Problem Solving

• Problem
- requiring a solution
• Solving, root word “solve”
- To find a solution, explanation or answer. How?
- In using methods, ways, techniques, strategies, postulates, theorems, properties and other
basic foundations and conceptual background.
• Problem Solving is a process

Mathematical Reasoning

• Deductive Reasoning – general to specific

• Inductive Reasoning – specific to general

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

3 Basic Functions of Problem Solving

1. Seeking information
2. Generating new knowledge
3. Making decisions

Other functions of Problem Solving

Mathematical and Problem-Solving Skills focus on Scientific Literacy and Numeracy Skills, which are basic
to meaningful participation in community life and improving the quality of life of the people, the
community, and the country as a whole.

This is intended to develop the skills of the youth and adults that include the core competencies of
scientific literacy and numeracy. Integrated across scientific and numeracy literacy skills are the critical
functional competencies of openness to change, awareness of options, ability to make critical and
informed decisions, curiosity, inventiveness and creativity, scientific thinking, logical reasoning, spatial
intelligence, and future orientation. These competencies specifically seek to extend and refine learners’
critical and creative thinking processes, including the abilities to:

• organize new knowledge • apply the scientific process

• gather and analyze information • seek explanations for applying the scientific
• categorize things and ideas process
• make comparisons • support assertions with evidence
• infer principles from evidence • overcome obstacles and find a better way of
• critique one’s own thinking doing things
• evaluate options as a basis of decision • apply principles to draw conclusions
making • learn independently

Based on K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum about Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Skills

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

The Ultimate Goal of Problem Solving

The ultimate goal of problem solving is to develop individuals who are aware of their own thinking, able
to make critical and informed decisions, defend their ideas and evaluate the ideas of others, and are
persistent in striving for new ways to solve problems. Through the development of such critical thinking
and problem-solving skills, the learners will enhance their own personal and social effectiveness by way
of improving the quality of life.

Mathematical Reasoning refers to the ability to process the information using correct way of thinking:

• analyze problem situations

• construct logical arguments and/or statements

Note: Hypothesis is an assumption taken to be true for the purpose of arguments or investigations.

Also, (in science, particularly in scientific methods) hypothesis is a tentative conjecture explaining an
observation, phenomenon or scientific problem that can be tested by further

observation, investigation and/or experimentation

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Examples for Inductive Reasoning

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Examples for Inductive Reasoning and Deductive Reasoning

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Example for Inductive Reasoning

Counterexamples

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Counterexamples

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore
Deductive Reasoning

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

 Deductive Reasoning is commonly used in Geometry: Using Two-Way Column Proof

(Statement and Reason)

We already determine the types of reasoning of the following:

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore
Common Application of Problem Solving using Mathematical Reasoning

• Sudoku

Play Sudoku Now!

Sudoku is one of the most popular puzzle games of all time. The goal of Sudoku is to fill a 9×9 grid
with numbers so that each row, column and 3×3 section contain all of the digits between 1 and 9.
As a logic puzzle, Sudoku is also an excellent brain game. If you play Sudoku daily, you will soon
start to see improvements in your concentration and overall brain power.

About Sudoku
The popular Japanese puzzle game Sudoku is based on the logical placement of numbers. An
online game of logic, Sudoku doesn’t require any calculation nor special math skills; all that is
needed are brains and concentration.

How to play Sudoku

The goal of Sudoku is to fill in a 9×9 grid with digits so that each column, row, and 3×3 section
contain the numbers between 1 to 9. At the beginning of the game, the 9×9 grid will have some
of the squares filled in. Your job is to use logic to fill in the missing digits and complete the grid.

• KenKen Puzzle

KenKen and KenDoku are trademarked names for a style of arithmetic and logic puzzle invented
in 2004 by Japanese math teacher Tetsuya Miyamoto, who intended the puzzles to be an
instruction-free method of training the brain.

Rules for Playing KenKen

The numbers you use in a KenKen puzzle depends on the size of the puzzle grid you choose. A 4 x
4 grid (4 squares across, 4 squares down) means you use the numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4. In a 6 x 6 grid,
use the numbers 1 to 6. An 8x8 grid requires you use the numbers 1 to 8, and so on.
The numbers in each heavily outlined set of squares, called cages, must combine (in any order) to
produce the target number located in the top corner of that cage using the mathematic operation
indicated (+, -, ×, ÷).
The goal is to fill in all the squares so that each number is used in each row and column and no
numbers are repeated in any row or column.

Here's how you play:

1. Do not repeat a number in any row or column.
2. Cages with just one square should be filled in with the target number in the top corner.
3. A number can be repeated within a cage as long as it is not in the same row or column.

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

 • Logic Puzzles

- can be solved by using deductive reasoning and chart that enables us to display the given
information in a visual manner.

Solve a Logic Puzzle

Example: Each of four neighbors, Sean, Maria, Sarah and Brian, has a different occupation (editor, banker,
chef or dentist). From the following clues, determine the occupation of each neighbor.

1. Maria gets home from work after the banker but before the dentist.
2. Sarah, who is the last to get home from work, is not the editor.
3. The dentist and Sarah leave for work at the same time.
4. The banker lives next door to Brian.

Editor Banker Chef Dentist

Sean X3 (/) X3 X4
Maria (/) X1 X3 X1
Sarah X2 X2 (/) X3
Brian X3 X4 X3 (/)

Additional Meaning, Definition and Key Terms

Conjecture – a conclusion from “do thus so method”

• “do thus and so” method

– Egyptian’s and Babylonian’s approach
– It was performed over and over to solve similar problems
– An educated guess based on repeated observations of a particular pattern or process.
– A process of reaching a general conclusion (conjecture) by examining specific examples.

Proposition – a declarative statement that may expressed an idea.

Argument – the reason/s offered for or against something commonly referring to statements.

Premises – minor or major propositions or assertions that serves as bases of an argument

(assumption, rule, law)

Syllogism – an argument composed of two statements or premises and a conclusion

Conclusion – the last step in a reasoning process

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Single Premise and Conclusion

1. Today is Monday. (Premise)

Tomorrow is Tuesday. (Conclusion)

2. All doctors are men. (Premise)

My mother is a doctor. (Premise)
Therefore, my mother is a man. (Conclusion)
Note: Sometimes even an argument is valid but it doesn’t mean the conclusion is true.

General Case:

“In any right triangle, the sum of the squares of the legs is equal to the square of the
hypothenuse.”

Specific Case: Given: a=3, b=4

Problem: Find the value of the hypothenuse, c.

Solution for this case: Using Pythagorean Theorem

Note: “If all of the premises are TRUE, then the conclusion must also be TRUE.”

Polya’s Problem Solving

• Polya’s Problem Solving, involves 4 steps and named after George Polya (1887-1985)

Polya’s Problem Solving Strategy

1. Preparation: Understand the Problem

2. Thinking Time: Devise a Plan

3. Insight: Carry out the Plan

4. Verification: Review the Solution

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Examples

#1 The sum of two numbers is 30. The first number is twice as large as the second number. What are the
numbers?

1. Understand the problem

2. Devise a plan
We, let x – be the second number and 2x – first number (since its twice the second)

3. Carry out the plan:

2x + x = 30
3x = 30
x = 10
Thus, x=10 second number 2x = 20 first number

4. Verification:
We should check and review the solution
2x + x = 30 2(10) + 10 = 30 20 + 10 = 30

#2 An animal farmer has 37 chickens and goats in his farm. The total number of legs among them is 100.
Assuming each chicken has exactly two legs and each goat has exactly four legs. How many chickens and
goats are there?

Step 1 & 2: Let c – chickens, g – goats

Equations:

c + g = 37, the total number of animals

2c + 4g = 100, the total number of legs

Step 3: Use elimination method:

2c + 4g = 100 2c + 4g = 100

(c + g = 37 ) times 2 - 2c + 2g = 74

2g = 26

g = 13

Step 4: Use substitution:

c + g = 37

c + 13 = 37

c = 24

Therefore: 24 chickens, 13 goats

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore
The Importance and Research about Problem Solving

To emphasize the ultimate goal of problem solving is to develop individuals through the development of
such critical thinking and problem-solving skills, the learners will enhance their own personal and social
effectiveness by way of improving the quality of life.

According to Amy Magin Wong from Harvard Graduate School of Education that in order to solve math
problems accurately and efficiently, students need to learn multiple strategies as well as how to choose
among them.

A central claim of the current reform movement in mathematics education is that students benefit from
comparing and contrasting multiple solution methods. Cognitive science research supports the value of
using comparison and contrast to promote general learning: identifying similarities and differences in
multiple examples has proven to be a critical and fundamental pathway to flexible, transferable
knowledge.

In his current research, Harvard Graduate School of Education Associate Professor Jon Star, who is also a
former middle and high school math teacher, is examining the value of comparing, reflecting on, and
discussing multiple solution methods. In a series of experimental studies in middle school classrooms, Star
has found that comparing and contrasting solution methods — as opposed to studying one method at a
time — does in fact promote greater learning.

Star hypothesized that this approach would promote three critical components of mathematical
competence: procedural knowledge; procedural flexibility, the abilities to generate, recognize, and
evaluate multiple solution methods for the same problem; and conceptual knowledge, students' verbal
and nonverbal knowledge of algebra concepts, such as maintaining equivalence, and the meaning of
variables.

A useful description should acknowledge that problem solving is an activity requiring an individual (or
group) to engage in a variety of cognitive actions, each of which requires some knowledge and skill, and
some of which are not routine.

To be a successful problem solver, an individual must have ample relevant experience in learning how to
solve problems, strong content knowledge, proficiency in using a variety of representations and a solid
grasp of how to recognize and construct patterns of inference. Moreover, it recognizes the importance of
intuition in successful problem solving.

Focus on individuals rather than groups or whole classes. Throughout most of the history research in
mathematical problem solving (dating back about 50 years) the focus has been on the thinking processes
used by individuals as they solve problems or as they reflect back on their work solving problems. When
the goal of research is to characterize the thinking involved in a process like problem solving, a
microanalysis of individual performance seems appropriate. However, when our concerns are with
classroom instruction, we should give attention to groups and whole classes. To be sure, small groups can
serve as an appropriate environment for research on teaching problem solving, but the research on
problem-solving instruction cannot be limited to the study of small groups. In order for the field to move
forward, research on teaching problem solving needs to examine teaching and learning processes for
individuals, small groups, and whole classes.

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Figure 1. A model of complex mathematical activity

A Final, More Positive Note

I do not intend for my remarks to give the impression that I think mathematical problem solving research
has not amounted to much during the past 40 years or that current research efforts are misguided. Indeed,
quite the opposite is the case! Several important principles have slowly emerged from the research since
the early 1970s. I end this article by listing these principles without comment: each principle could serve
as the basis for an article or monograph. My hope is that this list, like much of the rest of my

article, will stimulate discussion among those who are interested in pursuing a research

agenda that includes problem solving at its core.

1. The prolonged engagement principle. In order for students to improve their ability to solve mathematics
problems, they must engage in work on problematic tasks on a regular basis, over a prolonged period of
time.

2. The task variety principle. Students will improve as problem solvers only if they are given opportunities
to solve a variety of types of problematic tasks (in my view, principles 1 and 2 are the most important of
the seven).
Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore
3. The complexity principle. There is a dynamic interaction between mathematical concepts and the
processes (including metacognitive ones) used to solve problems involving those concepts. That is,
heuristics, skills, control processes, and awareness of one’s own thinking develop concurrently with the

development of an understanding of mathematical concepts. (This principle tells us that problem- solving
ability is best developed when it takes place in the context of learning important mathematics concepts.)

4. The systematic organization principle. Problem-solving instruction, metacognition instruction in

particular, is likely to be most effective when it is provided in a systematically organized manner under
the direction of the teacher.

5. The multiple roles for the teacher principle. Problem-solving instruction that emphasizes the
development of metacognitive skills should involve the teacher in three different, but related, roles: (a)
as an external monitor, (b) as a facilitator of students' metacognitive awareness, and (c) as a model of a

metacognitively-adept problem solver.

6. The group interaction principle. The standard arrangement for classroom instructional activities is for
students to work in small groups (usually groups of three or four). Small group work is especially
appropriate for activities involving new content (e.g., new mathematics topics, new problem-solving
strategies) or when the focus of the activity is on the process of solving problems (e.g., planning, decision
making, assessing progress) or exploring mathematical ideas.

7. The assessment principle. The teacher's instructional plan should include attention to how students'
performance is to be assessed. In order for students to become convinced of the importance of the sort
of behaviors that a good problem-solving program promotes, it is necessary to use assessment techniques
that reward such behaviors.

Sources:

Wong, A. (2008). RESEARCH: Developing Flexibility in Math Problem Solving, Harvard Graduate School of
Education. Appian Way, Cambridge, MA 02138, United States retrieved from
[Link]

Rittle-Johnson, B, & Star, J.R. (2007). Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and
procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 99(3), 561-574.

Department of Education (2019). K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum. LS-3-Mathematical-and-

[Link] ([Link]). Pasig City, Philippines retrieved from
[Link]
[Link]

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

[Link]

References Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching:
What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 389-408. Cai, J. (2010). Helping
elementary students become successful mathematical problem solvers. In D. V. Lambdin & F. K.
Lester (Eds.), Teaching and learning mathematics: Translating research for elementary teachers
(pp. 9-14). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Charles, R., & Lester, F. (1982). Teaching problem solving: What, why and how. Palo Alto, CA:
Dale Seymour Publications.

Charles, R.I. & Lester, F. K. (1984). An evaluation of a process-oriented mathematical problem-

solving instructional program in grades five and seven. Journal for Research in Mathematics
Education, 15(1), 15-34.

Collins, A., Brown, J., & Newmann, S. (1990). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching students the
craft of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and
instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Davis, B. (1997). Listening for differences: An evolving conception of mathematics teaching.

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 355-376.

DiMatteo, R. W. & Lester, F. K. (2010). The role of problem solving in the secondary school
mathematics classroom. In J. Lobato & F. Lester (Eds.). Teaching and learning mathematics:
Translating research for secondary teachers (pp. 7-12). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers
of Mathematics.

Duncker, K. (1945). On problem solving. Psychological Monographs, 58(5), Whole No. 270.

Frensch, P. A. & Funke, J. (Eds.). (1995). Complex problem solving: The European perspective. Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Garofalo, J. & Lester, F. K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance.
Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16(3), 163-176.

Goldin, G. A. (2003). Representation in school mathematics: A unifying research perspective. In J.

Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore

Local References:

Guillermo, R. (2018). Mathematics in the Modern World: A Worktext, Nieme Publishing House Co.
LTD. Quezon City, Philippines
Rodriguez, M. J. (2018). Mathematics in the Modern World: Nieme Publishing House Co. LTD.
Quezon City, Philippines
Aufmann, R. (2018). Mathematics in the Modern World. Rex Book Store Inc. Manila, Philippines

Other Electronic:

Department of Education (2019). K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum. LS-3-Mathematical-and-

[Link] ([Link]). Pasig City, Philippines retrieved from
[Link]
[Link]

Sudoku:

[Link]

KenKen Puzzle:

[Link]

Youtube:

[Link]

Prepared by: Mr. Joemclee A. Manalo, LPT, Former MRIMath Singapore