STUDENTS’ THINKING, REASONING AND LEARNING PROFICIENCY

IN PROBLEM SOLVING RATIONAL FUNCTIONS

PSYCHOLOGY AND EDUCATION: A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL

Volume: 34
Issue 8
Pages: 909-919
Document ID: 2025PEMJ3308
DOI: 10.70838/pemj.340802
Manuscript Accepted: 03-26-2025
 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Students’ Thinking, Reasoning and Learning Proficiency in Problem Solving Rational Functions
Jasten Jan-Vincent T. Japitana*, Allan Jay S. Cajandig
For affiliations and correspondence, see the last page.
Abstract
The pressing issue of students' poor development of critical thinking and reasoning abilities impedes their skills to
understand complex mathematical ideas and restricts their ability for innovation. This situation needs extensive
research into successful mathematical instructional strategies. This descriptive correlational study employed
simultaneous multiple simple linear regression to assess students' levels of thinking, reasoning, and learning
competency. It also looked at how students' thinking and reasoning skills correlated with their ability to solve rational
functions. Data from 284 randomly selected students, examined using open-ended math questions and a multiple-
choice test, revealed that while students displayed high general thinking and reasoning skills, their proficiency in
rational function was average only, with considerable performance variability. A high positive correlation was found
between these skills and learning proficiency, with critical and creative thinking, as well as inductive reasoning, having
a major influence on mastery of concepts including domain, range, intercepts, zeros, asymptotes, and graphing.
Inductive reasoning outperformed deductive reasoning, particularly for overall performance of rational functions.
However, both inductive and deductive reasoning skills had a lower influence on acquiring rational inequalities,
indicating the necessity for intense direct interactive instruction in this area. These findings highlight the need of
including activities that encourage diverse thinking while emphasizing critical and inductive reasoning into modern
and interactive direct instructional approaches. Regular assessments of students' thinking and reasoning abilities,
together with a variety of interactive and current teaching methodologies on rational inequalities, are critical for
improving learning proficiency in rational functions.
Keywords: students’ thinking, reasoning, learning proficiency, problem solving and rational functions

Introduction
Globally, mathematics stands out as a key driver of innovation. The evolution of Mathematics education over time reflects a
commitment to aligning with the ever-changing global landscape and the challenges that shape individuals' cognitive processes. This
evolution is deeply rooted in enhancing the understanding of human thought processes, including actions, behaviors, and cognitions,
with a strong emphasis on decision-making and problem-solving skills that are essential for modern living. Mastering rational functions
does not only enhance students' mathematical abilities but also plays a crucial role in improving their thinking and reasoning skills.
The developed and developing countries are making extensive efforts to enhance students’ thinking and reasoning skills (Ayal et al.
2020). In the Philippines, curriculum reforms and researches are continuously conducted to improve the quality of mathematics
instruction. However, despite the government’s numerous initiatives to improve mathematics pedagogies, Abdullah (2020) noticed that
students’ thinking and reasoning are still at low level particularly in solving rational functions. Sharma (2021) insisted that creative and
advanced mathematics instruction produces best learning opportunities for the students.
The study of Yenice (2021) showed that best learning opportunities definitely develop students’ thinking and reasoning. He found out
that students’ proficiency in solving rational functions is related to their thinking and reasoning. Fortune (2015) added that lessons in
solving rational functions are the excellent learning opportunities to enhance students’ thinking and reasoning. Maliga (2023) found
out that dealing with rational functions is the most challenging topic in Algebra particularly when students lack foundation in basic
operations on fractions.
Rosita and Sukestiyarno (2019) emphasized that the primary ingredients of solving rational functions is to stimulate and enhance
students’ thinking and reasoning that will boost their problem-solving skills. The visual ability of the students is a vital tool to help
them improve their academic achievement in rational functions by honing their thinking and reasoning. In exchange, students are able
to make sound judgments, comprehend the repercussions of their actions, and solve arithmetic problems.
Rajkumar and Hema (2020) noted that many students who excel in solving rational functions are just simply following the steps given
by the teacher but could not simply justify their answers. Moreover, Napitupulu et al. (2016) added that many students fail to carry out
the required tasks and tend to remain silent when teachers require them to solve rational functions and inequalities which can be
considered as a critical part of the learning process. Abdullah (2020) observed that many students get difficulties in performing
operations on rational functions. One of the common misconceptions that students commit is directly adding both the numerators and
denominators without considering the least common denominator (LCD) of the rational expressions. Agung et al (2020) added that
directly adding both the numerators and denominators can be a sign of failure for both teachers and students and various learning
institutions seem to have this kind of dilemma.
Numerous researches have been undertaken to investigate the impact of students' problem-solving abilities on their mathematical

Japitana & Cajandig 909/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

performance (Basra and Fauzi, 2017; Fortune & Williams, 2019; Ayebale et al., 2020). Additional research has focused on the
challenges that teachers face when teaching rational functions, with findings indicating that students' lack of readiness to perform
fractional operations is a major barrier to understanding lessons on solving rational equations and equalities (Ertekin et al., 2019;
Ghazivakili et al., 2020). According to Fortune and Williams' 2019 study, students achieved the lowest competency level in logical
functions, falling below 75. Furthermore, they discovered that pupils who had the lowest proficiency in rational functions were more
likely to face difficulties in higher math. Despite much research on rational functions, there has yet to be an investigation of the influence
of thinking and reasoning of students on their learning proficiency in this area (Kramarski & Mevarech, 2022).
In Esperanza National High School, the mean percentage score (MPS) of the first quarter examination of Grade 11 students showed a
dismal result. Much of this frustrating result was due to the lack of mastery of students in solving rational equations and inequalities
which got the lowest MPS described as very low mastery. This prompted the researcher to conduct a study to analyze the impact of
students’ thinking and reasoning on their learning proficiency in solving rational functions. Aside from that, he is indebted to determine
the common errors encountered by students in solving rational functions as well as the challenges of teachers in teaching the said topic
in General Mathematics.
Research Questions
This research largely aimed to investigate the relationship of thinking and reasoning skills of Grade 11 students on their learning
proficiency in solving rational functions for the School Year 2024-2025. Specifically, this study was carried out to give answer the
following research questions:
1. What is the level of students’ thinking skills in solving rational functions relative to:
1.1. Convergent Thinking;
1.2. Divergent Thinking;
1.3. Critical Thinking; and
1.4. Creative Thinking?
2. What is the level of students’ reasoning skills in solving rational functions relative to:
2.1. Inductive Reasoning; and
2.2. Deductive Reasoning?
3. What is the level of students’ learning proficiency in the following topics:
3.1. Rational Equations;
3.2. Rational Inequalities;
3.3. Domain/Range of Rational Functions;
3.4. Intercepts, Zeros and Asymptotes of Rational Functions; and
3.5. Graphs of Rational Functions?
4. Is there a significant relationship between students’ thinking and their learning proficiency in solving rational functions?
5. Is there a significant relationship between students’ reasoning their learning proficiency in solving rational functions?
6. How do students’ thinking and reasoning affect their learning proficiency in solving rational functions?
Methodology
Research Design
This research employed a descriptive correlational design to determine the relationship of students’ thinking and reasoning on their
learning proficiency. It also used multivariate linear regression that investigated the impact of students’ thinking and reasoning in
improving the learning proficiency of students of solving rational functions. It described the thinking and reasoning of students and
using open-ended scale of math questions. It determined the learning proficiency of students using closed-ended scale of multiple-
choice test on rational functions.
Aloqaili (2016) stated that the purpose of descriptive correlational research design using a simultaneous multiple simple linear
regression is not only to draw a valid conclusion out of the quantitative but also to give appropriate recommendations that can be used
as a baseline concept for future researches.
Shirazi and Heidari (2019) added that descriptive correlational research design with multivariate linear regression best suits in
investigating the relationship between critical thinking skills and learning styles and academic achievement of students as well as the
impact of independent variables to the dependent variable.
Respondents
This study's respondents were Esperanza National High School Grade 11 students during the 2024-2025 school year. They were
selected regardless of their chosen tracks or strands and came from all 23 sections. These students were chosen as the respondents of
the study because Solving Rational Equations and Inequalities is a competency within General Mathematics, and this subject is only
offered in the Grade 11 curriculum.

Japitana & Cajandig 910/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Table 1 shows the distribution of respondents of the study.

Table 1. Distribution of Student-Respondents of the Study
Senior High School Curricular Offerings Population Sample
1 Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) 131 38
2 Pre-Baccalaureate Maritime 43 13
3 Accountancy, Business and Management (ABM) 49 14
4 Arts and Design 36 11
5 Humanities and Social Sciences (HUMSS) 317 93
6 Technical-Vocational Livelihood (TVL) 392 115
Total 968 284

The number of samples in this study was determined using Slovin's equation. The proportional allocation equation was used to calculate
the number of samples for each strand/track. The study's individual respondents were then selected using basic random sampling and
random number generation. The sampling strategies described above ensured that all Grade 11 students took part in the survey. Out of
968 Grade 11 pupils, only 284 were chosen as the study's final responses. Alternative Learning System (ALS) pupils are not included
in the total of 968 Grade 11 students since their curriculum differs from the conventional curriculum.
Instrument
This study utilized two (2) sets of research instruments. The first set is a set of open-ended math questions on rational functions that is
composed of two (2) parts. Part I determined the level of thinking of students in terms of convergent thinking, divergent thinking,
critical thinking and creative thinking. Part II determined the level of reasoning of students in terms of inductive reasoning and
deductive reasoning. Each indicator of thinking and reasoning of students consists has specific math questions in which students are to
answer the series of questions based on their stock knowledge.
The second set of research instrument described the learning proficiency of students in solving rational functions. It is a researcher-
made test that consists of fifty (50) items, ten (10) items per topic, after being validated by Mathematics experts.
The multiple-choice exam results were used to assess students' learning proficiency in solving rational functions and inequalities. It
was translated into MPS and dichotomously classified, characterized, and interpreted using the standards established by the National
Educational Testing Research Council (NETRC) (Memorandum Circular No. 32, 1999).
Results and Discussion
This section presents the results and discussion of the study based from the order of the research questions.
Students’ Thinking Skills on Rational Functions
Students are adventurers of knowledge, constantly exploring the world around them. Thinking skills are the tools they use on this
journey, helping them learn, solve problems, and choose their own paths.
Table 2 presents the level of thinking skills of the students on rational functions.
Table 2. Level of Thinking Skills of Students on Rational Functions
Indicators Mean SD Verbal Description
1 Convergent Thinking 2.66 0.51 Evident
2 Divergent Thinking 2.60 0.52 Evident
3 Critical Thinking 2.72 0.55 Evident
4 Creative Thinking 2.69 0.57 Evident
Overall Mean 2.67 0.42 Evident

As shown, students demonstrated solid reasoning skills when working with rational functions, as indicated by a section mean score of
2.67, classified as "Evident." This suggests a high level of comprehension and proficiency in applying these skills to assess, interpret,
and solve mathematical problems. This strong performance was consistent across all four indicators (Convergent, Divergent, Critical,
and Creative Thinking), further supporting the "Evident" level of reasoning skills.
A closer examination of individual scores reveals a relatively low level of variability. The standard deviation (SD) of 0.42 for the
overall mean suggests a homogeneous distribution of scores, with students exhibiting similar levels of proficiency in solving rational
function problems. This consistency in performance indicates a strong foundation in these reasoning skills. Further research is needed
to understand the factors contributing to this high level of proficiency and to develop strategies to help all students achieve similar
success.
The "Critical Thinking" indicator had the highest mean score (2.72), also classified as "Evident." This indicates a high level of expertise
in analyzing, interpreting, evaluating, and synthesizing information related to rational functions. Students effectively applied analytical
and problem-solving skills to complex problems. However, the SD for this indicator (0.55) shows moderate variability, suggesting that

Japitana & Cajandig 911/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

while many students excelled, some struggled to apply critical thinking skills effectively. This variability necessitates further research
to identify the factors contributing to this difference in performance and develop targeted interventions.
Despite having the lowest mean score (2.60) among the four thinking skills, "Divergent Thinking" was still rated as "Evident,"
indicating an ability to generate multiple, creative solutions. The SD of 0.52 for this indicator reflects a moderate level of variability,
suggesting a range of abilities in generating diverse solutions. This variability, however, doesn't negate the overall strong performance
in divergent thinking.
In summary, students demonstrated strong reasoning skills across all four thinking skill categories when working with rational
functions. While some variability exists within individual indicators, the overall performance is high, suggesting a solid foundation in
these essential mathematical skills. Further research should focus on understanding and addressing the variability observed in critical
and divergent thinking to ensure all students reach their full potential.
Ghazivakili et al. (2020) and Zetriuslita et al. (2020) emphasized the relevance of students' mathematical thinking abilities, highlighting
how they prepare them to face real-world problems that require mathematical solutions. Ayal et al. (2020) bolstered this principle by
claiming that students with lower levels of cognitive skills frequently struggle with math difficulties. This implies that the capacity to
evaluate, reason, and apply logical steps is critical for success in mathematics.
Nonetheless, this statistical result contradicts the broader understanding of "thinking" in mathematics. According to Abdullah (2020),
"thinking" in mathematics extends beyond logical reasoning and includes intuition, creativity, and the capacity to connect seemingly
unrelated concepts. Maliga (2023) underlined the relevance of these non-logical thinking abilities, especially in real-world situations.
Demirhan et al. (2020) contended that the ability to see patterns, link ideas, and picture solutions can compensate for a lack of formal
logical thinking. Karbalae (2020) highlighted the larger and more complicated nature of thinking, requiring a variety of talents and
perspectives.
In addition, Gharib et al. (2019) argued that thinking, for a variety of reasons, can become unhelpful and negatively damage students'
well-being if not used effectively. The research findings challenged the notion that students with varying degrees of academic success
have varied thinking skills. Zetriuslita et al. (2020) discovered that students with high levels of academic performance, whether male
and female, could generalize data but were unable to recognize, justify, or analyze algorithms. Students with medium and low academic
achievement had equal levels of reasoning ability in mathematics.
Students’ Reasoning Skills on Rational Functions
Mathematical reasoning skills are mental processes that enable pupils to answer issues rationally and systematically. They entail
employing prior knowledge, using mathematical principles, and creating connections to reach valid conclusions. The two basic forms
of reasoning skills used by students in mathematics are inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. Table 3 presents the level of
reasoning skills of the students on rational function.
Table 3. Level of Reasoning Skills of Students on Rational Functions
Indicators Mean SD Verbal Description
1 Inductive Reasoning 2.71 0.45 Evident
2 Deductive Reasoning 2.66 0.57 Evident
General Mean 2.69 0.42 Evident

The overall mean score of 2.69, categorized as “Evident,” indicates that students possessed a high level of reasoning skills. This finding
is promising for both educational stakeholders and students themselves, as it reflects positive cognitive development and readiness for
more advanced learning challenges in Mathematics, particularly in rational functions.
The standard deviation (SD) of 0.42 for the general mean is relatively low, suggesting that the reasoning skills among students were
quite homogeneous. The overall assessment shows that students possessed a high level of reasoning skills, and this low SD indicates
no significant disparities within the group. This means that students demonstrated strong reasoning skills, with no students whose
reasoning skills were considerably lower than their peers. This suggests a high level of achievement across the board, although
maintaining differentiated instructional strategies to serve all learners effectively remains important.
The study discovered a small but significant difference in students' reasoning between inductive (mean score of 2.71, SD of 0.45) and
deductive reasoning (mean score of 2.66, SD of 0.57). The slightly higher SD for deductive reasoning suggests a greater spread of
scores compared to inductive reasoning. This insight highlights students' skills in spotting patterns and drawing generalizations
(inductive reasoning), but also indicates possible areas for improvement in applying logical principles to specific situations (deductive
reasoning). This suggests that teachers might refine their teaching practices to promote more comprehensive growth of students'
reasoning abilities. In other words, students excel at identifying patterns and drawing conclusions from specific examples—a talent
essential for creative thinking and problem-solving, allowing students to explore options and build novel solutions. The higher SD in
deductive reasoning, however, suggests that some students may need additional support in this area.
With regards to this study, Maliga (2022) emphasized the importance of reasoning skills in mathematics education, stating that these

Japitana & Cajandig 912/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

abilities are required for problem solving and a thorough knowledge of mathematical topics. Murawski (2020) added that effective
teaching strategies, such as oral questioning, can help students improve their reasoning skills.
However, Nasrabadi et al. (2020) found out that many students demonstrate inadequate levels of mathematical reasoning abilities,
particularly when faced with complex issues requiring higher-order thinking. Setiyani et al. (2020), as referenced by Kramarski and
Mevarech (2022), claimed that many students struggle to solve arithmetic issues due to deficiencies in their reasoning skills, implying
that there is potential for improvement in how these skills are taught.
The research of Erdem and Gurbuz (2015), as found in the works of Maliga (2022), found out that individuals with high mathematical
reasoning abilities tend to understand and solve mathematical problems more easily, indicating a correlation between reasoning skills
and overall mathematical performance. On the other hand, Rosita and Sukestiyarno (2019) stated that students' mathematical reasoning
abilities were generally low, indicating that many students struggle with understanding and solving mathematical problems effectively.
The authors emphasize the need for significant attention to improve these skills, contradicting the notion that high reasoning abilities
universally lead to better problem-solving outcomes.
Lemmer (2023) discovered that good reasoning abilities considerably improve students' capacity to generate information and solve
complicated issues, particularly in rational functions, which confirms the current study. He emphasized the crucial role of high-level
reasoning in fostering deeper understanding and application of mathematical concepts within this domain. This enhanced cognitive
flexibility translates to improved performance across various mathematical tasks. Furthermore, strong reasoning skills are linked to
greater persistence in problem-solving. This is further supported by Abdullah (2020), who showed that students with strong inductive
reasoning skills readily comprehend and solve mathematical problems. However, Maliga (2022) argued that effective problem-solving
requires not only inductive but also deductive reasoning skills.
Students’ Learning Proficiency on Rational Functions
Students' mathematical proficiency refers to their ability to understand, apply, and engage with mathematical concepts and processes
effectively. Table 4 presents the students’ proficiency in rational functions.
Table 4. Level of Students’ Learning Proficiency on Rational Functions
Indicators MPS SD Verbal Description
1 Rational Equations 59.44 18.08 Average Mastery
2 Rational Inequalities 31.02 9.88 Low Mastery
3 Domain and Range of Rational Functions 74.33 11.34 Moving Towards Mastery
4 Intercepts, Zeros and Asymptotes of Rational Functions 64.93 11.66 Average Mastery
5 Graphs of Rational Functions 39.86 20.00 Average Mastery
Overall Mean 53.92 7.72 Average Mastery

Students demonstrated an “Average Mastery” of rational functions, achieving an overall mean proficiency score (MPS) of 53.92%.
This average score suggests a moderate level of understanding of rational functions within the student population. The standard
deviation (SD) of 7.72 for the overall mean is relatively low, indicating minimal variability in student performance. This low SD shows
that there's no substantial spread in the scores among students; individual student scores were closely clustered around the average.
The topic "Domain and Range of Rational Functions" yielded the highest MPS of 74.33%, categorized as "Moving Towards Mastery."
This high performance, coupled with a relatively low SD of 11.34, suggests a homogenous distribution of scores and indicates a strong
overall understanding of this specific concept. The low SD further supports this finding, indicating that most students performed at a
similar level of high proficiency.
Students also performed well on "Intercepts, Zeros, and Asymptotes of Rational Functions," achieving an MPS of 64.93%, classified
as "Average Mastery." This high MPS indicates a strong level of proficiency. The low SD of 11.66 further supports this, showing that
most students performed similarly well on this topic. The insignificant variation in student performance emphasizes the need to sustain
the effective teaching approaches employed to ensure that all students have a thorough comprehension of this critical concept.
In contrast, students displayed the lowest proficiency in rational inequalities, with an MPS of only 31.02% ("Low Mastery"). This poor
result demonstrates significant difficulties with the multi-step solution procedure. The high SD of 9.88 for this topic highlights a
significant feature of this poor performance. This substantial SD reflects a wide range of scores, indicating that some students performed
much better than others. This inconsistency in performance strongly suggests a systematic issue, such as a lack of foundational
knowledge or ineffective instructional strategies addressing rational inequalities. A review of teaching methods is therefore emphasized
to address this widespread difficulty.
In support to this finding, Ayal et al. (2020) suggested that, in order to improve the proficiency of students in mathematics, teachers
should lean towards methods of teaching that are easy to comprehend. But more often than not, the techniques, steps, and formulas
taught are not only difficult to understand but also to apply in the real world. Murawski (2020) added that if students struggle with
grasping a certain method, they will not be able to remember it after class. It is important in this case, that teachers modify their method
of teaching to suit the entire class.

Japitana & Cajandig 913/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

However, Bingolbali and Bingolbali (2020) observed that many students simply don’t spend enough time practicing math concepts.
Even though students have a thorough understanding of the math lesson, without practice, the concepts will be lost on them. The authors
added that without practicing math concepts will definitely result to poor proficiency in math tests. Abdullah (2020) added that
improving students’ proficiency in mathematics requires the expertise of math teachers to let students comprehend difficult lessons
particularly in rational functions.
Further, Fortune and Williams (2019) highlighted the positive impact of mastering rational functions on students' confidence and
motivation. By successfully navigating the challenges associated with these functions, students develop a sense of accomplishment and
are more likely to tackle complex problems with greater enthusiasm. Gulveren (2017) added that the practical applications and problem-
solving opportunities inherent in rational functions can make learning more engaging and relevant for students, fostering a deeper
interest in mathematics. This increased engagement can translate into improved learning outcomes and a more positive attitude towards
the subject.
This study reveals a moderate level of student mastery in rational functions (57.88%), aligning with average achievement levels
reported in similar mathematical domains by Karbalae (2020) and Murawski (2020). However, a significant divergence emerges in the
substantial heterogeneity of student performance, reflected in a high coefficient of variation (21.96%). This contrasts with studies like
Ghazivakili et al. (2020) which may have shown more homogenous results. The wide performance spread, supported by prior research
on variability in mathematics achievement (Gharib et al., 2019; Gülveren, 2017; Kumari & Vyas, 2020; Mahmoud, 2020), highlights
a need to investigate the influence of factors such as teaching methodologies (Kramarski & Mevarech, 2022) and individual student
characteristics, an area where the current study's analysis is limited.
Relationship of Between Students’ Thinking Skills and their Learning Proficiency on Rational Functions
Table 5 presents the correlation analysis between students’ thinking skills and learning proficiency in mathematics.
Table 5. Simple Linear Correlation Analysis between Students’ Thinking Skills and their Learning Proficiency on
Rational Functions
Variables Correlation Coefficient (r) Description p-value Decision Interpretation
1 Thinking Skills 0.927* Very Strong Positive 0.001 Reject Significant
Correlation Ho
2 Learning Proficiency
*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Table 5 shows a very strong positive correlation (r = 0.927, p < 0.001) between thinking skills and learning proficiency. This highly
significant p-value allows us to reject the null hypothesis, indicating a strong relationship where improved thinking skills are associated
with significantly increased learning proficiency. The results suggest that fostering stronger thinking skills in students is likely to lead
to better academic performance. This finding has significant implications for the math teachers, highlighting the importance of
incorporating strategies to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills into their teaching practices.
Numerous studies support this positive association, highlighting the importance of higher-order thinking skills in academic success
(Zetriuslita et al. 2020; Yenice, 2020). However, it's crucial to acknowledge that correlation does not equal causation. While the data
strongly suggests a connection between the two variables, other factors such as motivation and learning environment likely play
significant roles in determining learning proficiency (Tümkaya & Aybek, 2018). Therefore, while enhanced thinking skills are likely
beneficial, they are not the sole determinant of academic achievement. Furthermore, the observed correlation might not translate
directly into improved outcomes without differentiated instruction aligning thinking skills with specific learning content (Tran et al.,
2020).
Although the p-value is highly significant, researchers caution against solely relying on statistical significance without considering
effect sizes and the broader context of the findings (Suliman, 2016). In short, while the strong correlation was found, it's important to
remember that many factors contribute to academic success, and this correlation alone doesn't tell the whole story.
Relationship Between Reasoning Skills and Learning Proficiency of Students in Rational Functions
Table 6 shows a correlation analysis of students' reasoning and learning proficiency in rational functions.
Table 6. Simple Linear Correlation Analysis between Students’ Reasoning Skills and their Learning Proficiency on
Rational Functions
Variables Correlation Coefficient (r) Description p-value Decision Interpretation
1 Reasoning Skills 0.842 Very Strong 0.001 Reject Significant
Positive Correlation Ho
2 Learning Proficiency
*Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Table 6 presents a correlation analysis between reasoning skills and learning proficiency of students. The correlation coefficient (r) of
0.842 indicates a very strong positive correlation between these two variables. This means that as reasoning skills improve, learning

Japitana & Cajandig 914/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

proficiency tends to increase significantly. The p-value of 0.001 is less than the commonly used significance level of 0.05, leading to
the rejection of the null hypothesis of no correlation. This statistically significant finding strongly suggests that there is a real
relationship between reasoning skills and learning proficiency.
The above finding suggests that enhancing students' reasoning skills is likely to improve their learning proficiency. Educators should
focus on developing these skills in educational settings to foster better academic outcomes. This could involve incorporating activities
and strategies that promote critical thinking, problem-solving, and analytical reasoning into the curriculum.
This finding is consistent with Nasrabadi et al.'s (2020) substantial study in cognitive psychology, which shows that reasoning abilities
such as inductive and deductive reasoning play an important part in learning, problem solving, and information acquisition. Murawski's
(2020) educational study further confirms this conclusion, demonstrating a substantial correlation between well-developed reasoning
skills and increased academic success, particularly in complicated areas.
Many educational researches support this relationship by revealing the role of person’s brain in both thinking and learning (Mahmoud,
2020). Reasoning abilities are required for making sense of information, formulating conclusions, and applying knowledge to novel
circumstances. They allow students to assess situations, evaluate arguments, and make educated judgments, all of which are necessary
for academic achievement and lifelong learning (Maliga, 2022).
However, this strong correlation doesn't negate the influence of other factors. Some research suggests the importance of learning styles
(Kumari & Vyas, 2020), although the evidence supporting distinct learning styles remains inconclusive. Similarly, student motivation
and engagement are undeniably crucial for successful learning (Kramarski & Mevarech, 2022), and these factors should be considered
alongside reasoning skills.
Prioritizing the development of reasoning skills through effective instructional strategies is crucial for enhancing learning proficiency.
Furthermore, assessment methods should incorporate measures of reasoning skills to gain a more holistic understanding of student
learning. Finally, recognizing individual differences in reasoning abilities allows for more effective individualized instruction,
maximizing learning outcomes for all students. Future research should explore the specific types of reasoning most influential in various
subjects and investigate the complex interplay between reasoning skills, learning styles, motivation, and other factors affecting learning.
Overall Impact of Students’ Thinking and Reasoning Skills on their Learning Proficiency in Rational Functions
To determine how influential are the thinking and reasoning skills of students on their learning proficiency, Table 7 is presented.
Table 7. Multiple Regression Analysis on the Overall Impact of Students’ Thinking and Reasoning Skills
on their Learning Proficiency on Rational Functions
Variables Unstandardized Coefficient (B) Standardized Coefficient (Beta) t-statistic p-value
Constant 0.706 3.100 0.002
Thinking Skills 9.910 0.539 88.450 0.000
Reasoning Skills 9.944 0.536 87.866 0.000
R-squared 0.995
Adjusted R-squared 0.995

Table 7 presents the results of the multiple regression analysis, which aims to quantify the influence of students' thinking and reasoning
skills on their learning proficiency in rational functions. The regression coefficients indicate a remarkably strong and positive
association between these cognitive skills (thinking and reasoning) and learning proficiency.
The model reveals that both thinking skills (B = 9.910, p < 0.000) and reasoning skills (B = 9.944, p < 0.000) significantly contribute
to the learning proficiency of students in solving rational functions, with near-identical unstandardized coefficients suggesting that each
skill has a comparable impact. This finding indicates that for every one-unit increase in either thinking or reasoning skills, there is an
associated increase of nearly 10 units in learning proficiency, holding other factors constant. The standardized coefficients (Beta =
0.539 for Thinking Skills and Beta = 0.536 for Reasoning Skills) reinforce the significance of these predictors, highlighting that both
skills play a crucial role in enhancing academic performance.
Notably, the R-squared value of 0.995 signifies that the model accounts for an impressive 99.5% of the variance in learning proficiency.
This high R-squared value suggests that the model captures the relationship between the predictors and the outcome variable
exceptionally well. The adjusted R-squared value, which accounts for the number of predictors in the model, also reinforces this
conclusion, confirming the robustness of the model.
However, it is essential to acknowledge the limitations inherent in this analysis. The results depend on the specific measures used for
reasoning, thinking skills, and learning proficiency, and the generalizability of the findings may be constrained by the sample's
representativeness. Additionally, the model does not account for other potential influences on learning proficiency, such as prior
knowledge, motivation, learning environment, or instructional methods. Future research should explore these additional factors to
develop a more comprehensive understanding of learning proficiency.
In relation to this study, Sacli and Demirhan (2018) emphasized the crucial role of critical thinking in mathematics, arguing that it goes

Japitana & Cajandig 915/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

beyond problem-solving to encompass evaluating information, identifying assumptions, and justifying conclusions. This perspective
aligns with the study's findings, demonstrating the significant impact of thinking skills on learning proficiency.
Tümkaya and Aybek (2018) emphasized the close relationship between reasoning skills and problem-solving abilities in mathematics.
They added that students with strong reasoning skills are better equipped to analyze problems, identify relevant information, and
develop effective solution strategies. This view aligns with the findings of this study, which demonstrate that students with higher
levels of thinking and reasoning skills exhibit greater proficiency in solving rational function problems.
To further assess the overall significance of the relationship between thinking and reasoning skills and learning proficiency, Table 8
presents the results of an ANOVA test. This analysis examines the variance in learning proficiency across different groups of students
based on their combined thinking and reasoning scores. The ANOVA test helps determine if there is a statistically significant difference
in learning proficiency between groups with varying levels of cognitive skills.
Table 8. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Assessing the Model Fit for the
Relationship of Thinking and Reasoning Skills and Learning Proficiency
on Rational Functions
Source Sum of Squares df Mean Square F-statistic p-value
Regression 995 2 497.5 27860.067* <0.001
Residual/Error 5 97 0.05155
Total 1000 99
- significant @ 0.05 Level

The ANOVA table further elucidates the significance of the regression model, providing a statistical framework to evaluate the overall
fit of the model. The results demonstrate that the combined influence of thinking and reasoning skills on learning proficiency is
statistically significant (F-statistic = 27860.067, p < 0.001). This high F-statistic indicates that the model explains a substantial portion
of the variance in learning proficiency compared to the unexplained variance, confirming that the predictor variables (thinking and
reasoning skills) are significantly related to the outcome variable.
The ANOVA table shows that the regression model has a sum of squares for regression (SSR) of 995, which reflects the variation
explained by the model. In contrast, the residual sum of squares (SSE) is only 5, indicating minimal unexplained variation. The total
sum of squares (SST) is 1000, which is the total variation in learning proficiency. The significant ratio of SSR to SSE highlights the
efficacy of the model in capturing the relationship between cognitive skills and academic performance.
In summary, the regression analysis and ANOVA findings provide compelling evidence for the substantial contributions of reasoning
and thinking skills to learning proficiency. However, it remains essential to consider the potential mediating and moderating influences
of other factors to achieve a comprehensive understanding of the complex interplay between cognitive abilities and academic
performance.
While the results are compelling, it is crucial to consider the broader context of cognitive abilities and academic achievement. Various
studies corroborate the findings of this analysis, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking and reasoning skills in enhancing
learning outcomes. Rudd and Moore (2018) found a strong positive correlation between critical thinking skills and academic
achievement across diverse disciplines, suggesting that analytical abilities are key predictors of success. Similarly, Yenice (2020)
demonstrated that students with higher levels of abstract reasoning skills performed better on complex problem-solving tasks, further
emphasizing the significance of reasoning in learning.
Nonetheless, some literature suggests that the relationship between cognitive skills and learning proficiency may be more nuanced.
Zetriuslita et al. (2020) argued that the effects of reasoning and thinking skills on learning outcomes may be mediated by other factors,
such as motivation and prior knowledge. This perspective indicates that while cognitive skills are vital, they may not act in isolation.
Additionally, research by Lee & Kim (2018) highlights the importance of individual differences in learning styles, suggesting that the
relationship between cognitive skills and academic success may vary based on personal learning characteristics.
Further, these findings align with a considerable body of research emphasizing the crucial role of critical thinking and reasoning in
enhancing learning outcomes across various disciplines (Napitupulu et al. 2016). However, the literature also acknowledges the
complexity of this relationship, suggesting that factors such as motivation, prior knowledge, and individual learning styles can mediate
or moderate the impact of cognitive skills on learning proficiency (Nasrabadi et al. 2020).
Pithers and Soden (2020) added that a comprehensive understanding requires considering this intricate interplay of thinking and
reasoning abilities, individual differences, and learning contexts. They suggested that further research should investigate these
mediating and moderating factors to provide a more holistic understanding of the multifaceted nature of academic success.
Conclusions
Based from the findings of the study, the following conclusions are hereby formulated.
Students possess a commendable understanding of creative thinking and reasoning skills when approaching rational functions. Their

Japitana & Cajandig 916/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

proficiency in applying critical thinking skills signifies their ability to engage deeply with mathematical concepts, moving beyond rote
memorization to demonstrate analytical and problem-solving capabilities. Furthermore, the high level of reasoning skills observed
among students suggests a positive trajectory in their cognitive development, preparing them for more complex mathematical
challenges. However, the moderate mastery of rational functions among students, coupled with significant variability in learning
proficiency, reveals that while some excel, others struggle, underscoring the diverse range of abilities within the student population.
There was a strong positive relationship between students' thinking and reasoning skills and their proficiency in learning rational
functions. The correlation between improved thinking skills and enhanced learning proficiency suggests that fostering these skills can
lead to better academic outcomes. Notably, critical thinking emerged as a most influential factor in understanding various rational
function concepts, with inductive reasoning also playing a significant role. This points to the importance of emphasizing both critical
thinking and inductive reasoning in instructional strategies, especially in areas such as domain and range, intercepts, zeros, and graphing
rational functions. However, the lesser impact of both thinking and reasoning skills on mastering rational inequalities indicates the
need for a focus on procedural knowledge in this specific area.
References
Abdullah, S. (2020). Comparative assessment on the full implementation of senior high school curriculum among private and public
high schools. Education Research Journal. 10(2): 8-25. http//:
file:///C:/Users/user/AppData/Local/Temp/Comparative_Assessment_on_the_Full_Imple-1.pdf Retrieved on September 05, 2012
Abdullah, S. (2020). Practical work approach using supplemental learning materials for effective teaching in Statistics and Probability.
International Journal of Science, Engineering and Management (IJSEM). 5(5): 1-14.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341726016_Practical_Work_Approach_Using_Supplemental_Learning_Materials_for_Eff
ective_Teaching_in_Statistics_and_Probability
Agung, M., Hidaya, I., Lestari, T., Oktoviana, L. & Hasanah, D. (2020). First year undergraduate mathematics students’ error analysis
on solving rational inequality. Advances in Social Sciences and Humanities Research. 50(2): 426-450.
https://www.google.com/search?q=First+year+undergraduate+mathematics+students+error+analysis+on+solving+rational+inequalit
y&oq=8
Aloqaili, A. (2016). The relationship between reading comprehension and critical thinking: A theoretical study. Journal of King Saud
University - Languages and Translation. 24(1): 35-41.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257740181_The_relationship_between_reading_comprehension_and_critical_thinking_A_t
heoretical_study
Ayal, C., Kusuma, Y., Sabandar, J. & Dahlan, J. (2020). The enhancement of mathematical reasoning ability of junior high school
students by applying mind mapping strategy. Journal of Education and Practice. ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper), ISSN 2222-28X (Online).
7(12): 240-255
Ayebale, L., Habasa, G. & Tweheyo, S. (2020). Factors affecting students’ achievement in mathematics in secondary schools in
developing countries: A rapid systematic review. Statistical Journal of the International Association for Official Statistics (IAOS).
36(2): 573-576. https://content.iospress.com/download/statistical-journal-of-the-iaos/sji200713?id=statistical-journal-of-the-
iaos%2Fsji200713
Basra, M. & Fauzi, K. (2017). An analysis of students’ mathematical reasoning ability using metacognition strategy based-learning in
Malay culture among junior high school students. Journal of Education and Practice. 8(21): 187-197.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234640757.pdf
Bingolbali, E. & Bingolbali, F. (2020). Divergent and convergent thinking: Are they promoted in Mathematics Textbooks?
International Journal of Contemporary Education Research. 7 (1): 240-252. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1262396.pdf
Demirhan, E, Besoluk, Ş. & Önder, I. (2020). The change in academic achievement and critical thinking disposition scores of pre-
service science teaching over time. Journal of Educational Science. 3(3):403-6.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236964088_The_change_in_academic_achievement_and_critical_thinking_disposition_sco
res_of_pre-service_science_teaching_over_time
Ertekin, E., Dilmac, B. & Yazici, E. (2019). The relationship between mathematics anxiety and learning styles of pre-service
mathematics teachers. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. 37(9):1187-1196.
https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=AONE&u=googlescholar&id=GALE|A221654520&v=2.1&it=r&sid=googleScholar&asid=330e7529
Fortune, N. & Williams, D. (2019). Students’ conceptions of rational functions. 18th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate
Mathematics Education. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283346560_Students'_conceptions_of_rational_functions
Gharib, M., Rabieian, M., Salsali, M., Hadjizadeh, E., Kashani, A. & Khalkhali, H. (2019). Critical thinking skills and critical thinking
dispositions in freshmen and senior students of health care management. Iranian journal of medical education. 9(2):125–135

Japitana & Cajandig 917/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Ghazivakili, Z., Nia, R., Panahi, F., Karimi, M., Sorkhi, H. & Ahmadi, Z. (2020). The Role of Critical and Creative Thinking Skills
and Learning Styles of University Students in their Academic Performance. 24(1): 35–41
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4235550/ **
Gülveren, H. (2017). Skills of critical thinking of students of educational faculty and factors of critical thinking affecting these skills.
Unpublished Post-Graduate Thesis. Institute of Educational Sciences of Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir. **
Karbalae, A. (2020). Critical thinking and academic achievement. Department of English, Qeshm International Branch, Islamic Azad
University, Iran. 17(2): 230-238. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0123-34322012000200001
Kramarski, B. & Mevarech, Z. (2022). Enhancing mathematical reasoning in the classroom: The effects of cooperative learning and
metacognitive training. American Educational Research Journal, 40 (1): 155-126.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/250185049_Enhancing_Mathematical_Reasoning_in_the_Classroom_The_Effects_of_Coo
perative_Learning_and_Metacognitive_Training
Kumari, A. & Vyas, C. (2020). Challenges faced by teachers in teaching slow learners in mathematics at primary level of education.
Journal of Xi’an University of Architecture and Technology. ISSN 1006-7930. http://www.xajzkjdx.cn/gallery/430-mar2020.pdf
Mahmoud, H. (2020). Critical thinking dispositions and learning styles of baccalaureate nursing students and its relation to their
achievement. International Journal of Learning & Development. 2(1) – 25
Maliga, G. (2022). Teachers’ Pedagogical content knowledge and students’ performance in General Mathematics. Master’s Thesis.
Sultan Kudarat State University, ACCESS Campus, EJC Montilla, Tacurong City
Murawski, L. (2020). Critical thinking in the classroom and beyond. Department of Human Resources Development, Graduate and
Professional Studies, Tusculum College, Knowville, Tennesse, USA. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1143316.pdf
Nasrabadi, H, Mousavi, S. & Kave, F. (2020). The contribution of critical thinking attitude and cognitive learning styles in predicting
academic achievement of medical university’s students. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 12(4):285–96.
https://ijme.mui.ac.ir/article-1-1817-en.html
Napitupulu, E., Suryadi, D., & Kusumah, Y. (2016). Cultivating upper secondary students’ mathematical reasoning-ability and attitude
towards mathematics through problem-based learning. Journal on
Mathematics Education, 4(7), 117-128. https://ejournal.unsri.ac.id/index.php/jme/article/view/3542
Pithers, T. & Soden, R. (2020). Critical thinking in education: A Review. Educational Research Journal. 2 (42), 237-249.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/001318800440579.
Rajkumar, R. & Hema, G. (2020). Teaching slow learners in mathematics: Innovative technologies and strategies.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/324825429
Rosita, N. & Sukestiyarno, Y. (2019). The analysis of students, mathematical reasoning in completing the world problem. Advances
in Social Sciences, Education and Humanities Research. 443(15):240-251. file:///C:/Users/ACER/Downloads/125941463.pdf
Sacli, F. & Demirhan, G. (2018). Detecting and comparing levels of critical thinking of the students in academic program of physical
training and sports teaching. Journal of Sportive Sciences. 19(2):92-110. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271762841
Sharma, P. (2021). A study of learning-thinking style of secondary school students in relation to their academic achievement.
International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications. 2(4):115-223.
http://ijonte.org/FileUpload/ks63207/File/12._sharma.pdf
Shirazi, F., & Heidari, S. (2019). The Relationship between critical thinking skills and learning styles and academic achievement of
nursing students. The Journal of Nursing Research: JNR, 27, e38. https://doi.org/10.1097/jnr.0000000000000307
Sukestiyarno, Y. (2019). The analysis of students, mathematical reasoning in completing the world problem. Advances in Social
Sciences, Education and Humanities Research. 443(15):240-251. file:///C:/Users/ACER/Downloads/125941463.pdf
Tümkaya, S. & Aybek, B. (2018). Investigating the university students’ predisposition to think critically based on socio-demographic
characteristics. Journal of Institute of Social Sciences of Çukurova University. 17(2): 387-402.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1297304.pdf
Tran, T., Nguyen, T., Le, T. & Phan, T. (2020). Slow learners in mathematics classes: the experience of Vietnamese primary education.
International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education. 48(5): 580-596, DOI: 10.1080/03004279.2019.1633375.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03004279.2019.1633375?journalCode=rett20
Yenice, N. (2020). A review on learning styles and critically thinking disposition of pre-service science teachers in terms of
miscellaneous variables. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching. 13(2):2-31. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ999933

Japitana & Cajandig 918/919

 Psych Educ, 2025, 34(8): 909-919, Document ID:2025PEMJ3308, doi:10.70838/pemj.340802, ISSN 2822-4353
Research Article

Yenice, N. (2021). Investigating pre-service science teachers’ critical thinking dispositions and problem-solving skills in terms of
different variables. Educational Research and Reviews. 6(6):497-508. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ936663
Zetriuslita, H., Ariawan, R. & Nufus, H. (2020). Students’ convergent, divergent, critical and creative thinking abilities: Description
based on academic level and gender. Journal of Education and Practice. ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper), ISSN 2222-28X (Online). 7(12):
245- 258. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1099476.pdf
Affiliations and Corresponding Information
Jasten Jan-Vincent T. Japitana
Esperanza National High School
Department of Education – Philippines
Allan Jay S. Cajandig, PhD
Sultan Kudarat State University – Philippines

Japitana & Cajandig 919/919