ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
This module was developed to address students’s weaknesses in algebraic topics. Particularly in understanding the fundamentals of algebraic concepts. Research indicated that many students encounter difficulties with key algebraic terms and find it challenging to connect abstract algebraic concepts to real-life situations. To overcome these issues, this module is designed based on the 5E learning model (engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate) and incorporates the Engineering Design Process (EDP) application. The module incorporates hands-on activities to enhance students' visualisation of algebraic concepts. The module's design aligns with the Mathematics Curriculum and Assessment Standard Document (DSKP) by the Malaysian Ministry of Education, ensuring its relevance to the national curriculum. By enhancing the students fundamental understanding of algebra, this module also encourages active participation in the learning process, ultimately aiming to strengthen the algebraic thinking skills as well as engagement during learning. This paper presents the conceptual framework of the Hands-on 5E (HO5E) module along with a concise example of a lesson for teaching and learning early algebra topics using this methodology. Utilising a context analysis methodology, we examined and evaluated material and documents pertaining to algebraic thinking, hands-on activities, the 5E model, and engineering design processes (EDP) to formulate the HO5E framework, which connects algebra with practical experiences. This framework offers essential resources for mathematics educators and researchers, compromising conventional lesson materials, assessment instruments, and new pedagogical strategies for core algebra topics. By employing this framework, teachers and researchers can establish a shared foundation that outlines the methodology, methods, process, and activities for visualising algebraic concepts through hands-on activities with tangible manipulatives. This approach not only helps students grasp algebra more clearly but also enables them to appreciate its beauty and relevance to real-world context.
Abacioglu, C. S., Epskamp, S., & Fischer, A. H. (2023). Effects of multicultural education on student engagement in low- and high-concentration classrooms: The mediating role of student relationships. Learning Environments Research, 26(3), 951–975. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-023-09462-0
Atkin, J. M., & Karplus, R. (1962). Discovery or intervention? The Science Teacher, 29(5), 45–51.
Balt, J. (2017). Small group math instruction in the middle school classroom [Master's thesis, Saint Catherine University].
Bishop, J. W., & Stump, S. L. (2000). Preparing to teach in the new millennium: Algebra through the eyes of pre-service elementary and middle school teachers. In M. Fernandez (Ed.), Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 107–113). ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31(1), 21–32.
Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Biological Sciences Curriculum Studies.
Carbonneau, K. J., Marley, S. C., & Selig, J. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380–400.
Chimoni, M., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2023). Unfolding algebraic thinking from a cognitive perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 114, 89–108. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-023-10218-z
Clements, M. A. (1980). Analysing children's errors on written mathematical tasks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 11(1), 1–21.
Clements, D. H., & McMillen, S. (1996). Rethinking concrete manipulatives. Teaching Children Mathematics, 2, 270–279. https://doi.org/10.5951/TCM.2.5.0270
Clements, D. (1999). 'Concrete' manipulatives, concrete ideas. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1(1), 45–60.
Cunningham, C. M. (2009). Engineering is elementary. The Bridge.
Cunningham, P. R. H., Micheal, S. M., & Hunt, A. B. (2018). Facilitating an elementary engineering design process module. School Science and Mathematics, 118(1–2), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12259
Driscoll, M. (1999). Fostering algebraic thinking: A guide for teachers grades 6–10. Heinemann.
Egodawatte, G., McDougall, D., & Stoilescu, D. (2011). The effects of teacher collaboration in grade 9 applied mathematics. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 10(3), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-011-9104-y
Goold, E. (2015). Investigating engineering practice is valuable for mathematics learning. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 34(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hru026
English, L. D. (2017). Advancing elementary and middle school STEM education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15, 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9802-x
English, L. D., & King, D. (2019). STEM integration in sixth grade: Designing and constructing paper bridges. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(5), 863–884. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9912-0
Fletcher, J. A. (2008). Developing algebraic thinking through group discussion. Mathematics Connection, 7, 25–36.
Gagnon, J. C., & Maccini, P. (2001). Preparing students with disabilities for algebra. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34, 8–15.
Hansen, A., Drews, D., Dudgeon, J., Lawton, F., & Surtees, L. (2014). Children’s errors in mathematics. Learning Matters.
Hasim, S. M., Rosli, R., & Halim, L. (2023). An integrated STEM framework for facilitating statistics instruction. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 12(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v12-i1/15557
Herbert, K., & Brown, R. H. (1997). Patterns as tools for algebraic reasoning. Teaching Children Mathematics, 3(6), 340–344.
Hinzman, K. P. (1997). Use of manipulatives in mathematics at the middle school level and their effects on students’ grades and attitudes [Master's thesis, Salem-Teikyo University].
Jones, R. L. (2008). Development of seventh grade pre-algebra students’ mathematical problem solving through written explanations and justifications [Doctoral dissertation, University of Central Florida]. University of Central Florida.
Jacobs, V. R., Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T. P., Levi, L., & Battey, D. (2007). Professional development focused on children’s algebraic reasoning in elementary school. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(3), 258–288. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034868
Jupri, A., Drijvers, P., & Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2015). Improving grade 7 students’ achievement in initial algebra through a technology-based intervention. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 1(1), 28–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-015-0004-2
Kaput, J. J. (1995). A research base supporting long-term algebra reform? In D. Owens, M. Reed, & G. M. Millsaps (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 71–94). ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
Kaput, J. J. (1999). Teaching and learning a new algebra. In E. Fennema & T. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 133–155). Erlbaum.
Kaput, J. J. (2008). What is algebra? What is algebraic reasoning? In J. Kaput, D. Carraher, & M. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades (pp. 5–17). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kieran, C. (1996). The changing face of school algebra. In C. Alsina, J. Alvarez, B. Hodgson, C. Laborde, & A. Pérez (Eds.), 8th International Congress on Mathematical Education: Selected lectures (pp. 271–290). S.A.E.M. Thales.
Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z
Knuth, E. J., Alibali, M. W., McNeil, N. M., Weinberg, A., & Stephens, A. C. (2005). Middle school students' understanding of core algebraic concepts: Equivalence and variable. ZDM Mathematics Education, 37(1), 68–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02655899
Kriegler, S. (2008). Just what is algebraic thinking? Department of Mathematics, UCLA.
Lin, K. Y., Wu, Y. T., & Hsu, Y. T. (2021). Effects of infusing the engineering design process into STEM project-based learning to develop preservice technology teachers’ engineering design thinking. International Journal of STEM Education, 8, Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00258-9
Long, N. L., Hoang Yen, N. T., & Hanh, N. V. (2020). The role of experiential learning and engineering design processes in K–12 STEM education. International Journal of Education and Practice, 8(4), 720–732. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.61.2020.84.720.732
Makar, K., & Fielding-Well, J. (2018). Shifting more than the goal posts: Developing classroom norms of inquiry-based learning in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30(1), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0215-5
Maiorca, C., & Stohlmann, M. (2016). Inspiring students in integrated STEM education through modelling activities. In Annual perspectives in mathematics education 2016: Mathematical modelling and modelling mathematics (pp. 1–15). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Mangold, J., & Robinson, S. (2020). The engineering design process as a problem-solving and learning tool in K-12 classrooms. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--22581
Mason, J. (2008). Making use of children’s powers to produce algebraic thinking. In J. Kaput, D. Carraher, & M. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades (pp. 57–94). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315097435-4
McCoy, L. P. (2005). Effect of demographic and personal variables on achievement in eighth-grade algebra. Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 131–135.
Miller, S. P., & Hudson, P. J. (2007). Using evidence-based practices to build mathematics competence related to conceptual, procedural, and declarative knowledge. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(1), 47–57.
Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2022). Annual report on mathematics achievement in secondary schools. Ministry of Education.
Moore, T. J., Glancy, A. W., Tank, K. M., Kersten, J. A., Smith, K. A., & Stohlmann, M. S. (2014). A framework for quality K-12 engineering education: Research and development. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 4(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1069
Moyer, P. S. (2001). Are we having fun yet? How teachers use manipulatives to teach mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 47(2), 175–197.
Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (Eds.). (2019). TIMSS 2019 assessment frameworks. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/frameworks/
Nathan, M. J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2000). An investigation of teachers’ beliefs about students’ algebra development. Cognition and Instruction, 18(2), 209–237. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1802_03
Noor, S., & Leong, S. (2016). Linking conceptual understanding to procedural skills in algebra: Malaysian secondary school students’ performance. Educational Research Journal, 20(1), 78–93.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to action: Ensuring mathematical success for all. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Nesin, G. (2012). Active learning. In AMLE (Ed.), This we believe in action: Implementing successful middle-level schools (pp. 17–27). Association for Middle Level Education.
OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results: Insights and implications for education in Malaysia. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/888933930533
Panaoura, A. (2018). Inquiry-based teaching approach in mathematics by using the history of mathematics: A case study. CERME 10 Proceedings, 1780–1787. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01938806/document
Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Viking Press.
Radford, L. & Sabena, C. (2015). Radford, L., and Sabena, C. (2015) address the issue of method within a Vygotskian semiotic framework. In Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education (Issue January 2014, pp. 157-182). https://doi.org/ 10.1007/978-94-017-9181-6_7
Stephens, A. C. (2008). What “counts” as algebra in the eyes of preservice elementary teachers? The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 27(1), 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2007.12.002
Thompson, P. W. (1992). Notations, principles, and constraints: Contributions to the effective use of concrete manipulatives in elementary mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 123–147. https://doi.org/10.2307/749165
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). (2019). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
Turan, S., & Matteson, S. M. (2021). Middle school mathematics classrooms practice based on the 5E instructional model. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, 9(1), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1041
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Windsor, W. (2010). Algebraic thinking: A problem-solving approach. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Shaping the future of mathematics education (pp. 665–672). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA).
Xi, F., Ma, H., Pi, Z., & Zhang, L. (2024). Integrating the engineering design process into the conception-design-implement-operate model for promoting high school students’ STEM competence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72, 2267–2295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10377-7
Zakaria, E., & Maat, S. M. (2010). Analysis of errors in solving algebra problems among Malaysian secondary school students. European Journal of Social Sciences, 13(4), 609–617.
Manas, M. A., & Hashim, S. M. (2025). Hands-on Activity with Manipulatives Framework for Facilitating Early Algebraic Thinking. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 14(1), 391–404.
Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode