. This is followed by the
General Mathematics. Lising and Elby (2004)

Bautista et al. 533/539

Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
statement “There is a need to recall mathematical facts
related to the problem." with a mean of 2.93 (s=.686),
and “There is pressure to solve the problem correctly.”
with a mean of 2.90 (s=.729).
The least source of difficulty based on the mean of the
responses is from the item “I do not enjoy doing
mathematics.” with a mean of 2.22 (s=.830). This
student’sttitude towards mathematics slightly causes
difficulty in accomplishing problem-solving tasks in
General Mathematics.
Overall, the respondents rated the psychological
factors to be a moderate cause of difficulty in problem-
solving tasks, M=2.5079, s=.51273.
Table 5. Distribution of Responses Categorized as
Psychological Sources of Difficulty
Although the highest mean is on the difficulty on the
need for visualization for the learners, majority of the
responses classified under psychological sources fall
under being confused on what the problem says and
asks, and being forgetful of what solutions to use. As
presented in Table 7, among 468 respondents, 55
(11.8%) respondents stated their confusions. This
Bautista et al.
confusion can be connected with the number one
epistemological source which is on the bulk of
formulas and equations to be used in problem solving.
With confusion on the problems, the respondents
experience misinterpretation of the problems which
makes problem solving difficult. Also, confusion
resulted into incorrect analysis of the problem for the
respondents.
This result is supported by the findings from the
studies of Tambychika and Meera (2010) that
difficulty in problem solving among students is
attributed to facts recall which influences
mathematical efficiency. Also, Phonapichat,
Wongwanich and Sujiva (2014) found out that
problem solving is difficult for the students because
they are unable to figure out what to assume and what
information from the problem is necessary to solve it,
which Novriani and Surya (2017) also supported when
they concluded that students often misinterpret the
problems given to them.
Psychologically, this confusion or uncertainty can be
attributed to the intellectual capacities of the learners.
Since problem-solving in General Mathematics
requires several formulas or equations to be used and
the cognitive load of a learner is limited, it is possible
that what the learner studied can be mixed up, and
recalling the correct solution to be used could be
difficult. It is in this situation that Cognitive Load
Theory (CLT) can explain the confusion. According to
Kirschner, Sweller & Clark (2007 as cited in Elliot,
Kurz, Beddow & Frey, 2009), CLT researchers have
accepted the notion that people’s working memory is
definitely limited, both in capacity and duration, when
they process new information. Therefore, this
limitation on information that can be stored in short-
term memories can confuse learners on what
information can be retrieved to respond (answer) to a
particular stimulus (question).
It was also found from their responses that their
difficulty in problem-solving is attributed to the
behavior of their classmates or their behavior – that
they have difficulty understanding the lesson because
of their noise or the behavior of the class, in general.
Out of 468 respondents, 50 (10.7%) said that problem-
solving becomes difficult because they are not
listening to their teacher during class discussions, they
did not take the lessons seriously, and they are not
cooperating in class as well. This scenario really
created difficulty for the respondents because if they
did not participate well in classroom discussions
would be difficult for them to answer the word
problems since they did not understand the lessons
first.
534/539
Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
Pedagogically speaking, this could be attributed to the
classroom management techniques of the teacher but
their responses focused on their own behavior, and not
because the teacher lacked good control of the class.
Table 6. Pedagogical Sources of Difficulties in
Mathematical Problem-Solving Tasks
On pedagogical sources of difficulties, Table 8 shows
that all items somewhat cause difficulty in the
problem-solving tasks of the respondents in General
Mathematics. The item “There is little time given to
solve a given problem.” is the top pedagogical source
of difficulty with a mean of 2.32 (s=.791) followed by
the item “The problems provided are too long.” with a
mean of 2.30 (s=.786).
At the bottom source of difficulty are the items “My
teacher does not take the lessons seriously.” and “My
teacher gives negative feedback on wrong answers to
problems.” with means of 1.69 (s=.673) and 1.67
(s=.652), respectively.
Overall, the pedagogical sources only have a slight
cause of difficulty for the respondents in their
problem-solving tasks in General Mathematics,
M=1.9937, s=.43648.
Bautista et al.
Table 7. Distribution of Responses Categorized as
Pedagogical Sources of Difficulty
As seen in Table 7, the topmost pedagogical source of
difficulty mentioned by the respondents is the
teachers’ choice of problem-solving tasks, problems
being too abstract, complex, unfamiliar contexts,
confusing, and too long with 35 (7.55) respondents
experiencing this. Such a result is related to the
statement with the second highest mean in Table 8 on
the cause of difficulty about problems that are too
long. This pedagogical source can be attributed to the
psychological source of difficulty that students are
experiencing confusion in solving problems because
the problems provided are too difficult for them to
understand and analyze. Phonapichat, Wongwanich,
and Sujiva concluded that students are really impatient
and do not like to read mathematical problems which
relates to the difficulty of trying to answer word
problems that are complicated or too long that require
thorough understanding and analysis. Given the
limited time to answer problems as identified by the
respondents in Table 7 as the topmost pedagogical
source with the highest mean, analyzing problems will
really be difficult for them.
On the other pedagogical sources, respondents also
stated that problem-solving becomes difficult for them
because of the teachers’ fast pace of instruction which
535/539
Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
some revealed that their teachers talk too fast for them
to cope with. Given that mathematics was described by
the respondents as a subject with too many formulas or
equations to memorize, and that this number confuses
them even in understanding the problem, talking too
fast during classroom discussion could really result in
failure in accomplishing problem-solving tasks.
Teachers’ capability to explain well the lessons and to
provide meaningful contexts in their problem-solving
tasks can lessen such difficulty as linguistic
complexity is attributed to the mathematical difficulty
of the problems (Barbu, 2010). If students were not
able to understand the lesson very well because the
teacher did not teacher very well or the teacher was too
fast in discussion, consequently, achievement in
problem solving tasks will really suffer.
Test of Significant Differences on the Senior High
School Students’ Sources of Difficulties
Table 8. Descriptive Statistics and Tests of Within-
Subjects Effects for the Measure, Sources of
Difficulties
Based on Table 8, epistemological sources had the
highest computed mean of 2.7238 which means this is
a moderate cause of difficulty, followed by
psychological sources which had a mean of 2.5079,
and by pedagogical sources which had a mean of
1.9937.
The results of the repeated measures ANOVA showed
that there was a significant difference among the three
sources of difficulties as shown by the Greenhouse-
Geisser correction, F1.738, 811.698=565.299,p<.05,
◻p2=.548.
Bautista et al.
Table 9. Post hoc Test (Pairwise Comparison) on the
Sources of Difficulties
Post hoc tests using the Bonferroni correction revealed
in Table 9 that based on the respondents’ answers,
epistemological sources have significantly greater
causes of difficulty in their problem-solving tasks than
psychological sources and pedagogical sources (p-
values<0.05). Moreover, psychological sources have
significantly greater causes of difficulty than
pedagogical sources (p<.05). Thus, it can be
concluded that the epistemological source is the most
affecting source of difficulty for the respondents,
followed by psychological source and pedagogical
source. This is evident in the interconnected sources of
difficulty by the respondents based on the previous
discussions. Seeing mathematics as a complex subject
with many equations and formulas, the nature in turns
is a source of psychological source where students
experience confusion on what equation or formula to
use or on how to visualize the problems, and
magnified by the pedagogical source that problems
given to them are too abstract or too complicated to
answer.
This result concerning students’ answers based on
their experiences is different from what pre-service
and in-service teachers had revealed in the study of
Bingolbali, Akkoc, Ozmantar, and Demir (2014)
where they tend to attribute students’ difficulties to
student-related factors or psychological causes.
Investigating sources of difficulties is a major
springboard to better understand the abilities of
mathematics learners in terms of problem-solving.
Based on the study, it can be concluded that, in
particular, epistemological and psychological sources
were found to be moderate causes of difficulty in
problem-solving tasks in General Mathematics, while
pedagogical sources cause difficulty at a lower extent.
These differences were found to be significantly
different from the nature of mathematics at the top.
Senior High School Mathematics Teachers’
Experiences on the Sources of Difficulty
The senior high school mathematics teachers surfaced
536/539
Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
sources of difficulty in problem-solving tasks in
General Mathematics that their students experienced in
the classroom. These sources are on lack of
foundations in concepts and skills where senior high
school students lack understanding of basic concepts
of functions needed in General Mathematics, and poor
skills in integer operations.
Another source according to the teachers is poor
reading comprehension. Senior high students,
according to them, experience difficulty because of
language barriers where they do not understand the
terms used in the problem or misunderstood the
problem due to confusion on the terms used.
Other sources identified by the teachers are on
students’ views on the non-use of mathematics in the
real world, and teacher-factor on increasing students’
interest or motivation.
Recommendations for the Teaching Guide in
General Mathematics
Based on the findings and conclusions, the following
recommendations are forwarded for the improvement
of the General Mathematics Teaching Guide.
Since the nature of mathematics as a discipline greatly
affects Grade 11 students on their problem-solving
tasks, mathematical appreciation must be developed
first among students before solving any problem which
can be done in providing enjoyable and/or interactive
learning activities during classroom discussions.
Creative works on functions, business mathematics,
and logic can also be developed to increase
mathematical appreciation. Moreover, mathematics
can be appreciated better if students are engaged in
more activities focused on the usefulness of the subject
in the learners’ daily and future lives.
In addition to that, since many Grade 11 learners
complain about being confronted with too many and
too long formulas and equations, especially under
Business Mathematics, teachers can develop
mnemonic devices to easily remember the formulas or
provide drill activities to be able to memorize these
formulas or equations. They can also adapt or modify
existing mnemonic devices from the web or from
books that can be applied to the formulas and
equations in General Mathematics. Whitney (2017)
created the Math Handbook of Formulas, Processes
and Tricks which can develop students’ easier
manipulation of formulas and equations which
students will find easy to understand.
Bautista et al.
On psychological sources of difficulties where
students experience confusion on what the problem
says or what formula/equation to use, some
recommendations for the teaching guide is to include a
problem-solving framework in its tasks. George Polya
developed one influential framework which had been
helping students achieve success in mathematical
problem-solving tasks (Dannawi, 2013). Also, based
on the findings, many students are having problems on
attending to tasks because of their classmates’
behavior in the classroom. Thus, teaching guides must
include engaging tasks and differentiated learning
activities for the different types of learners to capture
their interest and attention. Rivas (2016) suggested
differentiated products to allow students have choices
on their problem-solving tasks and by providing tasks
at varying levels of difficulty to match their readiness
for instruction. In addressing students’ interest to
minimize their inattentiveness in class, teachers can
provide in their teaching guides a provision for broad
access to and use of a wide range of technologies to be
used in problem-solving tasks. Non-routine problems
can be solved using discovery with the assistance of
various technologies.
Based on the pedagogical sources of difficulties,
teachers are recommended to include in their teaching
guide more problem-solving tasks with varied levels of
difficulties, preferably arranged from the easiest to the
most difficult or challenging. This is to gradually
increase students’ self-confidence with the teacher, the
topic, and the subject itself. On the other hand,
problem-solving tasks in the teaching guide must be
checked on their time allotment maximized for the
lowest achiever in the class. Also, since linguistic
capability is a major indicator of success in problem-
solving tasks, vocabulary development by unlocking
difficulties should be done for problems especially
when the real-life context is used. Regarding teachers’
fast pace of instruction, teachers should strictly follow
the schedule in the teaching guide and prepare on the
teaching guide alternative learning activities for
unavoidable class disturbances due to school-based
activities.
Conclusion
Based on the findings of the study, the following were
concluded: (1) Senior high school students associate,
to the greatest extent, their difficulty in problem-
solving tasks with how they view the nature of
mathematics as a discipline and a subject with too
many calculations, followed by their own nature as
mathematics learners on their capabilities to
537/539
Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article
understand problems, and the nature of the teaching
and learning process on teacher’s choice of problems
and time given to solve them. (2) Senior high school
mathematics teachers tend to attribute students’
difficulty in problem-solving tasks to psychological
sources of difficulty in students’ cognitive and
behavioral aspects. (3) The recommendations for the
teaching guide address the different sources of
difficulty with a primary focus on the progressive
increase of students’ attitude towards mathematics and
learning it.
Based on the findings and conclusions of the study, the
following recommendations are forwarded: (1)
Problem-solving in General Mathematics should be
carefully presented to the students for a more effective
transition from the lesson proper to the problem-
solving tasks. (2) Teachers should effectively diagnose
and check the prior knowledge and skills of the
students before proceeding to problem-solving tasks.
(3) Teachers should include activities that could
enhance the mathematical vocabulary of the students
to comprehend the problem-solving tasks given to
them. (4) Senior high school mathematics teachers
should consider the recommendations of this study for
the enhancement of their teaching guide for General
Mathematics. (5) Extensive research is still
recommended for evaluating the competencies and,
instructional and assessment activities of the teaching
guide against the achieved competencies of the
students at the end of the semester to clearly gauge the
gap with the intended and the implemented
curriculum.
References
Barbu, O. (2010). Effects of Linguistics Complexity and Math
Difficulty on Word Problem Solving by English Learners.
International Journal of Education, 2(2), 1 – 19.
Bingolbali, E., Akkoç, H., Ozmantar, M. F., & Demir, S. (2011).
Pre-Service and In-Service Teachers◻ Views of the Sources of
Students◻ Mathematical Difficul-ties. International Electronic
Journal of Mathematics Education, 6(1), 40-59.
Dannawi, D. M. (2013). A Study on Effect of Problem solving on
student's achievement (Doctoral dissertation, The British University
i n D u b a i ( B U i D ) ) . R e t r i e v e d f r o m
h t tp s :/ /b s pa c e .bu id . a c. a e/ ha ndl e /1 23 4/ 415
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal
guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure
of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and
inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. In
Elliott, S. N., Kurz, A., Beddow, P., & Frey, J. (2009, February).
Cognitive load theory: Instruction-based research with applications
for designing tests. In Proceedings of the National Association of
School Psychologists' Annual Convention, Boston, MA,
February (Vol. 24, pp. 1-22).
Bautista et al.
Lester, F. K., & Kehle, P. E. (2003). From problem solving to
modeling: The evolution of thinking about research on complex
mathematical activity. Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling
perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and
teaching, 501-518.
Lising, L., & Elby, A. (2004). The impact of epistemology on
learning: A case study from introductory physics. arXiv preprint
physics/0411007.
Newcombe, N. S., Ambady, N., Eccles, J., Gomez, L., Klahr, D.,
Linn, M., ... & Mix, K. (2009). Psychology’s role in mathematics
and science education. American Psychologist, 64(6), 538.
Novriani, M., & Surya, E. (2017). Analysis of Student Difficulties in
Mathematics Problem Solving Ability at MTs SWASTA IRA
Medan. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied
Research (IJSBAR)(2017), 33(3), 63-75.
Phonapichat, P., Wongwanich, S., & Sujiva, S. (2014). An analysis
of elementary school students’ difficulties in mathematical problem
solving. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 3169-3174.
Rivas, S. A. (2016). Implementing Differentiated Instruction in
Secondary Math Classes (Doctoral dissertation, University of
Houston-Downtown). Retrieved from
http://cms.uhd.edu/faculty/redlt/rivasseniorproject.pdf
Southwell, B., White, A. L., Way, J., & Perry, B. (2006). Attitudes
versus achievement in pre-service mathematics teaching. In
Refereed Proceedings of the Australian Association for Research in
Education Annual Conference.
Tambychik, T., & Meerah, T. S. M. (2010). Students’ difficulties in
mathematics problem-solving: What do they say?. Procedia-Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 142-151.
Viholainen, A., Asikainen, M., & Hirvonen, P. E. (2014).
Mathematics student teachers’ epistemological beliefs about the
nature of mathematics and the goals of mathematics teaching and
learning in the beginning of their studies. Eurasia Journal of
Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(2), 159-171.
Whitney, E. L. (2017). Math handbook of formulas, processes and
tricks. Retrieved from
http://mathguy.us/Handbooks/PreAlgebraHandbook.pdf
Yasin, S., & Enver, T. (2007). Students′ Difficulties with
Application of Definite Integration. Educatia Matematica, 3(1-2),
1 5 - 27. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Enver_Tatar/publication/24268
5561_StudentsDifficulties_with_Application_of_Definite_Integratio
n_1/links/54ed455f0cf2465f5330ec6d/StudentsDifficulties-with-
Application-of-Definite-Integration-1.pdf
Yeo, K. K. J. (2009). Secondary 2 Students' Difficulties in Solving
Non-Routine Problems. International Journal for Mathematics
Teaching and Learning.
Young-Loveridge, J., Taylor, M., Sharma, S., & Hāwera, N. (2006).
Students' perspectives on the nature of mathematics. In Mathematics
Education Research Group of Australasia Incorporated. Conference
(Grootenboer, P., Zevenbergen, R., & Chinnappan, M. (2005).
Identities Cultures and Learning Spaces: Proceedings of the 29 Th
Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of
Australasia, Melbourne, 1-5 July, 2006. MERGA.
538/539
Psych Educ, 2023, 12: 530-539, Document ID:2023 PEMJ1080, doi:10.5281/zenodo.8260635, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Affiliations and Corresponding Information

Gerome H. Bautista
Saint Mary’s University – Philippines
Analyn A. Guevara
Saint Mary’s University – Philippines
Rowena A. Rivera
Saint Mary’s University - Philippines

Bautista et al. 539/539