Journal of Educational Studies in Science and Mathematics
ISSN (Online): 2979-9899

Research article    |    Open Access
Journal of Educational Studies in Science and Mathematics 2025, Vol. 4(1) 27-41

Variations in Thinking Levels Among Senior High School Students Across Different Study Programmes

Emmanuel Antwi Adjei

pp. 27 - 41   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/jessm.2025.1339.2

Publish Date: June 30, 2025  |   Single/Total View: 2/3   |   Single/Total Download: 2/3

PDF Download

Abstract

The study investigated whether senior high school students’ thinking levels in permutation and combination differ by the programme of study. Therefore, the Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) taxonomy was used as a theoretical framework to assess their thinking levels in permutation and combination. Quantitative research method that employed descriptive research design was used as a strategy of enquiry in this present study. Three senior high schools were purposively selected and a sample of 360 students which comprised 256 males and 104 females were randomly selected for the study. The data were collected using tests. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics (percentages, mean and standard deviation) and inferential statistics (Kruskal-Wallis tests). The results indicated that, the majority (73.9%) of the students reached the lower levels of the SOLO taxonomy (pre-structural, uni- structural and multi- structural) while a few (26.1%) reached the higher levels (relational and extended abstract). Furtherance to this, the Kruskal-Wallis H test indicated that there was a statistically significant difference in the thinking levels of the SOLO taxonomy across the various programme of study where General Science students differed significantly from General Agriculture and Business students. Therefore, it is recommended that educators should use differentiated instructional methodologies, including active learning techniques adapted to each subject of study. Again, to overcome the identified disparities, curriculum developers may incorporate discipline-specific cognitive skill-building activities.

Keywords: Combinatorial, SOLO taxonomy, Permutation

How to Cite this Article?

APA 7th edition
Adjei, E.A. (2025). Variations in Thinking Levels Among Senior High School Students Across Different Study Programmes. Journal of Educational Studies in Science and Mathematics, 4(1), 27-41. https://doi.org/10.29329/jessm.2025.1339.2

Harvard
Adjei, E. (2025). Variations in Thinking Levels Among Senior High School Students Across Different Study Programmes. Journal of Educational Studies in Science and Mathematics, 4(1), pp. 27-41.

Chicago 16th edition
Adjei, Emmanuel Antwi (2025). "Variations in Thinking Levels Among Senior High School Students Across Different Study Programmes". Journal of Educational Studies in Science and Mathematics 4 (1):27-41. https://doi.org/10.29329/jessm.2025.1339.2

References
  1. Abrahamson, D., & Cendak, R. M. (2006, July). The odds of understanding the law of large numbers: A design for grounding intuitive probability in combinatorial analysis. In J. Novotná (Ed.), Proceedings of the Thirtieth Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 1–8). PME. [Google Scholar]
  2. Adjei, E. A., & Oppong, R. A. (2024). Exploring pre-service teachers' algebraic thinking levels: A mixed-method research. International Journal of Current Educational Studies, 3(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.12188822 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. Afriansyah, E. A., Herman, T., & Dahlan, J. A. (2021, February). Critical thinking skills in mathematics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1778(1), 012013. IOP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1778/1/012013 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  4. Aoyama, K. (2007). Investigating a hierarchy of students’ interpretations of graphs. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 2(3), 298–318. [Google Scholar]
  5. Apawu, J., Owusu-Ansah, N. A., & Akayuure, P. (2018). A study on the algebraic working processes of senior high school students in Ghana. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(2), 62–68. [Google Scholar]
  6. Arslan, R., Gulveren, H., & Aydin, E. (2014). Research on critical thinking tendencies and factors that affect critical thinking of higher education students. International Journal of Business and Management, 9(5), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v9n5p43 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Batanero, C., Navarro-Pelayo, V., & Godino, J. D. (1997). Effect of the implicit combinatorial model on combinatorial reasoning in secondary school pupils. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 32, 181–199. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002993110843 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  8. Ben-Hur, M. (2006). Concept-rich mathematics instruction: Building a strong foundation for reasoning and problem solving. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. [Google Scholar]
  9. Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). Academic Press. [Google Scholar]
  10. Biggs, J. B., & Tang, C. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university (4th ed.). Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
  11. Chen, S., & Li, Q. (2022). The impact of specialized curricula on cognitive abilities in STEM education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114(5), 890–905. [Google Scholar]
  12. Curriculum Research and Development Division (CRDD). (2010). Curriculum Research and Development Division (Ghana), Ministry of Education. [Google Scholar]
  13. Davies, A., White, M., & Brown, P. (2023). Advanced problem-solving in science education: A focus on combinatorial reasoning. International Journal of Science Education, 45(2), 201–218. [Google Scholar]
  14. Enciso, O. L. U., Enciso, D. S. U., & Daza, M. D. P. V. (2017). Critical thinking and its importance in education: Some reflections. Rastros Rostros, 19(34), 78–88. [Google Scholar]
  15. English, L. D. (2005). Combinatorics and the development of children’s combinatorial reasoning. In G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring probability in school: Challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 121–141). Springer Verlag. [Google Scholar]
  16. Godino, J. D., Batanero, C., & Roa, R. (2005). An onto-semiotic analysis of combinatorial problems and the solving processes by university students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60(1), 3–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-5893-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Greenhill, V. (2010). 21st century knowledge and skills in educator preparation. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. [Google Scholar]
  18. Groth, R. (2003). High school students’ levels of thinking in regard to statistical study design. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(3), 252–268. [Google Scholar]
  19. Ihsan, I. R., & Karjanto, N. (2019). Optimizing students' combinatorial-thinking skill through design-based research. arXiv preprint arXiv:1911.07655. [Google Scholar]
  20. Johnson, K. L., & Lee, R. A. (2024). Differentiated instruction in mathematics: Tailoring approaches for diverse learners. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 36(1), 55–72. [Google Scholar]
  21. Kargar, M., Tarmizi, R. A., & Bayat, S. (2010). Relationship between mathematical thinking, mathematics anxiety, and mathematics attitudes among university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 537–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.074 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  22. Kirvan, R., Rakes, C. R., & Zamora, R. (2015). Flipping an algebra classroom: Analyzing, modeling, and solving systems of linear equations. Computers in the Schools, 32(3–4), 201–223. [Google Scholar]
  23. Laisouw, R. (2013). Student response profile in solving algebraic problems based on SOLO taxonomy in terms of interest in learning mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Learning, 1(1). [Google Scholar]
  24. Lockwood, E. (2013). Student approaches to combinatorial enumeration: The role of set-oriented thinking [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Portland State University. https://doi.org/10.15760/etd.338 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  25. Mhlolo, M. K., & Schafer, M. (2013). Consistencies far beyond chance: An analysis of learner preconceptions of reflective symmetry. South African Journal of Education, 33(2). [Google Scholar]
  26. Miller, E., & Thompson, S. (2019). Cross-disciplinary cognitive skill transfer: Exploring connections between humanities and quantitative reasoning. Cognitive Science, 43(8), e12760. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ministry of Education (MOE). (2020). Mathematics common core programme curriculum. Ministry of Education, Accra. [Google Scholar]
  28. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2006). Assessing scientific, reading, and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 2006. OECD Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  29. Patel, R., & Singh, A. (2021). The influence of practical application focus in vocational curricula on mathematical understanding. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 73(3), 321–338. [Google Scholar]
  30. Rezaie, M., & Gooya, Z. (2011). What do I mean by combinatorial thinking? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 11, 122–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.01.046 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  31. Salman, M. F. (2002). Types of errors committed in word problem solving by concrete and formal operational junior secondary-school mathematics students. International Journal of Education. Retrieved June 5, 2021, from http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/journals/education/ije/dec2002 [Google Scholar]
  32. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2016). Learning to think mathematically: Problem-solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics (Reprint). Journal of Education, 196(2), 1–38. [Google Scholar]
  33. Serow, P. (2007). Utilising the Rasch model to gain insight into students’ understanding of class inclusion concepts in geometry. Mathematics: Essential Research, Essential Practice, 2, 651–666. [Google Scholar]
  34. Smith, J., & Jones, A. (2020). Analytical and logical reasoning development in high school science curricula. Research in Science Education, 50(4), 1401–1419. [Google Scholar]
  35. Suhartoyo, E. (2017, October). The importance of critical thinking competence: An investigation of students’ writing experience. In Proceedings at International Seminar on Language, Education, and Culture (ISoLEC) (pp. 2598–0653). [Google Scholar]
  36. Sumarmo, U. (2010). Mathematical thinking and disposition: What, why, and how developed in learners. FPMIPA UPI. [Google Scholar]
  37. United States Academic Decathlon (USAD). (2018). Mathematics resource guide. Retrieved 2021, from https://www.eriesd.org/cms/lib/PA01001942/Centricity/Domain/691/Mathematics-Resource-Guide.pdf [Google Scholar]
  38. West African Examination Council (WAEC). (2016). West African Senior School Certificate Examinations chief examiner's report for elective mathematics. [Google Scholar]
  39. Yayuk, E., & As’ari, A. R. (2020). Primary school students' creative thinking skills in mathematics problem solving. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 1281–1295. [Google Scholar]
Meta
Vol. 4 (1)
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 4 Issue 1

June 2025

All Manuscript

Journal of Educational Studies in Science and Mathematics

Copyright © 2025 Journal of Educational Studies in Science and Mathematics.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. CC BY
All elements of this website were created using the BOQ™ - Intelligent Webverse System.