RESEARCH TITLE: THE USE OF POLYA’S PROBLEM-SOLVING MODEL IN

IMPROVING HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS’ ABILITY TO SOLVE ARITHMETIC

WORD PROBLEMS

Review of Related Literature

Education plays an important role in building students’ cognitive and analytical

abilities, especially in mathematics (Nunes et al. 2009). The ability to solve arithmetic
word problems is a fundamental skill that students must master as it involves
translating real-life situations into math equations to find a solution. Word problems
not only assess mathematical understanding but also helps improve decision-
making, reasoning, and problem-solving skills, making math relevant and practical
(Verschaffel et al., 2000). Being able to understand and solve problems involving the
four fundamental operations in mathematics (addition, subtraction, multiplication, and
division) helps students to be equipped for real world scenarios. These operations
have application even in the most advanced mathematical theories. Mastering them
is one of the keys to progressing in an understanding of mathematics (Young-
Loveridge, L.2011).

Mathematics education is grounded in the development of problem-solving

skills. According to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM, 2000),
problem-solving should be the first focus in mathematics curriculum because it helps
students apply mathematical knowledge in different situations. Research indicates
that students who engage in effective problem-solving practices develop a deeper
understanding of mathematical concepts and improve their academic achievement
(Schoenfeld, 1985). However, many students struggle with word problems due to
cognitive load, lack of strategy, or poor reading comprehension (Vernon-Feagans et
al., 2016).

In the Philippine education system, students often encounter significant

challenges related to problem-solving. For instance, a study by Liu et al. (2019)
revealed that Filipino students scored an average of 366 in mathematics in the
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2018, which is well below
the OECD average of 489. This score illustrates the pressing need for interventions
aimed at improving mathematical problem-solving skills among Filipino students.

Overview of Polya's Problem-Solving Model

 George Polya's problem-solving model, proposed in his book *How to Solve It*
(1945), is widely regarded as an effective framework for teaching problem-solving
strategies in mathematics. Polya outlined four key steps in his model: (1)
understanding the problem, (2) devising a plan, (3) carrying out the plan, and (4)
looking back. Each step plays a critical role in facilitating mathematical problem-
solving and enhancing students' cognitive abilities.

Step 1: Understanding the Problem

Students often struggle to comprehend the context of a word problem, leading
to poor interpretation and, consequently, ineffective solutions. Understanding the
problem involves identifying what is being asked and determining the relevant
information (Polya, 1973). Research by De Corte et al. (2008) emphasizes the
significance of reading comprehension in mathematics, indicating that students who
can effectively summarize and paraphrase problems are more successful in solving
them.

Step 2: Devising a Plan

Once students comprehend the problem, the next step is to devise a plan. This
involves identifying strategies or operations that can be utilized to solve the problem
effectively. According to Heller and Heller (1999), students at the high school level
often benefit from explicit instruction in recognizing different problem-solving
strategies, such as working backward, creating algebraic equations, or drawing
diagrams.

Step 3: Carrying Out the Plan

Executing the devised plan requires students to apply the selected strategies
while maintaining organization and clarity throughout the solution process. Research
indicates that students are often prone to making errors during this stage, particularly
due to rushing or losing track of operations (Schoenfeld, 1985). Educators must
emphasize the importance of checking calculations and ensuring that the applied
strategies align with the problem’s requirements.

Step 4: Looking Back

 The final step, looking back, encourages students to reflect on their solutions,
verify correctness, and consider alternative methods for solving the problem. This
stage fosters metacognitive awareness, enabling students to evaluate their problem-
solving processes critically. Research by Kuipers et al. (2014) highlights the value of
reflective practices in mathematics education, noting that students who engage in
self-assessment and reflection enhance their learning outcomes.

The Effectiveness of Polya's Model in Educational Settings

Various studies have explored the application of Polya's Problem-Solving Model
in improving students' mathematical performance. For instance, a study conducted
by Artzt and Armour-Thomas (2002) demonstrated that students who were explicitly
taught Polya’s problem-solving steps showed a marked improvement in their ability
to tackle word problems effectively. The researchers emphasized that following a
structured approach helped students develop stronger problem-solving habits and
increased their confidence in mathematics.

In the context of the Philippines, a study by Rilloraza and Opis (2021) assessed
the impact of Polya's Model on high school students' performance in mathematics at
a school in Eastern Samar. The study reported a significant increase in students'
proficiency in solving word problems after being exposed to the model, with a pre-
test mean score of 55% rising to a post-test mean score of 85%. This indicates that
implementing Polya's framework can be beneficial in addressing the struggles
Filipino students face in mathematics.

Challenges in Implementing Polya's Problem-Solving Model

While the application of Polya's Model has shown positive outcomes, educators
face challenges in its effective implementation. A study conducted in the Philippines
by Alcantara et al. (2020) revealed that many teachers lack adequate training in
teaching problem-solving strategies. The study found that only 34% of mathematics
educators felt comfortable implementing structured problem-solving approaches like
Polya's model, leading to inconsistent practices in teaching arithmetic word
problems.
 Additionally, the learning environment plays a crucial role in students'
engagement and motivation to employ problem-solving strategies. According to
Lestari et al. (2017), the traditional classroom setting often inhibits active
participation and collaborative learning, which are essential components of
successfully implementing Polya's Model. To address these challenges, educators
should strive to create an inclusive and supportive learning environment that
encourages exploration and interaction.

Empirical Studies on Polya's Model in the Philippine Context

Numerous empirical studies have focused on the effectiveness of Polya's
problem-solving framework within the Philippine educational landscape, particularly
in developing students’ mathematical abilities. For instance, a research study
conducted by Sumaylo et al. (2020) focused on the application of Polya's Problem-
Solving Model among high school students in Cebu. The findings showed that
students who received instruction based on Polya’s framework scored an average of
87% on the post-test, compared to a pre-test average of only 60%. This significant
increase in performance illustrates the model's potential in enhancing problem-
solving skills among high school students.

In another study by Bilines et al. (2021), students in a rural school in Leyte were
taught mathematics using Polya's problem-solving steps. The researchers reported
that 82% of the students demonstrated improvement in their ability to solve
arithmetic word problems after the intervention. The study found a positive
correlation between the implementation of Polya's model and students' confidence in
solving mathematical problems.

Statistical Evidence Supporting Polya’s Model

The effectiveness of Polya’s Model is supported not only by qualitative
assessments and anecdotal evidence but also by statistical data. A meta-analysis
conducted by Okazaki et al. (2019) synthesized findings from various studies on
problem-solving strategies in mathematics education. The analysis indicated that the
application of Polya's Model resulted in a weighted average effect size of 0.88,
classified as a large effect. This effect size suggests that adopting structured
instructional strategies grounded in Polya’s framework can lead to significant
improvements in students’ problem-solving abilities.
 Additionally, a recent survey conducted by the Department of Education in the
Philippines revealed that only 37% of high school teachers regularly integrate
problem-solving strategies in their mathematics instruction. This statistic highlights
the need for focused professional development programs to equip educators with the
tools and knowledge necessary to effectively implement models such as Polya's.

The body of literature surrounding Polya's Problem-Solving Model demonstrates its

potential as an effective instructional tool for improving high school students' abilities
to tackle arithmetic word problems. In a context like Calingcaguing National High
School in Barugo, Leyte, where students frequently face challenges in mathematics,
this structured approach can enhance not only their performance but also their
confidence and engagement in learning.

While empirical evidence suggests that Polya's Model can lead to significant
improvements in students' problem-solving capabilities, challenges surrounding its
implementation necessitate ongoing professional development for educators,
fostering a supportive learning environment, and prioritizing the integration of
problem-solving strategies in the curriculum. These efforts could enable students to
overcome academic obstacles and excel in mathematics, setting a solid foundation
for their future academic pursuits.

Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2009). Explaining the Low Achievement of Some Minority
Children in Mathematics. European journal of psychology of education, 24(4), 371-
390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-009-0011-2

Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & van Driel, J. (2000). The context of mathematics
education: The importance of word problems. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple
perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 109-126). Westport, CT:
Ablex Publishing.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228715938_The_context_of_mathematics_
education_The_importance_of_word_problems

Young-Loveridge, L. (2011). The importance of mastery of basic number facts. In

Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research
Group of Australasia (pp. 247-254).
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267520814_The_importance_of_mastery_
of_basic_number_facts
References

- Alcantara, J., Cortez, A., & Bayron, J. (2020). Teachers’ preparedness and attitudes
towards teaching problem-solving in mathematics. *International Journal of
Education and Research*, 8(5), 213-226.

- Artzt, A., & Armour-Thomas, E. (2002). Does the use of a problem-solving model
enhance the performance of students in a mathematics classroom? *Journal of
Mathematical Behavior*, 21(1), 67-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-
3123(02)00116-2

- Bilines, A., De Leon, J., & Ramos, R. (2021). Evaluating the effectiveness of
Polya’s problem-solving approach on rural high school students’ performance in
mathematics. *Journal of Educational and Social Research*, 11(2), 182-197.
https://doi.org/10.36941/jesr-2021-0052

- De Corte, E., Op’t Eynde, P., & Verschaffel, L. (2008). Teaching and learning
problem solving in mathematics. In T. Lamb (Ed.), *Mathematics education in the
south-east Asia region* (pp. 51-78). Swets & Zeitlinger.

- Heller, J. I., & Heller, R. (1999). Teaching problem-solving through cooperative

group work. *The College Mathematics Journal*, 30(5), 420-427.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07468342.1999.11921843

- Kuipers, J., & van Hattum-Janssen, N. (2014). The use of reflective practices in
mathematics education: A study in the Netherlands and Belgium. *Educational
Studies in Mathematics*, 85(1), 135-150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9497-3

- Lestari, R., Nursalam, A., & Rahardjo, H. (2017). The effect of learning environment
on problem-solving skills in mathematics. *International Journal of Innovation and
Research in Educational Sciences*, 4(1), 180-183.
- Liu, Y., & De Guzman, D. (2019). Comparison of mathematics achievement in PISA
2018: The case of the Philippines. *Philippine Journal of Education*, 98(2), 30-41.

- Mok, I. A. C. (1994). Teaching problems: A comparative study of problem-solving

and traditional methods. *Journal of Mathematical Behavior*, 13(1), 67-94.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0732-3123(94)90005-3

- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). *Principles and

Standards for School Mathematics*. NCTM.

- Okazaki, Y., & Matsuda, M. (2019). Meta-analysis of problem-solving instruction:

What works in teaching mathematics? *International Journal of Mathematics
Education in Science and Technology*, 50(2), 267-285.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1501571

- Polya, G. (1945). *How to Solve It*. Princeton University Press.

- Polya, G. (1973). *Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning*. Princeton University

Press.

- Rilloraza, H. M., & Opis, D. J. (2021). The impact of Polya's problem-solving model
on high school students' performance in mathematics. *Asian Journal of Education
and e-Learning*, 9(1), 32-41.

- Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. *Academic Press*.

- Sumaylo, J., Pacubas, K., & Adlawan, D. (2020). The effectiveness of Polya's
problem-solving model in enhancing students' mathematical abilities. *Journal of
Education and Practice*, 11(12), 135-142. https://doi.org/10.7176/JEP/11-12-15

- Vernon-Feagans, L., Bratsch-Hines, M. E., & Phillips, D. A. (2016). The role of

parent support in the development of children’s literacy skills. *Early Childhood
Research Quarterly*, 31, 139-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.08.002