Develop Problem Solving

Thinking Skills and Creativity 51 (2024) 101454
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Thinking Skills and Creativity

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tsc
The application of educational technology to develop

problem-solving skills: A systematic review
Dan Lu a, Ya-Nan Xie b, *
a
School of Foreign Languages, Northeast Normal University, China
b
Library, Northeast Normal University, China
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Fostering problem-solving skills is vital for students to tackle the complexities of the 21st century.
Technological tools The integration of educational technology has spurred scholarly interest in cultivating students’
Problem-solving skills problem-solving skills. A systematic examination of these scholarly pursuits can yield invaluable
Systematic review
insights and serve as a reference for both researchers and practitioners. In this context, the current
study conducted a systematic review, aiming to answer the following questions: (1) What and
how are educational technological tools applied to promote problem-solving skills? (2) What
instructional strategies are used? (3) What is the impact of the application on students’ devel
opment of problem-solving skills? Web of Science was the database used to search literature, and
69 articles were included after the screening procedure. After analyzing the included studies, key
findings and implications include: (1) Technological tools deployed in these studies serve diverse
functions, often combined to establish immersive learning environments, which indicates that
incorporating diverse cognitive and practical technology elements into curriculum design is
essential for students’ successful problem-solving; (2) Instructional strategies like scaffolding,
guidance, tool training, course orientation, and peer collaboration are employed to facilitate
students’ problem-solving proficiencies. This finding stresses the significance of a comprehensive
approach to developing problem-solving skills, involving guidance, practical training, situational
awareness, and collaboration; (3) The incorporation of educational tools in purposefully designed
instruction has a positive impact on students’ problem-solving skills. Consequently, educators and
institutions are urged to strategically embrace these tools to foster students’ problem-solving
abilities.
1. Introduction
Problem-solving is a crucial 21st-century skill that is indispensable for learning, work, and daily life in our rapidly changing society
(Annetta, 2008). As problem-solving involves cognitive processes and strategies such as constructing and manipulating representa
tions, analyzing data, identifying causes, devising plans, and finding solutions, it is a fundamental approach to achieving effective and
meaningful learning. Therefore, problem-solving is considered essential in many subject domains in formal educational settings from
primary to tertiary education (Chan & Wu, 2007; Jonassen, 2000; Jonassen et al., 2003, 2004; Polya, 1957).
To develop problem-solving skills, students must be provided with opportunities to practice approaching problems in a non-
* Corresponding author at: Library, Northeast Normal University, 5268, Renmin Street, Changchun, Jilin 130024, China.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Y.-N. Xie).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2023.101454
Received 15 May 2023; Received in revised form 16 December 2023; Accepted 27 December 2023
Available online 28 December 2023
1871-1871/© 2023 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
D. Lu and Y.-N. Xie Thinking Skills and Creativity 51 (2024) 101454
threatening environment (Kapp, 2007). The rapid development of information and communication technology has turned today’s
youth into “digital citizens” equipped with effective computer and internet skills (Ferrari, 2013). Along with these technological
advances, educational technology has provided schools and educators with more opportunities to conduct meaningful teaching ac
tivities in technology-enhanced environments. A growing body of research has focused on the integration of educational technology
with the development of problem-solving skills. Therefore, a methodical examination of the studies in this field can yield invaluable
insights and references for both scholars and practitioners.
1.1. Defining problem-solving skills
McCormick (1997) emphasized that problem-solving constitutes a particular form of elevated procedural knowledge (p. 145),
encompassing the procedural skills integral to the problem-solving process. It’s worth noting that, although creativity, critical
thinking, and problem-solving are closely correlated, this study treats them as independent constructs. Creativity is the ability to form
something new and valuable, which involves looking at problems or situations from a fresh perspective and generating novel and
original ideas (Zhou et al., 2019); critical thinking is a mode of cognitive processing that assists individuals in making well-reasoned
decisions; whereas problem-solving is a set of valuable skills for addressing and resolving various challenges (Friedel et al., 2008).
Multiple problem-solving process frameworks have been formulated to enhance these skills by directing students through the stages of
problem-solving (e.g., Good & Brophy, 1995; Hohn & Frey, 2002; Ormrod, 2000; Sternberg, 2003). This study adopted a widely
recognized model advanced by Sternberg (2003), who proposed that effectively addressing both well-defined and ill-defined problems
might entail the following sequences: (1) problem identification, (2) problem definition, (3) strategy development, (4) information
organization, (5) resource allocation, (6) monitoring, and (7) evaluation of problem-solving.
1.2. Classification of educational technological tools
Educational technological tools in this study include the Information Communication and Technology (ICT) tools used in formal
educational setting. The categorization of ICT tools proposed by Chen et al. (2000) was used in the current study, which encompasses
informative tools, situating tools, constructive tools, and communicative tools. This classification was chosen because it focuses on the
mediating roles played by the tools in the teaching process and has been found to promote higher-order thinking skills among students
(see Oliver & Hannafin, 2000; Kearney & Treasure, 2001; Neo & Neo, 2001; Lapadat, 2000).
1.3. Previous review studies
In recent times, there has been a surge in review studies dedicated to examining research concerning students’ problem-solving
abilities. Several of these studies have opted to concentrate on specific instructional methods within particular subject areas. For
example, a number of review studies have delved into the research surrounding Schema-based instruction for solving mathematical
problems (Clausen et al., 2021; Cook et al., 2020; Jitendra, 2009; Peltier et al., 2018). Yeung et al. (2023) assessed the effectiveness of
team-based learning in cultivating the general skill of problem-solving in nursing education. Some studies have directed their attention
towards interventions aimed at aiding specific groups of students within specific subject domains. For instance, Kong et al. (2021) and
Hwang and Riccomini (2016) both sought to investigate interventions designed to enhance problem-solving abilities among students
with learning disabilities. Furthermore, certain studies have chosen to explore the development of problem-solving skills within
particular academic disciplines. As an example, Dood and Watt (2023) conducted a comprehensive review, focusing on students’
approaches, challenges, and achievements in solving mechanism-related problems in organic chemistry.
In recent years, numerous studies have applied various forms of educational technology to cultivate students’ problem-solving
skills across disciplines and educational levels. Several review studies have directed their attention toward the utilization of tech
nological tools to enhance problem-solving abilities. In an effort to comprehend the current state, areas of significant interest, and
future prospects of research related to online collaborative problem-solving, Jiang et al. (2023) conducted a knowledge graph analysis
using CiteSpace. In another study, Gyaurov (2022) outlined a protocol for a systematic review centered on entertainment digital games
designed to foster complex problem-solving skills. The research examines the characteristics of these games, the specific skills they
enhance, and the mechanisms through which they promote complex problem-solving abilities. Yilmaz and Griffiths (2023) also
explored studies involving games, focusing on children’s development of social problem-solving skills during gameplay. Their ex
amination specifically considered aspects such as research design, the types of games utilized, and the variables influencing children’s
social skills development.
Review studies focusing on the development of problem-solving abilities have typically aimed to assess instructional interventions
and their effects on students’ problem-solving skills. However, these studies often confine themselves to specific subject areas or
particular student groups, such as students with learning disabilities. Likewise, when it comes to review studies involving technological
tools, they tend to concentrate on individual tools. Broadening the scope of subject areas, participant demographics, and the variety of
technological tools within a systematic review would yield more comprehensive and consolidated insights. Specifically, a systematic
review analyzing the technology tools, the instructional design strategies employed, the findings regarding impact on problem-solving
skills will provide valuable insights and references for researchers and practitioners in broader and more diverse fields. Therefore, the
following research questions were sought:
(1) What and how are educational technological tools applied to promote problem-solving skills?
2
(2) What instructional strategies are used in the application of educational technology to promote problem-solving skills?
(3) What is the impact of the application of educational technology on students’ development of problem-solving skills?
2. Method
We carried out a methodical and structured review of the literature by adhering to the guidelines outlined in the Preferred
Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework (Liberati et al., 2009). The process encompassed the
following stages: (1) identifying relevant subjects and conducting a search for pertinent studies; (2) screening documents to identify
crucial studies; (3) evaluating the eligibility of the studies; and (4) incorporating the documents from the studies that were analyzed,
synthesized, and described.
2.1. Literature search
In this study, we used Web of Science Core Collection platform to search for literature within the SCI/SSCI/A&HCI. We chose Web
of Science because it provides a comprehensive and balanced coverage of high-quality, peer-reviewed articles. Although other da
tabases, such as Scopus, also offer peer-reviewed articles, Web of Science is often considered more authoritative for SCI, SSCI and
A&HCI (Chadegani et al., 2013; Li et al., 2010; Singh et al., 2021). The search sentence is “(((ti=(“Problem solving” or “problem
solution” or “solv* problem”) or ak=(“Problem solving” or “problem solution” or “solv* problem”)) and wc=education*) OR ((ti=
(“Problem solving” or “problem solution” or “solv* problem”) or ak=(“Problem solving” or “problem solution” or “solv* problem”))
and (ti=(teaching or learning or instruct* or pedagog* or lesson or class or course) or ak=(teaching or learning or instruct* or
pedagog* or lesson or class or course)))) and ts=(technology* or “computer-assisted” or “computer-supported” or ICT or website or
online or “e-learning” or virtual* or system)”. We limited the search to “articles” and retrieved a total of 1393 articles. There is no
restriction on the publication date, and the final retrieval date is March 27, 2023.
2.2. Inclusion criteria
To ensure a comprehensive and rigorous systematic review, the articles selected for this study must meet the following criteria:
1. The research must focus on problem-solving, with other related thinking skills, such as creativity and critical thinking, excluded.
2. The articles must feature common educational technology tools that have broad applicability across different fields. Tools designed
for specific knowledge or skills, such as specialized tools used in medical science, are excluded due to their lack of generalizability.
3. The articles must be relevant to teaching in formal education settings. Self-learning and extracurricular studies are excluded, except
for online credit courses offered by universities or colleges during the COVID-19 pandemic, which are included in the review.
4. Clear and detailed descriptions of teaching methods or instructional designs related to problem-solving are necessary for inclusion
in the review.
5. The research must be empirical, with scientific measurements of problem-solving abilities used as the basis for evaluation.
Fig. 1. The screening procedure.
3
2.3. Screening procedure
As for the screening procedure, we adhered to the following steps. In the first step, the coders screened 1393 articles by assessing
their titles, keywords, and abstracts against five selection criteria, which removed 1085 articles. In the second step, the remaining 308
articles were fully reviewed. After evaluating based on the selection criteria, 239 articles were excluded, including 115 articles that did
not address problem-solving, 100 articles that did not involve common educational technology tools, four articles that were not related
to in-campus teaching, six articles that lacked specific instructional design, and 14 articles that lacked scientific measurement. In the
end, 69 relevant articles were included in the review, as shown in Fig. 1.
Two coders (two authors of the article) conducted a two-week screening procedure. All the studies were examined by two coders
based on the review’s inclusion criteria. When discrepancies happened, they were resolved by further review of the respective titles,
abstracts and full text, and discussion between the two coders. The reliability was calculated using the Cohen’s Kappa coefficient.
Following the criteria established by Viera and Garrett (2005), an agreement level is considered acceptable if the Kappa value exceeds
0.61, while it is deemed a perfect agreement when surpassing 0.81. In this study, the agreement level reached 0.805, indicating a
nearly perfect match between the two coders.
2.4. Data extraction and analysis
To address the research questions, relevant data was extracted and categorized from the selected 69 studies, encompassing: (1)
designations and functions of technological tools, (2) the instructional strategies, and (3) the improvement of students’ problem-
solving skills. Data extraction and analysis were conducted by the guidance of the theoretical frameworks of the variables and a
narrative synthesis methodology (Aguilar & Turmo, 2019; Davis et al., 2009). We undertook the subsequent steps: (1) individually
Table 1
Types of technological tools and their use.
Types Tools Studies Use
Informative Diagnosis tool Huang and Chuang (2008), Lin (2019) • Providing learning materials
Assessing tool Crippen and Earl (2007) • Providing tests and quizzes
Websites Forrester et al. (2001) • Diagnosing students’ problems
Videos Karabulut-Ilgu et al. (2017), Lin (2019), Song (2018) • Supporting flipped classrooms
Constructive Mind/concept/ Song (2018), Wang et al. (2018a), Yilmaz-Na and Sönmez • Facilitating analysing process
argument mapping (2023) • Enabling information searching
Information searching Hwang and Kuo (2011), Ibieta et al. (2019), Kuo et al. • Presenting problem-solving process
system (2012), Kuo et al. (2014)
Reasoning tool Sun et al. (2018)
Problem solving tool Liang and She, 2021
Informative & Learning Management Aslan and Duruhan (2020), Cheng et al. (2021), Hsiao • Providing learning materials
communicative System (e.g. Moodle) et al. (2018), Huang and Chuang (2008), Janson et al. • Providing tests and quizzes
(2020), Karaoglan-Yilmaz (2021), Lazakidou and Retalis • Diagnosing students’ problems
(2010), Tsai and Tang (2017), Wong and Kan (2022) • Presenting learning products
Whiteboard Hwang and Hu (2013) • Supporting teachers’ feedback
Live online class (e.g. Aslan (2021) • Supporting peer review and comments
Zoom)
Constructive & VR/AR Araiza-Alba et al. (2021), Hwang and Hu (2013), • Enabling manipulation and construction of
situational Karagozlu (2017), Kim et al. (2022), Song (2018), Wu 3D objects/artifacts
et al. (2019) • Constructing learning context through
Visualization based Kohen et al. (2019), Wang et al. (2013), Wang et al. simulation
cognitive tool (2018b) • Facilitating knowledge construction and
Simulation Ceberio et al. (2016), Chang et al. (2017), Liu et al. (2011), problem solution through directly
Molnár and Csapó (2018), Pellas and Vosinakis (2018), interacting with the problem situation
Programming tool Akcaoglu and Koehler (2014), Chadli et al. (2018), Erümit
(2019), Kim et al. (2013), Pol et al. (2008), Pol et al.
(2009), Reisslein et al. (2010), Sonnleitner et al. (2017)
Computer assisted Chadli et al. (2018), Reisslein et al. (2010)
system
Individual gaming Ke and Clark (2018), Hwang and Chen (2017), Hwang
et al. (2013a), Jurdi et al. (2018), Liu et al. (2011), Pellas
and Vosinakis (2018), Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen et al.
(2013)
Informative, Tutoring/guided Baghaei et al. (2007), Chen (2010), Cheng et al. (2021), • Providing the learning materials
constructive & system Choi and Lee (2008), del Olmo-Muñoz et al. (2022), • Offering scaffolding
communicative Harskamp and Suhre (2007), Horton (2013), • Supporting diagnosing
Nirmalakhandan (2007), Lee (2010), Lin et al. (2018), Pee • Facilitating knowledge construction
(2019), Raes et al. (2012), Lazakidou and Retalis (2010), • Supporting collaboration and
Serin (2011), Yu et al. (2010), Zydney et al. (2012) communication
Adaptive training Neri et al. (2010), Schoppek and Tulis (2010)
Collaborative gaming Chou et al. (2020), Sánchez and Olivares (2011), Yang
(2012)
4
read the articles, (2) analyzed and categorized the articles, and (3) subsequently engaged in collaborative discussions to decide on the
theoretical frameworks and establish consensus regarding the classifications of technological tools, instructional strategies, and
improvement of students’ problem-solving skills. Throughout these discussions, patterns within the literature were identified through
coding.
To answer the first research question, we adopted the classification of ICT tools proposed by Chen et al. (2000) to assist analyzing
the educational technological tools. Specifically, informative tools encompass applications that deliver extensive information through
various media like text, audio, visuals, or videos; situating tools involve systems that immerse students within an environment where
they can practically ‘experience’ the context and events; constructive tools are versatile utilities enabling information manipulation,
personal knowledge construction, or visualization of comprehension; communicative tools are systems facilitating interactions be
tween teachers and students, or among students, transcending the physical confines (be it spatial, temporal, or both) of the classroom
(Lim & Tay, 2003). As for the specific use of the technological tools, we read the articles and identify the content describing how the
tools were utilized to facilitate the problem-solving process. Then the two coders work together to summarize the use.
With the purpose of answering the second research question, we borrowed Jonassen’s model for designing Constructivist Learning
Environments (CLEs) to assist the analysis of the instructional strategies adopted in the studies. This model is intended for problem
solving and conceptual learning (Jonassen, 1999). According to the model, a problem, question, or project is the focus of the envi
ronment, with various interpretative and intellectual support systems surrounding it, which includes related cases and information,
cognitive tools, conversation/collaboration, and social context support system (Jonassen, 1999). It’s worth noting that this model
served as a broad analytical framework. To pinpoint the specific strategies, we additionally adopted the narrative synthesis approach,
which involved extracting key concepts from the literature. We underwent several rounds of thematic coding, culminating in the
eventual categorization of the instructional strategies.
In order to answer the third research question, we first explored the various assessment instruments employed in the studies and
their findings in relation to the proficiency of problem-solving. Furthermore, we looked into the specific problem-skills addressed in
the studies. Following multiple rounds of coding, it became evident that the assessment of students’ specific problem-solving abilities
appeared to correspond effectively with Sternberg’s problem-solving model proposed in 2003. Consequently, we applied this estab
lished framework to categorize the enhancement of specific problem-solving skills.
3. Results
3.1. Use of technological tools
The study identified a total of 20 technological tools used to enhance problem-solving skills across the reviewed studies, with some
studies using multiple tools. Chen et al.’ (2000) classification of ICT tools (informative, situating, constructive, and communicative)
was used as the basic framework for presenting the technological tools. After examining the functions of the tools used in the studies,
some tools were found to possess multiple functions. As a result, we grouped the tools according to the functions they served (refer to
Table 1).
Informative tools, such as diagnosis and assessment tools, websites, and videos, were used to provide learning materials, quizzes,
and tests, diagnose students’ problems, and support flipped classrooms. For example, Lin (2019) examined the effects of a flipped
classroom with a smart learning diagnosis system on students’ learning performance, perception, and problem-solving ability in a
software engineering course. In the flipped classroom, videos that transformed in-class lectures were provided to students before class.
The smart learning diagnosis system supported the flipped classroom by allowing students to access learning materials, watch videos,
and take diagnostic assessments.
Constructive tools, such as mind maps, information searching systems, and reasoning tools, were found in the reviewed studies.
These tools were used to facilitate the analysis process, enable information searching, and present problem-solving processes. For
example, to examine the effects of the computer-based cognitive-mapping approach on students’ deep learning with complex prob
lems, Wang et al. (2018a, 2018b) extended the traditional concept mapping technique by allowing learners to visually represent the
problem-solving process and underlying knowledge in a more comprehensive format.
Some tools serve both informative and communicative functions, such as the learning management system (LMS) of Moodle and
whiteboard. These tools can be used to provide learning materials, tests and quizzes, diagnose students’ problems, present learning
products, support teacher feedback, and enable peer review and comments. For instance, in a study by Huang and Chuang (2008), the
Moodle platform was used to incorporate a problem-based learning (PBL) activity, with the addition of a learning diagnosis tool. This
allowed students to work collaboratively to solve problems while providing diagnostic feedback on incorrect solutions to facilitate
problem-solving.
Technological tools that serve both constructive and situational functions include virtual reality/augmented reality (VR/AR),
visualization-based cognitive tools, simulations, programming tools, computer-assisted systems, and individual gaming. These tools
can be utilized to enable the manipulation and construction of 3D objects/artifacts, construct learning contexts through simulation,
and facilitate knowledge construction and problem-solving by directly interacting with the problem situation. For instance, Chang
et al. (2017) conducted a study to investigate the effects of using individual-based and collaborative simulations to solve physics
problems on science learning. The simulations enabled students to manipulate variables to solve the problems, resulting in enhanced
learning outcomes.
Tools playing the informative, constructive and communicative role include tutoring system, adaptive training, and collaborative
gaming. This type of technological tools can provide learning materials, offer scaffolding, support diagnosis, facilitate knowledge
5
Table 2
Strategies of instruction design and improvement in problem-solving skills.
Author & Year School Level Subject area Strategies Improved problem-solving
skills
Akcaoglu and Koehler (2014) Secondary Computer • Scaffold and guidance • Analyzing the problem
• Drawing up the solution
Araiza-Alba et al. (2021) Primary Mathematics • Training on how to use the ICT
tools
Aslan (2021) University Medicine • Peer interaction and • Drawing up the solution
collaboration • Executing the solution
• Evaluating the solution
Aslan and Duruhan (2020) Secondary Science • Peer interaction and • Understanding the
collaboration problem
• Analyzing the problem
Baghaei et al. (2007) University Computer • Scaffold and guidance
Ceberio et al. (2016) University Physics • Scaffold and guidance • Analyzing the problem
Chadli et al. (2018) Primary Mathematics • Training on how to use the ICT • Understanding the
tools problem
• Executing the solution
Chang et al. (2017) Secondary Physics • Orientation of the course
• Peer interaction and
collaboration
Chen (2010) University Educational psychology • Scaffold and guidance • Representing the problem
Cheng et al. (2021) Primary Computer • Scaffold and guidance • Analyzing the problem
• Orientation of the course
collaboration
Choi and Lee (2008) University Early child education • Orientation of the course • Presenting the problem
• Peer interaction and • Drawing up the solution
collaboration • Evaluating the solution
Chou et al. (2020) Primary Chinese • Scaffold and guidance
Crippen and Earl (2007) University Chemistry • Scaffold and guidance
del Olmo-Muñoz et al. (2022) Primary Mathematics • Scaffold and guidance
Erümit (2019) Secondary Computer • Training on how to use the ICT
tools
Forrester et al. (2001) University Medicine • Peer interaction and
collaboration
Harskamp and Suhre (2007) Secondary Mathematics • Training on how to use the ICT • Analyzing the problem
tools • Drawing up the solution
• Orientation of the course • Executing the solution
• Scaffold and guidance • Evaluating the solution
Horton (2013) University Mathematics • Scaffold and guidance
collaboration
Hsiao et al. (2018) Secondary Mathematics • Training on how to use the ICT • Representing the problem
• Scaffold and guidance • Executing the solution
• Monitoring the process
Huang and Chuang (2008) Secondary Science • Peer interaction and
collaboration
Hwang and Chen (2017) Primary Science • Training on how to use the ICT • Understanding the
tools problem
• Representing the problem
Hwang et al. (2013a) Primary Science • Orientation of the course
collaboration
Hwang and Hu (2013) Primary Mathematics • Peer interaction and
collaboration
Hwang and Kuo (2011) Primary Reading • Scaffold and guidance
Ibieta et al. (2019) Secondary Computer • Orientation of the course
(continued on next page)
6
Table 2 (continued )
skills

collaboration
Janson et al. (2020) University Management and • Scaffold and guidance • Understanding the
business problem
• Representing the problem
Jurdi et al. (2018) Primary Computer • Peer interaction and
collaboration
Karabulut-Ilgu et al. (2017) University Engineering • Orientation of the course • Understanding the
• Peer interaction and problem
collaboration • Representing the problem
Karaoglan Yilmaz (2021) University Economy • Scaffold and guidance • Monitoring the process
Ke and Clark (2018) Secondary Mathematics • Training on how to use the ICT • Understanding the
tools problem
Kim et al. (2013) Secondary Computer • Training on how to use the ICT
tools
Kim et al. (2022) Secondary Art • Training on how to use the ICT
tools
collaboration
Kohen et al. (2019) Secondary Mathematics • Training on how to use the ICT
tools
Kuo et al. (2012) Elementary Computer • Orientation of the course • Presenting the problem
• Peer interaction and • Analyzing the problem
collaboration
Kuo et al. (2014) University Computer • Training on how to use the ICT • Representing the problem
collaboration
Lazakidou and Retalis (2010) Primary Mathematics • Scaffold and guidance • Understanding the
• Orientation of the course problem
• Peer interaction and • Drawing up the solution
collaboration • Executing the solution
Lee (2010) University Physics • Scaffold and guidance
Liang and She, 2021 Secondary Mathematics • Scaffold and guidance
Lin (2019) University Computer • Scaffold and guidance • Analyzing the problem
• Training on how to use the ICT • Drawing up the solution
tools
Lin et al. (2018) Secondary STEM • Scaffold and guidance • Understanding the
problem
Liu et al. (2011) University Computer • Training on how to use the ICT • Drawing up the solution
tools • Executing the solution
Molnár and Csapó (2018) Primary & Psychology • Training on how to use the ICT
Secondary tools
Neri et al. (2010) University Physics • Orientation of the course
Nirmalakhandan (2007) University Engineering • Scaffold and guidance
Pee (2019) University & Management • Scaffold and guidance • Drawing up the solution
graduate • Training on how to use the ICT
tools
collaboration
Pellas and Vosinakis (2018) Secondary Computer • Training on how to use the ICT
tools
Pol et al. (2008) Secondary Physics • Scaffold and guidance
• Training on how to use the ICT
tools
Pol et al. (2009) Secondary Physics • Scaffold and guidance
Raes et al. (2012) Secondary Science • Scaffold and guidance
Reisslein et al. (2010) Secondary Engineering • Scaffold and guidance • Representing the problem
Sánchez and Olivares (2011) Secondary Science • Peer interaction and
collaboration
(continued on next page)
7
Table 2 (continued )
skills
Schoppek& Tulis (2010) Primary Mathematics • Scaffold and guidance • Representing the problem
tools • Executing the solution
Serin (2011) Primary Science • Orientation of the course
• Training on how to use the ICT
tools
• Scaffold and guidance
Song (2018) Primary Science • Peer interaction and • Understanding the
• Presenting the problem
Sonnleitner et al. (2017) University, graduate Science • Scaffold and guidance • Understanding the
problem
Sun et al. (2018) Primary Computer • Scaffold and guidance
Tsai and Tang (2017) University Bioinformatics • Peer interaction and • Understanding the
Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen et al. Primary Mathematics • Orientation of the course
(2013)
Wang et al. (2013) University Medicine • Scaffold and guidance • Analyzing the problem
Wang et al. (2018a) University Medicine • Training on how to use the ICT • Analyzing the problem
Wang et al. (2018b) University Medicine • Scaffold and guidance • Analyzing the problem
tools
Winkler et al., 2021 Secondary Law • Scaffold and guidance
Wong and Kan (2022) University Nursing • Scaffold and guidance
collaboration
Wu et al. (2019) Primary Science • Orientation of the course
Yang (2012) Secondary Civics and society • Peer interaction and • Analyzing the problem
collaboration • Drawing up the solution
Yilmaz-Na and Sönmez (2023) University Pedagogy • Scaffold and guidance
Yu et al. (2010) Secondary Biology • Peer interaction and
collaboration
Zydney et al. (2012) Primary Mathematics • Scaffold and guidance
construction, and promote collaboration and communication. For example, Sánchez and Olivares (2011) implemented a series of
learning activities based on mobile serious games to develop students’ problem-solving and collaborative skills. The game was spe
cifically designed and developed for mobile devices, using sophisticated 3D graphics. It attempted to simulate the process of biological
evolution that occurs in nature, where students performed various actions, sometimes collectively, to develop and maintain different
animal species in the environment.
3.2. Strategies of instructional design
Various strategies were employed in instructional design to facilitate the application of technological tools in cultivating students’
problem-solving skills across different school levels, with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) disciplines
receiving most attention (See Table 2). Some of these strategies were considered as intervention variables in quasi-experimental or
mixed studies, while others were mentioned in the research design of the studies. Notably, many studies incorporated more than one
strategy in their instructional design.
3.2.1. Scaffold and guidance

Several studies have shown that scaffold and guidance from instructors or technological tools can facilitate the cultivation of
students’ problem-solving skills. For example, in a study conducted by Lee (2010), different types of instructional preparation
8
strategies were applied to different groups of students in an introductory physics class within a web-based learning environment. The
study’s results indicate that interactive tutorials providing just-in-time scaffolding were more effective than other types of strategies
when students faced challenging and complex problems. In another study, Akcaoglu and Koehler (2014) investigated the impact of an
after-school Game-Design and Learning program using a quasi-experimental design. The experimental group was subjected to a guided
discovery approach that provided students with minimal but sufficient guidance and feedback during the game-design process. The
findings of the study revealed that the experimental group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in their problem-solving
skills than the control group, who did not attend the program.
3.2.2. Training on how to use the ICT tools

Training and providing specific instructions on how to use the tools was listed as one of the rules that guide the instructional design.
For instance, Chadli et al. (2018) developed a system to assist students in solving mathematical word problems and compared its effects
with general strategy instruction on students’ problem-solving and computational skills. In the experimental group, the researchers
provided training sessions within the learning environment to familiarize students with the problem-solving program. The study’s
results showed a significantly better performance of the experimental group compared to the comparison group. The researchers noted
that the training session played an important role in developing students’ problem-solving abilities.
3.2.3. Orientation of the course

Several studies included an orientation session at the beginning of the course to familiarize students with online instruction. For
example, Hwang et al. (2014) proposed a peer assessment-based game development approach to enhance students’ problem-solving
skills with a quasi-experimental design. In the first few weeks, an orientation was given to help students understand the learning
content, criteria of learning tasks, and functions of the game development tool. Although the orientation was not a controlled variable
in the study, it could have facilitated students’ problem-solving process by enabling them to understand the learning content, tasks,
and tools.
3.2.4. Peer interaction and collaboration

Several of the articles reviewed suggested that interaction and collaboration among students should be incorporated into the course
design. For instance, in order to assist students with three-dimensional geometric problem-solving, Hwang and Hu (2013) developed
an Interactive Future Mathematics Classroom (IFMC) utilizing a Collaborative Virtual Reality Learning Environment (CVRLE). The
IFMC included various collaborative activities, such as synchronously reviewing peers’ solving processes, collaboratively manipulating
3-D objects, and providing feedback on peers’ work for future discussions. The results of the study indicated that the experimental
group performed significantly better than the comparison group in solving geometric problems. According to Hwang and Hu (2013),
peer interactions, which ranged from encouragement and cooperation to even unrelated social discussions, were positively correlated
with the problem-solving process.
3.3. Development of problem-solving skills
The studies under review employed a variety of assessment methods to gauge problem-solving abilities. These methods encom
passed standardized tests, problem-solving scales, self-assessment questionnaires and reports, discipline-specific tests, and the eval
uation of problem-solving performance using grading criteria. Despite the diverse array of assessment tools employed, the studies
consistently reported positive outcomes resulting from the integration of technological tools in students’ overall problem-solving
performance. Furthermore, some of these studies focused on honing specific problem-solving skills, allowing for a more in-depth
analysis of the effects of these tools. As previously mentioned in the introduction, we utilized Sternberg’s 7-step model as a struc
tured framework to systematically and consistently present the development of specific problem-solving skills. After closely examining
the findings from these studies, we made some modifications to these steps to better align them with the reported data (refer to Table 2
for details).
As presented in Table 2, the studies reviewed in this paper showed improvements in various problem-solving skills, with the skill of
drawing up a solution being reported to have improved the most frequently, while monitoring the problem-solving process was re
ported to have improved less often. While some studies examined the effects of technological applications on the development of all
problem-solving skills, others focused on the improvement of one or two specific skills. For instance, Harskamp and Suhre (2006)
evaluated the effectiveness of a student-controlled computer program, based on Schoenfeld’s theory, in improving problem-solving
abilities in high school mathematics. The study found that students who used the program demonstrated greater problem-solving
ability than those in a traditional mathematics course in a wide range of specific problem-solving skills. On the other hand, Sonn
leitner et al. (2017) conducted a study on embedding computer-based problem-solving scenarios in a sustainability course, with a
particular focus on the Genetics Lab scenario. The results showed that the computer-based scenarios deepened students’ compre
hension of complex problem-solving related to known phenomena.
4. Discussion
The integration of educational technology with the cultivation of problem-solving skills has garnered significant interest among
both researchers and practitioners in recent times. Previous review studies have tended to narrow their focus on specific technological
tools, instructional approaches, subject areas, or student demographics. Consequently, this review study was undertaken to
9
comprehensively examine a wide array of technology tools and instructional design strategies, as well as assess their impact on
problem-solving skills, without being constrained by specific instructional methods, student groups, academic disciplines, or research
methodologies.
4.1. Use of technological tools
After conducting the review, we found that 20 technological tools were commonly used to promote students’ problem-solving
skills, which aligned with the tools identified in previous systematic reviews by Lai and Bower (2020) and Granić (2022). These
tools were categorized into several types based on their functions, including informative, constructive, informative & communicative,
constructive & situational, and informative, constructive & communicative. It was found that most tools possessed multiple functions,
and different tools were often combined to construct the learning environment. Given that blended learning environments involve
various factors that can affect problem-solving performance, such as learning activities, resources, feedback, and evaluation (Soph
onhiranraka et al., 2015), it is essential for course designers to adopt technological tools that perform multiple functions or combine
different tools to perform various functions.
Furthermore, the use of these technological tools was found to be closely related to the problem-solving process. For example,
informative tools were mostly used to facilitate the understanding of the problem, situational tools to present the problem, and
constructive tools to analyze the problem and develop solutions. Communicative tools were used in almost all stages of the problem-
solving process. This suggests that researchers have designed and applied these tools in response to the challenges posed by different
stages of problem-solving.
4.2. Strategies of instructional design
4.2.1. Scaffold and guidance

The systematic review revealed that many studies have utilized the approach of scaffold and guidance to enhance students’
problem-solving abilities. Previous research has suggested that providing guidance at various stages of the problem-solving process can
be beneficial (Chang et al., 2006; Huang et al., 2012; Lee, 2017). There are several advantages to this approach. Firstly, graduated
scaffolding can reduce the cognitive and memory load on students, allowing them to concentrate on complex problems without feeling
frustrated (Puntambekar & Hu¨bscher, 2005; Quintana et al., 2004). Secondly, guidance can help students form a deeper understanding
and representation of the problems (Chi et al., 1994; Chen & Bradshaw, 2007; Zulfah et al., 2020). Thirdly, the step-by-step scaffold
and guidance approach can enhance students’ deep processing of information that is crucial to solving the problem (León et al., 2015).
While scaffold and guidance are widely recognized for their significance in improving students’ problem-solving skills, there is
ongoing debate about the appropriate degree and timing of support. Some researchers advocate for minimal support, provided only on
demand, with the amount gradually decreasing over time (Renkl, 2002; Collins et al., 1989; van Merriënboer et al., 2003; Reif, 1995;
Harskamp & Suhre, 2006). However, studies have shown that students may not always seek guidance at the right time, and some
learners with insufficient prior knowledge may require more human scaffold to model information problem-solving, as they may suffer
from minimal guidance (Kim & Hannafin, 2011; Kirschner et al., 2006). Therefore, additional research is needed to explore the
appropriate degree and timing of scaffold and guidance.
4.2.2. Training on how to use the tools

Numerous studies have emphasized the importance of training students on how to use technology tools effectively. Providing
specific instructions and training on tool use is a crucial aspect of instructional design. ICT tools can be complex and may require
specific skills to use efficiently. When students are unfamiliar with these tools, they may focus more on becoming proficient in their
use, rather than on the thinking activities they are intended to support. However, with proper training, students can learn to use these
tools more efficiently and effectively. This training can help reduce the cognitive load imposed by ICT tools, enabling students to
become more confident when using them.
4.2.3. Orientation of the course

Many studies have emphasized the importance of course orientation in cultivating students’ problem-solving skills through the use
of technological tools. Since this approach often involves unconventional materials and teaching methods, it is crucial to introduce
students to the course’s objectives and design, so they understand how it can benefit their problem-solving skills. Without proper
orientation, students may view the course as a waste of time (Ceberio et al., 2016). Moreover, research suggests that students tend to
focus on surface aspects of problems instead of gaining a comprehensive understanding of the problem area when faced with
problem-solving tasks (van de Wiel et al., 2000). When knowledge is taught through close association with specific problems, it be
comes challenging for learners to separate fundamental knowledge from the problem and apply it to new situations (Anderson et al.,
1996; Patel et al., 1993). Therefore, introducing students to the problem-solving process and its steps can help reduce cognitive load
and improve their ability to grasp new knowledge.
4.2.4. Peer interaction and collaboration

Peer interaction and collaboration have been found to be crucial components for developing students’ problem-solving skills in
many reviewed studies. Collaborative learning can lead to the improvement of students’ high-order thinking skills as they can be
scaffolded by their peers, which is consistent with the findings of previous studies (Hwang & Kuo, 2011; Kim & Hannafin, 2011). Group
10
discussions and other forms of peer interaction can also help to link abstract knowledge to daily experiences, leading to a deeper
understanding of the problem and easier identification of solutions (Sonnleitner et al., 2017). Additionally, when students have access
to their peers’ ideas, they are more likely to reflect on their own thinking and modify their solutions appropriately (Loibl et al., 2017).
However, studies suggest that collaborative learning needs to be balanced with individual learning in terms of proportion and order
(Rummel & Spada, 2005). For example, Sun and Looi (2013) pointed out that many students require individual learning tasks before
they can progress to collaborative learning activities in a group. Effective collaborative learning involves regularly switching between
individual activities such as self-exploration and reading, and group activities such as discussion and working together (Chang et al.,
2012). Thus, it is essential to strike a balance between collaborative and individual learning to ensure the development of well-rounded
problem-solving skills in students.
4.3. Development of problem-solving skills
The study’s findings suggest that the use of technological tools with supporting instructional strategies can enhance students’
problem-solving skills. These findings are in line with those of a recent systematic review conducted by Lai and Bower (2020), which
also demonstrated that technology use can bring significant learning benefits, including improvements in problem-solving skills. Taken
together, these results provide compelling evidence for the integration of technology in education.
Technological tools can contribute to the development of problem-solving skills in various ways. Gaming, for instance, provides a
non-threatening environment that facilitates students’ practice of problem solution (Kapp, 2007). By progressing through the levels of
the game, students receive positive feedback in the form of higher scores, which can help develop their self-efficacy and confidence,
thus facilitating their problem-solving process (Dörnyei, 1994). Augmented reality (AR) and simulation tools contribute to
problem-solving skills development by providing visual representations and allowing students to manipulate the anticraft. These tools
can lower students’ cognitive load and increase their focus, while also making their thinking visible, deepening their understanding,
and helping them reflect on and test existing solutions, ultimately leading to novel problem-solving (Holzinger et al., 2009; Ke & Hsu,
2015; Lan et al., 2021; Song, 2014; Wijaya et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2020). Web-based learning environments constructed with
websites, videos, and search engines can also cultivate problem-solving skills by allowing students to apply divergent and convergent
thinking strategies to draw up solutions (Chiou et al., 2009; Hwang et al., 2013a, 2013b). Additionally, web-based creative thinking
environments allow students of different cognitive styles to practice problem-solving at their own pace (Kuo et al., 2014). Finally,
diagnostic tools can test students’ prior knowledge and thinking skills, enabling instructors or online systems to assign the most
appropriate problems to facilitate the development of students’ problem-solving skills (Huang et al., 2014; Panjaburees et al., 2013).
While review studies have generally found positive outcomes associated with the use of technology in education, it is important to
avoid assuming that technology use will inevitably lead to improvements in learning outcomes and experiences. Many of the reviewed
studies were the result of extensive collaboration and effort between researchers and educators, aimed at examining the potential
benefits of technology integration. In actual classrooms, however, technology is often integrated without the same level of support and
collaboration. Consequently, it is possible that randomly selected classes attempting to integrate technology may not experience the
same positive outcomes as those in the reviewed studies.
5. Conclusion
5.1. Summary of the major findings
This review investigated how technological tools were used, the approaches employed in their implementation, and the resulting
improvements in problem-solving skills within formal educational settings. After conducting a thorough and structured examination of
various studies, the following conclusions emerged: (1) The technological tools employed in these studies served a wide range of
purposes, often combined to create engaging learning environments to promote students’ problem-solving skills. (2) Instructional
strategies, such as providing support, guidance, training in tool usage, course orientation, and peer collaboration, were commonly
employed to facilitate students’ problem-solving process. (3) The deliberate integration of educational tools into well-designed
instructional approaches had a favorable impact on students’ problem-solving capabilities.
5.2. Implications
The findings from this study have implications both for research and pedagogy. In terms of research implications, future studies
should place greater emphasis on assessing the impact of technology application on the development of specific problem-solving skills.
As the findings reveal, many studies have not delved into the assessment of specific skills during problem-solving, thus hindering the
presentation of the developmental aspects of the thinking process effectively. Additionally, further research is needed to explore the
application of educational technological tools in fostering problem-solving skills in subjects within the social sciences and humanities,
where the cultivation of problem-solving abilities has been gaining increasing attention. Two pedagogical implications emerge to
guide educators using educational technology to enhance problem-solving skills. First, educators can blend technological tools with
diverse functionalities to create a learning environment that targets students’ problem-solving processes. Second, instructional stra
tegies like scaffolding, guidance, tool training, course orientation, and peer collaboration should be incorporated into instructional
design to ensure positive learning experiences and outcomes for students.
11
5.3. Limitations and further research
Similar to all research, this study had certain limitations. The first limitation is that the search approach adopted for the chosen
database could only include a representative selection of research papers published in a number of established journals, and it may not
have encompassed all the relevant papers on the topic of improving students’ problem-solving skills through educational technology.
Nevertheless, the collection of 69 papers was enough to create a reasonable sample size to describe the population and analyze the
pattern. To update and extend the current systematic literature review, upcoming research could widen the range for reviewing
published papers, include additional search engines, and broaden the scope of search terms employed. The study’s second limitation
lies in treating problem-solving as a relatively independent construct and concentrating solely on the subskills within the problem-
solving process. Future research could benefit from adopting a more comprehensive theoretical framework to encompass other
closely related thinking skills such as critical thinking and creativity. The third limitation of this review is that it did not evaluate the
effectiveness of using technological tools in terms of effect size. The absence of a report on the effectiveness of the meta-analysis
method could weaken the robustness of the conclusion. There is an opportunity for future studies to conduct a meta-analysis to
determine the effect size of educational technology on the enhancement of problem-solving skills.
During the preparation of this work the authors used ChatGPT in order to polish the language.
After using this tool, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the
publication.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Dan Lu: . Ya-Nan Xie: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – review & editing.
Data availability
Data will be made available on request.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by the Department of Social Sciences, Ministry of Education, PRC under Grant 21YJA740022.
References
Aguilar, D., & Turmo, P. M. (2019). Promoting social creativity in science education with digital technology to overcome inequalities: A scoping review. Frontiers in
Psychology, 10, 1474.
* Akcaoglu, M., & Koehler, M. J. (2014). Cognitive outcomes from the Game-Design and Learning (GDL) after-school program. Computers & Education, 75, 72–81.
Anderson, J. R., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (1996). Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher, 25, 5–11.
Annetta, L. A. (2008). Video games in education: Why they should be used and how they are being used. Theory Into Practice, 47(3), 229–239.
* Araiza-Alba, P., Keane, T., Chen, W. S., & Kaufman, J. (2021). Immersive virtual reality as a tool to learn problem-solving skills. Computers & Education, 164.
* Aslan, A. (2021). Problem- based learning in live online classes: Learning achievement, problem-solving skill, communication skill, and interaction. Computers &
Education, 171.
* Aslan, S. A., & Duruhan, K. (2020). The effect of virtual learning environments designed according to problem-based learning approach to students’ success,
problem-solving skills, and motivations. Education and Information Technologies, 26(2), 2253–2283.
* Baghaei, N., Mitrovic, A., & Irwin, W. (2007). Supporting collaborative learning and problem-solving in a constraint-based CSCL environment for UML class
diagrams. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2–3), 159–190.
* Ceberio, M., Almudí, J. M., & Franco, Á. (2016). Design and application of interactive simulations in problem-solving in university-level physics education. Journal
of Science Education and Technology, 25(4), 590–609.
Chadegani, A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ebrahim, N. (2013). A comparison between two main academic literature collections:
Web of science and scopus databases. Asian Social Science, 9(5), 18–26.
* Chadli, A., Tranvouez, E., Dahmani, Y., Bendella, F., & Belmabrouk, K. (2018). An empirical investigation into student’s mathematical word-based problem-solving
process: A computerized approach. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(6), 928–938.
Chan, S. M., & Wu, W. T. (2007). New problem solving ability test. Taipei, TW: Psychological Publishing Press.
* Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Liu, C. C., Chiu, B. C., Fan Chiang, S. H., Wen, C. T., Hwang, F. K., Chao, P. Y., Chen, Y. L., & Chai, C. S (2017). An analysis of
collaborative problem-solving activities mediated by individual-based and collaborative computer simulations. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(6),
649–662.
Chang, C. J., Liu, C. C., & Shen, Y. J. (2012). Are one-to-one computers necessary? An analysis of collaborative web exploration activities supported by shared
displays. Educational Technology & Society, 15, 3–13.
Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Lin, S. F. (2006). Computer-assisted learning for mathematical problem solving. Computers & Education, 46(2), 140–151.
* Chen, C. H. (2010). Promoting college students’ knowledge acquisition and ill-structured problem solving: Web-based integration and procedure prompts. Computers
& Education, 55(1), 292–303.
Chen, C. H., & Bradshaw, A. (2007). The effect of web-based question prompts on scaffolding knowledge integration and ill-structured problem solving. Journal of
Research on Technology in Education, 39(4), 359–375.
Chen, D. T., Hsu, J. F., & Hung, D. (2000). Learning theories and IT: The computer as a tool. In M. D. Williams (Ed.), Integrating technology into teaching and learning -
concept and applications (pp. 185–201). Singapore: Prentice Hall.
* Cheng, P. J., Liao, Y. H., & Yu, P. T. (2021). Micro: Bit robotics course: Infusing logical reasoning and problem-solving ability in fifth grade students through an
online group study system. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 22(1), 21–40.
Chi, M. T. H., deLeeuw, N. D., Chiu, M. H., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18(3), 439–477.
Chiou, C. K., Hwang, G. J., & Tseng, J. C. R. (2009). An auto-scoring mechanism for evaluating problem-solving ability in a web-based learning environment.
Computers & Education, 53(2), 261–272.
* Choi, I., & Lee, K. (2008). Designing and implementing a case-based learning environment for enhancing ill-structured problem solving: Classroom management
problems for prospective teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(1), 99–129.
12
* Chou, P. N., Chang, C. C., & Hsieh, S. W. (2020). Connecting digital elements with physical learning contexts: An educational escape-the-room game for supporting
learning in young children. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 29(4), 425–444.
Clausen, A. M., Tapp, M. C., Pennington, R. C., Spooner, F., & Teasdell, A. (2021). A systematic review of modified schema-based instruction for teaching students
with moderate and severe disabilities to solve mathematical word problems. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 46(2), 94–107.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing,
learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.
Cook, S. C., Collins, L. W., Morin, L. L., & Riccomini, P. J. (2020). Schema-based instruction for mathematical word problem solving: An evidence-based review for
students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 43(2), 75–87.
* Crippen, K. J., & Earl, B. L. (2007). The impact of web-based worked examples and self-explanation on performance, problem solving, and self-efficacy. Computers &
Education, 49(3), 809–821.
Davis, K., Drey, N., & Gould, D. (2009). What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(10), 1386–1400.
* del Olmo-Muñoz, J., González-Calero, J. A., Diago, P. D., Arnau, D., & Arevalillo-Herráez, M. (2022). Using intra-task flexibility on an intelligent tutoring system to
promote arithmetic problem-solving proficiency. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6), 1976–1992.
Dood, A. J., & Watt, F. M. (2023). Students’ strategies, struggles, and successes with mechanism problem solving in organic chemistry: A scoping review of the
research literature. Journal of Chemical Education, 100(1), 53–68.
Dörnyei, Z. (1994). Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. Modern Language Journal, 78(3), 273–284.
* Erümit, A. K. (2019). Effects of different teaching approaches on programming skills. Education and Information Technologies, 25(2), 1013–1037.
Ferrari, A. (2013). DIGCOMP: A framework for developing and understanding digital competence in Europe. Scientific and policy report. Seville: Joint Research Centre of the
European Commission.
* Forrester, S. D., Inzana, K. D., Leib, M. S., & Purswell, B. J. (2001). Using the world wide web to enhance the problem-solving skills of third-year veterinary students.
Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, 28(1), 31–33.
Friedel, C., Irani, T., Rhoades, E., Fuhrman, N., & Gallo, M. (2008). It’s in the genes: Exploring relationships between critical thinking and problem solving to problems
in mendelian genetic. Journal of Agricultural Education, 49, 25–37.
Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. (1995). Contemporary educational psychology (5th ed.). NY: Longman Publishers.
Granić, A. (2022). Educational technology adoption: A systematic review. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 9725–9744.
Gyaurov, D., Fabricatore, C., & Bottino, A. (2022). Features of entertainment digital games for learning and developing complex problem-solving skills: A protocol for
a systemic review. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 21, 1–9.
* Harskamp, E., & Suhre, C. (2007). Schoenfeld’s problem solving theory in a student controlled learning environment. Computers & Education, 49(3), 822–839.
Harskamp, E., & Suhre, C. (2006). Improving mathematical problem solving: A computerized approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 22(5), 801–815.
Hohn, R., & Frey, B. (2002). Heuristic training and performance in elementary mathematical problem solving. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 374–380.
Holzinger, A., Kickmeier-Rust, M. D., Wassertheurer, S., & Hessinger, M. (2009). Learning performance with interactive simulations in medical education: Lessons
learned from results of learning complex physiological models with the HAEMO dynamics SIMulator. Computers & Education, 52(2), 292–301.
* Horton, N. J. (2013). I hear, I forget. I do, I understand: A modified moore-method mathematical statistics course. The American Statistician, 67(4), 219–228.
* Hsiao, H. S., Lin, C. Y., Chen, J., & Peng, Y. F. (2018). The influence of a mathematics problem-solving training system on first-year middle school students. Eurasia
Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 77–93.
* Huang, C. J., & Chuang, Y. T. (2008). Supporting the development of collaborative problem-based learning environments with an intelligent diagnosis tool. Expert
Systems with Applications, 35(3), 622–631.
Huang, T. H., Liu, Y. C., & Chang, H. C. (2012). Learning achievement in solving word-based mathematical questions through a computer assisted learning system.
Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 248–259.
Huang, Y. M., Huang, S. H., & Wu, T. T. (2014). Embedding diagnostic mechanisms in a digital game for learning mathematics. Educational Technology Research &
Development, 62(2), 187–207.
* Hwang, G. J., & Chen, C. H. (2017). Influences of an inquiry-based ubiquitous gaming design on students’ learning achievements, motivation, behavioral patterns,
and tendency towards critical thinking and problem solving. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(4), 950–971.
* Hwang, G. J., Hung, C. M., & Chen, N. S. (2013a). Improving learning achievements, motivations and problem-solving skills through a peer assessment-based game
development approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 62(2), 129–145.
* Hwang, G. J., & Kuo, F. R. (2011). An information-summarising instruction strategy for improving the web-based problem solving abilities of students. Australasian
Journal of Educational Technology, 27(2), 290–306.
Hwang, G. J., Kuo, F. R., Chen, N. S., & Ho, H. J. (2013b). Effects of an integrated concept mapping and web-based problem-solving approach on students’ learning
achievements, perceptions and cognitive loads. Computers & Education, 71, 77–86.
Hwang, J., & Riccomini, P. (2016). Enhancing mathematical problem solving for secondary students with or at risk of learning disabilities: A literature review.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 31(3), 169–181.
* Hwang, W. Y., & Hu, S. S. (2013). Analysis of peer learning behaviors using multiple representations in virtual reality and their impacts on geometry problem
solving. Computers & Education, 62, 308–319.
* Ibieta, A., Hinostroza, J. E., & Labbé, C. (2019). Improving students’ information problem-solving skills on the web through explicit instruction and the use of
customized search software. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 51(3), 217–238.
Jiang, P., Ruan, X., Feng, Z., Jiang, Y., & Xiong, B. (2023). Research on online collaborative problem-solving in the last 10 Years: Current status, hotspots, and outlook-
A Knowledge graph analysis based on CiteSpace. Mathematics, 11, 2353.
Jonassen, D. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional
theory (pp. 215–239). University Park: Pennsylvania State University.
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85.
Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra, M. (2003). Learning to solve problems with technology: A constructivist approach (2nd ed.). NJ: Merill Prentice Hall.
Jonassen, D. H. (2004). Learning to solve problems: An instructional design guide. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
* Janson, A., Sӧllner, M., & Leimeister, J. M. (2020). Ladders for learning: Is scaffolding the key to teaching problem-solving in technology-mediated learning
contexts?. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 19(4), 439–468.
Jitendra, A. K., Jon, R. S., Kristin, S., Jayne, M. L., Sheetal, S., Grace, C., Cheyenne, L. H., & &Toshi, R. M (2009). Improving seventh grade students’ learning of ratio
and proportion: The role of schema-based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 34(3), 250–264.
* Jurdi, S., Garcia-Sanjuan, F., Nacher, V., & Jaen, J. (2018). Children’s acceptance of a collaborative problem solving game based on physical versus digital learning
spaces. Interacting with Computers, 30(3), 187–206.
Kapp, K. M. (2007). Gadgets, games, and gizmos for learning: Tools and techniques for transferring know-how from boomers to gamers. Hoboken, NJ: Pfeiffer.
* Karabulut-Ilgu, A., Yao, S., Savolainen, P., & Jahren, C. (2017). Student perspectives on the flipped-classroom approach and collaborative problem-solving process.
Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(4), 513–537.
* Karaoglan Yilmaz, F. G. (2021). Utilizing learning analytics to support students’ academic self-efficacy and problem-solving skills. The Asia-Pacific Education
Researcher, 31(2), 175–191.
* Karagozlu, D. (2017). Determination of the impact of augmented reality application on the success and problem-solving skills of students. Quality & Quantity, 52(5),
2393–2402.
Ke, F., & Hsu, Y. C. (2015). Mobile augmented-reality artifact creation as a component of mobile computer supported collaborative learning. The Internet and Higher
Education, 26, 33–41.
* Ke, F., & M Clark, K. (2018). Game-based multimodal representations and mathematical problem solving. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education,
18(1), 103–122.
13
Kearney, M., & Treagust, D. F. (2001). Constructivism as a referent in the design and development of a computer program using interactive digital video to enhance
learning in physics. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17(1), 64–79.
* Kim, H., So, H. J., & Park, J. Y. (2022). Examining the effect of socially engaged art education with virtual reality on creative problem solving. Educational Technology
& Society, 25(2), 117–129.
Kim, M. C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Scaffolding problem solving in technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and theory with
practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403–417.
* Kim, S., Chung, K., & Yu, H. (2013). Enhancing digital fluency through a training program for creative problem solving using computer programming. The Journal of
Creative Behavior, 47(3), 171–199.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery,
problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
* Kohen, Z., Amram, M., Dagan, M., & Miranda, T. (2019). Self-efficacy and problem-solving skills in mathematics: The effect of instruction-based dynamic versus
static visualization. Interactive Learning Environments, 30(4), 759–778.
Kong, J. E., Yan, C., Serceki, A., & Swanson, H. L. (2021). Word-problem-solving interventions for elementary students with learning disabilities: A selective meta-
analysis of the literature. Learning Disability Quarterly, 44(4), 248–260.
* Kuo, F. R., Chen, N. S., & Hwang, G. J. (2014). A creative thinking approach to enhancing the web-based problem solving performance of university students.
Computers & Education, 72, 220–230.
* Kuo, F. R., Hwang, G. J., & Lee, C. C. (2012). A hybrid approach to promoting students’ web-based problem-solving competence and learning attitude. Computers &
Education, 58(1), 351–364.
Lai, J. W., & Bower, M. (2020). Evaluation of technology use in education: Findings from a critical analysis of systematic literature reviews. Journal of Computer
Assisted Learning, 36(3), 241–259.
Lan, X., Zhou, Y., Wijaya, T. T., Wu, X., & Purnama, A. (2021). The effect of dynamic mathematics software on mathematical problem solving ability. Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, 1882, Article 012059.
Lapadat, J. C. (2000). Teaching online: Breaking new ground in collaborative thinking. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Canadian Society of the Study
of Education (CSSE). In Congress of the social sciences & humanities: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. (ERIC Document reproduction service No. ED 443 420).
* Lazakidou, G., & Retalis, S. (2010). Using computer supported collaborative learning strategies for helping students acquire self-regulated problem-solving skills in
mathematics. Computers & Education, 54(1), 3–13.
Lee, C. I. (2017). An appropriate prompts system based on the Polya method for mathematical problem-solving. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology
Education, 13, 893–910.
* Lee, Y. J. (2010). Effects of instructional preparation strategies on problem solving in a web-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research,
42(4), 385–406.
León, J., Núñez, J. L., & Liew, J. (2015). Self-determination and STEM education: Effects of autonomy, motivation, and self-regulated learning on high school math
achievement. Learning and Individual Differences, 43, 156–163.
Li, J., Burnham, J., Lemley, T., & Britton, R. (2010). Citation Analysis: Comparison of Web of Science®, Scopus™, SciFinder®, and Google Scholar. Journal of
Electronic Resources in Medical Libraries, 7, 196–217.
* Liang, C. P., & She, H. C. (2021). Investigate the effectiveness of single and multiple representational scaffolds on mathematics problem solving: Evidence from eye
movements. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(6), 3882–3897.
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA
statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: Explanation and elaboration. BMJ (Clinical
Research Edition), 339, B2535.
Lim, C. P., & Tay, Y. (2003). Information and communication technologies (ICT) in an elementary school: Students’ engagement in higher-order thinking. Journal of
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(4), 425–451.
* Lin, K. Y., Yu, K. C., Hsiao, H. S., Chang, Y. S., & Chien, Y. H. (2018). Effects of web-based versus classroom-based STEM learning environments on the development
of collaborative problem-solving skills in junior high school students. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 30(1), 21–34.
* Lin, Y. T. (2019). Impacts of a flipped classroom with a smart learning diagnosis system on students’ learning performance, perception, and problem solving ability
in a software engineering course. Computers in Human Behavior, 95, 187–196.
* Liu, C. C., Cheng, Y. B., & Huang, C. W. (2011). The effect of simulation games on the learning of computational problem solving. Computers & Education, 57(3),
1907–1918.
Loibl, K., Roll, I., & Rummel, N. (2017). Towards a theory of when and how problem solving followed by instruction supports learning. Educational Psychology Review,
29(4), 693–715.
McCormick, R. (1997). Conceptual and procedural knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 141–159.
* Molnar, G., & Csapo, B. (2018). The efficacy and development of students’ problem-solving strategies during compulsory schooling: Logfile analyses. Frontiers in
psychology, 9, 302.
Neo, K. T. K., & Neo, M. (2001). A constructivist learning experience: Reconstructing a web site using web based multimedia authoring tools. Australian Journal of
Educational Technology, 17(3), 330–350.
* Neri, L., Noguez, J., & Robledo-Rella, V. (2010). Improving problem-solving skills using adaptive on-line training and learning environments. International Journal of
Engineering Education, 26, 1316–1326.
* Nirmalakhandan, N. (2007). Computerized adaptive tutorials to improve and assess problem-solving skills. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1321–1329.
Ormrod, J. E. (2000). Educational psychology: Developing learners (3rd ed.). Merrill Prentice Hall.
Oliver, K., & Hannafin, M. (2000). Student management of web-based hypermedia resources during open-ended problem solving. Journal of Educational Research, 94
(2), 75–92.
Panjaburees, P., Triampo, W., Hwang, G. J., Chuedoung, M., & Triampo, D. (2013). Development of a diagnostic and remedial learning system based on an enhanced
concept effect model. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 50(1), 72–84.
Patel, V. L., Groen, G. J., & Norman, G. R. (1993). Reasoning and instruction in medical curricula. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 335–378.
* Pee, L. G. (2019). Enhancing the learning effectiveness of ill-structured problem solving with online co-creation. Studies in Higher Education, 45(11), 2341–2355.
* Pellas, N., & Vosinakis, S. (2018). The effect of simulation games on learning computer programming: A comparative study on high school students’ learning
performance by assessing computational problem-solving strategies. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2423–2452.
Peltier, C. J., Vannest, K. J., & Marbach, J. J. (2018). A meta-analysis of schema instruction implemented in single-case experimental designs. The Journal of Special
Education, 52(2), 89–100.
* Pol, H. J., Harskamp, E. G., Suhre, C. J. M., & Goedhart, M. J. (2008). The effect of hints and model answers in a student-controlled problem-solving program for
secondary physics education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(4), 410–425.
* Pol, H. J., Harskamp, E. G., Suhre, C. J. M., & Goedhart, M. J. (2009). How indirect supportive digital help during and after solving physics problems can improve
problem-solving abilities. Computers & Education, 53(1), 34–50.
Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mechanical method (2nd ed.). Garden City, NJ: Doubleday.
Puntambekar, S., & Hu¨bscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed?
Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12.
Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The
Journal of the Learning Science, 13(3), 337–386.
* Raes, A., Schellens, T., De Wever, B., & Vanderhoven, E. (2012). Scaffolding information problem solving in web-based collaborative inquiry learning. Computers &
Education, 59(1), 82–94.
14
Reif, F. (1995). Understanding and teaching important scientific thought processes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4, 261–282.
* Reisslein, M., Moreno, R., & Ozogul, G. (2010). Pre-college electrical engineering instruction: The impact of abstract vs. Contextualized representation and practice
on learning. Journal of Engineering Education, 99(3), 225–235.
Renkl, A. (2002). Learning from worked-out examples: Instructional explanations supplement self-explanation. Learning and Instruction, 12, 149–176.
Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. The
Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 201–241.
* Sánchez, J., & Olivares, R. (2011). Problem solving and collaboration using mobile serious games. Computers & Education, 57(3), 1943–1952.
* Schoppek, W., & Tulis, M. (2010). Enhancing arithmetic and word-problem solving skills efficiently by individualized computer-assisted practice. The Journal of
Educational Research, 103(4), 239–252.
* Serin, O. (2011). The effects of the computer-based instruction on the achievement and problem solving skills of the science and technology students. Turkish Online
Journal of Educational Technology, 10(1), 183–201.
Singh, V., Singh, P., Karmakar, M., Leta, J., & Mayr, P. (2021). The journal coverage of web of science, scopus and dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics,
126, 5113–5142.
Song, Y. (2014). Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)” for seamless science inquiry in a primary school. Computers & Education, 74, 50–60.
* Song, Y. (2018). Improving primary students’ collaborative problem solving competency in project-based science learning with productive failure instructional
design in a seamless learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 66(4), 979–1008.
* Sonnleitner, P., König, A., & Sikharulidze, T. (2017). Learning to confront complexity: What roles can a computer-based problem-solving scenario play?.
Environmental Education Research, 24(9), 1340–1358.
Sophonhiranrak, S., Suwannatthachote, P., & Ngudgratoke, S. (2015). Factors affecting creative problem solving in the blended learning environment: A review of the
literature. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 2130–2136.
Sternberg, R. (2003). Cognitive psychology. Thomson, Wadsworth.
* Sun, C. T., Chen, L. X., & Chu, H. M. (2018). Associations among scaffold presentation, reward mechanisms and problem-solving behaviors in game play. Computers
& Education, 119, 95–111.
Sun, D., & Looi, C. K. (2013). Designing a Web-based science learning environment for model-based collaborative inquiry. Journal of Science Education and Technology,
22, 73–89.
* Tsai, M. H., & Tang, Y. C. (2017). Learning attitudes and problem-solving attitudes for blended problem-based learning. Library Hi Tech, 35(4), 615–628.
* van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., Kolovou, A., & Robitzsch, A. (2013). Primary school students’ strategies in early algebra problem solving supported by an online
game. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 84(3), 281–307.
van de Wiel, M. W. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & Schmidt, H. G. (2000). Knowledge restructuring in expertise development: Evidence from pathophysiological
representations of clinical cases by students and physicians. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 12, 323–355.
van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner’s mind: Instructional design principles for complex learning. Educational
Psychologist, 38, 5–13.
Viera, A. J., & Garrett, J. M. (2005). Understanding interobserver agreement: The kappa statistic. Family Medicine, 37(5), 360–363.
* Wang, M., Wu, B., Kinshuk, Chen, N. S., & Spector, J. M (2013). Connecting problem-solving and knowledge-construction processes in a visualization-based learning
environment. Computers & Education, 68, 293–306.
* Wang, M., Wu, B., Kirschner, P. A., & Michael Spector, J. (2018a). Using cognitive mapping to foster deeper learning with complex problems in a computer-based
environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 450–458.
* Wang, M., Yuan, B., Kirschner, P. A., Kushniruk, A. W., & Peng, J. (2018b). Reflective learning with complex problems in a visualization-based learning environment
with expert support. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 406–415.
Wijaya, T. T., Zhou, Y., Ware, A., & Hermita, N. (2021). Improving the creative thinking skills of the next generation of mathematics teachers using dynamic
mathematics software. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 16(13), 212–226.
* Winkler, R., Söllner, M., & Leimeister, J. M. (2021). Enhancing problem-solving skills with smart personal assistant technology. Computers & Education, 165, Article
104148.
* Wong, F. M. F., & Kan, C. W. Y. (2022). Online problem-based learning intervention on self-directed learning and problem-solving through group work: A waitlist
controlled trial. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 19, 720.
* Wu, J., Guo, R., Wang, Z., & Zeng, R. (2019). Integrating spherical video-based virtual reality into elementary school students’ scientific inquiry instruction: Effects
on their problem-solving performance. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(3), 496–509.
* Yang, Y.-T. C. (2012). Building virtual cities, inspiring intelligent citizens: Digital games for developing students’ problem solving and learning motivation.
Computers & Education, 59(2), 365–377.
Yeung, M. M., Yuen, J. W., Chen, J. M., & Lam, K. K. (2023). The efficacy of team-based learning in developing the generic capability of problem-solving ability and
critical thinking skills in nursing education: A systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 122, Article 105704.
Yilmaz, E., & Griffiths, M. (2023). Children’s social problem‑solving skills in playing videogames and traditional games: A systematic review. Education and
Information Technologies, 28, 11679–11712.
* Yilmaz-Na, E., & Sönmez, E. (2023). Unfolding the potential of computer-assisted argument mapping practices for promoting self-regulation of learning and
problem-solving skills of pre-service teachers and their relationship. Computers & Education, 193.
* Yu, W. F., She, H. C., & Lee, Y. M. (2010). The effects of Web-based/non-Web-based problem-solving instruction and high/low achievement on students’ problem-
solving ability and biology achievement. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(2), 187–199.
Zhang, L., Zhou, Y., & Wijaya, T. T. (2020). Hawgent dynamic mathematics software to improve problem-solving ability in teaching triangles. Journal of Physics:
Conference Series, 1663, Article 012069.
Zhou, J., Wang, X. M., Bavato, D., Tasselli, S., & Wu, J. (2019). Understanding the receiving side of creativity: A multidisciplinary review and implications for
management research. Journal of Management, 45(6), 2570–2595.
Zulfah, A., Surya, Y. F., Marta, R., & Wijaya, T. T. (2020). Measurement of mathematics problems solving ability using problem based mathematics question. Journal of
Physics: Conference Series, 1613, Article 012026.
* Zydney, J. M., Bathke, A., & Hasselbring, T. S. (2012). Finding the optimal guidance for enhancing anchored instruction. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(5),
668–683.
15

Develop Problem Solving

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Develop Problem Solving

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Develop Problem Solving

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thinking Skills and Creativity 51 (2024) 101454

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thinking Skills and Creativity

The application of educational technology to develop

1.1. Defining problem-solving skills

1.2. Classification of educational technological tools

1.3. Previous review studies

2.1. Literature search

2.2. Inclusion criteria

Fig. 1. The screening procedure.

2.3. Screening procedure

2.4. Data extraction and analysis

3.1. Use of technological tools

• Peer interaction and

3.2. Strategies of instructional design

3.2.1. Scaffold and guidance

3.2.2. Training on how to use the ICT tools

3.2.3. Orientation of the course

3.2.4. Peer interaction and collaboration

3.3. Development of problem-solving skills

4.1. Use of technological tools

4.2. Strategies of instructional design

4.2.1. Scaffold and guidance

4.2.2. Training on how to use the tools

4.2.3. Orientation of the course

4.2.4. Peer interaction and collaboration

4.3. Development of problem-solving skills

5.1. Summary of the major findings

5.3. Limitations and further research

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Data will be made available on request.

You might also like