(Ghasempour et al., 2013; Nardone & Lee, 2011).
Kilpatrick
INTRODUCTION
One of the main goals of education is to generate students
whothink mathematically and who use mathematical thinking
to solve problems (Stacey, 2006). The development of students
thinking skills requires mathematics curricularwith an
environment for teaching and learning which differs from
current practices. One alternativetoencourage students to think
mathematically is through thegeneration of mathematical
problems by the students themselves. The National Council
of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000) proposed
teachers to provide opportunities for students to think
mathematically anddevelop mathematical knowledge through
problem posingin teaching and learning. This approach
emphasizes the capability of relating mathematical knowledge
with creativity (Pelczer & Rodriguez, 2011) and can also
enhance higher order thinking skills among students
(1987) states that students should have experience in
posing problems because it may improve their problem
solving perfor mance and Polya (1973) added that the
experience of posing problems is important in the learning
of mathematics.
Problem posing has been defined byresearchers from
different perspectives. Stoyanova & Ellerton (1996), Yuan &
Sriraman (2011) and Bonotto (2013) defines mathematical
problem posingas the process of when students construct
personalinterpretations of concrete situations and formulate
meaningful mathematical problems, while Gonzales (1996) and
Stickles (2006), explain mathematicalproblem posing as
generating or reformulation of new problems. Recognizing the
advantages of problem posing, countries such as Singapore and
Japan have begun to embrace this approach. For example, the
Singapore Curriculum Planning and Development Division
(2012) in teaching and learning mathematics syllabus level O &
N (A) states that students should be given the opportunity to
pose mathematics questionsin classroom. While in Japan, the
study of problem posing spearheaded by Tsubota (1987) and
current researchers such as Hirashima and Kuruyama (2013),
Yamamoto, Waki and Hirashima (2010) and Nakano, Hirashima
& Takeuchi (2000) have begun to focus on the integration of
technology in problem posing. In similar vein, in Malaysia,
problem posinghas gained substantial place among mathematics
education researchers (Salleh, 2013). Therefore, this study aimed
to focus on the literature about problem posing research with
particular attention addressed in the Malaysian context. Any
gaps that exist can be filled in for the purpose of improving
the quality of teaching and learning in mathematics, particularly
in Malaysia.
METHODOLOGY
Previous studies on problem posing in Malaysia were searched
through electronic databases, namely Google Scholar, UKM
Repository and UTM Repository published from 2006 to 2012.
The following keywords were used to search for related
publications: Problem Posing in Malaysia, Pengutaraan Masalah
Matematik (posing mathematics problems) and Penjanaan Masalah
Matematik (generating mathematics problems). The search produced
12studies; 8 journal articles and 4 master dissertations. After
analysis, the studiesregarding problem posing in Malaysiawere

Research of Problem Posing in Malaysia

summarised, as presented in Table I.
The results of the systematic review of literature conducted
revealed that there are two main focuses ofresearch on problem
posing in Malaysia; firstly, the ability topose mathematical
problems and secondly, the strategy used in problem posing.

Table I
The next section presents a more detailed discussionin the
context of ability and strategies in mathematical problem posing.

ABILITY IN PROBLEM POSING

The majority of the studies (8 out of 12) focus on student’s
ability in problem posing while only one study focused on
teachers’ creativity in problem posing. Studiesby Norman &
Bakar (2009), Noh (2010), Normanet al., (2011) and Zakaria &
Ngah (2012) used ‘Uno Problem’ and ‘Due Problem’adopted
from Abu Elwan (1999) to study students’ ability in problem
posing. However, the results of studies by Norman & Bakar
(2009), Noh (2010), Norman et al., (2011) do not support the
study conducted by Zakaria & Ngah (2012). Those researchers
found that the students are more capable ofposing ‘Uno
Problems’ than ‘Due Problems’.
The review also shows that the studies are more focused
on students compared to the teachers. This may be due to the
present educational system emphasizing on students’
responsibility for their learning and they are encouraged to
construct new knowledge by themselves. In contrast, studies
from abroad show that problem posing research are more
focused on prospective teachers (e.g. Abu-Elwan, 1999; Akay
& Boz, 2009, 2010; Chapman, 2012; Crespo & Sinclair; 2008;
Ellerton, 2013; Isik & Kar; 2012; Kar et al., 2010; Kilic, 2013;
Lavy & Bershadsky, 2003; Leung & Sliver, 1997; Rosli, Goldsby
& Capraro, 2011; Silver, Mamona-Downs & Kenney, 1996;
Southwell, 1998; Toluk-Ucar, 2009).
The study of Zakaria & Ngah (2011) showed students were
able to pose mathematics problem but at a low level, while
Norman & Bakar (2009) and Norman et al., (2011) listdown
difficulties that the students face when they are going through
problem posing activities whereone of the factors is the students
unfamiliarity with problem posing. Similarly, Akay and Boz
(2009) also agreed that problem posing is a very different
approach. In addition, Gurvercin and Verbovskiy (2014) also
states that problem posing is a new approach and that students
still need more exposure to this approachso that they are more
comfortable and familiar with problem posing activities.
According to Stoyanova (2005), in the initial stage of problem
posing, students tended to pose problems that only have simple
solution. However, they became more independent and felt free
to pose more complex questions as they became familiar with
problem posing activities.
The study of Zakaria & Salleh (2012) showed that not all
the teachers have ability to pose higher order thinking
problems. The teachers may not be familiar with problem
posing activities because they are inclined to use reference
books and other resources in teaching mathematics. Teacher
should be exposed to problem posing activities especially in
posing higher order thinking problems so thatstudents are
given opportunities to stimulate theirhigher order thinking
skills. It is believed that the higher level thinking skills is a
result that would be obtained through experience while
attending or through a learning process that encourages the
use of higher cognitive skills (Brophy, 1992; Lumpkin, 1992;
Royer, Cisero and Carlo, 1993).
STRATEGY IN PROBLEM POSING
The review of the studies also emphasized the strategies used
by students in posing mathematical problems. However,
Norman & Bakar (2011) and Norman et al., (2011) indicated
the use of limited strategies in problem posing. Stoyanova (2005)
also suggested several strategies that canencourage students to
pose a mathematical questions such as: reformulation strategy,
reconstruction strategy and imitation strategy.
Findings of previous studies by Alias et al., (2009) and
Ahmad& Ahmad Zanzali (2006) showed that the students
displayed various strategies in posing mathematical problem and
the majority of the strategies were derived from personal
experience. Therefore, it is important for parents and teachers
to provide and broaden the students’ knowledge in real life so
that theycan develop mathematical thinking.
CONCLUSION
Problem posing is a new approach and beginning to be
addressed by researchers in Malaysia.However,the results of a
systematic review of the literature show that problem posing
researchhas focused only on some specific aspects. Therefore,
further research is suggested so that this learning approach will
thrive and beimplemented in mathematics education. Below are
suggestionsfor future studies in problem-posing:
• Focus on the development of problem posing task
that allow students to use their thinking skills.
According to Ghasempour et al., (2012), problem
posing task possess all criteria of a practical task for
enhancing higher order thinking skills.
• Further research can be carried out using a different
sample such as prospective teachers because they
canapply this approach in the future. According to a
study conducted by Akay and Boz (2009), the
majority of the prospective teachers agreedto
problem posing activities because it provide an
opportunity to view a problem from different
perspectives.
• Majority of the research that have beenconducted only
focused on the product of problem posing. Further
study should also emphasized on the mathematical
thinking process involved when students pose a
problem.
• None of the research regarding problem posing in
Malaysia use technology as a tool for students to pose
their mathematical problems. Future research is
suggested to integrate problem posing activities with
technology.
• The study of the effectiveness ofproblem posing
approachcompared to the conventional teaching and
learning method should also be carried outin further
research. Countries such as the United States, China,
Singapore and the Middle East found that the impact
of this approach isvery beneficial for students. There
are many possible new inventions that can be obtained
fromstudies in Malaysia.
 Based on the review, students were able to pose
mathematics’ questions even though they were not familiar with
problem posing approach. It shows that the students have
potential in posing mathematical questionsand that it can be
nurtured among them. Therefore, it is important to integrate
problem posing activities in mathematics classroom so that the
students can build their mathematical thinking and enhance
higher order thinking skills.