Pedagogical Research

2023, 8(1), em0151

e-ISSN: 2468-4929
https://www.pedagogicalresearch.com Research Article OPEN ACCESS

Investigation of the relationship between problem-solving

achievement and perceptions of students
Ayten Pinar Bal 1* , Merve Buse Or 2

1
Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Faculty of Education, Cukurova University, Adana, TURKEY
2
Social Sciences Institute, Cukurova University, Adana, TURKEY
*Corresponding Author: [email protected]

Citation: Bal, A. P., & Or, M. B. (2023). Investigation of the relationship between problem-solving achievement and perceptions of students.
Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0151. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/12745

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Received: 26 Oct. 2021 This study examined the relationship between secondary school students’ problem-solving success and
Accepted: 16 Oct. 2022 perceptions using a relational survey model. This study investigated 378 students (212 girls and 166 boys) in the
sixth, seventh, and eighth grades between 11 and 14 years old using the convenience sampling method. The
problem-solving inventory for children, routine and non-routine problem tests, and problem evaluation rubric
were used for data collection. Descriptive and inferential analyzes were utilized. The results indicated that
students tended to avoid the problem-solving process. Variables of trust, self-control, and avoidance regarding
problem-solving perceptions significantly predicted students’ success in solving routine and non-routine
problems.

Keywords: problem-solving perception, routine problem, non-routine problem, secondary school students,
problem-solving achievement

INTRODUCTION

Recent changes in economic, social, technological, and scientific fields affect the needs of individuals and problems they face.
In order for curriculum to adapt to modern developments, it should enable individuals to cope with complex problems
encountered in daily life, think critically, analyze events, and have mathematical skills. Mathematical skills are not just arithmetic
four-operation skills, but problem-solving activities that are modeled on real-life situations. It improves the thinking, discussion,
and reasoning skills of the problem-solver. These problems can be expressed as a situation that a person encounters, which
requires a solution that is not immediately known. Schoenfeld (1992) defined a problem as a situation where the answer must be
found or is confusing or where the solution is not easily found. Adair (2007) expressed it as a situation that is thrown in front of
people, which creates an obstacle. Fan and Zhu (2000) defined a problem as a situation that requires a solution regardless of the
availability of the problem solver’s existing knowledge. Krulik and Rudnick (1989) defined the problem as a quantitative or other
form of situation faced by a person or group, requiring a solution that cannot be seen clearly. Fülöp (2015, 2021) stated that the
problem changes based on the person assigned the task and emphasized that the person should be willing to solve the problem.
As such, particularly in mathematics education, students are expected to make sense of mathematical algorithms and solve four
operations problems as well as associate this information with daily life based on available data, analyze, make inferences, and
gain advanced thinking skills.
Anderson (2009) defined problem-solving as an important life skill that covers various processes, such as analyzing,
interpreting, predicting, evaluating, and reasoning. Problem-solving is a complex process that includes cognitive skills as well as
affective and behavioral characteristics (Frey et al., 2000). In this process, the individual’s difficulties and obstacles consist of
complex stages that must be overcome (Heppner, 2008). Therefore, including non-routine problems that students can use in daily
life is crucial, allowing them to develop creative and critical thinking skills, rather than procedures solved with standard rules and
formulas (Lee et al., 2014). Through the process of problem-solving, students learn to solve a problem systematically and reveal
how they think while solving it (Han & Kim, 2020).
Research on problem-solving generally classifies problems as routine and non-routine (Anderson, 2009; Lee & Kim, 2005).
Routine problems are situations that require the application of a learned formula to a new situation that can be solved with a
certain algorithm in mathematics textbooks, which enables students to develop four operations skills (Polya, 2004). Non-routine
problems are unstructured, with complex questions that cannot be solved with a specific algorithm (Apostol, 2017; Elia et al., 2009;
Evans et al., 2020). Non-routine problems are challenging for students as they require the use of many metacognitive skills, such
as organizing existing knowledge with data in the problem, establishing appropriate hypotheses, and interpreting problems. Many

Copyright © 2023 by Author/s and Licensed by Modestum. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits
unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
2/7 Bal & Or / Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0151

researchers argue that non-routine problems are more effective in developing and evaluating students’ problem-solving skills
(Polya, 1981; Lee et al., 2014). Since there are various problems in daily life, students should be provided with many types of
problems, enriching student thinking, reasoning, relating to real life (Temiz & Ev Cimen, 2017).
The individual’s perception of their problem-solving performance plays a significant role. As such, an individual’s problem-
solving performance depends on their prior knowledge, experience, education, and environmental factors, making it a complex
process (Heppner et al., 2004; Zeidner & Endler, 1996). Individual perception influences thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in
problem-solving (Larson et al., 1993). An individual’s belief or judgment about performance in the problem-solving process is
defined as problem-solving skill perception (Kaplan et al., 2016). In addition, it has been observed that individuals who perceive
their problem-solving skills as high have a high sense of self-confidence, are not overly anxious about the events they encounter,
and approach the problem cautiously to derive an effective solution (Heppner et al., 2004; Rosenberg, 1989).
Individuals with high problem-solving perception tend to be more successful than others in coping with the problems they
encounter. In other words, individuals who exhibit effective problem-solving are flexible and develop effective methods to solve
problems and achieve their goals (Heppner et al., 2004). In addition, individuals who perceive themselves as good at problem-
solving spend more time on problem-solving than others, engage more, and develop thoughts appropriate for the task (Serin et
al., 2010). According to Heppner et al. (2004), individuals with a high perception of problem-solving are psychologically and
physically healthier and feel safe and successful, while individuals with a low perception of problem-solving tend to be reluctant,
anxious, and insecure in the face of the problems. Heppner and Petersen (1982) emphasized that problem-solving perceptions
they observe in individuals should be handled in the dimensions of trust, approach-avoidance, and personal control. The trust
dimension shows the individual’s belief that they can solve a problem when faced with it. Individuals who do not rely on problem-
solving skills spend less time focusing on the task and cannot develop appropriate ideas (Heppner & Petersen, 1982). This
increases anxiety further, making the individual unable to solve the problems they encounter effectively (Jerath et al., 1993).
On the other hand, self-confident individuals have high self-efficacy and positive emotions when solving problems (Bandura,
1997; Betoret & Artiga, 2010; Karademas & Kalantzi-Azizi, 2004; Morales-Rodríguez & Pérez-Mármol, 2019; Weiten et al., 2018). The
second dimension, approach-avoidance, is related to the individual’s tendency to stay near or far from problem-solving activities.
Individuals who feel confident in their ability to solve the problem engage in these activities, using effort and time (Betoret & Artiga,
2010; Heppner, 2008; Larson et al., 1994; Stephanou & Oikonomou, 2018). Finally, the personal control dimension refers to the
individual’s ability to control their emotions and behaviors during the problem-solving process. Individuals are more successful
academically if they have positive evaluations based on a sense of trust and personal control in the problem-solving process
(Betoret & Artiga, 2010).
Studies on student perceptions of problem-solving generally include perception levels and metacognitive skills (Bakioglu et
al., 2015; Kaplan et al., 2016; Karakelle, 2012; Kozikoglu, 2019; Ozcakir Sumen & Calisici, 2016), intelligence (Karakelle, 2012),
academic self-efficacy (Kozikoglu, 2019), functional and scientific literacy (Ozenc & Carkit, 2021), automatic thinking and decision-
making styles (Tezel & Tezgoren, 2019), assistance in the learning process (Koc, 2014), thinking styles (Gokmen, 2019), and general
academic achievement (Alci, 2011; Alci et al., 2008; Berkant & Eren, 2013; Biber & Kutluca, 2013). However, research examining the
relationship between problem-solving success and problem-solving perception is scarce. Ceylan (2008), for instance, concluded
that there is a significant relationship between 6th grade students’ problem-solving perceptions and their success in solving
problems related to daily life. Biber and Kutluca (2013) found a significant difference between the students’ problem-solving
perceptions and their general academic achievement. However, Alci (2011) observed no significant relationship between problem-
solving perceptions and undergraduate graduation success. Similarly, Alci et al. (2008) found that students’ perceptions of
problem-solving did not make a significant difference in predicting mathematics achievement.
This study aimed to investigate the correlation between secondary school students’ problem-solving achievement and
perception. The following research questions were posed:
1. Is there a correlation between students’ routine and non-routine problem-solving achievement and problem-solving
perceptions?
2. Do students’ perceptions of problem-solving predict their achievement in routine and non-routine problem-solving?
METHOD
Research Model
This study utilized the relational survey model, a quantitative research model, to examine the relationship between students’
problem-solving success and perceptions. The relational survey model determines changes between two or more variables and
the degree of change (McMillan & Schumacher, 2014). Therefore, this model was used to examine the relationship between
students’ routine and non-routine problem-solving achievement and perceptions and predictive ability of these variables for
routine and non-routine problem-solving achievement.
Participants
This study examined 378 (212 girls and 166 boys) secondary school students belonging to the 2018-2019 academic year from
a large province in eastern Turkey, who were selected using the convenience sampling method. Convenience sampling provides
quick collection of information, utilizing easily accessible and suitable individuals at the time to form a sample (Fraenkel et al.,
2012; McMillan & Schumacher, 2014). Of the total, 32% (121) of the students were in the sixth grade, 32% (122) were in the seventh
grade, and 36% (135) were in the eighth grade. All students were between 11 and 14 years old.
 Bal & Or / Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0151 3/7

This study was conducted with the approval of the Ministry of National Education and the ethical committee of the university
(#66109502, dated May 3rd, 2020) Informed consent was obtained from the parents of students who volunteered to participate in
the study.
Data Collection Tools
This study used the problem-solving inventory for children to evaluate perceptions, the routine and non-routine problem tests
to examine problem-solving, the problem evaluation rubric to evaluate problem solutions.
Problem-solving inventory for children
The problem-solving inventory for children, developed by Serin et al. (2010), was used to determine students’ perception levels
of their problem-solving skills. This inventory consists of 24 items marked on a 5-point Likert scale that evaluate problem-solving
skill in three categories: confidence, self-control, and avoidance. An example item in the confidence category was, “I believe that
I will solve problems I encounter by thinking about all the possible solutions.” An example item in the self-control category was,
“sometimes I do not stop and take time to deal with my problems, but just kind of carry on in a muddled manner.” An example
item in the avoidance category was, “I make up many excuses to from my work and responsibilities.” Cronbach’s alpha values of
the scale were .85 for the confidence category, .79 for the self-control category, and .66 for the avoidance category. The value for
the whole scale was .80 (Serin et al., 2010). Similarly, within the scope of this study’s data, Cronbach’s alpha values were .89 for
the confidence category, .78 for the self-control category, .75 for avoidance category, and .72 for the whole scale.
Routine and non-routine problem tests
The routine and non-routine problem tests consisted of six routine problems and six non-routine problems based on previous
studies (Cai, 2000; Verschaffel et al., 1994; Xin et al., 2007). It consisted of open-ended questions including numbers, fractions,
proportions, patterns, generalization, areas, and lengths. Routine problems focused on questions in textbooks that allow certain
operations, such as addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, which students frequently encounter in their daily lives.
Non-routine questions focused on including questions that are not frequently encountered and unfamiliar in textbooks, which
develop advanced thinking skills beyond the students’ operational skills, such as reorganizing data and classifying and seeing
relationships.
An example routine problem was, as follows:

A group of 10 people go on a three-day scout camp. Since there is no water at their destination, they have to take water
with them. The scout guidebook said that eight liters of water was enough for five people for one day. How much water
should a group of 10 people take with them? Show how you found the answer.

An example non-routine problem was, as follows:

A primary school decides to rent a bus and travel to Istanbul. There are a total of 1,128 people participating in the school
trip. If there are 36 seats on each bus, how many buses are needed in total? Describe your solution.

To test the validity of the problems, opinions were obtained from two math educators, and a linguist. A pilot test was
conducted with 64 students. As a result of the pilot application, it was concluded that the problem test was valid in terms of validity
and reliability.
Problem evaluation rubric
The routine and non-routine problem tests were evaluated using five-point scoring criteria (from zero to four) developed by
Cai (2000). Answers with correct and complete explanations and solutions were given four points. Answers were largely correct
explanations and solutions containing minor errors and uncertainties were given three points. Answers that indicated some
understanding but provided no solution or explanation of the problem were given two points. Answers indicating limited
knowledge of the subject were given one point. Incorrect answers or unanswered questions were given zero point.
Procedure
Descriptive and inferential analyzes were utilized. Descriptive and inferential analyzes were utilized. In the descriptive analysis,
the general tendencies of the participants about the situations of interest are explained (Creswell, 2012; Sezgin Selcuk, 2019). In
this context, the relationship between the scores the participants got from the problem-solving inventory and the scores they got
from the routine and non-routine problems was calculated with the Pearson correlation value. On the other hand, inferential
analysis is the situation where the researcher reaches conclusions and generalizations about the population based on the data
obtained from the sample (Creswell, 2012). In this context, it was analyzed with multiple regression how much the scores of the
students participating in the sample from the problem-solving inventory predicted their routine and non-routine problem-solving
achievement
Data Collection
The problem-solving inventory for children and the routine problem test were administered in one lesson, while the non-
routine problem test was administered in another lesson. The data were collected in two lesson hours (40 minutes each).
4/7 Bal & Or / Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0151

Table 1. Descriptive and relational analysis values between variables

Bivariate correlation Descriptive statistics
Variables
Routine Non-routine n Mean Standard deviation Skewness Kurtosis
Confidence .37** .31** 378 2.79 1.45 -.800 -.626
Self-control .38** .27* 378 2.78 1.44 -.837 -.178
Avoidance .38** .28** 378 3.49 1.55 -.232 .335
Note. **p<.01

Table 2. Multiple regression analysis results for predicting routine and non-routine problem-solving achievement
Variable B Standard error Beta t p Pearson r Partial R2
Confidence 5.361 1.033 5.192 .000
Self-control 1.031 .296 .198 3.486 .001 .379 .177
Routine Avoidance 1.073 .355 .187 3.027 .003 .387 .155
Total .888 .365 .154 2.431 .016 .382 .125
R=0.454; R2=0.206; F(3-374)=32.400; & p=0.00
Confidence 2.068 .742 2.788 .006
Self-control .733 .212 .206 3.451 .001 .318 .176
Non-routine Avoidance .362 .255 .092 1.421 .156 .272 .073
Total .461 .263 .117 1.756 .080 .289 .090
R=0.353; R2=0.124; F(3-374)=17.712; & p=0.00

Data Analysis
IBM SPSS 22 (IBM Corp, 2017) software was used to analyze the data. First, the dimensions of the problem-solving inventory
for children and the normal distribution of the data obtained from routine and non-routine problem tests were examined. In this
context, the normal distribution of the data was analyzed with skewness and kurtosis tests. Accordingly, the skewness value for
the problem-solving inventory for children was calculated as .332 and the kurtosis value as .870. The skewness value of the routine
and non-routine problem form was -.281, the kurtosis value was -.989. It is accepted that there is a normal distribution when the
skewness and kurtosis values are between -1.5 and 1.5 (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013). In this context, Pearson correlation analysis
was applied because the data showed normal distribution. On the other hand, multiple regression analysis was utilized to examine
results of the routine and non-routine problem tests and determine the predictive level of problem-solving perception.

RESULTS

The correlation coefficients and descriptive analysis between students’ routine and non-routine problem-solving
achievements and their perceptions of problem-solving are presented in Table 1.
The results indicated a positive, moderate, significant correlation between routine problem-solving achievement. In addition,
there was a positive, moderate, significant correlation between non-routine problem-solving achievement and the confidence
category of perception. However, the correlation with self-control and avoidance was positive, low, and significant (p<.01).
The results of multiple regression analysis for predicting the students’ routine and non-routine problem-solving achievement
are presented in Table 2.
The perception of problem-solving in the categories of confidence, self-control, and avoidance significantly predicted
achievement of solving routine problems (R=.454, R2=.206, F=32.400, p<.01=). Confidence, self-control, and avoidance variables
together explained approximately 20% of the total variance in routine problem-solving achievement. In addition, perception in
the categories of confidence, self-control, and avoidance together significantly predicted the achievement of non-routine
problems (R=.353, R2=124, F=17.712, p<.01). Confidence, self-control, and avoidance together explained approximately 12% of the
total variance in non-routine problem-solving achievement. However, the regression coefficients indicated that, among the
predictor variables, only confidence was significant and predictive of the achievement of solving non-routine problems.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This study examined the correlation between secondary school students’ problem-solving achievement and perceptions. At
the end of the study, it was found out that students generally use avoidance in the problem-solving process, and that confidence
and self-control in the problem-solving process were moderate. These results are in line with existing studies (Erdem & Genc, 2014;
Kaplan et al., 2016; Koc, 2014; Tezel & Tezgoren, 2015). Kaplan et al. (2016) found that secondary school students participated at
a moderate level in the dimensions of confidence, self-control, and avoidance in problem-solving. Similarly, Koc (2014)
determined that secondary school students demonstrated high avoidance of problem-solving and moderate confidence and self-
control.
There was a positive, moderate, significant correlation between students’ routine and non-routine problem-solving
achievement and categories of problem-solving perception (p<.01). In other words, it can be said that as students’ routine and
non-routine problem-solving achievement increases, they have more confidence in problem-solving and can control themselves
 Bal & Or / Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0151 5/7

better. In this regard, Heppner and Peterson (1982) reported that those who perceive themselves as successful in problem-solving
are more determined, consistent, motivated to solve problems, see problems as a part of life, and do not avoid finding solutions.
Similarly, Ceylan (2008) found a significant positive correlation between the problem-solving perceptions of sixth grade students
and their achievement in solving mathematics problems. The acquisition of problem-solving skills is extremely important in
mathematics lesson and in daily life, making it a basic skill that should be acquired by students. Students who are successful in
solving mathematical problems are likely to be confident and controlled in solving problems they encounter in daily life. Biber
and Kutluca (2013) revealed a significant relationship between students’ problem-solving perceptions and general academic
achievement. However, unlike this study and previous research, Alci (2011) concluded that there is no significant relationship
between the problem-solving perceptions of graduate students and their general academic achievement. Likewise, Berkant and
Eren (2013) concluded that there is no significant relationship between the general academic achievement and problem-solving
perceptions of undergraduate students in the department of elementary mathematics.
This study had some limitations. First, this study was limited to the relationship between students’ routine and non-routine
problem-solving success and problem-solving perceptions. Future studies should consider various variables, such as
metacognitive awareness, reading skill, belief in mathematics, self-efficacy, which are factors affecting problem-solving success.
In addition, this study was limited to secondary school students in a particular region, selected based on a homogeneous sampling
method. Comparisons should be made by examining the problem-solving perceptions of students at different grade levels.
Author contributions: All authors have sufficiently contributed to the study and agreed with the results and conclusions.
Funding: No funding source is reported for this study.
Ethical statement: The authors stated that the study was approved by the Social and Human Sciences Scientific Research and Publication
Ethics Committee of Cukurova University on 2 June, 2020 (Decision number: 6).
Declaration of interest: No conflict of interest is declared by authors.
Data sharing statement: Data supporting the findings and conclusions are available upon request from the corresponding author.

REFERENCES

Adair, J. (2007). Decision making & problem solving strategies. Kogan Page.
Alci, B. (2011). Relation between secondary school science and mathematics education students’ problem solving skills and their
undergraduate graduation points. Education Sciences, 6(1), 1227-1232.
Alci, B., Erden, M., & Baykal, A. (2008). Üniversite öğrencilerinin matematik başarıları ile algıladıkları problem çözme becerileri,
özyeterlik algıları, bilişüstü özdüzenleme stratejileri ve ÖSS sayısal puanları arasındaki açıklayıcı ve yordayıcı ilişkiler örüntüsü
[The explanatory and predictive relationship pattern between university students’ mathematics achievement and their
perceived problem solving skills, self-efficacy perceptions, metacognitive self-regulation strategies, and OSS numerical
scores]. Bogazici University Journal of Education, 25(2), 53-68.
Anderson, J. (2009). Mathematics curriculum development and the role of problem solving. In Proceedings of the The Australian
Curriculum Studies Association’s 2009 Biennial Conference (pp. 1-8).
Apostol, E. M. D. (2017). Problem solving heuristics on non-routine problems of college students. American Journal of Educational
Research, 5(3), 338-343. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-5-3-16
Bakioglu, B., Kucukaydin, M. A., Karamustafaoglu, O., Sagir, S. U., Akman, E., Ersanli, E., & Cakir, R. (2015). Investigation of
prospective teachers’ metacognitive awareness levels, problem solving skills and attitudes towards technology. Trakya
University Journal of Education, 5(1), 22-23.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co.
Berkant, H. G., & Eren, I. (2013). Investigating problem solving skills of students of primary school math teaching department in
terms of some variables. International Journal of Social Science, 6(3), 1021-1041. https://doi.org/10.9761/jasss_777
Betoret, F., & Artiga, A. (2010). Barriers perceived by teachers at work, coping strategies, self-efficacy, and burnout. The Spanish
Journal of Psychology, 13, 637-654. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1138741600002316
Biber, A. C., & Kutluca, A. Y. (2013). Investigating problem solving skill perceptions of students at different institutions in terms of
various variables. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi [Abant Izzet Baysal University Journal of the Faculty of
Education], 13(2), 276-288.
Cai, J. (2000). Mathematical thinking involved in U.S. and Chinese students’ solving of process-constrained and process-open
problems. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2(4), 309-340. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327833MTL0204_4
Ceylan, F. (2008). İlköğretim 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin günlük hayat problemlerini çözme envanteri puanları ile matematik problemlerini
çözme başarıları arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between primary school 6th grade students’ daily life problem solving
inventory scores and their success in solving mathematical problems] [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Gazi University.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson
Education.
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, 41, 605-618. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0184-6
6/7 Bal & Or / Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0151

Erdem, A. R., & Genc, G. (2014). High school students’ opinions of problem solving skills. Turkish Journal of Educational Studies,
1(2), 1-21.https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/download/article-file/402889
Evans, T., Thomas M. O. J., & Klymchuk, S. (2020). Non-routine problem solving through the lens of self-efficacy. Higher Education
Research & Development, 40(7), 1403-1420. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1818061
Fan, L. H., & Zhu, Y. (2000). Problem solving in Singapore secondary mathematics textbooks. The Mathematics Educator, 5(1), 117-
141.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill.
Frey, K. S., Hirschstein, M. K., & Guzzo, B. A. (2000). Second step: Preventing aggression by promoting social competence. Journal
of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 8(2), 102-112. https://doi.org/10.1177/106342660000800206
Fülöp, E. (2015). Teaching problem-solving strategies in mathematics. LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and
Technology Education, 3(1), 37- 54. https://doi.org/10.31129/lumat.v3i1.1050
Fülöp, E. (2021). Developing problem-solving abilities by learning problem solving strategies: An exploration of teaching
intervention in authentic mathematics classes. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(7), 1309-1326.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2020.1869070
Gokmen, S. U. (2019). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının düşünme stilleri, problem çözme algıları, yaratıcı düşünmeleri ve eleştirel
düşünme eğilimleri arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between pre-service science teachers’ thinking styles, problem solving
perceptions, creative thinking, and critical thinking dispositions]. [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Sakarya University.
Han, S., & Kim, H. M. (2020). Components of mathematical problem solving competence and mediation effects of instructional
strategies for mathematical modeling. Education and Science, 45(202), 93-111. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2020.7386
Heppner, P. P. (2008). Expanding the conceptualization and measurement of applied problem solving and coping: From stages to
dimensions to the almost forgotten cultural context. American Psychologist, 63(8), 805-816. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-
066X.63.8.805
Heppner, P. P., & Petersen, C. H. (1982). The development and implications of a personal problem-solving inventory. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 29, 66-75. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.29.1.66
Heppner, P. P., Witty T. E., & Dixon, W. A. (2004). Problem-solving appraisal and human adjustment: A review of 20 years of research
using the problem solving inventory. The Counseling Psychologist, 32, 344-428. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000003262793
IBM Corp. (2017). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows. IBM Corp.
Jerath, J. M., Hasija, S., & Malhotra, D. (1993). A study of state anxiety scores in a problem solving situation. Studia Psychologica,
35(2), 143-149.
Kaplan, A., Duran, M., & Bas, G. (2016). Examination with the structural equation modeling of the relationship between
mathematical metacognition awareness with skill perception of problem solving of secondary school students. Inonu
University Journal of the Faculty of Education, 17(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.17679/iuefd.17119785
Karademas, E. C., & Kalantzi-Azizi, A. (2004). The stress process, self-efficacy expectations, and psychological health. Personality
and Individual Differences, 37(2004), 1033-1043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2003.11.012
Karakelle, S. (2012). Interrelations between metacognitive awareness, perceived problem solving, intelligence and need for
cognition. Education and Science, 37(164), 237-251.
Koc, C. (2014). Perceptions of primary school students for problem solving skills and their help-seeking during learning process.
Kastamonu Education Journal, 23(2), 659-678.
Kozikoglu, I. (2019). Investigating critical thinking in prospective teachers: Metacognitive skills, problem solving skills and
academic self-efficacy. Journal of Social Studies Education Research, 10(2), 111-130.
Krulik, S., & Rudnick, J. A. (1989). Problem solving: A handbook for senior high school teachers. Allyn and Bacon.
Larson, L. M., Allen, S. J., Imao, R. A. K., & Pierse, W. C. (1993). Self‐perceived effective and ineffective problem solvers’ differential
views of their partners’ problem‐solving styles. Journal of Counseling & Development, 71(5), 528-538.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1993.tb02236.x
Larson, L. M., Toulouse, A. L., Ngumba, W. E., Fitzpatrick, L. A., & Heppner, P. P. (1994). The development and validation of coping
with career indecision. Journal of Career Assessment, 2, 91-110. https://doi.org/10.1177/106907279400200201
Lee, J.-E., & Kim, K.-T. (2005). Elementary school teacher candidates’ perception of good problems. IUMPST: The Journal, 1, 1-13.
Lee, N. H., Yeo, D. J. S., & Hong, S. E. (2014). A metacognitive-based instruction for primary four students to approach non-routine
mathematical word problems. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46(3), 465-480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0599-6
McMillan, J. W., & Schumacher, S. (2014). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry. Pearson.
Morales-Rodríguez, F. M, & Pérez-Mármol, J. M. (2019). The role of anxiety, coping strategies, and emotional intelligence on general
perceived self-efficacy in university students. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1689. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01689
Ozcakir Sumen, O., & Calisici, H. (2016). The relationships between preservice teachers’ mathematical literacy self efficacy beliefs,
metacognitive awareness and problem solving skills. Participatory Educational Research, 2, 11-19.
https://doi.org/10.17275/per.16.spi.2.2
Ozenc, M., & Carkit, C. (2021). The relationship between functional literacy and problem-solving skills: A study on 4th-grade
students. Participatory Educational Research, 8(3), 372-384. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.71.8.3
 Bal & Or / Pedagogical Research, 8(1), em0151 7/7

Polya, G. (1981). Mathematical discovery: On understanding, learning, and teaching problem solving. John Wiley & Sons.
Polya, G. (2004). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton University Press.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics.
In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the national council of teachers
of mathematics (pp. 334-370). Macmillan Library Reference.
Serin, O., Bulut Serin, N., & Saygili, G. (2010). Developing problem solving inventory for children at the level of primary education
(PSIC). Elementary Education Online, 9(2), 446-458.
Sezgin Selcuk, G. (2019). Tarama yöntemi [Scan method]. In H. Ozmen, & O. Karamustafaoglu (Eds.), Eğitimde araştırma yöntemleri
[Research methods in education]. Pegem Academy. https://doi.org/10.14527/9786052417867.07
Stephanou, G., & Oikonomou, A. (2018). Teacher emotions in primary and secondary education: Effects of self-efficacy and
collective-efficacy, and problem-solving appraisal as a moderating mechanism. Psychology, 9(4), 820-875.
https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.94053
Temiz, D., & Ev Cimen, E. (2017). Investigation of fifth grade students’ skills of solving different type of problems. Journal of
Research in Education and Teaching, 6(4), 297-310.
Tezel, O., & Tezgoren, I. (2019). Sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin bilimsel okuryazarlık düzeyleri ile problem çözme becerileri arasındaki
ilişkinin incelenmesi [Examination of the relationship between the scientific literacy levels of eighth grade students and their
problem solving skills]. ESTUDAM Journal of Education, 4(2), 68-84.
Verschaffel, L., De Corte. E., & Lasure, S. (1994). Realistic considerations in mathematical modeling of school arithmetic word
problems. Learning and Instruction, 4, 273-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90002-7
Weiten, W., Dunn, S. D., & Hammer, E. Y. (2018). Psychology applied to modern life adjustment in the 21st century. Cengage Learning.
Xin, Z., Lin, C., Zhang, L., & Yan, R. (2007). The performance of Chinese primary school students on realistic arithmetic word
problems. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23, 145-159. https://doi.org/10.1080/02667360701320853
Zeidner, M., & Endler, N. S. (1996). Handbook of coping: Theory, research, applications. John Wiley & Sons.