Effect of Manipulatives on the Achievement of Grade 9 Students in Geometry

This study investigated the effect of manipulatives on the achievement of Grade 9 students in Geometry for the school year 2024-2025. The respondents of this study were the ninety Grade 9 students in a public school in Negros Occidental. The researcher adopted a standardized test as the research instrument to enhance the reliability and validity of the study. The findings revealed that students who were exposed to the enhanced instructional approach showed greater improvement in their post-test scores compared to those who experienced the traditional method of teaching. This suggests that the strategy helped learners better understand the concepts and develop their problem-solving skills. Furthermore, the significant difference between the performances of the control and experimental groups confirms the effectiveness of the intervention in improving students’ academic achievement.

Mathematics

1. Adegboyega, S. M., J C Amadi, J. C., Isaac Taley, I., Hamidu Ibrahim Bukari, H. I. (2023). Trends in Primary and Secondary School Mathematics Education (pp.222-232). KATAPUNO-PRINTS. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376313200_CHAPTER_21_USE_OF_MANIPULATIVES_FOR_MATHEMATICS_TEACHING_AND_LEARNING [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Sowell, E. J. (1989). Effects of Manipulative Materials in Mathematics Instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(5), 498–505. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Apsari, R. A., & Abrahamson, D. (2024). Embodied geometry in movement: Using spatial sense to model abstract concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Artigue, M., et al. (2020). Using Manipulatives to Support Diverse Learners in Mathematics Education. Journal of Educational Research, 113(4), 411-421. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Benjamin J. Norton. (2022)."Traditional versus Modern Teaching Styles: Effect on Mathematical Achievement and Motivation," published in May 2022.https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.psichi.org/resource/resmgr/journal_2024/29_150_norton.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Broadbent, J., Sharman, S. J., & Fuller-Tyszkiewicz, M. (2023). Designing effective summative post-assessments in blended higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 48(4), 512–526. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chris Hurst and Chris Linsell. (2020). "Manipulatives and Multiplicative Thinking" by, published in the European Journal of STEM Education in 2020. 5(1), 04 ISSN: 2468-4368 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Christine M. Higgins, et al. (2022). "Propensities by Grade of Math Anxiety Levels K-12: Addressing Mathematics Dispositions and How Manipulatives May Help. https://nsuworks.nova.edu/transformations/vol8/iss1/1/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2021). Learning and Teaching Early Math: The Learning Trajectories Approach (3rd ed.). Routledge. (Analyzes the cognitive bridge between physical and computer-based virtual manipulatives). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Dienes, Z. P. (2023)."Mathematics Manipulatives: Base 10” [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. https://www.tts-group.co.uk/blog/2023/02/21/maths-manipulatives-base-10-dienes.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). "Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features from an Instructional Design Perspective." Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Gu, X., & Luo, Y. (2023). Formative assessment mechanisms in blended learning and technology-enhanced environments. Educational Psychology Review. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Ginsburg, H. P., Pappas, S., & Lee, Y. (2010). Early Mathematics Assessment System. (Project number 1 RO1 HD051538-01). https://vkrponline.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/10/EMAS-Overview-2022-10-14_svl.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Hanafiah, W. O. (2022). Conventional Teaching Method and an Interactive-Based Teaching Methods to Adjust Learners’ Grammar and Speaking Competence in English Classrooms: A Comparative Study for Effectiveness Methods in Learning. Eduvelop: Journal of English Education and Development, 6(1), 79–90. https://doi.org/10.31605/eduvelop.v6i1.1957 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Jablonski, S., & Ludwig, M. (2023). Teaching and Learning of Geometry—A Literature Review on Current Developments in Theory and Practice. Education Sciences, 13(7), 682. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13070682 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Lamon, S. J., & Turner, M. (2006). Teaching Mathematics with Manipulatives: How Teachers Can Promote Deep Understanding. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Linaza, N. K. D., Gultiano, S. R. O., & Susada, B. L. (2025). Enhancing Grade 4 students’ mathematical problem-solving skills using manipulatives. Davao Research Journal, 16(1), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.59120/drj.v16i1.303 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Maurya, R. (2026). Modern teaching strategies in mathematics: A comprehensive review of conventional and student-centered approaches. International Journal of Mathematics Education, 34(1), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/ijme.2026.34.1.22 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Müller, C., & Mildenberger, T. (2021). "Facilitating Flexible Learning by Replacing Classroom Time with an Online Learning Environment: A Systematic Review of Blended Learning in Higher Education." Educational Research Review, 34, 100394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100394 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Ochu, A. O. (2023). The confluence of attitudes towards mathematics and pedagogical practice: Evaluating the use of mathematical manipulatives. Mathematics Education Research Journal. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Sande, N., & Ndlovu, M. (2022). Grade 9 learners' structural and operational conceptions of the equal sign. Educational Studies in Mathematics. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Sison, J. (2025). Policies and reforms in mathematics education: Conventional teaching in exam-driven cultures. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Sun, Y., Nambiar, R., & Vidyasagaran, V. (2023). Gamifying Math Education Using Object Detection. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06270. https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.06270 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Suydam, M. N., & Rieger, J. L. (1975). Mathematics in the Elementary School: The Use of Manipulatives and Activities. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Taley, I.B., & Bukari, H.I. (2022). Use of Manipulatives for Mathematics Teaching and Learning.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376313200_CHAPTER_21_USE_OF_MANIPULATIVES_FOR_MATHEMATICS_TEACHING_AND_LEARNING [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Zbiek, R. M., & Muir, M. (2011). Making Connections with Virtual Manipulatives: The Role of Dynamic Software in Teaching Algebra. The Mathematics Teacher, 104(9), 660-664. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363799334_A_Retrospective_of_TeachingTechnology_and Teacher_Education_During_the_COVID-19_Pandemic [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Altun, M. (2023). The ongoing debate over teacher centered education and student centered education. International Journal of Social Sciences & Educational Studies, 10(1), 106–110. https://doi.org/10.23918/ijsses.v10i1p106 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Baumgartner, E., Kaplan-Rakowski, R., Ferdig, R. E., Hartshorne, R., & Mouza, C. (Eds.). (2022). A retrospective of teaching, technology, and teacher education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/221522/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Dinsmoor, K. (2023). Math manipulatives. In Student-centered approaches in K–12 and higher education. EdTech Books. https://edtechbooks.org/student_centered/math_manipulatives [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Greenstein, S., & Fernández, E. (2023). Learning mathematics with mathematical objects: Cases of teacher-made mathematical manipulatives. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 23(1), 1–128. https://citejournal.org/volume-23/issue-1-23/objects-to-think-with/learning-mathematics-with-mathematical-objects-cases-of-teacher-made-mathematical-manipulatives [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Hurst, C., & Linsell, C. (2020). Manipulatives and multiplicative thinking. European Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/8375 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Jaggernauth, S., Ramsawak-Jodha, N., Kamalodeen, V. J., Dedovets, Z., Barrow, D., & Figaro-Henry, S. (2020). Exploring gamification for reinforcing geometrical concepts and skills at the primary level in Trinidad: A mixed methods pilot study. Caribbean Curriculum, 26, 65–98. https://doi.org/10.47161/CC.2.u0017 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Nash, E. (2023, April 19). Math manipulatives: A student-centered approach to teaching mathematics. Great Minds. https://greatminds.org/math/blog/eureka/math-manipulatives-a-student-centered-approach-to-teaching-mathematics [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Tjandra, C. (2023). Effectiveness of using manipulatives in mathematics teaching in inclusive education programs in an elementary school. Dharmas Education Journal (DE_Journal), 4(1), 168–178. https://doi.org/10.56667/dejournal.v4i1.944 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study