IMPACT OF HEURISTIC STRATEGIES ON PUPILS’ ATTITUDES TO PROBLEM SOLVING
The paper is a sequel to the article (Novotná et al., 2014), where the authors present the results of a 4-month experiment whose main aim was to change pupils’ culture of problem solving by using heuristic strategies suitable for problem solving in mathematics education. (Novotná et al., 2014) focused on strategies Analogy, Guess – check – revise, Systematic experimentation, Problem reformulation, Solution drawing, Working backwards and Use of graphs of functions. This paper focuses on two other heuristic strategies convenient for improvement of pupils’ culture of problem solving: Introduction of an auxiliary element and Omitting a condition. In the first part, the strategies Guess – Check – Revise, Working backwards, Introduction of an auxiliary element and Omitting a condition are characterized in detail and illustrated by examples of their use in order to capture their characteristics. In the second part we focus on the newly introduced strategies and analyse work with them in lessons using the tools from (Novotná et al., 2014). The analysis of results of the experiment indicates that, unlike in case of the strategy Introduction of an auxiliary element, successful use of the strategy Omitting a condition requires longer teacher’s work with the pupils. The following analysis works with the strategy Systematic experimentation, which seemed to be the easiest to master in (Novotná et al., 2014); we focus on the dangers it bears when it is used by pupils. The conclusion from (Novotná et al., 2014), which showed that if pupils are introduced to an environment that supports their creativity, their attitude towards problem solving changes in a positive way already after the period of four months, is confirmed.
- Brousseau, G., Novotná, J. (2008) ‘La culture scolaire des problèmes de mathématiques’, Les didactiques et leurs rapports à l‘ enseignement et à la formation. Quel statut épistémologique de leurs modèles et de leurs résultats?, Bordeaux, [CD ROM].
- Břehovský, J., Eisenmann, P., Ondrušová, J., Přibyl, J., Novotná, J. (2013) ‘Heuristic Strategies in Problem Solving of 11-12-year-old pupils’, Proceedings of SEMT ´13, Prague, pp. 75-82.
- Cihlář, J., Zelenka, M. (1998) Matematika 8, Praha: Pythagoras Publishing, a.s.
- Elia, I., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., Kolovou, A. (2009) Exploring strategy use and strategy flexibility in non-routine problem solving by primary school high achievers in mathematics. ZDM Mathematics Education, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 605-618.
- Fan, L., Zhu,Y. (2007) Representation of Problem-Solving Procedures: A Comparative Look at China, Singapore, and US mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 66, no. 1, pp. 61-75.
- Novotná, J., Eisenmann, P., Přibyl, J., Ondrušová, J., Břehovský, J. (2013) ‘Heuristic strategies in problem solving in school mathematics’, Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2013), Prague, pp. 461-468.
- Novotná, J., Eisenmann, P., Přibyl, J., Ondrušová, J., Břehovský, J. (2014) ‘Problem solving in school mathematics based on heuristic strategies’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1-6.
- Pólya, G. (2004) How to Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method (Expanded Princeton Science Library ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Wittmann, E.C. (1995) ‘Mathematics education as a „Design Science”’, Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 355-374.
- Zeitz, P. (2007) The Art and Craft of Problem Solving, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Authors declare with this manuscript intended for publication to ERIES Journal that:
- all co-authors agree with the publication of the manuscript even after amendments arising from peer review;
- all co-authors agree with the posting of the full text of this work on the web page of ERIES Journal and to the inclusion of references in databases accessible on the internet;
- no results of other researchers were used in the submitted manuscript without their consent, proper citation, or acknowledgement of their cooperation or material provided;
- the results (or any part of them) used in the manuscript have not been sent for publication to any other journal nor have they already been published (or if so, that the relevant works are cited in this manuscript);
- submission of the manuscript for publication was completed in accordance with the publishing regulations pertaining to place of work;
- experiments performed comply with current laws and written consent of the Scientific Ethics Committee / National Animal Care Authority (as is mentioned in the manuscript submitted);
- grant holders confirm that they have been informed of the submitted manuscript and they agree to its publication.
Authors retain copyright and grant ERIES Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the published work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. Moreover, authors are able to post the published work in an institutional repository with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. In addition, authors are permitted and encouraged to post the published work online (e.g. institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.