(ST, PT)
. | Theoretical parameter values (PT) . | Empirical parameter values (PE) . | Role of data . |
---|---|---|---|
Theoretical model structure (ST) | Useful for mathematical modelling in schools (ST, PT) | Suitable for mathematical modelling in schools in many cases (ST, PE) | of model structure |
Empirical model structure (SE) | (Impossible) (SE, PT) | Not recommended for mathematical modelling in schools (SE, PE) | of model structure |
Role of data | of parameter values | of parameter values |
Establishing the structure of a model based on theory allows students to see the relevance of mathematics, where mathematical functions emerge naturally from the real-world development, understanding and description of the situation. Sometimes, the values of the parameters in the model also emerge through the same process. In contrast, developing a model (especially the model structure) purely based on the data presents numerous challenges, both for mathematicians in practice and especially for students in schools, as the suite of tools necessary to do this well are statistical, often complicated, not in the curriculum and perhaps produce a model that was not interpretable in the real-world context (Galbraith’s modelling as curve fitting).
In model development, data can be used to validate or to estimate . Validation refers to the process of using theory and/or context to guide development of the model structure and/or the values of the parameters, then using the data confirms that the result is sensible and sufficiently accurate. That is
… the objective is not to confirm or deny the model (we already know it is not precisely correct because of the simplifying assumptions we have made), but rather to test its reasonableness [i.e. validity]. We may decide that the model is quite satisfactory and useful, and elect to accept it. Or we may decide that the model needs to be refined or simplified. In extreme cases, we may even need to redefine the problem, in a sense rejecting the model altogether. [...] this decision process really constitutes the heart of mathematical modelling. ( Giordano & Weir, 1997 , p. 38).
Estimation refers to using the data to determine the model structure or values of the parameters. If the structure is determined based on theory, then it can be validated by comparing to data; if no theory underpins the structure, then the data are used to estimate the structure. Similarly, if the values of the parameters are based on theory, then these can be validated using the data; if no guiding theory exists, then the data can be used to estimate the parameter values.
Validation and estimation can be performed using formal or informal tools. A crucial observation is that formal approaches using data require the use of statistical tools (such as residual analysis), which require experience to use well and appropriately and are usually not covered in the school curriculum. Even those few techniques that are covered in the school curriculum (such as R 2 ) are often used inappropriately even by experienced researchers ( Kvålseth, 1985 ). In many cases, informal processes might be suitable in the classroom (`there are no obvious departures from the proposed model’) and are often better didactically as they build conceptual understanding of the mathematics and ability to interpret the model to describe the real world. In Section 5, we discuss the challenges when teachers attempt to use statistical tools.
Hence, we see that real data have a role to play in the mathematical modelling process, but ensuring that the role is appropriate remains crucial. This has implications for classroom teaching.
Theoretical structure and parameter values: Both the model structure and the parameters values are determined from underlying theory. Data are then used for validating the structure and the parameter values. This approach is an excellent choice for teachers (see Cramer, 2001 for examples) as the mathematics emerges naturally in the description of the real world, and real-world data are used for validating the model. Hence, the modelling is a `vehicle for teaching other mathematical material’ ( Galbraith, 2011 , p. 282).
Theoretical structure and empirical parameter values: The model structure is developed from an understanding or description of the context, and data are used to validate the structure. The unknown parameter values are then estimated using the data. This approach is also a good choice for teaching as students can see the mathematics emerging from the real-world situation and once again the modelling is a `vehicle for teaching other mathematical material’ ( Galbraith, 2011 , p. 282). Estimation of the parameters can be as simple or as complex as necessary and may not even require statistical tools for parameter estimation. Formally, a statistical approach would be used for model validation and parameter estimation, but in a school situation, this may be unnecessary and even counterproductive. In fact, a non-formal approach to parameter estimation is often preferred as this clearly shows how the mathematics describes the real world. Without a formal approach, students may develop many varied ways to estimate parameters based on the meaning of the parameters (Section 6.3).
[...] can be generated in complete ignorance of the principles underlying the real situation […] when used mindlessly it creates a dangerous aberration of the modelling concept. (p. 271).
Many reasons exist for why this approach should be avoided in schools, which we discuss in the next section.
The fourth combination—empirical model structure and theoretical parameter values—is unusual, if not impossible. If there is no guiding theory to suggest a model structure, then it is unlikely that theory will exist to determine the parameters of the structure with no theoretical basis. These approaches have been summarized in Table 1 .
Validation and estimation use data very differently, and the tools necessary are different for both. Formal (statistical) methods of validation and estimation require appropriate knowledge to do well, while informal methods are simple and retain connections with the real-world context.
As noted above, data can be used to validate or estimate the structure of a model and/or to validate or estimate the parameter values. We argue that adopting a theoretical approach to developing model structure is the best way for students to see how mathematical functions emerge naturally to describe the real world and hence are useful for showing the relevance of mathematics in the real world ( Galbraith, 2011 ). Using an empirical approach presents many challenges in the classroom. (Using a theoretical approach is also preferred in the real world, but sometimes an empirical approach is the only option.)
Firstly, an empirical approach to model structure is not usually required by the curriculum. The curricula require students to develop models by describing the real world but rarely cover formal empirical validation or estimation techniques for modelling with non-linear functions. The empirical approach imposes functions on a context, rather than having functions emerge from an understanding of the context. Commonly in Australian schools, R 2 is used to help with decision making as it is easily accessible (using Excel and graphing calculators), even when this is not appropriate. Without guidance from the real-world context, the resulting model may be a poor approximation to reality if the decision is made solely on which model has the `best’ fit. Furthermore, different students with different data from the same context may select different model structures. `Fitting the data well’ is not the only criterion for deciding on a model (see Dunn & Smyth, 2018 , Section 1.10).
Secondly, the resulting models may have no real-world interpretation if the model structure is not based on theory. When using mathematics to describe the real world, mathematical ideas and functions emerge naturally, and students need to think about the context to `mathematise’ it (`mathematising’ is just as important as `interpreting’: Wake, 2016 ). In contrast, when models are imposed upon data, no context is necessary, and the mathematics becomes subservient to the data (modelling as curve fitting Galbraith, 2011 ).
Thirdly, teachers are often not trained to teach empirical modelling. Determining model structures empirically requires statistical techniques, yet mathematics teachers are often not trained in the formal statistical techniques used to properly fit models. Furthermore, many teachers may not understand many basic statistical concepts ( Engel & Sedlmeier 2005 ) so that empirical modelling presents significant challenges. For example, one study ( Dunn et al. , 2015 ) asked teachers to define `regression’ and `correlation’. Although a small sample, the sample was a voluntary, self-selected group of keener mathematics teachers, so the results are optimistic. The results indicate that the teachers’ understanding of regression and correlation was poor. Only 32% gave a correct definition of regression and 16% for correlation (see Dunn et al ., 2015 for details of the study), yet an almost identical group of teachers expressed confidence in their knowledge of regression and correlation ( Marshman et al. , 2015 ). This aligns with other research showing that mathematics teachers may be proficient with the formulae and computations used with regression but do not necessarily understand the statistical concepts or the meaning of the formulae ( Engel & Sedlmeier, 2005 ) and hence the connections between the model and the real world.
Fourthly, teachers may not understand the difference between statistics and mathematics. Formal attempts to fit a model empirically (that is, using statistical approaches) require the use of statistical tools. However, mathematics and statistics have many differences. For example, teachers and researchers alike are often surprised to learn that the language and notation of statistics and mathematics may contradict each other ( Dunn et al. , 2016 ). Even the concept of `linear’ is different in mathematics and statistics ( Dunn et al. , 2016 ). Furthermore, a straight line has different presentations in mathematics and statistics. Straight lines in mathematics are presented deterministically as (say) |$y= mx+c$| , implying that every value of |$x$| is associated with a single possible value |$y$| . In statistics, the structure of the model is written as (say) |$\hat{y}=a+ bx$| , where the left-hand side shows that the model predicts a mean value |$\hat{y}$| for a given value of |$x$| , and the actual (observed) values of |$y$| for that value of |$x$| are generated randomly from the given (often normal) distribution of possible values around the given mean. Failure to understand these differences produces a clash of notation. Other examples of language inconsistencies between mathematics and statistics include the words `graph’, `estimate’, `significant’, `variable’ and the symbol |$\pm$| ( Dunn et al. , 2016 ).
Finally, teachers are not adequately supported to teach a statistical approach. Because many teachers lack an understanding of the empirical modelling approach (i.e. statistical techniques), teachers may reasonably be expected to turn to textbooks. However, many textbooks used in teaching mathematics contain errors and inconsistencies when discussing statistics ( Dunn et al. , 2015 ) or lack useful features to enhance learning ( Dunn et al. , 2017 ). Problems with textbooks include the following: errors in formulae ( Bland & Altman, 1988 ; Dunn et al. , 2015 ), cumbersome and misleading language, confusing or incorrect notation, unexplained language, misusing notation or not explaining what the model means. Furthermore, very few textbooks use real data, and many of those that do use real data (for example, Barnes et al. , 2016 ) use contrived examples such as the relationship between student height and hair length. Many examples and exercises are clearly made up or simply provide a list of |$x$| and |$y$| values and ask students to compute a regression line with no attempts at a context or to attach meaning (for example, Morris, 2016 , p. 598, 599). These approaches do not even try to help students see a connection between mathematics and the real world and may reinforce students’ belief that there is no connection (`these data are made up, because there are no real examples’). Other easily accessed resources, such as Wikipedia, also have significant problems explaining simple statistical concepts ( Dunn et al. , 2018 ).
We recommend approaching mathematical model by using data for validation of the model structure, for reasons described above, and suggest a framework to support teachers’ choice of resources for modelling activities ( Fig. 2 ). We then describe some examples of the modelling process (using Fig. 1 ) of how to do this in the classroom and some examples of how a different approach leads to poor experience of mathematics being useful in the real world.
A simple example that could be used with Year 11 and 12 (aged 16 and 17) students in their final 2 years of school is to simulate radioactive decay to introduce power functions. For example, consider repeatedly tossing coins on a table, where coins that turn up as `heads’ are considered to have radioactively decayed. A model is sought for the number of coins remaining after n tosses. After each toss, the expected number of coins removed at each toss is about one-half. Hence, the `half-life’ is one toss. Using dice and removing dice that land with a (say) six uppermost is similar but with a longer `half-life’ (about one-sixth of the dice are removed with each throw, and the `half-life’ is between three and four rolls). In both cases, a mathematical model can be developed with known parameters. Students can then validate the model by tossing coins (or rolling dice) to see how well the model fits the data. Students only need to be familiar with index notation (including fractional indices) and some guiding questions from the teacher to introduce power functions. This may also give a reason to introduce logarithms.
An example that was used by one of the authors with Year 11 and 12 students both as an in-class activity and a take-home assessment task uses a `marble sifter’ in which holes just large enough for marbles to comfortably pass through are cut in the lid of a cardboard box (for example, printer paper box lid; Fig. 3a ). Students begin with 100 marbles and `sift’ them through the sifter by tilting the box ( Fig. 3b ) and counting how many remain unsifted after each tilt. The process is repeated for 11 to 20 tilts. We can define |$t$| as the number of tilts and |$N$| as the number of marbles (out of 100) that remain unsifted (specify: identifying variables). Some (real) example data are shown in Table 2 . Again, students could mindlessly fit many functional relationships to the data. However, this activity lends itself to a useful discussion of mathematical modelling to establish the model structure. The initial assumption is that we can model a discrete situation with a continuous model (specify: identifying initial assumptions).
To determine a suitable model structure for the marble sifter, students can graph the number of marbles remaining against the tilt number, so that they can visualize the data to help them understand the data (formulate). Then various model structures can be critiqued (analyse; interpret). For example, the model cannot be linear as the graph does not look linear. In addition, a linear model would imply that approximately the same number of marbles would fall through the sifter; however, many marbles began the sift at any iteration, which makes no sense. A linear model also implies that more and more sifting would eventually end up producing a negative number of remaining marbles.
The model cannot be quadratic, as the number of marbles remaining cannot start increasing as a quadratic would permit (marbles cannot jump back up through the holes). Furthermore, if students attempt to fit a quadratic, then they usually see a turning point occurring and the function increasing within the range of the data.
Attempting to fit a logarithmic model of the form |$N=a\ \log (t)+b$| will cause difficulties as the data begins at |$t=0$| and |${N}_0=100$| (since |$\log\ 0$| is undefined). A similar problem exists when trying to model with a power function (the initial conditions are undefined; |$N=a{t}^b$| can never satisfy the initial conditions).
An exponential relationship, however, makes sense. From Table 2 , the fraction remaining (say |$a$| ) at each tilt is approximately constant. For example, if we start with |${N}_0$| marbles, then after one tilt, we would have an average of |${N}_0a$| marbles remaining. After two tilts, an average of |${N}_0\ {a}^2$| would remain. Continuing, after |$t$| tilts, the predicted number of marbles remaining would be |$\hat{N}={N}_0\ {a}^t$| , for some value of |$a$| , and where |$\hat{N}$| is the average number of marbles left after |$t$| tilts. This is the process of mathematical modelling describing the real world.
Data from one example of conducting the marble-sifting study
Sift # . | Trial 1 . | Trial 2 . | Trial 3 . | Mean number remaining . | Fraction remaining compared to previous sift . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100.0 | |
1 | 85 | 87 | 89 | 87.0 | 0.8700 |
2 | 72 | 78 | 82 | 77.3 | 0.8889 |
3 | 67 | 66 | 74 | 69.0 | 0.8922 |
4 | 57 | 58 | 63 | 59.3 | 0.8599 |
5 | 51 | 51 | 60 | 54.0 | 0.9101 |
6 | 45 | 49 | 49 | 47.7 | 0.8827 |
7 | 43 | 43 | 43 | 43.0 | 0.9021 |
8 | 39 | 37 | 34 | 36.7 | 0.8527 |
9 | 37 | 30 | 32 | 33.0 | 0.9000 |
10 | 32 | 28 | 30 | 30.0 | 0.9091 |
11 | 28 | 25 | 29 | 27.3 | 0.9111 |
Mean, |$a$|: | 0.8890 |
Sift # . | Trial 1 . | Trial 2 . | Trial 3 . | Mean number remaining . | Fraction remaining compared to previous sift . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
0 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100.0 | |
1 | 85 | 87 | 89 | 87.0 | 0.8700 |
2 | 72 | 78 | 82 | 77.3 | 0.8889 |
3 | 67 | 66 | 74 | 69.0 | 0.8922 |
4 | 57 | 58 | 63 | 59.3 | 0.8599 |
5 | 51 | 51 | 60 | 54.0 | 0.9101 |
6 | 45 | 49 | 49 | 47.7 | 0.8827 |
7 | 43 | 43 | 43 | 43.0 | 0.9021 |
8 | 39 | 37 | 34 | 36.7 | 0.8527 |
9 | 37 | 30 | 32 | 33.0 | 0.9000 |
10 | 32 | 28 | 30 | 30.0 | 0.9091 |
11 | 28 | 25 | 29 | 27.3 | 0.9111 |
Mean, |$a$|: | 0.8890 |
Opportunities emerge to discuss the assumptions made in developing the model (interpret) (for example, is it reasonable to assume that decay rate is constant?) and strengths and limitations of the model (for example, the data are discrete, so does it matter that |$N$| is continuous as we develop the model?) ( The State of Queensland (Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority), 2017 ). A discussion of half-life also fits with the discussion.
To determine values for the parameters, first observe that the model has two unknown parameters to be estimated: |${N}_0$| and |$a$| , though |${N}_0$| could be constrained to 100 as it is the only known value. To estimate these values, students could use technology (such as graphics calculators or Excel) as a `black box’ or formal statistical tools. Technology allows students to determine equations and coefficients of determination, R 2 , for various regression lines from the scatterplot. However, if students are not encouraged to think about each model as it is generated, then the technology is a black box and opportunities for strengthening students’ understanding of modelling have been missed. Of concern is that the students (and most of their teachers) do not understand how the computer creates the estimates and the reason why it is important to refer each model generated to the real world for validation. Secondary school students were expected to evaluate every possible model before deciding on their final choice as part of the written assessment or so that they could participate in a whole class discussion.
An alternative approach to using a black-box approach, which has arisen when the activity was used with pre-service mathematics teachers, is for pre-service teachers to understand the meaning of the parameters, helping them connect the mathematics to the real world. For example, the value of |${N}_0$| is the initial number of marbles, so using |${N}_0=100$| seems sensible. An estimate of |$a$| can be found by combining results from all groups and estimating |$a$| as the fraction of marbles retained at each sift ( Table 2 ). Of course, the modelling can be rearranged to lead to the exponential function also.
For most students, this approach allows them to see explicitly how mathematics is used to describe the real world, how mathematics emerges naturally and that the parameters have physical meaning. However, students could also use some of the basic statistical modelling ideas that are in the curriculum to estimate the parameters, by first transforming to a linear model (taking logarithms of the modelling equation): |$\textrm{log}\ \hat{N}=\textrm{log}\{N}_0+t\ \textrm{log}\ a$| . This equation is now linear in |$\textrm{log}\ \hat{N}$| and |$t$| (a plot, not shown, of the data confirms this is approximately true), and the slope of the line is expected to be about |$\textrm{log}\ a$| . The slope can be estimated formally using technology or informally using a ruler ( |$a$| may be estimated using a graph and fixing the intercept at |$\textrm{log}\{N}_0$| , then a ruler used to estimate the slope |$\textrm{log}\ a$| ).
Estimating a by averaging the three values of a that emerge from each individual trial: |$\hat{N}=100\ {t}^{0.8890}$|
Fitting the model |$\hat{N}={N}_0{a}^t$| directly using a statistical approach: |$\hat{N}=98.892\ {t}^{0.8858}$|
Log-transform and the fitting a linear model statistically, fixing |${N}_0:\hat{N}=100\ {t}^{0.8854}$|
Fitting an exponential model: |$\hat{N}=98.0\ \exp (-0.119t)$| .
Fitting an exponential model, fixing |${N}_0$| as 100: |$\hat{N}=100\ \exp (-0.122t)$|
All produce similar, but not identical, values for |$a$| . This leads to useful discussions of why they are different, which are the `best’ estimates and what is meant by `best’. It is also useful and helpful for students to see that there is not just one possible answer ( Carrejo & Marshall, 2007 ). A discussion of these different methods would be dependent on whether students used these methods themselves and whether time was available.
A child of one author was given a mathematics assignment in Year 11 where students were asked to generate data as follows. Stand 30 cm from a wastepaper basket, take 10 shots at landing a wad of paper in the bin and record the number of successful shots. Students were to repeat at other distances from the wastepaper basket (60 cm, 90 cm, 120 cm and up to 330 cm). Students were then asked to plot the data and fit linear, quadratic, cubic and reciprocal functions to the data using software. Students were told to vary the parameters of the model and then select a `best fitting’ model by eye (rather than by computer optimization, say). Students used their chosen model to predict what would happen at a different distance (say 105 cm). The data collected by the author’s child are plotted in Fig. 4 . Students can identify the variables as the distance from the bin |$x$| and the number of successful shots |$y$| out of 10 (step 1: specify; Fig. 1 ). They then defer to technology to fit a model (step 2: formulate), which they chose `by eye’ as the best (step 3: analyse).
Data collected from the paper toss study, with various fitted models shown over the data.
This task uses the empirical approach entirely: no attempt is made to mathematize the situation or even to understand what the fitted parameters mean. For example, none of the candidate functions restrict the values of |$y$| to between 0 and 10 even within the domain of the data. None of these proposed models sensibly describe reality, and none of the models or their parameters can be sensibly interpreted or have any physical meaning relating to the actual task. The mathematical functions have been imposed onto the data (the instructions tell students to fit specific functions), and none actually make sense. How can a student be expected to see mathematics being useful in this context, when the models are all clearly ridiculous?
This is an example of a task that `exclude[s] real knowledge from [the] solutions’ ( Verschaffel et al. , 1997 , p. 339). Despite intentions, this activity then could `actually teach students to suspend real-world sense making ( Greer, 1997 )’ ( Gainsburg, 2008 , p. 200; citation in the original) and reinforce the idea that mathematics has no connection to the real world (as it did for the author’s child):
Secondary mathematics teachers count a wide range of practices as real-world connections. Teachers make connections frequently, but most are brief and many appear to require no action or thinking on the students’ part. ( Gainsburg, 2008 , p. 215)
A sensible model would be a logistic regression model ( Fig. 1 , left panel), which is outside the scope of many curricula ( Morrell & Auer, 2007 ).
This example (from Dunn & Smyth, 2018 ) considers real data from small-leaved lime trees Tilia cordata grown in Russia ( Fig. 6 , left panel; Schepaschenko et al. , 2017 ). It has been used with university students but could also be used with Year 11 and 12 students (16 and 17 year olds). The interest is in estimating the oven-dried foliage biomass (hard to measure) from just the diameter of the tree (easy to measure). A data-based approach would require students to fit quadratic models, exponential models and other functional forms to model the structure of the data and then decide which fits the data best (Section 6.4). However, this approach is poor mathematical modelling and misses rich learning opportunities.
A small-leaved lime tree ( T. cordata). (Used under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Austria licence. Photo by Haeferi, downloaded from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Feldkirchen_an_der_Donau_-_Naturdenkmal_nd325_-_Linde_in_Feldkirchen_-_Winter-Linde_(Tilia_cordata).jpg on 07 November 2017).
Of course, the value of the proportionality constant |$b$| is unknown, but can be estimated informally, as the modelling implies that |$y/{x}^2$| should be approximately constant (analyse). This estimation could be done formally using the data using statistical methods, but the complications this entails are easily avoided and teaching opportunities increased. For each tree, we can compute |$y/{x}^2$| and then find the mean of all these values; this produces an estimate of the proportionality constant of |$0.005309$| , so that |$y=0.005309\ {x}^2$| . This model can be plotted on the data ( Fig. 6 , right panel), and the fit appears to be reasonable, and so the mathematical modelling seems reasonable; this is informal validation (interpret). In addition, the students can see directly where the estimate of the proportionality constant comes from, and the parameter has meaning.
The oven-dried foliage biomass from 185 naturally growing lime trees in Russia. Left panel: the original data; right panel: some mathematical models plotted on the data.
Note that rather than suggesting using the mean of |$y/{x}^2$| as an estimate of the proportionality constant (Method 1), students may also suggest the mean of |$y$| divided by the mean of |${x}^2$| (Method 2; giving 0.004742) or the mean of |$y$| divided by the square of the mean of |$x$| (Method 3; giving 0.005766). These can all be drawn on the graph of the data and all seem reasonable. All these approaches—while not specifically statistical—demonstrate an understanding of the mathematics and the meaning of the parameters and connect the mathematics to the real world. Furthermore, all models are reasonable so there is not a single correct answer (which may surprise students in mathematics classes; Grootenboer & Marshman, 2016 ), and there is no obvious answer to which estimate is the `best’, or even an answer to what `best’ means in this context.
What else might impact foliage biomass, and how might these be incorporated into a model? (Soil type, hours of sunlight, amount of water received, genetics, planting density, competitor species present etc.)
In what ways is the spherical assumption for the canopy likely to break down? What might be the implication of this? (The canopy sphere may be not quite accurate; there is a `gap’ in the sphere where the trunk is; some foliage is inside the canopy. So maybe the `power’ may not actually be two, but the general structure of the relationship is probably sound.) This shows the balance of simplicity and accuracy, and the level of accuracy needed may depend on what the model will be used for.
What are the units of measurement for the proportionality constant, and what does it mean? (kg/cm 2 ; the average mass of foliage per unit surface area.)
Why are the estimates of the proportionality constant different? Which is the best estimate and why? What is meant by `best’?
Why is the power not two (using one of the approaches), when the modelling led us to expect a power of two? (The model is just an approximation.)
Connecting mathematics to the real world is important ( Smith & Morgan, 2016 ) for increasing students’ understanding of and motivation to study mathematics ( Gainsburg, 2008 ). Using real data and real contexts is a useful way of showing students the applicability of mathematics, and this can be done through mathematical modelling ( Jablonka, 2007 ). In this article, we considered mathematics modelling as a vehicle for teaching mathematical material ( Galbraith, 2011 ) to develop their students’ understanding of particular mathematical functions. We have provided a framework to support teachers as they choose resources and data sets for mathematical modelling.
Using examples where the model structure can be described theoretically (ST; Fig. 2 ) is a better approach for teaching (and in practice), as the mathematics is being used to describe the real world. Parameter estimates then are usually determined from the data (PE), and a theoretical basis for the model structure often leads to sensible ways to estimate the parameters that retain meaning in the parameters.
In contrast, asking students to fit many functional relationships to real (or artificial) data without any meaning behind the resulting models or their parameters (SE) can reinforce the misconception that mathematics is irrelevant in the real world (Section 6.4). Finding suitable real data sets—or having students generate suitable real datasets—is not always easy or straightforward. We have given some suggestions here for students to potentially generate different data sets (Sections 6.2 and 6.3).
We do not recommend fitting mathematical models by determining the model structure through empirical means. When teachers are trying to teach mathematical modelling this way, by using `modelling as curve fitting’ ( Galbraith, 2011 , p. 281), the applicability of mathematics is lost in the procedure and students forget about the real-world knowledge. Generally, students and teachers do not have the skills in statistical modelling to do this effectively as it is not generally included in the curriculum. As a consequence, we believe that if data are used in the teaching of mathematical modelling, then it should be used in a confirmatory (for validation) and not exploratory (for estimation) manner when applied to determining the model structure.
Teaching functions using real data is possible and sensible and can be abounding with meaning. Our framework is useful to remind teachers that the model should be derived from the real world rather than the data and the data then used for validation. If done well, using real data can encourage good mathematical modelling skills in students and help them see the utility of mathematics in describing the real world.
Dr Peter Dunn has broad expertise in the application of statistics in a variety of fields, with publications in diverse areas that includes the teaching of statistics, health, ecology, climatology, agriculture and mathematical statistics.
Dr Dunn has developed a unique R package (called tweedie) for understanding the Tweedie class of distributions. He has presented numerous conference papers (winning a prize at the 16th International Workshop on Statistical Modelling in Odense, Denmark; and the EJ Pitman Prize at the Australian Statistics Conference in 2002).
Dr Dunn is the co-author (with Prof. Gordon Smyth) of Generalized Linear Models With Examples in R, and developed the Dunn-Smyth (quantile) residuals used in statistical modelling. He has been invited to give presentations on the R statistical environment at conferences and workshops.
Dr Dunn was awarded a national Office of Learning and Teaching Citation in 2012, has worked as a climate scientist, and has over 20 years' experience as a lecturer in statistics and mathematics at university level.
Dr Margaret Marshman worked as a physicist in a hospital, laser physics and magnetic resonance imaging before becoming a secondary mathematics and science teacher and mathematics Head of Department. She is involved in teacher education in the undergraduate and Master of Teaching programs.
Dr Marshman supervises a range of doctoral and masters students in Education. Her research interests include Mathematics Education and Science Education and she is particularly interested in how students formulate and solve mathematical and scientific problems and peoples' beliefs about mathematics, its teaching and learning. Margaret also researches areas of collaborative learning, middle schooling, statistics education and first year in higher education.
Aliaga , M. , Cobb , G. , Cuff , C. , Garfield , J. , Gould , R. , Lock , R. , Moore , T. , Rossman , A. , Stephenson , B. , Utts , J. , Velleman , P. & Witmer , J. ( 2005 ) Guidelines for Assessment and Instruction in Statistics Education: College Report, Technical Report . VA : American Statistical Association .
Google Scholar
Google Preview
Australian Curriculum Assessment, and Reporting Authority ( 2018 ) Australian Curriculum: Mathematics retrieved 2 January 2018 . https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/mathematics/
Barnes , M. , Nolan , J. & Phillips , G. ( 2016 ) Maths Quest 12: Further Mathematics VCE Units 3 and 4 , 5th edn. Milton, Australia : John Wiley & Sons .
Bland , J. M. & Altman , D. G. ( 1988 ) Misleading statistics: errors in textbooks, software and manuals . Int. J. Epidemiol. , 17 , 245 – 247 .
Blum , W. & Ferri , R. B. ( 2009 ) Mathematical modelling: can it be taught and learnt? J. Math. Model. Appl. , 1 , 45 – 58 .
Bradstreet , T. E. ( 1996 ) Teaching introductory statistics courses so that nonstatisticians experience statistical reasoning . Amer. Statist. , 50 , 69 – 78 .
Carreira , S. & Baioa , A. M. ( 2018 ) Mathematical modelling with hands-on experimental tasks: on the student’s sense of credibility . ZDM , 50 , 201 – 215 .
Carrejo , D. J. & Marshall , J. ( 2007 ) What is mathematical modelling? Exploring prospective teachers’ use of experiments to connect mathematics to the study of motion . Math. Educ. Res. J. , 19 , 45 – 76 .
Common Core State Standards Initiative ( 2010 ) Common Core State Standards for Mathematics . Washington, DC : National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers .
Cramer , K. ( 2001 ) Using models to build an understanding of functions . Math. Teach. Middle School , 6 , 310 .
da Silva Soares , D. ( 2015 ) Model analysis with digital technology: a ``hybrid approach”. International Perspectives on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematical Modelling ( G. Kaiser & G. A. Stillman eds) . New York, NY : Springer , pp. 453 – 463 .
Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs ( 2000 ) Numeracy, a Priority for All: Challenges for Australian Schools . Canberra : DETYA doi : 10.1093/teamat/hrw015 .
Dewolf , T. , Van Dooren , W. , Ev Cimen , E. & Verschaffel , L. ( 2014 ) The impact of illustrations and warnings on solving mathematical word problems realistically . J. Exp. Educ. , 82 , 103 – 120 .
Dunn , P. K. , Marshman , M. & McDougall , R. ( 2018 ) Evaluating Wikipedia as a self-learning resource for statistics: you know they'll use it . Amer. Statist. , 1 – 8 doi: 10.1080/00031305.2017.1392360 .
Dunn , P. K. & Smyth , G. K. ( 2018 ) Generalized Linear Models with Examples in R . New York : Springer .
Dunn , P. K. , Carey , M. D. , Farrar , M. B. , Richardson , A. M. & McDonald , C. ( 2017 ) Introductory statistics textbooks and the GAISE recommendations . Amer. Statist. , 71 , 326 – 335 .
Dunn , P. K. , Carey , M. D. , Richardson , A. M. & McDonald , C. ( 2016 ) Learning the language of statistics: challenges and teaching approaches . Stat. Educ. Res. J. , 15 .
Dunn , P. K. , Marshman , M. , McDougall , R. & Wiegand , A. ( 2015 ) Teachers and textbooks: on statistical definitions in senior secondary mathematics . J. Stat. Educ. , 23 , 1 – 26 .
Engel , J. & Sedlmeier , P. ( 2005 ) Correlation and regression in the training of teachers. Teaching Statistics in School Mathematics—Challenges for Teaching and Teacher Education: A Joint ICMI/IASE Study ( C. Batanero, G. Burrill & C. Reading eds ). Dordrecht : Springer , pp. 247 – 258 .
Falsetti , M.C. , Rodriguez , M.A. ( 2005 ). A proposal for improving students’ mathematical attitude based on mathematical modelling . Teach. Math. Appl. , 24 , 14 – 28 . doi: 10.1093/teamat/hrh015 .
Gainsburg , J. ( 2008 ) Real-world connections in secondary mathematics teaching . J. Math. Teach. Educ. , 11 , 199 – 219 .
Galbraith , P. ( 2011 ) Models of modelling: Is there a first among equals? Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of MERGA and AAMT ( J. Clark, B. Kissane, J. Mousley, T. Spencer & S. Thornton eds ). Mathematics Research Group of Australasia and the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers , pp. 279 – 287 .
Giordano , F. R. & Weir , M. D. ( 1997 ) A First Course in Mathematical Modelling . California : Brooks/Cole Publishing Company .
Greer , B. ( 1997 ) Modeling reality in mathematics classrooms: the case of word problems . Learn. Instr. , 7 , 293 – 307 .
Grootenboer , P. & Marshman , M. ( 2016 ) Mathematics, Affect and Learning: Middle School Students’ Beliefs and Attitudes About Mathematics Education . Singapore : Springer .
Hand , D. J. , Daly , F. , McConway , K. , Lunn , D. , & Ostrowski , E. ( 1993 ) A Handbook of Small Data Sets . London : CRC Press .
Hand , D. J. , Daly , F. , Lunn , A. D. , McConway , K. Y. & Ostrowski , E. ( 1996 ) A Handbook of Small Data Sets . London : Chapman and Hall .
Huynh , M. , Baglin , J. , Hart , C. , MacGillivray , H. , Bulmer , M. , Dunn , P. K. & Marshman , M. ( 2016 ) Teachers’ perceptions of teaching statistics in schools using the islands. Proceedings of the Ninth Australian and New Zealand Conference on Teaching Statistics ( H. MacGillivray, M. Martin & B. Phillips eds ). Canberra : Statistical Society of Australia Inc .
Jablonka , E. ( 2007 ) The relevance of modelling and applications: relevant to whom and for what purposes? Modelling and Applications in Mathematics Education ( W. Blum, P. L. Galbraith, H. W. Henn & M. Niss eds ). New York : Springer , pp. 193 – 200 .
Kaiser , G. ( 2014 ) Mathematical modelling and applications in education. Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education ( S. Lerman ed). Netherlands : Springer , pp. 396 – 404 .
Kaiser , G. & Sriraman , H. ( 2006 ) A global survey of international perspectives on modelling in mathematics education . ZDM , 38 , 302 – 310 .
Kvålseth , T. O. ( 1985 ) Cautionary note about R 2 . Amer. Statist. , 39 , 279 – 285 .
Lampert , M. ( 1990 ) When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: mathematical knowing and teaching . Am. Educ. Res. J. , 27 , 29 – 63 .
Marshman , M. , Dunn , P. K. , McDougall , R. & Wiegand , A. ( 2015 ) A case study of the attitudes and preparedness of secondary mathematics teachers towards statistics . Aust. Senior Math. J. , 29 , 51 – 64 .
Morrell , C. H. & Auer , R. E. ( 2007 ) Trashball: a logistic regression classroom activity . J. Stat. Educ. , 15 , 1 – 18 .
Morris , S. ( 2016 ) Maths Quest 11: General Mathematics VCE Units 1 and 2 . Milton, Australia : John Wiley and Sons .
Pollak , H. O. ( 1969 ) How can we teach applications of mathematics? Educ. Stud. Math. , 2 , 393 – 404 .
Rodgers , J. L. ( 2010 ) The epistemology of mathematical and statistical modelling: a quiet methodological revolution . Am. Psychol. , 65 , 1 .
Schepaschenko , D. , Shvidenko , A. , Usoltsev , V. A. , Lakyda , P. , Luo , Y. , Vasylyshyn , R. , Lakyda , I. , Myklush , Y. , See , L. , McCallum , I. , Fritz , S. , Kraxner , F. & Obersteiner , M. ( 2017 ) Biomass plot data base. PANGAEA. In supplement to: Schepaschenko, D et al. . ( 2017 )) A dataset of forest biomass structure for Eurasia . Sci. Data .
Singer , J. D. & Willett , J. B. ( 1990 ) Improving the teaching of applied statistics: putting the data back into data analysis . Amer. Statist. , 44 , 223 – 230 .
Smith , C. & Morgan , C. ( 2016 ) Curricular orientations to real-world contexts in mathematics . Curriculum J. , 27 , 24 – 45 .
Smyth , G. K. ( 2011 ) OzDASL: Australasian Data and Story Library (OzDASL) [online]. Accessed 22 February 2018 , Retrieved 2 January 2018 http://www.statsci.org/data .
Stillman , G. , Galbraith , P. , Brown , J. & Edwards , I. ( 2007 ) A framework for success in implementing mathematical modelling in the secondary classroom. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australia ( J. Watson & K. Beswick eds ). Adelaide : MERGA , pp. 688 – 697 .
The State of Queensland (Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority) . ( 2017 ) Mathematics Methods General Senior Syllabus 2019, Retrieved 2 January 2018 https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/downloads/portal/syllabuses/snr_maths_methods_19_syll.pdf
Verschaffel , L. , De Corte , E. & Borghart , I. ( 1997 ) Pre-service teachers' conceptions and beliefs about the role of real-world knowledge in mathematical modelling of school word problems . Learn. Instr. , 7 , 339 – 359 .
Wake , G. ( 2016 ) Mathematics, modelling and students in transition . Teach. Math. Appl. , 35 , 172 – 186 .
Willett , J. B. & Singer , J. D. ( 1992 ) Providing a statistical “model”: teaching applied statistics using real-world data. Statistics for the Twenty-First Century ( F. Gordon & S. Gordon eds ). Washington : Mathematical Association of America , pp. 83 – 98 .
Month: | Total Views: |
---|---|
October 2019 | 37 |
November 2019 | 26 |
December 2019 | 7 |
January 2020 | 12 |
February 2020 | 3 |
March 2020 | 23 |
April 2020 | 13 |
May 2020 | 12 |
June 2020 | 39 |
July 2020 | 75 |
August 2020 | 113 |
September 2020 | 113 |
October 2020 | 158 |
November 2020 | 130 |
December 2020 | 160 |
January 2021 | 122 |
February 2021 | 124 |
March 2021 | 137 |
April 2021 | 110 |
May 2021 | 115 |
June 2021 | 146 |
July 2021 | 102 |
August 2021 | 108 |
September 2021 | 104 |
October 2021 | 103 |
November 2021 | 96 |
December 2021 | 84 |
January 2022 | 93 |
February 2022 | 59 |
March 2022 | 120 |
April 2022 | 116 |
May 2022 | 65 |
June 2022 | 75 |
July 2022 | 57 |
August 2022 | 79 |
September 2022 | 87 |
October 2022 | 87 |
November 2022 | 80 |
December 2022 | 68 |
January 2023 | 95 |
February 2023 | 74 |
March 2023 | 107 |
April 2023 | 118 |
May 2023 | 157 |
June 2023 | 173 |
July 2023 | 124 |
August 2023 | 129 |
September 2023 | 149 |
October 2023 | 169 |
November 2023 | 226 |
December 2023 | 164 |
January 2024 | 215 |
February 2024 | 133 |
March 2024 | 174 |
April 2024 | 141 |
May 2024 | 158 |
June 2024 | 105 |
Citing articles via.
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide
Sign In or Create an Account
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
Teaching problem solving.
Print Version
Expert vs. novice problem solvers, communicate.
Experts (teachers) in a particular field are often so fluent in solving problems from that field that they can find it difficult to articulate the problem solving principles and strategies they use to novices (students) in their field because these principles and strategies are second nature to the expert. To teach students problem solving skills, a teacher should be aware of principles and strategies of good problem solving in his or her discipline .
The mathematician George Polya captured the problem solving principles and strategies he used in his discipline in the book How to Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method (Princeton University Press, 1957). The book includes a summary of Polya’s problem solving heuristic as well as advice on the teaching of problem solving.
Making Sense of Mathematics
By inviting children to solve problems in their own ways, we are initiating them into the community of mathematicians who engage in structuring and modeling their “lived worlds” mathematically.
Fosnot and Jacob, 2007
Teaching mathematics through problem solving requires you to think about the types of tasks you pose to students, how you facilitate discourse in your classroom, and how you support students use of a variety of representations as tools for problem solving, reasoning, and communication.
This is a different approach from “do-as-I-show-you” approach where the teacher shows all the mathematics, demonstrates strategies to solve a problem, and then students just have to practice that exact same skill/strategy, perhaps using a similar problem.
Teaching mathematics through problem solving means that students solve problems to learn new mathematics through real contexts, problems, situations, and strategies and models that allow them to build concept and make connections on their own.
The main difference between the traditional approach “I-do-you-do” and teaching through problem solving, is that the problem is presented at the beginning of the lesson, and the skills, strategies and ideas emerge when students are working on the problem. The teacher listens to students’ responses and examine their work, determining the moment to extend students’ thinking and providing targeted feedback.
Here are the 4 essential moves in a math lesson using a student-centered approach or problem-solving approach:
The mini-lesson starts with a Number Talk. The main purpose of a Number Talk is:
*to build number sense, and
*to provide opportunities for students to explain their thinking and respond to the mathematical thinking of others.
Please refer to the document Int§roducing Number Talks . Or watch this video with Sherry Parrish to gain understanding about how Number Talks can build fluency with your students.
Here are some videos of Number Talks so you can observe some of the main teaching moves.
The role of the teacher during a number talk is crucial. He/she needs to listen carefully to the way student is explaining his/her reasoning, then use a visual representation of what the student said. Other students also share their strategies, and the teacher represents those strategies as well. Students then can visualize a variety of strategies to solve a problem. They learn how to use numbers flexibly, there is not just one way to solve a problem. When students have a variety if strategies in their math tool box, they can solve any problem, they can make connections with mathematical concepts.
There are a variety of resources that can be used for Math Talks. Note : the main difference between Number Talks and Math Talks, is that one allows students to use numbers flexibly leading them to fluency, develop number sense, and opportunities to communicate and reason with mathematics; the other allows for communicating and reasoning, building arguments to critique the reasoning of others, the use of logical thinking, and the ability to recognize different attributes to shapes and other figures and make sense of the mathematics involved.
Problems that can serve as effective tasks or activities for students to solve have common features. Use the following points as a guide to assess if the problem/task has the potential to be a genuine problem:
*Problem should be appropriate to their current understanding, and yet still find it challenging and interesting.
*The main focus of the problem should allow students to do the mathematics they need to learn, the emphasis should be on making sense of the problem, and developing the understanding of the mathematics. Any context should not overshadow the mathematics to be learned.
*Problems must require justification, students explain why their solution makes sense. It is not enough when the teacher tells them their answer is correct.
*Ideally, a problem/task should have multiple entries. For example “find 3 factors whose product is 108”, instead of just “multiplying 3 numbers. “
The most important part of the mini-lesson is to avoid teaching tricks or shortcuts, or plain algorithms. Our goal is always to help guide students to understand why the math works (conceptual understanding). And most importantly how different mathematical concepts/ideas are connected! “Math is a connected subject” Jo Boaler’s video
“Students can learn mathematics through exploring and solving contextual and mathematical problems vs. students can learn to apply mathematics only after they have mastered the basic skills.” By Steve Leinwand author of Principles to Action .
This is the opportunity for students to work with partners or independently on the problem, making connections of what they know, and trying to use the strategy that makes sense to them. Always making sure to represent the problem with a visual representation. It can be any model that helps student understand what the problem is about.
The job of the teacher during this time, is to walk around asking questions to students to guide them in the right direction, but without telling too much. Allowing students to come up with their own solutions and justifications.
Some lessons will include a rich task, or a project based learning, or a number problem (find 3 numbers whose product is 108). There are a variety of learning target tasks to choose from, for each grade level on the Assessment Live Binders website created by Erma Anderson and Project AERO.
Again, keep in mind that some lessons will follow a different structure depending on the learning target for that day. Regardless of instructional design, the teacher should not be doing the thinking, reasoning, and connection building; it must be the students who are engaged in these activities
The most crucial part of the lesson is here. This is where the teaching/learning happens, not only learning from teacher, but learning from peers reaching their unique “zone of proximal development” (Vygotsky, 1978).
We bring back our students to share how they solved their problem. Sometimes they share with a partner first, to make sure they are using the right vocabulary, and to make sure they make sense of their answer. Then a few of them can share with the rest of the class. But sharing with a partner first is helpful so everyone has the opportunity to share.
“Talk to each other and the teacher about ideas – Why did I choose this method? Does it work in other cases? How is the method similar or different to methods other people used?” Jo Boaler’s article “How Students Should Be Taught Mathematics.”
Students make sense of their solution. The teacher listens and makes connections between different strategies that students are sharing. Teacher paraphrases the strategy student described, perhaps linking it with an efficient strategy.
“It is a misperception that student-centered classrooms don’t include any lecturing. At times it’s essential the teacher share his or her expertise with the larger group. Students could drive the discussion and the teacher guides and facilitates the learning.” Trevor MacKenzie
If the target for today’s lesson was to introduce the use a number line, for example, this is where the teacher will share that strategy as another possible way to solve today’s problem!
This could also be a good time for any formative assessment, using See Saw, using exit slips, or any kind of evidence of what they learned today.
References.
“Teaching Student-Centered Mathematics” Table 2.1 page 26 , Van de Walle, Karp, Lovin, Bay-Williams
“Number Talks” , Sherry Parrish
“How Students Should be Taught Mathematics: Reflections from Research and Practice” Jo Boaler
“Erma Anderson, Project AERO Assessments live binders
“Principles to Action” , Steve Leinwand
“ Turning Teaching Upside Down “, by Cathy Seeley
“Four Inquiry Qualities At The Heart of Student-Centered Teaching”
By Trevor MacKenzie
“The Zone of Proximal Development” Vygotsky, 1978
*** Here is a link to my favorite places to plan Math padlet, you will find a variety of resources, videos, articles, etc. By Caty Romero
***One more padlet for many resources to plan, teach, and assess mathematics that make sense: Making Sense of Mathematics Padlet.
Passionate about learning and making sense of mathematics. Teacher, Math Learning Specialist, K-8 Math Consultant, and Instructional Coach. Student-Centered-Learning is my approach! Contact me at [email protected] or follow me on Twitter @catyrmath View all posts by Caty Romero - Math Specialist
Thanks for downloading this podcast from Teacher magazine. I’m Dominique Russell.
Research shows that challenging problem solving tasks have a positive impact on student learning, but there is little evidence on student attitudes towards problem solving when it comes to doing this in the maths classroom.
My guest today is education consultant at Love Maths , Michael Minas. He works in primary schools to help improve learning in mathematics through professional development, classroom modelling and work with parents.
His areas of interest include problem solving and student engagement, and during his time working in primary school maths classrooms, he’s noticed anecdotally that students respond really positively to being presented with challenging problem solving tasks.
So, to formally investigate this, he conducted a study to assess student attitudes towards problem solving in maths alongside Dr James Russo from Monash University. This study focused on 52 students in two classrooms – a Year 3 and 4 class and a Year 5 and 6 class – in a primary school in Melbourne. Michael led a number of lessons in each classroom which presented challenging problem solving tasks to students. The classroom teachers observed these lessons, and then led these same tasks with the students. The lesson structure used was launch-explore-discuss/summarise, which Michael will go over in more detail in the episode.
After these lessons, the students completed a questionnaire to assess their opinions on the task. The results found that three-quarters of students reported unambiguously positive attitudes towards problem solving, the others were ambivalent, and no student expressed a negative attitude.
So, if you’re interested in implementing challenging problem solving tasks in your classroom, keep listening to hear Michael explain in detail the structure of these tasks, and what elements students enjoyed most. Let’s jump in.
Dominique Russell: Thanks for joining me Michael. I just thought it would be good to get a bit of background on the work you’re doing at the moment to start things off and why this research was important for you to conduct?
Michael Minas: Yeah I guess a lot of my work at the moment is in classrooms and one of the things that a lot of the schools are interested in is trying to get more problem solving happening in their mathematics classrooms. So a lot of the work that I do is in classrooms modelling problem solving lessons, working with teachers to sort of develop their sort of approach, their level of comfort with that style of teaching.
And so for me this was really interesting because, you know, I know anecdotally through my sort of experience with working with hundreds and hundreds of students, that I can see the positive responses. But, you know, it’s obviously an area that hasn’t had a lot of research done into it, so it’s good to be able to have, you know, the start of looking at it in a more formal way, of how do students actually feel in these types of lessons? What’s the experience like for them?
DR: And so the research obviously looks at two classrooms in particular in a primary school in Melbourne, looking at those middle years in primary school, which like you say, hasn’t really been looked at in much detail in the literature. So can you describe for me a bit about the school context of this particular school that you were doing the research in?
MM: Yeah, so I mean it’s a typical sort of primary school. It wasn’t, it didn’t have sort of anything outstanding in terms of the cohort of students, the size of the school – you know, 300 kids – it was a pretty sort of, demographically, a regular mix of students.
In terms of mathematics, it was philosophically quite a traditional environment for students to work in with a lot of sort of teacher directed work – you know, ‘I’ll show you how to do it, and then you go back to your tables and you reproduce what I’ve put on the board and maybe answer a series of questions using the approach that I’ve shown you’. So this style of lesson and learning was quite different for both the staff and the students at the school.
DR: And so obviously this style of learning that you exposed them to was received very positively from the students involved which we’ll talk about in a bit more detail soon, but I’m interested then in what the students opinions were of maths before this problem solving task was introduced to them. Do you have any concept of how they viewed maths in general? Did they enjoy it or were they enthusiastic about it?
MM: Yeah, so we had a couple things. So, you know, fairly informal, but when I arrived there one of the first things I did was I did some surveys with all of the students from Year 3-6. And the surveys were around their attitude to maths and also their self-perception (so, how they saw themselves as maths learners) and there were some really clear negative trends there.
So that was a starting point, you know, working with the leadership in the school to say, there are some issues here and you know, you can clearly sort of see that there are some issues here from the survey data.
But beyond that, I mean, anecdotally, my very first day at the school, I distinctly remember this. I was walking into one of the rooms at the school and a little Grade 3 girl said to me ‘oh, who are you?’ and I said, you know, ‘I’m Michael, I’m going to be here, I’m going to be working with you guys on maths’ and whatever. And her friend that was sitting with her, who wasn’t part of the conversation, inserted herself into the conversation to say, ‘oh, we hate maths. Both of us hate maths.’ Like really wanted to make a point of letting me know that she hated maths.
So that type of interaction was probably the most memorable, but I had lots of those types of interactions where people said ‘oh, you’re working with maths? Yeah I don’t like learning maths. I’m not interested in maths. I hate maths. Maths is my least favourite subject.’
So I had lots of those interactions with the kids and, you know, with that girl on the very first day and I said to her ‘well, you know, hopefully if we have this same conversation in November, that you will have shifted the way that you see maths. But that’s my job to do that, that’s not your job.’
DR: And so can you talk me through really the structure of these problem solving tasks that you led in the classrooms? Because I know you were leading them for a little while and the classroom teacher was observing the lessons that you were conducting. So what’s the structure of these tasks?
MM: Yeah, so one of the things is that the structure is a very, sort of central feature of this approach. And the idea is that, that structure is meant to be very predictable for both the staff and for the students.
You know, so we’d start with a warm up activity and the central idea of that is that you want that to be an engaging warm up to have the kids starting the lesson with, you know, a lot of energy and enthusiasm. And that would be followed by the launch of the problem. And, ideally, most problems, we want them to be launched with some of narrative link, some sort of connection to the real world. And we want that to be done in a concise way.
So the idea there is it’s not like a mini lesson of ‘let me get up the front and tell you everything I know about division for the next 15 minutes’. The idea is that we’re giving them a task that – maybe the task lends itself to multiplicative thinking and division, but we’re leaving space for the students to approach the task from their own perspective. So that, I will say to teachers ideally I want that launch to be sort of somewhere around the five minute mark. And for a lot of classroom teachers that’s a challenge, that sort of directly conflicts with the way they’re currently taking their maths lessons.
And then by extension, the shorter that launch time is, the more time the students have to be exploring, engaged with the task. So in order for, you know, students to stay working on a task for 35, 40 minutes, the task needs to be challenging, it needs to be cognitively engaging for them.
And so that explore time starts with five minutes of silent, independent work. And it’s really important that it is silent and is independent. And then from there, I’m a big advocate for actively encouraging collaboration in the classroom. So, not just saying ‘if you want to work with someone, you can’, but actively encouraging the kids; say: ‘hey, why don’t you go over and talk to Megan and see what she’s doing because she’s got some similar thoughts to you, but she’s approaching it a bit of a different way’.
And then the lessons will always finish with some sort of summary of what we’ve done and that again is student-centred. So the idea is that we’re (myself or whoever the teacher is) is looking for student examples to sort of showcase at the end of the lesson to say: ‘hey, you know, talk to me Dominique about what you’ve done’, and getting you to explain your thinking, but being really strategic about it who you select. So it’s not like ‘everyone come to the floor, okay, who’d like to share their work?’ and the same three kids put their hands up every day. It’s you as a teacher being really strategic about who you select and why.
DR: And so something that I found really interesting in the report, just as a bit of an example of how this structure plays out, the example of the chessboard tournament problem. So, the problem was launched with a short story about a family holiday and there was a big chessboard where they were staying. So you displayed a photo of one of the children playing on the chess board at the front of the classroom, and then you gave the task, which was if six children wanted to have a round robin tournament, how many games would need to be played? And then you had a prompt, which asked students to draw a diagram to show how they’d work this out, then you also provided some extending prompts. So can you give a quick run through of how that played out in the classroom? And did the students respond well to the extension prompts?
MM: Just to give you a bit of an idea about the narrative side of things – that task was based around a photo that I shared with the kids of my own family when we were on holidays playing chess on a chessboard. And I’ve had some really positive interactions with kids around that, where some kids will come and say to you ‘oh I play chess lots,’ and ‘I’m a big fan of chess’ so it’s building relationships there where they can say, you might share a common interest.
I mean I’ve had the other experience where I’ve been at a school and I’ve told the kids: ‘this giant chess board was at this particular holiday place in Queensland, and then I’ve had a student come back to me like two months later over the summer holidays and saying: ‘guess where I went over summer? We went and stayed at Paradise Resort and we played chess on that chessboard’ and the kid being really excited to share that with you.
So the narrative, that was the true part of the narrative. I mean the made-up part was – it talks about us having a round robin chess tournament. Now, we didn’t have a round robin chess tournament, we were actually there trying to enjoy, we didn’t spend all day at a giant chessboard playing chess.
So I think it’s teachers being able to feel comfortable taking parts of their life – you know, some real-world application – but also feeling free to be able to sort of elaborate, add to it, and make it work for the maths.
The task – yeah, it’s a really fantastic task because it’s got quite a low entry point, in that you could work on that task just sort of saying – you know it’s like the old problem where you say ‘there are eight people in a room and they all shake hands with each other. How many handshakes would there be?’ But it’s much more – I mean, the idea of playing chess against each other, students can visualise that a lot better and can sort of conceptualise it to say: ‘well if Nash plays against Isaiah, and then next Nash would play against Genevieve…’ so they can sort of work through all the combinations of who Nash would need to play.
Nearly every student you give that task to can enter the task and can have some level of success. But at the higher level it’s a very cognitively engaging task. I mean, the extension task is asking for them to basically find a formula of how to work out any triangular number. And so I used that task with Year 3/4 students and I’ve had students I’ve worked with in the Year 3/4 cohort who are able to sort of show you, ‘I can work out any triangular number and this is how you do it’. And they can show you visually how the formula works.
So I think that’s the beauty to this approach to teaching in that you’re really allowing for true differentiation. You’re presenting a task and there’s scope there for students to work there at a number of different levels.
DR: And as we mentioned very briefly before the classroom teachers were observing you first conducting these lessons before conducting the lessons themselves. Why was that important to do than just instructing teachers on how to run this and getting them to launch straight into it. Why was the observation element quite critical?
MM: I’m a big believer of if you want to get change happening within an organisation, it’s important to have buy-in from people. It’s important for people to actually believe that what you’re doing is going to be doing is beneficial. And for teachers, the vast majority of teachers, when they see that something is effective with their own students, you’ve won them over. So if they can see their own students being challenged in a way they previously haven’t been challenged.
I mean I had this experience yesterday when I was at a school in the western suburbs of Melbourne and I was working in a prep classroom and there was a prep student who, you know, traditionally didn’t really have a lot of success in the maths class and then this student produced some work and this classroom teacher was literally speechless. He was just blown away, he was like, ‘I cannot believe that he’s just done that, I’ve never seen him do that before’.
Now when I go back to work with that teacher in a fortnight’s time or whenever I’m back out there to work with them, they’re going to be much more receptive to this approach because they can see that it works.
And I think you’re also setting teachers up for success then. Because if they’ve seen that lesson structure a few times, the idea that it is very repetitive as a structure, it gives them something that they can sort of say, ‘right, now if I’m going to have a go at taking a lesson using this approach, these are the things that I want to do’. And it’s very easy to reproduce because they’ve seen it done a number of times.
So it’s both about supporting the teachers so they can have success, but also about generating that buy-in and I think that that comes – it’s one thing to deliver PD and to say ‘this is great’. It’s another thing for teachers to see it working with their own students.
DR: And so another big part of the study was how you actually measured the attitudes that students held towards these problem solving tasks and they were overwhelmingly positive. You’d mentioned before that this was kind of what you were expecting to happen because anecdotally you knew that students responded really well to these kinds of tasks. But something that I found really interesting was that they really enjoyed the challenging aspect of these problems and also the collaborative nature. So can you talk me through what the students said and wrote in their questionnaires about those two particular aspects?
MM: Yeah. I guess, I mean one thing that did surprise me was – I expected the results to be positive because that’s what I kind of see when I work not just at this school, but at lots of schools – I was surprised in the fact that of all the students that were involved in the study, that there was no one that expressed, like, negative attitude. Which, you know, was quite sort of gobsmacking for me.
But in terms of what they identified that made it enjoyable, engaging for them. Like you said, there was a couple things they touched on. So one was the idea of challenge. And I think this is something that sometimes teachers struggle with, this idea that: ‘if I make the work more challenging, the kids will disengage. They won’t persist, they won’t enjoy tackling the task’.
And I actually think that’s counter to everything we know about humans. If we think about ourselves as adults, if we’re given some sort of routine, mundane task to perform over and over again it’s every chance that we might do it if we have to do it, but we’re not going to enjoy it. But people love a challenge, people love being pushed cognitively and trying to see if they can be the first one to figure things out. I think humans love a challenge and if I enjoy a challenge as a 43-year-old, there’s no reason to think that like a six-year-old or a 12-year-old wouldn’t enjoy a challenge. So that’s come through to me anecdotally, you know, time and time again over the years, so it was good to see that come in through formally in the study that we did.
The other really big – and again, in some cases this really contrasts with the regular classroom practice – this idea of allowing the students to collaborate. And like I said before, not just allowing, but actively encouraging it. I think a lot of classroom teachers are concerned that if they let the kids move around the room and talk to each other, they’re going to lose control and it’s going to descend into chaos. But I think the two ideas that you’ve just asked about are connected. Like if they’re working on something that they think is worthwhile and challenging, they’re much more likely to stay on task.
And again, humans enjoy collaborating. Humans enjoy socialising, talking, sharing ideas. So if that’s the way, if I was to present PD [professional development] at a school and I was to do five hours of me talking and there’d be no opportunity for staff to actively engage and collaborate with each other, I mean, I would never be invited back to the school.
So then the question would be, well why do we get our students to do this? Why is a maths lesson me talking for 20 minutes telling you everything I know about place value, and then you working on a worksheet by yourself for half an hour and not being allowed to talk?
That’s not going to be enjoyable for us as adults. Why would it be enjoyable for an eight-year-old in a Year 2 class? So I think that in some cases the success that we have when we go and work in schools is partly because it’s such a sharp contrast to the regular practice in the school about the way maths is learned. And that if we can make mathematics more social, then we have much more chance of having students being engaged and wanting to learn.
DR: And is part of that as well – like you mentioned before – the fact that they have that five minutes at the beginning to concentrate on the problem as an individual and silently, but then they open up to the collaboration. Is that balance quite good and quite important?
MM: Yeah. It’s really crucial. And I always tell teachers that I’m working with that one’s not more important than the other, that they’re equally important. But if you let kids collaborate straight away then what you might find is that kids will just straight away – say you and I are working together, and you’re a stronger student in terms of your current performance in maths, well I might just be led by you, and you’ll just be telling me, ‘do this, do that’.
Much more likely if I’ve had some time to think and ponder on the task, that A, when I come to you, maybe I’ll have some questions about what I’m doing and you can guide me and direct me, rather than telling me what to do. But, B, there might be the chance that I may choose not to work with you, even thought we may be best friends, because I may see that someone else is approaching the problem with a similar mindset, a similar approach to me. Or I may choose to say in this instance: ‘I’m going to keep doing this by myself because I feel like I’m getting some momentum here. I can see that I’m making some progress’.
So I think that five minutes silent time is really crucial, and then it becomes really crucial (this becomes a classroom management thing) as a teacher, you have to be able to make sure that it is truly five minutes and it is truly silent and it is truly independent and also truly productive. Because it’s no good them just sitting silently looking at the clock, you know, looking at the stop watch counting down before they bang go into talking to each other.
So the way you know that’s productive is when you see the kids are on task. When you see the tops of their heads looking down at their page, and they’re thinking, and they’re gathering materials. And you can tell really clearly as a teacher when that’s not happening.
DR: And so just finally then, I’m thinking now for teachers who are listening to this episode who are thinking they want to implement a similar approach in their maths classroom for students of a similar age, is there anything that we haven’t covered already that would be good to keep in mind? Or perhaps some good first steps to take?
MM: Yeah, look I think that the model that I see that works really well is I think what we spoke about before. Is that you have to have people that are able to model what it should look like to be able to win teachers over, for them to be able to say ‘I can see the benefit of this, I can see how this works’. So whether that be – I mean, I’m definitely not trying to spruik for work – but whether that be internally – you know, like a lot of schools have really great classroom teachers. Some of those people have moved into learning specialist roles.
But whether that be internally with those people, like give them the time to go into other people’s classrooms and to be able to model this type of approach and to show the classroom teachers how it works and to be able to answer those questions. Or whether it be externally, by bringing in consultants who have the skill and expertise to do it, I think that’s really important. I think it’s important that people see it in practice first before they try to do it.
And it’s also really important, as well as seeing lessons, that people have time to then unpack the lesson and talk about it together. So if you’ve got a learning specialist at your school that’s modelling this type of lesson for, say a graduate teacher, there needs to be some time allocated for them to sit. Because the graduate teacher may walk away saying, ‘that was a great lesson’. But the next step is them being able to identify why was it a great lesson? What worked? And what can they do to plan a similar great lesson the following week?
Because, you know, if you just say ‘well, that was a great lesson, but I can’t do that lesson again because my kids have already done it, so where do I go with it?’ Whereas if you can identify and say: ‘oh I see what worked well. The thing that worked well is they were engaged with the problem.’ Why were they engaged in the problem? ‘It had a real world link’. Why was your questioning effective during the lesson? ‘Well, it was because you knew, you had a clear focus of what the content was’. What are we focusing here? What’s the mathematical concepts we’re focusing on?
So, as a classroom teacher you know the right question to ask and the right student at the right time and there’s a lot of work that goes into that, but like I said, it’s definitely something that’s attainable for all classroom teachers with the right support.
That’s all for this episode. Thanks for listening. Be sure to subscribe to our podcast channel on Spotify , Apple podcasts or SoundCloud , so you can be notified of any new episodes. While you're there, we'd love for you to rate and review the podcast in your podcast app.
Russo, J., & Minas, M. (2020). Student Attitudes Towards Learning Mathematics Through Challenging, Problem Solving Tasks: “It’s so Hard– in a Good Way”. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 13 (2), 215-225. https://doi.org/10.26822/iejee.2021.185 .
Michael Minas says he believes sometimes teachers struggle with the idea that: ‘if I make the work more challenging, the kids will disengage. They won’t persist, they won’t enjoy tackling the task’.
Reflect on a recent lesson you taught. How challenged would you say students were? How do you know the level of challenge was appropriate? Do you think you could have challenged students further? Were there opportunities for students to participate in extension tasks?
Discover the world's research
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Teaching about problem solving begins with suggested strategies to solve a problem. For example, "draw a picture," "make a table," etc. You may see posters in teachers' classrooms of the "Problem Solving Method" such as: 1) Read the problem, 2) Devise a plan, 3) Solve the problem, and 4) Check your work. There is little or no ...
main goal in teaching mathematical problem-solving is for the students to develop a generic ability in solving real-life problems and to apply mathematics in real life situations. It can also be used, as a teaching method, for a deeper understanding of concepts. Successful mathematical problem-solving depends
That is, the mathematics education community is interested in analysing and documenting the students' cognitive and social behaviours to understand and develop mathematical knowledge and problem-solving competencies. "…the idea of understanding how mathematicians treat and solve problems, and then implementing this understanding in instruction design, was pivotal in mathematics education ...
Singer et al. ( 2013) provides a broad view about problem posing that links problem posing experiences to general mathematics education; to the development of abilities, attitudes and creativity; and also to its interrelation with problem solving, and studies on when and how problem-solving sessions should take place.
problem-based teaching methods can be used to foster deeper understanding. ... wider variety of general tools for problem-solving (Näveri et al., 2011; Leppäaho, ... The aim of teaching mathematics through problem - solving is to equip students with skills to apply previously learned techniques in non - routine and novel situations (Leppäaho ...
PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES AND TACTICS. While the importance of prior mathematics content knowledge for problem solving is well established (e.g. Sweller, 1988), how students can be taught to draw on this knowledge effectively, and mobilize it in novel contexts, remains unclear (e.g. Polya, 1957; Schoenfeld, 2013).Without access to teaching techniques that do this, students' mathematical ...
derstand the role of problem solving in cognition. If, the argument goes, we are not really teaching people mathematics but rather are teaching them some form of general problem solving, then math-ematical content can be reduced in importance. According to this argument, we can teach students how to solve problems in general, and that will
Effective teaching of mathematics establishes clear goals for the mathematics that students are learning, situates goals within learning progressions, and uses the goals to guide instructional decisions. Implement tasks that promote reasoning and problem solving. Effective teaching of mathematics engages students in solving and discussing tasks ...
Effectiveness ofProblem Solving Method in Teaching Mathematics at Elementary Level 234 According to Nafees (2011), problem solving is a process to solve problems through higher order cognitive operations of visualizing, associating, abstracting, comprehending, manipulating, reasoning and analyzing. PSA encourages students to
for solving the problem; 5. must evaluate solutions for the prob lem. Such models provide the teacher with an excellent framework for viewing general problem solving. However, they are not specific enough to furnish the teacher with a guide for constructing activities that promote the students' development of problem-solving abilities.
When set in the real world, problem-solving in mathematics involves mathematical modelling. (The State of ... However, many textbooks used in teaching mathematics contain errors and inconsistencies when discussing statistics (Dunn et al., 2015) or lack useful features to enhance learning ... Mathematics Methods General Senior Syllabus 2019,
Abstract This study uses the methodology of design-based research in search of ways to teach problem-solving strategies in mathematics in an upper secondary school. Educational activities are designed and tested in a class for four weeks. The design of the activities is governed by three design principles, which are based on variation theory.
Make students articulate their problem solving process . In a one-on-one tutoring session, ask the student to work his/her problem out loud. This slows down the thinking process, making it more accurate and allowing you to access understanding. When working with larger groups you can ask students to provide a written "two-column solution.".
7. Sequence of Problem Solving Method in Teaching Mathematics: Okorie (1986) in Obodo (2004) outlined a problem solving sequence for which one can relate it to the teaching of mathematics are as follows: 1. The students should first read the mathematical problem so as to understand its demands in a general way. 2.
George Pólya was a great champion in the field of teaching effective problem solving skills. He was born in Hungary in 1887, received his Ph.D. at the University of Budapest, and was a professor at Stanford University (among other universities). ... In 1945, Pólya published the short book How to Solve It, which gave a four-step method for ...
Teaching mathematics through problem solving requires you to think about the types of tasks you pose to students, how you facilitate discourse in your classroom, and how you support students use of a variety of representations as tools for problem solving, reasoning, and communication. This is a different approach from "do-as-I-show-you ...
"problem-solving is a teaching method, rather than being a goal in itself" (p.342). Since the idea of problem-solving is conceived at a very early age, prekindergarten, ... implications for future mathematics teaching practices. METHODOLOGY In this study, a desk review method was adopted. We
general mathematical competence, a specific skill such as problem solving or reasoning. The present literature review examines how teaching designs are used in mathematics education research as a way to improve mathe-matics teaching and learning of and via problem solving or reasoning. The
The problem-solving process consists of four basic phases according to Polya. These four phases complement each other like pieces of a puzzle (Ortiz, 2016). The four-phase conceptual framework of ...
structured problem solving. 7) Use inductive teaching strategies to encourage synthesis of mental models and for. moderately and ill-structured problem solving. 8) Within a problem exercise, help ...
For the past 15 years, educators and researchers in the field of general education have advocated for reform-based mathematics instruction based primarily on the work of the National Council of ...
This study focused on 52 students in two classrooms - a Year 3 and 4 class and a Year 5 and 6 class - in a primary school in Melbourne. Michael led a number of lessons in each classroom which presented challenging problem solving tasks to students. The classroom teachers observed these lessons, and then led these same tasks with the students.
Abstract: The use of manipulatives in teaching mathematics allows students to construct. their own cognitive models for abstract mathematical ideas and processes. They also provide. a common ...