A. SURIYON ET AL.
giving up their efforts to create new problem solving ap-
proaches and to express various ways of thinking by using
problem solving tools of previously learned ideas and strategies.
These findings are in line with Schoenfeld’s conclusion (1985)
that a good problem-solver constantly questions his or her
achievement. S/he generates a number of possible candidates to
the method of solution, but is not seduced by them. By making
careful moves such as pursuing productive leads and abandon-
ing, fruitless path, s/he solves the problem successfully.
Secondly, the study showed association between the open
approach-based teaching and students’ problem solving process.
The open approach-based teaching underlining problem solving
in the mathematic class consisted of the four teaching steps: 1)
posing open-ended problem, 2) students’ self learning, 3) whole
class discussion and comparison, and 4) summarization through
connecting students’ mathematical ideas emerging in the class-
room. The aforementioned relation could be seen from recipro-
cal assimilation between the teacher’ s teaching behavior and
students’ problem solving behavior, leading to planned objec-
tives. Each teaching step promoted students’ learning in many
skills and processes, for example, ability of connecting their
previously learned ideas with new situations, ability to commu-
nicate with other people, open-mindedness, ability to work with
other people, and especially the emphasis that student could
learn and solve problems by themselves. The study results are
consistent with the study of Kongthip et al. (2012) which
showed that the open approach-based mathematics class in the
lesson study context a l l owed the student s to have opportunity in
learning base d on t h eir potentiality , being able to think, perform,
and express. They preferred to e xpress divergent think.
In addition, the findings indicated the importance of open-
ended problem solving situations, planning teacher orders for
learning units and planning order of activities in each study
period according to objectives in each unit and in each study
period. Those plans were developed from the process of lesson
study with an emphasis on preparation for important learning
experience depending on recording and combining what stu-
dents learned and especially tools for students’ thinking as a
way or an idea of thinking for problem solving which the stu-
dents could apply in the future and could do by themselves. The
teacher’ s teaching and learning activity management corre-
sponded to the open approach based teaching steps to create a
class highlighting the problem solving process. This classroom
environment could help motivate students to participate in
problem solving and to express various thinking ways. Also,
the students could apply their previously learned knowledge
and experiences to solving new problems. Students’ problem
solving behavior with monitoring and reflecting on their own
problem solving process showed students’ efficient metacogni-
tive strategies as a good trait of a good problem solver which
should be cultivated in students beginning at the earliest school
grade as recommended by NCTM (2000).
According to the study results, what the research team is in-
terested in further research is developing the aforementioned
findings into creating tools for exploring students’ metacogni-
tive strategies in order to survey and study how students devel-
oped metacognitive strategies in open-ended problem situations.
In addition, it includes contextual factors affecting development
of students’ metacognitive strategies in the mathematic class-
room, using the innovation of lesson study and open approach
in three areas: the structure of teaching and learning activities in
the class, the teacher’ s intervention and interaction with stu-
dents, and interaction between students. The research team
plans to explore these areas for further study.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Higher Education Re-
search Promotion and National Research University Project of
Thailand, Office of the Higher Education Commission, through
the Cluster of Research to Enhance the Quality of Basic Educa-
tion. This research was partially supported by Center for Re-
search in Mathematics Education, Thailand.
REFERENCES
Begle, E. G. (1969). The role of research in the improvement of
mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 2, 232-
244. doi:10.1007/BF00303460
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B.
Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-236). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum
Gakkoh Tosho Co., LTD. (1999). Study with your friends MATHE-
MATICS for elementary school 1st grade Gakkoh Tosho. Tokyo:
Gakkotosho Co., LTD.
Goos, M., & Galbraith, P. (1996). Do it this way! Metacognitive strate-
gies in collaborative mathematical problem soving. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 3 0 , 229-260. doi:10.1007/BF00304567
Inprasitha, M. (1997). Problem solving: A basis to reform mathematics
instruction. The Journal of the National Research Council of Thai-
land, 29, 221-259.
Inprasitha, M. (2003). Reform process of learning mathematics in
schools by focusing on mathematical proces se s. Khon Kaen.
Inprasitha, M. (2004). Teaching by open-approach method in japanese
mathematics classroom. KKU Journal of Mathematics Education, 1.
Inprasitha, M., & Loipha, S. (2007). Developing student’ s mathemati-
cal thinking through lesson study in Thailand. Progress Report of the
the APEC Project: “Collaborative Studies on Innovations for
Teaching and Learning Mathematics in Different Cultures
(II)-Lesson Study focusing on Mathematical Thinking” Center for
Research on International Cooperation in Educaitonal Development
(CRI CE D) (pp. 255-264). Tsukuba.
Inprasitha, M. (2010). One feature of adaptive lesson study in Thailand:
Designing learning unit. Proceeding of the 45th Korean National
Meeting of Mathematics Education (pp. 193-206). Gyeongju: Dong-
kook University.
Kongthip, Y., Inprasitha, M., Pattanajak, A., & Inprasitha, N. (2012).
Mathematical communication by 5th grade students’ gestures in les-
son study and open approach context . Psychology, 3, 632-637.
doi:10.4236/psych.2012.38097
Kroll, D. L., & Miller, T. (1993). Insights from research on mathemati-
cal problem solving in the middle grades. In D. T. Owens (Ed.), Re-
search ideas for the classroom: Middle grades mathematics. Reston:
NCTM.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1980). An
agenda for action. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of
Mathematics.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1989). Cur-
riculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston,
VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000). Princi-
ples and Standards. Reston, VA: NCTM.
Pugalee, D. K. (2001). Writing, mathematics, and metacognition:
Looking for connections through students’ work in mathematical
problem solving. School Science and Mathematics , 101, 236-245.
doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2001.tb18026.x
Pugalee, D. K. (2004). A Comparison of verbal and written descriptions
of students’ problem solving processes. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 55, 27-47.
doi:10.1023/B:EDUC.0000017666.11367.c7
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem soving. New York:
Copyright © 2013 SciRes.
590