Assessment Beliefs of Mathematical Thinking among Elementary Mathematics Teachers
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.65339/ijsis.V1.I2.93Keywords:
Assessment Beliefs, Assessment Benefits, Assessment Forms, Assessment Purpose, Elementary Mathematics Teachers, Mathematical Thinking, Students’ LearningAbstract
This study examined the assessment beliefs of public elementary mathematics teachers in Sta. Maria District, Division of Zamboanga City, in terms of assessment forms, assessment benefits, assessment purpose, and students’ learning, including differences according to gender and length of service and the relationships among these dimensions. Using a quantitative, descriptive-correlational, and non-experimental design, the study involved 183 mathematics teachers selected through total enumeration. Data were gathered using the 20-item Assessment Beliefs of Mathematical Thinking (ABMT) questionnaire and analyzed through weighted mean, standard deviation, Pearson Product-Moment Correlation, independent-samples t-test, and one-way ANOVA. Findings showed a very high overall level of assessment beliefs in mathematical thinking (M = 4.58). Assessment purpose obtained the highest mean (M = 4.64), followed by assessment forms (M = 4.62), students’ learning (M = 4.58), and assessment benefits (M = 4.50). No significant differences were found according to gender or length of service, while all four assessment-belief dimensions were significantly and positively correlated, with the strongest relationship observed between assessment benefits and assessment purpose (r = 0.757, p = 0.000). The study concluded that teachers viewed assessment forms, benefits, purposes, and students’ learning as interconnected components in supporting mathematical thinking. It recommended sustained professional development, varied and learner-centered assessment approaches, timely feedback, technology-enhanced assessment, and further research across wider populations and contexts. The study supports SDG 4: Quality Education by strengthening teachers’ assessment competence and instructional decision-making. Its sustainability impact lies in supporting continuous professional development, improved classroom assessment practices, and sustained mathematics instruction that promotes reasoning, conceptual understanding, and responsiveness to learners’ needs.
References
Alhunaini, S., Osman, K., & Abdurab, N. (2022). Development and validation of teachers’ assessment belief of mathematical thinking instrument. European Journal of Educational Research, 11(1), 179–191. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.1.179 DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.1.179
Bellido-García, R. S., Venturo-Orbegoso, C. O., Cruzata-Martínez, A., Sarmiento-Villanueva, E. B., Corro-Quispe, J., & Rejas-Borjas, L. G. (2024). Involvement of the student in their learning: Effects of formative assessment on competency development. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(5), em2440. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14453 DOI: https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/14453
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2023). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. SAGE publication page
Cruz, J. D. (2023). Classroom assessment thoughts, skills, and practices of secondary school mathematics teachers: An in-depth analysis. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 2(2), 184–190. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7969302
Field, A. (2024). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (6th ed.). SAGE Publications. SAGE publication page
Goodfellow, L. T. (2023). An overview of survey research. Respiratory Care, 68(9), 1309–1313. https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.11041 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4187/respcare.11041
Largo, M., & Adanza, J. (2025). Mathematics assessment practices and the students’ academic achievement. Journal of Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 3(7). https://doi.org/10.69569/jip.2025.190 DOI: https://doi.org/10.69569/jip.2025.190
Maskos, K., Schulz, A., Oeksuez, S. S., & Rakoczy, K. (2025). Formative assessment in mathematics education: A systematic review. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 57, 679–693. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-025-01696-x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-025-01696-x
National Privacy Commission. (2023). NPC Circular No. 2023-04: Guidelines on consent. National Privacy Commission circular
OECD. (2023). PISA 2022 assessment and analytical framework. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/dfe0bf9c-en
Paglomutan, P. M. C., Cabarubias, R. A., Valdesimo, R. T., & Lachica, R. L. (2023). Assessment practices of senior high school mathematics teachers in relation to students’ test performance. Psychology and Education: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10(8), 820–831. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8148805
Palmberg, B., Granberg, C., Andersson, C., & Palm, T. (2024). A multi-approach formative assessment practice and its potential for enhancing student motivation: A case study. Cogent Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2371169 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2371169
Panadero, E., Andrade, H., & Brookhart, S. M. (2022). Fostering self-regulated learning through self-assessment. Educational Psychologist, 57(3), 1–16.
Pastor, M. J. D., & Pedro, L. A. C. (2023). Mathematics teachers’ levels of ICT expertise and use and their beliefs about ICT integration and students’ problem-solving skills. Southeast Asian Mathematics Education Journal, 13(1), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.46517/seamej.v13i1.208 DOI: https://doi.org/10.46517/seamej.v13i1.208
Philippine Statistics Authority. (2025, August 1). Highlights of the Region IX (Zamboanga Peninsula) population: 2024 Census of Population (2024 POPCEN). Philippine Statistics Authority report
Rasmini, N. W., Antara, P. A., & Wulandari, I. G. A. A. M. (2023). The use of technology-based formative assessment in improving mathematics achievement of elementary school students. Journal of Education Technology, 7(3), 497–503. https://doi.org/10.23887/jet.v7i3.67770 DOI: https://doi.org/10.23887/jet.v7i3.67770
Smit, R., Dober, H., Hess, K., Bachmann, P., & Birri, T. (2023). Supporting primary students’ mathematical reasoning practice: The effects of formative feedback and the mediating role of self-efficacy. Research in Mathematics Education, 25(3), 277–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2022.2062780 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2022.2062780
Smit, R., Hess, K., Taras, A., Bachmann, P., & Dober, H. (2023). The role of interactive dialogue in students’ learning of mathematical reasoning: A quantitative multi-method analysis of feedback episodes. Learning and Instruction, 86, 101777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101777 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101777
Sortwell, A., Trimble, K., Ferraz, R., Geelan, D. R., Hine, G., Ramirez-Campillo, R., Carter-Thuiller, B., Gkintoni, E., & Xuan, Q. (2024). A systematic review of meta-analyses on the impact of formative assessment on K–12 students’ learning: Toward sustainable quality education. Sustainability, 16(17), 7826. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177826 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177826
Takele, M., & Melese, W. (2022). Primary school teachers’ conceptions and practices of assessment and their relationships. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2090185. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2090185 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2090185
Tóth, E., & Csapó, B. (2022). Teachers’ beliefs about assessment and accountability. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 34, 459–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09396-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-022-09396-w
UNESCO, & International Task Force on Teachers for Education 2030. (2024). Global report on teachers: Addressing teacher shortages and transforming the profession. UNESCO. UNESCO Global Report on Teachers
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Jesconi S. Zara, Dr. Julieta D. Francisco (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication. All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License. This license permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that appropriate credit is given to the original author(s) and the journal, a link to the license is provided, and any changes made are indicated.
