Linking Adaptive Reasoning to Newman's Error Patterns in Digital Geometry Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v6i2.1143Keywords:
Adaptive reasoning, Digital geometry learning, Error diagnosis, Newman’s error analysis, Pythagorean theoremAbstract
Adaptive reasoning is a fundamental component of mathematical proficiency, yet limited research has examined how students’ reasoning relates to specific stages of problem-solving failure in digital geometry learning. Existing studies on Newman’s Error Analysis (NEA) primarily classify error types, whereas research on adaptive reasoning tends to evaluate reasoning quality without explaining its relationship to problem-solving errors. This study investigated students’ adaptive reasoning profiles, identified error patterns using Newman’s Error Analysis, and examined the relationship between reasoning ability and error occurrence in solving Pythagorean theorem problems within a digital geometry learning environment. An embedded mixed-methods design was employed involving 30 eighth-grade students from a junior secondary school in Indonesia. Students learned through an interactive digital flipbook integrated with GeoGebra before completing adaptive reasoning tasks and participating in semi-structured interviews. The findings revealed that students demonstrated moderate adaptive reasoning, with transformation errors emerging as the most frequent problem-solving difficulty, followed by comprehension and process-skill errors. Students with lower adaptive reasoning experienced substantially more difficulties in transforming contextual information into mathematical representations and constructing coherent solution strategies. This study extends current research by demonstrating a systematic relationship between adaptive reasoning and Newman’s error stages, providing diagnostic insights for designing reasoning-oriented scaffolding in technology-enhanced geometry instruction.
References
Amirah, I., Anggoro, B. S., & Gunawan, W. (2023). The implementation of accelerated learning model assisted by Autograph on students’ adaptive reasoning ability and environmental literacy. Online Learning in Educational Research (OLER), 3(2), 117–126. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v3i2.282
Arcavi, A. (2003). The role of visual representations in the learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(3), 215–241. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024312321077
Ardimas, A., Basith, A., Priyasmika, R., Annovasho, J., & Risdianto, N. S. (2021). Dynamic electrical subject for senior high school: Developing interactive tutorial method animation. Online Learning in Educational Research, 1(2), 103–111. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v1i2.72
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Sorensen, C. K., & Walker, D. A. (2018). Introduction to research in education (10th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Awi, A., Sutamrin, S., Ihsan, H., Nasir, N., Naufal, M. A., & Ikram, M. (2025). Spatial geometry learning in higher education through flipped classroom with metacognitive scaffolding: A mixed-methods study. Online Learning in Educational Research, 5(2), 583–600. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v5i2.817
Baccaglini-Frank, A., & Mariotti, M. A. (2010). Generating conjectures in dynamic geometry: The maintaining dragging model. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15(3), 225–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-010-9169-3
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cho, S., Qin, Z., Liu, Y., Choi, Y., Lee, S., & Kim, D. (2025). Plane geometry problem solving with multi-modal reasoning: A survey [Preprint]. arXiv. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2026.findings-eacl.7
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Drijvers, P., Ball, L., Barzel, B., Heid, M. K., Cao, Y., & Maschietto, M. (2016). Uses of technology in lower secondary mathematics education. In P. Drijvers (Ed.), Uses of technology in lower secondary mathematics education (pp. 1–34). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33666-4_1
Drijvers, P., Doorman, M., Boon, P., Reed, H., & Gravemeijer, K. (2010). The teacher and the tool: Instrumental orchestrations in the technology-rich mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75(2), 213–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9254-5
Drijvers, P., & Sinclair, N. (2023). The role of digital technologies in mathematics education: Purposes and perspectives. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 56(2), 239–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01535-x
Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61(1–2), 103–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-0400-z
Engelbrecht, J., & Borba, M. C. (2023). Recent developments in using digital technology in mathematics education. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 56(2), 281–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01530-2
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
Ghefira, A. M., & Jupri, A. (2025). Newman’s error analysis on junior high school students’ mathematical problem-solving ability in the Pythagorean theorem. Mathline: Jurnal Matematika dan Pendidikan Matematika, 10(4), 913–928. https://doi.org/10.31943/mathline.v10i4.1033
Granberg, C., & Olsson, J. (2015). ICT-supported problem solving and collaborative creative reasoning: Exploring linear functions using dynamic mathematics software. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 37, 48–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2014.11.001
Ikhsan, M., Rochaminah, S., & Mastura, A. (2024). The development of Geo-Math application by integrating GeoGebra applets to improve students’ spatial ability. Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 12(3), 1129–1154. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v12i3.1492
Jeannotte, D., & Kieran, C. (2017). A conceptual model of mathematical reasoning for school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9761-8
Jupri, A., & Drijvers, P. (2016). Student difficulties in mathematizing word problems in algebra. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(9), 2481–2502. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1299a
Kaplar, M., Radović, S., Veljković, K., Simić-Muller, K., & Marić, M. (2021). The influence of interactive learning materials on solving tasks that require different types of mathematical reasoning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(2), 411–433. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10151-8
Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. National Academy Press.
Komatsu, K., & Jones, K. (2018). Task design principles for heuristic refutation in dynamic geometry environments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(4), 801–824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9892-0
Laborde, C. (2000). Dynamic geometry environments as a source of rich learning contexts for the complex activity of proving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44(1–2), 151–161. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012793121648
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Lehmann, T. H., & Friend, L. (2025). Mathematical argumentative writing in K–12 education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 23(8), 3679–3705. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-025-10590-7
Leung, A., Baccaglini-Frank, A., & Mariotti, M. A. (2013). Discernment of invariants in dynamic geometry environments. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 84(3), 439–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9492-4
Lithner, J. (2017). Principles for designing mathematical tasks that enhance imitative and creative reasoning. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 49(6), 937–949. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0867-3
Malik, M., & Mursalin. (2018). Role of self-efficacy toward students’ achievement in mathematical multiple representation ability (MMRA). Jurnal Ilmiah Peuradeun, 6(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.26811/peuradeun.v6i1.174
Maoto, S., Masha, K., & Mokwana, L. (2018). Teachers’ learning and assessing of mathematical processes with emphasis on representations, reasoning and proof. Pythagoras, 39(1), Article a373. https://doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v39i1.373
Marbun, N., Siburian, R., Nasution, N., Fatiha, S., Girsang, R. L., Sitorus, A., & Fauzi, M. A. (2025). Students’ errors in solving plane geometry problems: A Newman’s error analysis approach. Jurnal Absis: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika dan Matematika, 8(2), 369–381. https://doi.org/10.31000/prima.v8i2.11199
Mayer, R. E., & Fiorella, L. (2021). Introduction to multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer & L. Fiorella (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (3rd ed., pp. 3–16). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108894333.003
Musa, L. A. D., Munir, N. P., Ikram, M., Garcia, J. G., & Rodriguez-Nieto, C. A. (2025). Students’ problem-solving skills in HOTS geometry tasks: A case study of spatial ability. Al-Jabar: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 16(2), 597–614. https://doi.org/10.24042/ajpm.v16i2.28482
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Nuralam, H., Jupri, A., & Alifulloh, W. (2024). Exploring high school students’ mathematical reasoning in geometry using GeoGebra-assisted problem-based learning. JTP: Jurnal Teknologi Pendidikan, 26(3), 1132–1147. https://doi.org/10.21009/jtp.v26i3.49887
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
Özaydın, Z., & Arslan, Ç. (2022). Assessment of mathematical reasoning competence in accordance with PISA 2021 mathematics framework. Journal of Theoretical Educational Sciences, 15(3), 453–474. https://doi.org/10.30831/akukeg.1027601
Prasasti, R. D., & Anas, N. (2023). Pengembangan media digital berbasis flipbook untuk meningkatkan kemampuan berpikir kritis pada peserta didik. Munaddhomah: Jurnal Manajemen Pendidikan Islam, 4(3), 694–705. https://doi.org/10.31538/munaddhomah.v4i3.589
Putri, D. A., & Warmi, A. (2024). An analysis of adaptive reasoning ability in middle school students mathematics learning. Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika (JPM), 10(2), 117–125. https://doi.org/10.33474/jpm.v10i2.21981
Rahmawati, D. U., Wilujeng, I., Jumadi, J., Kuswanto, H., Sulaeman, N. F., & Astuti, D. P. (2020). Problem based learning e-handout: Improving students’ mathematical representation and self efficacy. Jurnal Ilmiah Pendidikan Fisika Al-Biruni, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.24042/jipfalbiruni.v9i1.4607
Rohmah, L. A., Anggoro, B. S., & Gunawan, W. (2023). PDEODE strategy assisted by GeoGebra: improving students' critical thinking and mathematical analysis. Online Learning in Educational Research, 3(1), 15–22. https://doi.org/10.58524/oler.v3i1.203
Rudi, R., Suryadi, D., & Rosjanuardi, R. (2020). Identifying students’ difficulties in understanding and applying Pythagorean theorem with an onto-semiotic approach. MaPan: Jurnal Matematika dan Pembelajaran, 8(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.24252/mapan.2020v8n1a1
Sartika, D., Saputra, E., & Herizal. (2024). Batak ulos ethnomathematics exploration based on GeoGebra software. Pasundan Journal of Mathematics Education: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 14(1), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.23969/pjme.v14i1.11914
Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-8126-4
Tanujaya, B., Lisnani, L., & Fadhil, Z. N. (2025). Digital transformation of ethnomathematics: Preserving culture through technology in mathematics education. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Ethnomathematics, 1(2), 38–50.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage.
Wardhani, T. A. W., & Argaswari, D. P. A. D. (2022). High school students’ error in solving word problem of trigonometry based on Newman error hierarchical model. Infinity Journal, 11(1), 87–102. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v11i1.p87-102
Weber, K. (2001). Student difficulty in constructing proofs: The need for strategic knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48(1), 101–119. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015535614355
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.
Žakelj, A., & Klančar, A. (2022). The role of visual representations in geometry learning. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(3), 1393–1411. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.3.1393
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ramon Muhandaz, Sugiman Sugiman, Elly Arliani, Risnawati, M. Fikri Hamdani
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Online Learning in Educational Research is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with Online Learning in Educational Research agree to the following terms:
Copyright Retention: Authors retain the copyright of their work without any restrictions.
Publishing Rights: Authors retain the right to publish and distribute their work without any restrictions.
License Agreement: By publishing with Online Learning in Educational Research, authors agree that their work will be licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA). This license allows others to share and adapt the work, provided that appropriate credit is given, any changes are indicated, and the new creations are licensed under the same terms.
