Top-Down Approach to Teaching Problem Solving Heuristics in Mathematics

Similar documents
Five High Order Thinking Skills

What Is Singapore Math?

Mathematics Cognitive Domains Framework: TIMSS 2003 Developmental Project Fourth and Eighth Grades

Measurement with Ratios

Mathematics Education in Singapore

Abstraction in Computer Science & Software Engineering: A Pedagogical Perspective

Research into competency models in arts education

REFLECTIONS ON LEARNING THEORIES IN INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN 1

Writing Quality Learning Objectives

Click on the links below to jump directly to the relevant section

An Investigation into Visualization and Verbalization Learning Preferences in the Online Environment

INTRODUCTION TO CONCEPT MAPPING. Joseph D. Novak Professor of Education and Professor of Biological Sciences Cornell University

Integer Operations. Overview. Grade 7 Mathematics, Quarter 1, Unit 1.1. Number of Instructional Days: 15 (1 day = 45 minutes) Essential Questions

Facilitator: Dr. Mervin E. Chisholm h Manager/Coordinator, IDU

Unit 2 Module 3: Generating Examples and Nonexamples

Solving Rational Equations

Components of a Reading Workshop Mini-Lesson

Designing and Teaching a Course with a Critical Thinking Focus

Principles of Data-Driven Instruction

The South Africa Symposium of Singapore Maths Strategies 2016 PRE-PRIMARY SCHOOL PRESENTER MS PEGGY ZEE

How To Write A Standards Based Lesson Plan

3. Principles for teaching reading

OA3-10 Patterns in Addition Tables

Problem of the Month: Fair Games

Grade Level Year Total Points Core Points % At Standard %

Conference of Asian Science Education Science Education from an Asian Perspective February 20-23, 2008 Kaohsiung, Taiwan

Numeracy and mathematics Experiences and outcomes

FROM NUMERICAL EQUIVALENCE TO ALGEBRAIC EQUIVALENCE 1. Rolene Liebenberg, Marlene Sasman and Alwyn Olivier

Note-Taking Skills. Overview: This lesson adds to the learners note-taking skills. This is a

Using Algebra Tiles for Adding/Subtracting Integers and to Solve 2-step Equations Grade 7 By Rich Butera

Performance Assessment Task Baseball Players Grade 6. Common Core State Standards Math - Content Standards

Math vocabulary can be taught with what Montessorians call the Three Period Lesson.

Accessibility Strategies for Mathematics

MATHEMATICS SYLLABUS Primary One to Four

Metacognition. Complete the Metacognitive Awareness Inventory for a quick assessment to:

THE DEVELOPMENT, IMPLEMENTATION, AND EVALUATION OF A PROBLEM SOLVING HEURISTIC

Activity 1: Using base ten blocks to model operations on decimals

Designing instructional tools by Flash MX ActionScript some examples to teach basic geometric concepts Yuan, Yuan Lee, Chun-Yi

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS OR BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE: WHAT CAN HELP IN DECISION MAKING?

Solving Algebra and Other Story Problems with Simple Diagrams: a Method Demonstrated in Grade 4 6 Texts Used in Singapore

3.2 Methods of Addition

Teaching Methodology for 3D Animation

Session 7 Fractions and Decimals

Planning a Class Session

Ministry of Education REVISED. The Ontario Curriculum Grades 1-8. Mathematics

Standards for Mathematical Practice: Commentary and Elaborations for 6 8

Astrid Roe. What has Norway done to improve students reading skills and reading engagement?

The Pedagogy of Medical Education

Decomposing Numbers (Operations and Algebraic Thinking)

Grade 6 Math Circles. Binary and Beyond

Teaching for Understanding: Ongoing Assessment

Current California Math Standards Balanced Equations

A Concrete Introduction. to the Abstract Concepts. of Integers and Algebra using Algebra Tiles

Problems in Teaching Primary School Mathematics

Linking Singapore s English Language Syllabus 2010 to The Lexile Framework for Reading: STELLAR as an Example

Active Learning in Accounting Classes: Three Literacy Strategies

Assessment in Singapore:

Concept-Mapping Software: How effective is the learning tool in an online learning environment?

The relationship between the volume of a cylinder and its height and radius

Numeracy across learning Principles and practice

Warm up. Connect these nine dots with only four straight lines without lifting your pencil from the paper.

Overview. Essential Questions. Precalculus, Quarter 4, Unit 4.5 Build Arithmetic and Geometric Sequences and Series

USING ALGEBRA TILES EFFECTIVELY

EVALUATION OF IMPORTANCE FOR RESEARCH IN EDUCATION

Cognitive Domain (Bloom)

Exploring the Use of Slow Motion Animation (Slowmation) as a Teaching Strategy to Develop Year 4 Students' Understandings of Equivalent Fractions.

Writing learning objectives

Part 1 Expressions, Equations, and Inequalities: Simplifying and Solving

A STATISTICS COURSE FOR ELEMENTARY AND MIDDLE SCHOOL TEACHERS. Gary Kader and Mike Perry Appalachian State University USA

Requirements & Guidelines for the Preparation of the New Mexico Online Portfolio for Alternative Licensure

CREATING LEARNING OUTCOMES

Kindergarten Math Curriculum Course Description and Philosophy Text Reference:

A LOOK BACK: UNDERGRADUATE COMPUTER SCIENCE EDUCATION: A NEW CURRICULUM PHILOSOPHY & OVERVIEW

EDF 6211 Educational Psychology

This puzzle is based on the following anecdote concerning a Hungarian sociologist and his observations of circles of friends among children.

Academic Vocabulary. Six Steps to Better Vocabulary Instruction

Overview. Essential Questions. Grade 4 Mathematics, Quarter 4, Unit 4.1 Dividing Whole Numbers With Remainders

Problem of the Month Through the Grapevine

Cognitive, or "Top-Down", Approaches to Intervention

Overview. Essential Questions. Grade 2 Mathematics, Quarter 4, Unit 4.4 Representing and Interpreting Data Using Picture and Bar Graphs

OA4-13 Rounding on a Number Line Pages 80 81

JAPAN CONTENTS Background Information on the National Curriculum Standards in Japan

What is the impact of multisource learning on History at Key Stage 3?

Problem solving has been the focus of a substantial number of research

Helping English Language Learners Understand Content Area Texts

Multi-digit Multiplication: Teaching methods and student mistakes

Place Value (What is is the Value of of the the Place?)

Chapter One Love Is the Foundation. For Group Discussion. Notes

Decimal Notations for Fractions Number and Operations Fractions /4.NF

Chapter 3: Teaching Learning Strategies in the Learner- Centered Classroom

Mathematics SL subject outline

Study Guide for the Mathematics: Proofs, Models, and Problems, Part I, Test

Study Guide for the Physical Education: Content and Design Test

Classroom Management Plan

Nurturing Early Learners

Transcription:

Top-Down Approach to Teaching Problem Solving Heuristics in Mathematics John TIONG Yeun Siew Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Abstract Singapore mathematics syllabuses identified eleven heuristics which are applicable to problem solving at the upper primary level (MOE, 2001a), and thirteen heuristics at lower secondary level (MOE, 2001b). According to the different characteristics of these thirteen heuristics, how and when they can be used in the process of mathematical problem solving, they can be classified into four categories: representation heuristics, simplification heuristics, pathway heuristics, and generic heuristics. Together they form a model of problem solving in mathematics (Tiong, Hedberg, & Lioe, 2005). Using this model as a structure for teaching heuristics, this paper proposes a top-down approach to teaching heuristics. Background The Singapore mathematics syllabuses, developed by Curriculum Planning and Developing Division (CPDD), Ministry of Education Singapore (MOE), have identified thirteen heuristics that are applicable to mathematical problem solving. 1. Act it out 2. Use a diagram/model 3. Use guess-and-check 4. Make a systematic list 5. Look for patterns 6. Work backwards 7. Use before-after concept 8. Make suppositions 9. Restate the problem in another way 10. Simplify the problem 11. Solve part of the problem 12. Think of a related problem 13. Use equations (Heuristics 12 and 13 are not in the primary syllabus.) Though these heuristics are listed in the syllabus, the use of these heuristics are not fully reflected in Singapore published textbooks (Fan & Zhu, 2000), and it is by no means clear how these heuristics should be incorporated into teaching and when (Lee & Fan, 2002 p. 5). This paper from a theoretical point of view proposes a top-down approach to teaching heuristics. What are heuristics? Heuristic methods, heuristic strategies, or simply heuristics, are rules of thumb for making progress on difficult problems (Polya, 1973). They are general suggestions on strategy that

are designed to help when we solve problems (Schoenfeld, 1985). For Bruner (1960) they are methods and strategies that can be helpful in problem solving. In sum, they can be explained as non-rigorous methods of achieving solutions to problems, ideas that have been useful in previous problem solving that we might want to apply when we solve our current problems. Heuristics have been generally recognized as a crucial component for problem solving (Polya 1973; Schoenfeld, 1985; Rubinstein, 1986; Mayer, 2003). In fact, according to Schoenfeld (1985), heuristics have now become nearly synonymous with mathematical problem solving (p. 23). After analyzing the roles and functions of the thirteen heuristics in the Singapore syllabus, we can summarize them into four ideas: representation, simplification, pathway, and bring in solution (Tiong, Hedberg, & Lioe 2005). Putting them together, we have a model for problem solving in mathematics, as shown in figure 1. We can also treat these four ideas as four general heuristics, use different representations, simplify your problem, approach your problem from different directions, and bring in solutions. Bring in solution P R O B L E M Representation Simplification Pathway S O L U T I O N Figure 1: Model for problem solving in mathematics (Tiong, Hedberg, & Lioe, 2005) By definition, all heuristics have the following two characteristics: 1. Heuristics do not guarantee a solution. All heuristics do is pointing us towards possible ways in which we might be able to find our solution. 2. Heuristics do not come with specific procedures. When we use heuristics, we are required to make some judgments of our own regarding what we should do. Heuristics help us to deal with difficult problems or problems that we are not familiar with. Other than that, heuristics usually enables us to find solutions with less time and effort as compared to when we use algorithms to find solutions. Not all heuristics are the same in term of specificity. There are ones that give very general and ambiguous instruction, while the others have more specific procedures that we as problem solvers would like to follow. For example, heuristic represent you problem differently only gives us a very general direction to what we should do, where as heuristic draw a diagram tells how we can represent our problem, visually. Heuristic draw a histogram on the other hand gives a much more specific instruction than the previous two.

To follow this heuristic draw a histogram, we will need to know first the procedures in which we can draw a histogram, whereas to follow the heuristic draw a diagram we can invent our own diagrams and the rules or procedures in which we can manipulate them; here we have the freedom to choose and be creative. Of course, we can still end using the histogram, since it might be the best representation for our problems. Here we can construct hierarchy of heuristics according to their specificity. We propose to put the four general heuristics from the model above on top of the hierarchy. Using the example in the previous paragraph, we have Figure 2. We should note that Figure 2 is not an exhaustive hierarchy for representations, we can still add in more representation into the hierarchy, such as manipulative into the second level, pie chart into the third level, and so on. Here we are just trying to get a rough idea of how a hierarchy of heuristics might look like. Since the number of heuristics are only limited by our creativity and imagination, it is not possible to construct a hierarchy that contain all possible heuristics. General Representation Diagram Symbol Specific Histogram Bar chart Matrix Equation Table Figure 2: An example of hierarchy of heuristics Here we need to clarify first that diagram, symbol or histogram, matrix themselves are not heuristics, but use diagram, use equation and draw table are heuristics. Representations themselves are not heuristics, however suggestions to use representations are. Of course Figure 2 is only part of the whole hierarchy of heuristics for representations, and we can have similar hierarchy for simplification, pathway, and bring in solution. Heuristics on the top of the hierarchy are just very basic and general ideas that can be applied to most problems. These ideas can be further broken downward to make them more specific, making them easier to follow and apply to problems. However by doing so, we have restricted the applicability of the heuristics to only a specific few types of problems. Heuristics with specific procedures are usually less applicable than those with fewer procedures. Besides that, specific heuristics require less of problem solvers interpretation and intuition or creativity. As we can see in Figure 2, the heuristics at the bottom of the

hierarchy are pointing us to topics that we learn in mathematics lessons that come with a lot of procedures and rules governing how to create and manipulate them. After all, we can see mathematics as a big collection of tools or representations in which we use to solve problems. Learning and teaching heuristics Before we start talking about the teaching of heuristics, it is important for us to understand what it means to have learned heuristics, and how they are taught. The aim of heuristic (here heuristic refers the branch of study, not a heuristic strategy) is to study the methods and rules of discovery and invention (Polya 1973, p. 112). Heuristics help us discover and invent, and in case of problem solving, discover and invent solutions to problems or procedures to solve problems. Heuristics are not the discoveries and inventions themselves, but methods and rules of discovery and invention, so when we learn heuristics, we are learning ideas or strategies, not the actual discovery and invention. Of course, as mentioned above, this does not mean that heuristics guarantee us discovery and invention, but they give us a sense of direction and rules of thumb for making sense, especially when we run into difficult and unfamiliar problems. When we have learned heuristics, we have grasp ideas and apply them to help us solve problems. It can not be emphasized enough that heuristics are about ideas not procedures. Not all heuristics that can be used to solve problems are taught explicitly by teachers. In fact, sometimes the heuristics that we use are discovered from our own problem solving experience, or are identified when we observe other people solving problems. We can also learn them through examining and studying worked examples in textbooks. Schoenfeld (1985) summarizes these processes as: Occasionally the person solves a problem using a technique that was successful earlier, and some thing clicks. If that method succeeds twice, the individual may use it when faced with another similar problem. In that way a method becomes a strategy. Over a period of years each individual problem solver comes to rely quite possibly unconsciously upon those methods that have proven useful for himself or herself. That is the individual develops a personal and idiosyncratic collection of problem solving strategies. (p. 70-71) By means of introspection (Polya s method) or by making systematic observations of experts solving large number of problems, it might be possible to identify and characterize the heuristic strategies that are used by expert problem solvers. (p. 71) The idea of teaching heuristics explicitly is so that we can expedite these processes of discovering and identifying heuristics, and apply them in problem solving. Whether it is possible to simply expect the discovery and identification of processes, rather than explicitly teaching the heuristics, is questionable, it definitely requires more time and effort and is a less efficient approach to learning heuristics. However, the heuristics learned through discovery and identification are usually ones that we use most often, since we have a much better understanding and appreciation of them. The common way of teaching heuristics explicitly is to teach them as if they were mathematical concepts or skills. We teach one heuristic at a time and give students problems that can be solved by that particular heuristic at the end of the lesson. The problem with such an approach is that we have isolated each heuristic from the others, since often the relationships between heuristics and the ideas for these heuristics are not mentioned. Students

might treat these heuristics as algorithms; procedures they need to follow when they solve problems without really understanding the ideas behind the heuristics, why and when they should them. Schoenfeld (1985) has taken a different approach to teaching heuristics. He argued that most general heuristic strategies are so broadly defined that their definitions are far too vague to serve as a guide to their implementation (p. 95). He proposed breaking heuristics down to what he called more precise and usable descriptions of heuristic strategies or substrategies. Students not only need to learn these substrategies, they also need to learn how to break down general strategies to substrategies. These conditions (for transfer) include breaking down the general heuristic strategies into a collection of coherent substrategies, carefully delineating a fairly large sample of these, discussing the conditions under which they seem to be appropriate, and using problems from new domains for practice. (Schoenfeld 1985, p. 95) We should note that when Schoenfeld proposed this approach, he only meant it for students with reasonable mathematics background, college students or older. Top-down approach to teaching heuristics Here we try to propose an alternative approach to teaching heuristics. This approach can be seen as an extension of Schoenfeld s (1985) approach as it also involves breaking down general heuristics to specific heuristics; however here we start from even more general heuristics, using the problem solving model in Figure 1 above as a structure in which we teach heuristics. The idea of such an approach is to introduce to students the ideas behind the heuristics, why these heuristics are used, first before we start breaking them down to more specific heuristics and apply them to problem solving. We call this approach the top-down approach to teaching heuristics because we start teaching heuristics from the heuristics on the top of the hierarchy of heuristics we, and slowly work our way down the hierarchy. Again using the example in Figure, we start by first teaching the concepts and ideas of representations, then we move down to the heuristic draw a diagram, and then move further down to draw a histogram. Also, by deducing heuristics to four simple general heuristics, younger students might have a better chance of understanding and applying heuristics. Besides, with such a structure it will be easier for students to attach meaning to new heuristics that they might encounter, making these heuristics easier to remember and apply. Here we borrow Bruner s idea of structural teaching, we teach the ideas and structure first before we go into detail. Grasping the structure of a subject is understanding it in a way that permits many other things to be related to it meaningfully. To learn structure in short is to learn how things are related. (Bruner 1960, p. 7) Here we give an example of how the top-down approach can be applied in classrooms. First of course we start by giving students a few problems, preferably non-routine or ill-structured problems, problems that can not be solved easily by the students, or else there will be no point talking about heuristics.

Give a brief introduction of what representations are by showing students a few examples, preferably three examples, one enactive (physical), one iconic (visual), and one symbolic. Discuss with them which representations do they prefer and why. Give students some time to come up with their own representations for the problems. Through students representations, we can understand better how students actually come to understand problems. Ask some students to present to the rest of the class their representations and explain why they have represented the problems that way. Ask other students to comment on these representations. Now give students time to solve the problems with the representations they have created. Again ask students to present their works, if they have managed to solve the problems, and discuss with the class why they have done what they have done. Introduce the idea of simplification, again giving a few examples and explain why these heuristics can be useful to solve the problems. Also introduce the idea of pathway, explain to students problems have a starting state and ending state, and where we start solving the problems can have different level of difficulties. Give more time for students to try to solve the problems, and let them present and discuss their solutions. Introduce the concept of bringing in solutions as ways to solve problems, and ask them to comment on such methods, and why and when do they think they will be useful. Now ask them to solve the problems using as many ways as they possibly find, and comment on which way they think they prefer, and why. As we can see from the example above, top-down approach to teaching heuristic requires heavy involvements from students. It gives students chance to use their creativity to solve problems, from creating their own representations to discover or invent their own solutions, and creating their own heuristics. Again, here we are emphasizing the ideas not the procedures. The problems we use play a crucial part in the whole process, therefore we have to carefully select the problems to better facilitate the discussions with the students. As mentioned in the section in the section before, topics in mathematics textbook can be considered as forms of representation. We can introduce them to students as representations to solve the problems and ask them to discuss whether these representations are better than the ones they themselves have come up with. Teacher then will need to explain to students the strength of these representations. Approaching textbook topics will make the topics more meaningful for students and they can appreciate the topics more also. Summary In this paper we have proposed a top-down approach to teaching heuristics, where we put most of the emphasis on the ideas of the heuristics, why these heuristics are useful, not on the heuristics themselves. Also, unlike Schoenfeld s approach, top-down approach is meant for upper primary and lower secondary students, although empirical data will need to be collected to determine the effect of such an approach on students learning of heuristics and problem solving in general. However we do see from the example given that such an approach will be demanding on both teacher and students, especially teacher and students are

new to the approach. Here we also try to suggest a more problem-based approach to teaching topics in mathematics textbook. Acknowledgement This paper is part of a research project, Developing the Repertoire of Heuristics for Mathematical Problem Solving, MPS project, funded by Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practices (CRPP), National Institute of Education (NIE), Nanyang Technological University (NTU). The ideas are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the aims or directions of the MPS project. References Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Fan, L. & Zhu, Y. (2000). Problem solving in Singaporean secondary mathematics textbooks. The Mathematics Educator. 5(1/2), 117-141. Lee, P. Y. & Fan, L. (2002). The development of Singapore mathematics curriculum, understanding the changes in syllabus, textbooks and approaches. A talk given at the Chongqing conference 17 20 August 2002. Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Ministry of Education Singapore (MOE). (2001a). Primary mathematics syllabus. Retrieved January 7 th, 2005, from http://www1.moe.edu.sg/syllabuses/doc/maths_pri.pdf. Ministry of Education Singapore (MOE). (2001b). Lower secondary mathematics Syllabus. Retrieved January 7 th, 2005, from http://www1.moe.edu.sg/syllabuses/doc/maths_lowsec.pdf. Polya, G. (1973). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical model. (2nd ed). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Rubinstein, M. F. (1986). Tools for thinking and problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall Schoenfeld A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Tiong, Y. S. J., Hedberg J., & Lioe L. T. (2005). A Metacognitive Approach to Support Heuristic Solution of Mathematical Problems. Paper represented at International Conference on Education, Redesigning pedagogy: research, policy, practice, 30 May 1 June 2005. Singapore: National Institute of Education.