This article was first
published in The Scottish Mathematical Council's Journal
(2008), Vol 38, P54-57.
Often, when I start a problem-solving session I begin by saying
something like:
"Today we are going to be problem solving and this means
working on problems. So, before we start it might be good to
know what I mean by a problem. A problem is something that you
probably will not immediately see how to tackle or which once
started will challenge your thinking. This means that at some
point you are likely to get stuck and this is OK. In fact it is
important that you get stuck so that we can talk about possible
ways of getting unstuck."
In other words the very problem with problems, namely that they
should result in you being stuck, is at the heart of what
problem solving is about. This contrasts strongly with most
classroom experiences of learners when being stuck is equated
with failure. In this article I am going to talk about just a
few of the other problems with problems that make them such a
rich source of mathematics and approaches to learning
mathematics.
Of course, I have immediately set myself a problem because
whatever 'problems' I select for us to work on here, they will
not necessarily be problems for all of you. They may not
challenge you all (especially if you have seen them, or
questions like them, before and therefore you know what to do
and do not get stuck). I will do my best to identify good
problems that offer interesting insights and the rest is up to
you. So, in discussing what the problem with problems might be,
I will try to select examples that will engage you and extend
your thinking and perhaps even surprise you. Even if you have
seen a problem before and think you 'know it', I challenge you
to ask yourself "What next?" or "What if?" or "Do I really know
all there is to be known about this problem?" or "Can I learn
more?".
So this article is as much about doing as reading. In the true
spirit of problem solving though, I am trying to seed some
ideas and leave you to try things out and refine your own
thinking. I cannot be sure where you will end up but I have
some sense of the story I am trying to tell, and that is about
some of the problems that arise from working with problems and
how these are all part of being mathematical.
Time and Tide
So, let's start with a problem -
Big Powers :
Have you seen something like this before?
Do you immediately know what to do?
Are you fairly confident you can quickly find the answer?
If your answer to two or more of the above is "Yes", as it
stands, this is probably not a problem for you and you should
ask some of the questions that extend your thinking (for
example: What if it wasn't 3 and 4? Can you generalise? Can you
prove ...?).
If you are not certain what to do, spend some time thinking
about this problem. Make yourself a cup of tea, relax, take
your time, as you can always come back to the article
later.
If you had no idea where to start, what strategies did you
adopt or did you just give up and decide to read on?
A colleague of mine walked past this problem for nearly a year.
It took him this long before the penny dropped and it
'suddenly' went from being a problem to not being a problem. So
what, if anything, happened over that year? I would say lots.
My colleague allowed himself all the time he wanted to pull all
those ideas and issues hiding in metaphorical cupboards
together. There was no pressure. No one was testing him. There
were no time constraints.
I hope you are thinking how similar to the classroom this
isn't.
So, one problem with problems in the classroom is time. I do
not mean the time to fit problem solving into the curriculum
but the time to go about the activity of problem solving. What
strategies can we bring to bear to deal with this? Well the
first thing I am tempted to say is 'give your pupils time' and
allowing 'having time' to be part of their mathematical
experience seems important. Another colleague on the NRICH team
talks about 'pot boilers'. If one lesson is not long enough to
get focussed and thinking, how about introducing a problem or
idea in one lesson and keep on popping back to see how it is
doing? (Has anyone had any ideas since we last looked at
this?). We should welcome things that are left stated but
untried, started but not finished, finished but in arriving at
a solution raise more questions. Why not have a 'pot boiler'
always on your classroom wall and come back to it every so
often to see if anyone has had any ideas. This is basically
what my colleague did with Big Powers.
Another strategy related to time might be to work on things
more collaboratively but with the pupils working on the problem
together with your support. That is, they come up with ideas
that you help them share, stopping occasionally when a new
discovery or step has been made to highlight the progress for
all. One strategy that might be useful here is to encourage
learners to share their ideas with the class, facing the class,
rather than addressing them to you as the teacher, and asking
the group to feedback, comment or ask further questions.
What I am not advocating is breaking the problem down and
taking the learners step by step through the journey. Perhaps
if they cannot suggest, with your support, possible approaches
and strategies and you want them to move on quickly it was not
a 'good problem' and best left for the moment. What will they
learn by simply being told what to do? If they do learn
something it is difficult to see what it has to do with problem
solving so what was the point? Why not make it a pot
boiler?
Implicit in what I have been saying, but not yet stated, is
that problems take longer. Learners will inevitably spend
longer on each question that is set. In doing so, learners are
given time to engage in and own the mathematics rather than
learning a method that is easily forgotten and rarely
applied.
So one issue is definitely time, but this is a good problem to
have to work with. Many teachers I meet say that they wished
their pupils would not give up so easily, would persevere and
spend longer trying harder and not demanding to know what to do
or what the answer is. What better way to encourage a change in
such attitudes?
Same but Different
Now spend some time thinking about the following problem,
called
Sums of Pairs before reading on:
I remember a session when one of my colleagues was working with
a group of Year 10 pupils. In the session the pupils worked in
small groups trying to solve the problem. Probably, like me,
your first approach might be by using algebra but what was
interesting was the different approaches the pupils adopted in
order to find a solution. For example:
- some learners used an algebraic approach (calling the
original three numbers a, b and c)
- others used trial and improvement. One of these groups
starting by saying that the smallest number has to be $8$ or
less in order to make a total of $17$ (why?) ...
- another group of pupils found a solution almost 'by
accident', a set of random attempts result in unexpected
success. At that point my colleague gave them a similar
problem to encourage them to search for a method that they
could generalise.
After some time the pupils were encouraged to share their
methods and then to discuss approaches they found most
accessible, repeatable and efficient. Great value was being
placed on creativity, as differences in approaches were
described, valued and assessed. This formed a key part of the
learning process. It was the means by which the pupils made
their journeys towards a solution rather than the solution
itself which was being valued.
Everyone was encouraged to listen to, and learn from others.
Of course, pupils needed to be confident enough to
communicate with and to their peers and come to their own
views. This takes time and practice but is achievable if
pupils are used to working in this way and given lots of
opportunity to practise.
In this case the problem with the problem is the lack of
'control' of the way it was tackled. But this is its main
strength. In fact I don't think the algebraic approach is the
most elegant in this case and one of the
solutions on the website is as follows:
I think that is so neat and not at all the way I thought of it.
I certainly learnt a lot and what a useful idea to store
(partial sums). Now you may have done it this way, but watching
the approaches adopted by the pupils may have offered you
something different, not least the way they engaged in each
other's methods.
Perhaps I should end with just one more thought, leaving room
for plenty of other problems to be investigated later!
Outcome Versus Journey
I have mentioned earlier the importance of the journey and
sometimes there is a balance to be struck between letting go
and wanting a particular outcome. A problem that comes to mind
in this respect is
Making Rectangles, Making Squares :
I use this problem a great deal but I never start from the
question given, and only once or twice have the group I have
been working with answered the question as set. This is because
so much other rich mathematics arises naturally from discussion
that I find it a shame to let it go. Also, by inviting
learners' own ideas the problem offers me an opportunity to
assess their knowledge as well as their ability to pose their
own problems. At one level, it is possible to discuss proof,
use rational and irrational numbers, as well as utilise
Pythagoras' theorem. At other levels you might find yourself
exploring symmetry or triangle animals (all possible shapes
made from $2$, $3$, $4$ ... triangles that are joined by common
sides). It links to a number of other problems on the NRICH
website site including
Triangle Relations and
Equal Equilateral Triangles .
The tension for me is always about balancing the original
intentions of the problem with what the learners are telling me
in terms of their own understandings. In general I tend to use
the context, rather than the problem itself, as a starting
point for encouraging learners to see the mathematics in a
situation and to pose their own problems.
So how might this happen? Perhaps if I relate how I have used
this problem, things will be clearer. Firstly, I just hand out
the triangles without any indication of how they are related or
formed. Working in small groups the learners 'play' with the
triangles for a few minutes and write on large sheets of paper
(to share with the rest of the group) what they consider to be
four key mathematical properties of the triangles.
The class is then invited to walk around the room and look at
what other groups have written. At this point they can add
anything else they feel is important to their list. Discussion
as a whole group reveals what they were most 'surprised' by or
intrigued by as they walked around and what they might like to
investigate further. It is normally at this point we talk about
the relationships between the two triangles- including things
like their equal areas.
By now many of the learners are coming up with problems of
their own, although not yet fully articulated:
"The two triangles can be put together to form a right-angled
triangle. Can we make right-angled triangles any other
way?"
"Can we make a square?"
"Can we make a rectangle from just one colour?"
"What sized equilateral triangles can we make?"
"Can we make the same sized equilateral triangle in just red or
just green triangles?"
"What symmetrical shapes can we make?"
The list is almost endless but it is at this point I have to
make a decision; whether to encourage the exploration of
different areas of interest or bring the focus of the lesson in
on a particular idea. I could for example, pick up on the first
three questions posed and suggest an exploration of the problem
posed on the site. There is a great range of possibilities
around equilateral triangles and hexagons and, of course, there
are all the problems based on symmetry (for example, how many
different symmetrical shapes can you make with just four
triangles?). I remain very flexible and tend only to go in a
particular direction, such as squares and rectangles, if it has
appeared naturally out of earlier group discussions from
several of the groups. My rationale for this is that if the
groups have not seen the connection naturally they may not be
ready (though I do make efforts to extend thinking as the
groups work).
I know that we often use a problem to bring out a certain
aspect of mathematics, and when this is the case a certain
amount of classroom choreography is needed to provide a level
of steer in the intended direction. However, with this problem
I am rarely using it for the sole purpose of discussing
rational and irrational numbers, surds and Pythagoras' theorem.
I have been delighted when these ideas have come out of the
problem but basically my interest is in the process of seeing
the mathematics in the situation and posing some problems, so
the rest is just a bonus. Letting go is the key requirement but
the invitation to play and write ideas offers an excellent
opportunity for assessment too!
In Closing
In the end a problem is as good as we make it. There is a
requirement for patience, flexibility and allowing time to
think and share. But that is what mathematicians do. In fact
that is what we all do when we are stuck. We take a break, go
and make a cup of tea and even talk to a friend. We make sense
of situations at levels we can understand and then learn a
little more by doing. I think this can be summed up by
saying:
- Give learners space
- Value their differences
- Learn from what they do and help them to make
connections
- Use the inherent richness of opportunities to highlight
interesting mathematics