Determining factors in language and mathematics learning in basic education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26871/killkana_social.v10i2.1746Keywords:
autoeficacia, motivación académica, interacción docente-estudiante, clima escolar, educación primariaAbstract
To know the factors that influence the teaching and learning of language, literature and mathematics in basic education, approaches that incorporate pedagogical, motivational and institutional dimensions from a relational point of view are required. To examine the views of teachers and students about the factors that constitute the educational experience, this study used an exploratory qualitative design with descriptive quantitative addition. The participation included 30 students and 30 teachers from three public institutions in Ecuador. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, which were analyzed using the method of reflective thematic analysis. In addition, the General Scale of Academic Self-Efficacy and the Questionnaire of Motivational Climate in the Classroom were implemented. The results showed that the average self-efficacy was 3.16 and the motivational climate was 3.34, indicating positive levels with considerable variability between people. The fact that there is no obvious linear relationship between the two variables suggests that an environment considered positive does not guarantee the uniform internalization of academic trust. The qualitative analysis determined five main categories. Pedagogical strategies were responsible for 33.8% of the segments and presented a higher relational density, particularly in their relationship with self-efficacy (n = 50) and institutional problems (n = 57). The results confirm that the key factors form a network dependent on each other, and their impact changes according to the institutional context and personal experience.
Downloads
References
AlKhamees, S. B., & Durugbo, C. M. (2024). Organisational ambidexterity and innovation: a systematic review and unified model of ‘CODEC’ management priorities. Management Review Quarterly, 75(4), 3813–3887. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11301-024-00474-5
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Biagini, G. (2025). Towards an AI-Literate Future: A Systematic Literature Review Exploring Education, Ethics, and Applications. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 35(4), 2616–2666. https://doi.org/10.1007/S40593-025-00466-W
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2022). Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qualitative Psychology, 9(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/QUP0000196
Chuang, T. Y., Tsai, S. K., & Lu, Y. H. (2025). Exploring the Influence of Various Digital Game-Based Learning Platforms on Critical Thinking. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 41(6), e70141. https://doi.org/10.1111/JCAL.70141
Demetrio, G. R., Diele, L. M. V., Helena, H. R., Jacobina, U. P., & Barão, K. R. (2025). Assessing evolutionary theory knowledge performance among Brazilian undergraduates: exploring political and religious affiliation differences and gender, ethnicity, and socioeconomic inequalities. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 18(1), 7-. https://doi.org/10.1186/S12052-025-00222-7
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How Many Interviews Are Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Lin, L. H., Pryor, M. R., & Beckmann, N. (2025). Social opportunities, learning practices, and performance in metaverse and virtual world: A comparative scoping review in higher education. Computers & Education, 239, 105391. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2025.105391
Lincoln, Y. G. E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry . In Sage Publications, Inc. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/naturalistic-inquiry/book842
Ly, R., & Ly, B. (2025). Unraveling the dynamics of online learning engagement: a Cambodian perspective. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 24(3), 495–515. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10671-025-09401-1
Mahmood, A., Huang, X., & Rehman, N. (2025). Gender-based analysis of attitudes and challenges in ICT use for English teaching. Quality Education for All, 2(1), 462–490. https://doi.org/10.1108/QEA-12-2024-0156
Mehrvarz, M., Salimi, G., Abdoli, S., & McLaren, B. M. (2025). How does students’ perception of ChatGPT shape online learning engagement and performance? Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 9, 100459. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CAEAI.2025.100459
Osiesi, M. P., Ayanwale, M. A., Olatunbosun, S. O., Olayiwola, T. O. A., Adegboyega, S. M., Appah, O. R., & Amusa, J. O. (2025). Unpacking the dynamics of online learning in higher education through the interplay of engagement, readiness and attitudes. Discover Education, 4(1), 156-. https://doi.org/10.1007/S44217-025-00508-4
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Four triangulation processes for enhancing credibility. Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice, 1303–1333. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/qualitative-research-evaluation-methods/book232962
Pedrami, M. (2025). A meta-synthesis informing a integrated framework for nudges in student academic performance. Discover Education, 4(1), 503-. https://doi.org/10.1007/S44217-025-00921-9
Rodriguez, J. R. B., Carreño, O. D. F., Mendoza, M. Z., & Michca, M. H. M. M. (2025). Integrating digital skills into English language teaching: Implications for teacher performance. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 31(4), 45–58. https://doi.org/10.31876/RCS.V31I4.44838
Rosak, J. S., & Wolniak, R. (2025). AI-Driven Sustainability: The Future of Human Resources Management. AI-Driven Sustainability: The Future of Human Resources Management, 1–225. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003668282
Rutten, L., & Muenks, K. (2025). Can growth grow? Measuring growth rate orientation (GRO) beliefs: An unexplored avenue into understanding mindsets. Social Psychology of Education, 28(1), 40-. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11218-024-10002-8
Shi, Y., Wu, M., Wei, Y., Chen, J., Dong, Q., & Zhu, K. (2025). A person-centered perspective in assessing college students′ self-regulated learning in an online learning environment: potential profiles, antecedents, and outcomes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 22(1), 66-. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41239-025-00564-8
Soe, H. Y., Zhang, D., Fu, D., & Cui, Y. (2025). How an autonomy-supportive learning environment influences students’ achievements in science and mathematics. Social Psychology of Education, 28(1), 53-. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11218-024-09970-8
Tapia, J. A., & Heredia, B. F. (2008). Desarrollo y validación inicial del Cuestionario de Clima Motivacional en el Aula (CMCQ) - PubMed. Psicotema, 20(4), 1–9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18940098/
Uludağ, F., Kılıç, E., & Çelik, H. E. (2025). Artificial intelligence, social influence, and AI anxiety: analyzing the intentions of science doctoral students to use ChatGPT with PLS-SEM. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 1308-. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05641-x
Zhu, X., Li, W., Su, C., Hu, J., & Zhao, H. (2025). Associations between teacher academic support and externalizing problem behaviors among Chinese adolescents: an analysis of chain mediation and moderating effects. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 293-. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-04591-8
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Leidy Estefanía Robalino Laje, Carlos Manuel Núñez Michuy, Deysi Giscela Toledo Dias, Juan Jacinto Macias Hinojoza
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Se autoriza la reproducción total y parcial, y la citación del material que aparece en la revista, siempre y cuando se indique de manera explícita: nombre de la revista, nombre del autor(es), año, volumen, número y páginas del artículo fuente. Las ideas y afirmaciones consignadas por los autores están bajo su responsabilidad y no interpretan necesariamente las opiniones y políticas del Consejo Editorial de la Revista Killkana Sociales ni de la Universidad Católica de Cuenca.
La Revista Killkana Sociales utiliza la Licencia Creative Commons de Reconocimeinto-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0, que es la siguiente: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 Internacional.
