USE OF PROBLEM POSING

We have seen the benefits of acquiring problem type schemata in problem solving activities.
Recognition of the structures of the problem leads to the recognition of the essence of the problem This
promotes reflective abstraction and consequently critical thinking. Moses, Bjork and Goldenberg (1990)
give the following suggestions on how the experiences of middle school students in problem solving can be
enriched using problem posing:
1. Have students learn to focus their attention on known, unknown and restrictions of the
problem. Then consider the following question: What if different things were known and
unknown? What if the restrictions were changed.
2. Begin in comfortable mathematical territory.
3. Encourage students to use ambiguity to create new questions and problems.
4. Teach the idea of domain from the earliest grades, encouraging children to “ play the same
mathematical game with a different set of pieces.
(Moses, Bjork and Goldenberg, 1990, pp. 83-86)
When given in an atmosphere of collaboration and cooperation, students interact well and
participate actively in the activity. This way, they are able to monitor their own misconceptions and make
the necessary corrections. If working in a group or with partners, they learn to listen, evaluate and assess
the work of others, be open to different ideas and perspectives, and defend their viewpoints in case they
disagree on certain points.
Problem posing can also be applied to students using a variety of mathematical tasks that fit their
interest and capacity. Various versions of problem posing and problem formulation activities are developed
by mathematics educators, educational psychologists and cognitive scientists. An activity developed by
Wilson, Fernandez and Hadaway (1993, p. 65) consists of making students list down the attributes of a
given mathematical theorem or rule. Then the students are asked to generate new problems if some or all of
the given attributes are not true..
The study of Bernardo (1998) used a kind of strategy in problem posing that promotes analogical
transfer among high school students. They were given four types of basic probability problems. For each
problem type, four analogous problems were developed. The students were given instructions on the
solutions of the problems for each problem type. Students of the experimental group were asked to make
their own problems similar to the one they studied. Suggestions on objects and events they can use in the
problem were given. Then, the students were asked to solve the problem. The study showed that students
16
who used the problem construction strategy were better at solving the analogous word problems. His study
confirms an earlier research which he did in 1994 which showed that “problem solvers retain
problemspecific
information in problem-type representations because such information affords access to abstract
structural information about the problems” (p. 392). His studies clarified the valuable constribution of
problem-specific information in the process of acquiring abstract problem-type representation in the
learner.
Ban-Har and Kaur (1999) used a problem posing task requiring students to pose problems based
on a given set of facts. They established a framework which they called nodal framework for analyzing the
correctness and complexity of the problems formulated. They found out that students who were unable to
detect contradictions in the information they provided in their problems were consistently unable to solve
non-routine problems. There was no clear correlation, though, between the ability to pose good problems
and the ability to solve problems.
USE OF INTUITIVE BASED STRATEGIES
Inventiveness in solving problems can be encouraged among novices at the middle school up to the
secondary level. It is worthwhile to look at how informal explorations that are initially intuitively based can
be used in solving word problems. Allowing students to use invented solution lets all students work at their
own levels of abstraction and allows for multiple ways to obtain the same answer, fulfilling a goal of the
Standards document (NCTM, 1989, cited by Barb and Quinn).
Consider the examples by Barb and Quinn which allow the use of intuition and modeling in its
solutions.
1. Jessica’s typing job is worth P8 per page with illustration and P3.50 per page without
illustration. She typed 49 pages and earned a total of P293. How many pages of each kind did she
type?
The student can be allowed to use the following reasoning:
Since the total amount of the typing job is a whole number, then the total number of pages worth
P3.50 has to be even, example 24. Then there should be more P8 pages, say, 27 and there are 22 P3.50
pages. This gives the desired amount of P293.
Students may also be allowed to use successive approximations in such problems as the following:

In the view of both students and tutors the diary and related assignment went
some way in meeting the relevant requirements. In particular students
increased their awareness of common misconceptions in mathematics and all
had experience in identifying and trying to overcome errors and
misconceptions.
In the view of the course tutors many students still had some way to go in their
understanding of some of the issues and in relating their classroom experience
to their reading. In particular many students found it hard to engage with the
issue of the difference between a misconception and an error. Another area of
weakness was in considering long term action to reduce or avoid
misconceptions. Tutors are continuing to consider how the assignment and the
college input can be refined to improve these aspects, but the question is also
raised about whether there are issues here which may not be solved and
whether things are more problematic than the teacher training regulations
imply.
Both the students and tutors recognised that the work on misconceptions had
many benefits in addressing areas such as planning, classroom observation and
evaluation. In doing this it highlighted the inter-relationships between areas
and thus avoided the fragmented and itemised approach that the initial training
regulations could be seen to encourage. The intention is to retain and refine the
diary and assignment for use in future years.
References
Askew, M. and Wiliam, D. (1995) Recent Research in Mathematics Education 5-16,
London: HMSO.
Askew, M., Brown, M., Rhodes, V., Johnson, D. and Wiliam, D. (1997) Effective Teachers
of Numeracy, London: King’s College.
Cockburn, A. D. (1999) Teaching Mathematics with Insight, London: Falmer Press.
Page 13
Mathematics Education Review, no. 11, November 1999
58
DfEE (1997) Teaching: High Status, High Standards, Requirements for Courses of Initial
Teacher Training, Circular Number 10/97, London: DfEE.
DfEE (1998) Teaching: High Status, High Standards, Requirements for Courses of Initial
Teacher Training, Circular Number 4/98, London: DfEE.
Donaldson, M. (1978) Children’s Minds, London: Fontana Press.
Duncan, A. (1992) What Primary Teachers Should Know About Maths, London: Hodder and
Stoughton.
Haylock, D. and Cockburn, A. (1997) Understanding Mathematics in the Lower Primary
Years, London: Paul Chapman Publishing.
Hughes, M. (1986) Children and Number: Difficulties in Learning Mathematics, Oxford:
Blackwell.
Liebeck, P. (1984) How Children Learn Mathematics, Middlesex: Penguin.
OFSTED (1994) Science and Mathematics in Schools: A Review, London:HMSO.
QCA (1998a) Standards at key stage 1, English and Mathematics, London: QCA.
QCA (1998b) Standards at key stage 2, English, Mathematics and Science, London: QCA.
Shulman, L. S. (1986) Those who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching,
Educational Researcher, 15, 2, pp.4-14.
Skemp, R. (1971) The Psychology of Learning Mathematics, Middlesex: Penguin.
Swan, M. (1983) Teaching Decimal Place Value, A Comparitive Study of “Conflict” and
“Positive Only” Approaches, Nottingham: Shell Centre.
Correspondence
j.houssart@open.ac.uk brian.weller@northampton.ac.uk