Facilitating online learning environment in math classes: Teachers’ views and suggestions
Esra Karaca 1, Didem Akyuz 1 *
More Detail
1 Middle East Technical University, Türkiye
* Corresponding Author


This study aims to reveal the views and suggestions of in-service mathematics teachers about supporting online learning. Many times, studies indicate the teachers' views related to the advantages and disadvantages of online learning. However, limited studies investigate teachers' views for improving the online learning environment. Thus, this study reveals teachers' recommendations for supporting e-learning. To achieve this, a case study was conducted to describe teachers' views. Data were collected from four middle and high school mathematics teachers through interviews, reflections, and lesson plans for online mathematics education courses. Teachers' views and suggestions related to supporting online learning were coded under five categories: norms, selection of manipulatives, building a community of learners, participation in group work, and assessment in the online learning environment.



  • Almosa, A. (2002). Use of computer in education. Future Education Library.
  • Aydogan, A. Y., & Gokce, S. (2021). Teachers' opinions on web 2.0 tools used for measurement and evaluation purposes in distance education. Journal of Hasan Ali Yücel Faculty of Education, 18(2), 167-178. https://doi.org/10.5152/hayef.2021.21008
  • Baki, A., Aydın-Yalçınkaya, H., Özpınar, İ., & Çalık-Uzun, S. (2009). İlköğretim matematik öğretmenleri ve öğretmen adaylarının öğretim teknolojilerine bakışlarının karşılaştırılması. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 1(1), 65-83.
  • Bardelle, C., & Di Martino, P. (2012). E-learning in secondary–tertiary transition in mathematics: for what purpose? ZDM, 44, 787-800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0417-y
  • Bernard, H. R. (2002). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative methods. AltaMira Press.
  • Beswick, K. (2012). Teachers’ beliefs about school mathematics and mathematicians’ mathematics and their relationship to practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(1), 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9333-2
  • Borba, M. C., Askar, P., Engelbrecht, J., Gadanidis, G., Llinares, S., & Aguilar, M. S. (2017). Digital technology in mathematics education: Research over the last decade. In G. Kaiser (Ed.), Proceedings of the 13th international congress on mathematical education: ICME-13 (pp. 221–233). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62597-3_14
  • Cao, Y., Zhang, S., Chan, M. C. E., & Kang, Y. (2021). Post-pandemic reflections: lessons from Chinese mathematics teachers about online mathematics instruction. Asia Pacific Education Review, 22(2), 157-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-021-09694-w
  • Carliner, S. (2003). Modeling information for three-dimensional space: Lessons learned from museum exhibit design. Technical Communication, 50(4), 554-570.
  • Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, J., Wheatley, G., Trigatti, B., & Perlwitz, M. (1991). Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade Mathematics Project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(1), 3–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/749551
  • Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2018). Rethinking education in the age of technology: The digital revolution and schooling in America. Teachers College Press.
  • Engelbrecht, J., & Harding, A. (2005). Teaching undergraduate mathematics on the internet. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58, 253-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-6457-2
  • Engelbrecht, J., Borba, M. C., Llinares, S., & Kaiser, G. (2020). Will 2020 be remembered as the year in which education was changed? ZDM, 52, 821-824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01185-3
  • Finch, D., & Jacobs, K. (2012, September). Online education: Best practices to promote learning. Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, 56(1), 546-550. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181312561114
  • Fisher, C. D. (2017). Padlet: An online tool for learner engagement and collaboration. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 16, 163-165. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2017.0055
  • Francis, D. C., Rapacki, L., & Eker, A. (2014). The individual, the context, the practice. In H. Fives & M. G. Gill (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers’ beliefs (pp. 336-352). Routledge.
  • Grothaus, C. (2023). Engagement in online learning among Thai and German students: The role of classmates, instructors, and technology across country contexts. Online Learning, 27(3), 188-208. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v27i3.3413
  • Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E. A., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045
  • Hung, C. M., Huang, I., & Hwang, G. J. (2014). Effects of digital game-based learning on students’ self-efficacy, motivation, anxiety, and achievements in learning mathematics. Journal of Computers in Education, 1, 151-166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-014-0008-8
  • Karal, H. (2015). The effects of a technology-aided learning environment on the improvement of a primary special education school. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(24), 2908-2918. https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2015.2523
  • Kellogg, M., & Kersaint, G. (2004). Creating a vision for the Standards using online videos in an elementary mathematics methods course. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 4(1), 23-34.
  • Lampert, M., & Blunk, M. L. (1998). Talking mathematics in school: Studies of teaching and learning. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511571251
  • Lee, J., & Bednarz, R. S. (2012). Components of spatial thinking: evidence from a spatial thinking ability test. The Journal of Geography, 111(1), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221341.2011.583262
  • Livy, S., Muir, T., Murphy, C., & Trimble, A. (2022). Creative approaches to teaching mathematics education with online tools during COVID-19. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 53(3), 573-581. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1988742
  • Lowe, T., & Humphrey, O. (2018). A platform for partnership: a technology review of the padlet sharing platform. Journal of Educational Innovation, Partnership and Change, 4(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.21100/jeipc.v4i1.706
  • Mailizar, M., Hidayat, M., & Al-Manthari, A. (2021). Examining the impact of mathematics teachers’ TPACK on their acceptance of online professional development. Journal of Digital learning in teacher education, 37(3), 196-212. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2021.1934613
  • Marbán, J. M., & Mulenga, E. M. (2019). Pre-service primary teachers' teaching styles and attitudes towards the use of technology in mathematics classrooms. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(2), 253-263. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5649
  • Martin, F. & Bolliger, D.U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning 22(1), 205- 222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092
  • Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Moore, M. G., & Kearsley, G. (2011). Distance education: A systems view of online learning. Cengage Learning.
  • Moyer-Packenham, P. S., & Westenskow, A. (2016). Revisiting the effects and affordances of virtual manipulatives for mathematics learning. In K. Terry & A. Cheney (Eds.), Utilizing virtual and personal learning environments for optimal learning (pp. 186-215). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-8847-6.ch009
  • Naccarato, E., & Karakok, G. (2015). Expectations and implementations of the flipped classroom model in undergraduate mathematics courses. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 46(7), 968-978. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1071440
  • Palvia, S., Aeron, P., Gupta, P., Mahapatra, D., Parida, R., Rosner, R., & Sindhi, S. (2018). Online education: Worldwide status, challenges, trends, and implications. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 21(4), 233-241. https://doi.org/10.1080/1097198X.2018.1542262
  • Petty, T., & Farinde, A. (2013). Investigating student engagement in an online mathematics course through windows into teaching and learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 261-270.
  • Rahayu, R. P., & Wirza, Y. (2020). Teachers’ perception of online learning during pandemic covid-19. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan, 20(3), 392–406. https://doi.org/10.17509/jpp.v20i3.29226
  • Ramasamy, R. (2009). Mathematics in online-learning: The difference in its approach compared to face-to-face teaching. In E. Board (Eds.), ICI9-International Conference on Information (pp. 33-39). IEEE Computer Society,
  • Rasila, A., Malinen, J., & Tiitu, H. (2015). On automatic assessment and conceptual understanding: Teaching mathematics and its applications. International Journal of the IMA, 34(3), 149-159. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrv013
  • Reys, R., Lindquist, M., Lambdin, D. V., Smith, N. L., Rogers, A., Cooke, A., & West, J. (2020). Helping children learn mathematics. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Steffe, L. P., & Thompson, P. W. (2000). Interaction or intersubjectivity? A reply to Lerman. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 191-209. https://doi.org/10.2307/749751
  • Stephan, M. (2020). Sociomathematical norms in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 802-805). Springer.
  • Stephan, M., & Whitenack, J. (2003). Establishing classroom social and sociomathematical norms for problem solving. In F. Lester (Ed.), Teaching mathematics through problem solving: Prekindergarten–grade 6 (pp. 149–162). NCTM.
  • Sun, A., & Chen, X. (2016). Online education and its effective practice: A research review. Journal of Information Technology Education, 15, 157-190. https://doi.org/10.28945/3502
  • Sweeney, E. M., Beger, A. W., & Reid, L. (2021). Google Jamboard for virtual anatomy education. The Clinical Teacher, 18(4), 341-347. https://doi.org/10.1111/tct.13389
  • Taranto, E., Robutti, O., & Arzarello, F. (2020). Learning within MOOCs for mathematics teacher education. ZDM: Mathematics Education, 52(7), 1439-1453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01178-2
  • Trenholm, S., Hajek, B., Robinson, C. L., Chinnappan, M., Albrecht, A., & Ashman, H. (2019). Investigating undergraduate mathematics learners’ cognitive engagement with recorded lecture videos. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 50(1), 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1458339
  • Voigt, M., Fredriksen, H., & Rasmussen, C. (2020). Leveraging the design heuristics of realistic mathematics education and culturally responsive pedagogy to create a richer flipped classroom calculus curriculum. ZDM, 52, 1051-1062. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01124-x
  • Westberry, N. (2009) Moving between workplace and online learning spaces: an activity theory perspective. In R. J. Atkinson, & C. McBeath (Eds.), Same places, different spaces: Proceedings Ascilite Auckland 2009 (pp. 1100-1104). Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education.
  • Wills, T. (2020). Teaching math at a distance, grades K-12: A practical guide to rich remote instruction. Corwin. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071837092
  • Wood, T. (1998). Alternative patterns of communication in mathematics classroom: Funneling or focussing? In H. Steinbring, M. G. Bartolini Bussi, & A. Sierpinska (Eds.), Language and communication in the mathematics classroom (pp. 167-178). Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  • Zhao, Y., & Watterston, J. (2021). The changes we need: Education post COVID-19. Journal of Educational Change, 22(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09417-3


This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.