Pre-service mathematics teachers’ pedagogical reasoning in museum-based mathematics instruction through AI-mediated reflective dialogue
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29408/jel.v12i3.35112Keywords:
AI-mediated reflection, museum-based mathematics learning, pedagogical reasoning, pre-service mathematics teachers, reflective dialogueAbstract
Mathematics learning is often presented in abstract and procedural forms, making it difficult for students to connect mathematical ideas with meaningful real-world experiences. Museums offer authentic opportunities for contextual mathematics learning. Although previous studies have highlighted the educational potential of museum-based learning, little is known about how pre-service mathematics teachers develop pedagogical reasoning for designing museum-based mathematics instruction through AI-mediated reflective dialogue. This study investigated how pre-service mathematics teachers conceptualized museum-based mathematics learning and how AI-mediated reflective dialogue supported the development of their pedagogical reasoning. Using a qualitative approach, seventeen pre-service mathematics teachers participated in structured reflective dialogue sessions through the AISI chatbot platform. Data were collected through written interaction transcripts, revised responses, and semi-structured interviews and analyzed thematically. Initial responses showed that participants viewed museum-based learning as engaging and contextual but lacked instructional specificity and assessment alignment. Through iterative reflective dialogue, participants developed more coherent pedagogical reasoning by clarifying learning objectives, anticipating students' thinking, refining instructional procedures, and proposing more aligned assessment approaches. This study provides new insights into AI as a reflective scaffold for preparing pre-service mathematics teachers to design contextual and culturally grounded mathematics instruction.
References
Anderson, D., Lucas, K. B., & Ginns, I. S. (2003). Theoretical perspectives on learning in an informal setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10071
Celik, I., Dindar, M., Muukkonen, H., & Järvelä, S. (2022). The promises and challenges of artificial intelligence for teachers: A systematic review of research. TechTrends, 616–630. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00715-y
Cesário, V., & Campos, P. (2024). The integrated museum engagement model (IMEM): Bridging participatory design, immersive storytelling, and digital representation for enhanced museum experiences. The International Journal of the Inclusive Museum, 17(1), 63–81. https://doi.org/10.18848/1835-2014/CGP/v17i01/63-81
Chatain, J., Müller, C., Calabrese, L., Kapur, M., & Chatain, K. (2025). Concreteness and abstraction in mathematics education: A taxonomy of the semantic landscape. Educational Psychology Review, 37(92), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10073-9
Chen, S.-Y., Chen, W.-C., & Lai, C.-F. (2025). Generative AI as a reflective scaffold in a UAV-based STEM project: A mixed-methods study on students’ higher-order thinking and cognitive transformation. Education and Information Technologies, 30(17), 24787–24814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13758-4
Chen, Z., & Chen, R. (2022). Exploring the key influencing factors on teachers’ reflective practice skill for sustainable learning: A mixed methods study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(11630), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph191811630
Cramer, C., Brown, C., & Aldridge, D. (2023). Meta-reflexivity and teacher professionalism: Facilitating multiparadigmatic teacher education to achieve a future-proof profession. Journal of Teacher Education, 74(5), 467–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231162295
Ferguson, L. E., & Bråten, I. (2022). Unpacking pre-service teachers’ beliefs and reasoning about student ability, sources of teaching knowledge, and teacher-efficacy: A scenario-based approach. Frontiers in Education, 7(975105), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.975105
Gravemeijer, K., & Doorman, M. (1999). Context problems in realistic mathematics education: A calculus course as an example. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39(1), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003749919816
Hansson, P., & Öhman, J. (2022). Museum education and sustainable development: A public pedagogy. EERJ European Educational Research Journal, 21(3), 469–483. https://doi.org/10.1177/14749041211056443
Illeris, K. (2007). What do we actually mean by experiential learning? Human Resource Development Review, 6(1), 84–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484306296828
Kim, K., Hornor, E., & Zarrabi, A. (2024). The museum as a shared space: Developing contextual and cross-disciplinary approaches to arts-based education. Advances in Medical Education and Practice, 15, 761–769. https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S464634
Larsari, V. N., & Abouabdelkader, H. (2024). An investigation into flipped learning classroom (FLC) of EFL sixth grade students’ grammar literacy development: Implications for student-centered approach. International Journal of Education & Literacy Studies, 12(1), 13–24. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.12n.1p.13
Leton, S. I., Lakapu, M., Beda, W., Dosinaeng, N., & Fitriani, N. (2025). Integrating local wisdoms for improving students’ mathematical literacy: The promising context in learning whole numbers. Infinity Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(2), 369–392. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v14i2.p369-392
Li, H. (2025). Reflective practice for pre-service teachers’ professional development. SAGE Open, 15(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251363136
Li, K., Wijaya, T. T., Chen, X., & Harahap, M. S. (2024). Exploring the factors affecting elementary mathematics teachers’ innovative behavior: An integration of social cognitive theory. Scientific Reports, 14(2108), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52604-4
Li, R., Cevikbas, M., & Kaiser, G. (2024). Mathematics teachers’ beliefs about their roles in teaching mathematics: Orchestrating scaffolding in cooperative learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 117, 357–377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10359-9
Maples, B., Cerit, M., Vishwanath, A., & Pea, R. (2025). How AI companions shape learner’s socio‑emotional learning and metacognitive development. AI & SOCIETY, 41, 4261–4279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02737-5
Marshall, S. A. (2023). But what does it look like in maths?: A framework for culturally sustaining pedagogy in mathematics. International Journal of Multicultural Education, 25(1), 1–29.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. SAGE Publications.
Murugesan, S., & Cherukuri, A. K. (2023). The rise of generative artificial intelligence and its impact on education: The promises and perils. Computer, 56, 116–121. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2023.3253292
NCTM. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring mathematical success for all. NCTM.
Octaria, D., Ilma, R., Putri, I., & Hiltrimartin, C. (2026). Tracing elementary students’ learning trajectories of surface area in museum-based activities. Jurnal Elemen, 12(1), 241–262. https:/doi.org/10.29408/jel.v12i1.33240
Pahmi, S., Priatna, N., Suhendra, & Martadiputra, B. A. P. (2025). From learning to teaching: A study of mathematics academic and pedagogical anxiety in prospective elementary education teachers. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(6), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/16512
Schmidt, K., Rosman, T., Cramer, C., Besa, K., & Merk, S. (2022). Teachers trust educational science - especially if it confirms their beliefs. Frontiers in Education, 7(976556), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.976556
Siregar, R. A., Johar, R., & Mailizar. (2026). The effectiveness of AI-based emotional feedback in an online mathematics game on fractions for junior high school students. Jurnal Elemen, 12(1), 143–157. https:/doi.org/10.29408/jel.v12i1.32528
Sun, J., & Rui, J. (2025). Evaluating the longitudinal effects of AI-enhanced collaborative dialogue modes on computational thinking and language proficiency in EFL learners: A mixed-methods approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 64(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331251399452
Tanudjaya, C. P., & Doorman, M. (2020). Examining higher order thinking in Indonesian lower secondary mathematics classrooms. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(2), 277–300. https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.22342/jme.11.2.11000.277-300
Tsakeni, M., Nwafor, S. C., Mosia, M., & Egara, F. O. (2025). Mapping the scaffolding of metacognition and learning by AI tools in STEM classrooms: A bibliometric-systematic review approach (2005-2025). Journal of Intelligence, 13(148), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence13110148
Uyen, B. P., Tong, D. H., & Lien, N. B. (2022). The effectiveness of experiential learning in teaching arithmetic and geometry in sixth grade. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.858631
Virliani, V., Wahyudin, W., Priatna, N., & Turmudi, T. (2026). Ethnomathematics-based guided discovery learning using Gedung Sate to enhance junior high school students’ mathematical connection ability. Indonesian Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 09(1), 221–233. https://doi.org/10.24042/ijsme.v9i1.30023
Wetering, J. Van De, Leijten, P., Spitzer, J., & Thomaes, S. (2022). Does environmental education benefit environmental outcomes in children and adolescents? A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 81(101782), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101782
Xu, W., Dai, T.-T., Shen, Z.-Y., & Yao, Y.-J. (2023). Effects of technology application on museum learning: A meta-analysis of 42 studies published between 2011 and 2021. Interactive Learning Environments, 31(7), 4589–4604. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2021.1976803
Yardley, S., Teunissen, P. W., & Dornan, T. (2012). Experiential learning: Transforming theory into practice. Medical Teacher, 34(2), 161–164. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.643264
Žakelj, A., Cotič, M., & Doz, D. (2024). Evaluating the impact of active and experiential learning in mathematics: An experimental study on eighth-grade student outcomes. Cogent Education, 11(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2024.2436698
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Sindi Amelia, Nanang Priatna
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with the Jurnal Elemen agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0).
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Jurnal Elemen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
