VALIDATION STUDIES OF DIGITAL PEDAGOGY

AND COMPUTATIONAL THINKING IN

MATHEMATICS LEARNING FOR
JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Siska Firmasari1,2, Tatang Herman1, and Elah Nurlaelah1

1
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
2
Universitas Swadaya Gunung Jati, Cirebon, Indonesia
tatangherman@upi.edu
siska.fs27@gmail.com

Abstract. This study aims to obtain a learning design through a validation study process
using a digital pedagogy approach on junior high school computational thinking skills for
mathematics learning. The research method uses validation studies which have three phases,
namely preliminary design, teaching experiment, and retrospective analysis. The research was
located in a junior high school with 28 students and 2 mathematics teachers as subjects. The
research subjects were mathematics teachers analyzing mastery of digital pedagogy skills and
class IX students exploring computational thinking skills. The research focuses on hypothetical
learning trajectories. The data collected consists of observations, interviews, student responses,
and documentation. From the results of data processing and analysis, 1) Hypothetical learning
trajectory-1 focuses on achieving learning objectives through learning activities and
assumptions that advance the reviewing and recalling phase only in one step so there is no
repetition; 2) Hypothetical learning trajectory-2 focuses on the beginning of each activity and
learning assumptions for the reviewing and recalling stages of mathematics material so that it
always experiences repetition resulting in students always calling up their long term memory
for each learning concept.

Keywords: Validation Studies, Digital Pedagogy, Computational Thinking, Mathematics

Learning.

1 Introduction

Teachers are required to follow technological developments in the world of

education and be able to integrate them into teaching and learning activities while still
prioritizing the quality of students' thinking processes. This teacher professionalism
practice, which involves digital technology, represents integrating digital technology
into the learning curriculum and must produce products in the form of assisted or
technology-based learning instruments (Valverde-Berrocoso et al., 2021). There are
still variations in the quality of teachers and the pedagogical principles they choose in
2

the current era of technological sophistication, so there is a need for skills that embed
digital technology into teaching to improve the quality of learning, teaching,
assessment and curriculum. The term known to explain pedagogical use within the
scope of digital technology is digital pedagogy (Kivunja, 2013). Digital pedagogy
refers to using electronic elements to enhance or change educational experiences
(Boston & January 2012).
Using technological devices in the classroom without the teacher's lack of ability to
use them or inappropriate use of them makes learning less effective (Johnson et al.,
2014; Winter et al., 2021). Teachers need to understand how to use technology
effectively, the learning theories behind teaching practices, and how to choose the
right technology for the learning outcomes they aim for. Apart from that, the demand
for students to be fluent in using technology in learning is also a dilemma for
teachers. However, teachers do not have to understand how to create computer
programs or websites; they are more focused on their attitudes and talents in
developing digital technology in learning. The traditional paradigm, which previously
focused on passive students, teachers as sources of knowledge, and a lack of variety
in learning media for the digital generation, has changed to active, independent
learning with the freedom to search for teaching resources and choose the proper use
of technology to explore students' abilities (Paul & Jefferson, 2019). For this reason,
when teachers already have good digital pedagogy, their professionalism will be
visible following the development of education and learning (Pongsakdi et al., 2021).
Based on this explanation, teachers in the current era of advanced technology must
have a learning paradigm known as digital pedagogy.
Connecting digital pedagogy with complex and abstract learning materials is
challenging for teachers. One subject matter that is complex and abstract is
mathematics. Focusing on building student character, which must align with the
development of mathematics learning, digital pedagogy offers skills in developing
knowledge that consistently follows current developments. The characteristics of
digital pedagogy that combine theory and practice, foster creativity, play, and
problem-solving, encourage participation, collaboration, and public involvement, and
aim to increase critical understanding of the digital environment (Harris et al., 2012)
are very in line with the dynamic development of knowledge in various mathematical
materials. In addition, for digital pedagogy to develop in creative and innovative
mathematics learning, Piaget's constructivist principles and developmental
psychology must be the primary key.
A teacher's good digital pedagogy skills must also be accompanied by the ability to
think, especially in solving mathematical problems and conceptual understanding
related to the use of technology (Sessa, 2018). Concerning mathematics, humans are
faced with the ability and skills to use thinking through creativity to develop their
ideas to solve problems in everyday life (Mason, J., Burton, L. and Stacey, 2010).
Students who study mathematics with a rigid, absolute mindset and apply a rote
system make mathematics tedious and challenging to learn. Conditions like this must
be changed by recognizing mathematics as patterns, not just numbers, so students'
thinking becomes more flexible and dynamic. A thinking concept is needed to
 3

systematically combine cognitive and technological capabilities (Çelik & Özdemir,

2020).
Mathematics is at the core of what computers do (Gravemeijer et al., 2017), so it is
necessary to combine knowledge of mathematical material and technology to
familiarize students with solving mathematical problems in a structured manner. A
strategy for answering problems in mathematics material that is based on problem-
solving and helps grow students' cognitive abilities effectively through manipulation
and natural expression (Maharani et al., 2019). The combination of abilities and skills
required is called computational thinking. Computational thinking concepts such as
decomposition, pattern recognition, abstraction, and algorithm design are critical in
solving mathematical problems. Students will improve their logical and problem-
solving abilities by setting aside time in class to explore how computational thinking
relates to mathematics. For this reason, computational thinking becomes a thinking
ability that integrates into the mathematics curriculum to make ends become
independent learners.
Therefore, so that teachers' pedagogical and students' cognitive abilities in finding
solutions to problem-solving are arranged systematically within the scope of learning
by using technology successfully, it is necessary to have a learning design that goes
through the expert validation phase. Considering the various aspects that have gone
through the previous discussion, this research aims to obtain a learning design through
a validation studies process using a digital pedagogy approach for computational
thinking skills in junior high school mathematics learning. This research is new,
considering that the computational thinking paradigm that integrates itself into the
mathematics curriculum was initiated in PISA 2021. The demands of technological
developments combine teacher pedagogy and student cognition during the teaching
and learning process. Previous research was more limited to exploring thinking skills
and pedagogy that discussed them individually. This research is necessary because it
can provide a new colour in learning design that collaborates the abilities of teachers,
students and technology. The benefits of research results can contribute to serving
students according to their respective cognitive conditions so that demands for teacher
creativity continue to emerge along with changes in the curriculum, technological
developments and realization in the classroom environment.

2 Methods

The design research used in this study uses validation studies type, which includes
three phases, namely preliminary design, design trials (classroom experiments), and
retrospective analysis, with the product of this type of validation studies in the form of
local instructional theory (Akker et al., 2006). Validation studies focus on designing
learning environments or trajectories to develop and validate theories about the
learning process and how to create learning trajectories. This research focuses on
preparing a Hypothetical Learning Trajectory. HLT consists of learning objectives for
students, learning activity plans, and estimates of the learning process in the
classroom (Conner et al., 2017). When developing predictions about the learning
4

process in class, teachers need to predict the development of students' computational

thinking abilities in class and students' understanding or strategies that may emerge as
they occur during actual learning activities. Thus, teachers must observe students'
reactions at each stage that leads to learning objectives.
The research location was a junior high school with twenty-eight students and two
mathematics teachers as subjects. The research subjects were mathematics teachers
analyzing mastery of digital pedagogy skills and class IX students exploring
computational thinking skills. For initial observations, the research subjects were
twenty-seven class IX students from a junior high school location different from the
HLT implementation research location. The research instruments used were
observation sheets and videos related to mastery of digital pedagogy and
computational thinking, interview sheet to find out in depth the mathematics teachers'
mastery of digital pedagogy & students' computational thinking, and students'
responses to digital teaching materials .
In Figure 1, there is a research flow from conducting research using validation
studies.

Picture 1. Stages of Implementing Digital Pedagogy-Based Learning Design

to Developed Computational Thinking Abilities in Middle School Students
 5

In the first phase, Preliminary Design, researchers obtained data from preliminary
tests, observations, video documentation and interviews. Henceforth, this data
collection is the core of the research problem. Data from the computational thinking
ability test results in this phase provide information regarding students' initial mastery
of these thinking skills in mathematical material. The interview sheet emphasizes the
test results, which can add information about the ability to think of the research
subjects (students) openly and honestly. Meanwhile, to determine the digital
pedagogy capabilities of mathematics teachers, they use analysis from learning
videos, class observations and interview results. The results of this analysis are the
following three digital pedagogical competencies teachers must have when
implementing learning with technology-based instruments.
Meanwhile, in the second phase, the Teaching Experiment, researchers obtained
data from expert validation, learning video recording data, student response interview
data, and observation data. The results of the FGD provide expert validation data as a
basis for the validity of various learning instruments for implementation in digital
pedagogy-based learning. Meanwhile, observation data and video recordings of
learning during several meetings for research purposes can provide information on the
cognitive development of class IX students in solving various mathematical problems
with a higher level of difficulty. Differences in students' cognitive development
provide comparative data on the practice questions that students usually get on
previously existing questions. Meanwhile, the results of interviews with students at
the end of each learning meeting provide information regarding student responses to
the learning instruments. These responses show the limited effectiveness of digital
pedagogy-based learning designs.
Continuing with the third phase, retrospective analysis, the data from phases one
and two are again reviewed in detail to obtain answers to all research questions. Based
on the conclusions from the final research analysis, the product the researchers
succeeded in getting was a revision of the phase one learning design. The product is
the definitive learning design.

3 Results and Discussions

3.1 Results

Phase 1 - Preliminary Design

Preliminary analysis on computational thinking skills focuses on teachers and
students. The two research subjects are mathematics teachers with the same teaching
experience, around 20 years on average. The digital pedagogical competencies
possessed by the two research subjects include:
a. Pedagogical Orientation
Teachers prepare mathematics learning by using textbooks issued by the Ministry
of Education and Culture and asking for help from students with high cognitive
abilities to act as peer tutors to help their classmates understand the material.
Meanwhile, teachers use concrete learning media when explaining material about
numbers with powers, root forms and quadratic equations.
6

b. Digital Pedagogical Practices

Teachers use the internet as a student learning resource and WhatsApp social media
to share material files and assignments.
c. Digital Pedagogical Competencies
Teachers perceive digital learning by designing a series of learning aided by digital
teaching media or through a digital teaching platform that will make it easier for
students to understand the concepts of mathematical material by integrating
technology into it, then guiding each student during the learning process while still
providing adequate character education propositions, which is quite significant. The
following are the opinions of the two subjects regarding the teacher's ability to
design learning that integrates technology.
 Ability to develop learning objectives based on CP from the 2013 curriculum
that applies in class without inserting ICT to develop technology-based
mathematics teaching so that learning is still conventional.
 The choice of learning models, methods, and strategies is still traditional,
based on routine mathematical problems, and teacher-centred. Learning media
uses mathematical manipulative teaching aids to make it easier to understand
concepts.
 Able to operate the School LMS by using general menus that are easy for them
to understand.
 Able to develop evaluation instruments based on simple mathematical
problems to answer learning objectives and measure student cognitive abilities.
Meanwhile, students have difficulty finding solutions to the pretest questions, they
are confused about expressing initial ideas in solving the problems contained in the
questions. Students tend to work on problems with limited experience learning
mathematics material. Students' computational thinking abilities are still limited to
decomposition indicators, namely identifying mathematical problems with teacher
guidance because they still have difficulty finding their own solutions. Table 1 shows
a complete analysis of the pretest results of the research subjects' mathematical and
computational thinking abilities.
Table 1. Results of Analysis of Students' Initial Computational Thinking Ability
Students' Computational Thinking Ability
Indicator Analysis Results
Decomposition Students can identify problems in the questions, but to
determine the right solution, they still need guidance from the
teacher. So, it is not possible to prepare a solution independently
Pattern Students still have difficulty writing down systematic
Recognition mathematical patterns, so they cannot obtain solutions using
interrelated material concepts. Teachers still need to explore
students' learning experiences, so the composition of the
problem formulation does not yet measure the problem.
Abstraction Students still focus on solving routine problems because the
learning experience has not explored complex problem-solving
abilities. For this reason, when issues arise in non-routine cases,
students cannot solve similar problems based on their previous
experience.
 7

Algorithm Students have not written down problem solutions

systematically. Based on the students' answers, several steps that
apply concepts that should exist are missing. So, the majority of
students do not believe their answers are correct

Preliminary test results have not been able to show high activity and procedural
understanding in solving mathematical problems. Some students are still focused on
the procedure of writing answers according to the example but are not able to
understand the meaning of why the steps they wrote in the answer have a formula like
that. When the questions that students work on differ from the examples, they cannot
write down their initial ideas for answers. Students only know and write down the
elements contained in the question. For this reason, students' conceptual
understanding has not yet reached the activity of understanding the relationship
between concepts and procedures in providing answer arguments. Meanwhile,
regarding computational thinking abilities from mathematical cases, it appears that
students cannot organize answers systematically. Previously, the teacher had
introduced applications that could help them construct computational thinking
abilities through structured coding.
The teacher introduces the interesting Scratch application for students to learn,
with a colourful and straightforward programming display so that students can learn
fun coding to show their ability to think procedurally. After several examples of
coding the teacher gave, the students could compile the coding completely. However,
when the teacher provides exceptional cases of exponent numbers, problems arise in
completing the coding, making it difficult for students to find the final result. Only
around 19% of students can maximize computational thinking skills according to
indicators and explore them while remaining focused on building knowledge and
seriousness in studying mathematics. Figure 1 shows the results of the pretest analysis
based on mathematical and computational thinking abilities.
Phase 2 - Teaching Experiment
Preparation of HLT 1
In initial observations for two experimental classes with a total of 45 students, the
pretest results showed a lack of student understanding of the concept of prerequisite
material, and students had difficulty expressing initial ideas for solving problems. The
initial discussions with teachers revealed that students' thinking abilities were
alarming after the online learning phase. The simple case the teacher gives is still
complex for students to do perfectly. Limitations in delivering material and exploring
students' thinking abilities during online learning negatively affect their learning
outcomes.
Students who were research subjects experienced online learning for two years and
limited offline learning for one semester, so complaints from teachers about the
process of constructing their knowledge became common. The teacher said that all the
online learning instruments that students need are available, starting from online
learning platforms, learning videos, online learning evaluations, and assignments
collected via internet facilities. Apart from that, teachers complained that when
8

students started studying using an offline system, the basic concepts they should have
mastered in elementary grades had to be wholly repeated.
Repetition of these initial concepts becomes an obstacle in developing mathematics
material in high grades. Repetition leads to the ability of teachers to focus on
completing the material in a limited time and how to construct students' learning
experiences. So, in the end, teachers ignore the ability to solve complex mathematics
or those related to higher-order thinking skills. The teacher focuses more on solving
all mathematics material with simple procedural problems.
Based on a series of analysis activities of the Middle School Mathematics
curriculum and PISA 2021 results, initial observations during the learning process, as
well as interviews with students and teachers, a Hypothetical Learning Trajectory for
Exponents & Square Roots is compiled as shown in Figure 2. The flow of activities is
structured to offer the teacher's activities during learning and the alleged activities of
students to realize the learning objectives. The flow of activities is complete with
media and tasks to support the construction and development of computational
thinking skills while still paying attention to the ability of junior high school students
to understand mathematical concepts.

Picture 2. Hypothetical Learning Trajectory 1 for Exponents & Square Roots

Student response data for activities learning shows a positive percentage. Based on
calculations of the response results for each student at the end of each learning
meeting, it can be seen that the average percentage of positive student responses was
80.63%. In comparison, the negative reaction was 19.37%. Because the average
percentage of positive responses from students is 80%, the conclusion shows that
students provide positive and reasonable responses to the limited effectiveness of
digital pedagogy-based learning designs.
Phase 3 - Retrospective Analysis
In phases 1 and 2, several facts emerged, namely that teachers still relied only on
textbooks, teachers had not utilized digital applications as learning media, teachers
had not yet understood how to integrate computational thinking skills into
 9

mathematics learning, students were still getting used to working on routine

mathematics problems. Students with increased problem-solving abilities have
difficulty understanding complex problem-solving problems based on computational
thinking, and it still takes quite a long time to familiarize teachers and students with
digital pedagogy-based learning designs because it is difficult to eliminate the
application of conventional learning designs. The learning design in Phase 1 still
needs revision because it does not yet facilitate all the facts that emerge in the field.
When the learning design implementation found problems and the emergence of HLT
in phase 2 after discussions with experts in mathematics and technology education,
the researchers designed the learning again as a form of revision of the initial design.
Below in Figure 3 is a revised form of learning design based on digital pedagogy for
junior high school students' computational thinking abilities called HLT 2.

Picture 3. Hypothetical Learning Trajectory 2 for Exponents & Square Roots

The results of HLT 2 show a change in students' activities when they implement
theory regarding mathematical material for exponent numbers and root forms. In HLT
1, reviewing the substance of the material only appears during activity 1, whereas in
the revision of HLT 1, reviewing again is related to activities 2 and 3. The appearance
of studying in every learning activity is due to the idea that students must continue to
review the substantive material in every activity to continue improving their
understanding and reasoning. Meanwhile, in supporting activities for each activity,
students always recall the prerequisite material. This recall process is helpful because
the mathematics material is interrelated. If students cannot fulfil the prerequisites, the
more complex the material, the higher the student's difficulty level. All learning
processes from existing designs show learning activities and their proper support for
achieving learning goals.
10

3. 2 Discussions

Validation studies allow researchers to obtain learning design results through

developments in the world of education, actual conditions in schools, and the
applicable curriculum. This design provides considerations for teachers in perfecting
conventional methods used in classroom learning so that teaching and learning
activities become more detailed and systematic. Good learning design involves
objectives, context, theories, concepts, teaching principles, and students who must
learn according to the objectives (Phommanee, 2023). Validation studies are an option
for developing learning designs that focus on hypothetical learning trajectories that
emerge after the preliminary research. So, researchers design learning based not only
on theory but also on experience while they are conducting primary research. The
benefits can last a long time and are flexible because they continuously adapt to
changes in the curriculum and student conditions.
In mathematics learning, various students' cognitive processes can occur even
though students have the same initial knowledge [33]. Several factors influence
students' thinking processes: intelligence level, family environment, interest in
learning, children's emotions, and various other factors [34]. Students' ability to read
and understand a problem is another determining factor [35]. Therefore, students still
need to have learning experiences appropriate to their cognitive conditions and
processes in meeting computational thinking standards. In reality, students struggle to
sort out the various characteristics of their mathematics learning experience because
they prefer to formulate simple solutions that do not require too much long-term
memory. To be more proportional in determining the right solution, students must add
learning activities that identify various problem-solving models.
Few students encounter complex problem-solving when learning mathematics in
class, because some students find even routine questions difficult. Therefore,
strengthening students' understanding of concepts must be embedded in their thinking
patterns first. This requires a significant amount of learning time, but at least teachers
should consistently provide assignments and examples of complex problem-solving in
greater quantity and quality, as well as teaching media assistance to help students
become more interested in learning mathematics. This will make learning more
meaningful and make it easier for students to remember mathematical concepts that
they find confusing. Research has shown that teacher-centered learning methods lead
to a lack of understanding of mathematical concepts and minimal use of thinking
skills [36]. Therefore, mathematics teacher creativity and innovation are determining
factors in developing the education system in this century.
Learning mathematics becomes meaningful when the stimuli during the learning
process form a coherent sequence. In a century that prioritizes complex problem-
solving abilities, integrating computational thinking in mathematics teaching and
learning activities becomes an essential need and top priority. Embedding
computational thinking in mathematics learning can also help students solve
problems. Taking mathematics as a subject combined with computational thinking
still cannot change mathematical thinking as a primary ability. Therefore, the
combination of the two in mathematics subjects has a significant influence, especially
 11

those related to 21st-century thinking skills, the use of technology in learning, and
teacher professionalism. For teachers, the benefits of this research include learning
treatment patterns and various supporting instruments to create education that focuses
on learning outcomes. For students, computational thinking abilities provide cognitive
solid processing abilities to achieve real progress in constructing their knowledge and
learning experiences. Meanwhile, schools can provide adequate facilities and
infrastructure integrated with technology to bridge teachers and students in improving
their abilities continuously.

4 Conclusion

Digital pedagogy-based learning design directs teachers to show their professionalism

by following technological developments, one of which is through the ability to apply
digital application tools in mathematics learning. The seriousness of students'
mathematics learning maximises their ability to absorb knowledge only when
computational thinking, which integrates into mathematics learning, still requires a
long time. The long duration of time is because students who are starting to get used
to online learning due to the impact of previous distance learning have missed out on
strengthening mathematical concepts through learning experiences. As a result of
weak mathematical concepts, students' strengths are only in mastering digital
applications, but to enter the realm of computational thinking, they still need
adjustments. The weakness of HLT 1, later revised to become HLT 2, is that it
presents a meaningful learning design that always focuses on maximally achieving
learning objectives, especially those related to computational thinking abilities.

Acknowledgement

I thank the Education Financing Service Center (PUSLAPDIK), the Ministry of

Education, Culture, Research, and Technology and the Indonesia Endowment Fund
for Education (LPDP) of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia, which
has provided scholarships and supported this research.

References
1. Valverde-Berrocoso, J., Fernández-Sánchez, M. R., Dominguez, F. I. R., & Sosa-Díaz, M.
J.: The educational integration of digital technologies preCovid-19: Lessons for teacher
education. In PLoS ONE 16, 1 - 22 (2021).
2. Kivunja, C.: Embedding Digital Pedagogy in Pre-Service Higher Education to Better
Prepare Teachers for the Digital Generation. International Journal of Higher Education
2(4), 131 - 142 (2013)
3. Boston., & January.: In PMLA Program of the 2013 Convention 127, 1073-1272 (2012)
12

4. Jonsson, B., Norqvist, M., Liljekvist, Y., & Lithner, J.: Learning mathematics through
algorithmic and creative reasoning. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 36, 20–32 (2014).
5. Winter, E., Costello, A., O’Brien, M., & Hickey, G.: Teachers’ use of technology and the
impact of Covid-19. Irish Educational Studies 40(2), 235–246 (2021).
6. Paul, J., & Jefferson, F.: A Comparative Analysis of Student Performance in an Online vs.
Face-to-Face Environmental Science Course From 2009 to 2016. In Frontiers in Computer
Science 1, 1 - 9 (2019).
7. Pongsakdi, N., Kortelainen, A., & Veermans, M.: The impact of digital pedagogy training
on in-service teachers’ attitudes towards digital technologies. Education and Information
Technologies 26(5), 5041–5054 (2021).
8. Harris, K. D., Jakacki, D., & Sayers, J.: Digital Pedagogy in the Humanities. 1 – 61 (2012).
9. Sessa, C.: About Collaborative Work: Exploring the Functional World in a Computer-
Enriched Environment. 581 - 599 (2018).
10. Mason, J., Burton, L. and Stacey, K.: Thinking mathematically. In Early Years Educator.
(2010).
11. Çelik, H. C., & Özdemir, F.: Mathematical Thinking as a Predictor of Critical Thinking
Dispositions of Pre-service Mathematics Teachers. International Journal of Progressive
Education 16(4), 81–98 (2020).
12. Gravemeijer, K., Stephan, M., Julie, C., Lin, F. L., & Ohtani, M.: What Mathematics
Education May Prepare Students for the Society of the Future? International Journal of
Science and Mathematics Education 15, 105–123 (2017).
13. Maharani, S., Nusantara, T., As’ari, A. R., & Qohar, A.: Computational Thinking
Pemecahan Masalah di Abad Ke-21. (2020).
14. Akker, J. J. H. van den (Jan J. H., Plomp, Tj. (Tjeerd), Bannan, B., Cobb, Paul., Folmer,
Elvira., Gravemeijer, K. (Koeno P. E., Kelly, A. E., Nieveen, N. M., & SLO (2000- ).:
Educational design research / Part A: an introduction. (2006).
15. Conner, K., Webel, C., & Zhao, W.: Towards A Hypothetical Learning Trajectory For
Questioning. 861 - 868 (2017).
16. Phommanee, W., Plangsorn, B., & Siripipattanakul, S.: A systematic review of changing
conceptual to practice in learning experience design: Text mining and bibliometric
analysis. Contemporary Educational Technology 15(4), 1 - 12 (2023).
17. Ji, Z., & Guo, K.: The association between working memory and mathematical problem
solving: A three-level meta-analysis. In Frontiers in Psychology 14, 1 - 13 (2023).
18. Liang F, Li P.: Characteristics of Cognitive in Children with Learning Difficulties. Transl
Neuroscience 10, 141 - 146 (2019).
19. Hobri, Susanto, H. A., Hidayati, A., Susanto, & Warli.: Exploring thinking process of
students with mathematics learning disability in solving arithmetic problems. International
Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology 9(3), 498–513 (2021)
20. Alhunaini, S., Osman, K., Abdurab, N.: The Development and Validation of Mathematical
Thinking Beliefs (MTB) Instrument. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and
Technology Education, 17(11), 1–13 (2021).