Methodological Similarities and Differences in Teaching Cross-Sections of a Cube and a Rectangular Prism

2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.59941/2960-0642-2026-1-179-190
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to compare traditional and digital methods of teaching sections of cubes and rectangular prisms, with a focus on the development of students’ spatial reasoning. The study employed a quasi-experimental design involving 50 tenth-grade students divided into control and experimental groups. The experimental group used GeoGebra, while the control group followed traditional instructional methods. The results showed that the accuracy of section construction improved by 30% in the experimental group, compared to 10% in the control group. In addition, students’ spatial thinking scores increased from 65% to 85% in the experimental group, whereas only a slight improvement was observed in the control group. The findings indicate that the integration of digital tools enhances spatial visualization and supports deeper conceptual understanding. The study proposes a methodological framework combining traditional instruction with digital visualization and problem-based learning to improve geometry teaching.