Certificate: View Certificate
Published Paper PDF: View PDF
Varun Deshmukh
Independent Researcher
Maharashtra, India
Abstract
Mathematics anxiety, characterized by persistent feelings of tension, apprehension, and physiological arousal when engaging with numerical tasks, poses a significant barrier to student success across educational levels. This mixed‑methods study investigates the efficacy of interactive digital modules—comprising gamified challenges, adaptive feedback, scaffolded problem‑solving, and mindfulness prompts—in reducing mathematics anxiety among 200 secondary school students. Employing a quasi‑experimental pretest–posttest control‑group design, participants were evenly divided into experimental and control cohorts. Over eight weeks, the experimental group completed eight multimedia‑rich modules during scheduled lab sessions, while the control group received standard instruction. Quantitative outcomes were measured using the validated Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale–Revised (MARS‑R) and a custom mathematics achievement test; qualitative insights were gathered through focus group interviews. Results revealed a substantial decrease in anxiety scores for the experimental group (mean reduction of 15.5 points, p < .001) and a significant improvement in achievement (mean gain of 6.7 points, p < .001), with large effect sizes (d > 1.2). Thematic analysis highlighted enhanced confidence, increased intrinsic motivation, and positive shifts in attitudes toward mathematics, as students reported feeling empowered by scaffolded successes and immediate, constructive feedback. Notably, the integration of brief reflection prompts and gamified rewards fostered a sense of agency and normalized errors as opportunities for growth. These findings underscore the potential of technology‑mediated interventions to address both affective and cognitive barriers in mathematics learning. Implications for scalable curriculum integration, targeted teacher training, and future research on long‑term retention are discussed, suggesting that interactive digital modules can serve as a transformative tool for cultivating mathematical resilience, engagement, and achievement in diverse educational settings.
Keywords
Mathematics anxiety, interactive digital modules, gamification, secondary education, adaptive learning
References
- https://www.mdpi.com/jintelligence/jintelligence-11-00117/article_deploy/html/images/jintelligence-11-00117-g002.png
- https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/65e9bdf1fae79e05e21320c3/6718f29b44794c3fc576eef0_AD_4nXdcvWD11Ok_kc5LrHmvISI80foob3MiFi2Hlvfl3jN1ES4MQDJFcOUursIMYZrkkyw0fzqwtn8HQ-RAdhWMfVbKwvQhi4XApRcY2VJ8Qg5hBBRwRaTW9DN6pW8N5uHJrZ2dwf_HRj0ppQa8aRij7G-MUBd2.png
- Richardson, F. C., & Suinn, R. M. (1972). The Mathematics Anxiety Rating Scale: Psychometric data. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 19(6), 551–554.
- Hembree, R. (1990). The nature, effects, and relief of mathematics anxiety. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 33–46.
- Ashcraft, M. H., & Moore, A. M. (2009). Mathematics anxiety and the affective drop in performance. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27(3), 197–205.
- Maloney, E. A., & Beilock, S. L. (2012). Math anxiety: Who has it, why it develops, and how to guard against it. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(8), 404–406.
- Chang, H., & Beilock, S. L. (2016). The role of expressive writing in math anxiety. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(2), 214–223.
- Chapell, M. S., Blanding, Z. B., Silverstein, M. E., Takahashi, M., Newman, B., Gubi, A., & McCann, N. (2005). Test anxiety and academic performance in undergraduate and graduate students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(2), 268–274.
- Ramirez, G., Gunderson, E. A., Levine, S. C., & Beilock, S. L. (2016). Spatial–numerical associations facilitate arithmetic learning in children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 153, 1–13.
- Suárez‑Pellicioni, M., Núñez‑Peña, M. I., & Colomé, À. (2014). The functional neuroanatomy of arithmetic and related processes in adults and children. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 103.
- Plass, J. L., Moreno, R., & Brünken, R. (Eds.). (2010). Cognitive Load Theory. Cambridge University Press.
- Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
- Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self‑determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well‑being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78.
- Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257–285.
- Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 2014 47th Hawaiʻi International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3025–3034). IEEE.
- Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2017). Gamification in education: A systematic literature review. Educational Technology & Society, 20(4), 75–88.
- Nye, B. D., Graesser, A., & Hu, X. (2014). AutoTutor and family: A review of 17 years of natural language tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24(4), 427–469.
- VanLehn, K. (2011). The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46(4), 197–221.
- Papastergiou, M. (2009). Digital game‑based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers & Education, 52(1), 1–12.
- Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self‑regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self‑Regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press.
- Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
