Assessment of Digital and Mathematical Problem-Solving
Competences Development
Alice Barana
2a
, Cecilia Fissore
1b
, Anna Lepre
2c
and Marina Marchisio
2d
1
Department of Foreign Languages, Literatures and Modern Culture, Via Giuseppe Verdi Fronte 41, 10124 Turin, Italy
2
Department of Molecular Biotechnology and Health Sciences, University of Turin, Via Nizza 52, 10126, Turin, Italy
Keywords: Advanced Computing Environment, Digital Competences, Problem Solving, Problem-Solving Skills.
Abstract: Problem-solving and digital competences assume an essential role in developing students' life-long learning
competences. An effective tool to support problem-solving activities is an Advanced Computing Environment
(ACE). An ACE is a system that allows to perform numerical and symbolic calculation, make graphical
representations, and create mathematical simulations through interactive components. Moreover, it is able to
support students in reasoning processes, in the formulation of exit strategies and in the generalization of the
solution. The main goal of this paper is to study the development of problem-solving and digital competences
of secondary school students solving problems with an ACE in a Digital Learning Environment (DLE). The
research question is: "How can we evaluate the evolution of students' problem solving and digital competences
during the online training?”. To answer the research question, the resolutions of 158 grade 12 students to ten
problems carried out during an online training were analyzed. The research methodology was divided into
three phases: the analysis of a case study; the analysis of all student evaluations; the analysis of students'
answers to a final questionnaire. The results show that solving contextualized problems with the ACE in a
DLE enhanced the students' problem-solving and digital competences.
1 INTRODUCTION
Every individual needs to develop skills that can be
used throughout their lives: to respond to the
challenges of a world in which technologies influence
society, teaching and education, to improve as a
person and as a worker, and to be an active citizen. In
the recommendations relating to the key competences
for lifelong learning, the Council of the European
Union includes the problem-solving competence and
the digital competence (European Parliament and
Council, 2018). According to the European
Parliament and Council (2018): "Competences, such
as problem solving, critical thinking, ability to
cooperate, creativity, computational thinking, self-
regulation are more essential than ever before in our
quickly changing society. They are the tools to make
what has been learned work in real time, in order to
generate new ideas, new theories, new products, and
new knowledge". The Digital competence involves
a
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9947-5580
b
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8398-265X
c
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1332-2442
d
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1007-5404
the confident, critical and responsible use of, and
engagement with, digital technologies for learning, at
work, and for participation in society. These aspects
are also mentioned in the Italian National Guidelines
(MIUR, 2010), according to which students at the end
of upper secondary school should be able to apply
mathematical concepts to solve problems, also with
the help of technologies. Therefore, proposing
problem-solving activities with the use of digital
technologies is a teaching methodology that responds
to institutional objectives.
This research work has the main goal of
evaluating the development of problem-solving and
digital competences of secondary school students
who carry out problem-solving activities with an
Advanced Computing Environment (ACE), during an
online training in a Digital Learning Environment
(DLE). An ACE, with a special programming
language, allows for performing numerical and
symbolic computations, plotting two- and three-
318
Barana, A., Fissore, C., Lepre, A. and Marchisio, M.
Assessment of Digital and Mathematical Problem-Solving Competences Development.
DOI: 10.5220/0011987800003470
In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2023) - Volume 2, pages 318-329
ISBN: 978-989-758-641-5; ISSN: 2184-5026
Copyright
c
2023 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
dimensional static or dynamic graphs and
programming interactive components in order to
generalize a resolution process. An ACE also allows
students to approach a problematic situation in the
way that best suits their thinking, to use different
types of representations according to the chosen
strategy and to display the whole reasoning together
with verbal explanation in the same page (Barana et
al., 2019). All of this makes it an effective tool to
support problem solving and mathematics teaching
and learning (Brancaccio et al., 2015; Barana et al.,
2021). A DLE has been defined as an ecosystem in
which teaching, learning, and the development of
competence are fostered in classroom-based, online
or blended settings. It is made up of a human
component, a technological component, and the
interrelations between the two (Barana & Marchisio,
2022). According to Suhonen (2005), a DLE is a
“technical solution for supporting learning, teaching
and studying activities”.
The context of our research is the Digital Math
Training (DMT) project funded by the Fondazione
CRT within the Diderot Project and organized by the
Delta Research Group of the University of Turin in
Italy. The DMT project every year involves about
3000 upper secondary school Italian students. The
main goal of the project is to allow students to
develop digital and problem-solving competences by
solving contextualized problems with an ACE and
collaborating with each other remotely within an
integrated DLE (available at the link:
https://digitalmatetraining.i-learn.unito.it/) (Barana
& Marchisio, 2016; Barana, Boetti & Marchisio,
2022).
This study is guided by the following research
question: "How can we evaluate the evolution of
students' problem-solving and digital competences
during the online training?”. To answer the research
question, the course of the 12
th
grade students of the
DMT edition of the 2021/2022 school year was
analyzed. The submissions and all data relating to the
assessments obtained by 158 students during the
online training were collected and analyzed. The
students' answers to the final questionnaire that they
filled out at the end of the online training were also
analyzed.
This paper is structured as follows. In the section
“Theoretical framework” the methodology of
problem solving and problem solving with an ACE
are discussed, followed by a brief presentation of the
DMT project. In the section "Methodology" the
research methodology with which the analysis was
carried out is presented. The main results obtained
from the analyses are presented in the "Results"
section. In the "Conclusions" section some reflections
on the results obtained and possible further
developments for the research are presented.
2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 Problem Solving and Problem
Solving with an ACE
One of the fundamental skills in Mathematics is the
ability to solve problems in everyday situations,
which includes the ability to understand the problem,
devise a mathematical model, develop the solving
process and interpret the obtained solution (Samo et
al., 2017). The term “problem solving” refers to
mathematical tasks which provide intellectual
challenges that improve students’ understanding and
mathematical development (National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics, 2000). Problem solving is
a real challenge for students. It involves the use of
multiple rules, notions and operations whose choice
is a strategic and creative act of the students
(D'Amore & Pinilla, 2006). Its value lies not only in
being able to find the final solution but also in
developing ideas, strategies, skills and attitudes. The
focus then shifts from the final solution to the
problem-solving process. Solving problems that are
contextualized in everyday life activates modeling
skills in students and teaches them to recognize how
and when to use their knowledge, as well as getting
them accustomed to solving problems in real world
situations (Baroni & Bonotto, 2015; Samo et al.,
2017). Challenging problems should be used, whose
content topics have been studied in class or will soon
be, with open data in order to offer students a vast
range of possibilities to choose from and make
decisions about, and that suggest more than one
solving strategy (Barana et al., 2022). Through
problem solving it is also possible to develop social
and civic competences. For example, by solving
problems in small groups, students learn to work
together, to discuss, to support their own opinions and
respect those of others, to discuss and present their
ideas. Therefore, by learning problem solving in
Mathematics, students acquire ways of thinking,
creativity, curiosity, collaborative competences and
confidence in unfamiliar situations (Barana et al.,
2019).
The resolution of a problem by students can be
used to assess progress in problem-solving
competences, using an assessment rubric with a score
scale (Leong & Janjaruporn, 2015). The score scale
describes the reason why a performance was placed
Assessment of Digital and Mathematical Problem-Solving Competences Development
319
in a certain level. The next level guidance provides
students with an idea of what should be achieved and
what needs to be done to improve. The rubric is one
of the best ways to assess problem-solving
competence (Jonassen, 2014). It can be used to
evaluate problems on different mathematical topics
and the evaluations can be compared. Moreover,
through rubric assessment, students are provided with
relevant feedback on the problem-solving process,
since they receive an evaluation on each indicator
(Jonassen, 2014). Sharing rubrics with detailed
descriptors of the levels is a relevant formative
assessment strategy, since it helps students
understand the quality criteria (Black & Wiliam,
2009). In fact, through rubric assessment they can
understand their actual level, the reference level, and
in which area they should work more to reach the
goals: these are the three main processes of formative
assessment identified by Black and Wiliam (2009)
and by Hattie and Timperley (2007). Thus, feedback
provided through rubrics can help them bridge the
gap between current and desired performance in
problem solving (Hattie & Timperley, 2007).
Problem solving is characterized by four
fundamental phases described by Polya (1945) in
"How to solve it": understanding the problem,
devising a plan, carrying out the plan, looking back.
The looking back phase consists of reviewing and
reconsidering the results obtained and the process that
led to them. This allows one to consolidate
knowledge, better understand the solution and
possibly use the result, or the method, for some other
problem. Generalizing is an important process by
which the specifics of a solution are examined and
questions as to why it worked are investigated
(Liljedahl et al., 2016). This process can be compared
to the Polya looking back phase, and consists of a
verification and elaboration stages of invention and
creativity. This makes it possible to move from the
single case to all possible cases, to extend and readapt
the model developed and to consolidate what has
been learned through problem solving (Malara,
2012).
Technologies play a fundamental role in problem
solving and make it possible to amplify all phases of
the process. An ACE allows to perform numerical and
symbolic computations, make graphical
representations (static and animated) in 2 and 3
dimensions, create mathematical simulations, write
procedures in a simple language, programming, and
finally elegantly connect all the different
representation registers also with verbal language in
a single worksheet (Barana et al., 2020). An important
aspect of an ACE for problem solving is the design
and programming of interactive components (such as
sliders, buttons, checkboxes, text areas, tables and
graphics). They enable to visualize how the results
change when the input parameters are changed and
thus they allow to generalize the solving process of a
problem. The use of an ACE for problem solving
profoundly affects the entire problem-solving
practice and the nature of the problems that can be
posed. For example, problems may require difficult
pen-and-paper calculations, dynamic explorations,
algorithmic solutions to approximate results, and
much more. Without having to engage in calculations,
students can focus on understanding, exploring and
discussing the solving process and the obtained
results. The possibility of combining different types
of representation in the same worksheet influences
the way students approach problems and their
strategic choices, favoring high levels of clarity and
understanding (Barana et al., 2022). In this way, the
ACE is not only a tool, but it becomes an effective
methodology that can support problem solving and
the learning of Mathematics (Fissore et al., 2019).
Another technology that can enhance the
problem-solving methodology is a Digital Learning
Environment, i.e., an ecosystem in which teachers
and students can share resources and carry out
educational activities. In a DLE both the
technological component and the human component
are important, together with how the activities are
designed for the interactions between students,
teachers and peers. In a DLE, teachers can propose
many different types of activities in a single shared
environment; this aspect is essential in an online
teaching context, but it can also integrate the teaching
experience into ordinary teaching in classroom-based
or in a blended mode. In a DLE students can create,
share and compare their own works and always be in
contact with each other, exchanging opinions and
ideas (Barana & Marchisio, 2022).
2.2 The Digital Math Training Project
The DMT Project was funded by the Fondazione
CRT within the Diderot Project and was organized by
the University of Turin. The DMT was born in 2014
with the aim of developing and strengthening the
mathematical, digital and problem-solving
competences of secondary school students. The main
part of the project consists of an online training in a
DLE. The technological component of the DLE is a
Moodle platform integrated with the Maple ACE
(https://www.maplesoft.com/), developed by the
Computer Science Department of the University of
Turin. The activities of the DMT project are mainly
CSEDU 2023 - 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
320
based on the resolution, with the use of an ACE, of
non-routine problems, contextualized in reality and
open to different solving strategies. Students solve the
problem individually, collaborating asynchronously
online with other students. Students are also offered
training activities and tools that enable self-learning
and collaborative learning to understand how to use
an ACE and solve problems. Students from grade 9 to
grade 13 participate in the project. The students are
divided by grade, then five online training sessions
are designed and set up on the platform. During the
online training, a problem is proposed to the students
every ten days, for a total of 8 problems. The degree
of difficulty of the problems gradually increases
during the training. Increasing the difficulty of the
problems allows students to prepare for a final
competition and win a prize. All problems include
several requests. The first requests guide students to
understand, explore, identify a model and the solution
strategy of the problematic situation. The last
problem request requires a generalization of the
solution through the creation of interactive
components.
The problems’ solutions worked out by the
students are assessed by tutors according to a rubric
designed to evaluate the competences in problem-
solving while using an ACE. The rubric is an
adaptation of the one proposed by the Italian Ministry
of Education to assess the national written exam in
Mathematics at the end of Scientific Lyceum,
developed by experts in pedagogy and assessment.
The rubric has 5 indicators, each of which can be
graded with a level from 1 to 4. The first four
indicators have been drawn from Polya’s model and
refer to the four phases of problem solving; they are
the same included in the ministerial rubric. The
project’s adaptation mainly involves the fifth
indicator, and entails the use of the ACE, which we
chose to separate from the other indicators in order to
have and be able to provide students with precise
information about how the ACE was used to solve the
problem. Since the objective of the project is
developing problem solving with technologies, it has
been considered appropriate to evaluate the
improvements also in the use of the ACE in relation
to the problem to solve (Barana et al., 2022). The five
indicators are the following:
Comprehension: Analyze the problematic
situation, represent, and interpret the data and
then turn them into mathematical language
(score between 0 and 18);
Identification of a solving strategy: Employ
solving strategies by modeling the problem and
by using the most suitable strategy (score
between 0 and 21);
Development of the solving process: Solve the
problematic situation consistently, completely,
and correctly by applying mathematical rules
and by performing the necessary calculations
(score between 0 and 21);
Argumentation: Explain and comment on the
chosen strategy, the key steps of the building
process and the consistency of the results (score
between 0 and 15);
Use of an ACE: Use the ACE commands
appropriately and effectively in order to solve
the problem (score between 0 and 25).
A total score (maximum of 100) is given to each
resolution. Finally, each evaluation is integrated with
personalized feedback from the tutors, relating to the
evaluation obtained and containing advice on how
and what to improve. At the end of the training, all
participants are asked to fill out a satisfaction
questionnaire.
3 METHODOLOGY
The research question is: "How can we evaluate the
evolution of students' problem-solving and digital
competences during the online training?”. To answer
the research question, the course of the 12th grade
students of the DMT edition of the 2021/2022 school
year was analyzed. The submissions and all data
relating to the assessments obtained by 158 students
during the online training were collected and
analysed. The analysis was divided into three phases:
the analysis of how digital and problem-solving
competences vary in an exemplary case study; the
analysis of all student evaluations from the beginning
to the end of the online training; the analysis of the
students' answers to the final questionnaire. The
average number of submissions was 92 in the first
half of the training (first four problems) and 49 in the
second half (last four problems). The data collected
were organized in a table containing, for each student
and for each of the 8 problems, the evaluations
relating to the five indicators of the assessment rubric
and the total score. The table was important both for
the analysis of the case study and for the analysis of
student assessments (the trend of total assessments
and the trend of assessments of individual indicators).
A significant and exemplary case study was
selected which showed an overall improvement in the
scores of the five indicators and whose competences
showed significant changes during the training. For
Assessment of Digital and Mathematical Problem-Solving Competences Development
321
the analysis of the case study, all the solutions to the
problems made by the student were analysed, and
some explanatory examples were reported. The
assessment rubric was used to analyze the
submissions, paying particular attention to the level
descriptors of each indicator. A correspondence was
sought between the assessments given by the tutors
and the competences achieved by the student, to
analyze in detail how they changed over time.
Furthermore, the educational value of personalized
feedback from tutors was examined. All of these
investigations made it possible to make a global
assessment of the progress of problem-solving and
digital competences in the selected case study.
A second level of analysis concerned all the
evaluations of the students in the sample, in order to
obtain a global vision and a more complete study of
the evolution of the students' competences. In order
to be able to effectively evaluate any improvement
between an initial and a final phase of the training, it
was necessary to examine the students who had
actively participated. For this reason, the analysis
sample was restricted to students who had solved at
least five problems (66 students in total), regardless
of what they were. After that, it was necessary to
identify a submission that represented the initial level
of competences and a final submission that
represented the level of competences achieved by
participating in the training. As the initial submission,
the one relating to the second problem was chosen,
because the first problem had fewer requests as it did
not ask for the generalization of the solution. This
further narrowed the sample to students who had
solved the second problem (61 students in total). The
last assignment completed by each student was
chosen as the final submission. For this part of the
analysis, we will call the second problem the “initial
problem” and the last submission problem the “final
problem”. We will call the total scores relating to the
initial problem "initial assessments" and those
relating to the final problem "final assessments". The
Wilcoxon signed rank test for paired samples was
then carried out with RStudio, to compare the initial
and final evaluations and measure any increases or
decreases. The Wilcoxon test was chosen because the
data did not represent a normal distribution. The test
made it possible to verify whether the difference
between the median of the initial evaluations and that
of the final evaluations was zero. Finally, to confirm
the results obtained from the test, the box-plots
relating to the initial evaluations and final evaluations
were created, which made it possible to deepen the
study.
To continue and further the analysis, we moved
on to study the development of the competences of
the 158 students of the initial sample during the entire
training. To carry out this analysis, the trend of the
arithmetic averages of the evaluations in the
individual indicators and in the total was studied.
Since the sample of the population on which the
averages were carried out varied over time and since
the outliers had a great influence on the arithmetic
mean, the box-plots relating to the evaluations were
created and analyzed, comparing the results of the
two analyses.
The students' answers to the final questionnaire
were analyzed to also consider the students' point of
view and to draw the final conclusions. 69 students
replied to the questionnaire. The questionnaire
contained questions relating to various aspects of the
project, such as: the degree of appreciation of the use
of ACE for problem solving; the usefulness of having
learned to use it; the difficulties encountered in
solving problems; the usefulness of developing
digital and problem-solving competences in the world
of work; a self-assessment of mathematical, problem-
solving and digital competences at the end of the
training. The typology of the questions is mainly
Likert scale questions, where students can select an
answer from 1 = “not at all” to 5 = “very much”. All
analyses were performed using Excel software and
RStudio statistical software.
4 RESULTS
4.1 Analysis of the Case Study
Through the analysis of the case study, it was possible
to observe a general improvement in problem-solving
and digital competences in the case of a student who
obtained a low score (below 50) in the first problem
and a high score in the last. The scores of the case
study (see Figure 1) start with a low initial evaluation
of 33/100, in the first half of the training it remains
approximately constant while, subsequently, there is
a significant improvement which sees an evaluation
of 93/100 in its last submission. The increase in the
degree of difficulty of the problems made it possible
to consider these results as particularly significant and
to select the student as a case study.
From the graph of the evaluation trends relating to
the individual indicators (see Figure 2) it is possible
to observe that all the indicators show a significant
improvement. They reflect the trend of the total
CSEDU 2023 - 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
322
Figure 1: Trend of the overall assessments of the case study.
scores: starting from low evaluations, they show a
notable improvement in the second half of the
training, with the exception of the "use of Maple"
indicator which shows a progressive even if not linear
improvement during the entire training. As well as the
overall evaluations, also the evaluations of the single
indicators do not show a continuous and linear
improvement. Many factors influence this aspect: the
non-compulsory nature of the extracurricular project,
the progressive increase in the complexity of the
problems, school and personal commitments, the
mathematical knowledge possessed by the student.
Figure 2: Trend of the evaluations of the case study divided
by indicators.
The graph in Figure 2 shows an initial lowering of the
scores in the indicators "understanding the
problematic situation", "identifying a solution
strategy" and "developing the resolution process".
This may be due to the fact that the student is initially
not completely accustomed solving contextualized
problems and finds it difficult to solve problems with
increasing difficulty. At the same time, the
improvement of the indicators in the last submissions,
when the problems have a higher degree of
complexity, is particularly relevant. In the submission
of the first problem, the case study does not fully
develop the solution process. The student carries out
some calculations without arguing the steps taken and
the strategies chosen and provides a short final
answer to one of the questions in the problem. The
student uses the worksheet as a simple writing sheet
and is not familiar with Maple commands yet. In the
submission of the second problem the student still
does not develop and does not fully discuss the
proposed resolution. In this case, however, the
student tries to use the ACE to create an array of point
coordinates and to open packages with more
advanced commands (see Figure 3). Feedback from
tutors has been effective for student improvement.
The feedback for the resolution of the first problem
was: “The solution is only partially correct. The use
of Maple and the argument are poor but don't give up,
for the next problems it will be better! I advise you to
comment more on both the results found and the
individual steps". In the resolution of the second
problem, the student begins to comment on the
chosen strategies, such as: "I include "plots" to be
able to use the "pointplot" command"; "Imagining
that we have an exponential curve, the value that we
will have on the tenth day will be around 1600 new
cases"; "If you draw a line between the three points,
the new cases on the 19th day will be around 2500."
From the student's resolution and these last
comments, it is possible to notice how the student is
still unable to identify a solution strategy to model the
problem and to develop the resolution. The student
shows that they confuses exponential trend and linear
trend and demonstrates that he does not know how to
make the best use of the ACE. In fact, the student does
not obtain a mathematical expression that models the
problematic situation, and is not able to use the
commands to show a graph that adequately describes
it and for this reason he/she tries to "imagine" it.
In the submission of the third problem there is an
improvement in the use of Maple and in identifying
and implementing solution strategies for modeling
the problem. The student is still unable to identify the
correct strategies for modeling the problematic
situation, however he demonstrates originality and
creativity in developing the entire resolution through
an interactive component (see Figure 4). The
interactive component consists of an interactive table,
a slider and a text area. As the values of the slider
vary, the values of the last column of the table and the
result of the problem in the text area change. The
programming code to create the interactive
component (top right in Figure 4), shows the correct
use of the commands to take input data (for example:
parameter:=Do(%Slider0)) and return output values
(for example: Do(%TextArea0=parameter)). The
code also includes a nested loop. This represents an
improvement in programming proficiency. Despite
the originality of the problem-solving idea, it is not an
effective strategy due to a poor understanding of the
problem situation and the lack of identification of a
correct modeling.
Assessment of Digital and Mathematical Problem-Solving Competences Development
323
Figure 3: Solution of the second problem submitted by the
case study.
Figure 4: Resolution of the third problem submitted by the
case study.
During the training, the student's digital competences
gradually improve and it is possible to observe an
improvement also in the indicators "understanding
the problematic situation", "identifying a solution
strategy" and "developing the resolution process"
starting from the fifth problem. In the last submission,
despite a small error of understanding, the student
fully develops the resolution and implements
effective strategies, through modeling consistent with
the interpretation of the problem. The proposed
problem is contextualized in the advertising field, and
speaks of a disco that advertises its sound system.
Given the formula that describes the sound intensity
expressed in decibels (dB) as a function of the sound
intensity expressed in W/m2, the question was:
to calculate the total sound intensity in dB of
four 100 dB loudspeakers, the one in dB of
each single loudspeaker knowing the total
loudness of 400 dB and to state whether the
declaration of the disco regarding its sound
system is capable of diffusing music at 400 dB
having four speakers of 100 dB each, correct or
tendentious;
to construct an example that would show how,
given several speakers to which a different
sound intensity is associated, the total sound
intensity in dB could be approximated with that
of the speaker to which the greater intensity is
associated;
to create a system of interactive components
which, given two loudspeakers to which two
sound intensities in dB are associated, would
return the total sound intensity in dB and at
least two graphs;
The student incorrectly understands the intensity
formula provided by the text, replacing the sound
intensity expressed in W/m2 with that expressed in
dB. Despite this, the development of the resolution of
the problem is interesting. For example, to find the
intensity of each single loudspeaker, the student
constructs a while loop which increases the total
intensity at each cycle, checking that the decibels
obtained with it do not exceed the maximum
threshold indicated by the problem. When the latter is
exceeded, the cycle returns the total intensity that
caused the maximum value to be exceeded. The total
intensity is then divided by 4 to obtain the intensity of
each individual speaker. This strategy allows to solve
the problem in a clear, schematic and effective way
by exploiting a piece of code that automatically
controls the steps to be carried out in order to obtain
the desired result under the conditions required by the
problem. For this reason, the student obtained the
highest marks for the indicators "identifying a
solution strategy" and "developing the solution
process" but not in "understanding the problematic
situation". The indicators in fact, as components of
problem solving, are closely related but, at the same
time, each of them has its own "identity" which
characterizes and distinguishes it from the others.
CSEDU 2023 - 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
324
During the training, the students argumentative
ability also improves: in the last submission the
student discusses the steps taken and the strategies
chosen, leading the reader to follow the reasoning
made. The results show that solving contextualized
problems with the ACE enhanced the student's
problem-solving and digital competences.
4.2 Analysis of the Assessments of all
Students
For the analysis of the evaluations of all the students,
the Wilcoxon test was carried out to evaluate any
improvement between an initial phase and a final
phase of the training. The p-value of 0.89>0.05 did
not allow us to reject the null hypothesis according to
which the medians of the initial evaluations and of the
final evaluations were equal. This result is
satisfactory for the purpose of this research. In fact,
since the final evaluations relate to problems of
greater difficulty, the equality or a non-significant
difference in the evaluations shows that the students
have developed competences to solve problems of
greater difficulty, suggesting an improvement in these
competences. This result was confirmed by the box-
plots relating to the initial and final evaluations (see
Figure 5).
Indeed, they show that the medians are the same,
with a value of 84/100, indicating a high starting level
(above 70) which becomes more significant when
related to the final submission, reflecting more
developed problem-solving and digital competences.
In the initial problem, the median is very close to the
third quartile indicating a high number of evaluations
between 84 and 89, while in the final problem 50% of
the evaluations are distributed symmetrically with
respect to the median with evaluations between 74
and 95. These results satisfy expectations: 25% of the
evaluations with a value greater than 84, which
initially was between 84 and 89, in the final problem
are distributed between 84 and 95, indicating that a
greater number of students took evaluations greater
than 89. At the same time, the first quartile passes
from corresponding to an evaluation of 72 to an
evaluation of 74, indicating that a greater number of
students have obtained an evaluation higher than 74.
The greater dispersion found in the final problem
compared to the initial problem can be justified by the
increase in the difficulty of the problems, which
therefore led to a greater variability of the
evaluations. At the same time, however, the
dispersion to the right of the median and the increase
in the value of the first quartile show a general
improvement in students' competences.
Figure 5: Box-plot of the overall evaluations related to the
initial and final problem.
By studying the trend of the average evaluations
during the entire training, it was possible to expand
the analysis and obtain a more complete vision of the
development of the students' problem-solving and
digital competences. The investigation of average
ratings showed an overall improvement in problem-
solving and digital competences. In fact, from the
graphs of the trend of the average evaluations of the
individual indicators and of the total ones (see Figure
6), a slight improvement can be observed for all the
indicators, even though not continuous or linear, with
a general decrease in the sixth problem. In particular,
the "argumentation" indicator shows a more evident
improvement, with a more regular trend and a
progressive improvement. This aspect indicates that,
although it was complex to understand, identify and
develop a solution strategy, the students were able to
explain and justify their resolution in an even more
precise, complete and pertinent way. In problem six
there is a drop in scores on all indicators. The
students' difficulties can also be seen in the
discussions in the forum on the platform: "Hi, I didn't
quite understand the third request"; "I wanted to ask
what was the exp function in the formula that I didn't
understand"; “Hi, regarding point 2 of the problem,
how did you do it (in a very general way)? Did you
use a more algebraic or graphical approach? Because
graphically it seems to me very complex to visualize,
while algebraically I find it more it difficult to find
the right commands". A slight worsening of all
Assessment of Digital and Mathematical Problem-Solving Competences Development
325
indicators in the second problem can also be
observed. This aspect is not surprising since the first
problem, being at the beginning of the training, had a
lower difficulty as it did not require the
generalization phase of the resolution, thus leading to
generally higher scores.
Since the arithmetic mean is influenced by
outliers, the latter may not effectively represent the
assessment of students' results during training. We
therefore decided to also analyze the median of the
total scores obtained during the training.
From the box-plots of the evaluations relating to
the total score (see Figure 7) it can be observed, for
each problem, a distribution of half of the evaluations
approximately symmetrical with respect to the
median and a generally reduced width of the
interquartile ranges, indicating a concentration of the
evaluations around the median. This indicates that the
median gives a good representation of the evaluation
obtained by the students.
In the sixth problem, the interquartile range is
instead wider, indicating a wider distribution of
evaluations. This implies that the median, in this case,
is less representative of the evaluations obtained by
all the students for that problem. This may be due to
the considerations made previously on the difficulty
encountered by the students in solving that problem.
In the seventh problem, however, the median
corresponds to an evaluation of 95/100 and is close to
the third quartile, indicating a large number of
submissions with a very high evaluation (above 95).
This justifies the peak that is also found in the graph
of average ratings. The trend of the medians is very
similar to that of the average evaluations of the
various indicators and of the total. For this reason, it
was possible to confirm what emerged from our the
analysis of the average ratings.
4.3 Analysis of Students' Answers to
the Final Questionnaire
The last part of the analysis concerned the students'
answers to the satisfaction questionnaire, to
understand their point of view on some aspects of
online training and on the development of their
competences. The first question examined was: "In
solving problems, which of the following aspects
gave you difficulty?". The answers (see Table 1)
show that the students found approximately the same
degree of difficulty in developing all the competences
related to the five indicators of the evaluation grid.
The average values of the answers are all between
3.13 and 3.20. Only the "argumentation" indicator
has an average response of 2.70, so students had less
Figure 6: Graphs of the trends of the average evaluations of
the single indicators.
CSEDU 2023 - 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
326
difficulty developing this skill. This is also confirmed
by the constant increase in ratings for this indicator.
These results reflect what was observed in the
analysis of the assessments of all students. In
particular, students experienced a slightly greater
difficulty in generalizing the problem, indicated by an
average of 3.48 out of 5.
Figure 7: Boxplot of the overall evaluations of all the
students.
Table 1: Students' answers to the question about the
difficulties encountered in solving problems.
Mean St.Dev.
Interpret the text 3.20 1.1
Identif
y
a solution strate
gy
3.13 0.87
Com
p
lete the resolution
p
rocess 3.16 1.04
Discuss the solution 2.70 1.06
Generalize the problem 3.48 1.02
Use Maple 3.17 0.79
The second question examined was: "Please indicate
to what extent you think you have acquired the
following competences in online training". The
responses (see Table 2) indicate that, from the
students' point of view, participating in an online
training in a DLE and using an ACE for problem
solving fostered the development of their math,
digital and problem solving (with an average of 3.12,
3.46, 3.52 respectively). The third question examined
was: "Please indicate to what extent you think these
competences will be useful in the world of work".
Table 3 shows the results. It is interesting to observe
how students find mathematical competences (with
an average of 3.60) and problem-solving and digital
competences (with an average of 4.19 and 4.25
respectively) useful in the world of work, revealing
the strong awareness of importance of these
competences for their future, even outside the school
context.
Table 2: Students' answers to the question on the
development of their competences.
Ac
q
uired com
p
etences Mean St.Dev.
Mathematical com
p
etences 3.12 0.72
Di
g
ital com
p
etences 3.46 0.70
Problem-solving competences 3.52 0.85
Table 3: Students' answers to the question on the usefulness
of the competences in the world of work.
Utility in the world of wor
k
Mean St.Dev.
Mathematical competences 3.60 0.89
Digital competences 4.25 0.72
Problem-solvin
g
com
p
etences 4.19 0.81
The last question analyzed concerned the school
average of the students in mathematics (expressed by
the students in a grade from 1 to 10) at the beginning
and at the end of the online training. For 30% of the
students the average improved, for 67% of the
students the average remained unchanged and for 3%
of the students the average worsened. In particular,
the average decreased only in two students who went
respectively from 10 to 9.5 and from 8 to 6.
Furthermore, 55% of the students whose average
remained unchanged had a high starting average
(above 8) . For this reason, the results obtained are
satisfactory and show a general improvement in the
mathematical competence of the students
participating in the online training.
5 CONCLUSIONS
This research work had the main objective of
evaluating the development of problem-solving and
digital competences of secondary school students
who carry out problem-solving activities with an
Assessment of Digital and Mathematical Problem-Solving Competences Development
327
ACE during an online training in a DLE. To answer
the research question, the online training of grade 12
students from the 2021/2022 school year edition of
the DMT project was examined. The analysis was
developed following three phases: the analysis of an
exemplary case study; the analysis of all student
evaluations; the analysis of the students' answers to
the final questionnaire submitted at the end of the
training. The results show that the problem-solving
activities with an ACE carried out during the online
training allowed the development of all problem-
solving competences (in particular argumentation)
and digital competences. In fact, the use of an ACE in
problem solving has made it possible to support all
phases of problem solving, allowing to focus on the
resolution process, on exploration and on the results
obtained, and to exploit different types of
representation in the same environment. Furthermore,
the ACE, with the creation of interactive components,
has favored the process of generalization of the
problem, an important phase of problem solving
which, from what emerged from the questionnaire, is
considered difficult to tackle by students. In the
generalization phase students have to design and
program the interactive components in such a way
that they take data as input, process a result and return
an output of the results of the problem. In this way, it
is possible to generalize the initial situation and see
how the solution of the problem changes as the initial
data vary. This is not easy but it allows them to
develop abstraction and programming competences
using a specific language. The growing difficulty of
the problems has also helped to foster the
development of problem-solving and digital
competences, stimulating the commitment,
participation and training of the students, who in this
way have developed and consolidated their
competences.
The analysis of the case study submissions
showed that the evaluation system had a positive
impact on the development of students' competences.
The personalized feedback from the tutors and the
comparison of the evaluations obtained with the
shared assessment rubric have allowed the students to
establish their own level of competence and to
understand what and how to improve, which are the
three important processes of formative assessment
(Black & Wiliam, 2009).
Since the development of problem-solving and
digital competences, key competences for lifelong
learning and problem-solving activities with an ACE
are also part of the institutional objectives, it is
desirable to promote these activities within the school
context, entrusting the competences of problem-
solving and digital skills a central role in teaching.
A limitation of this study is the variation in the
number of students who turned in problem resolutions
over the course of training. Future research could
propose problem-solving activities with an ACE
during lessons at school, in order to carry out the
analysis on a sample of students that does not vary
over time. It would be interesting to compare the
development of problem-solving and digital
competences using a control sample of the same
education level, made up of students who do not
participate in the activities. In this way it would be
possible to further evaluate the effectiveness of
problem-solving activities with an ACE for the
development of these competences. However, this is
not easy because some problem requests would be
difficult to implement without the use of
technologies. This type of project shows how
technology can be used naturally in ordinary
teaching. It allows the teacher to rethink the teaching
methods, and at the same allows the student to
develop mathematical, digital and problem-solving
competences.
REFERENCES
Barana, A., Boetti, G., & Marchisio, M. (2022). Self-
Assessment in the Development of Mathematical
Problem-Solving Skills. Education Sciences, 12(2), 81.
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12020081
Barana, A., Brancaccio, A., Conte, A., Fissore, C., Floris,
F., Marchisio, M., & Pardini, C. (2019). The Role of an
Advanced Computing Environment in Teaching and
Learning Mathematics through Problem Posing and
Solving. Proceedings of the 15th International
Scientific Conference ELearning and Software for
Education, 2, 11–18. https://doi.org/10.12753/2066-
026X-19-070
Barana, A., Conte, A., Fissore, C., Floris, F., Marchisio, M.,
& Sacchet, M. (2020). The Creation of Animated
Graphs to Develop Computational Thinking and
Support STEM Education. In J. Gerhard & I. Kotsireas
(Eds.), Maple in Mathematics Education and Research
(pp. 189–204). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
030-41258-6_14
Barana, A., & Marchisio, M. (2022). A Model for the
Analysis of the Interactions in a Digital Learning
Environment During Mathematical Activities. In B.
Csapó & J. Uhomoibhi (Eds.), Computer Supported
Education (Vol. 1624, pp. 429–448). Springer
International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-031-14756-2_21
Barana, A., & Marchisio, M. (2016). From digital mate
training experience to alternating school work
activities. Mondo Digitale, 15(64), 63–82.
CSEDU 2023 - 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
328
Barana, A., Marchisio, M., & Sacchet, M. (2021).
Interactive Feedback for Learning Mathematics in a
Digital Learning Environment. Education Sciences,
11(6), 279. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11060279
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of
formative assessment. Educational Assessment,
Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5
Brancaccio, A., Marchisio, M., Meneghini, C., & Pardini,
C. (2015). More SMART Mathematics and Science for
teaching and learning. Mondo Digitale, 14(58), 1-8.
Baroni, M., & Bonotto, C. (2015). Problem posing e
problem solving nella scuola dell’obbligo. 62.
Fondazione Giovanni Agnelli. (2010). Rapporto sulla
Scuola in Italia.
D’Amore, B., & Fandiño Pinilla, M. I. (2006). Che
problema i problemi. L’insegnamento della matematica
e delle scienze integrate, 6(29), 645-664.
European Parliament and Council. (2018). Council
Recommendation of 22 May 2018 on key competences
for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European
Union, 1–13.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The Power of Feedback.
Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112.
https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Jonassen, D. H. (2014). Assessing Problem Solving. In J.
M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop
(Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational
Communications and Technology (pp. 269–288).
Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-
4614-3185-5_22
Leong, Y. H., & Janjaruporn, R. (2015). Teaching of
Problem Solving in School Mathematics Classrooms.
In S. J. Cho (Ed.), The Proceedings of the 12th
International Congress on Mathematical Education
(pp. 645–648). Springer International Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12688-3_79
Liljedahl, P.; Santos-Trigo, M.; Malaspina, U.; Bruder, R.
(2016). Problem Solving in Mathematics Education,
New York, NY: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Malara, N. A. (2012). Processi di generalizzazione
nell’insegnamento-apprendimento dell’algebra. Annali
online della Didattica e della Formazione Docente,
4(4), 13-35.
MIUR (2010). Schema di regolamento recante “Indicazioni
nazionali riguardanti gli obiettivi specifici di
apprendimento concernenti le attività e gli
insegnamenti compresi nei piani degli studi previsti per
i percorsi liceali". Roma.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000).
Executive Summary Principles and standards for school
Mathematics.
Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton university
press.
Samo, D. D., Darhim, D., & Kartasasmita, B. (2017).
Culture-Based Contextual Learning to Increase
Problem-Solving Ability of First Year University
Student. Journal on Mathematics Education, 9(1), 81–
94. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.9.1.4125.81-94
Suhonen, J. (2005). A formative development method for
digital learning environments in sparse learning
communities [University of Joensuu]. http://
epublications.uef.fi/pub/urn_isbn_952-458-663-
0/index_en.html.
Assessment of Digital and Mathematical Problem-Solving Competences Development
329