II
III
The study of problem-posing teaching technique in the elementary school grade two class Pei-Chi Chen Department of Education National Sun Yat-sen University Abstract The main purpose of this study is to understand the possible effects of the problem-posing teaching technique in an elementary school, grade-two class. With problem-posing teaching technique of twenty-four classes within 12 weeks, the experimenter first used the problem-posing texts to ask students to formulate mathematical problems. After reviewing the problems formulated by students, the necessary interviews were done. The statistical analysis is done on pre-tests and post-tests of mathematical-solving ability. Students feedbacks about problem posing teaching technique are collected. There were four stages in this experiment: (1) oral presentation of problem-posing, (2) written presentation of problem-posing, (3) written presentation of problem-posing and problem-solving by the same person, (4) wiitten presentation of problem-posing by one and problem-solving by another. The experimenter explored the following themes during these four stages: (1) the process of problem-posing learning, (2) the characteristics and erroneous types of the students opus, (3) the differences on the problem-posing abilities when students faced formulas, pictures and written contexts, (4) the behaviors of the high problem-posing ability group and the low problem-posing ability group, (5) the enhance of problem-solving abilities due to problem-posing teaching technique. From this study, the experimenter found that the majority of the students participated in this study interesting in this teaching technique, and students gained confidence in posing and solving mathematical problems. Besides, the experimenter also found that: (1) the students ability in posing and solving problems progressed gradually in speed and correctness, (2) the characteristics and erroneous IV
types of the students opus were diverse, which included relativeness of situations, students interests, school lives, and daily lives, correctness of mathematical logic, ambiguity of language, (3) students were better to pose problems from pictures and written contexts than from formulas, but there was no difference between from pictures and from written contexts, (4) the high problem-posing ability group performs better in speed and correctness to solve problem than the low problem-posing ability group, (5) Comparing the controlled and non-controlled groups, problem-posing teaching technique seems to helpe students to enhance their problem-solving ability. Key words: problem-posing, problem-solving, elementary school grade two class V
VI
VII
VIII
1
2
3
4
5
6
1 2 3 4 5 7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45 yes no
46 1. 2. 2b.
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61 88 2-4 88
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
SPSS10.0 T 27% 76
T T T 77
78
79
80
16 25 81
82 4-1 4+4=8 8+4=12 12+4=16 16+4=20 9+9=18 18+9=27 27+9=36
83
84
85
86
87
88
72 25 17 89
90
91
92 4-2 1
93
94
95
96
97
98
102-6= 102 6 4 42-=26 99
42 26 18 36+20=56 56-18=38 36 20 18 17 18+14=32 32+9=41 18 14 9 6 9+9=18 18+9=27 27+9=36 200 1. 9 9 9 9 7 2. 9 4 2 100
1. 102 6 20 2. 113 18 18 3. 18 14 9 21 1. 25 22 2. 36 20 18 33 3. 102 6 29 101
4. 18 14 9 25 5. 35 48 26 1. 27 12 28 2. 27 12 4 3. 47 25 30 4. 47 25 22 5. 36 20 18 20 6. 36 20 18 6 7. 49 21 12 20 8. 49 21 12 2 9. 4 4 4 4 4 35 10. 42 26 24 102
1. 27 12 1 2. 27 12 36 3. 35 48 25 4. 47 25 22 5. 6 5 31 6. 6 5 1 7. 102 6 24 8. 14 6 8 25 103
1. 47 25 22 2. 47 25 6 3. 27 12 9 4. 102 6 3 5. 102 6 5 6. 102 6 8 7. 102 6 15 8. 35 48 27 9. 42 26 11 10. 18 14 9 27 11. 36 20 18 1 104
1. 27 12 11 2. 42 26 2 3. 35 48 9 1. 9 4 9 2. 4 4 30 3. 6 5 32 4. 47 25 33 105
1. 18 14 9 3 2. 102 6 7 3. 102 6 21 4. 102 6 12 4-4 106
4-5 107
27-12= 1. 12 21 36 2. 27 14 32 108
1. 3 5 23 2. 5 4 28 3. 9 9 16 4. 36 20 18 12 1. 136 14 2. 9 6 3. 276 9 4. 42 1 5. 42 3 1. 27 12 30 2. 27 12 33 3. 192 52 15 4. 192 35 21 5. 42 26 15 6. 2 13 2 21 7. 24 30 6 8. 118 20 13 109
1. 47 25 32 2. 35 48 3 3. 27 12 1 4. 187 167 14 1. 47 25 10 2. 10 1. 27 12 3 2. 9 4 1 3. 47 25 21 4. 47 25 17 5. 6 14 6 6. 7 5 16 7. 9 4 3 26 110
1. 62 38 23 2. 14 23 7 3. 69 18 31 4. 4 2 19 5. 102 6 22 1. 60 20 4 2. 80 45 7 3. 100 69 24 4. 27 12 27 1. 47 25 35 2. 276 154 4 3. 42 26 8 4. 9 4 31 1. 47 25 22 2. 27 12 8 3. 2 5 11 111
1. 9 4 3 25 2. 27 12 34 3. 72 25 6 4. 14 10 15 5. 276 154 12 1. 47 25 1 2. 7 6 7 3. 120 45 12 4. 27 12 2 1. 27 12 1 2. 102 6 1 3. 9 4 3 8 4. 9 4 3 15 5. 9 4 3 8 112
1. 42 26 14 2. 276 154 14 3. 4 2 4 113
114
X X X 115
116
117
X 118
X 119
X X 120
121
36 35 T T X =80.14 X =75.71 4-9 X =88.47 X =78.43 122
4-10 T X =88.47 X =80.14 4-11 X =78.43 X =75.71 4-12 123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
X X X X X 131
X =80.14 X =75.71 X =88.47 X =78.43 X =88.47 X =80.14 X =78.43 X =75.71 132
5-1 1. 2. 133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
Borba M. C. (1994). High School Students Mathematical Problem Posing: An Exploratory Study in the Classroom. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA. Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (1983). The art of problem posing. Philadelphia, PA: Franklin Institute Press. Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (1988). Problem posing in mathematics education. Questioning Exchange, 2(2), 121-131. Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (1993). Problem posing: Reflection and application. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cai, J. (1998). An investigation of U. S. and Chinese students mathematical problem posing and problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10(1), 37-50. Cudmore, D. H., & English, L. D. (1998). Using Intranets to Foster Statistical Problem Posing and Critiquing in Secondary Mathematics Classrooms. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 1998. Dillon, J. T. (1982). Problem finding and solving. Journal of Creative Behavior, 16, 97-111. Dillon, J. T. (1988). Levels of problem posing vs. problem solving. Questioning Exchange 2(2), 105-115. English, L. D. (1997). Promoting a problem-posing classroom. Teaching children Mathematics, 4(3), 172. English, L. D. (1998). Children s problem posing within formal and 145
informal context. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(1), 83-106. Gagne, E.D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston: Little, Brown, and Company. Gergen, K. J. (1985). Social Constructionist Inquiry: Context and Implication. Gergen, Kenneth J. & Davis, Keith E. (Eds.) (1985). The social Construction of the person. New York: Springer----Verlag. Greer, B. (1991). Children s word matching multiplication and division calculation. In F. Furinghetti (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifteen International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics. Vol. 2. Assisi, Italy: Author. Hashimoto, Y. (1987). Classroom practics of problem solving in Japanese elementary school. Proceedings of the U.S. Japan Seminar on Mathematical Problem solving. Hinsley, D. A., Hayes, J. R., & Simon, H. A. (1977). From word to equations meaning and representation in algebra word problems. In M. Just & P. Carpenter (Eds.), Cognitive processes in comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Keil, G. E. (1965). Writing and solving original problems as a means of improving verbal arithmetic problem solving ability. Doctoral dissertation. Kilpatrick, J. (1987). Problem formulating: Were do good problems come from? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed), Cognitive science and mathematics education(pp.123-147). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associate. Kintsch, W., Greeno, J. G. (1985). Understanding and solving word arithmetic problem. Psychological Review, 92, 109-129 Kozmetsky, G. (1980). The significant role of problem solving in education. In D.T. Tuma F. Reif (Eds.), Problem solving and 146
education: Issues in teaching and research (pp. 151-157). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Krulik, S., Rudnick, J. A. (1993). Reasoning and problem solving: A handbook for elementary school teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bason. Krutetskii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in school children. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Leung, S. S. (1996). Problem posing as assessment: Reflections and reconstructions. The Mathematics Educator, 1(2), 159-171. Leung, S. S. (1997). On the role of creative thinking in problem posing. Zentralbatt fur Didaktik der Mathematik, 97(3), 81-85. Leung, S. S. & Silver, E.A. (1997). The role of task format, mathematics knowledge, and Creative thinking on the arithmetic problem posing of prospective elementary school teachers. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 9(1), 5-24. Mayer, R. E. (1982). Memory for algebra story problems. Journal of Educational psychology, 74, 199-216. Mayer, R. E. (1987). Educational Psychology: A cognitive approach. Boston: Little, Brown. And Company. Moses, B., Bjork, E., & Goldenberg, E. P. (1993). Beyond problem solving: problem posing. In S.I. Brown & M. I. Walter (Eds.), Problem posing: Reflections and applicationspp.178-188. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1980). An agenda for action: Recommendations for school mathematics of the 1980s. Reston, VA: Author. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Curriculum and 147
evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. Nohda, N. (1984). The heart of open approach in mathematics teaching. In T. Kawaguchi (Ed.), Proceedings of ICIM-JSME regional conference on mathematics education (pp.314-318). Tokyo: Japan Society of Mathematics Education. Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. (2nd ed.). New York: Doubleday. Reitman, W. (1965). Cognition and thought. New York: Wiley. Resnick, L. B., Ford, W. W. (1981). The psychology of mathematics for instruction. Hillsdale, NJLawrence Erlbaum. Riley, M. S., Greeno, J. G., & Heller, J. I. (1983). Development of children s problem solving ability in arithmetic. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp.153-196). New York: Academic Press. Schloemer, C. G. (1994). Integrating problem posing into instruction in advanced algebra: Feasibility and outcome. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1994). Mathematical thinking and problem solving. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Silver, E.A. (1985). Introduction. In E.A. Silver (Ed.), Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawerce Erlbaum. Silver, E.A. (1987). Foundations of cognitive theory and research for 148
mathematics problem solving instruction. In A, H. Schoenfeld (Ed.) Cognitive science and mathematics education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Silver, E.A. (1993). On mathematical problem posing. In N. Nohda F. L. Lin (Eds.). Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol.1(pp.66-85), Tsukuba, Japan: Auther. Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing, For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1), 19-28. Silver, E. A. (1995). The nature and use of open problem in mathematics education: Mathematical and pedagogical perspectives. International Reviews on Mathematical Education, 2, 67-72. Silver, E. A. (1996). An analysis of arithmetic problem posing by middle school students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Vol.27, No.5, 521-539. Silver, E. A., & Cai, J. (1993). Mathematical problem posing and problem solving by middle school students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational research association, Atlanta, GA. Silver, E. A., & Mamona, J. (1990). Problem posing by middle school teachers. In C. A. Maher, G. A. Goldin, & R. B. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting, North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp.263-269). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University. Silver, E. A., Mamona-Downs, J., Leung, S. S. & Kenney P.A. (1996). Posing mathematical problems: An exploratory study. Journal for research in mathematics Education, 27(3), 293-309. Silverman, F. L., Winograd, K. & Strohauer, D. (1992). 149
Student-Generated story problems. Arithmetic teacher, 39(8), 6-12. Simon, M. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for research in Mathematics education. Vol.26, No.2, 114-145 Skinner, P. (1990). What s your problem: Posing and solving mathematical problem, K-2. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Stenmark, J. k. (1989). Assessment alternatives in mathematics: An overview of assessment rechniques that promote learning. Berkerly: Regents, University of California. Stovanova, E. & Ellerton, N. F. (1996). A framework for research into student s problem posing in school mathematics. In Corwin, R. B. (Ed.). Talking Mathematics: Supporting Children s Voices. Portsmouth, NH. Stover, G. B. (1982). Structural variables affecting mathematical word problem difficulty in sixth graders. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 5050A. Tsubota, E. (1987). On children s problem posing (grade 1 to 3). Japan. Von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism a way of knowing and learning. London: The Farmer Press. Winograd, K (1990). Writing, solving and sharing original math story problem: Case studies of fifth grade children s cognitive behavior. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Northern Colorado. Writz, R. W. & Kahn, E. (1982). Another look at application in elementary school mathematics. The Arithmetic Teacher, 30, 21-25. 150
1-1 1-151
152
153
154
155
156
157
13 10 25 6 8 14 158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
( ) 167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
1 178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187