SYLLABUS -- MATH 279

Mathematical Problem-Solving Strategies I

 

                                            Instructor: Dr. Ron Wenger

                                            304 Ewing Hall

                                            831-8664

                                            wenger@math.udel.edu

http://www.math.udel.edu/~wenger/index.htm

 

                                            Meeting Time: Mondays 4:00pm – 4:50pm

                                            Meeting Place: Ewing Hall 210

Office Hours:  Mondays 11:15-12:30pm, Tuesdays 12:30-1:30pm, Wednesdays 1:30-2:30 pm, Thursdays 1-2 pm, Fridays 11:15-2:30 pm, (or any other time by appointment)

 

Objectives of the Course[1]

 

Problem solving is a process that provides students with opportunities to experience the power of mathematics in the world around them. It is also an instructional approach that provides a consistent context for students to learn and apply mathematics. Thus, problem solving has special importance in the study of mathematics. A primary goal of mathematics teaching and learning is to develop students' ability to solve a wide variety of complex mathematical problems. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Curriculum Standards indicates that: In grades 9-12, the mathematics curriculum should include the refinement and extension of methods of mathematical problem solving so that all students can:

*use, with increasing confidence, problem-solving approaches to investigate and understand mathematical content;

*apply integrated mathematical problem-solving strategies to solve problems from within and outside mathematics;

*recognize and formulate problems from situations within and outside mathematics;

*apply the process of mathematical modeling to real-world problem situations.

 

In order to implement this goal in the classroom, mathematics teachers must learn to be competent problem solvers.  This course is designed to study and experience various problem-solving strategies. Most importantly, it is designed to explore problem solving as an instructional goal (teaching problem solving). MATH 379 will emphasize the use of problem solving as an effective approach to teach mathematics (teaching mathematics through problem solving). In particular, the objectives of the instructor are to structure this course in such a way that students will be able to:

 

a) become competent and confident problem solvers;

b) construct knowledge about nature and strategies of problem solving; 

c) experience aspects of problem-solving processes as a learner, such as group problem solving, justification and communication of solutions, and models of problem solving;

d) become familiar with some useful instructional materials for use in your own teaching.

To achieve these objectives you must become quite introspective about your own thinking as you grapple with problems. Documenting such introspection in a journal will be an important catalyst to this process.

 

Methods of Instruction

 

This course is based on problem-solving activities using nonroutine problems designed or selected by the instructor. Group work, classroom discussion, and individual problem solving together with your thoughtful introspection about your thinking are the teaching methods for this course.  The working groups will also collaborate on the construction of a Problem Solving Handbook throughout the semester. That handbook should be a useful instructional document as you prepare to teach your own students in the schools in the future.

 

Text References

 

The following books have been placed on reserve in the Morris Library:

 

Johnson, K., &Herr, T. (2001 & 2004). Problem solving strategies: Crossing the river with dogs. Key Curriculum Press.

 

Polya, G. (1973). How to solve it.  Princeton University.

 

Schoenfeld, A. (1985). Mathematical problem solving.  Academic Press.

 

Problem Solving in school mathematics: 1980 NCTM Yearbook. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

 

In addition to these references, relevant sections of Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (2000) (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics) will be read. 

 

 

Grading

 

The final grade will be based on the following components.  Approximate weightings for each component are provided.

 

Introspective Journal (10%): You must keep a contemporaneous journal of your thinking as you grapple with the problems assigned in the course.  This journal must effectively  document your thinking and attitudes with dated and timed entries in a written form including references to copies of scratch work. It should be in a form that would allow a reader to effectively reconstruct your thinking while exploring the problems assigned. Think of this document as “data” if you were doing research on how a person grapples with and adjusts to engaging challenging, non-standard problems. Think of this journal as having two other related purposes: as baseline information for gauging the development of your own learning and as a catalyst for becoming more perceptive about the learning of others (e.g., your own students).

 

The instructor will request to see your journal at least twice: at least once during the semester (so bring it to class each week) and at the end of the semester. He may elect to copy a journal for informal (anonymous) use in the design of future versions of MATH279.

 

Problems (25%):  Each week you will be given one or more problems to solve. These problems have several instructional purposes. They will help you review or learn some new mathematical ideas and strategies.  They are a primary catalyst for you to think about your own thinking and attitudes. Your reflection on your work on them should lead to your identification of problem solving strategies that have value beyond the particular problem for which you constructed them (see the content of the Problem Solving Handbook below). Always attempt to determine more than one solution for a problem.

 

You should work alone on the problems assigned for a day or so and record that experience in your jounal before working on them with your group. Also record in your journal your experiences in working in your group.

 

Each week the solutions to the problems for that week will be collected from each of the students in a few of the groups. So you must bring your individual solutions and any group solutions to each class in case they are collect that week. Such work will be collected at least twice for the students in each group during the semester. They will be evaluated by the instructor using the Scoring Rubric for Problem Solving attached.  That rubric and the Scoring Rubric for Affect were developed by Dr. J. Cai.  The latter is provided for your use—perhaps with your own students when you teach.

 

Problem Solving Handbook (20%):  Each week a different group from the class will be responsible for using the references in the library (and other sources if you wish) to explore a different problem solving strategy or heuristic. That group is required to prepare a section for the handbook that focuses on that strategy. Although the labels used for the strategies in the outline below are usually chapter headings in the Johnson-Herr book, all the books on reserve, except Schoenfeld’s, must be examined as part of this assignment. Note that different authors use somewhat different labels for similar strategies. You are urged to skim the books on reference to become familiar with their content and uses beyond the particular strategy assigned to your group.

 

You should keep the future teaching needs of your fellow preservice teachers in mind as you develop your section because the value of this handbook to your future teaching will depend on the quality of your group’s work. A section should have at least the following features: 

 

Your group must do its work on its assigned section early enough that it is given to the instructor by late Thursday of the week your section is due. He will then add it to the Problem Solving Handbook web page. This will permit students in MATH279 to see and use an updated version each week.

 

Mid-term Test (20%):  There will be a mid-term test in class. Prior to that test you will each be assigned a chapter from the 1980 NCTM Yearbook on reserve. I will give each of you your assignment early in the semester so don’t procrastinate on reading/outlining it for yourself. The structure of that test will be essentially the following:

 

Final Exam( 25%):   There will be an in-class final exam. That exam will have a structure similar to that of the mid-term but the question concerning the chapter in the 1980 NCTM Yearbook will be replaced by one concerning readings in Schoenfeld’s book. You are expected to read pages xi-xiii, pp. 1-45, of that book sometime during the semester. The question(s) on this reading will be essentially: List and briefly discuss the four components of Schoenfeld’s framework for analyzing problem solving. Be prepared to provide as part of that discussion a brief example to illustrate each of the four components.  You may also be asked to describe your own personal experience and introspections from problem solving during the semester in terms of these components.  You are advised to select a time early in the semester to prepare yourself for these final exam questions.

 

 

Outline of the Course 

 

Our class time will be devoted to: A brief report from the group whose section of the Handbook was posted the preceding Friday; groups reporting on their solutions to that week’s problems; and solving new problems.  Note the deadlines for the reports from groups for the Problem Solving Handbook.  The group assigned the strategy for that week is listed. That group must get their report to the instructor by Thursday, 4:30 p.m., of that week. Please look ahead and don’t wait until that week to start your group’s work!

 

2/9                  Introduction to the course:    What is a problem?

                                                                        What is problem solving?

                                                                        What is a problem-solving strategy?

 

2/16                “Draw a Diagram”   [GROUP 1 – Your section report is due Thursday, February 19]

 

2/23               “Systematic Lists/Organizing Data”  [GROUP 2; due Thursday, February 26]

 

3/1                  “Look for a Pattern” [GROUP 3; due Thursday, March 4]

 

3/8                  “Guess and Check”   [GROUP 4; due Thursday, March 11]

 

3/15                “Subproblems”  [GROUP 5; due Thursday, March 18]

Do random drawing of group numbers to determine which groups are responsible for the strategies listed below for 4/19 – 5/10.

 

3/22                Spring Break

 

3/29                Mid-term Test

 

4/5                   “Solve and Easier Problem”   [GROUP 6; due Thursday, April 8]

 

4/12                “Work Backwards”  [GROUP 7; due Thursday, April 15]

 

4/19               “Algebra”   [GROUP ??; due Thursday, April 22]

 

4/26                “Finite Differences”  [GROUP ??; due Thursday, April 29]

 

5/3                  “Finite differences”  [GROUP  ??; due Thursday, May 6]

 

5/10                “Other Ways to Change Focus”  [GROUP ??; due Thursday, May 13]

 

5/17                General discussion about the role of problem solving in teaching secondary students


Scoring Rubrics for Problem Solving

 

Excellent:  4

* problem is solved with a clear, complete strategy and strong supporting explanation

* appropriate issues and questions are understood

* the reader finds nothing missing; the problem is completely and correctly solved and the answer is interpreted correctly

* may show originality or nonstandard procedures

* solution may go beyond what is asked – including providing alternative solutions

* checks for accuracy and precision

 

Adequate:  3

* problem is solved and there is clear evidence of the strategy

* solution process is complete or nearly complete and correct as far as it goes

* shows understanding of the problem’s elements, relationships, issues, and questions, with only minor omissions

* argumentation is complete or nearly complete and may contain only minor flaws

* checks for accuracy

 

O.K.:  2

* shows partial understanding of what the problem is about

* shows only some understanding of the relationships between important problem elements

* explanations are muddled, incomplete or missing

* shows some indication of a solution plan but makes errors in carrying it out

 

Minimal:  1

* begins but fails to give evidence that some strategy is operating

* shows a limited understanding of the problem situation

* may attempt to use irrelevant information or put too much emphasis on unimportant elements

 

Confused:  0

* no attempt

* illegible scratching

* combines numbers or applies rules without evidence of understanding

 

 

                       

                                               

                                               

 

 


 

Scoring Rubric for Affect

 

Excellent: 5

* shows persistence and makes effort to solve problems

* shows a good, confident attitude toward mathematical problem-solving processes

* no unreasonable complaints

* does not blame failure on someone else

* takes personal responsibility for problem solving, learning, improving, and other course related activities

 

Adequate: 4

* nearly always maintains a good, confident attitude toward problem solving

* may become slightly discouraged, but keeps trying

* very little complaining

* most of the time, takes personal responsibility for problem solving, learning, improving, and other course related activities

 

O.K.: 3

* may complain, but is willing to continue to meet the course requirements

* may claim to be stupid or not good at problem solving, but at least believes there is a chance to improve

* may tend to blame past or present teachers, but admits some need for personal exertion order to be successful

 

Minimal: 2

* shows passive attitudes toward mathematical problem solving

* may not complain if an idea for solving arises right away, but complains when the solution path is not immediately obvious

* blames past or present teachers or others for difficulties

* uses never having been good at math as an excuse not to try

* claims that the problems are too hard

* claims to be trying when there is little or no evidence of that happening

 

Confused: 1

* shows very negative attitudes toward math and teaching of math

* either fails to get started or gives up on a problem before doing anything

* shows no belief that personal responsibility is needed for learning

 

 



[1] Parts of this section of the syllabus and the two rubrics at the end were designed by Dr. J. Cai.