Transforming Mathematics Education Through Self-Directed and Peer Learning

The increasing demand for learner autonomy, collaboration, and higher-order thinking requires mathematics education to move beyond conventional lecturer-centered instruction. This study examined a student-centered transformative teaching approach integrating self-directed and peer learning to enhance students’ engagement, mathematical understanding, and active participation. A pre-experimental one-group pre-test and post-test design was employed, complemented by a student perception survey and qualitative feedback. The intervention involved self-directed exploration of mathematical topics, expert-group collaboration, development of learning materials and quizzes, Gallery Walk activities, peer sharing, and assessment and reflection. Digital tools were incorporated as supporting mechanisms to facilitate knowledge exploration, creation, and exchange rather than as an independent pedagogical approach. A total of 55 students completed a 14-item questionnaire assessing Self-Directed Learning, Peer and Collaborative Learning, Digital Tools as Learning Support, and Student Satisfaction. The questionnaire demonstrated excellent overall internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.932). Students’ cognitive achievement improved following the intervention, with the mean score increasing from 6.88 (SD = 3.04) in the pre-test to 8.76 (SD = 1.28) in the post-test. Students also reported highly positive perceptions of the approach, with all questionnaire items recording mean scores between 4.45 and 4.77. Students valued opportunities for self-directed learning, responsibility for their own learning, collaborative knowledge construction, and technology-supported activities. Qualitative feedback further highlighted peer interaction, knowledge sharing, improved understanding, and active participation as important features of the learning experience. Overall, the findings suggest that integrating self-directed and peer learning can provide a supportive environment for promoting learner autonomy, collaboration, engagement, and mathematical understanding. Moreover, given the absence of a control group, further studies using comparative designs and larger samples are recommended as preliminary evidence.

collaborative; mathematics education; peer learning; self-directed

1. Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2015). Malaysia Education Blueprint 2015-2025 (Higher Education). Ministry of Education Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Simsek, A., Clark-Wilson, A., Bretscher, N., & Hoyles, C. (2026). Exploring mathematics teachers’ integration of technology into classroom teaching practice: a focus on geometric similarity. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 57(4), 697–727. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2025.2469865 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Engelbrecht, J., Borba, M.C. Recent developments in using digital technology in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education 56, 281–292 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01530-2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. OECD (2017), The OECD Handbook for Innovative Learning Environments, OECD, Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/9789264277274-en. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Nabovati, H. (2024). Developing and Assessing Lifelong Learning Skills through a Self-Determined Learning Approach. https://doi.org/10.24908/pceea.2024.18519 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Darade, P. D., Jolhe, P. D., Patil, V., Chougule, M. N., & Kubde, R. R. (2024). Pedagogy To Heutagogy: Empowering Engineering Students For 21st -Century Challenges. International Journal on Environmental Sciences. https://doi.org/10.64252/320f8v02 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Michael, Batsa & Arthur, Yarhands & Asare, Bright. (2025). Influence of peer learning, self-regulatory learning, and mathematics interest on mathematics performance. 2. 3047-9207. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Oikarinen, R.M., Oikarinen, J.K., Havu-Nuutinen, S. et al. Students’ collaboration in technology-enhanced reciprocal peer tutoring as an approach towards learning mathematics. Educ Inf Technol 27, 7519–7548 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10799-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. D’Souza, S., Wood, L. N. (2003). Rationale for collaborative learning in first year engineering mathematics. https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/5661/1/2003001066.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Gürbüz MÇ, Özkul R and Şen S (2026) The relationship between peer learning and self-directed learning: the mediating role of collaborative leadership among pre-service mathematics teachers. Front. Psychol. 16:1724725. https://doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1724725 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Bhardwaj V, Zhang S, Tan YQ and Pandey V (2025) Redefining learning: student-centered strategies for academic and personal growth. Front. Educ. 10:1518602. https://doi:10.3389/feduc.2025.1518602 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Fisher M, King J, Tague G. Development of a self-directed learning readiness scale for nursing education. Nurse Educ Today. 2001 Oct;21(7):516-25. https://doi.org/10.1054/nedt.2001.0589 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Chen SL, Fan JY. Validation of the psychometric properties of the Self-Directed Learning Readiness Scale. Nurs Open. 2023 Mar;10(3):1639-1646. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1418 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Kiper, A. (2016). The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Collabrative Learning Scale. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 1(2), 42–48. https://doi.org/10.24331/ijere.309966 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Balaman, F., & Baş, M. (2023). Perception of using e-learning platforms in the scope of the technology acceptance model (TAM): a scale development study. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(8), 5395–5419. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.2007136 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Topala, I., & Tomozii, S. (2014). Learning satisfaction: Validity and reliability testing for Students’ Learning Satisfaction Questionnaire (SLSQ). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 128, 380–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.175 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Gao, H., Evans, T., & Fergusson, A. (2025). Student-generated explanation in undergraduate mathematics and statistics education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 56(12), 2534–2557. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2025.2556867 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Ramas, S., Yasin, R. M., & Adnan, N. H. (2024). Benefits and challenges of the heutagogy approach in education: A systematic review. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 19(2). https://10.18844/cjes.v19i2.7604 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Silva, H., Lopes, J. P., Cecchini, J. A., Fernández-Rio, J., et al. (2024). Cooperative learning scale: Validation among Portuguese and Brazilian university students. Revista Brasileira de Educação, 29. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-24782024290014 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Hague, C. (2024). Fostering higher-order thinking skills online in higher education: A scoping review. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 306. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/84f7756a-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Remote Working Environment on Academicians’ Performance in Public Higher Education Institutions
• Training Teachers for the New Pathways: Empowering Change through Inclusive, Innovative, and Sustainable Teacher Education in Africa
• Research on the Current Status, Problems, and Countermeasures of College Students' Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence
• Teaching and Learning Financial Performance Measurement: Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions of Objectivity and Sufficiency