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