Effectiveness of ChatGPT-integrated discovery learning on mathematical literacy in three-variable linear equation systems: A quasi-experimental study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33830/ijdmde.v3i1.13157Keywords:
ChatGPT, Mathematical literacy, Self-efficacy, Three-variable linear equation system, Discovery learningAbstract
This quasi-experimental study investigated the effectiveness of ChatGPT-integrated discovery learning on high school students' mathematical literacy in three-variable linear equation systems, while examining the moderating role of self-efficacy. Eighty tenth-grade students from a public high school in Indonesia were assigned to either an experimental group receiving ChatGPT-supported discovery learning instruction or a control group receiving conventional instruction, with mathematical literacy assessed through problem-solving tests and self-efficacy measured using validated questionnaires. Statistical analyses using non-parametric tests, including Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, Mann-Whitney U Test, and Rank-Based ANCOVA, revealed that the experimental group achieved significantly higher post-test scores (M=79.25, SD=8.42) compared to the control group (M=65.30, SD=9.18), yielding a large effect size (d=1.24, p<.001) that substantially exceeded typical outcomes reported in meta-analyses of computer-assisted mathematics instruction. Contrary to established theoretical frameworks positing strong relationships between self-efficacy and mathematics achievement, this study found that self-efficacy neither significantly predicted mathematical literacy (F=3.171, p=.083, η²=.077) nor interacted with the learning model, suggesting that ChatGPT's pedagogical benefits operated uniformly across students with varying confidence levels. These findings suggest that ChatGPT functioned as adaptive conversational scaffolding that provided immediate formative feedback, facilitated metacognitive engagement through dialogic prompting, and generated multiple mathematical representations to support conceptual understanding. The null self-efficacy effect may indicate that robust AI scaffolding serves as an external compensatory mechanism that equalizes learning opportunities by reducing students' dependence on internal confidence judgments, thereby contributing novel theoretical insights into the conditional nature of motivational constructs in AI-mediated learning environments and offering practical implications for implementing conversational AI in mathematics education.
References
Almarashdi, H. S., Jarrah, A. M., Abu Khurma, O., & Gningue, S. M. (2024). Unveiling the potential: A systematic review of ChatGPT in transforming mathematics teaching and learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(12), em2555. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15739
Attard, C., Thornton, S., & Petocz, P. (2025). Teachers' beliefs and practices about the potential of ChatGPT in teaching mathematics in secondary schools. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-024-00168-3
Barroso, C., Ganley, C. M., McGraw, A. L., Geer, E. A., Hart, S. A., & Daucourt, M. C. (2021). A meta-analysis of the relation between math anxiety and math achievement. Psychological Bulletin, 147(2), 134–153. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000307
Cheung, A. C. K., & Slavin, R. E. (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 88–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.001
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods. California: SAGE Publications
Farrokhnia, M., Banihashem, S. K., Noroozi, O., & Wals, A. (2024). ChatGPT in school mathematics education: A systematic review of opportunities, challenges, and pedagogical implications. Teaching and Teacher Education, 151, 104634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104634
Frieder, S., Pinchetti, L., Griffiths, R. R., Salvatori, T., Lukasiewicz, T., Petersen, P., & Berner, J. (2024). Mathematical capabilities of ChatGPT. In Proceedings of NeurIPS.
Gouia-Zarrad, R., & Gunn, C. (2024). Enhancing students' learning experience in mathematics class through ChatGPT. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 19(3), em0781. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/14614
Gustiningsi, T., Putri, R. I. I., Zulkardi, & Hapizah. (2024). LEPscO: Mathematical literacy learning environment for the Guru Penggerak program. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(2), 661–682. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v15i2.pp661-682
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 111–127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4
Kapur, M. (2008). Productive failure. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 379–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000802212669
Keller, L., Preckel, F., Eccles, J. S., & Brunner, M. (2022). How do self-efficacy and self-concept impact mathematical achievement? The case of mathematical modelling. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12443
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. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Koedinger, K. R., & Corbett, A. T. (2006). Cognitive tutors: Technology bringing learning sciences to the classroom. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 61–78). Cambridge University Press.
Lesh, R. (1979). Mathematical learning disabilities: Considerations for identification, diagnosis, and remediation. In R. Lesh, D. Mierkiewicz, & M. G. Kantowski (Eds.), Applied mathematical problem solving (pp. 111–180). ERIC/SMEAC.
Liu, R., Jong, C., & Fan, M. (2024). Reciprocal relationship between self-efficacy and achievement in mathematics among high school students. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 12, 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-024-00201-2
Luo, W., Hogan, D., Tan, L. S., Kaur, B., Ng, P. T., & Chan, M. (2024). The relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics achievement: Multilevel analysis with NAEP 2019. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 12, 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-024-00204-z
Milenković, A., Dimitrijević, S., & Savić, Z. (2025). The impact of discovery-based learning with physical manipulatives on geometry knowledge and its retention. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 9(3), 102–115. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202527706
OECD. (2024). PISA: Programme for International Student Assessment. https://www.oecd.org/en/about/programmes/pisa.html
Pepin, B., Xu, B., Trouche, L., & Wang, C. (2025). A scoping survey of ChatGPT in mathematics education. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-025-00172-1
Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4001_1
Ramadhani, M. H., Kartono, K., & Haryani, S. (2023). The effect of using discovery learning-based mathematics learning modules on students' interest in learning mathematics. International Journal of Research and Review, 10(4), 476–480. https://doi.org/10.52403/ijrr.20230458
Rittle-Johnson, B., & Schneider, M. (2015). Developing conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics. In R. Cohen Kadosh & A. Dowker (Eds.), Oxford handbook of numerical cognition (pp. 1102–1118). Oxford University Press.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). Macmillan.
Siregar, N. D., Deniyanti, P., & Hakim, L. E. (2020). The effect of guided discovery learning model on mathematical problem solving skills reviewed from students' prior knowledge. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 5(4), 268–275. https://doi.org/10.24331/ijere.715365
Siregar, N. D., Saragih, S., & Fauzi, K. M. A. (2020). The effects of a discovery learning module on geometry for improving students' mathematical reasoning skills, communication and self-confidence. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 19(4), 214–229. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.4.12
Stacey, K. (2011). The PISA view of mathematical literacy in Indonesia. Journal on Mathematics Education, 2(2), 95–126. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.2.2.746.95-126
VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.611369
Wardat, Y., Tashtoush, M. A., AlAli, R., & Jarrah, A. M. (2023). ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), em2286. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13272
Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 3087. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087
Yang, Y., Maeda, Y., & Gentry, M. (2024). The relationship between mathematics self-efficacy and mathematics achievement: Multilevel analysis with NAEP 2019. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 12, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-024-00204-z
Zakariya, Y. F. (2022). Improving students' mathematics self-efficacy: A systematic review of intervention studies. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 986622. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.986622
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rismun Sufia Monike, Sudirman Sudirman, Thesa Kandaga, Camilo Andrés Rodríguez-Nieto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
