Posted in Mathematics education

Levels of Problem Solving Skills

Here is one way of describing students levels of problem solving skills in mathematics. I call them levels of problem solving skills rather than process of reflective abstraction as described in the original paper. As math teachers it is important that we are aware of our students learning trajectory in problem solving so we can properly help them move into the next level.problem solving

Level 1 – Recognition

Students at this level have the ability to recognize characteristics of a previously solved problem in a new situation and believe that one can do again what one did before. Solvers operating at this level would not be able to anticipate sources of difficulty and would be surprised by complications that might occur as they attempted their solution. A student operating at this level would not be able to mentally run-through a solution method in order to confirm or reject its usefulness.

Level 2 – Re-presentation

Students at this level are able to run through a problem mentally and are able to anticipate potential sources of difficulty and promise. Solvers who operate at this level are more flexible in their thinking and are not only able to recognize similarities between problems, they are also able to notice the differences that might cause them difficulty if they tried to repeat a previously used method of solution. Such solvers could imagine using the methods and could even imagine some of the problems they might encounter but could not take the results as a given. At this level, the subject would be unable to think about potential methods of solution and the anticipated results of such activity.

Level 3 – Structural abstraction

Students at this level evaluates solution prospects based on mental run-throughs of potential methods as well as methods that have been used before. They are able to discern the characteristics that are necessary to solve the problem and are able to evaluate the merits of a solution method based on these characteristics. This level evidences considerable flexibility of thought.

Level 4 – Structural awareness

A solver operating at this level is able to anticipate the results of potential activity without having to complete a mental run-through of the solution activity. The problem structure created by the solver has become an object of reflection. The student is able to consider such structures as objects and is able to make judgments about them without resorting to physically or mentally representing methods of solution.

The levels of problem solving skills described above indicate that as solvers attain the higher levels they become increasingly flexible in their thinking. This framework is from the dissertation of Cifarelli but I read it from the paper The roles of reification and reflective abstraction in the development of abstract thought: Transitions from arithmetic to algebra by Tracy Goodson-Espy. Educational Studies in Mathematics 36: 219–245, 1998. © 1998 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.

You may also be interested on Levels of understanding of function in equation form based on my own research on understanding function.

Image Credit: vidoons.com/how-it-works

Posted in Algebra

What are the Three Worlds of Mathematics?

There are three worlds of mathematics according to David Tall: the world of conceptual embodiment, the world of symbolic calculation and manipulation, and the world of axiomatic formalism. This classification is based on how mathematical concepts/objects developed. It is important for us teachers to be at least aware of these three worlds.  It tells us that math ideas are not formed in the same way therefore we can’t teach all math topics in the same way. The use of real-life contexts, the use of concrete materials, may afford learning of some concepts but may hinder the learning of  others.

World of Conceptual Embodiment

According to Tall, the world of conceptual embodiment grows out of our perceptions of the world and consists of our thinking about things that we perceive and sense, not only in the physical world, but in our own mental world of meaning. The world includes the conceptual development of Euclidean geometry and other geometries that can be conceptually embodied such as non-Euclidean geometries and any other mathematical concept that is conceived in visuo- spatial and other sensory ways. A large part of arithmetical concepts also developed via conceptual embodiment (see Figure below).

World of Symbolic Calculation

The second world is the world of symbols that is used for calculation and manipulation in arithmetic, algebra, calculus and so on. The ‘development’ of the objects of this world begin with actions (such as pointing and counting) that are encapsulated as concepts by using symbol that allow us to switch effortlessly from processes to do mathematics to concepts to think about.  But the focus on the properties of the symbols and the relationship between them moves away from the physical meaning to a symbolic activity in arithmetic. My post Levels of understanding of function in equation form describes the development of the idea of equation from action to object conception.

World of axiomatic formalism

The third world is based on properties, expressed in terms of formal definitions that are used as axioms to specify mathematical structures (such as ‘group’, ‘field’, ‘vector space’, ‘topological space’ and so on).  It turns previous experiences on their heads, working not with familiar objects of experience, but with axioms that are carefully formulated to define mathematical structures in terms of specified properties. Other properties are then deduced by formal proof to build a sequence of theorems. The formal world arises from a combination of embodied conceptions and symbolic manipulation, but the reverse can, and does, happen.

development of mathematics

 

Read the full paper Introducing the Three Worlds of Mathematics by David Tall.

Posted in Assessment, Math research

Student Achievement in Mathematics – TIMSS Ranking

East Asian countries continue to lead the world in student achievement in mathematics. Singapore, Korea, and Hong Kong SAR, followed by Chinese Taipei and Japan, were the top-performing countries in TIMSS 2011 at the fourth grade. Similarly, at the eighth grade, Korea, Singapore, and Chinese Taipei outperformed all countries, followed by Hong Kong SAR and Japan. Here’s the result for 4th Grade and 8th grade achievement for 2011 released last December 2012.  The number enclosed in the parenthesis is the average scale score of the country. The average scale centrepoint is 500 for both grade levels. TIMSS stands for Trends in Mathematics and Science Study.

You can access the full report in International Student Achievement in Mathematics.

8th Grade TIMSS 2011 4th Grade TIMSS 2011
  1. South Korea (613)
  2. Singapore (611)
  3. Chinese Taipei (609)
  4. Hong Kong SAR (586)
  5. Japan (570)
  6. Russian Federation (539)
  7. Israel (516)
  8. Finland (514)
  9. United States (509)
  10. England (507)
  11. Hungary (505)
  12. Australia (505)
  13. Slovenia (505)
  14. Lithuania (502)
  15. Italy (498)
  16. New Zealand (488)
  17. Kazakhstan (487)
  18. Sweden (484)
  19. Ukraine (479)
  20. Norway (475)
  21. Armenia (467)
  22. Romania (458)
  23. United Arab Emirates (456)
  24. Turkey (452)
  25. Lebanon (449)
  26. Malaysia (440)
  27. Georgia (431)
  28. Thailand (427)
  29. Macedonia (426)
  30. Tunisia (425)
  31. Chile (416)
  32. Iran (415)
  33. Qatar (410)
  34. Bahrain (409)
  35. Jordan (406)
  36. Palestinian Nat’l Auth (404)
  37. Saudi Arabia (394)
  38. Indonesia (386)
  39. Syrian Arab Rep (380)
  40. Morocco (371)
  41. Oman (366)
  42. Ghana (331)
  1. Singapore (606)
  2. South Korea (605)
  3. Hong Kong SAR (602)
  4. Chinese Taipei (591)
  5. Japan (585)
  6. Northern Ireland (562)
  7. Belgium (549)
  8. Finland (545)
  9. England (542)
  10. Russian Federation (542)
  11. United States (541)
  12. Netherlands (540)
  13. Denmark (537)
  14. Lithuania (534)
  15. Portugal (532)
  16. Germany (528)
  17. Ireland (527)
  18. Serbia (516)
  19. Australia (516)
  20. Hungary (515)
  21. Slovenia (513)
  22. Czech Republic (511)
  23. Austria (508)
  24. Italy (508)
  25. Slovak Republic (507)
  26. Sweden (504)
  27. Kazakhstan (501)
  28. Malta (496)
  29. Norway (495)
  30. Croatia (490)
  31. New Zealand (486)
  32. Spain (482)
  33. Romania (482)
  34. Poland (481)
  35. Turkey (469)
  36. Azerbaijan (463)
  37. Chile (462)
  38. Thailand (458)
  39. Armenia (452)
  40. Georgia (450)
  41. Bahrain (436)
  42. United Arab Emirates (434)
  43. Iran (431)
  44. Qatar (413)
  45. Saudi Arabia (410)
  46. Oman (385)
  47. Tunisia (359)
  48. Kuwait (342)
  49. Morocco (335)
  50. Yemen (248)