Dear Label_Name,

Greetings! I hope you are well.

I am writing on behalf of an international publishing house, Science and Education Publishing, USA (http://www.sciepub.com).

Science and Education Publishing (SciEP) is a multidisciplinary open access publisher of Journals covering the fields of Science, Technology and Medicine. All SciEP publications are subject to high-quality peer review, editorial and production processes and are freely available online.

Welcome to the April, 2013 edition of SciEP newsletter, providing monthly summaries of articles on science & education related topics of interest to scientist and professionals. The mission of our journals is to provide an open access forum for publishing new findings on issues pertinent to scientific and academic field. We also invite you to submit original research papers, review articles, short reports, or case studies are considered for publication in our Multidisciplinary Journals.

American Journal of Public Health Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajphr-1-1-3

The Implementation of a Tele-Homecare System with Service Oriented Architecture and HL7 Message Transmission Standard
Ching-Sung Wang

American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
DOI: 10.12691/ajmbr-1-1-2

The Influence of Ethanol on Pyruvate Kinases Activity in Vivo, in Vitro, in Silico
Lelevich Sergey Vladimirovich, Khrustalev Vladislav Victorovich, Barkovsky Eugene Victorovich, Shedogubova Tatyana Aleksandrovna

American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
DOI: 10.12691/ajmsm-1-1-1

Clinical and Histological Features in Wegener Granulomatosis
Li Cavoli Gioacchino, Passantino Rita, Bono Luisa, Tortorici Calogera, Ferrantelli Angelo, Giammarresi Carlo, Rotolo Ugo

American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
DOI: 10.12691/ajidm-1-1-2

The Curse of Lymphatic Filariasis: Would the Continual Use of Diethylcarbamazine Eliminate this Scourge in Papua New Guinea?
Anne Lanham, Lillian Mwanri

We have released issues of some journals on February 2013.
American Journal of Public Health Research
American Journal of Medical Sciences and Medicine
American Journal of Medical and Biological Research
American Journal of Pharmacological Sciences
American Journal of Clinical Medicine Research
American Journal of Nursing Research
American Journal of Cancer Prevention
American Journal of Medicine Studies
American Journal of Infectious Diseases and Microbiology
American Journal of Cardiovascular Disease Research
American Journal of Biomedical Research
American Journal of Mechanical Engineering
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Journal of Preventive Medicine
American Journal of Food and Nutrition
American Journal of Hypertension Research
American Journal of Sports Science and Medicine
Journal of Cancer Research and Treatment
American Journal of Zoological Research
Journal of Biomedical Engineering and Technology
American Journal of Microbiological Research
Biomedical Science and Engineering

We are pleased to announce that submissions are now being accepted for peer review for all the journals across all our subject areas in SciEP.

Please submit your manuscript via our online submission system:
http://www.sciepub.com/author/signin

To unsubscribe from our mailing list, please click on the following link: unsubscribe

I am looking forward to hearing from you.

Kind regards,

David Rain
Email:join@sciepub.com
Science and Education Publishing (http://www.sciepub.com)

Literature Mapping of Problem-Posing in the Classroom

Rochelle R. Ylaran*, Rosie G. Tan

University of Science and Technology of Southern Philippines, Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines

Abstract: This systematic mapping review characterizes empirical research on problem-posing in classroom settings published from January 2020 through December 2025. Twenty-one studies met the documented eligibility criteria after an initial database yield of 305 records. Based on the study-classification table, 14 studies (66.7%) were conducted in secondary education, 3 (14.3%) in primary education, and 4 (19.0%) in higher education. Mathematics was the most frequently represented subject area (14 of 21 studies, 66.7%). The mapped literature included technology-enhanced, metacognitive or self-regulated, inquiry-based, structured, and contextually grounded problem-posing approaches. Reported outcomes included problem-posing performance, mathematical creativity, problem solving, engagement, conceptual understanding, and related learning outcomes. Because the included evidence was heterogeneous in design, duration, sample, and measurement, the synthesis treats outcomes as study-level reported findings rather than evidence of universal or causal effectiveness. Recurring implementation challenges involved digital-tool integration, motivation and procedural focus, conceptual and language demands, creativity and metacognitive demands, and reliance on familiar or textbook-like problem structures. Two of the 21 included studies were conducted in the Philippines, indicating limited Philippine evidence within the defined search and eligibility parameters. The review provides a structured map of contexts, approaches, outcomes, and implementation challenges and identifies priorities for more rigorous, transparent, and context-sensitive empirical research.

Keywords: Problem Posing Strategies, Instructional Design, Learner Involvement

Received August 02, 2026; Revised September 03, 2026; Accepted September 11, 2026

Citation: Rochelle R. Ylaran, Rosie G. Tan, Literature Mapping of Problem-Posing in the Classroom. Journal of Innovations in Teaching and Learning, 6 (2). 88-93. January 2026. doi:10.12691/jitl-6-2-1

1. Introduction

Since the 1990s, problem-posing has become an important part of mathematics instruction, particularly in the United States [1]. This instructional method is recognized for its capacity to improve students’ mathematical understanding and problem-solving abilities [2]. Problem-posing (PP) involves students generating new problems or modifying existing ones, thereby showing their understanding in ways that traditional problem-solving might not grasp [3,4]. PP enables students to formulate their own mathematical questions and interact more thoroughly with mathematical concepts [5]. Research further indicates that PP is effective as a teaching strategy and has been extended to other disciplines, including reading and science [6].

Although numerous studies have examined students' problem-posing skills, further research is needed to understand how teachers interpret students' thinking during these activities [7]. This review analyzes problem-posing strategies across various educational settings, synthesizing current research to provide insights for educators and researchers. The review not only summarizes the literature on teaching with problem-posing—addressing its goals, methods, results, and challenges—but also contributes theoretically by identifying critical factors that influence effective implementation across educational contexts. In practical terms, the synthesis offers evidence-based recommendations to guide educators and curriculum designers in integrating problem-posing approaches that increase student engagement and deepen conceptual understanding. The review thus examines the literature to determine factors that support effective problem-posing across different grades and subjects, clarifying both theoretical implications and practical applications.

Research Questions

• What educational levels, subject areas, and geographical settings were represented in empirical studies of problem-posing published from 2020 to 2025?

• What problem-posing objectives, approaches, outcomes, and study characteristics were reported across the included studies?

• What were the key challenges in implementing problem-posing activities in classroom settings?

2. Methodology

A thorough search was conducted in academic databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify studies on problem-posing strategies in education. These databases were selected due to their comprehensive coverage of peer-reviewed educational research, international scope, and inclusion of high-impact journals relevant to the field. The search strategy used key terms including "problem-posing," "problem formulation," "mathematical problem-posing," "scientific problem-posing," "creative problem-solving," and "open-ended problem-solving." Only studies published in English from 2020 to 2025 were considered to ensure the review focused on current research. The selection process followed a systematic and sequential approach: initially, all records were screened by title to exclude unrelated topics, after which potentially relevant studies underwent abstract review to determine eligibility based on research focus and methodology. Articles passing this stage were subjected to full-text assessment according to predefined inclusion criteria, such as empirical methodology, relevance to problem-posing in educational contexts, and detailed reporting of interventions. To ensure completeness, the reference lists of all included articles were also manually checked to identify any additional relevant studies.

Studies were included if they were empirical in nature, assessed the effectiveness of problem-posing strategies in educational contexts, offered detailed descriptions of their problem-posing interventions, and investigated the impact on students’ problem-solving skills, conceptual understanding, and attitudes toward mathematics. The rationale for these criteria was to ensure the selection of studies that provided reliable data, methodological transparency, and direct relevance to the review’s focus on educational outcomes associated with problem-posing. Studies were excluded if they lacked empirical data, did not specifically address problem-posing strategies, or failed to supply sufficient detail to allow for meaningful evaluation of either the intervention or its effects. This rationale was intended to maintain methodological rigor and ensure that the evidence synthesized was both credible and relevant to the research questions.

The database search yielded 305 studies initially. Duplicate articles were removed, and the titles and abstracts were screened for relevance. Studies that did not meet the per-defined inclusion criteria—such as those unrelated to the research topic, non-empirical publications, conference abstracts, review articles, or those with insufficient data—were excluded. The remaining full-text articles were then screened for eligibility. Twenty-one (21) studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review after applying all inclusion and exclusion criteria

3. Results and Discussion

This section distills and interprets the central patterns and limitations emerging from the twenty-one reviewed articles in response to the three research questions. As shown in Table 1, 13 out of the 21 studies (62%) implemented problem-posing interventions in secondary mathematics classrooms, establishing this as the predominant educational context. In contrast, only 4 studies (19%) were conducted at the primary level, and the remaining 4 (19%) applied problem-posing in other disciplines or cross-disciplinary settings, indicating a pronounced global concentration on secondary mathematics.

Table 1 provides a concise summary of the educational contexts examined across the reviewed studies, displaying the distribution of problem-posing interventions by grade level, subject area, and geographic locale. This summary offers an at-a-glance comparison of where and how problem-posing has been implemented, illustrating the breadth and diversity of contexts represented in the literature.

Table 1. Expanded map of educational context, study characteristics, problem-posing approach, and reported outcome

Methodologically, over 70% of the studies relied on cross-sectional designs and interventions lasting fewer than six weeks, as reported in Table 2, which constrains the assessment of long-term outcomes. Additionally, Table 2 reveals that 16 studies utilized researcher-developed assessment tools, but only 5 reported any reliability or validity coefficients, raising concerns about measurement rigor.

Table 2 also shows that technology-enhanced strategies were associated with increased individual and group engagement in 8 studies, whereas meta cognitive scaffolding appeared in 7 studies linked to gains in critical thinking. Open-ended inquiry activities, used in 4 studies, fostered creativity when grounded in authentic tasks, while structured approaches were most successful when connected explicitly to students' previous experiences. Despite these successes, the brevity of most interventions and qualitative reliance on self-reported measures, visible in at least 12 studies, diminish confidence in sustained impact.

Table 2 synthesizes the objectives, strategies, effectiveness, and reported outcomes of problem-posing interventions from the reviewed articles, supporting a clear comparative examination across educational contexts. Comparatively, the studies demonstrate that technological tools [8,9] are especially effective for promoting learner involvement and both collaborative and independent engagement in digital classroom settings. For example, [8]. describe an intervention where students used an online platform to design and share their own mathematical problems with peers, which led to increased participation and collective problem analysis during class discussions. In contrast, meta cognitive scaffolding techniques [5,10,11,12,13,14,15] more strongly associated with improvements in students’ abstract reasoning, critical thinking, and flexible application of conceptual understanding. Open-ended inquiry methods [16,17,18] stand out for their effectiveness in fostering creativity and originality, especially when situated in authentic, contextually relevant scenarios, which indicates that real-world relevance enhances deeper student engagement. Structured and guided problem-solving approaches [19,20,21,22,23,24] yield the greatest success when tailored to fit students’ sociology-cultural backgrounds and prior experiences. However, several limitations observed in the cited studies merit consideration. Many of the interventions were explored within relatively short time frames, which restricts insights into the long-term impact of problem-posing strategies. Additionally, the reviewed studies often featured limited sample sizes or specific institutional settings, potentially constraining the generalization of their findings to broader educational populations. The reliance on self-reported outcomes and researcher-developed assessment tools in some cases may also introduce measurement bias and influence the strength of the reported effects. In summary, while the comparative findings reveal that the effectiveness of problem-posing strategies is highly dependent on their alignment with curricular goals and the specific needs of learners, acknowledging these methodological limitations is essential for contextualizing the reported gains in student motivation, meta cognitive growth, and subject mastery. Integrating technology, adaptive scaffolding, and contextually meaningful activities nevertheless consistently leads to positive educational outcomes, but further research is needed to confirm these gains over time and across varied settings.

Table 2. Summary of the study Objectives, Strategies, Effectiveness and Reported Outcomes of Problem Posing

In terms of challenges, Table 3 quantifies that the 10 studies identified digital access barriers, 8 reported low technological skills, 9 cited diminishing student motivation, 7 noted difficulties in generating original problems, and 6 highlighted issues with limited academic vocabulary. Taken together, these data-driven findings underscore the necessity of developing contextually sensitive and adaptable pedagogical frameworks to support meaningful integration of problem-posing. In summary, while the evidence presented across Table 1–Table 3 affirms the potential of problem-posing to enhance engagement and learning, persistent contextual, practical, and methodological challenges currently restrict the strength of generalization claims regarding its overall effectiveness.

Table 3. Challenges of Problem-Posing Implementation

Across Disciplines

Existing literature confirms that students frequently encounter challenges when integrating digital technologies into their learning, as noted by [8,9]. These technological barriers arise from limited familiarity or access to digital tools, disparities in digital literacy, and steep learning curves, all of which can undermine the effectiveness of technology-enhanced problem-posing activities. Additionally, studies such as [11] report decreased motivation during the implementation of problem-posing activities, often resulting in students prioritizing task completion over conceptual understanding. This decline in motivation suggests that, without adequate scaffolding or perceived relevance, students may not recognize the intrinsic value of problem-posing, thereby limiting deeper cognitive engagement. Consistent with previous findings [5,12] further challenges include difficulties managing complex assignments, limited academic vocabulary, and a lack of originality. These barriers reflect both skill deficits and a lack of meta cognitive strategies necessary for generating novel problems, particularly when tasks require higher-order thinking. The tendency to replicate textbook problems, as noted by [16] further restricts the development of critical problem-solving abilities and may indicate limited confidence or opportunities to create authentic problems. Addressing these challenges is essential, as they have significant implications for educational practice and future research. If unaddressed, these issues risk perpetuating surface-level engagement and limiting the trans-formative potential of problem-posing pedagogy. The literature recommends developing comprehensive support systems, including targeted professional development and scaffolding strategies, to overcome these barriers and promote effective problem-posing activities. Further investigation is needed into how these support systems can be adapted to diverse contexts to meet the needs of learners and educators. Future research should also evaluate instructional strategies that promote deeper conceptual understanding, foster innovation, and support the integration of digital tools, as advised by prior studies, to enhance the implementation and outcomes of problem-posing approaches. Only through sustained and nuanced analysis of these challenges can the field advance more equitable and impact models of problem-posing in educational practice.

4. Summary and Conclusion

This review investigated the integration of problem-posing as both a pedagogical and assessment tool in education. Findings indicate that mathematics is the primary subject for problem-posing interventions across all grade levels [2]. As problem-posing is predominantly implemented at the secondary level, this stage is particularly beneficial for developing problem-posing skills [3]. In mathematics, embedding problem-posing strategies into curriculum units fosters abstract reasoning and supports flexible problem-solving, especially when utilizing technology-enhanced [8,9] and meta cognitive scaffolding methods [10,12]. For science education, adopting open-ended investigative approaches promotes inquiry-based learning and encourages students to formulate problems relevant to real-world contexts [16]. In language learning, integrating problem-posing tasks that require students to generate and analyze authentic questions enhances linguistic creativity and deepens understanding of textual materials [18]. Based on these findings, educators are recommended to deliberately embed problem-posing activities across a wider range of subjects, not only mathematics, by designing subject-specific tasks that require students to formulate original problems in real-world contexts. Curriculum designers should increase the use of technology and provide meta cognitive scaffolding tailored to learners’ needs to support abstract reasoning and creativity. To address regional gaps, future research should prioritize studies in underrepresented regions through partnerships and contextually relevant interventions. Implementing professional development programs focusing on problem-posing pedagogy and digital literacy can further support teachers in integrating these strategies effectively. Such targeted, actionable efforts will help improve student engagement, motivation, and conceptual understanding, while addressing critical gaps in research coverage and educational practice.

Addressing the challenges associated with implementing problem-posing exercises across disciplines requires targeted, evidence-based interventions aligned with the findings of this review. For instance, the need to integrate digital technology and support students through technological learning curves, as highlighted by [8,9], suggests that educators should implement structured professional development programs focused on digital literacy and adaptive scaffolding. The observed decline in student motivation and the importance of meta cognitive scaffolding, as reported by [11,12] underscore the value of designing classroom activities that promote authentic, open-ended problem creation and collaborative inquiry to enhance creativity and conceptual understanding. The literature also identifies ongoing formative assessment and feedback as effective strategies for monitoring student progress, particularly in addressing barriers such as limited vocabulary and over reliance on textbook problems, as noted by [16,25]. Curriculum designers are therefore encouraged to integrate problem-posing tasks that are contextually relevant and tailored to students’ backgrounds and prior experiences. By directly addressing these empirically identified challenges, these evidence-based recommendations are essential for maximizing the educational benefits of problem-posing across subject areas.

In conclusion, problem-posing in secondary mathematics education demonstrates promise for fostering critical problem-posing skills and enhancing students' creativity and understanding. However, this review is subject to limitations, including the small number of studies conducted in the Philippines, reliance on English-language publications, and a primary focus on mathematics rather than other subject areas. Challenges related to digital integration, student motivation, vocabulary barriers, and dependence on traditional textbooks also persist. To further advance the field, future research should broaden its scope by addressing underrepresented regions, incorporating multiple subject areas beyond mathematics, and considering literature in other languages to improve generalization.

5. Further Studies

Further research should specifically explore longitudinal effects of problem-posing interventions, investigate interdisciplinary applications, and examine culturally responsive adaptations of problem-posing strategies. Studies investigating the impact of professional development programs on teacher efficacy and the sustainability of problem-posing practices over time are warranted. Comparative research examining digital, blended, and traditional modalities for problem-posing implementation would also yield valuable insights for diverse educational settings. Educators are encouraged to provide comprehensive instructional support, prioritize professional development, and design adaptable, technology-enhanced problem-posing frameworks to optimize educational outcomes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The researcher would like to express his heartfelt gratitude to the Department of Science and Technology – Science Education Institute (DOST-SEI) for their generous scholarship support, and the people who, in one way or another, have contributed to the realization of this study.

References

[1]   | Capraro, M. M., & Kopparla, M. (2018). Portrait of a Second-Grade Problem Poser. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(2).

[2]  
Calabrese, J. E., Capraro, M. M., & Thompson, C. G. (2022). The Relationship Between Problem Posing and Problem Solving: A Systematic Review [Review of The Relationship Between Problem Posing and Problem Solving: A Systematic Review]. International Education Studies, 15(4), 1. Canadian Center of Science and Education.

[3]   | Bevan, D., & Capraro, M. M. (2021). Posing Creative Problems: A Study of Elementary Students’ Mathematics Understanding. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 16(3).
[4]   | Christidamayani, A. P., & Kristanto, Y. D. (2020). The Effects of Problem Posing Learning Model on Students’ Learning Achievement and Motivation. Indonesian Journal on Learning and Advanced Education (IJOLAE), 2(2), 100.
[5]   | Zhang, L., Stylianides, G. J., & Stylianides, A. J. (2024). Enhancing mathematical problem posing competence: a meta-analysis of intervention studies. International Journal of STEM Education, 11(1).
[6]   | Cai, J. (2022). What Research Says About Teaching Mathematics Through Problem Posing. Éducation & Didactique, 16, 31.
[7]   | English, L. D. (2019). Teaching and learning through mathematical problem posing: commentary. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 101451.

[8]  
Afandi, H. (2023). Implementation of problem posing learning using PhET interactive simulations to improve physics learning outcomes of XMIPA1 students MAN 1 Medan. Proceedings of the International Conference on Education Innovation and Social Science. https:// proceedings.ums.ac.id/ iceiss/ article/ download/3172/3112.

[9]  
Hu, Y., & Hwang, G.-J. (2024a). Cultivating visual literacy and critical thinking tendency with technological knowledge organizing supports: A concept mapping-based online problem-posing approach. Educational Technology Research and Development, 1-24. https:// www.researchgate.net/ profile/ Ying-Hu-5/ publication/381538333_.

[10]  
Arslan, Ç. D., Demirci, N., & Özaydın, Z. (2025). The effect of task focused problem solving and posing training on the problem posing skills of mathematics teacher candidates. In 10th International Conference on Lifelong Education and Leadership for ALL (ICLEL 2024). https:// www.atlantis-press.com/ article/ 126010162.pdf.

[11]  
Chiu, Y.-H., & Yang, H.-H. (2024). Enhancing mathematical metacognition and self-efficacy in third-graders in elementary school: Integrating problem-posing activities within the self-regulated learning cycle. International Journal of Innovation, Management and Technology, 15(4). https:// www.ijimt.org/ vol15/IJIMT-V15N4-966.pdf.

[12]   | Emre-Akdoğan, E. (2023). Examining mathematical creativity of prospective mathematics teachers through problem posing. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 42(2), 150–169. https:// www.researchgate.net/ publication/359759697.
[13]   | Peng, A., Li, M., Lin, L., Cao, L., & Cai, J. (2022). Problem Posing and Its Relationship with Teaching Experience of Elementary School Mathematics Teachers from Ethnic Minority Area in Southwest China. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 18(2), em2076.
[14]   | Roble, D. B., Lomibao, L. S., & Luna, C. A. (2021). Developing students’ creative constructs in mathematics with Problem-Based (PB) and Problem Posing (PP) tasks. In University of Alberta, Canadian Journal of Family and Youth (Vol. 13, Issue 2, pp. 82–94.
[15]   | Tuong, H.A., Nam, P.S., Hau, N.H., Tien, V.T.B., Lavicza, Z., & Hougton, T. (2023). Utilising stem-based practices to enhance mathematics teaching in Vietnam: Developing students’ real-world problem solving and 21st century skills. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 13(1), 73-91.
[16]   | Bos, R., & Kuijpers, R. (2024). Assessment through mathematical problem-posing. FAME, 5, 63. https://hal.science/hal-04807902v1/ file/ FAME1_Proceedings.pdf#page=74.
[17]   | Dwita, A. (2020). Improving problem-solving ability through problem-posing model in mathematics. In International Joint Conference on Arts and Humanities (IJCAH 2020). https:// www.atlantis-press.com/ article/ 125947324.pdf.
[18]   | Yeo, J., Tan, K.C.D. (2021). Science Education in Singapore. In: Tan, O.S., Low, E.L., Tay, E.G., Yan, Y.K. (eds) Singapore Math and Science Education Innovation. Empowering Teaching and Learning through Policies and Practice: Singapore and International Perspectives, vol 1. Springer, Singapore.
[19]   | Aparı, B., Özgen, K., & Zengin, Y. (2022). Developing students' problem posing skills with dynamic geometry software and active learning framework. Turkish Journal of Education, 11(2), 93–125. https:// dergipark.org.tr/ en/download/ article-file/1576920.

[20]  
Arabacı, D., & Baki, A. (2023). An analysis of the gifted and non-gifted students’ creativity within the context of problem-posing activity. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 7(1), 25–52. https://www.ijopr.com/download/an-analysis-of-the-gifted-and-non-gifted-students-creativity-within-the-context-of-problem-posing-12858.pdf.

[21]  
Asy'ary, M. L., & Jais, A. M. (2021). Comparison of the effectiveness of learning model problem posing with quantum learning TANDUR toward students’ understanding in mathematics concept. Hipotenusa: Journal of Mathematical Society, 3(2), 220-239. https:// www.academia.edu/ 90078187/ Comparison_of_the_ Effectiveness_of_Learning_ Model_Problem_ Posing_with_Quantum_ Learning_TANDUR_ toward_ Students_Understanding_in_Mathematics_Concept.

[22]   | Djafar, F. (2022). The effect of problem posing model on university students’ creativity and problem-solving skills. Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Pendidikan, 14(1), 445–454. https:// journal.staihubbulwathan.id/index.php/alishlah/article/download/1086/696.
[23]   | Efendi, R., & Marlina, L. (2022). Application of the problem posing approach to improve thematic learning outcomes of Class VA students at SD Negeri 014 Rambah. Indonesian Journal of Basic Education, 5(3), 256–262. https://e-jurnal. stkiprokania. ac.id/index.php/IJOBE/article/download/621/444.
[24]   | Sangco, A., Elpidang, E., & Sangco, R. (2023). PROBLEM POSING STRATEGY: EFFECT ON STUDENTS’ MATHEMATICAL PERFORMANCE AND ANXIETY. SDSSU MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH JOURNAL, 9(1), 1-4. Retrieved from https:/ /smrj.nemsu.edu.ph/ index.php/ SMRJ/article/view/251.
[25]   | Zhang, L., Song, N., Wu, G., & Cai, J. (2023). Understanding the cognitive processes of mathematical problem posing: evidence from eye movements. Educational Studies in Mathematics.