Inventing a Method of Problem Solving: The Natural Movement of the Mind to Solve a Problem
Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 32920
Inventing a Method of Problem Solving: The Natural Movement of the Mind to Solve a Problem

Authors: Amir Farkhonde


The major objective of this study was to devise a method for solving mathematical problems. Three concepts including faculty of understanding, faculty of guess, and free mind or beginner's mind provided the foundation for this method. An explanatory approach along with a hermeneutic process was taken in this study to support the assumption that mathematical knowledge is constantly developing and it seems essential for students to solve math problems on their own using their faculty of understanding (interpretive dialogue) and faculty of guess. For doing so, a kind of movement from the mathematical problem to mathematical knowledge should be adopted for teaching students a new math topic. The research method of this paper is review, descriptive and conception development. This paper first reviews the research findings on the NRICH’S project (NRICH is part of the family of activities in the Millennium Mathematics Project) with the aim that these findings form the theoretical basis of the problem-solving method. Then, the curriculum, the conceptual structure of the new method, how to design the problem and an example of it are discussed. In this way, students are immersed in the story of discovering and understanding the problem formula, and interpretive dialogue with the text continues by following the questions posed by the problem and constantly reconstructing the answer to find a formula or solution to solve the problem.

Keywords: Interpretive dialogue, NRICH, inventing, a method of problem solving.

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 211


[1] Stanford, J., Gilderdale, C., & Beardon, T. (2001). “The impact of the internet on learning mathematics amongst school-aged children”. An evaluation of the NRICH Online Maths Club.‏ Cambridge 2001.
[2] Piggott, J. (2004). “Developing a Framework for Mathematical Enrichment”. Conference Proceedings, 2004, Critical Thinking, University of the West Indies. Retrieved online at
[3] “The Cambridge University, The faculty of Education, department of Networks and Innovation” (2021).
[4] “The Cambridge University, The faculty of Education, department of Networks and Innovation” (2021).
[5] Piggott, J. (2004). “Mathematics enrichment: What is it and who is it for?”. the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference. Vol(1). Retrieved online at http://nrich.maths. org/5737.
[6] Mayer, R. (2002). “Mathematical Problem solving”. Mathematical Cognition, 69-72.
[7] Dewey, J. (1933). “How we think”. Boston: D.C. Heath and company (pp. 107 -115)
[8] Mason, J., Burton, L., Stacey, K. (1985). “Thinking Mathematically”. publish: Prentice Hall.
[9] Ernest, P., 2000, "Teaching and Learning Mathematics", in Koshy, V. et al, Mathematics for Primary Teachers. London: Routledge.
[10] Polya, G. (1957). “How to Solve it”, Princeton University press.
[11] Piggott, J. (2007). “The nature of mathematical enrichment: a case study of implementation”. Educat. Vol.7, No.2, 2007, pp. 30-45.
[12] Gilderdale, C. Kiddle, A. (2014). What are rich tasks?. View online at:
[13] Piggott, J. (2008). “Rich Tasks and Contexts”. View online at:
[14] Piggott, J. (2011). “Extension, Enrichment And/or Acceleration?”. View online at:
[15] Gilderdale, C. (2011). “Generating Curiosity in Mathematics Learning”. View online at:
[16] Feng, Yi Wai. (2005). “Conceptions of enrichment”. Paper presented at the Cambridge Education Research Annual Conference (CamERA) at the University of Cambridge, 21 April 2005, in Cambridge, UK.
[17] Ornstein, A. C. (1989). “Problem Solving: What is it? How can We Teach it?” NASSP Bulletin, 73(520), 113–121.
[18] Palmer. E. Richard. (1969). “Hermeneutics: interpretation theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger and Gadamer”. United States of America: Northwestern University Press.
[19] Khatami, Mahmood. (2021). “Gadamer and the hermeneutic problem”. Tehran: Alam Publishing.
[20] Lawn. C. (2006). “Gadamer (A Guide for the Perplexed)”. London: Cantinuum International Group
[21] Van Manen, M. (2016). “Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy”. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis.
[22] Short, E. Edmund. (1991). “Forms of Curriculum Inquiry”. Albany: state university of New York press.
[23] Jones, k. Simons, H. (1999). Online Mathematics Enrichment: an evaluation of the NRICH project. the Centre for Research in Mathematics Education, School of Education, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
[24] Amabile, Teresa. M. (1990). Within You, Without You: The Social Psychology of Creativity, and Beyond. In Theories of Creativity, edited by Mark A. Runco and Robert S. Albert. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
[25] Cohen, L. J. (1974). XI- Guessing, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 74, Issue 1, 1 June 1974, pages 189–210,
[26] Dorst, K., & Mandelkern, M. (2021). Good guesses. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.
[27] Polya, G. (1966). Let us teach guessing: A demonstration with George Polya. In K. Simon (Producer), ´MAA video classics: Mathematical Association of America.
[28] Holguín, B. (2021). Thinking, guessing, and believing. Manuscript, NYU.
[29] Kabat-Zinn, J. (2006). Mindfulness for beginners. Louisville, CO: Sounds True.