Both articles aim at improving the performance of students in mathematics. The articles use different approaches to show how the performance of students can be enhanced in mathematics. Ahdhianto et al. (2020) conducted an experiment on grade five learners to determine the role that problem solving and critical thinking skills play in improving the performance of elementary learners. Ahdhianto et al. (2020) reaffirmed that it was important to examine how problem-solving and critical thinking skills can improve the performance of the said learners because the two are believed to contribute a lot to elementary learners’ comprehension of mathematics. The target of the study was to find a way to develop the learners’ mathematical problem solving and critical thinking skills (Ahdhianto et al., 2020). To achieve the target, the study used problem-based learning as the most convenient approach. The study consisted of seventy-eight participants, both male and females. The participants used in the study were all grade five learners because they were the main target of the study (Ahdhianto et al., 2020). The participants were divided into two groups. One unit was named the experimental group (n=39), and the other was called the control group (n=39). In the experimental and control groups, the participants were subjected to a series of tests on problem-solving and critical thinking capabilities to generate the desired data (Ahdhianto et al., 2020). The data obtained were analyzed by using MANOVA and ANOVA tests. After data analysis, the study confirmed a high score in participants who belonged to the experimental collection than the participants in the control collection. An inference was concluded that problem-based learning effectively promoted grade five learners’ problem-solving and critical thinking capacities.

Similarly, Bryant et al. (2020) carried out an experiment to improve elementary learners’ understanding of mathematics using a different experimental design. The study targeted finding out how an early numeracy tier-2 intervention affected elementary learners’ performance in mathematics (Bryant et al., 2020). Using the above approach, the study would help conclude whether learners’ performance is negatively or positively affected, hence developing the best way of improving the learners’ performance. The study used grade two learners as participants (Bryant et al., 2020). The study targeted improving the numeracy concepts and skills in grade two learners through the use of whole number content and instructional design facets. According to Bryant et al. (2020), the study focused on grade two learners with mathematics complications. The study employed a pre-test and post-test control collection design. A group of eighty-three learners was subjected to the treatment situation, and thirty-eight learners were exposed to the comparison situation unexpectedly (Bryant et al., 2020). The team that was steadfast as mathematical interventionists in the experiment gave guidelines to the participants four days a week consistently for twenty weeks. The guidelines were given to learners with mathematics learning hitches (Bryant et al., 2020). The study used proximal and distal measures in determining the impacts of the tier intervention (Bryant et al., 2020). Results indicated that learners in the treatment situation performed well than learners in the comparison situation when a proximal measurement was employed to measure the participants’ performance (Bryant et al., 2020). Also, the result displayed no distinction between the two situations concerning problem-solving assessments (Bryant et al., 2020).

Even though the two articles have commonalities, they have differed results since they used different approaches to improve elementary learners’ performances. For instance, the study conducted by Ahdhino et al. (2020) used a problem-based approach which was different from the whole number of content and instructional design facets that were used in the study conducted by Bryant et al. (2020). Likewise, the two articles employed a different method of data analysis; hence, different results. For example, Ahdhiano et al. (2020) used MANOVA and ANOVA techniques to analyze the data collected in the experiment. On the other hand, Bryant et al. (2020) used proximal and distal techniques to analyze the information. Therefore, the results of the two articles differed as a result of the use of different research designs and data analysis techniques.

Ahdhiano et al. (2020) used ANOVA and MANOVA tests in determining the performance of grade five learners using a problem-based learning approach. The results from the two tests were recorded separately; the results of the MANOVA test showed that learners who used problem-based learning as their mode of learning scored well in the post-tests than learners who endorsed conventional learning as their learning modes. Using the results of the MANOVA test, a conclusion was made that problem-based learning is effective in catalyzing mathematics learning; hence, a possible improvement. Therefore, the MANOVA test revealed that a learner-centered approach to teaching would actively involve learners in the learning process, as it is a requirement when using problem-based learning (Ahdhiano et al., 2020). The involvement of learners in the learning process would help the teacher understand where the learner encounters difficulties. It is also key to mention that the MANOVA test exposed learners to the problem they meet in their daily engagements, hence motivated learners to participate (Ahdhiano et al., 2020). Similarly, the ANOVA outcomes informed that learners who used the problem-based learning approach acquired high scores concerning mathematical problem-solving skills than learners who depended on conventional teaching approaches (Ahdhiano et al., 2020). According to Ahdhiano et al. (2020), the results of the ANOVA tests would be a result of teachers organizing learners into groups where they can share and actively participate in solving problems. On the other hand, the results of the experiment conducted by Bryant et al. (2020) revealed that learners who were in the treatment collection had more performance benefits than learners who were in the comparison collection. This is a clear clue that even though the two articles aimed at improving elementary learners’ performance in mathematics, the different approaches used in the articles yielded varied results.

Elementary learners’ performances in mathematics need to be boosted for a better foundation in mathematics. The information, therefore, relates to my proposed study as it suggests the various approaches that are pertinent in transforming elementary learners’ performances in mathematics. Also, the information provides a platform for learning and research on the best techniques to use to improve the performance of elementary learners in mathematics.

Ahdhianto, E., Marsigit, M., Haryanto, H., & Nurfauzi, Y. (2020). Improving Fifth-Grade Students’ Mathematical Problem-Solving and Critical Thinking Skills Using Problem-Based Learning. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(5), 2012–2021. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080539

http://www.hrpub.org/journals/article_info.php?aid=9165

Bryant, D. P., Pfannenstiel, K. H., Bryant, B. R., Roberts, G., Fall, A. M., Nozari, M., & Lee, J. (2019). Improving the Mathematics Performance of Second-Grade Students with Mathematics Difficulties through an Early Numeracy Intervention. Behavior Modification, 45(1), 99–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445519873651

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0145445519873651