Understanding the words in a geometry problem was not the main obstacle for a group of university mathematics students in Ghana. Their most common mistakes occurred when carrying out mathematical procedures, followed by translating the problem into equations.
What researchers studied
Researchers investigated how first-year mathematics education students solve geometry word problems, which combine reading, diagrams, geometric concepts and algebraic calculations. The study also explored students’ perceptions of these questions and potential differences by gender.
The explanatory sequential mixed-methods design began with 80 students, equally divided between 40 men and 40 women, selected through stratified random sampling from a population of 240. Students completed a researcher-developed test comprising three open-ended geometry problems.
The researchers classified mistakes using Newman’s five stages: reading, comprehension, transformation, process skills and encoding. Five students were subsequently selected for qualitative interviews to explore the reasons behind their answers.
What they found
Process-skill errors occurred most often, followed by transformation errors, comprehension errors, encoding errors and finally reading errors. This ranking suggests that knowing how to read a question did not guarantee knowing how to turn its information into a mathematical solution.
Interview responses described difficulty constructing useful diagrams, performing algebraic manipulations and translating verbal descriptions into mathematical representations. These difficulties could overlap: an early misinterpretation can affect later calculations.
The research reported the error ordering rather than establishing that any particular teaching intervention would reduce it. Its design offers a diagnostic picture of student work, not a controlled comparison of teaching methods.
What it means
For university lecturers and teacher educators, the findings favour examining the steps students take rather than marking only the final answer. A student who reads a problem correctly may still need explicit support with choosing equations, drawing diagrams or checking intermediate algebra.
Guided practice that connects geometry and algebra is a plausible instructional response. However, its effectiveness would need to be tested separately with learning outcomes measured before and after an intervention.
Important limitation
The quantitative sample came from a single mathematics education setting, involved only three test problems and included just five qualitative interviewees. The study cannot establish the prevalence of these error patterns across universities, age groups or the wider student population.
Source Information
Study: Analysis of Algebraic Errors University Students Make in Solving Geometry Problems Using Newman Error Analysis
Authors: Patience Sumalia Asie, Ernest Larbi, Kwaku Appiah and Francis Amenorfe
Journal / Source: Frontiers in Education
Published: 6 November 2026
