Chapter 23

Analysis of Modeling Problem Solutions with Methods of Problem Solving

Gilbert Greefrath

Abstract This report describes the results of an empirical study of problem solving and mathematical modelling of pupils in secondary schools. Pupils of forms 8 10 were observed working on open, realistic problems. These observations were recorded and evaluated. The goal of the study is a detailed look at the planning processes of modelling problems. Of particular interest, are the problem-solving and modelling strategies used. In this context changes between real-life planning and mathematical planning during the planning phases are studied and evaluated. I describe in detail the sub-phases of planning and explain their connection to both modelling and problem solving processes. I illustrate different modelling types by certain courses of planning and sub phases of planning.

23.1 Introduction
To date, insights into the actual sequences of pupils problem-solving and modelbuilding processes are rare. Secondary school pupils (aged 1016) were therefore observed within the framework of a qualitative empirical study while completing open, reality-based tasks. The aim of this study is to reconstruct and to adequately describe the model-building and problem-solving processes applied by these pupils.

23.2 Descriptions of Model-Building and Problem-Solving Processes

Model-building processes are often pictured in the idealized form of a cycle. A variety of descriptions of such cycles can be found in the literature. What all models

G. Greefrath (B) University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany e-mail: g.greefrath@uni-koeln.de

R. Lesh et al. (eds.), Modeling Students Mathematical Modeling Competencies, International Perspectives on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematical Modelling, DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-6271-8_23, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013 265

266

G. Greefrath

share as a common feature is that they start from a real situation and lead to a mathematical model. Mller and Wittmann (1984) present a cyclic model of modelling, which only uses one step to move from the situation to the model. An especially clear description of modelling showing one step from reality to the model is presented by Schupp (1988). This model separates mathematics and reality within one dimension, something which is customary for modelling models. Additionally, an equal distinction is made between problem and solution in a second dimension. One well-known cycle of model building is described by Blum (1985, p. 200). This cycle represents in some respect a standard modelling model (Fig. 23.1). A more recent modelling model by Borromeo Ferri (2006, p. 92) has been designed from a cognitive point of view. Compared to the Blum model it has been extended by including the mental representation of the situation (situation model). The model by Fischer and Malle (1985, p. 101) also describes in detail the step from the situation to the mathematical model (Fig. 23.2). Especially the inclusion of the data collection process is of interest for the problems used in our study. With reference to the models mentioned above, it is not always possible to follow the entire cycle or to repeat it several times. Depending on the target group, the question to be researched or the special interest, the models mentioned earlier focus on different aspects of the modelling process.

Fig. 23.1 Modelling cycle, Blum (1985, p. 200)

Problem-solving processes are also often described using a model. In his book How to Solve It, Polya (1971) developed a catalogue of heuristic questions designed to help in solving problems. For this purpose the problem-solving process is divided into four phases: Understanding the problem, devising a plan, carrying out the plan and looking back. Within the literature there are many similar examples for the structuring of problem-solving processes. Schoenfeld (1985), for instance, describes the rst phase as reading, followed by analysing, exploring and planning. Garofalo and Lester (1985) combine these rst steps as orientation and organisation. In both models the next step is execution.

23

Modeling Problem Solutions

267

Fig. 23.2 Modelling cycle, Fischer and Malle (1985, p. 101)

The characterisations of problem solving thus refer to the description of the solution process. This is also the case with modelling models. Here, however, an additional content-related aspect (i.e. the distinction between reality and mathematics) is relevant.

23.3 Open, Reality-Related Problems

Open reality-related problems were used to analyse model-building and problemsolving processes. The following problems (Figs. 23.3and 23.4) are examples of the open and fuzzy problems with reality references used in the analysis. In order to characterize the house-plastering problem, I use the description of a problem as initial state, target state and transformation, borrowed from the psychology of problem solving (Bruder, 2000, p. 70). The problems initial state is unclear because the relevant information is missing. Also unclear is the transformation from initial state to target state which students can employ. However, the nal state is clearly dened, for instance, by asking for a price.

23.4 Analysis Design and Evaluation Methods

Two pupils at a time were monitored while they worked on their problems. The students were asked to undertake the task in pairs without any further help. The students work was recorded using a video camera.

268

G. Greefrath

How much will it cost to plaster this house?

Fig. 23.3 The house-plastering problem

How many people are caught up in a traffic jam 180 km long?

Fig. 23.4 The trafc jam problem

For evaluation the entire video data were transcribed. Within the framework of open coding with three raters, the individual expressions of the pupils were allocated conceptual terms, which were discussed and modied during several runs through the data. These terms for individual text passages were then assigned to the following categories: planning, data acquisition, data processing and checking. The process category planning describes text passages in which the pupils discuss the path to complete the task or which in the broadest sense relate to the path

23

Modeling Problem Solutions

269

of completing the task. The process category data acquisition describes text passages in which pupils procure data for their further work on the problem. This can involve guessing, counting, estimating, measuring or recalling intermediate results that had been achieved earlier. The process category data processing describes the calculation with concrete values. This can be done either with or without a calculator. For all problems the pupils were provided with a (conventional scientic) calculator. The process category checking includes text passages in which the data processing, data acquisition or planning is questioned or controlled. The choice of categories was done in such a way that the categories could be allocated in a consistent manner, independently from the problem. During this phase the preliminary categories were therefore combined and modied. Following this allocation, the entire transcripts were coded using the now nalized categories. Later we found that one rater was able to code all categories with adequate condence on his/her own. The degree of agreement was checked by performing a sample correlation analysis (see Bortz et al., 1990, p. 460f), which showed statistically signicant concordance at the 0.05 level. As a result, I then coded all of the remaining transcripts on the basis of the developed categories.

23.5 Results
Because we are interested in those planning processes that have special importance for the completion of modelling tasks and that have frequently appeared the completion of problem-solving tasks, we chose to correlate that descriptions of model-building and problem-solving processes. Consequently, these elements of the planning process are described and allocated to the phases of the modelling process.

23.5.1 Orientation Phases

Typically the orientation phases form the start of the work on the problem. They should relate directly to the material that is handed out and thus intrinsically belong to the domain of reality. If orientation phases appear again in the later stages of the completion process, it is a sign that some of the comprehension issues were not dealt with at the beginning of the work. These orientation phases can then be related to the situation model in the modelling cycle.

23.5.2 Transition of Planning in Reality and Mathematics

In some sections of the transcripts, planning processes in reality and in mathematics succeed each other closely. More precisely, there are three kinds of transition. One type of transition is the one from reality to mathematics. Starting from the standard modelling model, this is the type that we would expect to appear most

270

G. Greefrath

frequently, as the mathematical model is only supposed to be developed after the real model. The second type is the transition from mathematics to reality. According to the standard modelling model this transition within the planning is rather unusual, since the creation of a mathematical model would be followed by carrying out the calculations and not by planning in reality. Such a step was found more frequently within the completion processes, especially for those completions, in which planning processes were discussed very precisely. The third type is a multiple transition between reality and mathematics. This is a combination of the two types of transition mentioned above. It could be an indication of an intensive examination of the real and mathematical contents of the problem. In the standard modelling model this is the section between the real and the mathematical model, which cannot be separated any longer with this type of transition.

23.5.3 Partial Models

We speak of partial models in reality or mathematics, if simplications and assumptions are made during the planning phases that lie in the area of reality or mathematics respectively. These planning steps can be identied with the creation of the real model or mathematical model, respectively, during the model-building cycle. According to initial observations, the elements mentioned above are suitable for the characterization of the following planning types.

Type I: Following a target-led orientation phase pupils take time for planning and discuss simplications of reality in depth. They often use mathematical terms and correctly apply them to reality. They also correctly associate objects from reality with the relevant mathematical actions and simplications. Planning processes are discussed in depth and are generally successful. Type II: The pupils orientation phase is quiet and very short. In their discussions they refer mainly to the real situation. The mathematical models are used but not discussed. Reality is not consciously simplied or these simplications are not expressed. Terms from reality are integrated into mathematical process descriptions. Here, no clear indications can be made regarding the eventual success of the students modelling efforts. Type III: Pupils frequently need orientation phases in order to see the problem in context. The discussion is very much reality-oriented. No mathematical terms are used and mathematical process description only takes place on a low level. Simplications are rarely discussed. On the whole, the planning is not very abstract, but rather supercial and generally not successful.

23

Modeling Problem Solutions

271

As a consequence of our ndings, we recommend that these different planning types provide indications for education. For example, pupils can discuss about mathematical and real simplications of open problems. The Type I is a prototype for such a discussion. In our view the Type II is of special interest in diagnosing modelling competencies, because no clear indications can be made regarding the success. Whether the number of planning types is to be increased will be subject to future investigation.

References
Blum, W. (1985). Anwendungsorientierter Mathematikunterricht in der didaktischen Diskussion. Mathematische Semesterberichte, 32(2), 195232. Blum, W., and Lei, D. (2005). Modellieren im Unterricht mit der Tanken-Aufgabe. Mathematik lehren, 128, 1821. Borromeo Ferri, R. (2006). Theoretical and empirical differentiations of phases in the modelling process. Zentralblatt fr Didaktik der Mathematik, 38(2), 8695. Bortz, J., Lienert, G. A., and Boehnke, K. (1990). Verteilungsfreie Methoden in der Biostatistik. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer. Bruder, R. (2000). Akzentuierte Aufgaben und heuristische Erfahrungen. Wege zu einem anspruchsvollen Mathematikunterricht fr alle. In: L. Flade, and W. Herget, (Eds.), Mathematik lehren und lernen nach TIMSS: Anregungen fr die Sekundarstufen (pp. 6978). Berlin: Volk und Wissen. Fischer, R., and Malle, G. (1985). Mensch und Mathematik. Mannheim Wien, Zrich: Bibliographisches Institut. Garofalo, J., and Lester, F. K. (1985). Metacognition, cognitive monitoring, and mathematical performance. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16(3), 163176. Greefrath, G. (2006). Modellieren lernen mit offenen realittsnahen Aufgaben. Kln: Aulis Verlag Deubner. Mller, G., and Wittmann, E. (1984). Der Mathematikunterricht in der Primarstufe. Braunschweig, Wiesbaden: Vieweg. Polya, G. (1971). How to Solve It. Princeton, NJ: University Press. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical Problem Solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press. Schupp, H. (1988). Anwendungsorientierter Mathematikunterricht in der Sekundarstufe I zwischen Tradition und neuen Impulsen. Der Mathematikunterricht, 34(6), 516. Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1996). Grounded Theory. Grundlagen Qualitativer Sozialforschung. Weinheim: Beltz Psychologie Verlags Union. Wiegand, P., and Blum, W. (1999). Offene Probleme fr den Mathematikunterricht Kann man Schulbcher dafr nutzen? Beitrge zum Mathematikunterricht (pp. 590593). Hildesheim: Franzbecker.