The impact of changing environment on undergraduate mathematics students’ status

Mario Lepore 1, Roberto Capone 2 *
More Detail
1 University of Salerno, Fisciano, ITALY
2 University of Study Aldo Moro, Bari, ITALY
* Corresponding Author
EUR J SCI MATH ED, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp. 672-689.
Published Online: 23 June 2023, Published: 01 October 2023
OPEN ACCESS   894 Views   448 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)


This paper focuses on the impact of changing environment on undergraduate mathematics students’ status, described through their engagement, participation, and motivation levels. These parameters were computed through a fuzzy cognitive map, which gathered data from a situation-aware e-learning platform. The main goal is to analyze the students’ reaction to a long-term emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. A mixed-methods case study was conducted at University of Salerno to evaluate how completely remote teaching for the second year influenced the student’s status. The results show that distance learning and other social factors decrease university mathematics students’ motivation, engagement, participation, and overall performance in the long term, despite the countless teaching strategies implemented, the consolidated combination of mathematics and technology, and the use of a situation-aware e-learning platform.


Lepore, M., & Capone, R. (2023). The impact of changing environment on undergraduate mathematics students’ status. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(4), 672-689.


  • Alabdulaziz, M. S. (2021). COVID-19 and the use of digital technology in mathematics education. Education and Information Technologies, 26(6), 7609-7633.
  • Aldon, G., & Raffin, C. (2019). Mathematics learning and augmented reality in a virtual school. In T. Prodromou (Ed.), Augmented reality in educational settings (pp. 123-146). Brill Sense.
  • Arzarello, F., & Robutti, O. (2010). Multimodality in multi-representational environments. ZDM, 42(7), 715-731.
  • Azhari, B., & Fajri, I. (2021). Distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic: School closure in Indonesia. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(7), 1934-1954.
  • Bakker, A., Cai, J., & Zenger, L. (2021). Future themes of mathematics education research: An international survey before and during the pandemic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107(1), 1-24.
  • Berthoz, A. (2003). La decision [The decision]. Odile Jacob.
  • Biggs, J. B. (2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. McGraw-Hill Education.
  • Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2010). Applying constructive alignment to outcomes-based teaching and learning. In: Proceedings of the Training Material for “Quality Teaching for Learning in Higher Education” Workshop for Master Trainers (pp. 23-25).
  • Borba, M. C. (2021). The future of mathematics education since COVID-19: Humans-with-media or humans-with-non-living-things. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108, 385-400.
  • Brunetto, D., Bernardi, G., Andrà, C., & Liljedahl, P. (2021). Teaching as a system: COVID-19 as a lens into teacher change. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 110, 65-81.
  • Cahyono, A. N., Sukestiyarno, Y. L., Asikin, M., Ahsan, M. G. K., & Ludwig, M. (2020). Learning mathematical modelling with augmented reality mobile math trails program: How can it work? Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(2), 181-192.
  • Capone, R. (2022). Blended learning and student-centered active learning environment: A case study with STEM undergraduate students. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 22(1), 210-236.
  • Capone, R., & Lepore, M. (2020). Augmented reality to increase interaction and participation: A case study of undergraduate students in mathematics class. In Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality, and Computer Graphics: 7th International Conference, AVR 2020, Lecce, Italy, September 7–10, 2020, Proceedings, Part II 7 (pp. 185-204). Springer International Publishing.
  • Capone, R., & Lepore, M. (2022). From distance learning to integrated digital learning: A fuzzy cognitive analysis focused on engagement, motivation, and participation during COVID-19 pandemic. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 27(4), 1259-1289.
  • Capone, R., De Falco, M., & Lepore, M. (2022a). The impact of Covid-19 pandemic on undergraduate students: The role of an adaptive situation-aware learning system. In 2022 IEEE Conference on Cognitive and Computational Aspects of Situation Management (CogSIMA) (pp. 154-161). IEEE.
  • Capone R., De Falco M., & Lepore M. (2022b). Improving undergraduate students’ performance through a Situation Aware e-learning system [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Technology Enhanced Learning Environments for Blended Education, CEUR Workshop, Foggia.
  • Chan, M. C. E., Sabena, C., & Wagner, D. (2021). Mathematics education in a time of crisis–A viral pandemic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(1), 1-13.
  • Cochran, W. G. (1963). Sampling techniques. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2015). Revisiting mixed methods and advancing scientific practices. In S. N. Hesse-Biber, & R. B. Johnson (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of multimethod and mixed methods research inquiry (pp. 57-71).
  • Dominguez, R. G. (2012). Participatory learning. In N. M. Seel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the sciences of learning (pp. 2556-2560). Springer.
  • Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(1), 103-131.
  • Gasparetti F., Micarelli, A., & Sansonetti, G. (2014). Exploiting web browsing activities for user needs identification. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (pp. 86-89).
  • Goldstein, L. S. (1999). The relational zone: The role of caring relationships in the co-construction of mind. American Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 647-673.
  • Hakkarainen, K. (2009). A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-mediated learning. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(2), 213-231.
  • Heid, M. K. (2005). Technology in mathematics education: Tapping into visions of the future. Technology- Supported Mathematics Learning Environments, 67, 345.
  • Hoyles, C., Noss, R., Vahey, P., & Roschelle, J. (2013). Cornerstone mathematics: Designing digital technology for teacher adaptation and scaling. ZDM, 45(7), 1057-1070.
  • Hung, D., & Nichani, M. R. (2002). Bringing communities of practice into schools: Implications for instructional technologies from Vygotskian perspectives. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(2), 171.
  • Kaput, J. J., & Thompson, P. W. (1994). Technology in mathematics education research: The first 25 years in the JRME. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(6), 676-684.
  • Keller, J., & Suzuki, K. (2004). Learner motivation and e-learning design: A multi-nationally validated process. Learning, Media and Technology, 29, 229-239.
  • Kosko, B. (1986). Fuzzy cognitive maps. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 24(1), 65-75.
  • Kuh, G. D. (2003). What were learning about student engagement from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 35(2), 24-32.
  • Laurillard, D. (2007). Modelling benefits-oriented costs for technology enhanced learning. Higher Education, 54(1), 21-39.
  • Lepper, M. R. (1988). Motivational considerations in the study of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 5(4), 289-309.
  • Levy, Y. (2007). Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Computers and Education, 48(2), 185-204.
  • Li, J., Wong, S. C., Yang, X., & Bell, A. (2020). Using feedback to promote student participation in online learning programs: Evidence from a quasi-experimental study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 485-510.
  • Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22, 55.
  • McKenzie-Mohr, D. (2000). Promoting sustainable behavior: An introduction to community-based social marketing. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 543-554.
  • McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6-23.<6::AID-JCOP2290140103>3.0.CO;2-I
  • Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 1997(74), 5-12.
  • Mitchelmore, M., & Cavanagh, M. (2000). Students’ difficulties in operating a graphics calculator. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 12(3), 254-268.
  • Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (2005). Is it age or IT: First steps toward understanding the net generation. Educating the Net Generation, 2(1-2), 20.
  • Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 2: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1-6.
  • Rivoltella, P. C. (2012). Neurodidattica. Insegnare al cervello che apprende [Neurodidactics. Teaching the learning brain]. Raffaello Cortina.
  • Rutherford, T., Duck, K., Rosenberg, J. M., & Patt, R. (2021). Leveraging mathematics software data to understand student learning and motivation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 54, S94-S131.
  • Siregar, G. M. A., & Siagian, M. D. (2021). Evaluation of online learning for mathematics education students. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1882(1), 012064.
  • Swidan, O., & Faggiano, E. (2021). Constructing shared mathematical meanings in the classroom with digital artifacts that simulate real-world phenomena. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 34, 789-811.
  • Swidan, O., Schacht, F., Sabena, C., Fried, M., El-Sana, J., & Arzarello, F. (2019). Engaging students in covariational reasoning within an augmented reality environment. In T. Prodromou (Ed.), Augmented reality in educational settings (pp. 147-167). Brill Sense.
  • Veen, W., & Vrakking, B. (2006). Homo zappiens: Growing up in a digital age. A&C Black.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  • Xiong, Y., Li, H., Kornhaber, M., Suen, H. K., Pursel, B., & Goins, D. (2015). Examining the relations among student motivation, engagement, and retention in a MOOC: A structural equation modeling approach. Global Education Review, 2, 23-33.
  • Yilmaz, Z., Dede, H. G., Sears, R., & Nielsen, S. Y. (2021). Are we all in this together?: Mathematics teachers’ perspectives on equity in remote instruction during pandemic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108, 307-331.