Scribd
Upload
4 views21 pages

MATH 11n Lesson 2.2 2.3

The document outlines POLYA's Problem-Solving Strategy, which includes understanding the problem, devising a plan, carrying out the plan, and looking back. It also discusses types of reasoning in mathematics, specifically inductive and deductive reasoning, highlighting their definitions and differences. The learning outcomes focus on analyzing problems and applying reasoning to justify mathematical statements.

Uploaded by

roniancris.caboboy
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
4 views21 pages

MATH 11n Lesson 2.2 2.3

The document outlines POLYA's Problem-Solving Strategy, which includes understanding the problem, devising a plan, carrying out the plan, and looking back. It also discusses types of reasoning in mathematics, specifically inductive and deductive reasoning, highlighting their definitions and differences. The learning outcomes focus on analyzing problems and applying reasoning to justify mathematical statements.

Uploaded by

roniancris.caboboy
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 21

MATH 11n

Lesson 2.2 POLYA’S Problem-Solving


Strategy
Donna V. Pagliawan
Learning Outcomes:

1. Enumerate and discuss POLYA’s Stage of Problem Solving


2. Solve problems involving patterns and recreational problems
following POLYA’s four steps
3. Organize one’s methods and approaches for proving and
solving problems
RECAP – Lesson 2.1 Problem
Solving &
Heuristics
1. Problem vs Exercise
2. Families of Problems
3. Types of Problems
4. Problem-solving strategies/Heuristics
POLYA’s Problem Solving Strategy

1. Understand the Problem


2. Devise a Plan
3. Carry out the Plan
4. Look back
1. Understand the Problem

• Do we comprehend all the words used in affirming the problem?


• What is ask for us to show?
• What are the data?
• What is the condition?
• Can we repeat the problem in our own arguments?
• Can we think of an image or diagram that might help us
comprehend the problem?
• Is there enough data to permit us to find an answer?
1. Understand the Problem

• A jet flies at an altitude of 52,800 ft. If it descends 6,500 ft and


then ascends 7,460 ft, at what altitude is the jet flying now?
• In an Algebra test, the highest grade was 42 points more than
the lowest grade. The sum of the two grades is 138. Find the
highest grade.
• The furniture in a classroom consists of tables and chairs. The
teacher is making a seating plan. If two students sit at each
table, eight students will be left without a place. If three
students sit at each table, four tables will be left empty. How
many students are there in the room?
2. Devise a Plan

• What is the connection between the data and the unknown?


• Have we gotten it before?
• Have we realized the same problem in a somewhat different
form?
• Do we know an associated problem?
• Do we know a proposition that could be valuable?
• What strategy could be used to solve the problem?
• Look at the unidentified!
3. Carry out the Plan

• Execute the chosen strategy for solving the problem


• Work carefully by checking each step
• Change strategies as soon as the solution does is no longer
working
4. Look back

• Can we check the outcome? Can we check the dispute?


• Can we originate from the solution inversely?
• Can we see it at a glimpse?
• Can we use the product, or the technique, for some other
problem?
MATH 11n
Lesson 2.3 Mathematical Reasoning
Donna V. Pagliawan
Learning Outcomes:

1. Analyze problems using different types of reasoning


2. Apply different types of reasoning to justify statements and
arguments made about mathematics and mathematical concepts
Types of Reasoning

1. Inductive Reasoning
2. Deductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning

It is the procedure of accomplishing a general assumption by


examining specific instances. When you examine a list of
numbers and predict the next number in the list according to
some pattern you have observed, you are using inductive
reasoning. The assumption from using the inductive reasoning is
called a conjecture since it may or may not be correct.
Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning is not used just to predict the next number in


a list. It is also used to make conclusions/conjectures about
specific observed patterns.

Ex. What is the sum of all numbers from 1 to 100?


Inductive Reasoning – Examples

1. Every sports car I have ever seen is red. Thus, all sports cars
are red.
2. The coin I drew from the bag is a 5-peso coin. Another 5-peso
coin is drawn from the bag. A third coin from the bag is again
a 5-peso coin. Therefore, all the coins in the bag are 5-peso
coins.
3. Observe that 1 + 1 = 2, 1 + 3 = 4, 3 + 5 = 8, 7 + 11 = 18. Thus,
the sum of two odd integers is always even.
Note:

When we use inductive reasoning, we have no guarantee that


our conclusion is correct. Just because a pattern is true for few
cases, it does not mean the pattern will continue. A statement is a
true statement provided that it is valid in all cases. If we can find
one case for which a statement is not valid, called a
counterexample, then it is a false statement.
Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning is the process of concluding by applying


general assumptions, procedures, or principles. Deductive
reasoning is an elementary form of valid reasoning. Deductive
reasoning, or deduction, starts with a universal statement or
theory and studies the opportunities to reach a specific, logical
conclusion. In mathematics, deductive reasoning makes uses of
definitions, axioms, theorems and rules and inference.
Deductive Reasoning

1. All men are mortal. Raymund is a man. Therefore, Raymund


is mortal.

Triangle ABC is congruent to triangle DEF. ∠𝐵 and ∠𝐸 are


2. Corresponding parts of congruent triangles are congruent.

corresponding angles. Thus ∠𝐵≅∠𝐸.


Deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning often move in
opposite directions. Where the former tends to go from general
premises to specific conclusions, the latter often goes the other
way-from specific examples to general conclusions. Deductive
reasoning implies logical certainty, while inductive reasoning
only gives us a reasonable probability.
Thank you!

You might also like