Posing Problems on Photographs: Quality of Posed Problems and Perception of Pre-

Service Teachers

Rogielou P. Andam

Ph.D. Science Education major in Mathematics

Ateneo de Zamboanga University

March 2018
 Introduction

Problem posing is identified to be an essential component in the mathematical thinking

(Kilpatrick,1987). As described by Ticha and Hospesova (2009), problem posing is the

construction of new problem or the reformulation of a given problem while Silver(1994)

believed that posing a problem is done to explore and solve a given situation. Mathematics

learning has always aims to improving the skills of learners in problem posing, thus it should be

a central role in the mathematics activities (Crespo, 2003). Learners should be given

opportunities to posed problems in the classroom (Stoyanova 2005; Singer et al. 2011; Cankoy

2014).One of the promising activities in learning mathematics is learning by problem posing

(Silver and Cai 1996; English 1998). Many researchers have found that problem posing helps

problem solving impressively (Cankoy & Darbaz, 2010; Christou et al., 2005; Işık, 2011; Kılıç,

2013a, Lowrie, 2002; Luo, 2009; Stoyanova & Ellerton 1996; Tichá & Hošpesová, 2009; Toluk-

Uçar, 2009).

An effective activity in mathematics that aids learners to formulate mathematical

knowledge by incorporating their present structure of knowledge is problem posing. Van-Harpen

and Presmeg (2013) established a relationship between the mathematical knowledge and the

abilities in problem posing of the learners. Posing problems is advantageous in numerous means

not only to pre-service teachers but as well as teachers. It is an instrument to measure the effect

of curriculum on the learners (Cai et al., 2012).

Another , it can serve as an instrument for studying cognitive processes (Mestre, 2002)

and aids students to develop their understanding of mathematics, as well as to explore the nature

of problems rather than concentrating only on arriving at solutions (Stoyanova, 2003). Further, it
develops and strengthens students’ critical thinking skills (Nixon-Ponder, 1995) and

demonstrates deep understanding of a concept (Rizvi, 2004). For these reasons, problem-solving

instruction that is based on problem posing can foster understanding (Cankoy & Darbaz, 2010).

Providing problem posing opportunities to learners can raise flexible thinking, improve

skills in problem solving, widen their view of mathematics, and enhance and combine basic

concepts (Brown and Walter 1993; English 1996). Also, problem posing could provide valuable

intuitions into leaners’ understanding of concepts and processes in mathematics, and their

perceptions of, and attitudes toward problem solving and mathematics (Brown and Walter 1993).

To enhance the learners’ ability in posing problems in mathematics, it is vital to have a good

grasp on understanding the developmental status of the thinking and reasoning of the learners.

Having an information on what the learners know and how they think will give the teachers

opportunities to create strategies on the enhancement of learners’ success (Cai 2003).

During pre-service training of primary school teacher, posing of problems has contributed

to the development of their knowledge in mathematics (Tichá & Hošpesová, 2009). It has a

positive effect on their concept in knowing mathematics (TolukUçar, 2009), which may aid to

develop their knowledge in mathematics (Kılıç, 2013). In addition, problem posing encourages

teachers to be active learners and to reconsider mathematical objects and concepts without

explicit instruction (Lavy & Shriki, 2010). Lastly, Lowrie (2002) specified that problem posing

of learners can be supported by teachers’ actions; hence, it is vital to make teachers aware of

problem posing during the training in the field. Furthermore, since problem posing can be

nurtured by teachers (Lowrie, 2002) and that they have to impart their knowledge in problem

posing , it is therefore essential to understand the pre-service teachers’ performance in posing

problems as means of problem solving , in order to educate them during the training. Besides,
pre-service teachers must be able to posed meaningful problems and improving learners’ posed

problems efforts (Lavy & Shriki, 2010; Tichá & Hošpesová, 2009; Toluk-Uçar, 2009). It has

been stressed in many studies that pre-service teachers always have difficulties related to

activities in posing problems (Korkmaz & Gür, 2006; Luo, 2009; Toluk-Uçar, 2009).

A teacher’s knowledge has an important effect on student achievement (Ball et al., 2008;

Hill, Rowan & Ball, 2005; Kulm, 2008). In other words, if teachers do not have the necessary

knowledge and experience regarding the concepts they are supposed to teach, they will have

difficulty teaching these concepts.

The current study aimed to evaluate the quality of the pre-service teachers’ posed

problem based on photographs. It has been observed that most studies examined the ability to

translate between representations through problem-posing have focused on problem-posing

based on symbolic representations (e.g., Işık & Kar, 2012; Kar, 2015; MacAllister & Beaver,

2012; Toluk-Uçar, 2009) while some studies are on the problem-posing using graphs (e.g., Cai et

al., 2013). To the best of the researcher’s knowledge, no studies have evaluated quality of posed

problems by the pre-service teachers based on photographs. In addition, no studies on problem

posing was conducted in the Philippines. This study is therefore limited in such a way that it will

help to fill these gaps in the literature.

Review of Related Literature

This study was anchored to the Theory of Jean Piaget (1936) The Cognitive

Development Theory to elaborate the objective of this research.

 Piaget's (1936) theory of cognitive development, cited in McLeod, S. (2009) described

how a child constructs a mental model of the world and since problem-posing is the

reconstruction and reformulation of knowledge to understand complex concepts in math, then it

agrees to the concept being theorized by Piaget. He did not agree with the notion that

intelligence was a permanent trait, and viewed cognitive development happens because of

biological maturation and contact with the environment. Cognitive improvement is a progressive

restructuring of mental processes as a result of biological progress and environmental awareness.

Children create an understanding of the world that surround them, and then experience

differences between what they have known and what they learn in their environment. All

knowledge is created from a base of previous knowledge. Children are not a blank account and

knowledge cannot be communicated without the child making meaning of it according to his or

her current conceptions. Thus, children learn best when they are allowed to formulate a personal

understanding based on experience and reflection on their experiences.

Piaget provides no concise description of the development process as a whole. It

involves of a cycle: The child completes an action which has an outcome on or categorizes

objects, and the child is able to note the features of the action. By iterating this process across a

wide range of objects and actions, the child forms a new level of knowledge and perception. This

is the process of forming a new "cognitive stage". This dual process allows the child to construct

new ways of dealing with objects and new knowledge about objects themselves. However, once

the child has constructed these new kinds of knowledge, he or she starts to use them to create

still more complex objects and to carry out still more complex actions. As a result, the child

starts to spot still more difficult designs and to construct still more difficult objects. Thus a new
stage begins, which will only be done when all the child's activity and experience have been re-

organized on this still advanced level.

According to Bruner (1985), in his Discovery Learning, learning is an active process in

which learners construct new ideas or concepts based upon their current or past knowledge.

Education can be made more proficient by giving, a careful sequencing of things to permit

learners to shape upon what they have known and drive afar from the information they have been

given to realize the significant principles by themselves.

Also, Dewey (1859), in his Experiential Theory, it is the solid critical of the

transmission of facts as the objective of education. Dewey often described education as a device

for social change, telling that "education is a guideline of the process of coming to share in the

social consciousness; and that the tuning of individual activity on the basis of this social

consciousness is the only sure way of social reconstruction.

In addition, Social Development Theory of Vygotsky (1978) offered that social contact

strongly influences cognitive development. He dedicated on the connections between people and

the cultural context in which they act and interact in mutual experience. According to him,

humans use tools that cultivate from a culture, such as speech and writing, to facilitate their

social environments. Originally children develop these tools to function specially as social

purposes, ways to communicate needs.

According to Katie, M. (2008), problem-posing seemed to take more of a facilitator

way of teaching than that of Banking Education which teachers make deposits of information.

Where the teacher has teachings and a program, but the students are cheered to join and ask

questions. Problem-posing does not only enhance critical thinking, but the students feel as

though they are equally as a portion of their learning process and the teacher is not as frightening
and dictator-like. Kelli, H. (2008) said that problem-posing education seems to be less teacher

lecturing students and more teacher helping the students realize connections between the lessons

in class and reality. Problem-posing involves the demonstration of different theories and

concepts and then students are allowed to question, agree or disagree with, or change ideas.

Kirylo (1958) claimed that there are those who have become so captivated with the

concept of banking education and the convenience of explaining school reform with detached

terminology such as outcomes, results, performance, monetary rewards, takeover, competition,

and comparing and opposing that they have made a system similar to describing a for-profit

corporation, causing in the creation of “winners” and “losers,” eventually nurturing what he

labels institutionalization of the depersonalization of education.

Problem-posing Activities with Pre-service Teachers Studies related to problem posing

have explored many aspects of the issue. The considerable body of research that has dedicated on

structured problem-posing situations has been used to determine pre-service teachers’ problem

types (Goodson-Espy, 2009; Işık, 2011; Luo, 2009; Rizvi, 2004; Toluk-Uçar, 2009). Those

studies examined pre-service teachers’ problem posing on mathematical topics such as fractions

and operations using fractions. Furthermore, since problem posing can be nurtured by teachers

(Lowrie,2002) and that they have to impart their knowledge in problem posing , it is therefore

essential to understand the pre-service teachers’ performance in posing problems as means of

problem solving , in order to educate them during the training. Besides, pre-service teachers must

be able to posed meaningful problems and improving learners’ posed problems efforts (Lavy &

Shriki, 2010; Tichá & Hošpesová, 2009; Toluk-Uçar, 2009). It has been stressed in many studies

that pre-service teachers always have difficulties related to activities in posing problems

(Korkmaz & Gür, 2006; Luo, 2009; Toluk-Uçar, 2009).

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

Theory
Jean Piaget (1936)
Cognitive Development Theory

Problem-Posing

Evaluation on Pre-service Participants’ Perceptions

Teachers Quality of posed (categorized into themes)
problems

Pre-service Teachers
encountered problems

Figure 1. Theoretical Framework of the Study.

 Statement of the Problem

The purpose of this study is to determine the perceptions of the Pre-service Teachers

major in Mathematics about Problem-Posing Approach and to examine the pre-service

teachers’ task performance in Trigonometry using the Problem-Posing Approach.

Specifically, the study sought answers to the following questions:

1. What is the quality of the posed problems by pre-service teachers in terms of:

a. Problem Text (Language and Expression);

b. The Compatibility of the Problem with the Mathematical Principles;

c. The Type/Structure of the Problem;

d. The Solvability of the Problem?

2. What are the problems encountered by the pre-service teachers during the problem posing

task?

3. How do pre-service teachers perceived the problem posing as an activity?

Scope and Limitation of the Study

The study is only intended for the pre-service teachers in mathematics of the school year 2017-

2018. The scope of the study only deals with the posing of problems based on the pictures given.

The findings of the study is gathered from the 20 participants and are only limited to the

mathematics concept.
Significance of the Study
This study will be beneficial to the following groups of people and to those interested future

researchers who would like to do the same study as well.

Pre-service Teachers. This study will help them improve their teaching approach by using

problem posing approach for their students to learn. It could also help them to recognize

and appreciate questions coming from their students. They could also realize that

students who have questions are students who are learning by themselves.

Researchers. They could use this as their teaching instruction when they will become

teachers someday. They could also realize that posing problems and asking questions

should be given importance as their way on how to understand complex topic in math.

Future Researchers. They could utilize it as their reference and standpoints for their study if

it in line with it. Particularly, they would have a basis for their study especially when

talking about suitable instruction to teaching mathematics.

School Administrators. They could come up with a preparation on persuading their teachers

in managing students using problem-posing approach in their class discussion which is

to let the students to ask relevant questions and try to find the answers on themselves

with the help of teachers to deepen the learning.

Definition of Terms
Problem Posing. It refers to a method of teaching that emphasizes critical thinking for the

purpose of liberation. In this study, problem posing means either the creation of new problems in

terms of given conditions or the reformulation of a given problem.

Photographs. This refers to a picture made using a camera, in which an image is focused onto

filmed or other light –sensitive material and then made visible and permanent by chemical

treatment, or stored digitally. In this study, photographs are taken images of real life situation

where a possible problem posing can be done.

Posed Problems. These are problems formulated from a given condition specifically

mathematical problems.

Perception. This refers to a way of regarding, understanding, or interpreting something; a mental

impression. In this paper, participants’ perceptions on problem posing means their thoughts on

problem posing.
Chapter II: Research Method

Research Design

Qualitative research is a search for demonstrating perceptions and events in a holistic and

realistic manner in natural environments and a qualitative process is followed (Yıldırım &

Şimşek, 2008). In this sense, this study is a qualitative research which aimed to demonstrate

results of a particular situation and includes the analysis of the written responses. The document

analysis involves the analysis of written documents about the case or cases which are intended to

study (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2008). In this study, a problem posing task with five photographs and

two questions on problems encountered by the respondents as well as their perception on

problem posing which were done by pre service teachers were used as document.

Participants

All the 20 pre-service mathematics teachers who are already in the field for teaching practice

were considered in the study. Of these participants, 9 were female and 11 were male; all were 19

- 22 years. It is assumed that all participants already had basic knowledge of problem solving

and can use their knowledge to create problems. To protect confidentiality all participants were

coded as R1, R2, R3…,R20.

Instrument

A questionnaire with five photographs of real life scenes where a possible mathematical problem

can be formulated (see Appendix C). These are photographs like: a garden, a man looking at the

plane, painters painting, a ship, and stacks of cups. Two questions about the problems

encountered and perception were also included in the questionnaire. The participants posed

problems were checked according to the criteria identified such as: Problem text, compatibility
of the problem to mathematical principles, structure of the problem and its solvability. There

were three dimensions in each criteria. The participants’ responses on problems encountered and

perception on problem posing were grouped according to themes. This was done with the experts

in mathematics.

Data Gathering Procedure

The data of this study was collected using a two-step process. In the first step, all participants

were asked to pose problems from the five photographs given. In the second step, they were

asked to answer two questions: 1.What is are the problems you have encountered during the

posing of problems? 2. What is your perception of problem posing as an activity? These

questions allows the researcher to find out the problems encountered by the respondents as well

as their perception towards problem posing. The questionnaire was prepared by the researcher

and distributed to pre-service teachers. They had one hour (60 minutes) to complete the task.

Ethical Considerations

The researcher is fully aware of the responsibility and trust while carrying out this study

thus ethical considerations were given throughout the study with regard to access, confidentiality

and consent. Acknowledging the rights of all the research participants is of utmost concern. The

permission of the school Vice President for Academics( see appendix A) as well as the student

informed consent forms (see appendix B) were obtained prior to the conduct of the study.

Students as collaborators in the study are made aware that the research is going on and their

voluntary participation as respondents is very important; and that they have the right to withdraw

from the study at any stage without any pressure. Moreover, strict confidentiality was adhered to,
no names were included in the final written report. None of the personal details were asked by

carrying out the primary research.

The Reliability and Validity of Study

The validity in qualitative research means observing the searched issues objectively as much as

possible and as it is (Kirk & Miller, 1986). In order to present a holistic picture of the searched

topic, the researcher should confirm the data and outcomes of the study through variation,

participant confirmation and colleague confirmation (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2008). In this regard,

data of this study was analyzed by two experts in the field of teaching mathematics other than the

researchers and the validity of the study was provided through colleague confirmation. The

qualitative research begins with the thought that realities constantly change according to

individuals and to environments and repeating the same study with similar groups may not create

the same results. In this regard, in order to provide reliability to qualitative research, the

researcher should define the individuals who are the source of information clearly (Yıldırım &

Şimşek, 2008). In this study, the results of the evaluation were presented on the basis of

frequency (f) and percentage (%). The purpose here is to increase the reliability of the data, to

reduce bias and to provide a chance to make a comparison between the data. Besides, the data

presented in numbers in order to have an opportunity to repeat this small scale study later on to

reach a wider sample with tools such as surveys (Yıldırım & Şimşek, 2008)

Data Analysis

The researcher evaluated the posed problems based on the four criteria. These are; i) Problem

text (language and expression), ii) The compatibility of the problem with the mathematical
principles, iii) The type/structure of the problem and iv) The solvability of the problem. This

evaluation tool is adopted from Katranci and Sengul (2014). The data obtained was evaluated

using this evaluation form. The researcher and two experts from the field of teaching

mathematics evaluated each problem separately and evaluation results were compared. The

differences appeared were discussed and then an agreement was reached. In conclusion, the

evaluation results as being related with each sub-dimension was presented on the basis of

frequency (f) and percentage (%).

Content analysis was used on the responses on the problems encountered as well as the responses

on the perception on problem posing. Qualitative content analysis uses inductive reasoning, by

which themes and categories emerge from the data through the researcher’s careful examination

and constant comparison. To organize the data in this study, the participants’ responses were

listed and grouped into categories, and the data were analyzed qualitatively in three phases. The

responses were independently a) coded by concept, b) classified by topic, source, and connection

between topic and source, and c) examined for common characteristics.

 Chapter III: Results and Discussion

This section presents the results of the evaluation of the pre-service teachers posed problems

from photographs based on the criteria considered. Table 1-5 presents the quality of posed

problems while table 6 and 7 shows the analysis of the responses on the problems encountered

during the posing activity and the perception on posing problems respectively.

Table 1. Garden Problem

Evaluation Criteria f %
Problem Text (Language and
Expression) The text of the problem is not clear and understandable.
The text of the problem is relatively clear and understandable. 2 10
The text of the problem is clear and understandable 17 85
The Compatibility of the Problem with
the Mathematical Principles The problem is not suitable to mathematical principles
The problem is relatively suitable to mathematical principles
The problem is suitable to mathematical principles 20 100
The Type/Structure of the Problem Exercise 15 75
Simple normal problem 3 15
normal problem 2 10
The Solvability of the Problem The problem cannot be solved 1 5
The problem can be solved but it is erroneous 1 5
The problem can be solved. 18 90

When Table 1 is analyzed, it is seen that the text of 17 (85%) posed problems are clear
and understandable. It is interesting to note that all or 20 (100%) problems are suitable to
mathematical principles. It appeared that 15 (75%) of the posed problems are in exercise type. It
is understood that most of the problems posed or 18(90%) by pre-service mathematics teachers
regarding the task of posing problems on garden photograph are solvable. This implies that the
participants have very good knowledge on the principles in mathematics that their posed
problems have applied mathematical principles. In addition, the participants do not only create
problems without considering its solvability. This means that the pre-service teachers are capable
of posing problems in mathematics and can surely teach the learners problem posing.
 Table 2. Painter Problem

Evaluation Criteria f %
Problem Text (Language and
Expression) The text of the problem is not clear and understandable.
The text of the problem is relatively clear and understandable. 5 25
The text of the problem is clear and understandable 15 75
The Compatibility of the Problem with
the Mathematical Principles The problem is not suitable to mathematical principles 3 15
The problem is relatively suitable to mathematical principles 4 20
The problem is suitable to mathematical principles 13 65
The Type/Structure of the Problem Exercise 16 80
Simple normal problem 4 20
Normal problem
The Solvability of the Problem The problem cannot be solved 8 40
The problem can be solved but it is erroneous 1 5
The problem can be solved. 11 55

As shown in table 2, 15 (75%) of the posed problems are clear and understandable. On the
other hand, 13(65%) of the created problems from the photograph of painters are suitable to
mathematical principles. It is also seen in the table that an impressive 16(80%) of the problems
are considered an exercise. However, on the solvability of the problem only 11(55%) are
solvable while 8(40%) are problems which cannot be solved. This is an indication that almost
half of the problem posed on the photograph of painter missed essential information needed to
solve the posed problem. This further explains that the pre-service teachers have to revisit the
lessons on work problems. Furthermore, the posed problems are simply exercise which means
these are easy problems.
 Table 3. The Ship Problem

Evaluation Criteria f %
Problem Text (Language and
Expression) The text of the problem is not clear and understandable. 1 5
The text of the problem is relatively clear and understandable. 7 35
The text of the problem is clear and understandable 12 60
The Compatibility of the Problem
with the Mathematical Principles The problem is not suitable to mathematical principles
The problem is relatively suitable to mathematical principles 1 5
The problem is suitable to mathematical principles 19 95
The Type/Structure of the Problem Exercise 13 65
Simple normal problem 5 25
Normal problem 2 10
The Solvability of the Problem The problem cannot be solved 3 15
The problem can be solved but it is erroneous 1 5
The problem can be solved. 16 80

Table 3 reflects the evaluation of the posed problems on the photograph of a ship. It is
depicted in the table that a majority or 12(60%) of the posed problems are clear and
understandable. Whereas, a notable 19(95%) of the posed problems are suitable to mathematical
principles. This means that most of the pre-service teachers were able to posed problems which
applies mathematical principles. However, 13(65%) of the problems formulated are only an
exercise. This implies that the problems are easy. In addition, 16(80%) of the problems produced
are solvable.
 Table 4. The Cups Problem

Evaluation Criteria f %
Problem Text (Language and
Expression) The text of the problem is not clear and understandable. 1 5
The text of the problem is relatively clear and understandable. 8 40
The text of the problem is clear and understandable 11 55
The Compatibility of the Problem with
the Mathematical Principles The problem is not suitable to mathematical principles 3 15
The problem is relatively suitable to mathematical principles 2 10
The problem is suitable to mathematical principles 15 75
The Type/Structure of the Problem Exercise 13 65
Simple normal problem 4 20
Normal problem 3 15
The Solvability of the Problem The problem cannot be solved
The problem can be solved but it is erroneous 2 10
The problem can be solved. 18 90

Table 4 depicts the result of the evaluated posed problems of the pre-service teachers on the
photograph of cups. As reflected in the table, 11(55%) of the text in the posed problems are clear
and understandable. While 15(75%) of the problems are suitable to the principles in
mathematics. A good number of the problems that is 13(65%) are considered to be an exercise
but 7(35%) are better problems since these are simple normal and normal problems. As to the
solvability of the problems, 18(90%) are solvable.
 Table 5. Airplane Problem

Evaluation Criteria f %
Problem Text (Language and
Expression) The text of the problem is not clear and understandable.
The text of the problem is relatively clear and understandable. 8 40
The text of the problem is clear and understandable 12 60
The Compatibility of the
Problem with the Mathematical
Principles The problem is not suitable to mathematical principles 1 5
The problem is relatively suitable to mathematical principles 4 20
The problem is suitable to mathematical principles 15 75
The Type/Structure of the
Problem Exercise 10 50
Simple normal problem 9 45
Normal problem 1 5
The Solvability of the Problem The problem cannot be solved 2 10
The problem can be solved but it is erroneous 3 15
The problem can be solved. 15 75
Table 5 presents the product of the evaluation of the posed problems on the photograph of an
airplane. It can be seen in the table above that 12(60%) of the problems posed are clear and
understandable and 15(75%) of them are suitable to mathematical principles. Moreover, half of
the problems formulated are exercise. Among the 20 posed problems 15(75%) are solvable.

Table 6. Frequency and Percent Distribution of Problems Encountered by the Respondents

Categories f %
Inexperience 8 40
Complexness 8 40
Time-consuming 1 5
Demanding 5 25
Solvability 8 40
Appropriateness 3 15

Table 1 summarizes the problems encountered by the pre-service teachers whom

were able to do the problem posing task. Their answers fall into six categories. An important
point in the table is that forty percent of the respondents made mention of a lack of experience,
which indicated that they had no opportunity on posing problems. The same percentage of the
respondents encountered difficulty in devising a problem. It means that the pre-service teachers
lack skill in formulation of a problem. Another 40 percent found solvability of the posed problem
as an important factor to be considered.
 According to Cai and Hwang (2002),
when students pose a mathematical problem, they have to consider
its solution whether it is solvable or not . This hinder them to create or pose problems. In
addition, individuals attempt to solve their problems based on their experience and knowledge
(Toluk & Olkun, 2001). Thus providing opportunities on posing problems will greatly improve
the ability to pose good problems. Also, it has been asserted in several studies that preservice
teachers often have difficulties related to problem-posing activities (Korkmaz & Gür, 2006;
Luo, 2009; Toluk-Uçar, 2009).

Table 7. Frequency and Percent Distribution of Respondents’ Perception on Problem Posing

Categories f %
Challenging 15 75
Enjoyable 3 15
useful/helpful 8 40
Disgusting 1 5
Unique 1 5

Table 7 summarizes the perceptions generated by the pre-service teachers whom were
able to pose problems from photographs. There are five categories identified. The purpose was to
explore pre-service mathematics teachers’ perceptions of problem posing. As reflected in the
table 15(75%) views the tasks as challenging while 8(40%) perceives problem posing as useful
or helpful. Also, 3(15%) finds the problem posing activity as enjoyable. It is interesting that the
pre-service teachers see the activity as useful and helpful though they were challenged.
According to Mestre (2002) problem posing is intellectually a more demanding task than solving
problems. In addition Arikan and Unal (2013) posited that problem posing could be viewed as
challenging activity to acquire a deeper mathematical thinking.
Chapter IV: Conclusions, and Recommendations

Conclusions

Problem posing is an essential skill and an effective activity in Mathematics learning that

has many benefits not only for students but also for pre-service teachers. Also, it can expose

individuals’ ability to integrate mathematical knowledge and serves as a good approach to

analyzing mathematical knowledge and displaying the misconceptions of the learners. It has

been indicated that teachers’ ability to incorporate problem-posing activities into mathematics

lessons affects students’ understanding of mathematics (Stoyanova, 2003) and that the problem-

posing actions of students can be nurtured by teachers’ actions (Lowrie, 2002). Since teachers’

problem-posing performance can affect their students’ level of achievement and since content

knowledge is an important knowledge component (Shulman, 1986), it is crucial to educate pre-

service teachers on problem posing. Since problem-posing activity is a good tool to assess the

knowledge and skill of pre-service teachers, in this study 20 pre-service teachers were asked to

pose problems on the photographs given and later asked to express the problems that hinders

them in the posing activity as well as their perception on problem posing. The choice of

problems can be explained by pre-service teachers’ knowledge of patterns and problem-solving

strategies, their imagination or creativity, their experience with problem solving (Chapman,

2012), and their general educational experience (Tichá & Hošpesová, 2012). In this study, it can

be concluded that pre-service mathematics teachers posed clear and understandable problems

which are compatible with the mathematical principles in the form of exercise and which can be

solved by students. However, pre-service teachers faced several common problems while posing

like: inexperience, complexness, time-consuming, demanding, solvability and appropriateness.

Of these encountered problems, inexperience, complexness and solvability were the most
frequent. It can be concluded further that these pre-service teachers could produce problems but

lacked sufficient knowledge of problem posing. Moreover, pre-service teachers might have never

tried or been asked to pose problems related to problem-solving strategies in their academic

lives, and thus they may prefer to pose problems which are easy like an exercise that can be

solved. These results suggest that in methods courses, more time should be devoted to teaching

problem types, problem-solving strategies, and problem posing. Understanding how pre-service

teachers respond when asked to pose problems related not only to the photographs but to the real

life scenarios could make a significant impact to the improvement of teacher education courses.

Thus, during the training provided to pre-service teachers, many problem-posing activities that

include various problem-solving strategies could be incorporated. Previous studies have asserted

that pre-service teachers should participate in problem-posing activities (Contreras, 2007; Işık,

2011; Kılıç, 2013b; Lavy & Bershadsky, 2003; Luo, 2009; Toluk-Uçar, 2009) and that problem

posing should be a main activity in teacher education courses within undergraduate education

programs (Barlow & Cates, 2006; Kılıç, 2013a; Korkmaz & Gür, 2006; Rizvi, 2004; Tichá &

Hošpesová, 2012). Moreover, a course related to problem posing should be built into teacher

education programs to enhance these skills in pre service teachers (Korkmaz & Gür, 2006). Since

subject matter content knowledge includes the structure of the subject matter, it is important to

include information on how the basic concepts and principles are organized (Shulman, 1986).

Chen, Van Dooren, Chen, and Verschaffel (2011, p. 923) stated, “The completeness, correctness

and coherence of both teachers’ subject matter knowledge and their pedagogical content

knowledge impact the nature and quality of their actual teaching and, consequently, of students’

mathematical learning processes and outcomes.” Hence, training of pedagogically effective

mathematics teachers is very important. For this reason, different problem-posing approaches
should be taught to pre-service teachers as part of their training programs. In summary, the

findings of the present study suggest that pre-service teachers should be educated in problem

solving strategies and problem and types so that they can apply problem-posing skills effectively

in their teaching carrier.

Recommendation

One limitation of this study was that it only evaluated the quality of the pre-service teachers’

posed problems based on the problem text, compatibility to mathematical principles, type and

structure of the problem and the solvability of the problem. Future studies could ask pre-service

teachers to write problems associated with other strategies and evaluate using different

dimensions. Furthermore, different problem-posing tasks, could be applied during teacher

education programs to assess and develop pre-service teachers’ problem-posing performance

related to various strategies. Also, studies similar to the present one could be conducted with

senior high school students to assess their problem posing performance that require their

knowledge of problem-solving strategies.

 References

Cai, J., Moyer, J. C., Wang, N., Hwang, S., Nie, B., & Garber, T. (2012). Mathematical problem
posing as a measure of curricular effect on students’ learning. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 83(1), 57–69.
Cankoy, O., & Darbaz, S. (2010). Effect of a problem posing based problem solving instruction
on understanding problem. Hacettepe University Education Faculty Journal,38, 11–24.
Christou, C., Mousoulides, N., Pittalis M., Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Sriraman, B. (2005). An
empirical taxonomy of problem posing process. ZDM Mathematics Education, 37(3),
149–158.
Contreras, J. (2007). Unraveling the mystery of the origin of mathematical problems: Using a
problem-posing framework with prospective mathematics teachers. The Mathematics
Educator, 17(2), 15–23.
Crespo, S., & Sinclair, N. (2008). What makes a problem mathematically interesting? Inviting
prospective teachers to pose better problems. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,
11(5), 395–415.
English, D. L. (1998). Children’s problem posing within formal and informal contexts. Journal
for Research in Mathematics Education, 29(1), 83-106.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2005). How to design and evaluate research in education. New
York, NY: Mc Graw Hill.
Işık, C. (2011). Conceptual analysis of multiplication and division in fractions posed by pre-
service elementary mathematics teachers. Hacettepe University Journal of Education
Faculty, 41, 231–243.
Kar, T. (2015). Analysis of problems posed by sixth-grade middle school students for the
addition of fractions in terms of semantic structures. International Journal of Mathematical
Education in Science and Technology, 46(3), 1-16.
Kılıç, Ç. (2013). Pre-service primary teachers’ free problem posing performances in the context
of fractions: An example from Turkey. The Asia Pacific Education Researcher,
22(4), 677–686.
Kilpatrick, J. (1987). Problem formulating: where do good problems come from? Cognitive
Science and Mathematics Education, 123–147.
Korkmaz, E., & Gür, H. (2006). Öğretmen adaylarının problem kurma becerilerinin belirlenmesi
[Determining of prospective teachers’ problem posing skills]. Balıkesir Üniversitesi
Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(1), 64–74.
Kulm, G. (2008). Teachers’ mathematics knowledge. School Science and Mathematics, 108, 2-3.
Lavy, I., & Shriki, A. (2010). Engaging in problem posing activities in a dynamic geometry
setting and the development of prospective teachers’ mathematical knowledge. Journal of
Mathematical Behavior, 29, 11–24.
Lowrie, T. (2002). Designing a framework for problem posing: Young children generating
openended tasks. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3(3), 354–364.
Luo, F. (2009). Evaluating the effectiveness and insights of pre-service elementary teachers’
abilities to construct word problems for fraction multiplication. Journal of Mathematics
Education, 2(1), 83–98.
McAllister, C. J., & Beaver, C. (2012). Identification of error types in preservice teachers'
attempts to create fraction story problems for specified operations. School Science and
Mathematics, 112(2), 88-98.
Mestre, P. J. (2002). Probing adults’ conceptual understanding and transfer of learning via
problem posing. Applied Developmental Psychology, 23, 9–50.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook qualitative data analysis.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Nixon-Ponder, S. (1995). Using problem posing dialogue in adult literacy education. Teacher to
teacher. Adult Learning, 7(2), 10–12.
Pehkonen, E. (1995). Introduction: Use of open-ended problems. International Reviews on
Mathematical Education 27(2), 55-57.
Rizvi, N. F. (2004). Prospective teachers’ ability to pose word problems. International Journal
for Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 12, 1–22.
Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1),
19–28.
Stoyanova, E. (2003). Extending students’ understanding of mathematics via problem posing.
The Australian Mathematics Teacher, 59(2), 32–40.
Stoyanova, E., & Ellerton, N. F. (1996). A framework for research into students’ problem posing
in school mathematics. In P. Clarkson (Ed.), Technology in mathematics education (pp.
518–525). Melbourne, Australia: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
Tichá, M., & Hošpesová, A. (2012). Developing teachers’ subject didactic competence through
problem posing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 133–143.
Toluk-Uçar, Z. (2009). Developing pre-service teachers understanding of fractions through
problem posing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(1), 166–175.
Van Harpen, X. Y., & Presmeg, N. C. (2013). An investigation of relationships between
students’ mathematical problem-posing abilities and their mathematical content knowledge.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 117–132.
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C