Advertisement

Posing mathematically worthwhile problems: developing the problem-posing skills of prospective teachers

  • Aisling LeavyEmail author
  • Mairéad Hourigan
Article

Abstract

Problem solving is a key priority in school mathematics. Central to the valuable role played by problem solving is the quality of the problems posed. While we recognize the features of good problems and how to support learners in solving problems, less is known about the ways in which prospective teachers’ (PTs) conceptions of what constitutes a ‘good’ problem develop within the confines of an Initial Teacher Education program. This study explored the effect of engagement in a mathematics education course on the problem-posing skills of 415 prospective primary teachers. A 3-week instructional unit consisting of a series of lectures and tutorials on problem solving and problem posing was implemented. A questionnaire examining participants’ understandings of and ability to pose problems was administered prior to and following instruction. Results reveal that participation brought improvements in conceptions of what constituted a good problem and in the ability to pose good problems (targeted at grades 1–4). Initial problems generally were arithmetic, required one step to solve and had only one correct solution. Following the instructional unit, attention was paid to designing problems that had the potential of multiple strategy use, multiple possible correct solutions, multiple modes of representation and the incorporation of extraneous information. Despite these improvements, the complexities of problem posing and the challenges that persist for PTs in posing good problems are evidenced. Recommendations are made for the enhancement of problem-posing experiences, most notably developing skills in identifying mathematically worthwhile problems from a selection of problems or in reformulating given problems to make them better, that support PTs in developing the knowledge and understandings required to pose mathematically worthwhile problems.

Keywords

Problem solving Problem posing Prospective teachers Mathematics education Teacher education 

Notes

References

  1. Arbaugh, F., & Brown, C. A. (2004). What makes a mathematical task worthwhile? Designing a learning tool for high school mathematics teachers. In R. R. Rubenstein & G. W. Bright (Eds.), Perspectives on the teaching of mathematics (pp. 27–41). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  2. Blum, W., & Niss, M. (1991). Applied mathematical problem solving, modelling, applications, and links to other subjects-state, trends and issues in mathematics instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(1), 37–68.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, S. I., & Walter, M. I. (1983). The art of problem posing. Philadelphia, PA: Franklin Institute Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cai, J. (1998). An investigation of U.S. and Chinese students’ mathematical problem posing and problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10, 37–50.Google Scholar
  5. Cai, J., & Hwang, S. (2002). Generalized and generative thinking in US. and Chinese students’ mathematical problem solving and problem posing. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21, 401–421.Google Scholar
  6. Cai, J., Moyer, J. C., Wang, N., Hwang, S., Nie, B., & Garber, T. (2013). Mathematical problem posing as a measure of curricular effect on students’ learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 57–69.Google Scholar
  7. Chapman, O. (1999). In-service teacher development in mathematical problem-solving. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2, 121–142.Google Scholar
  8. Chapman, O. (2004). Helping pre-service elementary teachers develop flexibility in using word problems in their teaching. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  9. Chapman, O. (2005). Constructing pedagogical knowledge of problems solving: Preservice mathematics teachers. In H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th PME International Conference (vol. 2, 225–232).Google Scholar
  10. Chapman, O. (2008) Instructional practices to facilitate prospective mathematics teachers’ learning of problem solving for teaching (pp. 158–167). Paper presented at ICME, Monterrey, Mexico. Accessed at http://www.matedu.cinvestav.mx/~rptec/Sitio_web/Documentos_files/tsg19icme11.pdf
  11. Chapman, O. (2012). Prospective elementary school teachers’ ways of making sense of mathematical problem posing. PNA, 6(4), 135–146.Google Scholar
  12. Crespo, S. (2003). Learning to pose mathematical problems: Exploring changes in preservice teachers’ practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(3), 243–270.Google Scholar
  13. Crespo, S., & Sinclair, N. (2008). What makes a problem mathematically interesting? Inviting prospective teachers to pose better problems. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(5), 395–415.Google Scholar
  14. Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving. Psychological Monographs, 58(5), i–i113.Google Scholar
  15. Ellerton, N. F. (1986). Children’s made-up mathematics problems: A new perspective on talented mathematicians. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17(3), 261–271.Google Scholar
  16. Ellerton, N. F. (2013). Engaging pre-service middle-school teacher-education students in mathematical problem posing: Development of an active learning framework. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 87–101.Google Scholar
  17. English, L. D. (1997). The development of fifth-grade children’s problem-posing abilities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34, 183–217.Google Scholar
  18. English, L. D. (1998). Children’s problem posing within formal and informal contexts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 83–106.Google Scholar
  19. Ernest, P. (1989). The impact of beliefs on the teaching of mathematics. In P. Ernest (Ed.), Mathematics teaching: The state of the art (pp. 249–254). London: The Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  20. Getzels, J. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  21. Glaser, B. G. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.Google Scholar
  22. Hourigan, M., & Leavy, A. (2017a). Pre-service primary teachers’ geometric reasoning stages: Is pre-tertiary mathematics education building sufficiently strong foundations? The Teacher Educator, 52(4), 346–364.Google Scholar
  23. Hourigan, M., & Leavy, A. M. (2017b). Rate your course! The student teachers’ voice: Perceptions of effective primary pre-service mathematics education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 49(6), 802–829.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2017.1284266.Google Scholar
  24. Hourigan, M., Leavy, A. M., & Carroll, C. (2016). ‘Come in with an open mind’: Changing attitudes towards mathematics in primary teacher education. Educational Research, 58(3), 319–346.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2016.1200340.Google Scholar
  25. Kilpatrick, J. (1987). Problem formulating: Where do good problems come from? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 123–147). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  26. Knapp, M. S., Adelman, N. E., Marder, C., McCollum, H., Needels, M. C., Padillia, C., et al. (1995). Teaching for meaning in high poverty schools. New York Leavy: Teachers’ College Press.Google Scholar
  27. Lavy, I., & Bershadsky, I. (2003). Problem posing via “What if not?” strategy in solid geometry: A case study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(4), 369–387.Google Scholar
  28. Leavy, A., & Hourigan, M. (2018). The beliefs of ‘tomorrow’s teachers’ about mathematics: Precipitating change in beliefs as a result of participation in an Initial Teacher Education programme. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(5), 759–777.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2017.1418916.Google Scholar
  29. Leavy, A. M., Hourigan, M., & Carroll, C. (2017). Exploring the impact of reform mathematics on entry-level pre-service primary teachers attitudes towards mathematics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education., 15(3), 509–526.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9699-1.Google Scholar
  30. 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.Google Scholar
  31. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  32. National Council for Curriculum and Assessment (NCCA). (1999). Primary Mathematics Curriculum. Dublin: Stationary Office.Google Scholar
  33. Norton, A., & Kastberg, S. (2012). Learning to pose cognitively demanding tasks through letter writing. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 15, 109–130.Google Scholar
  34. O’Shea, J., & Leavy, A. M. (2013). Teaching mathematical problem-solving from an emergent constructivist perspective: the experiences of Irish primary teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 16(4), 293–318.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-013-9235-6.Google Scholar
  35. Polya, G. (1954). Mathematics and plausible reasoning. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Polya, George. (1961). Mathematical discovery-on understanding. Learning and Teaching Problem Solving: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Posamentier, A. S., & Krulik, S. (1998). Problem-solving strategies for efficient and elegant solutions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
  38. Sarrazy, B. (2002). Effects of variability of teaching on responsiveness to the didactic contract in arithmetic problem-solving among pupils of 9–10 years. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XVII(3), 321–341.Google Scholar
  39. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  40. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1989). Exploration of students’ mathematical beliefs and behaviours. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 20(4), 338–355.Google Scholar
  41. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1991). On mathematics sense making: An informal attack on the unfortunate divorce of formal and informal mathematics. In I. J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins, & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 311–343). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.Google Scholar
  42. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  43. Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1), 19–28.Google Scholar
  44. Silver, E. A. (1997). Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 29(3), 75–80.Google Scholar
  45. Silver, E. A. (2013). Problem-posing research in mathematics education: looking back, looking around, and looking ahead. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 157–162.Google Scholar
  46. Silver, E. A., & Cai, J. (1996). An analysis of arithmetic problem posing by middle school students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 521–539.Google Scholar
  47. Silver, E. A., Kilpatrick, J., & Schlesinger, B. (1990). Thinking through mathematics: Fostering inquiry and communication in mathematics classrooms. New York: The College Board.Google Scholar
  48. Singer, F. M., Ellerton, N., & Cai, J. (2013). Problem-posing research in mathematics education: New questions and directions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 1–7.Google Scholar
  49. Sriraman, B. (2009). The characteristics of mathematical creativity. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 41(1–2), 13–27.Google Scholar
  50. Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building Student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 455–488.Google Scholar
  51. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. New York: Free Press. (Chapter 7).Google Scholar
  52. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  53. Suter, W. N. (2012). Introduction to educational research: A critical thinking approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  54. Thompson, A. G. (1984). The relationship of teachers conceptions of mathematics and mathematics teaching to instructional practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics., 15(2), 105–127.Google Scholar
  55. Tichá, M., & Hošpesová, A. (2015). Developing teachers’ subject didactic competence through problem posing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 133–143.Google Scholar
  56. Vacc, N. (1993). Questioning in the mathematics classroom. Arithmetic Teacher, 41(2), 88–91.Google Scholar
  57. Van de Walle, J. (2013). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally (8th ed.)., Pearson international edition Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  58. Xenofontos, C. (2014). Defining mathematical problems and problem solving: Prospective primary teachers’ beliefs in Cyprus and England. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(2), 279–299.Google Scholar
  59. Xie, J., & Masingila, J. O. (2017). Examining interactions between problem posing and problem solving with prospective primary teachers: A case of using fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96, 101–111.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of STEM EducationMary Immaculate CollegeLimerickIreland

Personalised recommendations