Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no.

MATHEMATICAL PROBLEM-SOLVING STRATEGIES AMONG

STUDENT TEACHERS

Melanie Guzman Gurat

School of Teacher Education and Humanities / School of Graduate Studies, University Research Center, Saint Mary’s University, Philippines,
[email protected]

Highlights
• Problem-solving strategies among student teachers are cognitive, metacognitive and other strategies
• Results indicate significant influence of the strategies on academic performance of the student teachers

Abstract
The main purpose of the study is to understand the mathematical problem-solving strategies among Article type
student teachers. This study used both quantitative and qualitative type of research. Aside from the
semi-structured interviews, data were gathered through participant’s actual mathematical problem- Full research paper
solving outputs and the videotaped interviews. Findings revealed that the problem-solving strategies
among student teachers in the Problem-Solving subject are cognitive, metacognitive and other strategies.
The cognitive strategies used by the student teachers are rehearsal, elaboration, and organization. The Article history
metacognitive strategies are critical thinking and self-regulation. Other strategies are overlapping the Received: September 14, 2017
cognitive and metacognitive strategies. These are prediction/orientation, planning, monitoring, and Received in revised form: August 29, 2018
evaluating. The findings also suggest significant influence of the strategies on the academic performance Accepted: August 29, 2018
of the student teachers.
Available on-line: September 30, 2018
Keywords
Cognitive, critical thinking, elaboration, metacognitive, organization, rehearsal, self-regulation

Guzman Gurat M. (2018) “Mathematical problem-solving strategies among student teachers”, Journal on Efficiency and
Responsibility in Education and Science, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 53-64, online ISSN 1803-1617, printed ISSN 2336-2375, doi: 10.7160/
eriesj.2018.110302.

Introduction
Problem-solving has a special importance in the study of to the abilities to solve problems; make the individual aware of
mathematics (Wilson, Fernandez and Hadaway, 2011). The the problem-solving strategies, value of approaching problems
main goal in teaching mathematical problem-solving is for in an orderly manner and that many problems can be solved in
the students to develop a generic ability in solving real-life more than one way and; improve individuals’ abilities to select
problems and to apply mathematics in real life situations. It can appropriate solution strategies, capacity to implement solution
also be used, as a teaching method, for a deeper understanding strategies accurately and abilities to get a correct answers to
of concepts. Successful mathematical problem-solving depends problems (Hoon, Kee, and Singh, 2013).
upon many factors and skills with different characteristics. A heuristic is a mathematical problem-solving strategy
One of the main difficulties in learning problem-solving is the formulated in a free-of-context manner and done systematically
fact that many skills are needed for a learner to be an effective (Koichu, Berman and Moore, 2004). Moreover, a heuristic
problem solver. Also, these factors and skills make the teaching approach can encourage connection of mathematical thoughts
of problem-solving one of the most complex topics to teach by examining special cases, drawing a diagram, specializing
(Dendane, 2009). Mathematics is used to quantify numerically the solution, generalizing the solution (Hoon, Kee, and Singh,
and spatially natural as well as man-made situations. It is used 2013). It is associated with non-routine mathematical problems
to solve problems and it has helped in making social, economic such as looking backward or thinking forward (Koichu, Berman
and technological advances (Dendane, 2009). and Moore, 2004). Several studies were conducted to improve
Learning facts and contents in mathematics are important but students’ skills in solving mathematics problems. Hoon, Kee,
these are not enough. Students should learn how to use these Singh (2013) investigated students’ response in applying
facts to develop their thinking skills in solving problems. heuristics approach in solving mathematical tasks, and their
Special attention for the development of problem-solving abilities in applying the heuristics approach. Reiss and Renkl
ability has been accepted by mathematics educators (Stanic (2002) proposed the use of heuristic worked-out examples in
and Kilpatrick, 1989) and genuine mathematical problem- proving. They suggested that this should be integrated into
solving is one of the most important components in any mathematics classroom frequently so that students will learn
mathematics program or curriculum (Stacey, 2005; Halmos, to extract needed information in the problems. Novotná (2014)
1980; Cockcroft, 1982). Mathematical problem-solving may aimed to improve the pupils’ culture of problem-solving
help students to improve and develop the standard ability to through dealing with strategies such as analogy, guess-check-
solve real-life problems, (Reys et al. 2001), to develop critical revise, problem reformulation, solution drawing, systematic
thinking skills and reasoning, to gain deep understanding of experimentation, way back and use of graphs of functions With
concepts (Schoenfeld, 1992; Schoen and Charles, 2003) and the studies showing how strategies can improve mathematics
to work in groups, cooperate with and interact with each other problem solving, Koichu, Berman, and Moore (2004) aimed to
(Dendane, 2009). Specifically, it may also improve eagerness promote heuristic literacy in a regular mathematics classroom.
of an individual to try to analyze mathematical problems and Moreover, Dewey’s (1933) “How we think”, Polya’s (1988)
to improve their determination and self-concepts with respect problem-solving methods and the stages of Krulik and

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 53

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

Rudnick’s (1978) in solving were some of the theoretical bases problem set and their grades in Problem-Solving subject.
in conducting this study (cited by Carson, 2007). These theories Course & Grade in Score
explained problem-solving as strategies in solving. Dewey’s Name Gender
Year Problem-solving (out of 22 points)
(1933) steps are confronting the problem, diagnosing or defining Interviewed
the problem, inventorying several solutions, conjecturing Ana BEED 4 F 80 5
consequences of solutions and testing the consequences. On Barbara BEED 4 F 83 2
the other hand, Polya’s (1988) stages consist of understanding Carding BEED 4 M 81 1
the problem, devising a plan, carrying out the plan and looking Clara BEED 4 F 85 3
back. Similarly, Krulik and Rudnick’s (1978) procedures are Ester BEED 4 F 86 6
reading, exploring, selecting a strategy, solving and reviewing Grasya BEED 4 F 85 4
and extending. These theories serve as a guide to a researcher to Helen BEED 4 F 89 8
work on particular strategies performed by the student teachers Inday BEED 4 F 89 4
while dealing with the mathematical problem-solving task. In Isagani BEED 4 M 95 9
this study, problem-solving refers to the common situational Maria BEED 4 F 84 3
problems in mathematics in a form of problem set or worded Selya BEED 4 F 86 4
problems. The problems are composed of items in arithmetic Soledad BEED 4 F 89 5
and algebra, trigonometry, geometry, sets, probability, number Not Interviewed
theory and puzzle problem/logic. Delya BEED 4 F 85 6
Hence, with the main goal of mathematics education to improve Elyas BEED 4 M 77 5
students’ problem-solving skills in mathematics particularly to Esteban BEED 4 M 86 3
the student teachers who will be future mathematics educators, Fatima BSED 4 F 88 7
this study aimed to understand the mathematical problem- Julieta BEED 4 F 87 5
solving strategies among student teachers. This study can Katrina BSED 4 F 97 8
be used as a basis for the tertiary mathematics educators to Lusing BSED 4 F 97 8
determine different methods or interventions to improve the Nena BESD 3 F 94 12
problem-solving skills of the future teachers so that they will be Perla BEED 4 F 82 7
equipped with enough skills in teaching mathematics for their Tina BEED 4 F 87 6
future students. It can also serve as a realization for them to Wilma BEED 3 F inc 4
grow more sensitive to different strategies and to realize that Table 1: Course and year, gender, grade in Problem-Solving subject
there are more strategies in solving problems in mathematics. and scores of interviewed and not interviewed pre-service teacher
education students
Materials and Methods The instruments used in the study underwent tool validation and
The study was qualitative. Semi-structured interviews, pilot testing. Revisions on the instruments were done before the
participant’s actual mathematical problem-solving outputs, student teachers were given the problem set (see Appendix B).
Filled-up Mathematics Motivated Strategies Learning The data gathering procedure started upon the approval to
Questionnaires (MMSLQ) by Liu and Lin (2010) (See conduct this study. The student teachers answered the given set
Appendix A) and videotaped interviews were used to triangulate of problem-solving and the Mathematics Motivated Strategies
the gathered data. Techniques and analytical tools by Strauss Learning Questionnaires. The outputs of the students in the
and Corbin (1998) and the constant comparison method by problem set and the result on the MMSLQ questionnaires were
Glaser and Strauss (1967) were used. The data used in the study analyzed to construct the guide questions for the interview (see
was the initial process conducted to determine metacognitive Appendix C). Semi-structured interviews were conducted at
strategy knowledge in the study of Gurat and Medula (2016). Roger Tjolle Building, second floor conference room of Saint
The identified strategies were used by Gurat and Medula in Mary’s University. The interviews were recorded and videotaped
constructing a framework of metacognitive strategy knowledge to validate/support interview responses. The interviews were
in solving math problems. The participants of the study were transcribed and the transcriptions were analyzed through Strauss
the student teachers who were currently enrolled in Problem- and Corbin coding process. In this stage, microanalysis was
Solving subject during the summer 2011 term. Student teachers done which includes both open coding and axial coding. Then,
are the senior college students of Saint Mary’s University related concepts were grouped together using axial coding.
officially enrolled in Problem-Solving subject. The class The categories formed were analyzed word-for-word, line-by-
is composed of 23 students, 19 of which are Bachelor of line and sentence-by-sentence. Tables 2 and 3 show the sample
Elementary Education major in General Elementary Education excerpts from the open coding and axial coding respectively.
(BEED – GEE), 4 Bachelor of Secondary Education major Based on the concepts generated from the raw data, categories
in Mathematics (BSED Math) and 1 Bachelor of Elementary and subcategories were formed by constant comparison.
Education major in General Science (BEED General Science), Selective coding was also done to identify the themes formed
19 females and 4 males. Out of 23 students, only 12 BEED – from the axial coding. Finally, the result of the study was
GEE students were willing to be interviewed. Out of 19 females, reported to student teacher for verification purposes.
there are only 10 females interviewed and out of 4 males, there
are only 2 males interviewed. The scores of the student teachers
in the Mathematics problem set or their grades in Problem-
Solving subject were not used as a criterion for identifying the
respondents to be interviewed. Table 1 shows the course and
year, gender, grade in Problem-Solving subject and scores of
interviewed and not interviewed student teachers in the given

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 54

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

Behaviors/ Results
English Translations Type of strategies
Sub categories/Others Based on the transcriptions of the interviews, filled-up
Mathematical problem solving is about Systematic Approach (Monitoring) Mathematics Motivated Strategies Learning Questionnaires
applying the formula and it is a systematic Relate math to formulas
process. So meaning it is a step-by-step
(MMSLQ) and scanned outputs in their actual problem-solving
process to get the correct answer tasks, the strategies identified were cognitive, metacognitive and
I use the formulas Use of formulas other strategies.
(if familiar with the problem)
If not, I analyze first the problem before Analysis of information Cognitive Strategies
solving for the right answer.
I read and understand it first then identify Read, analyze, solve method of solving Three kinds of cognitive strategies were identified in this study.
the needed data These include rehearsal, elaboration, and organization.
I set aside the problem then I will ask -Categorize easy-hard question by skip-
for help from my classmate or I’ll search ping items that are difficult to answer Rehearsal
for problems that can be used to relate (Organization)
to them -Looking Back at the problem Rehearsal is one of the cognitive strategies used by the student
-Social
-relate to other problem (critical thinking) teachers in Summer 2011 Problem-Solving subject. Rehearsal
-Speculation is shown through re-reading the problem, solving problems
I leave it ma‘am, I do guessing but I feel -guessing/trial and Error repeatedly and recalling past lessons.
it‘s wrong If I really don‘t know it then -Explore/discover
no more In addition, Table 4 shows the frequency and percent distribution
It’s like it’s already in my mind like when -recall lesson(rehearsal) of cognitive strategy of rehearsal used by the student teachers
we have a lesson that I understood it so -analysis of information
I can imagine it.
in solving mathematical problem-solving. The table reveals
During elementary, basic math was taught -systematic approach (monitoring) that the student teachers make use of the cognitive strategy of
to us. -recall past lesson (rehearsal) rehearsal since they responded that they sometimes or even
Read what is the problem, and then first -analysis of information
you analyze it and find the given and then
always used their cognitive strategies. Only one respondent said
identify the specific question asked in the that s/he repeatedly practice similar question types.
problem
1- never
3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always
or only 2- some-
I‘m thinking about it, how I could answer -asking question (Elaboration) me about ly true of or almost
Cognitive Strategies rarely times true
the given question -constructing meaning and developing an half the me always
true in of me
interpretation time true of me
me
I read it first then I find ways to solve -exploring/discover f % f % f % f % f %
what is being asked in the problem -critical thinking
I analyze the problem
Sometimes if I really don‘t know, I read it -reading repeatedly (rehearsal, prediction/ 0 0 0 0 7 30.44 8 34.78 8 34.78
again and again.
again and again orientation)
-Constructing meaning and developing an I repeatedly practice
interpretation similar question 1 4.35 2 8.70 11 47.83 7 30.44 2 8.70
types.
Hhmmm the questions seem like some- -explore/discover
thing given that…aaaayyyy I will think -asking self (elaboration) I study the class notes
how to solve it and textbook again 0 0 5 21.74 11 47.83 5 21.74 2 8.70
and again.
Table 2: Extract from open coding of interview transcripts I memorize the im-
When does Why does portant and key math
How does the cat- formula to remind me 0 0 4 17.39 6 26.09 9 39.13 4 17.39
What the category the category Consequences
egory occur of the important part
occur occur
of my math class
Constructing during the primary -listing To understand
meaning and first phase of encounter -making drawing, the problem I do not forget prob-
0 0 6 26.09 12 52.17 4 17.39 1 4.35
developing the the problem and sense- illustrations, tables, lem-solving steps
interpretation solving making chart Table 4: Frequency and percent distribution of the cognitive
-reading the problem strategies of rehearsal used by the student teachers in solving
again and again
mathematical problems
Analyzing -selecting relevant To Analyze the
information information problem
-relating it to a cer- Elaboration
tain mathematical
field
Elaboration was used by the student teachers in solving
Looking back - recalling similar To Analyze the mathematical problems. This strategy was shown through
on the problem problems problem underlining and selecting important details such as words and
-assessing the degree
of difficulty
given in the problem and asking own self-questions related to
Exploring/ During Planning -Using trial and error Preparatory to solving. Table 5 shows that student teachers used elaboration
Discovering the second what to do -visualizing the design a plan. in solving mathematical problems. If not sometimes true about
phase of situation For better
the problem -establishing a con- analysis half of the time or frequently, some also responded that they use
solving nection among part it always.
of the problem
-analyzing the prob-
lem part by part
Speculating - relating it to real Preparatory to
life situation design a plan.
-relating to a similar For better
problem encountered analysis
before.
Reflecting on -decision making Reflecting
the discovery whether feasible
and speculation or not
Table 3: Extract from axial coding of interview transcripts

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 55

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

1- never
3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always
or only 2- some-
Cognitive Strate- me about ly true of or almost
rarely times true
gies half the me always
true in of me
time true of me
me
f % f % f % f % f %
I ask questions to
myself to make
sure that I under- 0 0 4 17.39 9 39.13 7 30.43 3 13.04
stand the math
materials content
I link the class
notes to text-
book examples 0 0 3 13.04 9 39.13 10 43.48 1 4.35
to improve my
understanding.
I combine my own
known knowledge
0 0 2 8.70 10 43.48 9 39.13 2 8.70
with the learning
materials.
I do my best to
link relative por-
1 4.35 2 8.70 12 52.17 8 34.78 0 0
Figure 2: Drawing of Lusing
tions of math and
other subjects.
Making a drawing of the problem statement is evident especially
I will find out any
sample in daily life if the given problem requires illustration before one can solve it.
0 0 4 17.39 15 65.22 4 17.39 0 0
to link with math Examples are shown in Figures 1 and 2.
materials.
The organization can also be shown through making table.
Table 5: Frequency and percent distribution of the cognitive
strategies of elaboration used by the student teachers in solving
a mathematical problem
Organization
The organization was shown by the student teachers by making
connections between parts of the problem, making a drawing
of the problem statement, and breaking down the problem into
pieces, making simple charts/tables to better organize what is
asked in the problem.
Problem solvers make connections between the parts of the
problem in order to decide which of the following given are
needed. They claim that if a solver did not get or understand
the connection between parts of the problem he may fail to get
the correct answer, especially that some problems have missing
numbers needed to be solved first before solving what is really
Figure 3: Table drawn by Helen
asked in the problem. It is also through making connections
between parts of the problem that a problem solver may decide Figure 3 does not just reveal that student teachers make tables
what strategy/formula/method/steps should fit the question. but it also shows the use of rehearsal. Helen draws table but
Furthermore, Figure 1 and 2 show the sample output revealing disregarded it maybe because she repeats reading the problem.
that student teachers make drawings. Though some respondents answered “no” when asked if they
break down the problems into pieces, make simple charts/
tables to better organized what is asked in the problem, this is
contradictory to their output revealing that the student teachers
actually make charts/tables in answering a problem. One reason
might be because the problem requires a solver to do so even
if it is not written there that they must make table/charts. Thus,
this also reveals that a solver may or may not be aware of their
cognitive strategies.
In addition, Table 6 shows the frequency and percent distribution
of cognitive strategy of organization used by the student teachers
in solving mathematical problems. Only two respondents
responded that they did not underline important words in the
word problem but for the rest of the items, the table shows that
they use the other strategies sometimes or even always. Thus,
this shows that the student teachers used a cognitive strategy of
Figure 1: Drawing of Katrina the organization in solving.

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 56

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

1- never
or only 2- some-
3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always the 23 respondents claimed that s/he compares the difference
me about ly true of or almost
Cognitive Strat- rarely times true
half the me always true
between the teacher’s explanation and textbook content and
egies true in of me
time of me draw a conclusion referring to the task.
me
f % f % f % f % f % 1- never
3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always
I mark-up the or only 2- some-
Metacognitive me about ly true of or almost
important lines rarely times true
0 0 4 17.39 7 30.43 7 30.43 5 21.74 Strategies half the me always true
for concepts true in of me
time of me
organization. me
I underline im- f % f % f % f % f %
portant words in 2 8.70 1 4.35 9 39.13 7 30.43 4 17.39 I usually question
the word problem what I heard or
I select relevant what I learned
numbers/data to 0 0 2 8.70 6 26.09 10 43.48 5 21.74 in math class, 0 0 6 26.09 8 34.78 7 30.43 2 8.70
solve the problem and judge if this
information is
I adhere to the persuasive.
plan systemati- 0 0 2 8.70 10 43.48 10 43.48 1 4.35
cally I make the math
class materials
I take time to as a start point
design an action and try to self- 0 0 4 17.39 12 52.17 6 26.09 1 4.35
0 0 4 17.39 6 26.09 9 39.13 4 17.39
plan before actu- develop my own
ally calculating viewpoint to the
I read through topics.
the class notes I combine my
and textbook and 0 0 4 17.39 6 26.09 9 39.13 4 17.39 own idea into
find out the most 0 0 3 13.04 13 56.52 4 17.39 3 13.04
the math class
important parts. learning.
I read through I try to find out
the class notes another efficient
0 0 4 17.39 9 39.13 7 30.43 3 13.04
and mark up the way to solve the
important parts. 0 0 3 13.04 6 26.09 12 52.17 2 8.70
problem when
I categorize the I hear some ideas
easy-hard type or some solutions.
0 0 4 17.39 7 30.43 9 39.13 3 13.04
questions of I use a real
every exam. example to verify
I orderly take 0 0 6 26.09 10 43.48 6 26.09 1 4.35
the math theory
note of problem- 0 0 4 17.39 11 47.83 5 21.74 3 13.04 conclusion.
solving steps I compare the dif-
I make simple ference between
charts and tables the teacher’s 1 4.35 4 17.39 11 47.83 5 21.74 2 8.70
to help me in or- 0 0 1 4.35 11 47.83 9 39.13 2 8.70 explanation and
ganizing my math textbook content.
class materials. I select relevant
I select the materials to solve 0 0 1 4.35 14 60.87 5 21.74 3 13.04
calculations that the problem.
will be needed to I make correct
solve the problem 0 0 3 13.04 10 43.48 3 13.04 7 30.43 0 0 3 13.04 9 39.13 9 39.13 2 8.70
use of units
and estimating
a possible out- I make notes
come related to the 0 0 6 26.09 9 39.13 7 30.43 1 4.35
problem
I act according to
0 0 5 21.74 13 56.52 5 21.74 0 0 I monitor the on-
the plan
going problem-
I follow the solving process 0 0 4 17.39 10 43.48 9 39.13 0 0
sequences of and change plan
0 0 5 21.74 12 52.17 5 21.74 1 4.35
problem-solving if necessary
steps orderly
I summarize the
I go over the answer and reflect 0 0 6 26.09 9 39.13 7 30.43 1 4.35
formula and im- on the answer
0 0 5 21.74 8 34.78 6 26.09 4 17.39
portant concepts
by myself. I draw a conclu-
sion referring to 1 4.35 5 21.74 10 43.48 4 17.39 3 13.04
Table 6: Frequency and percent distribution of the cognitive the task
strategies of organization used by the student teachers in solving I relate a future
0 0 5 21.74 8 21.74 10 43.48 0 0
mathematical problems problems
I relate the given
Meta-cognitive Strategies problem to other 0 0 0 0 7 30.43 14 60.87 2 8.70
problems
There are two types of metacognitive strategies revealed in this Table 7: Frequency and percent distribution of the metacognitive
study. These are the critical thinking and self- regulation. strategies of critical thinking used by the student teachers in solving
mathematical problems
Critical Thinking
The critical thinking among student teachers was shown Self-regulation
through having estimated outcome, relating problems in daily Student teachers reveal that they used self-regulation through
life, selecting or choosing only important numbers or details in answering the question, “how do you know that you have solved
a problem and asking one’s self if the answer makes sense. the problem correctly? What are your bases? And what makes
In addition, Table 7 shows the frequency and percent distribution you think it is correct?”
of metacognitive strategy of critical thinking used by the Student teachers associated getting the correct answer in checking
student teachers in solving mathematical problem-solving. their answers. If the answer matches with their checking, they
The table reveals that almost everyone used critical thinking are confident that the answer is correct. Some claim that they
in solving mathematical problem-solving. Only one among just know that it is correct because nothing is bothering them

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 57

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

anymore or they are just confident that the answer is correct. only one or 4.35% responded to some selected items such as
Others just wait for the result if they are correct or not. I underline important words in the word problem, I write down
Table 8 shows the frequency and percent distribution of cognitive with my own words what I already knew, I have some idea or
strategy of regulation used by the student teachers in solving estimates of the possible outcomes, I select relevant steps to
mathematical problem-solving. The table reveals that almost all solve the problem, and two student teachers responded that they
of student teachers responded sometimes true of me until always never underline important words in the word problem. Still, the
or almost true of me while few or almost nobody responded majority responded that if not always, at least sometimes or
never or only rarely true in me. Thus, this shows that student even half of the time they used the other strategies presented in
teachers used their metacognitive strategies self-regulation in the table. Thus, this shows that student teachers use their other
solving mathematical problems. strategies of prediction/orientation.
1- never 1- never
3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always 3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always
or only 2- some- or only 2- some-
Metacognitive me about ly true of or almost Metacognitive me about ly true of or almost
rarely times true rarely times true
Strategies half the me always Strategies half the me always
true in of me true in of me
time true of me time true of me
me me
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % f % f % f %
I will go over to find I underline important
4
out where the prob- 0 0 3 13.04 12 52.17 8 34.78 0 0 words in the word 2 8.70 1 4.35 10 43.48 6 26.09 17.39
lem is. problem
I set up my own I select the relevant
target and follow the 0 0 5 21.74 6 26.09 12 52.17 0 0 information needed 0 0 3 13.04 8 21.74 9 39.13 3 13.04
agenda I make. to solve the problem
I reorganize and I read the task again
clarify the confused 1 4.35 5 21.74 6 26.09 7 30.43 4 17.39 to comprehend it 0 0 3 13.04 5 21.74 7 30.43 8 21.74
points after class. better
I check my answer I write down with
again after I finish the 0 0 2 8.70 9 39.13 7 30.43 5 21.74 my own words what 1 4.35 6 26.09 7 30.43 6 26.09 3 13.04
question. I already knew
I list related formula I put the information
0 0 3 13.04 10 43.48 8 21.74 2 8.70
first. needed to solve the 0 0 1 4.35 10 43.48 9 39.13 3 13.04
When I make the problem together
wrong math answers, I write down with my
I will clarify whether own words what was 1 4.35 5 21.74 9 39.13 4 17.39 4 17.39
0 0 6 26.09 7 30.43 6 26.09 4 17.39
this conceptual asked for
mistake or miscalcu- I reflect on the works
lation. carefully and slowly
0 0 3 13.04 7 30.43 12 52.17 1 4.35
I am correct in my on difficult exercises
0 0 6 26.09 11 47.83 6 26.09 0 0
calculations and fast on easy parts
I check my calcula- I have some ideas or
tions by calculating 0 0 7 30.43 6 26.09 7 30.43 3 13.04 estimates of the pos- 1 4.35 3 13.04 10 43.48 9 39.13 0 0
again sible outcome
I check the answer I select relevant steps
1 4.35 5 21.74 7 30.43 9 39.13 1 4.35
with the estimated 0 0 3 13.04 13 56.52 7 30.43 0 0 to solve the problem
outcome I make a drawing
0 0 2 8.70 7 30.43 10 43.48 4 17.39
I reflect on what went related to the problem
well and how the 0 0 7 30.43 7 30.43 6 26.09 3 13.04
tasks were solved
Table 9: Frequency and percent distribution of prediction/
orientation used by the student teachers in solving mathematical
Table 8: Frequency and percent distribution of the metacognitive
problems
strategies of self-regulation used by the student teachers in solving
mathematical problems Planning
Other Strategies Student teachers actually planned before solving the given
Other strategies were also revealed in this study such as problem. This was shown through the act of underlining or
prediction/orientation, planning, monitoring, and evaluating. selecting important details, calculating or estimating outcome
These strategies were actually overlapping cognitive and and others. These actions were also classified as elaboration and
metacognitive strategies discussed as classified by the action critical thinking respectively.
undertaken by student teachers as a part of the process of solving In addition, Table 10 shows the frequency and percent
mathematical problems. distribution of planning used by the student teachers in solving
mathematical problem-solving. The table reveals that all of the
Prediction/Orientation
student teachers responded sometimes true of me until always
Prediction/orientation was revealed by the student teachers or almost true of me while few or almost nobody responded
by analyzing the problem, again and again, underlining and never or only rarely true in me. Thus, this shows that student
selecting important details in the problem, drawing of the teachers used their cognitive strategies of planning in solving
problem statement and having estimated outcomes which were mathematical problems.
categorized as rehearsal, elaboration, organization and critical
thinking respectively. Prediction/orientation is shown through
skipping difficult items and returning after solving the easy
problems.
Moreover, Table 9 shows the frequency and percent distribution
of prediction/orientation used by the student teachers in solving
mathematical problem-solving. The table reveals that only
one, two or nobody responded that they never used the other
strategies presented to the student teachers. It also shows that

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 58

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

1- never 1- never
3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always 3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always
or only 2- some- or only 2- some-
me about ly true of or almost me about ly true of or almost
Other Strategies rarely times true Other Strategies rarely times true
half the me always half the me always true
true in of me true in of me
time true of me time of me
me me
f % f % f % f % f % f % f % f % f % f %
I select relevant num- I adhere to the
bers/data to solve the 0 0 2 8.70 6 26.09 10 43.48 5 21.74 plan systemati- 0 0 2 8.70 10 43.48 10 43.48 1 4.35
problem cally
I select the calcula- I am correct in
1 4.35 5 21.74 11 47.83 6 26.09 0 0
tions that will be my calculations
needed to solve I make correct
0 0 3 13.04 11 47.83 3 13.04 6 26.09 0 0 3 13.04 10 43.48 9 39.13 1 4.35
the problem and to use of units
estimate the possible
I make notes
outcome
related to the 0 0 6 26.09 9 39.13 7 30.43 1 4.35
I select relevant problem
materials to solve the 0 0 1 4.35 14 60.87 5 21.74 3 13.04
I orderly take
problem.
note of problem- 0 0 4 17.39 11 47.83 5 21.74 3 13.04
I take time to design solving steps
an action plan before 0 0 4 17.39 6 26.09 9 39.13 4 17.39
I do not forget
actually calculating
problem-solving 0 0 7 30.43 12 52.17 4 17.39 0 0
Table 10: Frequency and percent distribution of planning used by steps
the student teachers in solving mathematical problems I follow the
sequences of
0 0 5 21.74 13 56.52 5 21.74 0 0
problem-solving
Monitoring steps orderly
I act according to
Through undergoing to the process, the student teachers strictly the plan
0 0 5 21.74 13 56.52 5 21.74 0 0

follow the whole step-by-step process. This is through solving I monitor the on-
repeatedly and remembering if they have encountered similar going problem-
solving process 0 0 4 17.39 10 43.48 9 39.13 0 0
problems before. These were also classified as rehearsal. and change plan
However, the student teachers also stated during the interview if necessary
I check my calcu-
that they monitor their work to check progress, comprehension, lation calculating 0 0 7 30.43 6 26.09 7 30.43 3 13.04
and production. again
In addition, Table 11 shows the frequency and percent I check the
answer with the
distribution of monitoring used by the student teachers in solving estimated out-
0 0 3 13.04 13 56.52 7 30.43 0 0
mathematical problem-solving. The table reveals that only one come
responded never or rarely true of me in the item, I am correct in I reflect on the
answer and only
the calculation in using other strategies presented to the student if all is checked
0 0 4 17.39 11 47.83 8 21.74 0 0
teachers. It also shows that the student teachers sometimes used giving a clear,
or always/almost used almost all of the other strategies showing exact and precise
answer
monitoring presented to them. Thus, this shows that student
Table 11: Frequency and percent distribution of monitoring used
teachers used monitoring in solving mathematical problems. by the student teachers in solving mathematical problems
Evaluation 1- never
3- true of 4-frequent- 5- always
or only 2- some-
me about ly true of or almost
The student teachers who use metacognitive strategies such as Other Strategies rarely times true
half the me always
organization, critical thinking, and elaboration also assess how true in of me
time true of me
me
well they accomplished their task of solving and how well they f % f % f % f % f %
used learning strategies like making connections between parts I summarize the
of the problem; relating the problem in a sample in daily life and answer and reflect 0 0 6 26.09 9 39.13 7 30.43 1 4.35
on the answer
asking one’s self if the answer makes sense; asking one’s self
I reflect on what
some questions or talking to one’s self; and checking answer went well and how 0 0 7 30.43 7 30.43 6 26.09 3 13.04
respectively. These allow them to decide how effective the the tasks were solved
strategies were and to identify changes that they will make next I draw a conclusion
1 4.35 5 21.74 10 43.48 4 17.39 3 13.04
referring to the task
time. I relate a future
0 0 5 21.74 8 21.74 10 43.48 0 0
In addition, Table 12 shows the frequency and percent problems
distribution of evaluation used by the student teachers in solving I relate the given
problem to other 0 0 0 0 7 30.43 14 60.87 2 8.70
mathematical problem-solving. The table reveals that almost all problems
used evaluation in solving mathematical problem solving except Table 12: Frequency and percent distribution of evaluation used by
for the item on drawing a conclusion referring to the task. the student teachers in solving mathematical problems

Discussion
The student teachers’ response to the questionnaire reveals that
they used cognitive, metacognitive, other strategies for solving
problems in mathematics. This was similar to the metacognitive
strategy knowledge used in constructing a framework of
metacognitive strategy knowledge of Gurat and Medula (2016)
supported by Liu and Lin (2010) in their Mathematics Learning
Strategies Scale. These strategies were also similar to the
metacognitive and cognitive strategies found by Akyol, Sungur,
and Tekkaya (2010) in science class. Other strategies such as

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 59

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

prediction/orientation, planning, monitoring, and evaluation prediction/orientation, planning, monitoring, and evaluating.
was also similar to Brown’s (1978) four types of skills. Three These strategies overlap with the cognitive and metacognitive
kinds of cognitive strategies revealed were rehearsal, elaboration, strategies. Prediction/orientation refers to analyzing the
and organization. These strategies were the same as the three problem, again and again, underlining and selecting important
of the five learning strategies described by Simsek (2006) as details in the problem, drawing of the problem statement and
cited by Simsek and Balaban (2010). The rehearsal refers to having estimated outcomes which were categorized as rehearsal,
the strategies such as rereading the problem, solving problems elaboration, organization and critical thinking respectively.
repeatedly and recalling past lessons to better understand the Planning refers to the act of underlining or selecting important
problem before trying to solve it. Student teachers took time details, calculating or estimating outcome and others. These
in analyzing repeatedly which depends on the difficulty of the actions were also classified as elaboration and critical thinking
problem. This is similar to the comprehension monitoring of respectively. Monitoring refers to the systematic process of
Schurter (2002) where readers of a mathematical problem must solving while solving repeatedly and remembering if they have
be able to comprehend the problem. However, some student encountered similar problems before. These were classified as
teachers do not repeat solving the problem whenever they were rehearsal and were similar to the strategy of analogy of Novotná,
given limited time. When student teachers were given parallel et al. (2014). Solvers also checked progress, comprehension,
problems they repeatedly solved the problem using the same and production. Lastly, evaluation refers to the assessment of
formula/method or they recalled the past lesson and applied accomplishment and decision on the effectiveness of strategies
the same method for attacking the problem. Another cognitive used.
strategy was elaboration. Elaboration was shown through The findings revealed that student teachers are applying the
underlining and selecting important details such as words and variety of problem-solving strategies in mathematics. Despite
given in the problem and asking own self-questions related to the strategies used, the result of the students in the mathematics
solving. Alternatives were also used by student teachers such as problem set test did not show favorable scores even if the
listing or singling out the important details or what they cannot students obtained a grade of passing rating (77 to 97) in their
understand. Student teachers asked themselves to identify if Problem-Solving subject except for one student who incurred an
the given is connected with what is asked about the problem. incomplete (INC) mark. The strategies used by student teachers
Some of them asked themselves in their mind and others talked and their grades in Problem Solving subject suggest that these
to themselves regarding the steps, if their answer was right or strategies are a contributory factor on the passing grades of the
wrong, how they understood the problem or how they analyzed student teachers. This corroborates the result of the studies of
the problem. Lastly, the organization was also shown by making Akyol, Sunur and Tekkaya (2010); and Simsek and Balaban
connections between parts of the problem, making a drawing (2010) on the significant contribution of metacognitive and
of the problem statement, and breaking down the problem into cognitive strategies to students’ achievement. However, when
pieces, making simple charts/tables to better organize what is strategies are related to the scores in the given mathematics
asked in the problem. Problem solvers relate parts of the problem problem set, it contradicts the result of the studies of Akyol,
in order to decide which of the values in the given were needed Sunur and Tekkaya (2010); and Simyek and Balaban (2010).
or not. If a solver failed to connect the given, he might fail to get
the correct answer, especially that some problems were tricky
Conclusion
that missing numbers are needed to be solved first before solving The problem-solving strategies among student teachers
for what was asked in the problem. Through this, the problem officially enrolled in the Problem-Solving subject are cognitive,
solver may decide what strategy/formula/method/steps should metacognitive and other strategies. Cognitive strategies used
fit the question. Moreover, making a  drawing of the problem in problem-solving are rehearsal, elaboration, and organization
statement was also evident especially if the given problem Metacognitive strategies involved in problem-solving are critical
requires illustration before one can solve it. Drawing or making thinking and self-regulation and other strategies involved are
representation was one of the problem strategies of Hoon, Kee planning, monitoring, and evaluation. These strategies can be
and Singh (2013) in learning mathematics and the solution taught by the student teachers for their future students. It may
drawing strategy and use of graphs of functions of Novotná, also help their future students succeed in solving math problems
et al. (2014). Furthermore, the study Krawec et al. (2012) used by student teachers’ prior knowledge and skills in strategies. The
the same term, cognitive strategy for improving math problem identified strategies could also be considered in making problem
solving of middle school students with learning disabilities. sets for the students for the improvement of the students. Future
However, their cognitive strategy was an intervention that researchers can work on identifying the strategies that lead to
motivated students to use several problem-solving strategies. correct answers and incorrect answers could be conducted to
Two types of metacognitive strategies were critical thinking and better understand how strategies in solving affect the students in
self- regulation. The critical thinking among student teachers understanding and answering mathematics problems. Since the
was shown through having estimated outcome, relating problems result of this study suggests a positive influence of the strategies
in daily life, selecting or choosing only important numbers or on the academic performance of the students, a more in-depth
details in a problem and asking one’s self if the answer makes study using linear regression or correlations may be conducted
sense. Problem solvers may or may not have estimated outcome to validate the result. They may also consider other factors that
depending on the depth of understanding of the problem. Some might affect students in solving mathematics problems such as
problems may not require the solution because it can be solved student’s attitudes, basic arithmetic skills, and retention to find
by relating the problem in real life. This strategy was similar to the possible reason of the low scores of the student teachers
the concept of Goldman and Booker (2009) who used everyday when given mathematics problem set in different areas of math.
practices in mathematics. In terms of self – regulation, student
teachers checked their own answer. Some know that their answer
Acknowledgment
was correct and others just wait for the result. The author thanks Dr. Cesar T. Medula, Jr. her thesis adviser;
Other strategies were also revealed in this study such as Dr. Dominga C. Valtoribio, Dean of School of Graduate Studies,

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 60

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

and to the distinguished panel members, namely: Dr. Moises Responsibility in Education and Science, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 1-6.
Alexander T. Asuncion, Mrs. Analyn A. Guevara and Mr. Jay-ar https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2013.070101
Castriciones for their time, patience guidance, direction, interest Polya, G. (1988) ‘How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical
and encouragements in the completion of this research. method’, (2nd ed.), Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Reiss, K. and Renkl, A. (2002) ‘Learning to prove: The idea of
References heuristic examples’, Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik
Akyol, G., Sungur, S. and Tekkaya, C. (2010) ‘The contribution (ZDM), Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 29-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/
of cognitive and metacognitive strategy use to students‘ science BF02655690
achievement’, Educational Research and Evaluation, Vol. 16, Reys, E, Lindquist, Lambdin D.V., Smith, N.L. and Suydam,
No. 1, pp. 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803611003672348 M.N. (2001) ‘Helping children learn mathematics’, (6th ed.),
Brown, A.L. (1978) ‘Knowing when, where, and how to John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York.
remember: A problem of metacognition’, In Glaser, R. (ed) Schoen, H.L. and Charles, R. I. (2003) ‘Teaching mathematics
Advances in Instructional Psychology, Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: through problem solving’, National Council of Teachers of
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, [Online], Available: http://www. Mathematics (NCTM) catalog.
eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED146562.pdf [7 Jun 2011]. Schoenfeld, A. (1992) ‘Learning to think mathematically:
Carson, J. (2007) ‘A problem with problem-solving: teaching Problem-solving, metacognition, and sense making in
thinking without teaching knowledge’, The Mathematics mathematics’, In D.A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of Research on
Educator, Vol. 17, No. 2, pp. 7–14. Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 165–197). MacMillan,
Cockcroft, W. (1982) Mathematics counts. Report of the New York.
committee of inquiry into the teaching of mathematics in schools, Schurter, W. (2002) ‘Comprehension monitoring: an aid to
London: Her Majesty‘s Stationery Office, (ED.), [Online], mathematical problem solving’, Journal of Developmental
Available: http://www.educationengland.org.uk/documents/ Education, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 22-33.
cockcroft/ [10 Jul 2011]. Simsek, A. and Balaban, J. (2010) ‘Learning strategies of
Dendane, A. (2009) ‘Skills needed for mathematical problem successful and unsuccessful university students’, Contemporary
solving’, [Online], Available: http://www.analyzemath.com/ Educational Technology, Vol. 1. No. 1, pp. 36-45.
math_problems/paper_7.html [3 Apr 2011]. Simsek, A. (2006) ‘Bilissel stratejilerin ogretimi [Teaching
Dewey, J. (1933). ‘How we think’, Boston: D.C. Heath. cognitive strategies]’, In A. Simsek (Ed.), Icerik turlerine dayali
Glaser, B.G., and Strauss, A.L. (1967) ‘The discovery of ogretim (pp.181-208). Ankara: Nobel.
grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research’, Chicago: Stacey, K. (2005) ‘The place of problem solving in
Aldine. contemporary mathematics curriculum documents’, The
Goldman, S. and Booker, A. (2009) ‘Making math a definition Journal of Mathematical Behavior, Vol. 24, pp. 341. https://doi.
of the situation: Families as sites for mathematical practices’, org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2005.09.004
Anthropology and Education Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 369- Stanic, G. and Kilpatrick, J. (1989) ‘Historical Perspective on
387. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1492.2009.01057.x Problem Solving in the Mathematics Curriculum’, In R. Charles
Gurat, M. and Medula, C. Jr. (2016) ‘Metacognitive strategy and E. Silver (Eds.), The teaching and assessing of mathematical
knowledge use through mathematical problem solving problem solving (pp. 1-22), Reston, VA: National Council of
amongst student teachers’, American Journal of Educational Teachers of Mathematics.
Research, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 170-189. https://doi.org/10.12691/ Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1998) ‘Basics of Qualitative
education-4-2-5 Research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques’, (2nd
Halmos, P. (1980) ‘The heart of mathematics’, American ed.). London: Sage.
Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 87, No. 7, pp. 519-524. https://doi. Wilson J., Fernandez M. and Hadaway, N. (2011) ‘Mathematical
org/10.2307/2321415 problem solving’, [Online], Available: http://jwilson.coe.uga.
Hoon, T., Kee K. and Singh, P. (2013) ‘Learning mathematics edu/emt725/PSsyn/Pssyn.html [8 Aug 2011].
using heuristics approach’, Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, Vol. 90, pp. 862-869. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
sbspro.2013.07.162
Koichu, B., Berman, A. and Moore, M. (2004) ‘Promotion of
heuristic literacy in a regular mathematics classroom’, For the
Learning of Mathematics, Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 33-39.
Krawec, J., Huang, J., Montague, M., Kressler, B. and de Alba, A.
(2012) ‘The effects of cognitive strategy instruction on knowledge
of problem-solving processes of middle school students with
learning disabilities’, Learning Disability Quarterly, Vol. 36,
No. 2, pp. 80-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0731948712463368
Krulik, S., and Rudnick, J.A. (1987) ‘Problem solving:
A handbook for teachers’, (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Liu, E. and Lin C. (2010) ‘The survey study of mathematics
motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MMSLQ)
for grade 10-12 Taiwanese’, The Turkish Online Journal of
Educational Technology, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 221-223.
Novotná, J., Eisenmann, P., Přibyl, J., Ondrušová, J. and
Břehovský, J. (2014) ‘Problem solving in school mathematics
based on heuristic strategies’, Journal on Efficiency and

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 61

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

Appendix A  36 I put the information needed to solve the problem together

B. While solving the problem,
Mathematics Motivated Strategies Learning
I usually question what I heard or what I earn in math class,
Questionnaires 37
and judge if this information is persuasive.
Name:___________________________________ 38 I know how and when to add, subtract, multiply and divide.
This questionnaire has a number of questions about your 39
I used trial and error when I don’t know the formula of the
problem.
metacognitive strategy knowledge.
40 I have my own tactics in solving a problem
There are many different strategies that good problem solvers
In order to get the right answer, I have to follow the method
use to solve a problem. It depends on the strategy which you 41
step by step.
may and may not be aware of. 42
I combine my own known knowledge with the learning ma-
Rate yourself by checking the box which you think is the most terials.
I make simple charts and tables to help me in organizing my
appropriate to you. Numbers below correspond to the following 43
math class materials.
response. I am aware of what „borrowing“ means in subtracting num-
44
1- never or only rarely true in me bers.
2- sometimes true of me 45
I select the calculations that will be needed to solve the prob-
lem and estimating a possible outcome
3- true of me about half the time I visualize the scenario in the problem by drawing, hoping to
4- frequently true of me 46
see what is really asked about the problem.
5- always or almost always true of me 47
I know how to manipulate the general formula to arrive at
a certain formula on getting what is missing in the problem.
Do not spend a  long time on each item; your first reaction
48 I use arithmetic in solving the problem.
is probably the best one. Please answer each item. Do not
49 I know what “carrying” means is in addition and how to use it.
worry about projecting a good image. Your answers are I  use strategies which provide a  definite and certain way to
CONFIDENTIAL. 50
reach a goal.
Be honest as you are in choosing the answer. This is not an I try using different strategies like guess and check, diagrams
51 and others in solving problems trying to bring out the answer
evaluation. even if I am not sure.
No. Statement 1 2 3 4 5 52 I act according to the plan
A. Before I begin, solving a problem, 53 I am correct in my calculations
1 I analyze the problem again and again. I reflect on works carefully and slowly on difficult exercises
54
2 I mark-up the important lines for concepts organization. and fast on easy parts
3 I underline important words in the word problem 55 I make correct use of units
4 I select relevant numbers/data to solve the problem 56 I do not forget problem-solving steps
5 I adhere to the plan systematically 57 I follow the sequences of problem-solving steps orderly
6 I relate the given problem to other problems I monitor the on-going problem-solving process and change
58
plan if necessary
7 I take time to design an action plan before actually calculating
C. After I’ve arrived at the answer,
8 I have some idea or estimates the possible outcome
I do my best to link relative portions of math and other sub-
I  compare the difference between the teacher’s explanation 59
9 jects.
and textbook content.
60 I go over to find out where the problem is.
I ask questions to myself to make sure that I understand the
10 61 I summarize the answer and reflecting on the answer
math materials content
11 I repeatedly practice similar question types. I reflect on the answer and only if all is checked giving a clear,
62
exact and precise answer
12 I study the class notes and textbook again and again.
When I make the wrong math answers, I will clarify whether
I make the math class materials as a start point and try to self- 63
13 this is a conceptual mistake or miscalculation.
develop my own viewpoint to the topics.
64 I draw a conclusion referring to the task
14 I reorganize and clarify the confused points after class.
65 I reflect on what went well and how the tasks were solved
I try searching for patterns or symmetry in order to find the
15 correct answer like thinking of an easier problem than doing 66 I check my calculation calculating again
the given task. 67 I check my answer again after I finish the question.
16 I read the task again to comprehend it better 68 I use a real example to verify the math theory conclusion.
17 I select relevant materials to solve the problem. 69 I go over the formula and important concepts by myself.
18 I make notes related to the problem 70 I find out any sample in daily life to link with math materials.
19 I write down with own words what was asked for 71 I check the answer with the estimated outcome
20 I select the relevant information needed to solve the problem 72 I repeatedly practice similar question types.
21 I combine my own idea into the math class learning.
I memorize the important and key math formula to remind me
22
of the important part of my math class
I link the class notes to textbook examples to improve my un-
23
derstanding.
I read through the class notes and textbook and find out the
24
most important parts.
25 I read through the class notes and mark up the important parts.
26 I categorize the easy-hard type questions of every exam.
I  try to find out another efficient way to solve the problem
27
when I hear some idea or some solution.
28 I set up my own target and follow the agenda I make.
29 I list related formula first.
30 I divide the problems into parts or I solve in general.
31 I write down with own words what is already know
32 I select relevant steps to solve the problem
33 I orderly take note of problem-solving steps
34 I relate a future problems
35 I make a drawing related to the problem

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 62

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

Appendix B Algebra and English 1a and 75 of which are enrolled

Mathematical Problem Solving Set both in Physics and English 1a.
Arithmetic a. How many students are enrolled in College
1. After the first 57 games of the UAAP season, the Blue Algebra? (1 pt)
Eagles have a winning percent of 0.561 and the Green b. What is the total number of students enrolled
Archers have a winning percent of 0.491. How many in English 1a? (1 pt)
games behind the Blue Eagles are the Green Archers? c. The number of students enrolled in Physics 1
(1pt) is ___. (1 pt)
2. If x is divided by 9, the remainder is 5. What is the d. The total number of students enrolled in
remainder if 3x is divided by 9? ( 1 pt) Physics 1 and College Algebra is ____. (1 pt)
Algebra e. How many students are enrolled in Physics 1a
3. The principal in a school decided that the number of and College Algebra but not enrolled in both
scouts who could go camping would be greater than or subjects? (1 pt)
equal to 100 but less than or equal to 140. She further
wanted 2/7 to be from the fourth year scout and the rest
would come in equal number from first, second and
third year scouts.
a. What minimum number of scouts from each
year of the lower years could go? What is the
maximum number?(2 pts)
b. What is the minimum number of fourth year
scouts that could go? What is the maximum
number? (2 pts)
4. Gina and Bebs are practicing for a swimming
competition. They are swimming back and forth to
the swimming pool. Gina takes 2 minutes to swim the
length of the pool while Bebs takes 3 minutes. Probability
a. If they begin together at the same end of the 8. In how many ways can 3 boys and 3 girls be seated in
pool, after how many minutes will they start a row if:
together from the same end? (1 pt) a. They may sit anywhere? (1 pt)
b. If they begin at the opposite end of the pool, b. The girls and boys must alternate? (1 pt)
after how many minutes will they start Number Theory
together from the same end? (1 pt) 9. What is the maximum number of positive consecutive
Trigonometry integers that can be added together before the sum
5. If points P, Q and R are the centers of the circles, and exceeds 5 000? (1 pt)
the circles have radii of 3,4,5 respectively, what is the Puzzle Problem/ Logic
perimeter of the triangle PQR? (1 pt) 10. Three couples all like sport. Gill is a captain of the
Geometry soccer team, Bill is a star basketball player and Neil is
6. Most proofs are done by means of deduction: that is we a good swimmer. However, Neil’s wife cannot swim.
proceed from the premises, step by step, to a conclusion. Carolyn plays golf: Mylene, who by the way is Neil’s
As we go from one step to the next step, we must have sister, is a good dancer and Jennelyn, whose husband is
a reason for each step to show that it follows logically. very short, is an expert diver. Who is married to whom?
The following is an example of the proof that does not (3 pts)
obey the rules: even though the desertion appears to be
correct, it is not. Can you find the error? (1 pt)
Statements Reasons
1. a=b Given
2. a2=ab Multiplying Both sides by a
3. a2-b2 = ab – b2 Subtracting b2 from both sides
4. (a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b) Factoring both sides
5. (a+b)(a-b) = b(a-b)
Dividing both sides by a- b
a-b
6. (a +b ) = b Result of Step 5
7. b+b = b Substituting b for a
8. 2b = b Combines b + b
9. 2b/b = b/b Dividing both sides by b
10. 2=1 Result for step 9
Q.E.D.
Sets
7. Consider the given information on the right regarding
the number of enrolled students in three major subjects
such as College Algebra, Physics, and English 1a.
There are 350 students enrolled in these subjects. 65
of which are enrolled both in Physics and College
Algebra, 70 of which are enrolled both in College

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 63

 Guzman Gurat M. - ERIES Journal vol. 11 no. 3

Appendix C 8. Once you have arrived at an answer, what do you

Semi-Structured Interview Protocol usually do? How often? Why?
Introduction: a. Do you check your answer again?
Hi, I’m Ms. Melanie G. Gurat. I am so glad you have decided to i. Do you look back
participate in this study. The purpose of this project is to better ii. Do you substitute your answer with
understand your thinking in Mathematical Problem Solving. the formula/ recheck the algorithmic
And I want you to feel free in using the dialect in answering computations
each question. The answers that you will give in this interview iii. Verify it using other strategies?
will help a lot in my research so please do not hesitate to b. Do you ask yourself if your answer makes
answer them as honestly as you can. If I stop you from asking sense?
a question, I am not actually disagreeing but only trying to gain 9. How do you know you have solved the problem
a better understanding of the way you think about some things. correctly? What are your bases? What makes you think
I’ll be recording and videotaping this interview and transcribing it is already correct?
it, but the information you will share with me will be strictly 10. Any concluding statements regarding your experience
confidential. The answers you will give in this interview will in solving mathematical investigation problems
not affect your class evaluation. If there are questions that are a. During solving the problem, and you
not clear to you, feel free to ask me. Do you have any questions? encountered difficulty (describe the character
(There will be pre-interview questions to be asked to establish of difficulty)
rapport with the students and let them feel comfortable with the b. During solving the problem, you found
researcher.) a mistake and corrected it (describe the
Interview Questions: mistake)
1. What do you know about mathematical problem- Note: Probing questions will depend on students’ responses on
solving? each question above.
2. How do you solve mathematical problems?
Probing Question if in case the answer of the respondent is
more technical: What are the processes you usually use in
solving math problems?
a. If you are familiar with the problem? (you know
the formula)
b. The problem is new to you or you are not familiar?
3. What is the first thing you do?
a. Do you analyze the problem again and again?
b. Do you make connections between parts of the
problem? When? Why?
c. Do you underline and select important details such as
words and given numbers? Do you usually use all the
information in the problem to solve what is unknown?
When? Why?
4. How do you know you have understood the problem?
a. Do you master the problem by solving the
problem repeatedly?
b. Do you make a drawing of the problem
statement?
c. Do you have an estimated outcome?
d. Do you relate the problem in the sample in
daily life?
5. Do you also try using different strategies in solving
varied mathematical investigation problems?? What
are those strategies? Why do you prefer to use them?
6. How do you select a  strategy in solving a  specific
problem?
a. Do you try to remember whether you had
worked on the problem similar to this before?
b. Do you ask yourself other questions to
understand the problem? What are those
questions? Why do you ask such questions?
Do you usually ask questions or talk to
yourself throughout the problem-solving
process?
c. Do you break down the problem into pieces,
make simple charts/tables to better organize
what is asked in the problem?
7. Do you usually use all the information in the problem
to solve what is unknown? Why?

Printed ISSN: 2336-2375 64