Evaluating the Impact of the WEI4S Instructional Approach on Middle School Students’ Algebraic Problem-Solving Skills
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis type of empirical research is not very important in mathematics education research. But for encouragement, I agree to publish the article.
Mathematics education is a complex and fundamental component for our children/pupils/students in the future digitized society and even marked by Ai. So, pay attention to what we do with the math format from early education. Good luck in the future yours research in mathematics education!
Author Response
I will take your suggestions into consideration for my future work. Thank you for your valuable feedback.
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article entitled “Evaluating the Impact of the WEI4S Instructional Approach on Middle School Students' Algebraic Problem-Solving Skills” is original, structured, but with some weaknesses.
The abstract is coherent and presents the main points of the whole research. It could have been shorter, omitting certain details.
The introduction is structured, including the main aspects of the problem that led the researchers to carry out the research and the purpose of the research. However, the introduction does not contain the research question(s) of the study and literature references used are not up to date.
The literature review is coherent, well-structured and includes the basic theoretical framework of the research and similar past research. On the other hand, the literature review is not a ‘‘stand-alone’’ section of the article and is a subsection of the introduction, in accordance with the researchers’ numbering. In the numbering of the introduction there is also a ‘‘Current Study” section which is well structured and contains all the main points of the research to be carried out.
Chapters two and three, which deal with the implementation of the research and its results, describe in detail and in a sound scientific manner the tools used to carry out the research. Furthermore, the results of the research are presented in a detailed manner.
Although the concept of problem solving is a crucial concept in the article, there is no discussion of how the authors understand the concept, its use, its history, p.s. strategies, etc. A short paragraph should be added. Two relevant articles that authors might consider are the following:
Mamona-Downs, J., & Downs, M. (2013). Problem Solving and its elements in forming proof. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 10(1), 137-162. https://doi.org/10.54870/1551-3440.1263
Rizos, I., & Gkrekas, N. (2023). Incorporating history of mathematics in open-ended problem solving: An empirical study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(3), em2242. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13025
The ‘‘Discussion’’ section is complete and includes the main points, limitations and future research proposals. However, the length of the section is long and some information is repeated.
The ‘‘Conclusion’’ is very long and includes information that is also present in the ‘‘Discussion’’ section.
Finally, he literature used is for the most part old and only a few references are contemporary. It must be improved.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer, ("Please see also the attachment.")
Thank you for your invaluable contributions to my article. I have incorporated all of your suggestions in an effort to enhance the overall quality of the manuscript. The following report outlines the specific changes I have made.
Comment 1:
The abstract is coherent and presents the main points of the whole research. It could have been shorter, omitting certain details.
Answer to comment 1:
I was unable to condense the summary due to the lack of coherence in meaning. If necessary, I can omit the last sentence.
Comment 2 …… the introduction does not contain the research question(s) of the study and literature references used are not up to date.
Answer to comment 2:
Since I designed the research by writing the research hypotheses, I did not write the research questions. I added the research questions at the end of the introduction solving (between lines 290-301) I also added current sources (listed below) to the introduction and literature review sections of the article.
- Barbieri, C. A., & Booth, J. L. (2020). Mistakes on display: Incorrect examples refine equation solving and algebraic feature knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 34(4), 862-878.
- Fuchs LS, Fuchs D, Prentice K, et al. Enhancing third-grade students' mathematical problem solving with self-regulated learning strategies. J Educ Psychol. 2003;95(2):306–315.
- Kieran, C. (2020). Algebra teaching and learning. Encyclopedia of mathematics education, 36-44.
- Kshetree, M. P., Acharya, B. R., Khanal, B., Panthi, R. K., & Belbase, S. (2021). Eighth Grade Students' Misconceptions and Errors in Mathematics Learning in Nepal. European Journal of Educational Research, 10(3), 1101-1121.
- Vargas-Alejo V, Cristóbal-Escalante C. Teacher's ways of thinking about students' mathematical learning when they implement problem solving activities. J Math Model Appl. 2014;1(9):41–48.
Comment 3: …..On the other hand, the literature review is not a ‘‘stand-alone’’ section of the article and is a subsection of the introduction, in accordance with the researchers’ numbering. In the numbering of the introduction there is also a ‘‘Current Study” section which is well structured and contains all the main points of the research to be carried out.
Answer to comment 3: The literature review section is presented separately from the introduction.
Comment 4: Although the concept of problem solving is a crucial concept in the article, there is no discussion of how the authors understand the concept, its use, its history, p.s. strategies, etc. A short paragraph should be added. Two relevant articles that authors might consider are the following:
Answer to comment 4: A paragraph on problem solving (between lines 46-61) was added to the introduction of the article using the recommended referencesses.
Comment 5:
The ‘‘Discussion’’ section is complete and includes the main points, limitations and future research proposals. However, the length of the section is long and some information is repeated.
Answer to comment 5:
Since the information in the Conclusion section is already presented in the discussion section, this section has been completely omitted. Some abbreviations have also been made from the discussion section and are indicated on the text.
Note: The references part is structured in accordance with the journal's format, both within the text and in the dedicated references section.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
