SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Teacher Education and Educators / 2026 / Volume: 15 Issue: 2

The Effects of Different Teaching Applications on Academic Success and Retention in the Fraction Subject

Nurullah Yazıcı(TOKAT GAZİOSMANPAŞA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-5594-8347
Mustafa Albayrak(BAYBURT ÜNİVERSİTESİ, BAYBURT EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-3788-5717
Fatma Biçen(Milli Eğitim Müdürlüğü)0009-0002-1634-728X
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-08-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The sample consisted of 51 students enrolled in a public secondary school and was divided into three groups: a control group receiving traditional teaching method , experimental group I receiving game-based teaching, and experimental group II receiving technology-enhanced teaching Quantitative results indicated no statistically significant differences among the groups in post-test achievement scores.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study examined the effects of implementing achievement goals in teaching fractions to 5th-grade secondary school students through different instructional approaches—traditional, game-based, and technology-enhanced—on academic achievement, retention, and students’ perceptions of these methods.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The sample consisted of 51 students enrolled in a public secondary school and was divided into three groups: a control group receiving traditional teaching method , experimental group I receiving game-based teaching, and experimental group II receiving technology-enhanced teaching Quantitative results indicated no statistically significant differences among the groups in post-test achievement scores.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Despite these positive outcomes, students also identified certain limitations, including the fact that games may not appeal to all learners and that technology can sometimes lead to distractions.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Fractions · game-based teaching · technology-enhanced teaching

Abstract

This study examined the effects of implementing achievement goals in teaching fractions to 5th-grade secondary school students through different instructional approaches—traditional, game-based, and technology-enhanced—on academic achievement, retention, and students’ perceptions of these methods. A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed. The quantitative phase used a quasi-experimental pre-test–post-test control group design, while the qualitative phase was conducted using a case study approach. The sample consisted of 51 students enrolled in a public secondary school and was divided into three groups: a control group receiving traditional teaching method , experimental group I receiving game-based teaching, and experimental group II receiving technology-enhanced teaching Quantitative results indicated no statistically significant differences among the groups in post-test achievement scores. However, the retention test results showed that game-based instruction was significantly more effective than the traditional teaching method. Qualitative findings showed that students generally evaluated the experimental methods positively. Game-based teaching was emphasized for increasing interest and enjoyment, whereas technology-enhanced teachingwas reported to enhance participation and motivation. Despite these positive outcomes, students also identified certain limitations, including the fact that games may not appeal to all learners and that technology can sometimes lead to distractions.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yazıcı, N., Albayrak, M., Biçen, F. (2026). The Effects of Different Teaching Applications on Academic Success and Retention in the Fraction Subject. Journal of Teacher Education and Educators, Volume: 15 Issue: 2. https://ajindex.com/articles/1514032

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (46)

  1. Arslan, N. (2016). The effect of game-supported teaching on students’ achievement in teaching basic geometrical concepts and drawings in the 5th grade (Publication No. 423540) [Master’s thesis, Sakarya University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  2. Barata, G., Gama, S., Jorge, J., & Gonçalves, D. (2013, October). Improving participation and learning with gamification. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on gameful design, research, and applications (pp. 10-17).
  3. Başün, A.R., & Doğan, M. (2020). The effect on academic success and permanence of teaching with game applied in mathematics education. The Journal of Interdisciplinary Educational Research, 4(7), 155-167.
  4. Behr, M. J., Lesh, R., Post, T. R., & Silver, E. A. (1983). Rational number concepts. In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes (pp. 91–126). Academic Press.
  5. Blaikie, N. (2003). Analyzing quantitative data. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849208604
  6. Boaler, J. (2002). Experiencing school mathematics: Traditional and reform approaches to teaching and their impact on student learning. Routledge.
  7. Canevi, K. (2019). The effect of GeoGebra-assisted instruction on students’ achievement and attitude in some issues of 10th-grade mathematics course (Publication No. 533890) [Master’s thesis, Karamanoğlu Mehmetbey University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  8. Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E. E., & Killingsworth, S. S. (2016). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 79–122. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582065
  9. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education (5th ed.). RoutledgeFalmer.
  10. Coşkun, H. (2006). Oyunlarla dil öğretimi: Spiele im Sprachunterricht: Learning languages through games. CTB Publications.
  11. Creswell, J. W. (2021). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.
  12. Demir, M. R. (2016). Effect of teaching mathematics through different play types on 1. grade students’ achievements and retention levels (Publication No. 436706) [Doctoral dissertation, Necmettin Erbakan University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  13. Demir, N., & Bilgin, E. A. (2021). The effect of game-based teaching method on academic achievement and attitude in middle school 8th grade mathematics lesson. e-Uluslararası Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 12(3). https://doi.org/10.19160/e-ijer.909639
  14. Dinçer, B. (2019). The effects of the digital story-based mathematics teaching on concept learning of secondary school students (Publication No. 557449) [Doctoral dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  15. Drijvers, P. (2015). Digital technology in mathematics education: Why it works (or doesn’t). In S. J. Cho (Ed.), Selected regular lectures from the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 135–151). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17187-6_8
  16. Empson, S. B., & Levi, L. (2011). Extending children’s mathematics: Fractions and decimals. Heinemann.
  17. Erkuş, S. & İnan, C. (2021). The impact of game-based activities on mathematical achievements and permanent learning of students. The Journal of International Education Science, 8 (29), 121-137.
  18. Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics: North American edition. SAGE.
  19. Gökbulut, Y., & Yücel Yumuşak, E. (2014). The effects of game-supported mathematics learning unit of fractions of 4. grade achievement and permanence. Electronic Turkish Studies, 9(2), 673–689.
  20. Gürsoy, K. (2010). A survey of prospective mathematics teachers’ beliefs and attitudes towards using the history of mathematics in mathematics teaching (Publication No. 270661) [Master’s thesis, Karadeniz Technical University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  21. Hanus, M., & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019
  22. Haser, Ç. & Ubuz, B. (2003). Students’ conception of fractions: A study of 5th grade students. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 24, 64-69.
  23. Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371–404). Information Age Publishing.
  24. Hohenwarter, J., Hohenwarter, M., & Lavicza, Z. (2009). Introducing dynamic mathematics software to secondary school teachers: The case of GeoGebra. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 28(2), 135–146.
  25. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  26. Hui, H. B., & Mahmud, M. S. (2023). Influence of game-based learning in mathematics education on the students' cognitive and affective domain: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1105806. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1105806
  27. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014
  28. Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., Kampylis, P., Vuorikari, R. & Punie, Y. (2014). NMC Horizon Report Europe: 2014 Schools Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved January 12, 2026 from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/182011/.
  29. Karadag, Z., & McDougall, D. (2009). Dynamic worksheets: visual learning with the guidance of Polya. MSOR Connections, 9(2), 13-16.
  30. Karakış, H. (2014). The effect of computer-assisted activities developed for the “Fractions” unit of primary school 4th grade on academic achievement and attitudes (Publication No. 373222) [Master’s thesis, Balıkesir University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  31. Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Technology-enhanced learning and teaching in higher education: what is ‘enhanced’ and how do we know? A critical literature review. Learning, Media and Technology, 39(1), 6–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2013.770404
  32. Kiryakova, G., Angelova, N., & Yordanova, L. (2014, October). Gamification in education. In Proceedings of 9th international Balkan education and science conference (Vol. 1, pp. 679-684).
  33. Küslü, F. (2015). The effect of computer-assisted mathematics teaching on the success of 8th-grade students in the topic of “prisms” (Publication No. 396088) [Master’s thesis, Sakarya University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  34. Lamon, S. J. (2007). Rational numbers and proportional reasoning: Toward a theoretical framework for research. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 629–668). Information Age Publishing.
  35. Lee, J. J., & Hammer, J. (2011). Gamification in education: What, how, why bother? Academic Exchange Quarterly, 15(2), 146.
  36. Mayer, R. E. (2024). The past, present, and future of the cognitive theory of multimedia learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(8). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09842-1
  37. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics.
  38. Pierce, R., & Stacey, K. (2010). Mapping pedagogical opportunities provided by mathematics analysis software. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-010-9158-6
  39. Plass, J. L., Homer, B. D., & Kinzer, C. K. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational Psychologist, 50(4), 258–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533
  40. Sarıer, H. K. (2020). The effect of teaching method with concept mapping on mathematics achievement: a meta-analysis study. Journal of Primary Education, 2(3), 27-38.
  41. Senemoğlu, N. (2007). Gelişim öğrenme ve öğretim kuramdan uygulamaya[Development, learning, and teaching: from theory to practice.] Gönül Publication.
  42. Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Paas, F. (2019). Cognitive architecture and instructional design: 20 years later. Educational Psychology Review, 31, 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09465-5
  43. Tekin, M. (2019). The effect of EBA-supported ratio and proportion teaching on course achievement and perceptions of metacognitive behavior (Publication No. 606308) [Master’s thesis, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
  44. Thomas, M. O. J., & Holton, D. (2003). Technology as a tool for teaching undergraduate mathematics. In A. J. Bishop, M. A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Second international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 351–394). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0273-8_12
  45. Uğurel, I. & Moralı, S. (2008). The interaction of mathematics & game. Gazi University Journal of Gazi Educational Faculty, 28(3), 75-98.
  46. Vankúš, P. (2021). Influence of game-based learning in mathematics education on students’ affective domain: A systematic review. Mathematics, 9(9), 986. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9090986