Authors : Raynan A. Tobeo

Volume/Issue : Volume 11 - 2026, Issue 3 - March

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/3xc7nzrr

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/nhe8kzzr

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/26mar1572

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : This study Basic Calculus is one of the core subjects in STEM Education in the K-12 Curriculum by the DepEd. It is recognized globally as a conceptually demanding subject that exposes weaknesses in foundational mathematical proficiency, particularly when instruction emphasizes rote procedures over reasoning and problem solving. Five Strands of Mathematical Proficiency, relative to conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, strategic competence, adaptive reasoning, and productive disposition, was the framework that guided research and curricular reform internationally, underscoring the importance of balanced proficiency for meaningful mathematical learning. With this, the study aimed to determine the students’ level of performance in Basic Calculus, to assess the student’s level of mathematical proficiency relative to conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, strategic competence, adaptive reasoning, and productive disposition, to find out the relationship between student’s performance in Basic Calculus and their mathematical proficiency, and to prepare and interactive learning material in Basic Calculus based on the results. The study used a descriptive-correlational design and the Raosoft Sample Calculator to compute the 245 SHS STEM students in public schools in the SDO of Batangas Province. The findings indicated that students demonstrated a very satisfactory level of performance in Basic Calculus, reflecting effective learning outcomes. Their mathematical proficiency across the five strands relative to conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, strategic competence, adaptive reasoning, and productive disposition was generally above average, suggesting well-developed mathematical skills. A significant relationship was found between students’ mathematical proficiency and their performance in Basic Calculus, emphasizing the importance of these competencies in learning calculus. In response to these findings, a web-based interactive learning material in Basic Calculus was developed to support and enhance students’ learning.

Keywords : Basic Calculus, Mathematical Proficiency, Interactive Learning Material, Conceptual Understanding, Strategic Competence.

References :

1. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.
2. Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets. Jossey-Bass.
3. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Harvard University Press.
4. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press.
5. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
6. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academy Press.
7. Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.
8. Stewart, J. (2016). Calculus: Early transcendentals (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
9. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
10. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
11. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2018-results-volume-i_947e3529.html
12. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing.
13. CA Learning Lab. (2023). Designing accessible mobile-friendly calculus learning resources. CA Learning Lab.
14. Department of Education – Division of Batangas. (2025). Senior high school enrollment and performance statistics. DepEd Batangas.
15. Department of Education – Laiya Integrated National High School. (2025). Classroom assessment reports in Senior High School mathematics.
16. Department of Education (DepEd). (2015). K–12 basic education grading system. Department of Education, Philippines.
17. Department of Education (DepEd). (2016). K to 12 curriculum guide: Senior high school mathematics (STEM – Basic Calculus). Department of Education, Philippines.
18. Department of Education (DepEd). (2025). DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2025: Policy guidelines on classroom assessment for the K–12 Basic Education Program. Department of Education, Philippines. https://depedph.com/deped-order-8/
19. FIU News. (2023). Active learning strategies improve calculus performance. Florida International University.
20. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM.
21. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. NCTM.
22. National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academy Press.
23. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/pisa-2018-results-volume-i_947e3529.html
24. Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Tarbiyah Babussalam Aceh Tenggara. (2024). Innovative problem-solving models in mathematics education. STIT Babussalam.
25. Cabaces, A. (2025). Mathematics proficiency of Grade 9 students in Calaca District (Unpublished research). Department of Education, Division of Batangas.
26. Flores, R. (2025). Mathematics performance of public secondary school students in the Division of Batangas (Unpublished research). Department of Education, Division of Batangas.
27. Mendoza, R. (2025). Structural equation model on engineering students’ mathematical proficiency and performance in calculus (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Batangas State University, Philippines.
28. Ansari, B. I., Taufiq, A., & Saminan. (2020). The effect of creative problem solving learning on students’ mathematical reasoning ability. Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(2), 145–156.
29. Bautista, R. G. (2013). Procedural fluency and mathematical reasoning among secondary students. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 44(5), 701–713.
30. Garcia, M., Santos, L., Cruz, J., & Lim, K. (2025). Effects of realistic mathematics education on students’ conceptual and strategic competence: A meta-analysis. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 109(1), 25–48.
31. Haji, S., Yumiati, Y., & Zamzaili, Z. (2025). Improving students’ productive disposition through realistic mathematics education with outdoor learning. Journal of Mathematics Education, 16(1), 89–104.
32. Hammoudi, A., & Grira, N. (2023). Mathematics self-concept, motivation, and achievement in calculus learning. International Journal of Instruction, 16(3), 521–540.
33. Hussein, M., & Csíkos, C. (2023). Conceptual-based mathematics instruction and students’ achievement and attitudes. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 38(2), 403–425.
34. Jäder, J., & Johansson, M. (2025). Multiple representations and conceptual understanding in rational numbers. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 78, 101–118.
35. Lin, Y., Chen, H., Wang, S., & Lee, C. (2024). Augmented reality–based learning materials for calculus education. Computers & Education, 201, 104807.
36. Liu, X., & Zhang, D. (2025). Relationships among conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, and strategic competence. Educational Psychology, 45(1), 67–84.
37. Novikasari, I., Rahmawati, D., & Elebiary, M. (2024). Conceptual understanding and mathematical values of prospective teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 27(3), 421–440.
38. Núñez, J., Reyes, A., & Molina, P. (2023). Effects of supplemental calculus modules on students’ achievement. Journal of STEM Education, 24(2), 15–28.
39. Putri, R. I., & Warmi, A. (2024). Students’ adaptive reasoning in mathematical problem solving. Journal of Mathematics Education Research, 6(1), 33–49.
40. Rahman, A. (2025). Productive disposition, motivation, and self-efficacy as predictors of mathematics achievement. International Journal of Educational Research, 119, 102210.
41. Rittle-Johnson, B., & Schneider, M. (2015). Developing conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107(4), 1115–1134.
42. Robles, R. (2020). Mathematical skills and calculus performance. Journal of STEM Education, 21(3), 15–24.
43. Sabilah, A., Siswono, T. Y. E., & Masriyah. (2018). Strategic competence in mathematical problem solving. Journal on Mathematics Education, 9(1), 1–12.
44. Sahmbi, M. (2020). Cognitive load and calculus learning difficulties. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(6), 825–842.
45. Schulz, A. (2024). Assessing procedural fluency and strategic competence in teacher education. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 27(1), 65–89.
46. Schulz, A., Müller, K., & Richter, S. (2021). Strategic competence in multistep mathematical problem solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107(3), 437–456.
47. Shamsuddin, N., Mahlan, S., & Umar, I. (2024). Foundational calculus mastery and performance in advanced mathematics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 22(2), 317–335.
48. Smith, J., & Thompson, P. W. (2017). Developing conceptual understanding through classroom tasks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(4), 393–427.
49. Sofroniou, A., Patel, R., Premnath, N., & Wall, S. (2025). Digital and model-based interventions in higher mathematics: A meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 205, 104861.
50. Star, J. R. (2005). Reconceptualizing procedural knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36(5), 404–411.
51. Susilawati, S., Rachmawati, T., & Nuraida, D. (2025). Technology-assisted learning and adaptive reasoning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 28(1), 112–126.
52. Wahyuni, S., Pratama, R., & Kurniawan, D. (2022). Contextualized calculus learning materials and higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(2), 201–218.
53. Xu, L. (2024). Students’ attitudes and achievement in calculus learning. Educational Psychology Review, 36(1), 89–110.
54. Yanti, R., Budayasa, I. K., & Sulaiman, R. (2025). Cognitive styles and adaptive reasoning in mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 79, 102–120.
55. Zebua, Y., & Waruwu, F. (2022). Procedural fluency and self-regulated learning in mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(1), 45–58.