top of page
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
open access

Published: 15 December 2022

Integrated Mathematics and Science Instruction on Motion Problems in Grade 9 Classes

Cihan Kılıç, Belgin Özaydınlı-Tanrıverdi

Yıldız Technical University (Turkey), Kocaeli University (Turkey)

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf



Pages: 136-156

Keywords: Curriculum and Instruction, Integrated Teaching, Motion Problems, Upper Secondary Education, Mathematics Education, Science Education


The integration of mathematics and science in teaching facilitates student learning, engagement, motivation, problem-solving, critical thinking, and real-life application. Although curriculum integration is theoretically desirable for many educators, what to integrate and how to integrate are often the big questions facing teachers working within education systems premised on a culture of segregated subject delivery. This quasi-experimental study reports on a 2-week inquiry of the implementation of an integrated unit of learning on motion problems, within upper secondary education in Turkey. In order to reveal the effect of the instruction on students with different mathematics achievements, the study was conducted with 131 students in two different schools. In the design of the integrated unit, continuum model of learning and four-stages of learning model were employed. The study employed a quantitative approach and examined the key aspects of the practice of the integration of mathematics and science teaching. In light of the data obtained, it was concluded that teaching the subject Motion Problems through an integrated design had a positive effect on students’ learning for the experimental groups in each school.


  1. Basista, B., & Mathews, S. (2002). Integrated science and mathematics professional development programs. School Science and Mathematics, 102(7), 359-370.

  2. Başkan, Z., Alev, N., & Karal, A. S. (2010). Physics and mathematics teachers’ ideas about topics that could be related or integrated. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1558-1562.

  3. Berlin, D. F., & Lee, H. (2005). Integrating science and mathematics education: Historical analysis. School Science and Mathematics, 105(1), 15-24.

  4. Berlin, D. F., & White, A. L. (1992). Report from the NSF/SSMA wingspread conference: A network for integrated science and mathematics teaching and learning. School Science and Mathematics, 92(6), 340-342.

  5. Berlin, D. F., & White, A. L. (2012). A longitudinal look at attitudes and perceptions related to the integration of mathematics, science, and technology education. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 20-30.

  6. Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3-11.

  7. Bosse, M., Lee, T., Swinson, M., & Faulconer, J. (2010). The NCTM process standards and the five es of science: Connecting mathematics and science. School Science and Mathematics, 110(5), 262-277.

  8. Bower, M. L. W., & Ellerton, N. F. (2004). Language & Belief Factors in Learning & Teaching Mathematics & Physics: A Study of Three Teachers. In D. E. McDougall & J. A. Ross (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth Annual Meeting, North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics & Education (PME-NA XXVI, Vol. 2, pp. 784-790). University of Toronto.

  9. Cohen, J. (2007). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic Press.

  10. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Sage.

  11. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.

  12. Czerniak, C. M. (2007). Interdisciplinary science teaching. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education(pp. 537-560). Routledge.

  13. Czerniak, C. M., & Johnson, C. C. (2014). Interdisciplinary science teaching. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 395-411). Routledge.

  14. Davison, D., Miller, K. W., & Metheny, K. L. (1995). What does integration of science and mathematics really mean? School Science and Mathematics, 95(5), 226-230.

  15. Dervişoğlu, S., & Soran, H. (2003). Ortaöğretim biyoloji eğitiminde disiplinlerarası öğretim yaklaşımının değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of interdisciplinary teaching approach in secondary education biology education]. Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Education, 25, 48-57.

  16. Drake, S. M., & Burns, R. C. (2004). Meeting standards through integrated curriculum. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  17. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71.

  18. Frykholm, J., & Glasson, G. (2005). Connecting science and mathematics instruction: Pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 105(3), 127-141.

  19. Furner, J. M., & Kumar, D. D. (2007). The mathematics and science integration argument: A stand for teacher education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(3), 185-189.

  20. Gentry, A. R. (2016). An Integrated mathematics/science activity for secondary students: Development, implementation and student feedback[Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Colorado State University.

  21. Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416.

  22. Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: design and implementation. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  23. Jacobs, H. H., & Borland, J. H. (1986). The interdisciplinary concept model: Theory and practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(4), 159-163.

  24. Karakuş, M., & Aslan, S. (2016). İlkokulda disiplinlerarası öğretime yönelik mevcut durumun incelenmesi [Current situation in interdisciplinary education in primary school]. Elementary Education Online, 15(4), 1325-1344.

  25. Kim, M., & Aktan, T. (2014). How to enlarge the scope of the curriculum integration of mathematics and science. A delphi study. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(5), 455-469.

  26. Lane, K. L., Bocian, K. M., MacMillan, D. L., & Gresham, F. M. (2004). Treatment Integrity: An Essential—But Often Forgotten—Component of School-Based Interventions. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 48(3), 36-43.

  27. Lonning, R. A., & De Franco, T. C. (1997). Integration of science and mathematics: A theoretical model. School Science and Mathematics, 97(4), 212-215.

  28. Maass, K., & Engeln, K. (2019). Professional development on connections to the world of work in mathematics and science education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 51, 967-978.

  29. Margot, K. C., & Kettler, T. (2019). Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education, 6, Article 2.

  30. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2017a). Ortaöğretim Fizik Programı[Secondary physics curriculum]. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.

  31. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2017b). Ortaöğretim Matematik Programı[Secondary mathematicsematics curriculum]. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı.

  32. Morrison, J., & McDuffie, A. R. (2009). Connecting science and mathematics: Using inquiry investigations to learn about data collection, analysis, and display. School Science and Mathematics, 109(1), 31-44.

  33. Nadelson, L. S., & Seifert, A. L. (2017). Integrated STEM defined: Context, challenges, and the future. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(3), 221-223.

  34. Nagle, B. (2013). Preparing high school students for the interdisciplinary nature of modern biology. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 12(2), 144-147.

  35. Offer, J., & Vásquez-Mireles, S. (2009). Mix it up: Teachers’ beliefs on mixing mathematics and science. School Science and Mathematicsematics, 109(3), 146-152.

  36. Osborne, J. (2014). Teaching Scientific Practices: Meeting the Challenge of Change. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 177-196.

  37. Authors. (2019). Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences.

  38. Özçelik, C. (2015). Disiplinlerarası öğretim yaklaşımına dayalı hazırlanan öğretim etkinliklerinin, öğrencilerin geometrik cisimlerin hacimleri konusundaki akademik başarılarına ve problem çözme becerilerine etkisi [The effect of teaching activities based on interdisciplinary teaching approach on academic achievement and problem- solving skills of students on the volumes of geometric bodies] [Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Bartin University, Turkey.

  39. Özhamamcı, T. (2013). İlkokul ve ortaokul öğretim programlarındaki disiplinlerarası öğretim uygulamalarına yönelik öğretmen görüşleri [Teachers’ views on interdisciplinary teaching practices in primary and secondary school curriculum] [Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.

  40. Pang, J., & Good, R. (2000). A review of the integration of science and mathematics: implications for further research. School Science and Mathematics, 100(2), 73-82.

  41. Park-Rogers, M., Volkmann, M., & Abell, S. (2007). Science and mathematics: A natural connection. Science and Children, 45(2), 60-61.

  42. Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice (4th ed.). Sage.

  43. Rennie, L., Venville, G., & Wallace, J. E. (2012). Exploring curriculum integration editors. Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics: issues, reflections, and ways forward. Routledge.

  44. Ríordáin, M., Johnston, J., & Walshe, G. (2016). Making mathematics and science integration happen: key aspects of practice. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(2), 233-255.

  45. Rutherford, J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. Oxford University.

  46. Smith, M. (1955). Integrated mathematics and physics. The Mathematics Teacher, 48(8), 535-537.

  47. Stinson K., Harkness, S. S., & Meyer, H. (2009). Mathematics and science integration: models and characterizations. School Science and Mathematics, 109(3), 153-161.

  48. Tchoshanov, M. A. (2011). Relationship between teacher knowledge of concepts and connections, teaching practice, and student achievement in middle grades mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematicsematics,76, 141-164.

  49. Thibaut, L., Ceuppens, S., De Loof, H., De Meester, J., Goovaerts, L., Struyf, A., Boeve-de Pauw, J., Dehaene, W., Deprez, J., De Cock, M., Hellinckx, L., Knipprath, H., Langie, G., Struyven, K., Van de Velde, D., Van Petegem, P., & Depaepe, F. (2018). Integrated STEM Education: A Systematic Review of Instructional Practices in Secondary Education. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), Article 2.

  50. Treacy, P., & O’Donoghue, J. (2012, April 12-13). Authentic integration of mathematics and science: a model for integrating Mathematics and Science in 2nd level education [Conference presentation]. 2012 STEM Annual Conference: Aiming for Excellence in STEM Learning and Teaching, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom.

  51. Turna, Ö., & Bolat, M. (2015). Eğitimde disiplinlerarası yaklaşımın kullanıldığı tezlerin analizi. [An analysis of theses related to interdisciplinary approach in education]. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Faculty of Education, 34(1), 35-55.

  52. Weinberg, A. E., & Sample McMeeking, L. B. (2017), Toward Meaningful Interdisciplinary Education: High School Teachers’ Views of Mathematics and Science Integration. School Science and Mathematics, 117(5), 204-213.

  53. Wilhelm, J. A., & Walters K. L. (2006). Pre-service mathematics teachers become full participants in inquiry investigations. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 37(7), 793-804.

  54. Wong, V., & Dillon, J. (2019). ‘Voodoo maths’, asymmetric dependency and mathematics blame: why collaboration between school science and mathematics teachers is so rare. International Journal of Science Education, 41(6), 782-802.

  55. Yıldırım, A. (1996). Disiplinlerarası öğretim kavramı ve programlar açısından doğurduğu sonuçlar [The concept of interdisciplinary teaching and its results in terms of curriculum]. Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Education, 12, 89-94.

bottom of page