Purpose: This study aimed to compare students’ post-test critical-thinking performance across Maple-based, MATLAB-based, and conventional mathematics instruction and to examine whether statistically significant differences were observed between the instructional conditions. Method: This quantitative post-test-only comparative study involved 90 eleventh-grade students from a public senior high school in Blora Regency, Indonesia. Three intact classrooms were designated as Maple-based learning (n = 30), MATLAB-based learning (n = 30), and conventional instruction (n = 30) conditions. Data were collected using an essay-based critical-thinking test assessing interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference. Multiple linear regression with dummy-variable coding was used, with conventional instruction as the reference condition. Findings: The Maple classroom obtained a mean post-test critical-thinking score of 81.47 (SD = 7.23), followed by the MATLAB classroom at 78.23 (SD = 8.15) and the conventional instruction classroom at 62.90 (SD = 9.47). Relative to the conventional instruction condition, the Maple coefficient was 18.57 points (β = .521, p < .001), while the MATLAB coefficient was 15.33 points (β = .430, p < .001). The regression model was statistically significant, F(2, 87) = 47.83, p < .001, with R² = .524. Although the Maple classroom obtained a higher mean than the MATLAB classroom, the direct difference was not statistically significant (t = 1.61, p = .112). Significance: The findings indicate that, within the participating classrooms, both technology-supported instructional conditions were associated with higher post-test critical-thinking performance than conventional instruction. The results do not support the conclusion that Maple was superior to MATLAB. Because the study used a post-test-only design and one intact classroom represented each instructional condition, the findings should be interpreted as observed between-condition differences rather than definitive causal effects of the software environments.
Copyrights © 2026