Abstract

Mathematics instruction at the high school level generally continues to emphasize procedural mastery, so students’ problem-solving abilities are often assessed based on the accuracy of their final answers. Previous studies have tended to focus on procedural errors or students’ success rates, while studies that reveal the complete and meaningful process of students’ mathematical problem solving remain limited. Therefore, this study aims to explore students’ mathematical problem-solving processes in the topic of algebraic derivatives. This study employed a qualitative case study design with 32 twelfth-grade students. Data were collected through a written mathematical problem-solving test administered to all participants, followed by semi-structured interviews with a purposively selected group of students representing different problem-solving profiles. The data were analyzed thematically using NVivo to identify patterns in problem interpretation, mathematical modeling, solution strategies, mathematical communication, and the meaningful use of mathematics. The results showed that students’ main difficulty occurred at the mathematical modeling stage, where many students were unable to translate contextual information into appropriate algebraic representations before applying differentiation procedures. This difficulty triggered a chain reaction in subsequent stages, leading to the use of mechanical problem-solving strategies and affecting students’ mathematical communication and meaningful use of mathematics. This study confirms that mastery of derivative procedures does not guarantee meaningful problem solving. The findings imply the need for learning approaches that emphasize conceptual understanding, mathematical modeling, and reflection. They also open opportunities for further research based on learning interventions.

There is no Figure or data content available for this article

References

• Abakah, F., & Brijlall, D. (2024). Misconceptions of mathematical concepts vis-à-vis how they pose as barriers to developing students’ conceptual understanding. Gulf Journal of Mathematics, 16(2), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.56947/gjom.v16i2.1871
• Al-Hanifah, J. A., Cholily, Y. M., & Ummah, S. K. (2023). Analysis of students’ analytical thinking ability and mathematical communication using online group investigation learning model. Mathematics Education Journal, 7(1), 100–113. https://doi.org/10.22219/mej.v7i1.23342
• Arnon, I., Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., Oktaç, A., Roa Fuentes, S., Trigueros, M., & Weller, K. (2014). APOS theory. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7966-6
• Bibi, A., Aurangzeb, W., Tabassum, F., & Ahmad, M. (2025). Modelling the relationship among calculus scholars’ beliefs, critical thinking, elaboration, and problem-solving. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 20(1), Article em0808. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/15737
• Díaz, J. L. (2024). Integrating the anthropological theory of didactics in multivariate calculus education: Challenges, pedagogical shifts, and innovative activities. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 19(1), Article em0767. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/14142
• Dönmez, G., & Akkoç, H. (2025). Examining high school students’ conception of the function concept from a theoretical thinking perspective. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 56(11), 2251–2278. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2024.2415575
• Dubinsky, E. (1991). Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 95–123). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47203-1_7
• Felmer, P. (2023). Collaborative problem-solving in mathematics. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 52, Article 101296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2023.101296
• Fontana, A., & Groenwald, C. L. O. (2023). Meaningful learning and mathematical modelling: Contributions to dealing with business problem situations in higher education. Acta Scientiae, 25(4), 62–94. https://doi.org/10.17648/acta.scientiae.7667
• Galindo Illanes, M. K., Chamorro Manríquez, D., Breda, A., & Sala-Sebastià, G. (2025). Instructional process for the construction of the derivative function: Modelling and simulation in GeoGebra from the ontosemiotic approach. Journal on Mathematics Education, 16(3), 1001–1022. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v16i3.pp1001-1022
• Kramer, L., Fuller, E., Watson, C., Castillo, A., Oliva, P. D., & Potvin, G. (2023). Establishing a new standard of care for calculus using trials with randomized student allocation. Science, 381(6661), 995–998. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.ade9803
• Lin, T.-H., Riccomini, P. J., & Liang, Z. (2025). Mathematical error patterns of students with mathematics difficulty: A systematic review. Learning Disability Quarterly, 48(4), 242–256. https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487241310873
• Maclean, K. D. S., & Bayley, T. (2024). That’s incorrect and let me tell you why: A scalable assessment to evaluate higher order thinking skills. INFORMS Transactions on Education, 25(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.1287/ited.2023.0020
• Mastrobattista, L., Muñoz Rico, M., & Cordón García, J. A. (2024). Optimising textual analysis in higher education studies through computer assisted qualitative data analysis (CAQDAS) with ATLAS.ti. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 14(2), 622–636. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.2516
• Muhaimin, L. H., Sholikhakh, R. A., Yulianti, S., Ardani, A., Hendriyanto, A., & Sahara, S. (2024). Unlocking the secrets of students’ mathematical literacy to solve mathematical problems: A systematic literature review. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(4), Article em2428. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14404
• Park, H.-J., Lee, D., & Park, H. (2023). Understanding students’ problem-solving patterns: Evidence from an allotted response time in a PISA 2012 item. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 1050435. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1050435
• Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400828678
• Putra, F. G., Lengkana, D., Sutiarso, S., Nurhanurawati, N., Saregar, A., Diani, R., Widyawati, S., Suparman, S., Imama, K., & Umam, R. (2023). Mathematical representation: A bibliometric mapping of the research literature (2013–2022). Infinity Journal, 13(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v13i1.p1-26
• Rathour, L., Obradovic, D., Narayan Mishra, L., Khatri, K., & Narayan Mishra, V. (2023). Application of the function in basic mathematics. International Journal of Advanced Science and Engineering, 9(4), 3144–3150. https://doi.org/10.29294/IJASE.9.4.2023.3144-3150
• Rohati, R., Kusumah, Y. S., & Kusnandi, K. (2023). Exploring students’ mathematical reasoning behavior in junior high schools: A grounded theory. Education Sciences, 13(3), Article 252. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13030252
• Rohyati, R., & Purwanto, J. (2023). The effect of PBL model on students’ mathematical problem-solving ability based on HOTS questions. AlphaMath: Journal of Mathematics Education, 9(2), Article 183. https://doi.org/10.30595/alphamath.v9i2.19119
• Romaniuk, M. W., Mika, P., Apanasewicz, J., & Duda-Maciejewska, E. (2025). Enhancing research practices: Digital technologies in the social sciences and practical tools for doctoral students. International Journal of Electronics and Telecommunications, 71(1), 181–188. https://doi.org/10.24425/ijet.2025.153560
• Sa’diyah, M., Sa’dijah, C., & Susiswo, S. (2024). Students’ ability to formulate situation mathematically from context-based mathematics problems. TEM Journal, 13(2), 1443–1451. https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM132-58
• Sandoval Jiménez, F. R., & Sierra, G. M. (2025). Mathematical modelling and covariational reasoning: A multiple case study. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 56(10), 1964–1993. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2024.2379485
• Saputra, W., Andriani, S., & Dewi, N. R. (2024). The effect of video-assisted brain-based learning model on mathematical critical thinking and mathematical problem solving skills. AlphaMath: Journal of Mathematics Education, 10(2), Article 205. https://doi.org/10.30595/alphamath.v10i2.22115
• Satiti, W. S., & Wulandari, K. (2021). Students’ ability to think mathematically in solving PISA mathematics problems content change and relationship. Mathematics Education Journal, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.22219/mej.v5i1.14380
• Setiyani, Waluya, S. B., Sukestiyarno, Y. L., & Cahyono, A. N. (2023). Construction of reflective thinking: A field independent student in numerical problems. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(1), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v15i1.pp151-172
• Sinaga, B., Sitorus, J., & Situmeang, T. (2023). The influence of students’ problem-solving understanding and results of students’ mathematics learning. Frontiers in Education, 8, Article 1088556. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1088556
• Singh, P., Md Nasir, N. A., & Sian Hoon, T. (2024). The cognitive gap in the mathematical thinking abilities of high school leavers for college: Are they ready? Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(11), Article em2529. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15577
• Smith, M. A., & Nigro, S. (2023). Applying design-thinking principles to practice-based pharmacy research. Annals of Pharmacotherapy, 57(9), 1111–1116. https://doi.org/10.1177/10600280221147014
• Syaiful, S., Mukminin, A., & Puspayanti, P. (2025). Using APOS theory in learning basic mathematics to promote students’ mathematical critical thinking skills. Discover Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00863-2
• Tasarib, A., Rosli, R., & Rambely, A. S. (2025). Impacts and challenges of mathematical modelling activities on students’ learning development: A systematic literature review. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(5), Article em2641. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/16398
• Teledahl, A., Kilhamn, C., Ahl, L. M., & Helenius, O. (2025). Defining and measuring quality in students’ mathematical writing: A systematic literature review. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 37(3), 557–576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-024-00501-4
• Türkoğlu, H., & Yalçınalp, S. (2024). Investigating problem-solving behaviours of university students through an eye-tracking system using GeoGebra in geometry: A case study. Education and Information Technologies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12452-1
• Zhou, Y., Ning, Y., Chen, J., Zhang, W., & Wijaya, T. T. (2024). Development and validation of mathematical higher-order thinking scale for high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 61(8), 3160–3192. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.23213

How to Cite This

Article Metrics

Download Statistics

Other Statistics

Copyright and Permissions

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors published in this journal agree to the following terms:

• The copyright of each article is retained by the author (s) without restrictions
• The journal allows the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions
• The author grants the journal the first publication rights with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, allowing others to share the work with an acknowledgement of authorship and the initial publication in this journal.
• Authors may enter into separate additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of published journal versions of the work (for example, posting them to institutional repositories or publishing them in a book), with acknowledgement of their initial publication in this journal
• Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (For example in the Institutional Repository or on their website) before and during the submission process, as this can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and larger citations of published work
• Articles and all related material published are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution-4.0 International Public License (CC - BY 4.0).

License

AlphaMath: Journal of Mathematics Education is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- 4.0 International Public License (CC - BY 4.0).

You are free to :

Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format

Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially

Data Availability