Research Article

Enhancing mathematics education for students with special educational needs through generative AI: A case study in Greece

Ioannis Rizos 1 * , Evaggelos Foykas 2 , Spiros V. Georgakopoulos 1
More Detail
1 Department of Mathematics, University of Thessaly, Lamia, GREECE2 Greek Secondary Education, Lamia, GREECE* Corresponding Author
Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(4), October 2024, ep535, https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15487
Published: 17 October 2024
OPEN ACCESS   1320 Views   705 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is expected to have a profound impact on various aspects of human society, including mathematics education. Nevertheless, there is a noticeable lack of research, particularly in Greece, that focuses on the development and assessment of lesson plans and math worksheets tailored for students with special educational needs. To address this research gap, we designed and conducted a nine-hour teaching intervention in a general mathematics classroom in Greece, involving two 8th grade students with special educational needs as the subjects of the study. The intervention utilized worksheets generated by the ChatGPT 3.5 application, which were customized based on the current curriculum, as well as the special educational needs and interests of the two participating students. The data were collected through interviews, tasks, and e-questionnaires, and analyzed using a new theoretical framework based on the concept of mathematical familiarity. The results indicated that students were actively engaged in the educational process, felt safe and confident, satisfactorily met the learning objectives, and developed positive attitudes towards the mathematics course. The paper concludes with a list of good practices, teaching suggestions and restrictions that could be useful to teachers and education policy makers. The target audience for the current study is, mainly, mathematics teachers who serve at all levels of education and have students with special educational needs in their classrooms. Furthermore, the article may also prove of interest to students, parents and teachers who are interested in the interaction between mathematics education and generative AI.
Keywords: special educational needs, mathematical familiarity, math worksheets, ChatGPT, qualitative research

CITATION (APA)

Rizos, I., Foykas, E., & Georgakopoulos, S. V. (2024). Enhancing mathematics education for students with special educational needs through generative AI: A case study in Greece. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(4), ep535. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15487

REFERENCES

  1. Abreu, R. L., Townsend, D., Mitchell, Y., Ward, J., Audette, L., & Gonzalez, K. A. (2022). LGBTQ qualitative and mixed methods research in counseling psychology: A content analysis. The Counseling Psychologist, 50(5), 708–737. https://doi.org/10.1177/00110000221092481
  2. Alsolami, A. S. (2022). Teachers of special education and assistive technology: Teachers’ perceptions of knowledge, competencies and professional development. Sage Open, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221079900
  3. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5™ (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596
  4. Anteneh, B. A., & Anshu, A. H. (2024). ELT teachers’ curriculum implementation approaches in teaching freshman English at Ethiopian public universities’ context. Cogent Education, 11(1), Article 2348862. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2348862
  5. Astle, D. E., & Fletcher-Watson, S. (2020). Beyond the core-deficit hypothesis in developmental disorders. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(5), 431–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721420925518
  6. Awofala, A. O. A., & Lawani, A. O. (2020). Increasing mathematics achievement of senior secondary school students through differentiated instruction. Description of our teaching intervention. Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.31258/jes.4.1.p.1-19
  7. Bartholomew, T. T., & Lockard, A. J. (2018). Mixed methods in psychotherapy research: A review of method(ology) integration in psychotherapy science. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 74(10), 1687–1709. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22653
  8. Bounou, A., Lavidas, K., Komis, V., Papadakis, S., & Manoli, P. (2023). Correlation between high school students’ computational thinking and their performance in STEM and language courses. Education Sciences, 13(11), Article 1101. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13111101
  9. Castro, R. A. G., Cachicatari, N. A. M., Aste, W. M. B., & Medina, M. P. L. (2024). Exploration of ChatGPT in basic education: Advantages, disadvantages, and its impact on school tasks. Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(3), Article ep511. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14615
  10. Denzin, N. K. (2009). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Transaction Publishers.
  11. Dindler, C., Smith, R., & Iversen, O. S. (2020). Computational empowerment: Participatory design in education. CoDesign, 16(1), 66–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2020.1722173
  12. Ding, L., Kim, S., & Allday, R. A. (2024). Development of an AI literacy assessment for non-technical individuals: What do teachers know? Contemporary Educational Technology, 16(3), Article ep512. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/14619
  13. Drolia, M., Papadakis, S., Sifaki, E., & Kalogiannakis M. (2022). Mobile learning applications for refugees: A systematic literature review. Education Sciences, 12(2), Article 96. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12020096
  14. Duff, D. M., Hendricks, A. E., Fitton, L., & Adlof, S. M. (2023). Reading and math achievement in children with dyslexia, developmental language disorder, or typical development: Achievement gaps persist from second through fourth grades. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 56(5), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194221105515
  15. Feigenbaum, K. D. (2024). A critique of Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers as educators. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 64(1), 44–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221678231154819
  16. Florian, L., & Beaton, M. (2018). Inclusive pedagogy in action: Getting it right for every child. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 22(8), 870–884. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1412513
  17. Foykas, E. (2024a). Children’s voice as a parameter of Ryan’s model for promoting inclusive education: The case of Greece. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 5(3), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2024.5.3.824
  18. Foykas, E. (2024b). How can the inclusive school leader promote a democratic society? The case of Greek schools. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 5(3), 82–89. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2024.5.3.842
  19. Gheyssens, E., Coubergs, C., Griful-Freixenet, J., Engels, N., & Struyven, K. (2022). Differentiated instruction: The diversity of teachers’ philosophy and praxis to adapt teaching to students’ interests, readiness and learning profiles. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 26(14), 1383–1400. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1812739
  20. Ginja, T. G., & Chen, X. (2023). Conceptualising inclusive education: The role of teacher training and teacher’s attitudes towards inclusion of children with disabilities in Ethiopia. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27(9), 1042–1055. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2021.1879958
  21. Grabiner, J. (1995). Descartes and problem-solving. Mathematics Magazine, 68(2), 83–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/2691183
  22. Griffiths, M. A., Goodyear, V. A., & Armour, K. M. (2022). Massive open online courses (MOOCs) for professional development: Meeting the needs and expectations of physical education teachers and youth sport coaches. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 27(3), 276–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2021.1874901
  23. Hackenberg, A. J., Creager, M., & Eker, A. (2021). Teaching practices for differentiating mathematics instruction for middle school students. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 23(2), 95–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2020.1731656
  24. Hasanah, U., & Nurcholis, I. A. (2024). English education students’ perception of the use of ChatGPT in writing articles. Pubmedia Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris, 1(2), Article 10. https://doi.org/10.47134/jpbi.v1i2.298
  25. Hutchison, A., Gutierrez, K., Colwell, J., Evmenova, A., Offutt, J., & Gross, M. (2023). Evaluating the role of professional development on elementary teachers’ knowledge, comfort, and beliefs related to teaching computer science to students with high-incidence disabilities. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(6), 1003–1019. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2089408
  26. Ke, F., Moon, J., & Sokolikj, Z. (2022). Virtual reality-based social skills training for children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Special Education Technology, 37(1), 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643420945603
  27. Kenny, N., Doyle, A., & Horgan, F. (2023). Transformative inclusion: Differentiating qualitative research methods to support participation for individuals with complex communication or cognitive profiles. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069221146992
  28. Knight, C., & Crick, T. (2022). Inclusive education in Wales: Interpreting discourses of values and practice using critical policy analysis. ECNU Review of Education, 5(2), 258–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/20965311211039858
  29. Knott, E., Rao, A. H., Summers, K., & Teeger, C. (2022). Interviews in the social sciences. Nature Reviews Methods Primers, 2, Article 73. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-022-00150-6
  30. Kokkinos, T., & Gakis, P. (2021). Student teachers’ differentiated teaching practices for high-achieving students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45(7), 916–931. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2020.1827374
  31. Lai, C. P., Zhang, W., Chang, Y. L. (2020). Differentiated instruction enhances sixth-grade students’ mathematics self-efficacy, learning motives, and problem-solving skills. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 48(6), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.9094
  32. Lavidas, K., Voulgari, I., Papadakis, S., Athanassopoulos, S., Anastasiou, A., Filippidi, A., Komis, V., & Karacapilidis, N. (2024). Determinants of humanities and social sciences students’ intentions to use artificial intelligence applications for academic purposes. Information, 15(6), Article 314. https://doi.org/10.3390/info15060314
  33. Lian, H., Huai, M., Farh, J.-L., Huang, J.-C., Lee, C., & Chao, M. M. (2022). Leader unethical pro-organizational behavior and employee unethical conduct: Social learning of moral disengagement as a behavioral principle. Journal of Management, 48(2), 350–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206320959699
  34. Lindner, K. T., & Schwab, S. (2020). Differentiation and individualisation in inclusive education: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. International Journal of Inclusive Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1813450
  35. Luger, G. F. (2021). Modern AI and how we got here. In Knowing our world: An artificial intelligence perspective (pp. 49–74). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71873-2_3
  36. Luoma, T., & Kosunen, S. (2024). Participation and educational conservatism among lower secondary school students in a disadvantaged neighborhood in Finland: A request for visible pedagogies. Peabody Journal of Education, 99(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2024.2307797
  37. Malberg, N. T. (2021). Working with autistic children and their families from a mentalization based therapy for children (MBT-C) approach. Psychoanalytic Perspectives, 18(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/1551806X.2021.1845033
  38. Mather, N., White, J., & Youman, M. (2020). Dyslexia around the world: A snapshot. Learning Disabilities, 25(1). https://doi.org/10.18666/LDMJ-2020-V25-I1-9552
  39. McQuillan, M., & Mayo, C. (2024). School leaders and transphobia: Direct, facilitative, accommodative, and resistant forms of gender-based bias and bullying. Educational Administration Quarterly, 60(1), 37–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X231217747
  40. Moorhouse, B. L., & Tiet, M. C. (2021). Attempting to implement a pedagogy of care during the disruptions to teacher education caused by COVID-19: A collaborative self-study. Studying Teacher Education, 17(2), 208–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2021.1925644
  41. Morrow, E. (2023). Music reading for students with learning disabilities. American String Teacher, 73(4), 21–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/00031313231197638
  42. Nam, B. H., English, A. S., Li, X., Hanh Van, H., & Nyman, J. K. (2023). Subjectivities and the future of comparative and international education: Teacher researchers and graduate student researchers as co-constructive narrative inquirers. Educational Review, 76(5), 1093–1112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2022.2159934
  43. O’Connor, S. L., Ezell, J. A. & Roberts, J. (2019). Review of the complexity of autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Pediatric Neuropsychology, 5, 52–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40817-019-00064-4
  44. Onal, S., & Kulavuz-Onal, D. (2024). A cross-disciplinary examination of the instructional uses of ChatGPT in higher education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 52(3), 301–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/00472395231196532
  45. Patterson, D. R., & Hicks, S. C. (2020). Teaching math vocabulary in small groups to youth with autism. Teaching Exceptional Children, 52(6), 372–380. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920924688
  46. Pozas, M., Letzel, V., & Schneider, C. (2020). Teachers and differentiated instruction: Exploring differentiation practices to address student diversity. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 20(3), 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12481
  47. Price, K. M., Wigg, K. G., Misener, V. L., Clarke, A., Yeung, N., Blokland, K., Wilkinson, M., Kerr, E. N., Guger, S. L., Lovett, M. W., & Barr, C. L. (2022). Language difficulties in school-age children with developmental dyslexia. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 55(3), 200–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194211006207
  48. Puzio, K., Colby, G. T., & Algeo-Nichols, D. (2020). Differentiated literacy instruction: Boondoggle or best practice? Review of Educational Research, 90(4), 459–498. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320933536
  49. Renger, S., & Macaskill, A. (2021). Developing the foundations for a learning-based humanistic therapy. Journal of Humanistic Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221678211007668
  50. Rizos, I., & Adam, M. (2022). Mathematics students’ conceptions and reactions to questions concerning the nature of rational and irrational numbers. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 17(3), Article em0686. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/11977
  51. Rizos, I., & Foykas, E. (2023a). How can we help a student with Asperger syndrome to avoid the illusion of linearity? Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 4(2), Article ep23021. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/13404
  52. Rizos, I., & Foykas, E. (2023b). Utilization of “Byrne’s Euclid” in the teaching of geometry to students with special learning difficulties: A qualitative research. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 4(2), 139–148. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.2.623
  53. 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), Article em2242. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13025
  54. Rosello, R., Martinez-Raga, J., Mira, A., Pastor, J. C., Solmi, M., & Cortese, S. (2022). Cognitive, social, and behavioral manifestations of the co-occurrence of autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: A systematic review. Autism, 26(4), 743–760. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211065545
  55. Rowan, L., Bourke, T., L’Estrange, L., Lunn Brownlee, J., Ryan, M., Walker, S., & Churchward, P. (2021). How does initial teacher education research frame the challenge of preparing future teachers for student diversity in schools? A systematic review of literature. Review of Educational Research, 91(1), 112–158. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320979171
  56. Ruppar, A., Kurth, J., Bubash, S., & Lockman Turner, E. (2023). A framework for preparing to teach students with extensive support needs in the 21st century. Teacher Education and Special Education, 46(1), 26–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/08884064211059853
  57. Sánchez-Ruiz, L. M., Moll-López, S., Nuñez-Pérez, A., Moraño-Fernández, J. A., & Vega-Fleitas, E. (2023). ChatGPT Challenges blended learning methodologies in engineering education: A case study in mathematics. Applied Sciences, 13(10), Article 6039. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13106039
  58. Scarparolo, G., & MacKinnon, S. (2022). Student voice as part of differentiated instruction: students’ perspectives. Educational Review, 76(4), 774–791. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2022.2047617
  59. Servant-Miklos, V., & Noordegraaf-Eelens, L. (2021). Toward social-transformative education: An ontological critique of self-directed learning. Critical Studies in Education, 62(2), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2019.1577284
  60. Sharma, S., & Yadav, R. (2023). ChatGPT–A technological remedy or challenge for education system. Global Journal of Enterprise Information System, 14(4), 46–51.
  61. Sharp, K., Jarvis, J. M., & McMillan, J. M. (2020). Leadership for differentiated instruction: Teachers’ engagement with on-site professional learning at an Australian secondary school. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(8), 901–920. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1492639
  62. Siegle, D. (2023). A role for ChatGPT and AI in gifted education. Gifted Child Today, 46(3), 211–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/10762175231168443
  63. Singer, J. B., Báez, J. C., & Rios, J. A. (2023). AI creates the message: Integrating AI language learning models into social work education and practice. Journal of Social Work Education, 59(2), 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/10437797.2023.2189878
  64. Strzelecki, A. (2023). To use or not to use ChatGPT in higher education? A study of students’ acceptance and use of technology. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2209881
  65. Theocharopoulos, P. C., Anagnostou, P., Tsoukala, A., Georgakopoulos, S. V., Tasoulis, S. K., & Plagianakos, V. P. (2023). Detection of fake generated scientific abstracts. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 9th International Conference on Big Data Computing Service and Applications (pp. 33–39). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/BigDataService58306.2023.00011
  66. Theocharopoulos, P. C., Georgakopoulos, S. V., Tasoulis, S. K., & Plagianakos, V. P. (2024). Who writes the review, human or AI? arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.20285
  67. Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L. A., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest, and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2–3), 119–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235320302700203
  68. Tomlinson, S. (2012). The irresistible rise of the SEN industry. Oxford Review of Education, 38(3), 267–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2012.692055
  69. van’t Hof, M., Tisseur, C., van Berckelear-Onnes, I., van Nieuwenhuyzen, A., Daniels, A. M., Deen, M., Hoek, H. W., & Ester, W. A. (2021). Age at autism spectrum disorder diagnosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis from 2012 to 2019. Autism, 25(4), 862–873. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361320971107
  70. Wardat, Y., Tashtoush, M. A., AlAli, R., & Jarrah, A. M. (2023). ChatGPT: A revolutionary tool for teaching and learning mathematics. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), Article em2286. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13272
  71. Yaroshenko, O. M., Anisimova, H. V., Koliesnik, T. V., Kaplina, H. A., & Babych, N. O. (2024). National strategy for a barrier-free environment: Problems, tolerance and implementation. International Social Work, 67(1), 226–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208728221126002