Innovative Research on TMS Tripartite Collaborative Teaching System for Higher Mathematics Based on Informational Teaching

Authors

https://doi.org/10.48314/isti.vi.36

Abstract

With the rapid development of Information and Communication Technology (ICT), traditional college mathematics teaching is increasingly showing deficiencies in knowledge delivery, student engagement, and personalized support, making it difficult to adapt to the diverse and advanced learning needs of current college students. Based on an in-depth analysis of the current situation and main issues of mathematics teaching in colleges and universities, this paper proposes a teaching method based on an ICT platform. The platform adopts a three-tier architecture comprising foundation, data, and application layers, integrating functions such as curriculum knowledge graph construction, learning behavior data collection, student portrait generation, personalized lesson plan design, and intelligent matching of teaching resources via the Teacher-Machine-Student (TMS) integration. This system facilitates precise alignment of instructional content with student profiles, enabling personalized learning arrangements through diverse pathways and levels. Its implementation enhances teaching efficiency, refines pedagogical pathways, and drives the transformation of college mathematics education toward intelligent, digitally enhanced formats.

Keywords:

Information and communication technology, Teaching and learning, Teacher-machine-student, Mathematics education in universities, Education platform

References

  1. [1] Graham, M. A., Kruger, G. M., & van Ryneveld, L. (2024). Developing a novel model for ICT integration in South African education: Insights from TIMSS. Education sciences, 14(8), 865. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080865
  2. [2] Hall, C., & Lundin, M. (2024). Technology in the classroom: Personal computers and learning outcomes in primary school. Economics of education review, 100, 102536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2024.102536
  3. [3] Winter, E., Costello, A., O’Brien, M., & Hickey, G. (2021). Teachers’ use of technology and the impact of Covid-19. Irish educational studies, 40(2), 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323315.2021.1916559
  4. [4] Cirneanu, A. L., & Moldoveanu, C. E. (2024). Use of digital technology in integrated mathematics education. Applied system innovation, 7(4), 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/asi7040066
  5. [5] Tashtoush, M. A., Wardat, Y., Ali, R. Al, & Saleh, S. (2024). Artificial intelligence in education: Mathematics teachers’ perspectives, practices and challenges. Iraqi journal for computer science and mathematics, 5(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.52866/ijcsm.2024.05.01.004
  6. [6] Li, M. (2025). Integrating artificial intelligence in primary mathematics education: Investigating internal and external influences on teacher adoption. International journal of science and mathematics education, 23(5), 1283–1308. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10515-w
  7. [7] Gouia-Zarrad, R., & Gunn, C. (2024). Enhancing students’ learning experience in mathematics class through ChatGPT. International electronic journal of mathematics education, 19(3), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/14614
  8. [8] Großmann, L., & Krüger, D. (2024). Assessing the quality of science teachers’ lesson plans: Evaluation and application of a novel instrument. Science education, 108(1), 153–189. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21832
  9. [9] Gibbs, K. (2023). Voices in practice: Challenges to implementing differentiated instruction by teachers and school leaders in an Australian mainstream secondary school. The Australian educational researcher, 50(4), 1217–1232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-022-00551-2
  10. [10] Gunawardena, M., Bishop, P., & Aviruppola, K. (2024). Personalized learning: The simple, the complicated, the complex and the chaotic. Teaching and teacher education, 139, 104429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104429
  11. [11] Yu, H., Shi, G., Li, J., & Yang, J. (2022). Analyzing the differences of interaction and engagement in a smart classroom and a traditional classroom. Sustainability, 14(13), 8184. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14138184
  12. [12] Hase, A., & Kuhl, P. (2024). Teachers’ use of data from digital learning platforms for instructional design: A systematic review. Educational technology research and development, 72(4), 1925–1945. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-024-10356-y
  13. [13] He, H. (2025). From human-computer interaction to entangled symbiosis: Research on the theoretical model and real-world applications of" teacher-student-machine" triadic interaction in new engineering under the digital intelligence era. Journal of educational theory and practice, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.62177/jetp.v2i2.408
  14. [14] Sapountzi, A., Bhulai, S., Cornelisz, I., & van Klaveren, C. (2021). Analysis of stopping criteria for bayesian adaptive mastery assessment. Proceedings of the 14th international conference on educational data mining (EDM 2021) (pp. 745–750). International Educational Data Mining Society. https://educationaldatamining.org/EDM2021/virtual/static/pdf/EDM21_paper_134.pdf
  15. [15] Zheng, Z., Liang, G., Luo, H., & Yin, H. (2025). Attention assessment based on multi-view classroom behaviour recognition. IET computer vision, 19(1), e12146. https://doi.org/10.1049/cvi2.12146

Downloads

Published

2025-09-11

Issue

Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): Information Sciences and Technological Innovations

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Gu, Y., Zhu, H., Jiang, H., & Tu, J. (2025). Innovative Research on TMS Tripartite Collaborative Teaching System for Higher Mathematics Based on Informational Teaching. Information Sciences and Technological Innovations, 2(3), 186-195. https://doi.org/10.48314/isti.vi.36

Similar Articles

1-10 of 17

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.