Technology-enhanced IB mathematics: A framework for integrating digital pedagogies with global best practices

Year 2025, Volume: 6 Issue: 2, 161 - 176, 26.12.2025

Harun Yorulmaz

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17996128

https://izlik.org/JA49NF28WP

Abstract

redefines IB Mathematics learning in modeling and flipped learning and addresses equity concerns for poor-resource contexts. Five pedagogical models—active learning, problem-based learning (PBL), flipped class, technology-enabled learning (focus on Singapore's AI-supported CPA model), and mathematical modeling—are explored using 45-study systematic review (2000-2024) and Singapore, Kenya and Turkey case studies. Post-pandemic data (UNESCO, 2021) show that 72% of IB schools now make use of hybrid tools, yet they have deeply ingrained equity gaps our model addresses. Based on social constructivist, inquiry, and modeling theories, the following paper presents a conceptual model for how the strategies promote reasoning, depth of concept, and interdisciplinarity. Sample lesson plans and classroom activities are presented to illustrate aligned applied IB pedagogy. Issues of equity, curriculum flexibility, and implementation concerns are important topics covered. GeoGebra/Desmos sample lesson plans demonstrate how technology enhances IB's Assessment Objectives (AO3/AO4). This study contributes to the international debate in mathematics education by bridging theory and practice and investigating how globally-informed pedagogies can digitally enhance student learning in IB mathematics environments.

Keywords

Mathematics education , digital pedagogy , problem-based learning , mathematical modeling , EdTech , International Baccalaureate , hybrid learning

Ethical Statement

No human participants were involved in the research. All data used are publicly available documents, AI-generated outputs, and anonymized classroom case studies with verbal consent from participants.

Supporting Institution

The author received no specific funding for this work, and no grant was obtained from any public, commercial, or not-for-profit funding agency for the conduct of this research.

References

• Barba, D., Valeria, Z., Caserial, I., & Gaylo, D. (2024). Alignment of General Mathematics Curriculum to the PISA 2022 Mathematics Framework. Dinkum Journal of Social Innovations, 3(3).
• Basham, J. D., Hall, T. E., Carter Jr, R. A., & Stahl, W. M. (2016). An operationalized understanding of personalized learning. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(4), 233–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643416660835
• Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip Your Classroom: Reach Every Student in Every Class Every Day. International Society for Technology in Education.
• Bishop, J., & Verleger, M. A. (2013, June). The Flipped Classroom: A Survey of the Research Paper presented at 2013 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Atlanta, Georgia. 10.18260/1-2—22585
• Boaler, J. (2016). Mathematical mindsets: Unleashing students' potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. Jossey-Bass/Wiley.
• Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
• Deng, Z. & Gopinathan, S. (2016). PISA and high-performing education systems: explaining Singapore’s education success. Comparative Education, 52(4), 449 472. https://www.tandfonline.com
• Engelbrecht, J., Borba, M.C. & Kaiser, G. (2023). Will we ever teach mathematics again in the way we used to before the pandemic?. ZDM Mathematics Education 55, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-022-01460-5
• Engelbrecht, J., & Borba, M.C. (2024). Recent developments in using digital technology in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 56, 281–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01530-2
• Fang, C. Y., Zakaria, M. I., & Muslim, I. N. E. (2023). A Systematic Review: Challenges in Implementing Problem- Based Learning in Mathematics Education. International Journal Of Academic Research in Progressive Education And Development, 12(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v12-i3/19158
• Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410-8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
• Geiger, V., Stillman, G., Brown, J., Galbriath, P., & Niss, M. (2018). Using mathematics to solve real world problems: the role of enablers. Math Ed Res J, 30, 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0217-3
• Hallinger, P., & Lee, M. (2012). A Global Study of the Practice and Impact of Distributed Instructional Leadership in International Baccalaureate (IB) Schools. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 11(4), 477–495. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2012.700990
• harunyorulmaz. (2025). harunyorulmaz/IB-Math-PBL-Examples: Supplementary Code Files for IB Mathematics Modeling Activities.. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17877362
• Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students' learning. Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, 1, 371-404. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
• Hwang, G. J., Xie, H., Wah, B. W., & Gašević, D. (2020). Vision, challenges, roles and research issues of Artificial Intelligence in Education. Computers & Education: Artificial Intelligence, 1, 100001.
• International Baccalaureate Organization. (2019). Mathematics: analysis and approaches guide. International Baccalaureate.
• IB Mathematics: Analysis and Approaches HL/SL Subject Guide (2021).
• International Baccalaureate Organization. (2021). IB Mathematics: Analysis and Approaches HL/SL: Approaches to teaching and learning in the Diploma Programme. International Baccalaureate. https://resources.ibo.org/dp/subject/Mathematics-2021-analysis
• International Baccalaureate Organization. (2022). The IB Diploma Programme and Career-Related Programme Final Statistical Bulletin May 2022 Assessment Session. https://www.ibo.org
• International Baccalaureate Organization. (2023). Access and Equity Policy Update. https://resources.ibo.org
• Jacinto, H. (2023). Engaging Students in Mathematical Problem Solving with Technology during a Pandemic: The Case of the Tecn@Mat Club. Education Sciences, 13(3), 271. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13030271
• Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for PBL. Routledge.
• Johnson, E., Andrews-Larson, C., Keene, K., Keller, R., Fortune, N., & Melhuish, K. (2018). Inquiry and inequity in the undergraduate mathematics classroom. Proceedings of the 40th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Greenville, SC: University of South Carolina & Clemson University.
• Laursen, S. L., Hassi, M. L., Kogan, M., & Weston, T. J. (2014). Benefits for women and men of inquiry-based learning in college mathematics: A multi-institution study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(4), 406– 418. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.45.4.0406
• Laursen, S. L., & Rasmussen, C. (2019). I on the prize: Inquiry approaches in undergraduate mathematics. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753- 019-00085-6
• Lesh, R., Doerr, H. M., Carmona, G., & Hjalmarson, M. (2003). Beyond Constructivism. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(2–3), 211–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2003.9680000 Luckin, R., Holmes, W., Griffiths, M., & Forcier, L. B. (2016). Intelligence Unleashed: An Argument for AI in Education. Pearson.
• Liu, X., Hansen, K.Y., Valcke, M., & Neve, J. D. (2024). A decade of PISA: student perceived instructional quality and mathematics achievement across European countries. ZDM Mathematics Education 56, 859–891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01630-7
• 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(1–13). https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733
• OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en
• OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The state of learning and equity in education. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/53f23881-en
• Pierce, R., & Stacey, K. (2010). Mapping Pedagogical Opportunities Provided by Mathematics Analysis Software. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-010- 9158-6
• Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution and revolution in artificial intelligence in education. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(2), 582–599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-016-0110-3
• Rutkowski, L., & Rutkowski, D. (2010). Getting it ‘better’: The importance of improving background questionnaires in international large-scale assessments. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 42(3), 341–360.
• Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of Problem-based Learning: Definitions and Distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1002
• Singapore Ministry of Education. (2020). Mathematics Teaching and Learning Syllabus. Curriculum Planning and Development Division.
• Skovsmose, O., & Alro, H. (2002). Dialogical mathematics education: Intention, Reflection and Critique. Dialogue and Learning in Mathematics Education, Volume 29. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/0-306-48016-6
• Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom. Simon and Schuster.
• Stillman, G. A., & Brown, J. P. (2021). Modeling the phenomenon versus modeling the data set. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 25(3), 270–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2021.2013144
• Theobald, E. J., Hill, M. J., Tran, E., Agrawal, S., Arroyo, E. N., Behling, S., ... & Freeman, S. (2020). Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(12), 6476-6483. https://www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073/pnas.1916903117
• Tsui, M. Y., & Mok, I. A. C. (2024). Math lessons go online: Insights and challenges of blended learning during the pandemic. Journal on Mathematics Education, 15(2), 593–612. http://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v15i2.pp593-612
• UNESCO. (2015). Revisiting mathematics learning in Sub-Saharan Africa. Montreal: UNESCO Institute for Statistics.
• UNESCO. (2021). Education in a post-COVID world: Nine ideas for public action. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000377897
• Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Drijvers, P. (2014). Realistic Mathematics Education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 521-525). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007- 4978-8_170
• Yorulmaz, H. (2025). IB-Math-PBL-Examples [Source code]. GitHub. https://github.com/harunyorulmaz/IB- Math-PBL-Examples
• Zbiek, R. M., Heid, M. K., Blume, G. W., & Dick, T. P. (2007). Research on technology in mathematics education: A perspective of constructs. Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning