~'

?
I

"o

'" "

','r.,~

J :/'(

......
- -':. ;-:-.'(t
. .~ :-r"
A.

'

",

'-1 In"

"

i ,.I.~,\:\;;">~
'~l~
'\"'("~<~"'~hl:
1 ,'f, ,
l.~',i',
.. -"', jI~A~~.~'.I;.'!H

~ .'1

~f~:~':';~.

.. ~

30

C""

I;

I r) ;'

'(

I,

!)

..--'

I- .-

I -

,,-'.-------- ...~

Sam a ha~~

1,!1

to answcr a question

on decimais.

When

/'.

L.~NEW DIRECT10NS FOR ELE~IE~TRY SCHOOL ~IATHE~IATJCS

-:.:,;

/I.

Jf

he gave a numbcr

response , the' tcacher's head carne up andshe opened her mouth to ask a
Iollow-up questiono Bctore she could speak. Sam sado "I know, I know, Ms.
Davis. You 'want me to tell you why and 10 draw a picture!"
He then
procecded

to 'do exactly that.

Developing Understanding in

11 is not easy to change students' pcrceptions and beliefs about rnathematics. It is also not easy to change our own perceptions about what studerits can
an d cannot do in mathematics.
lf we want to help our students 10 valuc
rnathernarics,
10 devclop mathematical
power. and to have the confidence 10
tuckle new situations, we must pose interesting. challenging problem situations

and give our

stude nts time

to explore,

to formulare

problcrns.

i.

(,lu~stiOI1,S!lf we liste n c~refully

their thoughts.

to our stude~ts,~howing

math c rnatical

situations.

-"::'1"

thern th;# we value

we are likcly to learn that children are rcmarkubly

;, :-::~;ltaking s'cnsC' of

:'.

clever ai

. ", ".:.-,,,-', U,'

.. ~".",=

"':'1: .. :. ,-.

....
o.'

Thomas L. Schrceder
Frank K. l.ester, Jr.

~.

tI

:1.'
::1

':.

via Problem Solving

to

develop strategies, to make conjectures, to reason about the validity of these

conjcctures, to discuss, to argue, to predict , aud, of course.-to -raisemore ....'
\'.~],

Mathematics

REff.Rt:i\(ES

".'

BriglH. Gcorg e W.. and John G. Harvey. "Learning and Fun.v.ith Gcornctry Garne." ArulimeTeaclier 35 (April 1988): 22-26.
;'
Burns. Marilyn. t1 Collection of.Walh Lessons from Crade~'..J through
Solurion Publications , 1987.:

I;C

Hoylcs. Cclia. "What ls lhe Point 01 Group Discussion?"

16(2)(1985):
205-14,

San Fra~ci~co: Math

:

Educationa! Ssudies in ,\lntl'~mati(J

.'
',:

National Council of Tcachers o/ Mathernatics. Currit'ulum and E\'I1IUl1liOIl SI,IIIJa"lj for School
.Hatl,e"wliu,
Working draft , Resron, Va.: Thc Council, 1987.
~,
Romberg. Thornas A, ..A Common Curriculum for Mathernaucf'"
In individuol Diff~rr"as
allJ th CO/7/I1/()1/
Curriculum, editcd by G. D. Fensrermacher and J. 1.Goodlad. pp. 121-59,
Chicago: Rand McNally & Co .. 1976.

Schocnctd. Alan H, "00 Mathernatics as Sense-making:

An Informal Attack on lhe Unrtu-

of Formal ano Intormal Mathernatics."

Paper preserued aI lhe Olfice of
Educational Research and Irnprovernent/ Learning Rcscarcb and Development CenterCon[ercncc on 1nforrnal Reasoning and Education. University of Pittsburgh. March 1987.

nate Divorcc

Swan. Malcclm. The Languag 01 Graphs, p. 13. Draft version. Nottingham,

Centre for :Vlalhemalics Educarion, University of Nottingharn. 1986.

England:

..,

~
~

~
;~

in this decade th.e theme of schaoI mathernatics shifted Irem "back

to "problern solving." ln fact, in recent years problem
solving has been lhe most written-about
and talked-about
part of lhe rnathematics curricul~m ~nd ai lhe sarne lime lhe l~t;.t'understoodj'Now
that
there has been nearly a decade of arternpts to make problern solving "~he
focus of school mathernatics"
(NCTM,198~,
p. 1), we need 10 asse.ss' the '
results of these efforts/!his
a.rtic~e .addr,7's~es)h,e fo~e .?[ problem solving in
elementary
school rnathemattcs in lhe lipe of adding some much-nceded
clarityto lhe discussion, .l!t::.!l:l-i!}Jllflili._.l.~L~b.~u:nost i~p.'!..!~~nt role for I
pf.QQlefTl.sp!vjngjs
to dev..J.Qp students' u nc)er~!~'-0qLng.Qtrn.at,h.,t:!DilJks.
1
ARL Y

E to the basics"

Shcll

(h'r<

Wc\ch. William, "Science Education in Urbanville: A Case Study." 10 Case Studtes inScimce
Educon on, ediied by R. Stake and J. Easley. p. 6. Urbana. 111.:Unvcrslty ar tllinois. 1978.

,.' (,,;

c.

"','

APPROACHES TO PROBLEM-SOLVING
,

Ir

".'

INSTRUCTION

l",'

ln the )main,.lhedscussions

about

problem

solving and the efforts, to

.

'""",

'\:.1"""

d~v~,lop cllr~,c~,l~alld materia{t}tof students and teachers have been worth-

\Vhile and helpfuLIToday the niion that problem solving should play a
prorninent
role in the curriculurn
has widespr ead ncceptnnce!lDuring
the

"

t;-0<Y'.

'\(r.~

. ,'jl."-'

\'.1l..'-'"

M~

~
~

past decade

6_j..v~...JU.L.. V~.P.j

f.O'~I'~

Nc..TtV1

(<:..c.l~. J

.5Sr...ou~
~=k.

ql:\ite a large nurnber of problem-solving

resources .have been
use jn lhe farm of collections ofproblems,
,..,," /
r. /,1 115t5of
strategies to be taught, suggestions for nctivities, and guidelines for valuar- ,
ng problcm-splring
perforrnance.
Much of this material hus beeu very
useful in helprrlg teachers make problem solving a focus of their instn.ction.
However, it lias no! providcd lhe sort of cohcrence and clear direction thal is

developed

Ior classroorn

,.)'
""

'

,',

\{,,
~
I, ,

'41'
~,::::".

.),

;'
-:

lree

. ~~

(}-'\J

~)~"
.

i'EW

DIRECT10NS

rOR

ELEMENTARY

SC~OOL

I"

I: (

DEVELOPING

MA~HEI>J..\TlCS

nceded,

,I

,r

.,"

32

primarily bccause to da \ !ittle agreernent has been reacned on 110 u:

is to bc aChievcd~n~ubtedIY
there ar e ~cvcral rcasons for this
~t<ltc of affails,
UI lhe confusion
probably stems from the vast differences
3111011g individuais'
and groups'
conceptions
of what it rneans 10 make
pt oble m solv~ng lh,c Iocus of ~chool mat~emati,csfbn~
ar lhe best w,,~y~e+coming to rI 5 ith these differences IS to disfinguish among three aproac es to problem-solving instruction: (1) teaching a~
problem solvmg, (2) tcachillg.[Qr problem solving, and (3) teaching.l-:LProblem solving.
An explicir statcmcnt of this distinction
appeared in a paper written more
than a decade ago by Hatfie!d (1.9.18), but we suspect that others may have
~
similar POi~lt of vie;v as ,;'ell. Ler us explain what each of these
3pproachcs entails. _.
li

..thIS

,~!

,.

/'j

modcl dC5~ribes a ser of four interdependent

phases in lh~ ~rocess of solving

problcrns: understanding
lhe problem. devising apjan, carryiug out the plan, aud looking back. Students are explicitly taught the pnns-cs
chato according to Plya, exper~~blem
sQl~se
when solving rnathernaties pr oblcrns. and theylITencouragd
to become aware ar their own
progr ession through' these phases when Ihey them~e~
s(;ve problemsl
Aclditionally, thcy are taught a number of " heuristis."W"slralegies;
from
which they can choose or which they should use in devislOg and carrying out
thcir pr oblcm-solving plans/Some
of the strategies ypically taught include
looking for pauerns, solving a sirnpler problem~ and worki0l. backwQ, At
its bcst , teaching about problem solving also Includes
experiences
with
actually solving problerns. but it a!ways involves a great deal of explicit
discussion o, and teaching about, how problems are solved':-'
rnathematics

33

Solving

Exnmplc A: Use your tiles 10 rnak c different arrangements

that wil! se at
twenty people.
EWlI/fI{('
B: Add squar cs to the [ollowing arrungcrne nt so ihat lhe perirneter is 18. Whut is lhe new urca?

Problem Solving

In teaching for problern

crEr

which

~{~

SOL\'ING

solving, lhe teacher concentrares on ways n

the rnatlicmaticsbejng
taurllt ca~ be a~plied in the solution of both
rou tine and nonrouunc problem1 Although \he acquistion of mathernatical
knowJedge is ol prirnary irnpoftance,
the essentia! purpose for learnng
mathematics is to be able to use iVConsequently,
students are given many
instanccs of lhe mathernatical concepts and structures thcy are studrng and
rnany opportunities to apply that mathernatcs in solving problems/Funher,
,
lhe teacher who teaches for problem so!ving is very concerned about students' ability to Iransfer what they have learned fram one proble'm context to
others/ A suong adhcre~t of Ihis approach might argue that lhe sole reason
for learniii-g mat~s
is to be able to use the knowledge gaiIled to solve
problems.
.

PROULE~I

The rcacher who teaches

about problem solving highljghls
P61ya's
(1957) rnodl afproblem solving (or some minor variationof
it), Brif1y. this

for

VIA

In tcaching viu problcrn solving. prob lcrns are value d no t only as a

purvose for learning rnathe matics but also as a pr irnary means of doing so.
,
The teaching of a maihematical
topic begins with a problern situation that
,rl;\: 'v-embodies
key .3specls of j he topic, and mathernurical
techniques are ceI}-=- .-)
,\ r,!
'
.
veloped as reasonable responses to reasonable problerns. A goal of le arrung
mathematics is to transform certain nonroutine problerns into routine ones.
The learning of mathematics in this way can be viewe d as a move rne nt Irem
the concrcte (a real-world problem thut serves as au instauce of lhe rnatb ematial concept or technique) to the abstract (a syrnbolic representation
ar a
class of problems and techniques for ope rating with these symbols).
An exarnple from the Middle Grades Mathematics
Project can serve to
illustrate teaching via problern solving (Shroyerand
Fitzgerald
1986), A
fifth-grade tcacher who has decided to introduce the concepts af ar e a and
perirneter gives each studeru a ser ar twcnry-Iour neinch-square
tiles that
are to be regarded as small tables. The students are challenged to determine
lhe number of small tables (tiles) needcd to make banquet tubles of dif c rcnt
sizes (arca) and the number of pcople who ca n be scnte d at these banquei
tables (pe rimeter). The students are told that one 51\1al1tublc cau seat Iour
people, one on each side, and that lhe banquet tables rnade from lhe srual
tables are usually rectangular. Th e rcul-world situatio n (forrnng banquet
tables und seating people around th e rn) scrves us a cont ext in which stude nts
explore arca and pcrirne tcr arul lhe rclauonshps
be twc en t he m. At first no
formulas
are U5C or Jc\'clopc: thcy will come in a la te r activity
Example
s
I
of lhe chullengcs prcscrucd by thc teuchcr i ncl ude thc follllwillg (Shrcycr
\
and Fitzgerald
1986):
I

Teaching about Problem Solving

Teaching

UNDERST,\f'DI:-IG

r'--

Teacbing v~_ P~~m

goal

'"
/~

l' "

,j

<Y::-

1>.-/

Some Obsrvations about lhe Three Approaches

,.,

'

~J;
~

Although in theory these three conccptions of tcachi [u!rroblem solving in'

mathematics can be isolated. in pr<lclice thcy overl3~1ld
occur in var;ous
combinalions
and sequences, Thus. ir is probably counlcrproductive
to
arguc in (avoro( om: ar more of thcse types or teaching or against lhe otLers,

"

... , :'1~~.

;1

}<1 ~ .,

J.~

;.

,.7.': I
;,4

f'lEW DIRE<.IIONS

FOR ELE~IENTARY SCHOOL \I,\THE\1.-\T1CS

Ncvcrthcless,
ir curriculum developers, textbook writers. ar classroorn
tc achc rs intcnd 10 mak c problem
solving the "Iocus of instruction."
thcy
nccd to be awarc of the Iirnitations inherent in exclusiv'e adherence to eithe r
of lhe first two typcs of problern-solving
instruction. One such limitation
stcrns frorn the Iact that problem solving is not a topic of mathcrnntics. and it
;hQU Id no! be regarded
as such. If reaching ubout problern solving is lhe
tccus, the danger is lha! .. problcm solving" will be regarded as a strand (O be
added to lhe curriculurn. lnstead of problem solving serving as a context in
which marhcrnaucs is Icarncd and applied, it rnay becorne just another topie.
t aught in isolation from lhe content and relationships
of mathernatics.

A dieren: shoncoming

arises from leaching

[M problem solving. When

lbis approach

is intcrpretcd
narrowly,
prohlcm sol\"ing is vic\Vcu "as ;111
activity students engagc in only after the introducti'
n of a new concept or
following work on a computational skill or algorith
;The purpose is to give
studcuts <111 npportunity
to" apply" recently lcarne
cunccpts
und skiils \O
lhe solution of rcal-world
problems'~Often
these problerns appear under a

hcadillg sucn as "Using Dvision to Solve Problems," and a solution of a

samplc st~ry problem is given as a model for solving other , very similar
proiJJemsl0ften.
solutions
to these problems
be obtained simply by
folluwing the pattern esiablished
in lhe samplc and when students encouruer pr oblcms that do not follow lhe sarnple, I ey often feel ar a loss/lt
lias bcen our experieuce (which is supported
by several studies) that when
taugh: in this way, students often simply pick out lhe numbers in each
problem and apply the given operatioo(s)
to them without regard Sar the
problcm's contcxt: as oft en as nOI, they obtain lhe "'torrecl answersllln our
view this practice is certainly no! problem solving. lndeed. it does not even
rcquire mathematical thinking.1 Furtherrnore, a side effect is that students
come to beiieve that ali mathernatics
problems can be solved quickly and
velatively effortlessly without any need to undersrand how the mathematics
ihey are using relates to real situati~ounfoftuoareIY,
ths approach 10
problem-solving
instruction has been quite ommon n-texlbooks~
, Unlike the othcr two apprcaches,
ching via problem solving is a
conception that lias not becn adopted either implicitly ar explicitly by many
te ache rs , le~lbook write rs, a~~ eurrieul,u~velopers.
b~t it is?n apPr;'ach
\0 t!IC teaching of Inl.hcmatlcs
that eserves to be considercd, developed.
tricd, and evaluated ndec'd, teaching VI
oblem solving is the approach
that is most consist .lIt with the recommendations
of NCfM's Standards
Corruuission
that (1) marhernatics
concepts
and _skills be learned in lhe
coutext of sclving problems; (2) lhe development
of higher-level
thinking
processes
b e Iost er e d through
problem-solving
exp er icnces:
a nd
(3) mathcrnatics
inst~ction
tak e place in an inquiry-oriented,
problernsolving atrnosphcre (~CrM 1987).

DE\'ELOPING

U~DERSTANDING

TWO MODELS

.9/-

35

PROBLE/o.l SOL\'I:->G

OF THE PROCESS

MATHEMATICS

OF SOLVING

PROBLEMS

Problem solving has sometirncs be en conceptualiz ed in a simplistic way by

a rnodel lik e that in figure 3.1. 111is model lias IWO levcls. ar "worlds":
lhe
everyday world of things. problcrns,
and applicauons
of mathernatics:
and
lhe idealized, abstr act world of rnath ematical syrnbols, oper ations, and
!echnjque~UIIl
this model the problern-solving
prccess has thre e steps:
8eginnin/'with
a problcrn posed in terms of lhe everyday
physieal r ealiry ,
the problem solver first translates
(arrow A) lhe 'problem into abstract
muihematical terrns. then oper atcs (arrow B) 00 lhe mathernatical
represeruation to come to a rnathernatical
solution of lhe problern. which is then
trunslutcd

back (nrrow

C) !nto lhe

t erms

Malnernatical
Mathernatical
represenlalion

cal

r~~Oot

VIA

r1

of lhe original
World

-Mathemalical

soiutlon

1
i

Real-world

problern.

C+
"

problem

Real proble
solulion

"Real" World
Fig.3.1.

A sirnplistic model of lhe proc ess of solving rnathernatics

proble ms

mathematics
can be. and often is, learnecl sepaIn teaching for problem solving, instructors are
very concerned to develop students' abilities to translate real-world problems into mathernarical
represent ations. and vice versa/Sut
thcy tend to
deal with probJems and applications of mathematics only after thosc mathematical concepts and skills have been introduced,
dcvcloped, and practiced. The difficulty with this model is that it applies to routine problerns
better than to nonroutine ones/Problems
classified as .. translation probo
lems" (Charlcs and Lester 1982) are solveu exactly as lhe model indicares.
but for more challenging
problerns, like those categorized
by Charles and
Lester as "prccess problerns,"
lhe problem solver has no single alr eadylearned mathernatical
operation that will solve the problem. As well as
translation
and interpretation,
these nonroutine
problems
also
more complex processes, such as planning , selecting <1 straregy, identiyiug
subgoals, conjecturing.
and verifying th at a solution has be en found. For
nonruutine problems, a different type of model is rcquire d.
According

to this model,

rately from its applications.

(dcmi6!)

)
,7~ ~ :

f'

~r

l. "
36

NEW OIRECTIONS FOR ELEME:-.ITARY SCHOOL \IATHE\tATlCS

Figu re 3.2 sows a modification

tion problerns

tine

problerns

adopted,
'I.

that

CJn

of the problern-solving

be uscd to illustrare

are involved

thinking

when nonrou-

\iu problern solving is

two levels that represem lhe everyday

wor ld of problcms and lhe abstract world of muthernatical

syrnbols and
op er ations. In this model. hcwever, lhe mathematical processes in lhe uppcr
lcvcl are "urider construction"
(i.c., being learned, as opposed 10 .already
lcar ne d), aud its most irnporrant features are lhe relationships
berween lhe
steps in the mathernatical
process (in lhe upper levei) and lhe actions on
particular elcments in lhe problems (in lhe lower levei),
Malhematical World

X'

Mathematical

Mathemalical

~epresenlalion

solution

Y,

x'

:blom

Real problern's

solution

"Real" World
Fig. 3.2. A rnodcl of the process

"r

II

_.

solving

pH1CCSS

problems

IfI rhc figure,

some of lhe Y arrows paiol upwurd to indicare that thc
problern
solver is learning to make abstract written records of lhe actions
lha! are understood
in a concrete setting/These
arrows pointing upward
reprcsent
lhe processes of abstraction and gencralization.
Some of lhe
arrows point downward t show that the problern solver is able to explain a
muthernarical
process by rcferring to lhe rcal-world actions that the mathe-

matical

syrnboIs

that a problcm

representjArrows

solver

pointing

w~ had

Iorgotten

downward~lso

the details

ar

suggest

a mathematical

procedure
would be able to reconstruct lha! process by imagining lhe corresponding concrcte steps in the world in which the problem was posedfrhe
collcction of Y arrows illustrate lhe correspondence
between lhe process of
solving lhe problcm in concrete terms (labeled X) and lhe parallel. abstract
mathcmatica!

process

[labeled

X')$The

Y arrows

figure

also show that lhe prob-

le rn solver typically moves back and Iorth between lhe two worlds-lhe
real
aud lhe mathematical-as
lhe need arises. For a particular problern the
pi oblcm solver might move directly along arrow YI from lhe real world to

VIA PRODU'.:"I

3.1.

SOLV1NG

37

~
-

r" ~'-

PROBLEM

SOLVING

AND UNDERSTAiDING

IN MATHEMATICS

Central to our inrcrcst in icachiug via problcrn solving is lhe bclicf tht.l the
primary reason for school rnarhernatics instruction is to help students uuder5ICJlld mathernatical
concepts. processes. and rechniques. During lhe backto-basics rnovernent
of lhe 19705. and also with lhe more rccent focus 00
problern solving. this fundarnental tenet of good mathernancs
instruction lias
been given far too little attenlioJ1'Treovcr.
some cornrnentators
have
limiied thcir discussion of understanding
10 lhe question
of studcnts' cornprehension of lhe information prcscnted in mathematical
text, especially in
lhe. SIalements of verbal problerns. In our view, stude nts' unde rstanding ar
ma'themalics iuvolve s much more than this.

A large nurnber

y"

Real-world

UNDERSTANOING

lhe ma i h e rn at ic al wo rtd ano procecd directly alung ar row X' 10 mathe ruatical genernlizution
and hence to a solution of the original realworld
problem. In such a situation
lhe solution prucess can be mode le d as shown in

model for transla-

processes

and when teaching

This model also contains

DEVELOPING

ofmathematics

educators

nave written about rnathe.uati-

cal understanding
brdistinguishin
between typcs or qualities of underslanding.Browncll's=v;.or
e...
5.19.t5.t9.t7)oI1'meanin'gfularithmetic" in lhe 19JOs and 1940s is especially r e lcvant. but only during lhe past ten
to fifteen years has any substantial
activity takcn place in this arc3.&Of
particular
note are lhe works of Ske mp (1976. 1979). Herscovics
nd
Bergeron
(1981. 1982). Davis (198-1), and Hicbert (198L 1986). A cornmon thrcad running through thesc considcrations of thc naturc of uuderstanding in mathernutics
is lhe idea that to understand is csseruially to relate.
In particular, a person's undersranding
increuses (I) as he ar she is able to
. relate a given rnathe matical idca to a grcatcr nurnbcr ar vuricty of contcx ts.
or (2) as he or she relates a give n problem to a greater number of lhe
mathemalicalideasimplicitinil.or(3)
as he or she constructs relationships
arnong lhe various rnathematical
ideas cmbedded
in a problcm.
Indications that a student understands
(ar rnisunde rstands. ar does not

understand)

specific rnathcrnatical

ideas oen appear as lhe student solves a

problern. Relationships
of the kinds mentioncd
above are cvident in SIUderus' aucrnpts 10 solve lhe following pr o blcm (fig. 3.3). vvh ich is an adapta-

QO

@
@(6)@Q)QXB@

@E"D@

ri!! . .1.J. "Cllin

pr oble m

'1

f\.r- .': : ,....;.

r'

";r

f'i~{;
.'

NEW DIRECTIONS

FOR ELEMENTARY

SCHOOL

vO

VIA

PROlJLE\l

39

SOLVING

O@@

~r.)\Mo.A
'<2;i '<!.:l ~'
~
\:..6

Qt\.\r:1\D,
~~~\:J

'

Croft noticcd that different children had distinct levelsI understanding

: "'lhal corrcspondcd
to the nurnber of different mathematical
concepts and
.~ 'processes they used in solving lhe problem. AI! lhe children began by sorting

nickc!s.

--

theu th~p.:E).!!les. BUI some students}ot

~
st5:-'h,en

'@@

~us

~o,-~
V

\;:jl

they reache.d t~e

figo ).5

situation shown m figure 3.4. Although they-Were satisfied that the COlOS \O
cach of the Iour piles matched, they did no! k now what to do with the nickel
and thrce pennies that were lefl over. The children at the lowest levei of
understanding
never got beyond thif'tmpasse.
despi te being encouraged
to
.. try a differcnt way" and to "share out ali lhe coins:fbne
child suggested
tlia: hc could solve lhe problern if only he could take lhe nickel to lhe store
an d exhang it (01' tive pennics/Ot~e~.children
used the rnuking-change
idca and recognzed that by "undomg
part of lhe sharing, they could
remove the thrce pennics from one pile and replace them with lhe "extra"
nickel 50 lha! six pennies could then be put in lhe other three pile~,This
solution represcnts lhe next levei of understanding,
When lhe teacher asked.
"Can you [m another way? Could lhe piles have different coins in thern but
lhe same arnount of 1II0ney?" some children rearranged lhe coins UU! found
no new solutions. Howcver, the students at the highest levei of understandillg noticed lha! Lhe value of lhe coins in each pile was twenty-Iive
cents and
used this Iact to find several dilferent ways of makng change, such as those
shown in figure 3.5.
-,

es
@@

@@

~
@@
@ @
@

@@)<W
Fig. J.4. An impasse on lhe way Ia solving the coi~ problem

{a.

rn.rk c

t\\l'nl~-ri\\':

(~Ilt~

and grow as they worke d 011 lhe pr oble m: rheir progress

carne in stages. by discovery. rather than all at once. This
lha!
rh csc sllld':l1lS wc rc I.:."ning
"i" IHIlI'km slll\'il1g . e vc n th
tcachers
purpose
was to assess thcir undc rstandinc ruth cr th an

~..Ii~

with the

problem

suggests

We betieve that inslcud of rnuki ng

ough

"

thc

to reuch

r:

DEVELOPING UNDERSTAND1NG

VIA PROBLEM SOLVING

Jlmhft'IIl,\{)/l'ill~

th e foeus of rnathcmat-

ics instruction,
teachers, textbook authors, curriculum developcrs.
and evaluators should make understanding their focus an d their goal. By doing 50

they will shift from lhe narrow view that mathematics

is sirnply a tool for
solving problems to the broader conception that rnathematics
is a way of
thinking about and organzing one's experiences/As
a consequence. problem solving will not be de-ernphasized,
but the ro(e of problern solving in rhe
curriculurn wll change from being an activity students engage i[~r
they l
have acquired certain concepts and skills to being both,3 m~ans for quiring \
new mathernarical
knowledge and a process for app:lying wll;Jt has been
\

~M~~
@ @

J.rkr~n( \\ay:-.

them via problern solving.

These differences in students' perforrnance indicate the variety of malheinhercnt in lhe problern, including sorting, finding a
ouc-to-one correspondence,~ng,~xchanging
sets of equal value, and
counting lhe value of a collectfii 'of coins and using the value (rather than
the coins themselves) to find othcr~ollections
of the same value. T~ls'

<0

SlllllC

.'

ability to recognize and use these ide as gives a rneasur e of their understanding. It is inreresting to note rhat some childr cns unde rstanding seemcd to

matical operations

U;-';DERSTA;--IDI~G

@@@@

tion of one suggcstcd

',~'\:;,~:i~.Jhe
coins by value and repeatedly using one-to-one carrespond~ttrey
..'
placed lhe four dimcs into Iour piles, then four of the nicke!s-;-tIrii fo~ore

o:"

DEVELOPI:-;G

MATHEMATICS

for students in grade 2 (Alberta Education

1983, p.
'~': 54), This problcrn was used by Croft (1987), a teacher who canducted
.-; individual intervicws with several of her grade 1 students.

,
\

38

.j

learned previously~FundamentallO

the view that understanding

should be a

prirnary goal of instruction is lhe bclief that childrens learning of mathernatics is richest when ir is self-generared
rather th an when i! is imposed by a

teacher or textboolY,ifA primary advantage of sel-gerierated

knowledge is

that it is tied to what the learner a!ready knows/Furtherrnore,

when cliildren
construct new mathernatical
knowledge for thcmselves, they learn not ouly
concepts, facts, skills, and 50 on. but also how to rnanage and regulare the
application
of this new knowledgeKfhat
is. ihey are in charge of this
knowledge (and of their learning in general), thereby making it more useful
to thern in solving problerns and in learning new conccpts
and skills. A
benefit of having acquired mathe rnatical knowledge
in this way is tlrat
problem-solving
efforts are lcss susccptible to errar. We be lieve th at tcach-

'-:.;:
I '
.r-

4U .

:"'1,\\ I)IHU

"t it
I'

.:

.....
Il:}.

'I IO;';!) I'()I~

1'.1.l,~1l::-; r.'\I(

y ~l'It()()t

~,I

rlC:-

OI:I'LI.()I't:"(

I.

are nnt \)nly cornp.u,

\'1;IIHI)bkm
~(lhiltg and teaching for understunding
ihk hu t in Ltct mutuully hc ncf iciul.

;j

\1.,\.nll'\I,'

l':"D[;RST,,\:-.IDI:"(;

y1Lalrll D' Arnbrosio hus suggested lhe following challcnge ~ISan illustrutidn l,f t h c tact th at solving a pr oblern em deepen a studerus
undcrstunding
. \...~ .p('.1 iopic 01' mutb e ma t ics.

given this

investigation

and exploration.

skills but also dcepcn

ing of two important

conccpts.

mcasurcrnent

Aids Problem

111(' !U'''/I{OIl,\{,/I'''I';1/

(e,g,.

(e.g .. performing

mude rowurd

problem

learn some usclul problern-solving

Understanding

tI,I,";,II\

,,{ l'I'u('(tllII'n

11I"1/;'"";,,,<: tlu- ,\dn tiou (/1/,1

,1/1'(/'('.<:;('1, 111,1:"1';1//11/.1).

eQmputatlo~s)

conforrn

to goals, and the ubility to

a solu tion.

'

would

J. Undvrsmn ding aid: lhe problcm solvcr in j//dginS [h,' reasonublencss c]

The abiliry 10 create a mcuningful
and appropriate interna! reprcsentarion (Ir the inforrn.uion
in a problern enhunces lhe problern solvers
;'Ibilily to determine
whc thcr lhe uns-ver 1ll;lkc~,:"

already

rem/H.

4. Utulcrstatuling !}J'(J/IICi/( .v tlu: lI'c11I,'fcl'

o] knlil!'h'dgc
I"~ rciatcd prohlcrn
atu! its genrrulizubitio: to othcr situ a tians , Brownel lI917). among othe rs.
has pointe d out that a, ~oIUlio~l to a problern that is meuningful (i.e .. we ll
undcr stood) transfers rcudilv 10 pr oblerns th.u are similar in structurc cven if
thcy are difkrcnt in,pntc~l.' Th.u is. <ince IImkrstandin,!! involvcx ihc ahili:y
to <!pply a particular
conccpt , xk ill. \Ir IHllLL'd\lJ'c t(1 unl';u1lili;lf siIl:ttilll1~.:tn

undcrstanding
of thc rclarionships
betwcen arca and perirnele0"he
solutiun to this pr oblcm rcquires
that students
make many dccisions. among
thern how 10 keep lrack in a systcmalic
wa}' of the shapcs that have been
mude 50 lhi sn posstbllllles em 5e found and none willbe Jup\icate~lIch
dccisinlls .rnd thc ~lss\lalcJ xk ills nccdcd to carrythem
(Iul are an implHlanl
part o[ lcurning huw 10 solve prohlcms succcssfully and dticicntlyl1BlIl
lcarning what decisions 10 mak e and when to rnake them is not lhe only
be ncfit of this tas1P'1l addition , as shapes are modified to Iit the conditions of
lhe problern, lhe lcarner is exposed to relationships bctween area and
pe rirnct er that, if noticed,
can facilitate
a richer understanding
of both

through

tli:

rnake various tQ!de;p-ff decisions (e.g .. deciding tha! an estimare will give a
"close enough" answcr). The prublern solver who under stnnds thc relauonships arnong lhe conditions and variables in a problern and who can place the
probtcrn in a rncaningfut
conte xt is wc ll c quippud to anticipute the consc'luences of var ious dccisions and actio ns and to evaluat e t he progrcss being

havc a basic unJerstilndillg

of the concepts of area and perimeter for rectarigullr sh;lpesjrhe
intcntion is not simply to alluw thc stude nts an opportunity
to appf y their knowlcdge
of these two conceptsf Rather. it is to enhance their

Thus.

['II.J"I'.\ltllltlil/,<:

actions

is assumed, of course. that students

concepts.

oi rt.'/'I't.'.\CII/(lrJO!lS

(\'/,(',":

S\l\xe~~rlll problcrn
solving requires thc ability 10 monitor lhe selcctiou an d subseque nt CXCCl!tion 01' prece dures. and lhe ability to evaluute lhe extent to which local

ti

em

fite

During problcrn snl\'ing it is ncccssary for

ihc inlormution
in ;1 pr oblcrn. Thut is , th e

-r-'v -,

"

,',\('t'I/Ii""

exarnple:

EP

(Ir

rich"t'\S

a reprcscntauon
of lhe inforrnution. The more
Jq:,icts thc inorrnation
antKi.i!d.:s pieces of
togcthe r', the mpf(:li~cly
it i~ thut lhe problern \ViII be solvcd

inforrn.uion
2,

Nol allowed

tire

('(111.\11'/;(/,

solver to inrcrnalizc

corrcctly.

On cc nt irncrcr graph p ape r outline ali lhe shapcs th.u ha\'c ali ar<.:a\)1' 1-1
squar e em and a perirnerer
of 24 em. For each shape you druw, at lcust
one
side
ar e ach squ ar e mustshare a side with anuther
squar
e. Heres an

Allowed

i n c rcuscs
("/lI

rrnbkm
solver must dcvclop
accur.ucly
tll<.: rcpr cscnuuion

Solving Enhulles Understanding

I.

solvcr

the prublcrn

~rl7e/~

Pwblem

{.'lIt/(,..\(,,,,diltg

t/r"I'I'IIh!1'I1I

4l

\'1 ..\ 1'111111:,\1 S01.\'I:"t;

individual

\\hn has a gooc undecstanding

\11' ccrtain
nuuhcmutical
idcas and
is~ly
t~able
10 apply th.u lcarning
to conicxis that might be
very dierent Irorn the conrexts in which the muthernatics was originally
techniques

learncd.

/)}'

students not only

thcir unerstund-

CONCLUSION
y

Solving

Sl\CCCSS in solving a problem' depends on the student"s ha\'ing a

good ulldel'stil,IHlillg of lhe inforrnation
in ir. However. the value of underOf course,

s!anding i1l sucecssful problem solving goes far beyond this, In particular.
when undcl slanding is viewcd in the way we !lave discussed. il aids problem
solving in aI least four dislinct ways.

\VC bclicve that there can hl.:! a mutually

supportivc
r ctutionship
hctween
vemphasizing
problern solving :100 cmrha~i7.it1g understanding
in rnuthematic~ in~lruction, Whcn teuchers leacll I'il/ prohlcm snh'ing, as well JS /lhO/li
it
tlllJ foI' it. they pro\'ide their S(ud~rHS \\'i!11 (\ powcrful JI1U impllrtlfli
meiln~
uf Jcvdoping
Ibeir own unJcrslanding,
As stuents'
unoerstanuing
of
mathemalics
be<?omt's dccper'a'nu richu. lhcir abilily 10 use matht:rnaties Ia

~olve probll!ms

incre::lses,