Profiles of Thinking Skills and Levels of Motivation in a Problem-Solving Task

Sarah Buckley, Mary Ainley and Pip PattisonIn the following project, we investigated students’ use of mathematical thinking skills in an interactive, computer problem-solving task. Within the program Between The Lines (BTL) (Ainley & Hidi, 2002), a range of statistical information was presented. Students were required to integrate these different types of mathematical information in line with constructive assessment. This approach promotes problem solutions that move beyond the simple reproduction of answers and formulae and are representative of higher order thinking (Clarke, 1996). Note-taking is a process known to facilitate learning and the development of ideas (Kiewra, 1989), thus the program also asked students to take notes as they worked through the information. These notes were then used to create a problem solution. Students? motivational reactions (i.e., their interest levels) were also monitored throughout the task. Two-hundred and eighty-six Year 8 students (151 males and 135 females) participated in the project. The SOLO taxonomy (Biggs & Collis, 1982) was used to code students’ notes whereas their solutions and notes were marked for understanding of the material presented. Associations between students’ level of thinking and understanding were investigated in relation to levels of on-task interest and other indicators of motivational engagement. In this roundtable presentation, examples of students’ problem solutions and notes will be presented. Profiles of students’ thinking, for example, higher order versus low order thinking, and their relationship with on-task motivation will be examined. Discussion will focus on interpretation and implications of the data.

Reviewing of research papers

Research papers will be blind reviewed by a panel of peers approved by the conference committee. The main purpose of the refereeing process is to contribute to the growth and development of quality practice in mathematics education research. Thus reviewers are asked to assist authors by providing helpful feedback and to comment on the suitability of papers for presentation at the conference. Accordingly, it will not be assumed that published papers presented at the conference will be as polished as articles in scholarly journals. Referees will be asked to assess papers being reviewed against the accepted norms for scholarly works presented at MERGA conferences, as set out above.

Each conference proceedings’ Editorial Team will exercise discretion over the reviewing process.

Reviewers’ comments will be returned to the authors. Authors whose papers are not accepted for publication may be invited by the editorial panel to present their paper at the conference, with an abstract (only) being published in the proceedings. Papers may be rejected outright, with no opportunity for presentation at the conference in an alternative form.

The MERGA website has detailed advice about criteria for reviewing of MERGA papers, review forms, and examples of strong and poor reviews of different types.

Profiles of Thinking Skills and Levels of Motivation in a Problem-Solving Task

Profiles of Thinking Skills and Levels of Motivation in a Problem-Solving Task

Short Communications

Presentation of short communications

Beth Southwell Practical Implications Award

Recent Winners

Applying for entry into the BSPIA

Judging of the BSPIA

History of the Award

Research Papers

Research papers can take two major forms:

i. Empirical investigations

ii. Theoretical or position papers

Originality

Reviewing of research papers

Presentation of research papers

Research Symposia

Early Career Research Award

Recent Winners

Applying for the Award

Early Bird Review Process