Teaching Math: A Review of Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies in Higher Education

Teaching Math: A Review of Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies in Higher Education | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Systematic Review Teaching Math: A Review of Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies in Higher Education Darwin Castillo, Javier Carrión, Cristian Chamba, Yuliana Jiménez, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4708199/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The enduring challenge of facilitating profound knowledge acquisition and meaningful learning of mathematical concepts has been a constant throughout contemporary and historical educational contexts. This issue is particularly pronounced at higher education levels, where many students struggle to connect theoretical mathematical concepts with practical applications in their professional careers. In this context, our research undertakes a systematic review of scientific literature from 2020 onwards, critically examining diverse pedagogical strategies to enhance the efficiency and depth of mathematical learning. Our findings indicate a marked prevalence of semiotic representations and gamification in the literature. Semiotic representations emerge as a potent strategy for achieving deep cognitive engagement and a thorough understanding of mathematical concepts. Gamification, as an active learning method, proves to be a highly effective approach for enhancing student engagement and motivation, thereby helping students overcome their apprehension towards mathematics. Furthermore, the literature underscores the crucial role of educator training in successfully implementing these strategies. The evidence suggests that a synergistic combination of semiotic representations and gamification could significantly enhance students’ mathematical learning experiences, fostering a meaningful understanding firmly rooted in real-world problem-solving. This integrated approach holds substantial promise for advancing educational outcomes and better-preparing students for the practical demands of their professional lives. teaching math strategies didactic review mathematics education VOSviewer gamification semiotic representations. Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 1 Introduction Why is math perceived as difficult, even humiliating, by many? This question, posed by educator Dan Meyer on the UNESCO website(Dan Meyer: “Maths has an obvious perception problem among students” | The UNESCO Courier, 2023), challenges the conventional methodologies of mathematics instruction. Meyer argues that traditional teaching methods contribute significantly to the widespread perception of mathematics as an abstract and inaccessible subject reserved only for a select few. This problem is also reflected in higher levels, where the students don't have enough skills to establish the relationship between the math concepts and the proposes of solutions for real problems. In this context, (Vintere and Briede 2019) manifest the need to develop a methodical framework that includes mathematical competence and skills necessary for professional activities to be developed within a mathematical subject. On the same line, several studies conclude that mathematics presents difficulties for middle and higher-education students (Strømgren et al. 2014; Al Mutawah et al. 2015; Milovanović 2020; Workman 2023) principally due to mathematics teachers frequently refraining from incorporating innovative strategies into math lessons despite their benefits due to perceived irrelevance (Brozo et al. 2017). Also, (Vintere and Briede 2019) Workman (Workman 2023), in his study about income inequality and student achievement , found that income inequality was associated with lower mathematics achievement. In this line, the problem is more frequent, especially in mid and low-income countries, due to a lack of continuous education, where there is a persistent inequality gap to access education, which means people with a stable economy have more opportunities to access better education. However, in most countries, learning math produces anxiety in students (Al Mutawah et al. 2015; Milovanović 2020), and with that, students have deficient mathematical thinking skills. Hence, according to (AlAli et al. 2023; Wardat, Alali, et al. 2023), teachers must foster mathematical thinking skills among learners and emphasize the need for innovative educational approaches to address these gaps. Active teaching (Milovanovic et al. 2021), an alternative to traditional teaching (C. K. Lo and Hew 2020; C. Lo et al. 2021), fosters direct student engagement and collaborative learning, as opposed to an exclusively frontal teaching style (Bishara 2018). For example, (Selmer and Kale 2013) in their research focus on Teaching mathematics through PBL, and they suggest that mathematics teachers integrate PBL into their practices to convey meaningful mathematical concepts to students effectively. A study from (Y ABD ALGANI, 2019) mentioned some innovative ways to teach mathematics, where the main results showed that technology is rarely employed in teaching mathematics. In this line, several studies show innovative strategies related to the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) (Hoyles and Noss 2003; Borba et al. 2016; Tashtoush, AlAli, et al. 2023), Immersive and Collaborative strategies (Vivanco-Galván et al. 2018; Y. Jiménez-Gaona et al. 2020); Science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) (Perignat et al., 2019; Lakshminarayanan and McBride, 2015; Holmes and Hwang, 2016; Belbase et al., 2021); Project-Based Learning (Holmes and Hwang 2016) (PBL), Adaptive learning, and Learning in the metaverse (Selmer and Kale 2013; Tarouco et al. 2013; Y ABD ALGANI 2019; Rodríguez 2022; Villacís Macías et al. 2022). On the other hand, studies such as those proposed by(Brock et al. 2020) (Brock et al., 2020) raise the bar on rigor and encourage students to solve problems creatively while gaining valuable data on their growth as thinkers and mathematicians (Hancock and Karakok 2021). So, here is also the importance of research in the semiotic representations, which, according to (Duval, 2006, 2017), produce a deep comprehension in learning abstract mathematic objects. Therefore, it is essential to incentivize and create the abilities and capabilities of students to understand the need for mathematics in our lives; e.g., these days, there are also different projects concerning the use of the ChatGPT (Alneyadi and Wardat 2023; Jarrah et al. 2023; Wardat, Tashtoush, et al. 2023), that mentions and show in their works how this AI chatbot could constitute an efficient tool that allows students to gain abilities to apply math in authentic contexts, and also for teachers help to delineate a better way to innovate in their classes. By leveraging AI tools like ChatGPT, educators can personalize learning experiences, tailoring content to individual student needs and promoting deeper conceptual understanding(Alneyadi and Wardat 2023). In this sense, teaching and learning mathematics constitutes a serious challenge if educators want to transmit their passion for numbers and get their applications due principally to the abstract nature of the content subject. In this line, several studies (Tashtoush, Wardat, et al. 2023; Tashtoush, AlAli, et al. 2023; Zakariya and Wardat 2023) also contemplate the teachers' point of view and emphasize the importance of providing training programs to help teachers deal with the challenges of learning loss. They also suggest further research in different contexts. Nowadays, higher education institutions seek teaching strategies that affect academic performance and impact students' development to achieve a solid professional profile (McCray et al. 2004; Sullivan 2011). In addressing the pivotal concern of how mathematics can be made more appealing to students in higher education, this paper aims to explore groundbreaking didactic strategies through a literature review. This review aims to explore and identify the most effective didactic strategies that can be employed to optimize teaching and learning outcomes in mathematics within the higher education context (university-undergraduate students). The investigation analyzes pedagogical practices and their impact on educational outcomes. To identify recent findings in mathematics educational approaches, we conducted a careful search through the specialized literature between 2001 and 2021 in several scientific databases, including Taylor & Francis, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), ScienceDirect, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar, MDPI. To select and identify the best documents concerning the didactic mathematics teaching strategies, the Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (Moher et al. 2009; Hutton et al. 2016) method and the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) methodology proposed by Torres-Carrion et al. (Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018a; Torres-Carrión et al. 2019), an adapted method from Kitchenham (Kitchenham 2004) and Bacca-Acosta et al. (Acosta et al. 2014). Also, the VOSviewer software version 1.6.15 was used for analysis to construct and display bibliometric maps to show the principal keywords related to the publications on the global semantic search. Finally, the principal findings concerning the main strategies found through this literature review were described and discussed: semiotic representations and gamification . The following research question was used as the guidelines for this article: What are the most effective didactic strategies for achieving optimal mathematics teaching and learning outcomes in higher education? This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 outlines the methodology and the literature review selection criteria. Section 3 summarizes and discusses the most pertinent findings and results from the systematic literature review, and finally, Section 4 gives the principal conclusions and recommendations derived from the results. 2 Materials and methods This work employs the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) methodology proposed by Torres-Carrion et al. (Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018a; Torres-Carrión et al. 2019), an adapted method from Kitchenham (Kitchenham 2004) and Bacca-Acosta et al. (Acosta et al. 2014). To select the articles and documents according to the central point of this research, the recommendations of Khan et al.(Khan et al. 2003) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [25, 26] were used. Figure 1 is a detailed description of the methodology that facilitated the achievement of the research objectives. The semantic structure was used to search for specialized and specific documents in different bibliographic databases, e.g., Scopus, Web of Science (WOS), Science Direct, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar. The scientific papers presented in this work were drawn from peer-reviewed articles published between 2001 and 2021. The next sections detail the process to get the best semantic global structure for adequately identifying, screening, and filtering the documents according to our principal goals and the PRISMA guidelines. 2.1 Identification Focusing on the real theoretical context of the investigation and our research question is essential to conduct an adequate search. In this case, we try to search literature related to answering the following items and a central research question indicated above in the introduction section. Based on the research question and the following criteria, a conceptual map has been developed to organize the key terms from the thesaurus for the subsequent search of specific literature related to the research topic. · Aim of the study: didactic strategies for effective and optimal mathematics teaching and learning outcomes in higher education. · Methods: ICTS, PBL, STEAM, gamification, semiotic representations, cooperating. · Results: effective strategies for teaching and learning math · Conclusions: challenges, problems, future guidelines. 2.2 Conceptual mindfact The conceptual framework used in this work allows us to focus and restrict the subject to didactic strategies for teaching mathematics. The method proposed by Torres-Carrión et al. (Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018b), called “conceptual mind fact” ( mentefacto conceptual ), helped to organize the scientific thesaurus keywords for the research topic. In this project, the conceptual mindfact began with the teaching approach, teaching method, teaching technique, and teaching strategies in math (see Figure 3). Then, it was complemented with the keywords Mathematics teaching, Didactics of Mathematics, Mathematics education, Teaching mathematics, calculus teaching, and Algebra teaching. Finally, the terms relating, cooperating, experiencing, applying, and transferring were also included. The terms related to engineering and psychology were excluded. 2.3 Conducting the Review Once done, the conceptual mind and identified the keywords concerning the research theme. The next step is to organize a semantic search structure that allows us to get the documents for the review analysis. Table 1 presents the semantic search structure (Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018b), such as entering specific search literature (documents) in scientific databases. The first level represents the teaching search; the second corresponds to the keyword Mathematics. The third level is relevant for applying the strategy (strategy) used for analyzing scientific documents. The fourth level is the search for global semantic structure. Table 1 . Keywords used in the search for global semantic structures. Teaching ((teaching AND (approach AND method AND technique ) ) AND strateg* ) Mathematics (((math*) AND (relating OR cooperating OR experiencing OR applying OR transferring ) ) OR mathematics AND teaching OR didactics AND of AND mathematics OR didactics AND of AND mathematics OR teaching AND mathematics OR calculus AND teaching OR algebra AND teaching ) ) Strategy (Relating AND Cooperating AND Experiencing AND Appying AND Transfering ) Key words for semantic structure search in database TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( ( teaching AND ( approach AND method AND technique ) ) AND strateg* ) AND ( ( ( math* ) AND ( relating OR cooperating OR experiencing OR applying OR transfering ) ) OR mathematics AND teaching OR didactics AND of AND mathematics OR teaching AND mathematics OR calculus AND teaching OR algebra AND teaching ) ) The symbol (*) represents a wildcard to help search a word with multiple spelling variations. 2.4 PRISMA Identification: As mentioned above, the global semantic structure used allows us (see Table 1) to identify 525 documents through a global search, especially on Scopus (427 documents) and Web of Science (WoS) (98 documents). We used the exact global search on other databases, e.g., Google Scholar, but we generally got the same documents. Therefore, only the 525 documents selected by Scopus and WoS were selected. After the global search of the 525 documents, 160 were excluded because they were duplicated. Screening: After removing duplicates, 360 articles were screened by their titles and abstracts according to the following criteria: - Research articles and reviews are included - Articles about higher education - Articles concerning Math teaching After the screening, 255 documents were discarded, and 105 documents went to the next eligibility and inclusion phase. Eligibility and Included: Those 105 documents were screened by text, considering that the articles comply with the criteria aim of this study. In this case, the criteria were: · Aim of the study: didactic strategies for effective and optimal mathematics teaching and learning outcomes in higher education. · Methods: ICTS, PBL, STEAM, gamification, semiotic representations, cooperating. · Results: effective strategies for teaching and learning math · Conclusions: challenges, problems, future guidelines. According to these criteria, only 37 documents related to the items described above were included in a more detailed analysis (see results and discussions). 2.5 Maps in VOSviewer: VOS viewer (N. Van Eck et al. 2010) is a software tool designed by the Leiden University Center for Science and Technology Studies for building and visualizing bibliometric networks (Nees Jan van Eck and Waltman 2014a). These visualizations are often called maps (Güner and Gökçe 2021). The study of bibliometric networks, such as co-authorship, bibliographic linkage, and co-citation networks, has a long history in bibliometrics, with initial work dating back to the 1960s and 1970s (Price 1976; Hwang et al. 2021a). These networks can be built based on citations, bibliographic linkage, co-citation, or co-authorship relationships, including journals, researchers, or individual publications (Nees Jan van Eck and Waltman 2014b). Several studies show the application of the VOSviewer in different fields, such as economy (Perianes-Rodriguez et al. 2016; Iliescu 2021), engineering and computer science (Castillo et al. 2021; Wang et al. 2022), and of course also in math education research (Ersozlu and Karakus 2019; Verma et al. 2021; Hanif Batubara et al. 2022; Veith et al. 2023) We used VOSviewer software version 1.6.15 for analysis to construct and display bibliometric maps. The data for this objective were obtained from Scopus due to its coverage of a broader range of journals. 3 Results and Discussion 3.1 Publication evolution: The global semantic structure search (Table 1 ) found 525 documents of different types (article, presentation, and review) from 2001 to December 1, 2021. Figure 4 shows the number of publications and the types in this period. Concerning the type of documents, articles have the most significant number of publications (441), followed by conferences (52), reviews (21), and finally book Chaps. (11). Reviews that were published in 2003(1), 2004(1), 2006(1), 2014(1), 2015(2), 2016(2), 2017(3), 2018(2), 2019(3), 2021(5). Table 2 Documents type published during the period of study of this work Document type Quantity Period of years 10 documents Article 441 2001–2009 2009–2021 Review 21 2001–2021 Conference Paper 52 {2001, 2021}-2019 2019 Book Chapter 11 2008,2011,2016,2017,2020 Table 2 and Fig. 4 show that the number of publications concerning math education increased. In this way, it is essential to say that research on math education has gained more importance in recent years due to its close relationship with the development of technology(Tashtoush, AlAli, et al. 2023 ; Wardat, Tashtoush, et al. 2023 ). In this sense, integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies in mathematics education has emerged as a promising avenue to enhance teaching and learning practices (M. K. Pedersen et al. 2021 ). Figure 5 shows the principal journals where authors publish their work, and Fig. 6 lists the top 15 authors with the most published documents in the era of math education. Dr. Emily Bouck (Bouck et al. 2012 ; Bouck, Emily C. - Author details - Scopus 2021), from the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Michigan in the United States, has more documents (28) related to the research area of this project. Keywords and related publications In terms of the keywords and related publications, Fig. 7 presents the map of the network of publications about the citations and keywords of the documents related to the theme of this research. The keywords were those designated in VOSviewer (Nées Jan Van Eck and Waltman 2009). with the database got from Scopus. In the map, the density of the yellow color in each keyword indicates the number of repetitions in the total number of scientific documents. The most used keywords are mathematics education, students, and teaching. In the same line, the words that are most relevant in the abstracts are presented in the Fig. 8 3.2 Analysis and discussion of findings Table 3 describes the scientific documents related to our research topic in this project. These documents were obtained from the global semantic search. Table 3 . Documents of the systematic review related to the research topic and their findings According to Table 3 and through the analysis of the documents, we can see in Fig. 9 that gamification (54.1%), semiotic representations (24,3%), and learning theories (16,2%) are the strategies more applied to improve or research math learning. Also in Fig. 10 is detailed the distribution by levels of education (university 68,6%, secondary 17,1% and elementary school 14,3%), and, by country, in this last we can see a variety of countries where people are researching in order to improve the math education. Regarding Gamification in education, we observe that all analyzed papers mention that this strategy improves motivation and effectiveness in diverse educational contexts (Lakshminarayanan and McBride 2015 ; Bouchrika et al. 2021 ; Prieto-Andreu et al. 2022 ; Sobrino-Duque et al. 2022; Villacís Macías et al. 2022 ), particularly influential in higher education through interactive games that incorporate challenges and feedback. We also emphasize that gamification enhances student engagement in e-learning (Bouchrika et al. 2021 ) and significantly contributes to improving performance and consolidating concepts, especially in subjects such as algebra and calculus (U. Faghihi et al. 2014 ; Usef Faghihi et al. 2017 ; Hafzah et al. 2019 ; Jiménez-Hernández et al. 2020 ). One important thing to mention that can easily be combined with Gamification is the contextualization of the math problems. Bottge et al., in their study from 1993(Bottge et al., 1993), show that students have a significant improvement in their skills to solve math problems when those are contextualized to the real world. With ICT's development, different projects show that contextualization and gamification could improve math learning comprehension and motivation to learn. For example, (Villacís Macías et al., 2022 ) indicate the uses of Gamification and project-based Learning to achieve active learning in elementary school. In the university context and secondary education, there are also some examples of applying these methodologies in the diverse real contexts of areas like health, engineering, and biology; in this sense, the principal aim is to show the students the contribution of math to other knowledge areas and also to understand the value that has the math concepts in the development of new products related with their professional careers (Jiménez and Castillo 2017; Chapman and Rich 2018; Jiménez 2018 ; Yuliana Jiménez-Gaona et al. 2019 ; Rivera and Garden 2021 ; Sobrino-Duque et al. 2022). Hackathons, a tool generally used in computer and data science (Porras et al., 2018), are a good example of active learning and could be combined with gamification where math and other sciences collaborate. For example (Yarmohammadian et al. 2021 ) mentioned how the hackathon could improve medical education. Also, there are studies where hackathons could help to develop and propose solutions to solve real-world problems related to Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) (Fowler 2016 ; Zukin and Papadantonakis 2017; Vivanco-Galván et al. 2018 ; Webb et al. 2019 ; Yarmohammadian et al. 2021 ; Lee et al. 2023 ). Along the same line, currently, there is an interaction between gamification and flipped classroom models (C. K. Lo and Hew 2020; C. Lo et al. 2021 ), which is recognized as a powerful strategy for teaching and learning math in university courses. Recent studies that integrated gamification within a flipped classroom model have demonstrated better performance and understanding of the students about the math concepts (Hassan et al. 2021 ; Pehlivan and Arabacioglu 2023) and also the importance of the gamification due to it allowing to engage students in more active and motivating learning activities (Husain et al. 2023 ). For instance, an exploratory study found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the gamified flipped classrooms promoted student engagement and facilitated sustainable learning (Lo et al., 2022), as other proposes such as the Jigsaw Method, that promotes cooperative learning in order to address the decline in literacy and numeracy skills due the pandemic. Along the same line of the pandemic, we could manifest that e-learning education has more impact and development, and also like a traditional learning class, this could be beneficiated of the gamification as seen in the studies of (C. K. Lo and Hew 2020; Bouchrika et al. 2021 ) where the gamification allow to enrich the math learning experience. Currently, gamification could be nurtured using artificial intelligence models, such as ChatGPT. In the study of (Alneyadi and Wardat, 2023b), it is shown how the ChatGPT could provide students with a positive influence in the learning of magnetism concepts, so in that way, the uses of the AI models could improve the educational outcomes. Also, in the work of (Lubis et al., 2014 ), we can see how gamification in math could be traduced into smartphone apps to get effectiveness in the engagement of math students. Undoubtedly, gamification has attracted significant attention and has been applied to motivate and engage people in performing certain functions and activities and solving different problems. As an educational tool, gamification facilitates learning, encourages motivation and engagement, improves student engagement and lesson interactivity, and encourages students to expand their knowledge (S Bennani et al. 2021; Behl et al. 2022 ; Sabri et al. 2022 ). When implemented correctly, gamification can increase intrinsic motivation and engagement (Buckley et al. 2014; Chapman and Rich 2018; Bouchrika et al. 2021 ) and represents a powerful tool for teachers at all levels of the education system (Rivera and Garden 2021 ). Learning theory (Bada and Olusegun 2015 ) describes how students receive, process, and retain knowledge during learning. Cognitive, emotional, and environmental influences, as well as prior experience, all play a role in how understanding, or worldview, is acquired or changed and knowledge and skills are retained (te Braak et al. 2022 ). Table 3 shows that 16,2% of the analyzed documents correspond to this topic research. In general, several studies, such as (Meij et al., 2022 ), mention the gap between the theories of teaching and the reality in education and the formation of educators. This point suggests the potential existence of a discrepancy between theoretical educational paradigms and their practical implementation in teacher education (Uzun and Arslan 2009; M. Pedersen et al. 2023). Close to this last point, one factor to consider is motivation and teacher satisfaction in order to retain high-quality mathematics educators. In this line, a study from (Zakariya and Wardat, 2023) found that the influence of personal motivation to teach among Norwegian mathematics teachers was significant but unexpectedly negative. According to the literature (Raymond Duval 2006 ) on didactic strategies for achieving effective teaching and learning of mathematics at the university level, representations are crucial for mathematical activity, both for students and expert mathematicians (Morgan 2006 ; Iori 2018 ). In this sense, incorporating semiotic representations in university mathematics education has significantly enhanced the understanding of mathematical concepts and students academic performance. Semiotic representations are effective for teaching mathematics; according to (R Duval 1999 ), a necessary condition for understanding is that individuals can convert one semiotic register into another. Furthermore, (R Duval 1995 ) states that the cognitive activity required in teaching mathematics demands more than other areas, considering that the operations on figures and their corresponding speeches and calculations must be simultaneous. Using figures is essential in teaching mathematics because it allows access to represented mathematical objects, infer properties, and solve problems (Salazar 2018 ). These representations, which include signs, symbols, and representational transformations, facilitate the students comprehension of abstract mathematical objects and their cognitive manipulation, which contributes to significative learning, such as found(Caligaris et al. 2019 ) in this work related to learning of Calculus, where suggests the improvement of math skills focusing on natural, graphic, and symbolic registers. Semiotic complexity is behind the difficulties in learning mathematics, and the analysis of mathematical productions demands semiotic analysis tools adapted to the cognitive processes mobilized in all mathematical activity (R Duval 1995 ; R Duval 1999 ). Regarding the mathematical activity(Giaquinto 2005 ) this is necessarily done in a representation context since there is no other way to access the object except through its representation. Therefore, semiotic representations are considered a means to externalize mental representations for communicative purposes. They play a fundamental role in the development of mental representations, the execution of different cognitive functions, and the production of knowledge (Salazar 2018 ). Several studies(Hitt 1998 ; Ledesma 2011 ; M. Burgos et al. 2021 ; María Burgos et al. 2021 ) mention the importance of semiotic representations as a key to understanding and addressing the challenges of acquiring the mathematical concepts of calculus and precalculus. Furthermore, all learning is related to the processes of semiosis and noesis, where semiosis is the apprehension or production of a semiotic representation, and noesis is the conceptual apprehension of an object; thus, noesis is inseparable from semiosis (Ariza 2009b ). Also, according to (Duval, 1993 , 2017 ), the semiotic representations in mathematics allow conceptualization, reasoning, and problem-solving. The different representations foster deep understanding and conceptual learning by reinforcing students' ideas and skills (Ainsworth et al. 1997; Even 1998 ; Winsløw 2003 ). Integrating semiotic representations with other instructional strategies, such as problem-based learning or collaborative projects, can enhance their effectiveness. For example, (Ledesma 2011 ) in their study uses semiotic representations to solve calculus problems, challenges, and simulations. For instance, when students use semiotic representations to explore and solve real-world problems collaboratively, they engage more deeply with the material, applying theoretical knowledge in practical contexts (Moyer-Packenham et al., 2022 ). However, implementing semiotic representations could be a challenge, especially for teachers without training in semiotic strategies or how best to integrate them into their teaching practices. According to (Iori 2018 ), the success of semiotic representations in teaching mathematics depends on the ability of the teachers to select the appropriate representations that align with the learning objectives and levels of understanding of the students. Finally, we could mention that it will be a perfect complement of work the combination of the Semiotic Representations with Gamification in order to improve mathematics learning, not only in higher education but at all levels. The reason that we establish that is that these methods could encourage active learning (gamification) and critical thinking (semiotic representations), preparing students for complex problem-solving in real-world scenarios. Also, we understand that implementing these strategies effectively requires overcoming certain challenges, principally because, on the one hand, semiotic representations demand a solid understanding of visually and symbolically conveying mathematical concepts, while gamification requires creativity, technical skills, and, often, access to digital resources. Therefore, for educators, finding the equilibrium and balance could constitute a true challenge. 4 Conclusions The literature review of this work has identified two primary didactic strategies that have garnered significant research attention and demonstrated effectiveness in teaching mathematics: the use of semiotic representations and gamification. The theoretical basis for using semiotic representations in university-level mathematics education is grounded in Duval's theory, which posits that these representations provide an effective framework for analyzing how students and teachers use various forms of representation to solve problems. This approach aims to foster a deep cognitive understanding of mathematical concepts by focusing on the ways in which mathematical ideas are symbolized and interpreted. Gamification, on the other hand, serves as an active teaching-learning strategy that presents mathematics as an engaging and approachable subject. By incorporating game-like elements into the learning process, gamification helps to reduce students' anxiety towards mathematics and promotes a more positive learning experience. But it is important to mention that if we only apply gamification, we run the risk of losing the rigor of the math. In this sense, combining semiotic representations with gamification can create a synergistic effect that optimizes both engagement and comprehension in mathematics education. Semiotic representations facilitate deep cognitive processing, while gamification makes learning more enjoyable and accessible. This integrated approach can enhance students' ability to visualize and conceptualize mathematical ideas, thereby strengthening their analytical skills and understanding of complex concepts. Additionally, it is crucial to create environments that encourage discussion and collaborative knowledge construction, recognizing the teacher's role as a facilitator and guide in the learning process. By strategically implementing semiotic representations and gamification across all educational levels, from higher education to lower levels, educators can offer a compelling approach to enhance both the learning and teaching experiences in mathematics. This comprehensive strategy not only makes learning more enjoyable but also significantly improves students' analytical capabilities and conceptual understanding. Declarations Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. Acknowledgment The Authors acknowledge Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja to support this project. D.C. also acknowledges the support from Universitat Politècnica de València through Assistance Call Doctoral Student Mobility. References Acosta, JL Bacca, SM Baldiris Navarro. 2014. Augmented reality trends in education: a systematic review of research and applications. dugi-doc.udg.eduJL Bacca Acosta, SM Baldiris Navarro, R Fabregat Gesa, S GrafJournal of Educational Technology and Society, 2014, vol. 17, núm. 4, 2014•dugi-doc.udg.edu 17: 1176–3647. Ainsworth, SE, PA Bibby, DJ Wood - Journal of Information, and undefined 1997. 1997. Information technology and multiple representations: New opportunities–new problems. Taylor & FrancisSE Ainsworth, PA Bibby, DJ WoodJournal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 1997•Taylor & Francis 6: 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759399700200006. AlAli, Rommel, Yousef Wardat, and Mohammed Al-Qahtani. 2023. SWOM strategy and influence of its using on developing mathematical thinking skills and on metacognitive thinking among gifted tenth-grade students. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 19. Modestum: em2238. https://doi.org/10.29333/EJMSTE/12994. Alneyadi, Saif, and Yousef Wardat. 2023. ChatGPT: Revolutionizing student achievement in the electronic magnetism unit for eleventh-grade students in Emirates schools. Contemporary Educational Technology 15. Bastas: ep448. https://doi.org/10.30935/CEDTECH/13417. Ariza, M. 2009a. Noesis, semiosis y matemáticas. Mathesis 4: 203–220. Ariza, M. 2009b. Noesis, semiosis y matemáticas. Bada, SO, and S Olusegun. 2015. Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education 5: 66–70. Behl, A, N Jayawardena, V Pereira, N Islam, M Del Giudice, and J Choudrie. 2022. Gamification and e-learning for young learners: A systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis, and future research agenda. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 176: 121445. Belbase, Shashidhar, Bhesh Raj Mainali, Wandee Kasemsukpipat, Hassan Tairab, Munkhjargal Gochoo, and Adeeb Jarrah. 2021. At the dawn of science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) education: Prospects, priorities, processes, and problems. Taylor & FrancisS Belbase, BR Mainali, W Kasemsukpipat, H Tairab, M Gochoo, A JarrahInternational Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 2022•Taylor & Francis 2022. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 2919–2955. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1922943. Bennani, S, … A Maalel - Computer Applications in, and undefined 2022. 2021. Adaptive gamification in E‐learning: A literature review and future challenges. Wiley Online LibraryS Bennani, A Maalel, H Ben GhezalaComputer Applications in Engineering Education, 2022•Wiley Online Library 30. John Wiley and Sons Inc: 628–642. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22477. Bennani, Souha, Ahmed Maalel, and Henda Ben Ghezala. 2022. Adaptive gamification in E-learning: A literature review and future challenges. Computer Applications in Engineering Education 30. John Wiley and Sons Inc: 628–642. https://doi.org/10.1002/CAE.22477. Bishara, S. 2018. Active and traditional teaching, self-image, and motivation in learning math among pupils with learning disabilities. Cogent Education 5. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 1436123. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1436123. Borba, Marcelo C., Petek Askar, Johann Engelbrecht, George Gadanidis, Salvador Llinares, and Mario Sánchez Aguilar. 2016. Blended learning, e-learning and mobile learning in mathematics education. ZDM - Mathematics Education 48. Springer Verlag: 589–610. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11858-016-0798-4. Bouchrika, Imed, Nouzha Harrati, Vanissa Wanick, and Gary Wills. 2021. Exploring the impact of gamification on student engagement and involvement with e-learning systems. Interactive Learning Environments 29. Routledge: 1244–1257. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1623267. Bouck, Emily C. - Author details - Scopus. 2021. Scopus . Bouck, Emily C., Sara Flanagan, Bridget Miller, and Laura Bassette. 2012. Technology in Action. Journal of Special Education Technology 27. SAGE Publications Inc.: 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341202700404. te Braak, Petrus, Filip Van Droogenbroeck, Joeri Minnen, Theun Pieter van Tienoven, and Ignace Glorieux. 2022. Teachers’ working time from time-use data: Consequences of the invalidity of survey questions for teachers, researchers, and policy. Teaching and Teacher Education 109. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TATE.2021.103536. Brock, Cynthia, Vassiliki Zygouris-Coe, Kate Welsh, Kate Kniss, and Andrea Hayden. 2020. Engaging in Disciplinary Literacy Instruction: A Review of Read, Write, Inquire: Disciplinary Literacy in Grades 6–12. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy 64. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd: 114–118. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.1075. Brozo, WG, S Crain - The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational, and undefined 2018. 2017. Writing in math: A disciplinary literacy approach. Taylor & FrancisWG Brozo, S CrainThe Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 2018•Taylor & Francis 91. Informa UK Limited: 7–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2017.1342435. Buckley, P, E Doyle - Interactive learning environments, and undefined 2016. 2014. Gamification and student motivation. Taylor & FrancisP Buckley, E DoyleInteractive learning environments, 2016•Taylor & Francis 24. Routledge: 1162–1175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.964263. Burgos, M., S. Bueno, O. Pérez, and J.D. Godino. 2021. Onto-semiotic complexity of the Definite Integral: Implications for teaching and learning Calculus. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education 10: 4–40. Burgos, María, Seydel Bueno, Olga Pérez, and Juan D. Godino. 2021. Onto-semiotic complexity of the Definite Integral. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education 10. Hipatia Press: 4–40. https://doi.org/10.17583/REDIMAT.2021.6778. Caligaris, MG, ME Schivo, MR Romiti - International Journal of Learning, and undefined 2019. 2019. Communication competence in mathematics: Analysis of the evolution of calculus student skills throughout their freshmen year. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research 18: 49–62. Castillo, Darwin, Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan, and María José Rodríguez-Álvarez. 2021. Mr images, brain lesions, and deep learning. Applied Sciences (Switzerland) 11. MDPI AG: 1–41. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11041675. Chapman, Jared R., and Peter J. Rich. 2018. Does educational gamification improve students’ motivation? If so, which game elements work best? Journal of Education for Business 93. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 314–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2018.1490687. Chinna, Suresh, and Mahammad Ali Sunkesula. 2023. Jigsaw method: Addressing the learning loss in mathematics among secondary school students due to COVID-19 pandemic. Nonlinear Studies 30: 405–419. DiStefano, Michela, Bronwyn O’Brien, Andie Storozuk, Gerardo Ramirez, and Erin A. Maloney. 2020. Exploring math anxious parents’ emotional experience surrounding math homework-help. International Journal of Educational Research 99. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJER.2019.101526. Duval, R. 1993. Registres de représentation sémiotique et fonctionnement cognitif de la pensée. Strasbourg 5. Duval, R. 1995. Sémiosis et pensée humaine: registres sémiotiques et apprentissages intellectuels. Duval, R. 1999. Representation, Vision and Visualization: Cognitive Functions in Mathematical Thinking. Basic Issues for Learning. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education ERIC. Duval, Raymond. 1999. Representation, Vision and Visualization: Cognitive Functions in Mathematical Thinking. Basic Issues for Learning. Duval, Raymond. 2006. A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics 61. Springer: 103–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10649-006-0400-Z/METRICS. Duval, Raymond. 2017. Mathematical Activity and the Transformations of Semiotic Representations. Understanding the Mathematical Way of Thinking – The Registers of Semiotic Representations . Springer International Publishing: 21–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56910-9_2. Eck, N Van, L Waltman - scientometrics, and undefined 2010. 2010. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. akjournals.comN Van Eck, L Waltmanscientometrics, 2010•akjournals.com 84. Springer Netherlands: 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3. Van Eck, Nées Jan, and Ludo Waltman. 2009. How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well-known similarity measures. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60: 1635–1651. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.21075. van Eck, Nees Jan, and Ludo Waltman. 2014a. Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. Measuring Scholarly Impact . Springer International Publishing: 285–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13. van Eck, Nees Jan, and Ludo Waltman. 2014b. Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. In Measuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice , ed. Ying Ding, Ronald Rousseau, and Dietmar Wolfram, 285–320. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13. Ersozlu, Z, and M Karakus. 2019. Mathematics anxiety: Mapping the literature by bibliometric analysis. ournal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 15: 1673. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/102441. Even, Ruhama. 1998. Factors involved in linking representations of functions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 17. Elsevier Inc.: 105–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(99)80063-7. Faghihi, U., A. Brautigam, K. Jorgenson, D. Martin, A. Brown, E. Measures, and S. Maldonado-Bouchard. 2014. How gamification applies for educational purpose specially with college algebra. Procedia Computer Science 41: 182–187. Faghihi, Usef, Donald Aguilar, David Chatman, Nicholas Gautier, Jeffrey Gholson, Justin Gholson, Melvin Lipka, Robert Dill, Philippe Fournier-Viger, and Sioui Maldonado-Bouchard. 2017. How to apply gamification techniques to design a gaming environment for algebra concepts. E-Learning, E-Education, and Online Training: Third International Conference, eLEOT 2016, Dublin, Ireland, August 31–September 2, 2016, Revised Selected Papers -Springer 180. Springer Verlag: 62–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49625-2_8. Finck Brandt, Celia, Ana Lúcia, Pereira Baccon, C F Brandt, and A L P Baccon. 2015. The Teaching and Learning of Equations: Problems and Possibilities during the Transition from High School to Higher Education. Creative Education 6. Scientific Research Publishing: 961–975. https://doi.org/10.4236/CE.2015.610098. Fowler, Allan. 2016. Informal STEM learning in game jams, ackathons and game creation events. Proceedings of the International Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events, GJH and GC 2016 . Association for Computing Machinery, Inc: 38–41. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897167.2897179. Giaquinto, M. 2005. Mathematical Activity. Visualization, explanation and reasoning styles in mathematics. Mancosu, O. and Jørgensen, K.F. and Pedersen, S.A., (eds.). Synthese Library. Springer, New York, USA. 327. Springer Science and Business Media B.V.: 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3335-4_5. Güner, Pınar, and Semirhan Gökçe. 2021. Monitoring the nomological network of number sense studies. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 52. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 580–608. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1895343. Hafzah, Rini, Abdul Rahim, Siti Hasnah Tanalol, Rozita Ismail, Aslina Baharum, Emelia Abdul Rahim, Noorsidi Aizuddin, and Mat Noor. 2019. Development of Gamification Linear Algebra Application Using Storytelling. 2019 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC). IEEE : 133–137. Hancock, Emilie, and Gulden Karakok. 2021. Supporting the Development of Process-Focused Metacognition During Problem-Solving. PRIMUS 31. Bellwether Publishing, Ltd.: 837–854. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2020.1772914. Hanif Batubara, Ismail, Sahat Saragih, Edi Syahputra, Dian Armanto, Indah Purnama Sari, Baihaqi Siddik Lubis, Eko Febri, and Syahputra Siregar. 2022. Mapping research developments on mathematics communication: bibliometric study by VosViewer. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan 14: 2637–2648. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v14i1.925. Hassan, Muhammad Awais, Ume Habiba, Fiaz Majeed, and Muhammad Shoaib. 2021. Adaptive gamification in e-learning based on students’ learning styles. Interactive Learning Environments 29. Routledge: 545–565. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1588745. Hitt, F. 1998. The role of the semiotic representations in the learning of mathematics. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics 18: 23–28. Holmes, Vicki Lynn, and Yooyeun Hwang. 2016. Exploring the effects of project-based learning in secondary mathematics education. Journal of Educational Research 109. Routledge: 449–463. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.979911. Hoyles, Celia, and Richard Noss. 2003. What can digital technologies take from and bring to research in mathematics education? Second International Handbook of Mathematics Education . Springer Netherlands: 323–349. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0273-8_11. Husain, Anas, Al-Shayeb Abdelhafez Qasem, and Faye Saleem Khazalah. 2023. Students’ Achievement in a Flipped Database Management Course: The Impact of Flow Theory Gamification Elements. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research 22. Informing Science Institute: 409–428. https://doi.org/10.28945/5206. Hutton, Brian, Ferrán Catalá-López, and David Moher. 2016. The PRISMA statement extension for systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analysis: PRISMA-NMA. Medicina Clínica (English Edition) 147. Elsevier BV: 262–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MEDCLE.2016.10.003. Hwang, Gwo-Jen, Yun-Fang Tu, G.-J ; Hwang, and Y.-F Tu. 2021a. Roles and Research Trends of Artificial Intelligence in Mathematics Education: A Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. Mathematics 2021, 9. Mathematics 9: 584. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9060584. Hwang, Gwo-Jen, Yun-Fang Tu, G.-J ; Hwang, and Y.-F Tu. 2021b. Roles and Research Trends of Artificial Intelligence in Mathematics Education: A Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. Mathematics 2021, Vol. 9, Page 584 9. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute: 584. https://doi.org/10.3390/MATH9060584. Iliescu, Andra Nicoleta. 2021. Conceptual Atlas of the Knowmad Literature: Visual Mapping with VOSviewer. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy 9. Walter de Gruyter GmbH: 379–392. https://doi.org/10.2478/MDKE-2021-0025. Iori, Maura. 2018. Teachers’ awareness of the semio-cognitive dimension of learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics 98. Springer Netherlands: 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10649-018-9808-5/FIGURES/4. Jagušt, T, I Botički, and HJ So. 2018. Examining competitive, collaborative and adaptive gamification in young learners’ math learning. Computers & education 125: 444–457. Jarrah, Adeeb M., Yousef Wardat, and Patricia Fidalgo. 2023. Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism: What does the literature say? Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies 13. Bastas: e202346. https://doi.org/10.30935/OJCMT/13572. Jiménez, Yuliana. 2018. Estrategias lúdicas para la enseñanza-aprendizaje de la matemática a nivel superior. López-García, C., & Manso, J. (Eds.), Transforming education for a changing world. Eindhoven, NL: Adaya Press . Adaya Press: 170–179. https://doi.org/10.58909/ad18353224. Jiménez, Yuliana, and Darwin Castillo. 2017. Educación de calidad mediante la estrategia Design Thinking. In Conference Proceedings EDUNOVATIC 2017 , ed. REDINE, 472–481. Jiménez-Gaona, Y., I. Carrillo-Mayenquer, DC. Castillo-Malla, and Y. Ludeña González. 2020. Immersive and Collaborative learning: an educational resource for mathematical training in medicine. 2020 XV Conferencia Latinoamericana de Tecnologias de Aprendizaje (LACLO) IEEE : 1–7. Jiménez-Gaona, Yuliana, José Delgado-Ramón, and Darwin P. Castillo-Malla . 2019. Aprendizaje de la matemática basado en el contexto de las ciencias: Mathematics learning based on the science context. Revista Electrónica Calidad en la Educación Superior 10. Universidad Estatal a Distancia: 53–73. https://doi.org/10.22458/CAES.V10I2.2603. Jiménez-Hernández, Eréndira M., Hanna Oktaba, Frida Díaz-Barriga, and Mario Piattini. 2020. Using web-based gamified software to learn Boolean algebra simplification in a blended learning setting. Computer Applications in Engineering Education 28. John Wiley and Sons Inc: 1591–1611. https://doi.org/10.1002/CAE.22335. Khan, Khalid S, Regina Kunz, Jos Kleijnen, and Gerd Antes. 2003. Five Steps to Conducting a Systematic Review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 96. SAGE Publications: 118–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680309600304. Kitchenham, B. 2004. Procedures for performing systematic reviews. Keele, UK, Keele University 33: 1–26. Lakshminarayanan, Vasudevan, and Annette McBride. 2015. The use of high technology in STEM education. spiedigitallibrary.orgV Lakshminarayanan, AC McBrideEducation and Training in Optics and Photonics: ETOP 2015, 2015•spiedigitallibrary.org 9793. Ledesma, EFR. 2011. Representation registers in the solution of calculus problems. Creative Education 2: 270. Lee, Jung Yeop, Chong Un Pyon, and Jiyoung Woo. 2023. Digital Twin for Math Education: A Study on the Utilization of Games and Gamification for University Mathematics Education. Electronics 2023, Vol. 12, Page 3207 12. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute: 3207. https://doi.org/10.3390/ELECTRONICS12153207. Lo, CC, MH Hsieh, HH Lin, and HH Hung. 2021. Influences of flipped teaching in electronics courses on students’ learning effectiveness and strategies. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 18: 9748. Lo, Chung Kwan, and Khe Foon Hew. 2020. A comparison of flipped learning with gamification, traditional learning, and online independent study: the effects on students’ mathematics achievement and cognitive engagement. Interactive Learning Environments 28. Routledge: 464–481. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1541910. Lubis, F. F., Y. Rosmansyah, and S. H. Supangkat. 2014. Math workout series: Enhancing learning application with gamification. 2014 International Conference on Information Technology Systems and Innovation (ICITSI).IEEE : 290–294. Maarif, Samsul, Khoerul Umam, Joko Soebagyo, and Trisna Roy Pradipta. 2022. Critical review on mathematics virtual classroom practice in private university. International Journal of Nonlinear Analysis and Applications 13. Semnan University: 975–982. https://doi.org/10.22075/IJNAA.2022.5616. McCray, J, JQ Chen - North American Chapter of the International Group for, and undefined 2013. 2004. Innovation in Early Math Education: The Whole Teacher Approach to Professional Development. ERICJ McCray, JQ ChenNorth American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of, 2013•ERIC . Desimone. Meij, Erik, Anneke Smits, and Martijn Meeter. 2022. How and why learning theories are taught in current Dutch teacher education programs. Identifying a gap between paradigm and reality in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education 109. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TATE.2021.103537. Meyer, Dan. 2023. Dan Meyer: “Maths has an obvious perception problem among students” | The UNESCO Courier. UNESCO Courier . Milovanović, Ilija. 2020. Math anxiety, math achievement and math motivation in high school students: Gender effects. Croatian Journal of Education 22. FACTEACHEREDUCATION: 175–206. https://doi.org/10.15516/CJE.V22I1.3372. Milovanovic, J., T. Shealy, and A. Katz. 2021. Higher perceived design thinking traits and active learning in design courses motivate engineering students to tackle energy sustainability in their careers. Sustainability 13. Moher, David, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Douglas G. Altman, Gerd Antes, David Atkins, Virginia Barbour, et al. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine 6. Public Library of Science. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PMED.1000097. Morgan, Candia. 2006. What does social semiotics have to offer mathematics education research? Educational Studies in Mathematics 61. Springer: 219–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10649-006-5477-X/METRICS. Moyer-Packenham, Patricia S., Allison L. Roxburgh, Kristy Litster, and Joseph S. Kozlowski. 2022. Relationships Between Semiotic Representational Transformations and Performance Outcomes in Digital Math Games. Technology, Knowledge and Learning 27. Springer Science and Business Media B.V.: 223–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10758-021-09506-5/FIGURES/7. Al Mutawah, Masooma Ali, Masooma Ali, and Al Mutawah. 2015. The Influence of Mathematics Anxiety in Middle and High School Students Math Achievement. International Education Studies 8. Canadian Center of Science and Education. 1120 Finch Avenue West Suite 701-309, Toronto, ON M3J 3H7, Canada. Tel: 416-642-2606 Ext 206; Fax: 416-642-2608; e-mail: [email protected] ; Web site: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/es: 239–252. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n11p239. Pedersen, Mathilde Kjær, Cecilie Carlsen Bach, Rikke Maagaard Gregersen, Ingi Heinesen Højsted, and Uffe Thomas Jankvist. 2021. Mathematical Representation Competency in Relation to Use of Digital Technology and Task Design—A Literature Review. Mathematics 2021, Vol. 9, Page 444 9. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute: 444. https://doi.org/10.3390/MATH9040444. Pedersen, MK, CC Bach, RM Gregersen, IH Højsted - Mathematics, and undefined 2021. 2023. Mathematical representation competency in relation to use of digital technology and task design—a literature review. mdpi.comMK Pedersen, CC Bach, RM Gregersen, IH Højsted, UT JankvistMathematics, 2021•mdpi.com . https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/4/444. Accessed September 20. Pehlivan, Fatma, and Taner Arabacioglu. 2023. The Effect of Gamification on Math Achievement, Motivation, and Learning Strategies in Flipped Classrooms. International Journal of Education and Literacy Studies 11. Australian International Academic Centre: 309–317. https://doi.org/10.7575/AIAC.IJELS.V.11N.4P.309. Perianes-Rodriguez, Antonio, Ludo Waltman, and Nees Jan van Eck. 2016. Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting. Journal of Informetrics 10. Elsevier Ltd: 1178–1195. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2016.10.006. Perignat, E, J Katz-Buonincontro - Thinking skills and creativity, and undefined 2019. 2023. STEAM in practice and research: An integrative literature review. Elsevier . https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187118302190. Accessed November 5. Price, D.D.S. 1976. A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. Journal of the American society for Information science 27: 292–306. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630270505. Prieto-Andreu, Joel Manuel, Juan Diego Gómez-Escalonilla-Torrijos, Elias Said-Hung, Joel Manuel Prieto-Andreu, Juan Diego Gómez-Escalonilla-Torrijos, and Elias Said-Hung. 2022. Gamificación, motivación y rendimiento en educación: Una revisión sistemática. Revista Electrónica Educare 26. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/: 251–273. https://doi.org/10.15359/REE.26-1.14. Rivera, ES, and CLP Garden. 2021. Gamification for student engagement: a framework. Journal of further and higher education 45. Routledge: 999–1012. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1875201. Rodríguez, José L. 2022. Exploring Dynamic Geometry Through Immersive Virtual Reality and Distance Teaching: 343–363. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86909-0_15. Sabri, Z, Y Fakhri, and A. Moumen. 2022. The Effects of Gamification on E-learning Education: Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Model. Statistics, Optimization & Information Computing 10. Academic Press: 75–92. https://doi.org/10.19139/soic-2310-5070-1115. Salazar, Jesus Victoria Flores. 2018. Semiotic Representations: A Study of Dynamic Figural Register. Signs of Signification: Semiotics in Mathematics Education Research : 217–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70287-2_12. Saleem, Awaz Naaman, Narmin Mohammed Noori, and Fezile Ozdamli. 2022. Gamification Applications in E-learning: A Literature Review. Technology, Knowledge and Learning 27. Springer Science and Business Media B.V.: 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10758-020-09487-X. Samper, J De Zubiría. 2006. Los modelos pedagógicos: hacia una pedagogía dialogante. Selmer, S, and U Kale. 2013. Teaching mathematics through problem solving. Innovación educativa 13(62): 45–59. Sobrino-Duque, Raimel, Noelia Martínez-Rojo, Juan Manuel Carrillo-de-Gea, Juan José López-Jiménez, Joaquín Nicolás, and José Luis Fernández-Alemán. 2022. Evaluating a gamification proposal for learning usability heuristics: Heureka. International Journal of Human Computer Studies 161. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJHCS.2022.102774. Strømgren, Børge, Cathrine Berg-Mortensen, and Linn Tangen. 2014. The Use of Precision Teaching to Teach Basic Math Facts. European Journal of Behavior Analysis 15. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/15021149.2014.11434723. Sullivan, Peter. 2011. Teaching mathematics: Using research-informed strategies. Tarouco, L, B Gorziza, Y. Corrêa, É. M. Amaral, and T. Müller. 2013. Virtual laboratory for teaching Calculus: An immersive experience. 2013 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) : 774–781. Tashtoush, Mohammad A., Rommel AlAli, Yousef Wardat, Nedal Alshraifin, and Hasan Toubat. 2023. The Impact of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)-Based Education on the Mathematics Academic Enthusiasm. Journal of Educational and Social Research 13. Richtmann Publishing Ltd: 284–293. https://doi.org/10.36941/JESR-2023-0077. Tashtoush, Mohammad A., Yousef A. Wardat, and Abdelkader M. Elsayed. 2023. Mathematics Distance Learning and Learning Loss During COVID-19 Pandemic: Teachers’ Perspectives. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice 23. North American Business Press: 162–174. https://doi.org/10.33423/JHETP.V23I5.5933. Torres-Carrión, Pablo, Carina González-González, César Bernal-Bravo, and Alfonso Infante-Moro. 2019. Gesture-based children computer interaction for inclusive education: A systematic literature review. Communications in Computer and Information Science 895. Springer Verlag: 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05532-5_10. Uzun, Selcen Çalik, and Selahattin Arslan. 2009. Semiotic representations skills of prospective elementary teachers related to mathematical concepts. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 1: 741–745. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SBSPRO.2009.01.130. Veith, Joaquin Marc, Meeri Liisa Beste, Marco Kindervater, Michel Krause, Michael Straulino, Franziska Greinert, and Philipp Bitzenbauer. 2023. Mathematics education research on algebra over the last two decades: quo vadis? Frontiers in Education 8. Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/FEDUC.2023.1211920/FULL. Verma, R, V Lobos-Ossandón, J.M. Mérigo, C. Cancino, and J. Sienz. 2021. Forty years of applied mathematical modelling: A bibliometric study. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 89: 1177–1197. Vicente Torres-Carrion, Pablo, Germania Rocio Rodriguez, Pablo Vicente, and Carina Soledad. 2018a. Methodology for systematic literature review applied to engineering and education. ieeexplore.ieee.orgPV Torres-Carrión, CS González-González, S Aciar, G Rodríguez-Morales2018 IEEE Global engineering education conference (EDUCON), 2018•ieeexplore.ieee.org . https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363388. Vicente Torres-Carrion, Pablo, Germania Rocio Rodriguez, Pablo Vicente, and Carina Soledad. 2018b. Methodology for systematic literature review applied to engineering and education. ieeexplore.ieee.orgPV Torres-Carrión, CS González-González, S Aciar, G Rodríguez-Morales2018 IEEE Global engineering education conference (EDUCON), 2018•ieeexplore.ieee.org 2018-April. IEEE Computer Society: 1364–1373. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363388. Villacís Macías, C., C. Zea Silva, S. Campuzano Rodríguez, and M. Chifla Villón. 2022. Aprendizaje basado en proyectos y la gamificación para generar el aprendizaje activo en los estudiantes. Revista Ciencia UNEMI 15: 35–43. https://doi.org/10.29076/issn.2528-7737vol15iss39.2022pp35-43p. Vintere, Anna, and Baiba Briede. 2019. Methodical background of competence-based mathematics education for students of information technologies specialties. Engineering for Rural Development 18. Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies: 1947–1953. https://doi.org/10.22616/ERDEV2019.18.N489. Vivanco-Galván, Oscar Amable, Darwin Castillo-Malla, and Yuliana Jiménez-Gaona. 2018. HACKATHON multidisciplinario: fortalecimiento del aprendizaje basado en proyectos. 1 9: 119–135. https://doi.org/10.22458/caes.v9i1.1893. Wang, L, H Wang, Y Huang, B Yan, … Z Chang - European journal of, and undefined 2022. 2022. Trends in the application of deep learning networks in medical image analysis: Evolution between 2012 and 2020. European journal of radiology 146: 110069. Wardat, Yousef, Rommel Alali, Adeeb M. Jarrah, and Mohammed Alzyoudi. 2023. Neutrosophic Theory Framework for Building Mathematics Teachers Capacity in Assessment of High School Students in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Neutrosophic Science 21. American Scientific Publishing Group (ASPG): 33–49. https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.210103. Wardat, Yousef, Mohammad A. Tashtoush, Rommel AlAli, and Adeeb M. Jarrah. 2023. ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 19. Modestum: em2286. https://doi.org/10.29333/EJMSTE/13272. Webb, Helena, Louise Bezuidenhout, Jason R.C. Nurse, and Marina Jirotka. 2019. Lab hackathons to overcome laboratory equipment shortages in Africa: Opportunities and challenges. Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings . Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3299063. Winsløw, Carl. 2003. Semiotic and discursive variables in cas-based didactical engineering. Educational Studies in Mathematics 52: 271–288. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024201714126. Workman, Joseph. 2023. Income inequality and student achievement: trends among US States (1992–2019). Educational Review 75. Routledge: 871–893. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.1974349. Y ABD ALGANI. 2019. Innovative ways to teach mathematics: are they employed in schools? Journal of Computer and Education Research 7. Journal of Computer and Education Research: 496–514. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.612199. Yarmohammadian, Mohammad, Sanaz Monsef, Shaghayegh Javanmard, Youseph Yazdi, and Mostafa Amini-Rarani. 2021. The role of hackathon in education: Can hackathon improve health and medical education? Journal of Education and Health Promotion 10. Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications. https://doi.org/10.4103/JEHP.JEHP_1183_20. Zakariya, Yusuf F., and Yousef Wardat. 2023. Job satisfaction of mathematics teachers: an empirical investigation to quantify the contributions of teacher self-efficacy and teacher motivation to teach. Mathematics Education Research Journal . Springer Science and Business Media B.V.: 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13394-023-00475-9/FIGURES/4. Zukin, Sharon, and Max Papadantonakis. 2017. Hackathons as co-optation ritual: Socializing workers and institutionalizing innovation in the “new” economy. Research in the Sociology of Work 31. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.: 157–181. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0277-283320170000031005/FULL/XM Table Table 3 is available in the Supplementary Files section Additional Declarations The authors declare no competing interests. Supplementary Files Table3.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4708199","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Systematic Review","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":324419664,"identity":"d4702524-d0f2-44ba-a395-c259da0d2042","order_by":0,"name":"Darwin Castillo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Darwin","middleName":"","lastName":"Castillo","suffix":""},{"id":324419665,"identity":"ccbaf362-ed3e-43c7-b384-55f29a2e400b","order_by":1,"name":"Javier Carrión","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Javier","middleName":"","lastName":"Carrión","suffix":""},{"id":324419666,"identity":"89f6b5d6-2eec-4b3f-8bec-749ab17e3e93","order_by":2,"name":"Cristian Chamba","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Cristian","middleName":"","lastName":"Chamba","suffix":""},{"id":324419667,"identity":"5134547c-fef2-42a5-ad91-0a3cdca60ca6","order_by":3,"name":"Yuliana Jiménez","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Yuliana","middleName":"","lastName":"Jiménez","suffix":""},{"id":324419668,"identity":"18d010ea-9b56-4772-b4e6-8c71a60a0acd","order_by":4,"name":"María José Rodríguez-Álvarez","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universitat Politécnica de Valencia","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"María","middleName":"José","lastName":"Rodríguez-Álvarez","suffix":""},{"id":324419669,"identity":"54a52cbd-9ac7-445d-af21-ecf27cd10c56","order_by":5,"name":"Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Waterloo","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Vasudevan","middleName":"","lastName":"Lakshminarayanan","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-07-09 00:22:57","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":{"humanSubjects":false,"vertebrateSubjects":false,"conflictsOfInterestStatement":false,"humanSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false,"humanSubjectConsent":false,"humanSubjectClinicalTrial":false,"humanSubjectCaseReport":false,"vertebrateSubjectEthicalGuidelines":false},"doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4708199/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4708199/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":59980674,"identity":"dc372c12-5bc5-4d35-8484-d7f26a156a7c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 06:05:54","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":215787,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eFlowchart of the Systematic Review Methodology\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/87b88bc887200842f3a50d1e.png"},{"id":59979722,"identity":"bf628547-bf66-4938-bc21-5708b48f2137","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:49:54","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":44638,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eConceptual mindfact (\u003cem\u003ementefacto conceptual\u003c/em\u003e) allows the identification of keywords for a systemic search of the literature in scientific databases (Samper 2006; Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018b).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/75402e22cb37303aa877bb12.png"},{"id":59979713,"identity":"e97170e2-c04b-417b-9102-4b016768d65a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:49:54","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":118442,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003ePreferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram (Moher et al. 2009; Hutton et al. 2016).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/0ab6873e3f5bea67bed78f9f.png"},{"id":59979720,"identity":"1b0cbd91-dd25-4904-ae55-c05bb0b62177","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:49:54","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":101189,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEvolution of the number of publications during the last two decades. We can see that there has been an increase in the trend of research in math education since 2015.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/290d0a8ef55844c5a911b66d.png"},{"id":59980149,"identity":"e66bef41-5f75-4829-93ef-310d6e3cbcf8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:57:54","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":165685,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eTop ten Journals of research publications related to the goals of this work.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/fe29a441c83bd089f20a4f8d.png"},{"id":59980144,"identity":"82678de1-9a5c-4232-9435-1b2dcba79dee","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:57:54","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":37802,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eClassification of the top 15 authors according to the first criterion of search. In the figure, it can be seen that Dr. Bouck Dr. Emily Bouck, from the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Michigan in the United States, has more documents (28) related to the research area of this review.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/4d1946ab6b81e09bab09ae81.png"},{"id":59980148,"identity":"666c69a2-e879-421d-ae5a-d4c68e4a66d9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:57:54","extension":"png","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":274812,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eNetwork of publications related to keywords in global semantic search. In this figure, it can be seen that the words \"teaching\" and \"student\" are the most used.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"7.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/045116402dbe13c7a2b28a3b.png"},{"id":59979717,"identity":"ea7342e2-c2bb-48c1-992e-a7eae2000f9e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:49:54","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":501685,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eWord cloud of the principal words utilized in the abstract of the paper related to Math Education.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"8.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/f7a1bf58f9a912d690b082dd.png"},{"id":59980147,"identity":"16c6cda4-a08f-46fb-ae66-25b0c76e848b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:57:54","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":83190,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eStrategies are found in the document analysis in Table 3. Gamification and semiotic representation are the most used in the research and are applied to improve the skills and comprehension of math learning.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"9.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/e2bb4ca454b1e37c97d0194b.png"},{"id":59980675,"identity":"f36543be-de32-48cc-ae1f-5260669b6545","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 06:05:54","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"Figure 10","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":102786,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eThe distribution of the documents analyzed in this review is (a) by level of education and (b) by country.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"10.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/47a1bf58638877aa0d1976b6.png"},{"id":59981216,"identity":"3c226daa-a6d5-45f0-a8e2-4603fa5a9aff","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 06:13:55","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2395668,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/3d4c26d5-2df1-4435-a978-f73ab61751ab.pdf"},{"id":59979711,"identity":"3b0c2155-e8b8-45b8-802e-a25612afa10a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-07-10 05:49:54","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":397211,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table3.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4708199/v1/90bb0e8a888367cd0378b86f.docx"}],"financialInterests":"The authors declare no competing interests.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eTeaching Math: A Review of Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies in Higher Education\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"1 Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eWhy is math perceived as difficult, even humiliating, by many? This question, posed by educator Dan Meyer on the UNESCO website(Dan Meyer: “Maths has an obvious perception problem among students” | The UNESCO Courier, 2023), challenges the conventional methodologies of mathematics instruction. Meyer argues that traditional teaching methods contribute significantly to the widespread perception of mathematics as an abstract and inaccessible subject reserved only for a select few.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis problem is also reflected in higher levels, where the students don't have enough skills to establish the relationship between the math concepts and the proposes of solutions for real problems. In this context, (Vintere and Briede 2019) manifest the need to develop a methodical framework that includes mathematical competence and skills necessary for professional activities to be developed within a mathematical subject.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOn the same line, several studies conclude that mathematics presents difficulties for middle and higher-education students (Strømgren et al. 2014; Al Mutawah et al. 2015; Milovanović 2020; Workman 2023) principally due to mathematics teachers frequently refraining from incorporating innovative strategies into math lessons despite their benefits due to perceived irrelevance (Brozo et al. 2017). \u0026nbsp;Also, (Vintere and Briede 2019)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWorkman (Workman 2023), in his study about \u003cem\u003eincome inequality and student achievement\u003c/em\u003e, found that income inequality was associated with lower mathematics achievement. In this line, the problem is more frequent, especially in mid and low-income countries, due to a lack of continuous education, where there is a persistent inequality gap to access education, which means people with a stable economy have more opportunities to access better education. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, in most countries, learning math produces anxiety in students (Al Mutawah et al. 2015; Milovanović 2020), and with that, students have deficient mathematical thinking skills. Hence, according to (AlAli et al. 2023; Wardat, Alali, et al. 2023), teachers must foster mathematical thinking skills among learners and emphasize the need for innovative educational approaches to address these gaps.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eActive teaching (Milovanovic et al. 2021), an alternative to traditional teaching \u0026nbsp;(C. K. Lo and Hew 2020; C. Lo et al. 2021), fosters direct student engagement and collaborative learning, as opposed to an exclusively frontal teaching style (Bishara 2018). For example, (Selmer and Kale 2013) in their research focus on Teaching mathematics through PBL, and they suggest that mathematics teachers integrate PBL into their practices to convey meaningful mathematical concepts to students effectively.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA study from (Y ABD ALGANI, 2019) mentioned some innovative ways to teach mathematics, where the main results showed that technology is rarely employed in teaching mathematics. In this line, several studies show innovative strategies related to the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) (Hoyles and Noss 2003; Borba et al. 2016; Tashtoush, AlAli, et al. 2023), Immersive and Collaborative strategies (Vivanco-Galván et al. 2018; Y. Jiménez-Gaona et al. 2020); Science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) (Perignat et al., 2019; Lakshminarayanan and McBride, 2015; Holmes and Hwang, 2016; Belbase et al., 2021); Project-Based Learning (Holmes and Hwang 2016)\u0026nbsp; (PBL), Adaptive learning, and Learning in the metaverse (Selmer and Kale 2013; Tarouco et al. 2013; Y ABD ALGANI 2019; Rodríguez 2022; Villacís Macías et al. 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, studies such as those proposed by(Brock et al. 2020) (Brock et al., 2020) raise the bar on rigor and encourage students to solve problems creatively while gaining valuable data on their growth as thinkers and mathematicians (Hancock and Karakok 2021). So, here is also the importance of research in the semiotic representations, which, according to (Duval, 2006, 2017), produce a deep comprehension in learning abstract mathematic objects.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTherefore, it is essential to incentivize and create the abilities and capabilities of students to understand the need for mathematics in our lives; e.g., these days, there are also different projects concerning the use of the ChatGPT (Alneyadi and Wardat 2023; Jarrah et al. 2023; Wardat, Tashtoush, et al. 2023), that mentions and show in their works how this AI chatbot could constitute an efficient tool that allows students to gain abilities to apply math in authentic contexts, and also for teachers help to delineate a better way to innovate in their classes. By leveraging AI tools like ChatGPT, educators can personalize learning experiences, tailoring content to individual student needs and promoting deeper conceptual understanding(Alneyadi and Wardat 2023).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this sense, teaching and learning mathematics constitutes a serious challenge if educators want to transmit their passion for numbers and get their applications due principally to the abstract nature of the content subject. In this line, several studies (Tashtoush, Wardat, et al. 2023; Tashtoush, AlAli, et al. 2023; Zakariya and Wardat 2023) also contemplate the teachers' point of view and emphasize the importance of providing training programs to help teachers deal with the challenges of learning loss. They also suggest further research in different contexts.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNowadays, higher education institutions seek teaching strategies that affect academic performance and impact students' development to achieve a solid professional profile (McCray et al. 2004; Sullivan 2011).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn addressing the pivotal concern of how mathematics can be made more appealing to students in higher education, this paper aims to explore groundbreaking didactic strategies through a literature review. This review aims to explore and identify the most effective didactic strategies that can be employed to optimize teaching and learning outcomes in mathematics within the higher education context (university-undergraduate students). The investigation analyzes pedagogical practices and their impact on educational outcomes.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTo identify recent findings in mathematics educational approaches, we conducted a careful search through the specialized literature between 2001 and 2021 in several scientific databases, including Taylor \u0026amp; Francis, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), ScienceDirect, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar, MDPI.\u0026nbsp;To select and identify the best documents concerning the\u0026nbsp;didactic mathematics teaching strategies, the\u0026nbsp;Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) (Moher et al. 2009; Hutton et al. 2016) method and the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) methodology proposed by Torres-Carrion et al. (Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018a; Torres-Carrión et al. 2019), an adapted method from Kitchenham (Kitchenham 2004) and Bacca-Acosta et al. (Acosta et al. 2014). \u0026nbsp;Also, the VOSviewer software version 1.6.15 was used\u0026nbsp;for analysis to construct and display bibliometric maps to show the principal keywords related to the publications on the global semantic search.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFinally, the principal findings concerning the main strategies found through this literature review were described and discussed: \u003cem\u003esemiotic representations and gamification\u003c/em\u003e. The following research question was used as the guidelines for this article:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWhat are the most effective didactic strategies for achieving optimal mathematics teaching and learning outcomes in higher education?\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis paper is organized as follows: Section 2 outlines the methodology and the literature review selection criteria. Section 3 summarizes and discusses the most pertinent findings and results from the systematic literature review, and finally, Section 4 gives the principal conclusions and recommendations derived from the results.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2 Materials and methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis work employs the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) methodology proposed by Torres-Carrion et al. (Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018a; Torres-Carri\u0026oacute;n et al. 2019), an adapted method from Kitchenham (Kitchenham 2004) and Bacca-Acosta et al. (Acosta et al. 2014). \u0026nbsp;To select the articles and documents according to the central point of this research, the recommendations of Khan et al.(Khan et al. 2003) and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) [25, 26] were used.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFigure 1 is a detailed description of the methodology that facilitated the achievement of the research objectives.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe semantic structure was used to search for specialized and specific documents in different bibliographic databases, e.g., Scopus,\u0026nbsp;Web of Science (WOS), Science Direct, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar. The scientific papers presented in this work were drawn from peer-reviewed articles published between 2001 and 2021.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe next sections detail the process to get the best semantic global structure for adequately identifying, screening, and filtering the documents according to our principal goals and the PRISMA guidelines.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.1\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Identification\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFocusing on the real theoretical context of the investigation and our research question is essential to conduct an adequate search. In this case, we try to search literature related to answering the following items and a central research question indicated above in the introduction section.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the research question and the following criteria, a conceptual map has been developed to organize the key terms from the thesaurus for the subsequent search of specific literature related to the research topic.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Aim of the study: didactic strategies for effective and optimal mathematics teaching and learning outcomes in higher education.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Methods: ICTS, PBL, STEAM, gamification, semiotic representations, cooperating.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Results: effective strategies for teaching and learning math\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Conclusions: challenges, problems, future guidelines.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.2\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;Conceptual mindfact\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe conceptual framework used in this work allows us to focus and restrict the subject to didactic strategies for teaching mathematics. The method proposed by Torres-Carri\u0026oacute;n et al. (Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018b), called \u0026ldquo;conceptual mind fact\u0026rdquo; (\u003cem\u003ementefacto conceptual\u003c/em\u003e), helped to organize the scientific thesaurus keywords for the research topic.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this project, the \u003cem\u003econceptual mindfact\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003ebegan with the teaching approach, teaching method, teaching technique, and teaching strategies in math (see Figure 3). Then, it was complemented with the keywords Mathematics teaching, Didactics of Mathematics, Mathematics education, Teaching mathematics, calculus teaching, and Algebra teaching. Finally, the terms relating, cooperating, experiencing, applying, and transferring were also included. The terms related to engineering and psychology were excluded.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.3 \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Conducting the Review\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOnce done, the conceptual mind and identified the keywords concerning the research theme. The next step is to organize a semantic search structure that allows us to get the documents for the review analysis. Table 1 presents the semantic search structure (Vicente Torres-Carrion et al. 2018b), such as entering specific search literature (documents) in scientific databases.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe first level represents the teaching search; the second corresponds to the keyword Mathematics. The third level is relevant for applying the strategy (strategy) used for analyzing scientific documents. The fourth level is the search for global semantic structure.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Keywords used in the search for global semantic structures.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"right\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"100%\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"19.19191919191919%\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTeaching\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"80.8080808080808%\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e((teaching AND (approach AND method AND technique ) ) \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; strateg* )\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"19.19191919191919%\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMathematics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"80.8080808080808%\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(((math*) AND (relating \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; OR \u0026nbsp;cooperating \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; experiencing \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp;applying \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; OR \u0026nbsp;transferring ) ) \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; mathematics \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;teaching \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; OR \u0026nbsp;didactics \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; of \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;mathematics \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; OR \u0026nbsp;didactics \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; of \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;mathematics \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; OR \u0026nbsp;teaching \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; mathematics \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp;calculus \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; AND \u0026nbsp;teaching \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; algebra \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;teaching ) )\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"19.19191919191919%\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStrategy\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"80.8080808080808%\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e(Relating AND Cooperating AND Experiencing AND Appying AND Transfering )\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"19.19191919191919%\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKey words for semantic structure search in database\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd width=\"80.8080808080808%\" valign=\"top\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( ( teaching \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; AND \u0026nbsp;( approach \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; method \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;technique ) ) \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; strateg* ) \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;( ( ( math* ) \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; ( relating \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp;cooperating \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; OR \u0026nbsp;experiencing \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; applying \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp;transfering ) ) \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; mathematics \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;teaching \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; OR \u0026nbsp;didactics \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; of \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;mathematics \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; OR \u0026nbsp;teaching \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; mathematics \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp;calculus \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; AND \u0026nbsp;teaching \u0026nbsp;OR \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; algebra \u0026nbsp;AND \u0026nbsp;teaching ) )\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe symbol (*) represents a wildcard to help search a word with multiple spelling variations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.4 \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; PRISMA\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eIdentification:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eAs mentioned above, the global semantic structure used allows us (see Table 1) to identify 525 documents through a global search, especially on Scopus (427 documents)\u0026nbsp;and Web of Science (WoS) (98 documents). We used the exact global search on other databases, e.g., Google Scholar, but we generally got the same documents.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTherefore, only the 525 documents selected by Scopus and WoS were selected. After the global search of the 525 documents, 160 were excluded because they were duplicated.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eScreening:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter removing duplicates, 360 articles were screened by their titles and abstracts according to the following criteria:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e- Research articles and reviews are included\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e- Articles about higher education\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e- Articles concerning Math teaching\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter the screening, 255 documents were discarded, and 105 documents went to the next eligibility and inclusion phase.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEligibility and Included:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThose 105 documents were screened by text, considering that the articles comply with the criteria aim of this study. In this case, the criteria were:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Aim of the study: didactic strategies for effective and optimal mathematics teaching and learning outcomes in higher education.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Methods: ICTS, PBL, STEAM, gamification, semiotic representations, cooperating.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Results: effective strategies for teaching and learning math\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026middot;\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Conclusions: challenges, problems, future guidelines.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAccording to these criteria, only 37 documents related to the items described above were included in a more detailed analysis (see results and discussions).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e2.5 \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; Maps in VOSviewer:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVOS viewer (N. Van Eck et al. 2010) is a software tool designed by the Leiden University Center for Science and Technology Studies for building and visualizing bibliometric networks (Nees Jan van Eck and Waltman 2014a). These visualizations are often called maps (G\u0026uuml;ner and G\u0026ouml;k\u0026ccedil;e 2021).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study of bibliometric networks, such as co-authorship, bibliographic linkage, and co-citation networks, has a long history in bibliometrics, with initial work dating back to the 1960s and 1970s (Price 1976; Hwang et al. 2021a).\u0026nbsp;These networks can be built based on citations, bibliographic linkage, co-citation, or co-authorship relationships, including journals, researchers, or individual publications (Nees Jan van Eck and Waltman 2014b).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSeveral studies show the application of the VOSviewer in different fields, such as economy (Perianes-Rodriguez et al. 2016; Iliescu 2021), engineering and computer science (Castillo et al. 2021; Wang et al. 2022), and of course also in math education research (Ersozlu and Karakus 2019; Verma et al. 2021; Hanif Batubara et al. 2022; Veith et al. 2023)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe used VOSviewer software version 1.6.15 for analysis to construct and display bibliometric maps. The data for this objective were obtained from Scopus due to its coverage of a broader range of journals.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3 Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Publication evolution:\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe global semantic structure search (Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) found 525 documents of different types (article, presentation, and review) from 2001 to December 1, 2021. Figure \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e shows the number of publications and the types in this period.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConcerning the type of documents, articles have the most significant number of publications (441), followed by conferences (52), reviews (21), and finally book Chaps. (11). Reviews that were published in 2003(1), 2004(1), 2006(1), 2014(1), 2015(2), 2016(2), 2017(3), 2018(2), 2019(3), 2021(5).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003ctable id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDocuments type published during the period of study of this work\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003c/caption\u003e\n \u003cthead\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDocument type\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eQuantity\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriod of years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;10 documents\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003cth align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePeriod of years\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;10 documents\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/th\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/thead\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eArticle\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e441\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2001\u0026ndash;2009\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2009\u0026ndash;2021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eReview\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2001\u0026ndash;2021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eConference Paper\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e{2001, 2021}-2019\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2019\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBook Chapter\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"char\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2008,2011,2016,2017,2020\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd align=\"left\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n \u003c/div\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e and Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e show that the number of publications concerning math education increased. In this way, it is essential to say that research on math education has gained more importance in recent years due to its close relationship with the development of technology(Tashtoush, AlAli, et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Wardat, Tashtoush, et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). In this sense, integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies in mathematics education has emerged as a promising avenue to enhance teaching and learning practices (M. K. Pedersen et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFigure \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e shows the principal journals where authors publish their work, and Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e lists the top 15 authors with the most published documents in the era of math education. Dr. Emily Bouck (Bouck et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Bouck, Emily C. - Author details - Scopus 2021), from the Faculty of Social Sciences of the University of Michigan in the United States, has more documents (28) related to the research area of this project.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eKeywords and related publications\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn terms of the keywords and related publications, Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e presents the map of the network of publications about the citations and keywords of the documents related to the theme of this research. The keywords were those designated in VOSviewer (N\u0026eacute;es Jan Van Eck and Waltman 2009). with the database got from Scopus. In the map, the density of the yellow color in each keyword indicates the number of repetitions in the total number of scientific documents. The most used keywords are mathematics education, students, and teaching.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn the same line, the words that are most relevant in the abstracts are presented in the Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Analysis and discussion of findings\u003c/h2\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e describes the scientific documents related to our research topic in this project. These documents were obtained from the global semantic search.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Documents of the systematic review related to the research topic and their findings\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;According to Table \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e and through the analysis of the documents, we can see in Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e that \u003cem\u003egamification\u003c/em\u003e (54.1%), \u003cem\u003esemiotic representations\u003c/em\u003e (24,3%), and learning theories (16,2%) are the strategies more applied to improve or research math learning. Also in Fig. \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e is detailed the distribution by levels of education (university 68,6%, secondary 17,1% and elementary school 14,3%), and, by country, in this last we can see a variety of countries where people are researching in order to improve the math education.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegarding \u003cstrong\u003eGamification\u003c/strong\u003e in education, we observe that all analyzed papers mention that this strategy improves motivation and effectiveness in diverse educational contexts (Lakshminarayanan and McBride \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Bouchrika et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Prieto-Andreu et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Sobrino-Duque et al. 2022; Villac\u0026iacute;s Mac\u0026iacute;as et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), particularly influential in higher education through interactive games that incorporate challenges and feedback.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWe also emphasize that gamification enhances student engagement in e-learning (Bouchrika et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and significantly contributes to improving performance and consolidating concepts, especially in subjects such as algebra and calculus (U. Faghihi et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Usef Faghihi et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Hafzah et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Jim\u0026eacute;nez-Hern\u0026aacute;ndez et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOne important thing to mention that can easily be combined with Gamification is the contextualization of the math problems. Bottge et al., in their study from 1993(Bottge et al., 1993), show that students have a significant improvement in their skills to solve math problems when those are contextualized to the real world.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eWith ICT\u0026apos;s development, different projects show that contextualization and gamification could improve math learning comprehension and motivation to learn. For example, (Villac\u0026iacute;s Mac\u0026iacute;as et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) indicate the uses of Gamification and project-based Learning to achieve active learning in elementary school. In the university context and secondary education, there are also some examples of applying these methodologies in the diverse real contexts of areas like health, engineering, and biology; in this sense, the principal aim is to show the students the contribution of math to other knowledge areas and also to understand the value that has the math concepts in the development of new products related with their professional careers (Jim\u0026eacute;nez and Castillo 2017; Chapman and Rich 2018; Jim\u0026eacute;nez \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Yuliana Jim\u0026eacute;nez-Gaona et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Rivera and Garden \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Sobrino-Duque et al. 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHackathons, a tool generally used in computer and data science (Porras et al., 2018), are a good example of active learning and could be combined with gamification where math and other sciences collaborate. For example (Yarmohammadian et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) mentioned how the hackathon could improve medical education. Also, there are studies where hackathons could help to develop and propose solutions to solve real-world problems related to Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) (Fowler \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Zukin and Papadantonakis 2017; Vivanco-Galv\u0026aacute;n et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Webb et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Yarmohammadian et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Lee et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlong the same line, currently, there is an interaction between gamification and flipped classroom models (C. K. Lo and Hew 2020; C. Lo et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), which is recognized as a powerful strategy for teaching and learning math in university courses. Recent studies that integrated gamification within a flipped classroom model have demonstrated better performance and understanding of the students about the math concepts (Hassan et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Pehlivan and Arabacioglu 2023) and also the importance of the gamification due to it allowing to engage students in more active and motivating learning activities (Husain et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, an exploratory study found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the gamified flipped classrooms promoted student engagement and facilitated sustainable learning (Lo et al., 2022), as other proposes such as the Jigsaw Method, that promotes cooperative learning in order to address the decline in literacy and numeracy skills due the pandemic.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlong the same line of the pandemic, we could manifest that e-learning education has more impact and development, and also like a traditional learning class, this could be beneficiated of the gamification as seen in the studies of (C. K. Lo and Hew 2020; Bouchrika et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) where the gamification allow to enrich the math learning experience.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCurrently, gamification could be nurtured using artificial intelligence models, such as ChatGPT. In the study of (Alneyadi and Wardat, 2023b), it is shown how the ChatGPT could provide students with a positive influence in the learning of magnetism concepts, so in that way, the uses of the AI models could improve the educational outcomes. Also, in the work of (Lubis et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), we can see how gamification in math could be traduced into smartphone apps to get effectiveness in the engagement of math students.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUndoubtedly, gamification has attracted significant attention and has been applied to motivate and engage people in performing certain functions and activities and solving different problems. As an educational tool, gamification facilitates learning, encourages motivation and engagement, improves student engagement and lesson interactivity, and encourages students to expand their knowledge (S Bennani et al. 2021; Behl et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Sabri et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). When implemented correctly, gamification can increase intrinsic motivation and engagement (Buckley et al. 2014; Chapman and Rich 2018; Bouchrika et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and represents a powerful tool for teachers at all levels of the education system (Rivera and Garden \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLearning theory\u003c/strong\u003e (Bada and Olusegun \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) describes how students receive, process, and retain knowledge during learning. Cognitive, emotional, and environmental influences, as well as prior experience, all play a role in how understanding, or worldview, is acquired or changed and knowledge and skills are retained (te Braak et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTable \u003cspan class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e shows that 16,2% of the analyzed documents correspond to this topic research. In general, several studies, such as (Meij et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), mention the gap between the theories of teaching and the reality in education and the formation of educators. This point suggests the potential existence of a discrepancy between theoretical educational paradigms and their practical implementation in teacher education (Uzun and Arslan 2009; M. Pedersen et al. 2023). Close to this last point, one factor to consider is motivation and teacher satisfaction in order to retain high-quality mathematics educators. In this line, a study from (Zakariya and Wardat, 2023) found that the influence of personal motivation to teach among Norwegian mathematics teachers was significant but unexpectedly negative.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAccording to the literature (Raymond Duval \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e) on didactic strategies for achieving effective teaching and learning of mathematics at the university level, representations are crucial for mathematical activity, both for students and expert mathematicians (Morgan \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Iori \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eIn this sense, incorporating \u003cstrong\u003esemiotic representations\u003c/strong\u003e in university mathematics education has significantly enhanced the understanding of mathematical concepts and students academic performance. Semiotic representations are effective for teaching mathematics; according to (R Duval \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e), a necessary condition for understanding is that individuals can convert one semiotic register into another. Furthermore, (R Duval \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e) states that the cognitive activity required in teaching mathematics demands more than other areas, considering that the operations on figures and their corresponding speeches and calculations must be simultaneous.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUsing figures is essential in teaching mathematics because it allows access to represented mathematical objects, infer properties, and solve problems (Salazar \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). These representations, which include signs, symbols, and representational transformations, facilitate the students comprehension of abstract mathematical objects and their cognitive manipulation, which contributes to significative learning, such as found(Caligaris et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) in this work related to learning of Calculus, where suggests the improvement of math skills focusing on natural, graphic, and symbolic registers.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSemiotic complexity is behind the difficulties in learning mathematics, and the analysis of mathematical productions demands semiotic analysis tools adapted to the cognitive processes mobilized in all mathematical activity (R Duval \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1995\u003c/span\u003e; R Duval \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eRegarding the mathematical activity(Giaquinto \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e) this is necessarily done in a representation context since there is no other way to access the object except through its representation. Therefore, semiotic representations are considered a means to externalize mental representations for communicative purposes. They play a fundamental role in the development of mental representations, the execution of different cognitive functions, and the production of knowledge (Salazar \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeveral studies(Hitt \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e; Ledesma \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; M. Burgos et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Mar\u0026iacute;a Burgos et al. \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) mention the importance of semiotic representations as a key to understanding and addressing the challenges of acquiring the mathematical concepts of calculus and precalculus.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, all learning is related to the processes of semiosis and noesis, where semiosis is the apprehension or production of a semiotic representation, and noesis is the conceptual apprehension of an object; thus, noesis is inseparable from semiosis (Ariza \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009b\u003c/span\u003e). Also, according to (Duval, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e), the semiotic representations in mathematics allow conceptualization, reasoning, and problem-solving.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe different representations foster deep understanding and conceptual learning by reinforcing students\u0026apos; ideas and skills (Ainsworth et al. 1997; Even \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e; Winsl\u0026oslash;w \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). Integrating semiotic representations with other instructional strategies, such as problem-based learning or collaborative projects, can enhance their effectiveness. For example, (Ledesma \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e) in their study uses semiotic representations to solve calculus problems, challenges, and simulations.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFor instance, when students use semiotic representations to explore and solve real-world problems collaboratively, they engage more deeply with the material, applying theoretical knowledge in practical contexts (Moyer-Packenham et al., \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHowever, implementing semiotic representations could be a challenge, especially for teachers without training in semiotic strategies or how best to integrate them into their teaching practices. According to (Iori \u003cspan class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), the success of semiotic representations in teaching mathematics depends on the ability of the teachers to select the appropriate representations that align with the learning objectives and levels of understanding of the students.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFinally, we could mention that it will be a perfect complement of work the combination of the Semiotic Representations with Gamification in order to improve mathematics learning, not only in higher education but at all levels. The reason that we establish that is that these methods could encourage active learning (gamification) and critical thinking (semiotic representations), preparing students for complex problem-solving in real-world scenarios.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlso, we understand that implementing these strategies effectively requires overcoming certain challenges, principally because, on the one hand, semiotic representations demand a solid understanding of visually and symbolically conveying mathematical concepts, while gamification requires creativity, technical skills, and, often, access to digital resources. Therefore, for educators, finding the equilibrium and balance could constitute a true challenge.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4 Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe literature review of this work has identified two primary didactic strategies that have garnered significant research attention and demonstrated effectiveness in teaching mathematics: the use of semiotic representations and gamification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe theoretical basis for using semiotic representations in university-level mathematics education is grounded in Duval's theory, which posits that these representations provide an effective framework for analyzing how students and teachers use various forms of representation to solve problems. This approach aims to foster a deep cognitive understanding of mathematical concepts by focusing on the ways in which mathematical ideas are symbolized and interpreted.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGamification, on the other hand, serves as an active teaching-learning strategy that presents mathematics as an engaging and approachable subject. By incorporating game-like elements into the learning process, gamification helps to reduce students' anxiety towards mathematics and promotes a more positive learning experience. But it is important to mention that if we only apply gamification, we run the risk of losing the rigor of the math.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this sense, combining semiotic representations with gamification can create a synergistic effect that optimizes both engagement and comprehension in mathematics education. Semiotic representations facilitate deep cognitive processing, while gamification makes learning more enjoyable and accessible. This integrated approach can enhance students' ability to visualize and conceptualize mathematical ideas, thereby strengthening their analytical skills and understanding of complex concepts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdditionally, it is crucial to create environments that encourage discussion and collaborative knowledge construction, recognizing the teacher's role as a facilitator and guide in the learning process. By strategically implementing semiotic representations and gamification across all educational levels, from higher education to lower levels, educators can offer a compelling approach to enhance both the learning and teaching experiences in mathematics. This comprehensive strategy not only makes learning more enjoyable but also significantly improves students' analytical capabilities and conceptual understanding.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflicts of Interest:\u003c/strong\u003e The authors declare no conflict of interest.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAcknowledgment\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Authors acknowledge Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja to support this project. D.C. also acknowledges the support from Universitat Politècnica de València through Assistance Call Doctoral Student Mobility.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAcosta, JL Bacca, SM Baldiris Navarro. 2014. Augmented reality trends in education: a systematic review of research and applications. \u003cem\u003edugi-doc.udg.eduJL Bacca Acosta, SM Baldiris Navarro, R Fabregat Gesa, S GrafJournal of Educational Technology and Society, 2014, vol. 17, n\u0026uacute;m. 4, 2014\u0026bull;dugi-doc.udg.edu\u003c/em\u003e 17: 1176\u0026ndash;3647.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAinsworth, SE, PA Bibby, DJ Wood - Journal of Information, and undefined 1997. 1997. Information technology and multiple representations: New opportunities\u0026ndash;new problems. \u003cem\u003eTaylor \u0026amp; FrancisSE Ainsworth, PA Bibby, DJ WoodJournal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 1997\u0026bull;Taylor \u0026amp; Francis\u003c/em\u003e 6: 93\u0026ndash;105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759399700200006.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlAli, Rommel, Yousef Wardat, and Mohammed Al-Qahtani. 2023. SWOM strategy and influence of its using on developing mathematical thinking skills and on metacognitive thinking among gifted tenth-grade students. \u003cem\u003eEurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education\u003c/em\u003e 19. Modestum: em2238. https://doi.org/10.29333/EJMSTE/12994.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAlneyadi, Saif, and Yousef Wardat. 2023. ChatGPT: Revolutionizing student achievement in the electronic magnetism unit for eleventh-grade students in Emirates schools. \u003cem\u003eContemporary Educational Technology\u003c/em\u003e 15. Bastas: ep448. https://doi.org/10.30935/CEDTECH/13417.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAriza, M. 2009a. Noesis, semiosis y matem\u0026aacute;ticas. \u003cem\u003eMathesis\u003c/em\u003e 4: 203\u0026ndash;220.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAriza, M. 2009b. Noesis, semiosis y matem\u0026aacute;ticas.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBada, SO, and S Olusegun. 2015. Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research \u0026amp; Method in Education\u003c/em\u003e 5: 66\u0026ndash;70.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBehl, A, N Jayawardena, V Pereira, N Islam, M Del Giudice, and J Choudrie. 2022. Gamification and e-learning for young learners: A systematic literature review, bibliometric analysis, and future research agenda. \u003cem\u003eTechnological Forecasting and Social Change\u003c/em\u003e 176: 121445.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBelbase, Shashidhar, Bhesh Raj Mainali, Wandee Kasemsukpipat, Hassan Tairab, Munkhjargal Gochoo, and Adeeb Jarrah. 2021. At the dawn of science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) education: Prospects, priorities, processes, and problems. \u003cem\u003eTaylor \u0026amp; FrancisS Belbase, BR Mainali, W Kasemsukpipat, H Tairab, M Gochoo, A JarrahInternational Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 2022\u0026bull;Taylor \u0026amp; Francis\u003c/em\u003e 2022. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 2919\u0026ndash;2955. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1922943.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBennani, S, \u0026hellip; A Maalel - Computer Applications in, and undefined 2022. 2021. Adaptive gamification in E‐learning: A literature review and future challenges. \u003cem\u003eWiley Online LibraryS Bennani, A Maalel, H Ben GhezalaComputer Applications in Engineering Education, 2022\u0026bull;Wiley Online Library\u003c/em\u003e 30. John Wiley and Sons Inc: 628\u0026ndash;642. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22477.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBennani, Souha, Ahmed Maalel, and Henda Ben Ghezala. 2022. Adaptive gamification in E-learning: A literature review and future challenges. \u003cem\u003eComputer Applications in Engineering Education\u003c/em\u003e 30. John Wiley and Sons Inc: 628\u0026ndash;642. https://doi.org/10.1002/CAE.22477.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBishara, S. 2018. Active and traditional teaching, self-image, and motivation in learning math among pupils with learning disabilities. \u003cem\u003eCogent Education\u003c/em\u003e 5. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 1436123. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2018.1436123.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBorba, Marcelo C., Petek Askar, Johann Engelbrecht, George Gadanidis, Salvador Llinares, and Mario S\u0026aacute;nchez Aguilar.\u0026nbsp;2016. Blended learning, e-learning and mobile learning in mathematics education. \u003cem\u003eZDM - Mathematics Education\u003c/em\u003e 48. Springer Verlag: 589\u0026ndash;610. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11858-016-0798-4.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBouchrika, Imed, Nouzha Harrati, Vanissa Wanick, and Gary Wills. 2021. Exploring the impact of gamification on student engagement and involvement with e-learning systems. \u003cem\u003eInteractive Learning Environments\u003c/em\u003e 29. Routledge: 1244\u0026ndash;1257. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1623267.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBouck, Emily C. - Author details - Scopus. 2021. \u003cem\u003eScopus\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBouck, Emily C., Sara Flanagan, Bridget Miller, and Laura Bassette. 2012. Technology in Action. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Special Education Technology\u003c/em\u003e 27. SAGE Publications Inc.: 47\u0026ndash;57. https://doi.org/10.1177/016264341202700404.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ete Braak, Petrus, Filip Van Droogenbroeck, Joeri Minnen, Theun Pieter van Tienoven, and Ignace Glorieux. 2022. Teachers\u0026rsquo; working time from time-use data: Consequences of the invalidity of survey questions for teachers, researchers, and policy. \u003cem\u003eTeaching and Teacher Education\u003c/em\u003e 109. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TATE.2021.103536.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBrock, Cynthia, Vassiliki Zygouris-Coe, Kate Welsh, Kate Kniss, and Andrea Hayden. 2020. Engaging in Disciplinary Literacy Instruction: A Review of Read, Write, Inquire: Disciplinary Literacy in Grades 6\u0026ndash;12. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy\u003c/em\u003e 64. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd: 114\u0026ndash;118. https://doi.org/10.1002/JAAL.1075.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBrozo, WG, S Crain - The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational, and undefined 2018. 2017. Writing in math: A disciplinary literacy approach. \u003cem\u003eTaylor \u0026amp; FrancisWG Brozo, S CrainThe Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 2018\u0026bull;Taylor \u0026amp; Francis\u003c/em\u003e 91. Informa UK Limited: 7\u0026ndash;13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2017.1342435.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBuckley, P, E Doyle - Interactive learning environments, and undefined 2016. 2014. Gamification and student motivation. \u003cem\u003eTaylor \u0026amp; FrancisP Buckley, E DoyleInteractive learning environments, 2016\u0026bull;Taylor \u0026amp; Francis\u003c/em\u003e 24. Routledge: 1162\u0026ndash;1175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.964263.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBurgos, M., S. Bueno, O. P\u0026eacute;rez, and J.D. Godino. 2021. Onto-semiotic complexity of the Definite Integral: Implications for teaching and learning Calculus. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Mathematics Education\u003c/em\u003e 10: 4\u0026ndash;40.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eBurgos, Mar\u0026iacute;a, Seydel Bueno, Olga P\u0026eacute;rez, and Juan D. Godino. 2021. Onto-semiotic complexity of the Definite Integral. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Research in Mathematics Education\u003c/em\u003e 10. Hipatia Press: 4\u0026ndash;40. https://doi.org/10.17583/REDIMAT.2021.6778.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCaligaris, MG, ME Schivo, MR Romiti - International Journal of Learning, and undefined 2019. 2019. Communication competence in mathematics: Analysis of the evolution of calculus student skills throughout their freshmen year. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e 18: 49\u0026ndash;62.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eCastillo, Darwin, Vasudevan Lakshminarayanan, and Mar\u0026iacute;a Jos\u0026eacute; Rodr\u0026iacute;guez-\u0026Aacute;lvarez. 2021. Mr images, brain lesions, and deep learning. \u003cem\u003eApplied Sciences (Switzerland)\u003c/em\u003e 11. MDPI AG: 1\u0026ndash;41. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11041675.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChapman, Jared R., and Peter J. Rich. 2018. Does educational gamification improve students\u0026rsquo; motivation? If so, which game elements work best? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Education for Business\u003c/em\u003e 93. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 314\u0026ndash;321. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2018.1490687.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eChinna, Suresh, and Mahammad Ali Sunkesula. 2023. Jigsaw method: Addressing the learning loss in mathematics among secondary school students due to COVID-19 pandemic. \u003cem\u003eNonlinear Studies\u003c/em\u003e 30: 405\u0026ndash;419.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDiStefano, Michela, Bronwyn O\u0026rsquo;Brien, Andie Storozuk, Gerardo Ramirez, and Erin A. Maloney. 2020. Exploring math anxious parents\u0026rsquo; emotional experience surrounding math homework-help. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e 99. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJER.2019.101526.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDuval, R. 1993. Registres de repr\u0026eacute;sentation s\u0026eacute;miotique et fonctionnement cognitif de la pens\u0026eacute;e.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eStrasbourg\u003c/em\u003e 5.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDuval, R. 1995. S\u0026eacute;miosis et pens\u0026eacute;e humaine: registres s\u0026eacute;miotiques et apprentissages intellectuels.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDuval, R. 1999. Representation, Vision and Visualization: Cognitive Functions in Mathematical Thinking. Basic Issues for Learning. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eERIC.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDuval, Raymond. 1999. Representation, Vision and Visualization: Cognitive Functions in Mathematical Thinking. Basic Issues for Learning.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDuval, Raymond. 2006. A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. \u003cem\u003eEducational Studies in Mathematics\u003c/em\u003e 61. Springer: 103\u0026ndash;131. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10649-006-0400-Z/METRICS.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eDuval, Raymond. 2017. Mathematical Activity and the Transformations of Semiotic Representations. \u003cem\u003eUnderstanding the Mathematical Way of Thinking \u0026ndash; The Registers of Semiotic Representations\u003c/em\u003e. Springer International Publishing: 21\u0026ndash;43. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56910-9_2.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEck, N Van, L Waltman - scientometrics, and undefined 2010. 2010. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. \u003cem\u003eakjournals.comN Van Eck, L Waltmanscientometrics, 2010\u0026bull;akjournals.com\u003c/em\u003e 84. Springer Netherlands: 523\u0026ndash;538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVan Eck, N\u0026eacute;es Jan, and Ludo Waltman. 2009. How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well-known similarity measures. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology\u003c/em\u003e 60: 1635\u0026ndash;1651. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.21075.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003evan Eck, Nees Jan, and Ludo Waltman. 2014a. Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. \u003cem\u003eMeasuring Scholarly Impact\u003c/em\u003e. Springer International Publishing: 285\u0026ndash;320. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003evan Eck, Nees Jan, and Ludo Waltman. 2014b. Visualizing Bibliometric Networks. In \u003cem\u003eMeasuring Scholarly Impact: Methods and Practice\u003c/em\u003e, ed. Ying Ding, Ronald Rousseau, and Dietmar Wolfram, 285\u0026ndash;320. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10377-8_13.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eErsozlu, Z, and M Karakus. 2019. Mathematics anxiety: Mapping the literature by bibliometric analysis. \u003cem\u003eournal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education\u003c/em\u003e 15: 1673. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/102441.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEven, Ruhama. 1998. Factors involved in linking representations of functions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Mathematical Behavior\u003c/em\u003e 17. Elsevier Inc.: 105\u0026ndash;121. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(99)80063-7.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFaghihi, U., A. Brautigam, K. Jorgenson, D. Martin, A. Brown, E. Measures, and S. Maldonado-Bouchard. 2014. How gamification applies for educational purpose specially with college algebra. \u003cem\u003eProcedia Computer Science\u003c/em\u003e 41: 182\u0026ndash;187.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFaghihi, Usef, Donald Aguilar, David Chatman, Nicholas Gautier, Jeffrey Gholson, Justin Gholson, Melvin Lipka, Robert Dill, Philippe Fournier-Viger, and Sioui Maldonado-Bouchard. 2017. How to apply gamification techniques to design a gaming environment for algebra concepts. \u003cem\u003eE-Learning, E-Education, and Online Training: Third International Conference, eLEOT 2016, Dublin, Ireland, August 31\u0026ndash;September 2, 2016, Revised Selected Papers -Springer\u003c/em\u003e 180. Springer Verlag: 62\u0026ndash;70. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49625-2_8.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFinck Brandt, Celia, Ana L\u0026uacute;cia, Pereira Baccon, C F Brandt, and A L P Baccon. 2015. The Teaching and Learning of Equations: Problems and Possibilities during the \u0026nbsp;Transition from High School to Higher \u0026nbsp;Education. \u003cem\u003eCreative Education\u003c/em\u003e 6. Scientific Research Publishing: 961\u0026ndash;975. https://doi.org/10.4236/CE.2015.610098.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eFowler, Allan. 2016. Informal STEM learning in game jams, ackathons and game creation events. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the International Conference on Game Jams, Hackathons, and Game Creation Events, GJH and GC 2016\u003c/em\u003e. Association for Computing Machinery, Inc: 38\u0026ndash;41. https://doi.org/10.1145/2897167.2897179.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eGiaquinto, M. 2005. Mathematical Activity. \u003cem\u003eVisualization, explanation and reasoning styles in mathematics. \u0026nbsp;Mancosu, O. and J\u0026oslash;rgensen, K.F. and Pedersen, S.A., (eds.). Synthese Library. \u0026nbsp;Springer, New York, USA.\u003c/em\u003e 327. Springer Science and Business Media B.V.: 75\u0026ndash;87. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3335-4_5.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eG\u0026uuml;ner, Pınar, and Semirhan G\u0026ouml;k\u0026ccedil;e. 2021. Monitoring the nomological network of number sense studies. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology\u003c/em\u003e 52. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 580\u0026ndash;608. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1895343.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHafzah, Rini, Abdul Rahim, Siti Hasnah Tanalol, Rozita Ismail, Aslina Baharum, Emelia Abdul Rahim, Noorsidi Aizuddin, and Mat Noor. 2019. Development of Gamification Linear Algebra Application Using Storytelling. \u003cem\u003e2019 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC). IEEE\u003c/em\u003e: 133\u0026ndash;137.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHancock, Emilie, and Gulden Karakok. 2021. Supporting the Development of Process-Focused Metacognition During Problem-Solving. \u003cem\u003ePRIMUS\u003c/em\u003e 31. Bellwether Publishing, Ltd.: 837\u0026ndash;854. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970.2020.1772914.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHanif Batubara, Ismail, Sahat Saragih, Edi Syahputra, Dian Armanto, Indah Purnama Sari, Baihaqi Siddik Lubis, Eko Febri, and Syahputra Siregar. 2022. Mapping research developments on mathematics communication: bibliometric study by VosViewer. \u003cem\u003eAl-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan\u003c/em\u003e 14: 2637\u0026ndash;2648. https://doi.org/10.35445/alishlah.v14i1.925.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHassan, Muhammad Awais, Ume Habiba, Fiaz Majeed, and Muhammad Shoaib. 2021. Adaptive gamification in e-learning based on students\u0026rsquo; learning styles. \u003cem\u003eInteractive Learning Environments\u003c/em\u003e 29. Routledge: 545\u0026ndash;565. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1588745.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHitt, F. 1998. The role of the semiotic representations in the learning of mathematics. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics\u003c/em\u003e 18: 23\u0026ndash;28.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHolmes, Vicki Lynn, and Yooyeun Hwang. 2016. Exploring the effects of project-based learning in secondary mathematics education. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational Research\u003c/em\u003e 109. Routledge: 449\u0026ndash;463. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2014.979911.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHoyles, Celia, and Richard Noss. 2003. What can digital technologies take from and bring to research in mathematics education? \u003cem\u003eSecond International Handbook of Mathematics Education\u003c/em\u003e. Springer Netherlands: 323\u0026ndash;349. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0273-8_11.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHusain, Anas, Al-Shayeb Abdelhafez Qasem, and Faye Saleem Khazalah. 2023. Students\u0026rsquo; Achievement in a Flipped Database Management Course: The Impact of Flow Theory Gamification Elements. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Information Technology Education: Research\u003c/em\u003e 22. Informing Science Institute: 409\u0026ndash;428. https://doi.org/10.28945/5206.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHutton, Brian, Ferr\u0026aacute;n Catal\u0026aacute;-L\u0026oacute;pez, and David Moher. 2016. The PRISMA statement extension for systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analysis: PRISMA-NMA. \u003cem\u003eMedicina Cl\u0026iacute;nica (English Edition)\u003c/em\u003e 147. Elsevier BV: 262\u0026ndash;266. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MEDCLE.2016.10.003.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHwang, Gwo-Jen, Yun-Fang Tu, G.-J ; Hwang, and Y.-F Tu. 2021a. Roles and Research Trends of Artificial Intelligence in Mathematics Education: A Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. Mathematics 2021, 9. \u003cem\u003eMathematics\u003c/em\u003e 9: 584. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9060584.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eHwang, Gwo-Jen, Yun-Fang Tu, G.-J ; Hwang, and Y.-F Tu. 2021b. Roles and Research Trends of Artificial Intelligence in Mathematics Education: A Bibliometric Mapping Analysis and Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eMathematics 2021, Vol. 9, Page 584\u003c/em\u003e 9. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute: 584. https://doi.org/10.3390/MATH9060584.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIliescu, Andra Nicoleta.\u0026nbsp;2021. Conceptual Atlas of the Knowmad Literature: Visual Mapping with VOSviewer. \u003cem\u003eManagement Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy\u003c/em\u003e 9. Walter de Gruyter GmbH: 379\u0026ndash;392. https://doi.org/10.2478/MDKE-2021-0025.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eIori, Maura. 2018. Teachers\u0026rsquo; awareness of the semio-cognitive dimension of learning mathematics. \u003cem\u003eEducational Studies in Mathematics\u003c/em\u003e 98. Springer Netherlands: 95\u0026ndash;113. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10649-018-9808-5/FIGURES/4.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJagu\u0026scaron;t, T, I Botički, and HJ So. 2018. Examining competitive, collaborative and adaptive gamification in young learners\u0026rsquo; math learning. \u003cem\u003eComputers \u0026amp; education\u003c/em\u003e 125: 444\u0026ndash;457.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJarrah, Adeeb M., Yousef Wardat, and Patricia Fidalgo. 2023. Using ChatGPT in academic writing is (not) a form of plagiarism: What does the literature say? \u003cem\u003eOnline Journal of Communication and Media Technologies\u003c/em\u003e 13. Bastas: e202346. https://doi.org/10.30935/OJCMT/13572.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJim\u0026eacute;nez, Yuliana. 2018. Estrategias l\u0026uacute;dicas para la ense\u0026ntilde;anza-aprendizaje de la matem\u0026aacute;tica a nivel superior.\u0026nbsp;\u003cem\u003eL\u0026oacute;pez-Garc\u0026iacute;a, C., \u0026amp; Manso, J. (Eds.), Transforming education for a changing world. Eindhoven, NL: Adaya Press\u003c/em\u003e. Adaya Press: 170\u0026ndash;179. https://doi.org/10.58909/ad18353224.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJim\u0026eacute;nez, Yuliana, and Darwin Castillo. 2017. Educaci\u0026oacute;n de calidad mediante la estrategia Design Thinking.\u0026nbsp;In \u003cem\u003eConference Proceedings EDUNOVATIC 2017\u003c/em\u003e, ed. REDINE, 472\u0026ndash;481.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJim\u0026eacute;nez-Gaona, Y., I. Carrillo-Mayenquer, DC. Castillo-Malla, and Y. Lude\u0026ntilde;a Gonz\u0026aacute;lez. 2020.\u0026nbsp;Immersive and Collaborative learning: an educational resource for mathematical training in medicine. \u003cem\u003e2020 XV Conferencia Latinoamericana de Tecnologias de Aprendizaje (LACLO) IEEE\u003c/em\u003e: 1\u0026ndash;7.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJim\u0026eacute;nez-Gaona, Yuliana, Jos\u0026eacute; Delgado-Ram\u0026oacute;n, and Darwin P. Castillo-Malla \u0026nbsp; . 2019. Aprendizaje de la matem\u0026aacute;tica basado en el contexto de las ciencias: Mathematics learning based on the science context. \u003cem\u003eRevista Electr\u0026oacute;nica Calidad en la Educaci\u0026oacute;n Superior\u003c/em\u003e 10. Universidad Estatal a Distancia: 53\u0026ndash;73. https://doi.org/10.22458/CAES.V10I2.2603.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eJim\u0026eacute;nez-Hern\u0026aacute;ndez, Er\u0026eacute;ndira M., Hanna Oktaba, Frida D\u0026iacute;az-Barriga, and Mario Piattini.\u0026nbsp;2020. Using web-based gamified software to learn Boolean algebra simplification in a blended learning setting. \u003cem\u003eComputer Applications in Engineering Education\u003c/em\u003e 28. John Wiley and Sons Inc: 1591\u0026ndash;1611. https://doi.org/10.1002/CAE.22335.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKhan, Khalid S, Regina Kunz, Jos Kleijnen, and Gerd Antes. 2003. Five Steps to Conducting a Systematic Review. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the Royal Society of Medicine\u003c/em\u003e 96. SAGE Publications: 118\u0026ndash;121. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680309600304.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eKitchenham, B. 2004. Procedures for performing systematic reviews. \u003cem\u003eKeele, UK, Keele University\u003c/em\u003e 33: 1\u0026ndash;26.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLakshminarayanan, Vasudevan, and Annette McBride. 2015. The use of high technology in STEM education. \u003cem\u003espiedigitallibrary.orgV Lakshminarayanan, AC McBrideEducation and Training in Optics and Photonics: ETOP 2015, 2015\u0026bull;spiedigitallibrary.org\u003c/em\u003e 9793.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLedesma, EFR. 2011. Representation registers in the solution of calculus problems. \u003cem\u003eCreative Education\u003c/em\u003e 2: 270.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLee, Jung Yeop, Chong Un Pyon, and Jiyoung Woo. 2023. Digital Twin for Math Education: A Study on the Utilization of Games and Gamification for University Mathematics Education. \u003cem\u003eElectronics 2023, Vol. 12, Page 3207\u003c/em\u003e 12. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute: 3207. https://doi.org/10.3390/ELECTRONICS12153207.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLo, CC, MH Hsieh, HH Lin, and HH Hung. 2021. Influences of flipped teaching in electronics courses on students\u0026rsquo; learning effectiveness and strategies. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health\u003c/em\u003e 18: 9748.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLo, Chung Kwan, and Khe Foon Hew. 2020. A comparison of flipped learning with gamification, traditional learning, and online independent study: the effects on students\u0026rsquo; mathematics achievement and cognitive engagement. \u003cem\u003eInteractive Learning Environments\u003c/em\u003e 28. Routledge: 464\u0026ndash;481. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1541910.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLubis, F. F., Y. Rosmansyah, and S. H. Supangkat. 2014. Math workout series: Enhancing learning application with gamification. \u003cem\u003e2014 International Conference on Information Technology Systems and Innovation (ICITSI).IEEE\u003c/em\u003e: 290\u0026ndash;294.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMaarif, Samsul, Khoerul Umam, Joko Soebagyo, and Trisna Roy Pradipta. 2022. Critical review on mathematics virtual classroom practice in private university. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Nonlinear Analysis and Applications\u003c/em\u003e 13. Semnan University: 975\u0026ndash;982. https://doi.org/10.22075/IJNAA.2022.5616.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMcCray, J, JQ Chen - North American Chapter of the International Group for, and undefined 2013. 2004. Innovation in Early Math Education: The Whole Teacher Approach to Professional Development. \u003cem\u003eERICJ McCray, JQ ChenNorth American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of, 2013\u0026bull;ERIC\u003c/em\u003e. Desimone.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMeij, Erik, Anneke Smits, and Martijn Meeter. 2022. How and why learning theories are taught in current Dutch teacher education programs. Identifying a gap between paradigm and reality in teacher education. \u003cem\u003eTeaching and Teacher Education\u003c/em\u003e 109. Elsevier Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TATE.2021.103537.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMeyer, Dan. 2023. Dan Meyer: \u0026ldquo;Maths has an obvious perception problem among students\u0026rdquo; | The UNESCO Courier. \u003cem\u003eUNESCO Courier\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMilovanović, Ilija. 2020. Math anxiety, math achievement and math motivation in high school students: Gender effects. \u003cem\u003eCroatian Journal of Education\u003c/em\u003e 22. FACTEACHEREDUCATION: 175\u0026ndash;206. https://doi.org/10.15516/CJE.V22I1.3372.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMilovanovic, J., T. Shealy, and A. Katz. 2021. Higher perceived design thinking traits and active learning in design courses motivate engineering students to tackle energy sustainability in their careers. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e 13.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMoher, David, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Douglas G. Altman, Gerd Antes, David Atkins, Virginia Barbour, et al. 2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. \u003cem\u003ePLoS Medicine\u003c/em\u003e 6. Public Library of Science. https://doi.org/10.1371/JOURNAL.PMED.1000097.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMorgan, Candia. 2006. What does social semiotics have to offer mathematics education research? \u003cem\u003eEducational Studies in Mathematics\u003c/em\u003e 61. Springer: 219\u0026ndash;245. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10649-006-5477-X/METRICS.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMoyer-Packenham, Patricia S., Allison L. Roxburgh, Kristy Litster, and Joseph S. Kozlowski. 2022. Relationships Between Semiotic Representational Transformations and Performance Outcomes in Digital Math Games. \u003cem\u003eTechnology, Knowledge and Learning\u003c/em\u003e 27. Springer Science and Business Media B.V.: 223\u0026ndash;253. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10758-021-09506-5/FIGURES/7.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAl Mutawah, Masooma Ali, Masooma Ali, and Al Mutawah.\u0026nbsp;2015. The Influence of Mathematics Anxiety in Middle and High School Students Math Achievement. \u003cem\u003eInternational Education Studies\u003c/em\u003e 8. Canadian Center of Science and Education. 1120 Finch Avenue West Suite 701-309, Toronto, ON M3J 3H7, Canada. Tel: 416-642-2606 Ext 206; Fax: 416-642-2608; e-mail: [email protected]; Web site: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/es: 239\u0026ndash;252. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v8n11p239.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePedersen, Mathilde Kj\u0026aelig;r, Cecilie Carlsen Bach, Rikke Maagaard Gregersen, Ingi Heinesen H\u0026oslash;jsted, and Uffe Thomas Jankvist. 2021. Mathematical Representation Competency in Relation to Use of Digital Technology and Task Design\u0026mdash;A Literature Review. \u003cem\u003eMathematics 2021, Vol. 9, Page 444\u003c/em\u003e 9. Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute: 444. https://doi.org/10.3390/MATH9040444.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePedersen, MK, CC Bach, RM Gregersen, IH H\u0026oslash;jsted - Mathematics, and undefined 2021. 2023. Mathematical representation competency in relation to use of digital technology and task design\u0026mdash;a literature review. \u003cem\u003emdpi.comMK Pedersen, CC Bach, RM Gregersen, IH H\u0026oslash;jsted, UT JankvistMathematics, 2021\u0026bull;mdpi.com\u003c/em\u003e. https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/9/4/444. Accessed September 20.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePehlivan, Fatma, and Taner Arabacioglu. 2023. The Effect of Gamification on Math Achievement, Motivation, and Learning Strategies in Flipped Classrooms. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Education and Literacy Studies\u003c/em\u003e 11. Australian International Academic Centre: 309\u0026ndash;317. https://doi.org/10.7575/AIAC.IJELS.V.11N.4P.309.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePerianes-Rodriguez, Antonio, Ludo Waltman, and Nees Jan van Eck. 2016.\u0026nbsp;Constructing bibliometric networks: A comparison between full and fractional counting. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Informetrics\u003c/em\u003e 10. Elsevier Ltd: 1178\u0026ndash;1195. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOI.2016.10.006.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePerignat, E, J Katz-Buonincontro - Thinking skills and creativity, and undefined 2019. 2023. STEAM in practice and research: An integrative literature review. \u003cem\u003eElsevier\u003c/em\u003e. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187118302190. Accessed November 5.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePrice, D.D.S. 1976. A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes. \u003cem\u003eJournal of the American society for Information science\u003c/em\u003e 27: 292\u0026ndash;306. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630270505.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003ePrieto-Andreu, Joel Manuel, Juan Diego G\u0026oacute;mez-Escalonilla-Torrijos, Elias Said-Hung, Joel Manuel Prieto-Andreu, Juan Diego G\u0026oacute;mez-Escalonilla-Torrijos, and Elias Said-Hung. 2022. Gamificaci\u0026oacute;n, motivaci\u0026oacute;n y rendimiento en educaci\u0026oacute;n: Una revisi\u0026oacute;n sistem\u0026aacute;tica. \u003cem\u003eRevista Electr\u0026oacute;nica Educare\u003c/em\u003e 26. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/: 251\u0026ndash;273. https://doi.org/10.15359/REE.26-1.14.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRivera, ES, and CLP Garden. 2021. Gamification for student engagement: a framework. \u003cem\u003eJournal of further and higher education\u003c/em\u003e 45. Routledge: 999\u0026ndash;1012. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2021.1875201.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eRodr\u0026iacute;guez, Jos\u0026eacute; L. 2022. Exploring Dynamic Geometry Through Immersive Virtual Reality and Distance Teaching: 343\u0026ndash;363. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86909-0_15.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSabri, Z, Y Fakhri, and A. Moumen. 2022. The Effects of Gamification on E-learning Education: Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Model. \u003cem\u003eStatistics, Optimization \u0026amp; Information Computing\u003c/em\u003e 10. Academic Press: 75\u0026ndash;92. https://doi.org/10.19139/soic-2310-5070-1115.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSalazar, Jesus Victoria Flores. 2018. Semiotic Representations: A Study of Dynamic Figural Register. \u003cem\u003eSigns of Signification: Semiotics in Mathematics Education Research\u003c/em\u003e: 217\u0026ndash;233. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70287-2_12.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSaleem, Awaz Naaman, Narmin Mohammed Noori, and Fezile Ozdamli. 2022. Gamification Applications in E-learning: A Literature Review. \u003cem\u003eTechnology, Knowledge and Learning\u003c/em\u003e 27. Springer Science and Business Media B.V.: 139\u0026ndash;159. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10758-020-09487-X.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSamper, J De Zubir\u0026iacute;a. 2006. Los modelos pedag\u0026oacute;gicos: hacia una pedagog\u0026iacute;a dialogante.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSelmer, S, and U Kale. 2013. Teaching mathematics through problem solving. \u003cem\u003eInnovaci\u0026oacute;n educativa\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e13(62): 45\u0026ndash;59.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSobrino-Duque, Raimel, Noelia Mart\u0026iacute;nez-Rojo, Juan Manuel Carrillo-de-Gea, Juan Jos\u0026eacute; L\u0026oacute;pez-Jim\u0026eacute;nez, Joaqu\u0026iacute;n Nicol\u0026aacute;s, and Jos\u0026eacute; Luis Fern\u0026aacute;ndez-Alem\u0026aacute;n.\u0026nbsp;2022. Evaluating a gamification proposal for learning usability heuristics: Heureka. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Human Computer Studies\u003c/em\u003e 161. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJHCS.2022.102774.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStr\u0026oslash;mgren, B\u0026oslash;rge, Cathrine Berg-Mortensen, and Linn Tangen. 2014. The Use of Precision Teaching to Teach Basic Math Facts. \u003cem\u003eEuropean Journal of Behavior Analysis\u003c/em\u003e 15. Taylor and Francis Ltd.: 225\u0026ndash;240. https://doi.org/10.1080/15021149.2014.11434723.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSullivan, Peter. 2011. Teaching mathematics: Using research-informed strategies.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTarouco, L, B Gorziza, Y. Corr\u0026ecirc;a, \u0026Eacute;. M. Amaral, and T. M\u0026uuml;ller.\u0026nbsp;2013. Virtual laboratory for teaching Calculus: An immersive experience. \u003cem\u003e2013 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON)\u003c/em\u003e: 774\u0026ndash;781.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTashtoush, Mohammad A., Rommel AlAli, Yousef Wardat, Nedal Alshraifin, and Hasan Toubat. 2023. The Impact of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT)-Based Education on the Mathematics Academic Enthusiasm. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Educational and Social Research\u003c/em\u003e 13. Richtmann Publishing Ltd: 284\u0026ndash;293. https://doi.org/10.36941/JESR-2023-0077.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTashtoush, Mohammad A., Yousef A. Wardat, and Abdelkader M. Elsayed. 2023. Mathematics Distance Learning and Learning Loss During COVID-19 Pandemic: Teachers\u0026rsquo; Perspectives. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Higher Education Theory and Practice\u003c/em\u003e 23. North American Business Press: 162\u0026ndash;174. https://doi.org/10.33423/JHETP.V23I5.5933.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eTorres-Carri\u0026oacute;n, Pablo, Carina Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-Gonz\u0026aacute;lez, C\u0026eacute;sar Bernal-Bravo, and Alfonso Infante-Moro.\u0026nbsp;2019. Gesture-based children computer interaction for inclusive education: A systematic literature review. \u003cem\u003eCommunications in Computer and Information Science\u003c/em\u003e 895. Springer Verlag: 133\u0026ndash;147. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05532-5_10.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eUzun, Selcen \u0026Ccedil;alik, and Selahattin Arslan. 2009. Semiotic representations skills of prospective elementary teachers related to mathematical concepts. \u003cem\u003eProcedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences\u003c/em\u003e 1: 741\u0026ndash;745. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SBSPRO.2009.01.130.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVeith, Joaquin Marc, Meeri Liisa Beste, Marco Kindervater, Michel Krause, Michael Straulino, Franziska Greinert, and Philipp Bitzenbauer. 2023. Mathematics education research on algebra over the last two decades: quo vadis? \u003cem\u003eFrontiers in Education\u003c/em\u003e 8. Frontiers Media SA. https://doi.org/10.3389/FEDUC.2023.1211920/FULL.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVerma, R, V Lobos-Ossand\u0026oacute;n, J.M. M\u0026eacute;rigo, C. Cancino, and J. Sienz.\u0026nbsp;2021. Forty years of applied mathematical modelling: A bibliometric study. \u003cem\u003eApplied Mathematical Modelling,\u003c/em\u003e 89: 1177\u0026ndash;1197.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVicente Torres-Carrion, Pablo, Germania Rocio Rodriguez, Pablo Vicente, and Carina Soledad.\u0026nbsp;2018a. Methodology for systematic literature review applied to engineering and education. \u003cem\u003eieeexplore.ieee.orgPV Torres-Carri\u0026oacute;n, CS Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-Gonz\u0026aacute;lez, S Aciar, G Rodr\u0026iacute;guez-Morales2018 IEEE Global engineering education conference (EDUCON), 2018\u0026bull;ieeexplore.ieee.org\u003c/em\u003e. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363388.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVicente Torres-Carrion, Pablo, Germania Rocio Rodriguez, Pablo Vicente, and Carina Soledad.\u0026nbsp;2018b. Methodology for systematic literature review applied to engineering and education. \u003cem\u003eieeexplore.ieee.orgPV Torres-Carri\u0026oacute;n, CS Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-Gonz\u0026aacute;lez, S Aciar, G Rodr\u0026iacute;guez-Morales2018 IEEE Global engineering education conference (EDUCON), 2018\u0026bull;ieeexplore.ieee.org\u003c/em\u003e 2018-April. IEEE Computer Society: 1364\u0026ndash;1373. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363388.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVillac\u0026iacute;s Mac\u0026iacute;as, C., C. Zea Silva, S. Campuzano Rodr\u0026iacute;guez, and M. Chifla Vill\u0026oacute;n.\u0026nbsp;2022. Aprendizaje basado en proyectos y la gamificaci\u0026oacute;n para generar el aprendizaje activo en los estudiantes. \u003cem\u003eRevista Ciencia UNEMI\u003c/em\u003e 15: 35\u0026ndash;43. https://doi.org/10.29076/issn.2528-7737vol15iss39.2022pp35-43p.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVintere, Anna, and Baiba Briede. 2019. Methodical background of competence-based mathematics education for students of information technologies specialties. \u003cem\u003eEngineering for Rural Development\u003c/em\u003e 18. Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies: 1947\u0026ndash;1953. https://doi.org/10.22616/ERDEV2019.18.N489.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eVivanco-Galv\u0026aacute;n, Oscar Amable, Darwin Castillo-Malla, and Yuliana Jim\u0026eacute;nez-Gaona. 2018. HACKATHON multidisciplinario: fortalecimiento del aprendizaje basado en proyectos. \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e 9: 119\u0026ndash;135. https://doi.org/10.22458/caes.v9i1.1893.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWang, L, H Wang, Y Huang, B Yan, \u0026hellip;\u0026nbsp;Z Chang - European journal of, and undefined 2022. 2022. Trends in the application of deep learning networks in medical image analysis: Evolution between 2012 and 2020. \u003cem\u003eEuropean journal of radiology\u003c/em\u003e 146: 110069.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWardat, Yousef, Rommel Alali, Adeeb M. Jarrah, and Mohammed Alzyoudi. 2023. Neutrosophic Theory Framework for Building Mathematics Teachers Capacity in Assessment of High School Students in the United Arab Emirates. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Neutrosophic Science\u003c/em\u003e 21. American Scientific Publishing Group (ASPG): 33\u0026ndash;49. https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.210103.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWardat, Yousef, Mohammad A. Tashtoush, Rommel AlAli, and Adeeb M. Jarrah. 2023. ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. \u003cem\u003eEurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education\u003c/em\u003e 19. Modestum: em2286. https://doi.org/10.29333/EJMSTE/13272.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWebb, Helena, Louise Bezuidenhout, Jason R.C. Nurse, and Marina Jirotka. 2019. Lab hackathons to overcome laboratory equipment shortages in Africa: Opportunities and challenges. \u003cem\u003eConference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings\u003c/em\u003e. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3299063.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWinsl\u0026oslash;w, Carl. 2003. Semiotic and discursive variables in cas-based didactical engineering. \u003cem\u003eEducational Studies in Mathematics\u003c/em\u003e 52: 271\u0026ndash;288. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024201714126.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eWorkman, Joseph. 2023. Income inequality and student achievement: trends among US States (1992\u0026ndash;2019). \u003cem\u003eEducational Review\u003c/em\u003e 75. Routledge: 871\u0026ndash;893. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2021.1974349.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eY ABD ALGANI. 2019. Innovative ways to teach mathematics: are they employed in schools? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Computer and Education Research\u003c/em\u003e 7. Journal of Computer and Education Research: 496\u0026ndash;514. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.612199.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eYarmohammadian, Mohammad, Sanaz Monsef, Shaghayegh Javanmard, Youseph Yazdi, and Mostafa Amini-Rarani. 2021. The role of hackathon in education: Can hackathon improve health and medical education? \u003cem\u003eJournal of Education and Health Promotion\u003c/em\u003e 10. Wolters Kluwer -- Medknow Publications. https://doi.org/10.4103/JEHP.JEHP_1183_20.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZakariya, Yusuf F., and Yousef Wardat. 2023. Job satisfaction of mathematics teachers: an empirical investigation to quantify the contributions of teacher self-efficacy and teacher motivation to teach. \u003cem\u003eMathematics Education Research Journal\u003c/em\u003e. Springer Science and Business Media B.V.: 1\u0026ndash;23. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13394-023-00475-9/FIGURES/4.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eZukin, Sharon, and Max Papadantonakis. 2017. Hackathons as co-optation ritual: Socializing workers and institutionalizing innovation in the \u0026ldquo;new\u0026rdquo; economy. \u003cem\u003eResearch in the Sociology of Work\u003c/em\u003e 31. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.: 157\u0026ndash;181. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0277-283320170000031005/FULL/XM\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Table","content":"\u003cp\u003eTable 3 is available in the Supplementary Files section\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"teaching math, strategies, didactic, review, mathematics, education, VOSviewer, gamification, semiotic representations.","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4708199/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4708199/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe enduring challenge of facilitating profound knowledge acquisition and meaningful learning of mathematical concepts has been a constant throughout contemporary and historical educational contexts. This issue is particularly pronounced at higher education levels, where many students struggle to connect theoretical mathematical concepts with practical applications in their professional careers. In this context, our research undertakes a systematic review of scientific literature from 2020 onwards, critically examining diverse pedagogical strategies to enhance the efficiency and depth of mathematical learning. Our findings indicate a marked prevalence of semiotic representations and gamification in the literature. Semiotic representations emerge as a potent strategy for achieving deep cognitive engagement and a thorough understanding of mathematical concepts. Gamification, as an active learning method, proves to be a highly effective approach for enhancing student engagement and motivation, thereby helping students overcome their apprehension towards mathematics. Furthermore, the literature underscores the crucial role of educator training in successfully implementing these strategies. The evidence suggests that a synergistic combination of semiotic representations and gamification could significantly enhance students\u0026rsquo; mathematical learning experiences, fostering a meaningful understanding firmly rooted in real-world problem-solving. This integrated approach holds substantial promise for advancing educational outcomes and better-preparing students for the practical demands of their professional lives.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Teaching Math: A Review of Effective Teaching and Learning Strategies in Higher Education","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-07-10 05:49:49","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4708199/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"f8b1db51-76ba-4d4e-a5f6-ad03e33bd329","owner":[],"postedDate":"July 10th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-07-10T05:49:49+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-07-10 05:49:49","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4708199","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4708199","identity":"rs-4708199","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}