Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)
Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

SINTA

1.6519

Impact

GScholar

16

H-Index

Journal Evaluation in Education (JEE)

an Open Access Journal

How ICT Supports the Mathematical Problem-Solving Learning Process of Secondary School Students: A Systematic Literature Review

Ahmad Dzulfikar ORCID
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Turmudi Turmudi ORCID
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Tatang Herman ORCID
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
tatangherman@upi.edu
Kusnandi Kusnandi ORCID
Indonesia University of Education ROR
Indonesia
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study aims to systematically examine the role of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in supporting students’ mathematical problem-solving processes at the secondary school level. It addresses the current gap in the literature by providing a focused synthesis of how ICT is utilized in mathematics education to enhance students’ problem-solving abilities.

    Methodology: A Systematic Literature Review was conducted following the PRISMA protocol. Articles were sourced from reputable databases, such as Scopus, Taylor & Francis Online (Tandfonline), and Education Resources Information Center (ERIC). Through a rigorous selection process based on relevance and quality criteria, 25 peer-reviewed articles published within the past ten years were analyzed and synthesized.

    Main Findings: The review reveals that ICT is widely employed to improve the quality of instruction and students’ problem-solving skills in mathematics. ICT supports learning across various topics such as geometry, calculus, and algebra, mainly through visualization tools and interactive simulations. Furthermore, ICT serves multiple roles: as a medium for ICT-assisted instruction, a complement to instructional materials, a platform for online learning, an assessment tool and a resource for student-directed learning, and as an adaptive and diagnostic learning systems.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study contributes a focused and systematic analysis of how ICT specifically enhances mathematical problem-solving at the secondary level, a perspective that has been underrepresented in existing reviews. By identifying the specific functions and impacts of ICT in this context, the study lays the groundwork for future research and development of ICT-based pedagogical strategies in mathematics education.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    “How ICT Supports the Mathematical Problem-Solving Learning Process of Secondary School Students: A Systematic Literature Review”, Jor. Eva. Edu, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 924–936, Jul. 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i3.1649.

    More Citation Formats

  • 1188
    Abstract views
    353
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. J. P. C. Demapendan, E. A. T. Aquino, and G. P. Hilario, “Technology and livelihood education learning brochures for grade 7 students,” J. Eval. Educ., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 177–189, 2024, doi: 10.37251/jee.v5i4.1113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v5i4.1113
    2. T. W. Chun and M. M. Yunus, “Exploring teachers’ technology acceptance during COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review (2020-2022),” Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ., vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 956–968, 2023, doi: 10.11591/ijere.v12i2.25398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v12i2.25398
    3. D. Stoilescu, “Exploring challenges in integrating ICT in secondary mathematics with TPACK,” Southeast Asian Math. Educ. J., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 35–56, 2014, doi: 10.46517/seamej.v4i1.28. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46517/seamej.v4i1.28
    4. J. Garzón and J. Acevedo, “Meta-analysis of the impact of Augmented Reality on students’ learning gains,” Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 27, pp. 244–260, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2019.04.001
    5. I. Žilinskiene and M. Demirbilek, “Use of geogebra in primary math education in Lithuania: An exploratory study from teachers’ perspective,” Informatics Educ., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 129–144, 2015, doi: 10.15388/infedu.2015.08. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2015.08
    6. A. Hamid, T. Yuniarsih, D. Disman, and B. Santoso, “The impact of digital technology transformation on lecturer performance in higher education: An innovation diffusion perspective,” J. Eval. Educ., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 611–617, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i2.1526. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i2.1526
    7. NCTM, Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2000.
    8. E. Tatar and Y. Zengin, “Conceptual understanding of definite integral with GeoGebra,” Comput. Sch., vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 120–132, 2016, doi: 10.1080/07380569.2016.1177480. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2016.1177480
    9. P. J. K. Wen and S. M. Maat, “Integration of ICT in teaching and learning of mathematics: Feature of systematic literature,” Malaysian J. Soc. Sci. Humanit., vol. 5, no. 12, pp. 288–299, 2020, doi: 10.47405/mjssh.v5i12.582. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47405/mjssh.v5i12.582
    10. M. De Vita, L. Verschaffel, and J. Elen, “Interactive whiteboards in mathematics teaching: A literature review,” Educ. Res. Int., vol. 2014, no. 401315, pp. 1–16, 2014, doi: 10.1155/2014/401315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/401315
    11. A. Bray and B. Tangney, “Technology usage in mathematics education research – A systematic review of recent trends,” Comput. Educ., vol. 114, pp. 255–273, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.004
    12. K. Das, “Role of ICT for better mathematics teaching,” Shanlax Int. J. Educ., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 19–28, 2019, doi: 10.34293/ education.v7i4.641. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v7i4.641
    13. C. Rodríguez-Jiménez, J. C. de la Cruz-Campos, M. N. Campos-Soto, and M. Ramos-Navas-Parejo, “Teaching and learning mathematics in primary education: The role of ICT-A systematic review of the literature,” Mathematics, vol. 11, no. 272, 2023, doi: 10.3390/math11020272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/math11020272
    14. S. Asare et al., “The role of ICT in teaching and learning mathematics at college of education: A systematic review,” J. Educ. Pract., vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 70–77, 2023, doi: 10.7176/jep/14-12-06. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7176/JEP/14-12-06
    15. S. Krulik and J. A. Rudnick, Problem Solving: A Handbook for Elementary School Teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc, 1988.
    16. R. Novita, Zulkardi, and Y. Hartono, “Exploring primary student’s problem-solving ability by doing tasks Like PISA’s question,” J. Math. Educ., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 133–150, 2012, [Online]. Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1078578.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.3.2.571.133-150
    17. P. Liljedahl, M. Santos-Trigo, U. Malaspina, and R. Bruder, Problem Solving in Mathematics Education. Hamburg: Springer, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.12657/27743/1/1002262.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-40730-2_1
    18. Patmaniar, S. M. Amin, and R. Sulaiman, “Students’ growing understanding in solving mathematics problems based on gender: elaborating folding back,” J. Math. Educ., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 507–530, 2021, doi: 10.22342/JME.12.3.14267.507-530. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.12.3.14267.507-530
    19. A. Peng, A. Ezeife, and B. Yu, “Reciprocal learning in mathematics problem posing and problem solving: An interactive study between two Canadian and Chinese elementary schools,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 16, no. 12, p. em1913, 2020, doi: 10.5206/cie-eci.v47i1.9323. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9130
    20. M. S. Alabdulaziz, “The effect of using PDEODE teaching strategy supported by the e-learning environment in teaching mathematics for developing the conceptual understanding and problem-solving skills among primary stage students,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 18, no. 5, p. em2109, 2022, doi: 10.29333/ejmste/12019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12019
    21. B. Rott, “Teachers’ behaviors, epistemological beliefs, and their interplay in lessons on the topic of problem solving,” Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ., vol. 18, pp. 903–924, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10763-019-09993-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09993-0
    22. M. Simbolon, J. J. Pongkendek, A. Henukh, and D. Rochintaniawati, “Teachers’ and students’ feedback on sociocultural interactive digital modules for science literacy and problem-solving: A transformative learning approach,” J. Eval. Educ., vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 241–248, 2025, doi: 10.37251/jee.v6i1.1314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37251/jee.v6i1.1314
    23. V. Díaz, M. Aravena, and G. Fores, “Solving problem types contextualized to the quadratic function and error analysis: A case study,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 16, no. 11, p. em1896, 2020, doi: 10.29333/EJMSTE/8547. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/8547
    24. E. D. Spangenberg and A. K. Pithmajor, “Grade 9 mathematics learners’ strategies in solving number-pattern problems,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 16, no. 7, p. em1862, 2020, doi: 10.29333/EJMSTE/8252. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/8252
    25. L. G. Martins and M. H. Martinho, “Two problem-solving experiences: presential vs virtual,” J. High. Educ. Theory Pract., vol. 21, no. 13, pp. 27–38, 2021, doi: 10.33423/jhetp.v21i13.4785. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v21i13.4785
    26. S. S. K. M. Yatim, S. Saleh, H. Zulnaidi, and S. A. M. Yatim, “Effects of integrating a brain-based teaching approach with GeoGebra on problem-solving abilities,” Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 2078–2086, 2022, doi: 10.11591/ijere.v11i4.22873. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v11i4.22873
    27. A. F. Saunders, F. Spooner, and L. Ley Davis, “Using video prompting to teach mathematical problem solving of real-world video-simulation problems,” Remedial Spec. Educ., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 53–64, 2018, doi: 10.1177/0741932517717042. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517717042
    28. T. Hidayat and R. Mahardiko, “A systematic literature review method on AES Algorithm for data sharing encryption on cloud computing,” Int. J. Artif. Intelegence Res., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 49–57, 2020, doi: 10.29099/ijair.v4i1.154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29099/ijair.v4i1.154
    29. A. Martín-martín, E. Orduna-malea, E. D. López-cózar, and A. Martín-martín, “Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories,” J. Informetr., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1160–1177, 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2018.09.002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002
    30. J. Zhu and W. Liu, “A tale of two databases: The use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers,” Sci. Junwen, vol. 123, pp. 321–335, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8
    31. L. M. O. Räty, E. K. Kontu, and R. A. Pirttimaa, “Teaching children with intellectual disabilities: Analysis of research-based recommendations,” J. Educ. Learn., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 318–336, 2016, doi: 10.5539/jel.v5n2p318. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n2p318
    32. C. Okoli, “A guide to conducting a standalone systematic literature review,” Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., vol. 37, pp. 879–910, 2015, doi: 10.17705/1cais.03743. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03743
    33. R. Supinah and J. Soebagyo, “Analisis bibliometrik terhadap tren penggunaan ICT pada pembelajaran matematika,” JNPM (Jurnal Nas. Pendidik. Mat., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 276–290, 2022, doi: 10.33603/jnpm.v6i2.6153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33603/jnpm.v6i2.6153
    34. C. Holroyd, “Technological innovation and building a ‘super smart’ society: Japan’s vision of society 5.0,” J. Asian Public Policy, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 18–31, 2020, doi: 10.1080/17516234.2020.1749340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2020.1749340
    35. Mailizar, A. Almanthari, S. Maulina, and S. Bruce, “Secondary school mathematics teachers’ views on e-learning implementation barriers during the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of Indonesia,” Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 16, no. 7, p. em1860, 2020, doi: 10.29333/EJMSTE/8240. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/8240
    36. K. P. Adhikari, D. R. Joshi, and K. P. Sharma, “Factors associated with the challenges in teaching mathematics online during COVID-19 pandemic,” Contemp. Math. Sci. Educ., vol. 3, no. 2, p. ep22014, 2022, doi: 10.30935/conmaths/12225. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/12225
    37. T. Tambychik and T. S. M. Meerah, “Students’ difficulties in mathematics problem solving: what do they say?,” Procedia – Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 8, pp. 142–151, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.020
    38. A. H. Abdullah, B. Shin, U. H. A. Kohar, D. F. Ali, N. A. Samah, and Z. M. Ashari, “A comparative study of teaching problem-solving in mathematics secondary schools in Malaysia and South Korea,” in 2019 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Education (TALE), 2019, pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1109/TALE48000.2019.9226011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE48000.2019.9226011
    39. I. K. Amalina and T. Vidákovich, “An integrated STEM-based mathematical problem-solving test: Developing and reporting psychometric evidence,” J. Math. Educ., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 587–604, 2022, doi: 10.22342/jme.v13i4.pp587-604. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v13i4.pp587-604
    40. Kemdikbud, “Digitalisasi Sekolah Mendayung Generasi Indonesia Maju,” Jendela Pendidik. dan Kebud., vol. XXXIX, 2019, [Online]. Available: http://repositori.kemdikbud.go.id/17228/1/EDISI-39-2019-1.pdf
    41. NCTM, Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1989.
    42. Y. Yerizon, I. M. Arnawa, N. Fitriani, and N. M. Tajudin, “Constructing calculus concepts through worksheet based problem-based learning assisted by GeoGebra software,” HighTech Innov. J., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 282–296, 2022, doi: 10.28991/HIJ-2022-03-03-04. DOI: https://doi.org/10.28991/HIJ-2022-03-03-04
    43. I. M. R. Albaladejo, M. Del Mar García, and A. Codina, “Developing mathematical competencies in secondary students by introducing dynamic geometry systems in the classroom,” Egit. ve Bilim, vol. 40, no. 177, pp. 43–58, 2015, doi: 10.15390/EB.2015.2640. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2015.2640
    44. L. Diaz-Nunja, J. Rodríguez-Sosa, and S. K. Lingán, “Teaching of geometry with Geogebra software in high school students of an educational institution in Lima,” Propósitos y Represent., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 217–251, 2018, doi: 10.20511/pyr2018.v6n2.251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20511/pyr2018.v6n2.251
    45. A. T. T. Nguyen, H. N. Thanh, C. Le Minh, D. H. Tong, B. P. Uyen, and N. D. Khiem, “Combining flipped classroom and GeoGebra software in teaching mathematics to develop math problem-solving abilities for secondary school students in Vietnam,” Math. Teaching-Research J., vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 69–97, 2023, [Online]. Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1409361.pdf
    46. M. Jamaluddin, M. Mustaji, B. S. Bachri, and A. P. Sutarto, “The role of gender and self-efficacy on the relationship between flipped and flex blended learning and mathematics abilities,” Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 873–881, 2023, doi: 10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.5.1882. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.5.1882
    47. H. Nindiasari et al., “The use of augmented reality to improve students’ geometry concept problem-solving skills through the STEAM approach,” Infin. J., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 119–138, 2024, doi: 10.22460/infinity.v13i1.p119-138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v13i1.p119-138
    48. B. Fetaji, M. Fetaji, M. Ebibi, and F. Fetaji, “Devising VIMATE framework to assess the impact of visualization tools on geometric reasoning and problem-solving skills,” TEM J., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 3479–3485, 2024, doi: 10.18421/TEM134-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM134-80
    49. A. R. Hakim, Kartono, Wardono, and A. N. Cahyono, “Developing MoAR-integrated printed learning modules to improve mathematical problem-solving abilities in geometry learning,” Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol., vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 898–909, 2024, doi: 10.18178/ijiet.2024.14.6.2116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2024.14.6.2116
    50. E. R. Fyfe, “Providing feedback on computer-based algebra homework in middle-school classrooms,” Comput. Human Behav., vol. 63, pp. 568–574, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.082. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.082
    51. C. R. Beal and L. P. Rosenblum, “Evaluation of the effectiveness of a tablet computer application (App) in helping students with visual impairments solve mathematics problems,” J. Vis. Impair. Blind., vol. 112, no. 1, pp. 5–19, 2018, doi: 10.1177/0145482x1811200102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1811200102
    52. M. A. S. Parrot and K. E. Leong, “Impact of using Graphing Calculator in problem solving,” Int. Electron. J. Math. Educ., vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 139–148, 2018, doi: 10.12973/iejme/2704. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/iejme/2704
    53. S. Setiyani, N. Fitriyani, and L. Sagita, “Improving student’s mathematical problem solving skills through Quizizz,” JRAMathEdu (Journal Res. Adv. Math. Educ., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 276–288, 2020, doi: 10.23917/jramathedu.v5i3.10696. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23917/jramathedu.v5i3.10696
    54. D. Cardozo and J. P. Possamai, “The dimensions of making sense: The understanding of exponential functions from an investigative activity,” Acta Sci., vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 2–19, 2019, doi: 10.17648/acta.scientiae.v21iss4id4565. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17648/acta.scientiae.v21iss4id4565
    55. I. M. Suarsana, I. A. P. D. Lestari, and N. M. S. Mertasari, “The effect of online problem posing on students’ problem-solving abilitiy in mathematics,” Int. J. Instr., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 809–820, 2019, doi: 10.29333/iji.2019.12152a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2019.12152a
    56. D. Rais and Z. Xuezhi, “Human cognitive: learning mathematics through python programming to support students’ problem-solving skills,” Anatol. J. Educ., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 85–98, 2023, doi: 10.29333/aje.2023.826a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/aje.2023.826a
    57. S. M. E. Harding, P. E. Griffin, N. Awwal, B. M. M. Alom, and C. Scoular, “Measuring collaborative problem solving using mathematics-based tasks,” AERA Open, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1–19, 2017, doi: 10.1177/2332858417728046. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417728046
    58. A. M. Jarrah and K. M. A. B. M. Diab, “The effect of flipped classroom model on students’ achievement in the new 2016 scholastic assessment test mathematics skills,” J. Soc. Sci. Res., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 769–777, 2019, doi: 10.32861/jssr.53.769.777. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32861/jssr.53.769.777
    59. S. Soparat, S. R. Arnold, and S. Klaysom, “The development of thai learners’ key competencies by project-based learning using ICT,” Int. J. Res. Educ. Sci., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 11–22, 2015, [Online]. Available: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED548501.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.01778
    60. A. Barana, G. Boetti, and M. Marchisio, “Self-assessment in the development of mathematical problem-solving skills,” Educ. Sci., vol. 12, no. 81, pp. 1–27, 2022, doi: 10.3390/educsci12020081. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12020081
    61. T. M. Sarıtaş, “Development of mathematics mobile learning application: Examining learning outcomes and cognitive skills through math questions,” Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 17, no. 9, pp. 234–253, 2022, doi: 10.5897/err2022.4272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2022.4272
    62. A. Alenezi, “Using project-based learning through the madrasati platform for mathematics teaching in secondary schools,” Int. J. Inf. Commun. Technol. Educ., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2023, doi: 10.4018/IJICTE.332372. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICTE.332372
    63. M. A. S. Khasawneh, “Implementing adaptive learning technologies: Practical strategies for enhancing cognition in mathematics education,” Int. J. Adv. Appl. Sci., vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 111–118, 2024, doi: 10.21833/ijaas.2024.08.012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2024.08.012
    64. A. O. Samura and Darhim, “Improving mathematics critical thinking skills of junior high school students using Blended Learning Model (BLM) in GeoGebra assisted mathematics learning,” Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 101–117, 2023, doi: 10.3991/ijim.v17i02.36097. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v17i02.36097
    65. L. Budai, “Geogebra in fifth grade elementary mathematics at rural schools,” in Annales Mathematicae et Informaticae, 2011, pp. 129–136. [Online]. Available: https://ami.uni-eszterhazy.hu/uploads/papers/finalpdf/AMI_38_from129to136.pdf
    66. M. G. Baye, M. A. Ayele, and T. E. Wondimuneh, “Implementing GeoGebra integrated with multi-teaching approaches guided by the APOS theory to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of limit in Ethiopian Universities,” Heliyon, vol. 7, p. e07012, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07012. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07012
    67. S. Pahmi, A. Hendriyanto, S. Sahara, L. H. Muhaimin, K. S. Kuncoro, and B. Usodo, “Assessing the influence of Augmented Reality in mathematics education: A systematic literature review,” Int. J. Learn. Teach. Educ. Res., vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 1–25, 2023, doi: 10.26803/ijlter.22.5.1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.22.5.1
    68. A. Dzulfikar and Turmudi, “The role of Geogebra in secondary school mathematics education: A systematic literature review,” in AIP Conference Proceedings, 2024, pp. 030005-1-030005–10. doi: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0234915. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0234915
    69. D. Juandi, Y. S. Kusumah, M. Tamur, K. S. Perbowo, and T. T. Wijaya, “A meta-analysis of Geogebra software decade of assisted mathematics learning: what to learn and where to go?,” Heliyon, vol. 7, p. e06953, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06953. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06953
    70. S. Yemen Karpuzcu and M. Işiksal Bostan, “Implementation of technology enhanced activities for teaching slope in daily life situations,” Elem. Educ. Online, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–19, 2021, doi: 10.17051/ilkonline.2021.01.011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2021.01.011
    71. M. Latifi, A. Eseghir, A. Elmaroufi, K. Hattaf, and N. Achtaich, “Modeling with differential equations and Geogebra in high school mathematics education,” J. Educ. Soc. Res., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 47–91, 2022, doi: 10.36941/jesr-2022-0065. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2022-0065
    72. V. Murni, S. Sariyasa, and I. M. Ardana, “GeoGebra assist discovery learning model for problem solving ability and attitude toward mathematics,” J. Phys. Conf. Ser., vol. 895, pp. 1–6, 2017, doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012049. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012049
    73. A. H. Abdullah et al., “The effects of an inductive reasoning learning strategy assisted by the GeoGebra software on students’ motivation for the functional graph II topic,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 143848–143861, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3014202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3014202
    74. P. Güner and H. N. Erbay, “Prospective mathematics teachers’ thinking styles and problem-solving skills,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 40, p. 100827, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100827. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100827
    75. W. D. Adeline, “Adaptive learning technologies : Customizing education to individual needs,” Res. Output J. Arts Manag., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1–6, 2024, [Online]. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Kiu-Publication-Extension/publication/383273049_Adaptive_Learning_Technologies_Customizing_Education_to_Individual_Needs/links/66c5fa202fec7d516b5f39ab/Adaptive-Learning-Technologies-Customizing-Education-to-Individual
    76. N. Capuano and S. Caballé, “Adaptive learning technologies,” AI Mag., vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 96–98, 2020, doi: 10.1609/aimag.v41i2.5317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1609/aimag.v41i2.5317