Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups:

Harboring Mathematical Thinking In The Middle

School Classroom

Diana French
Alliance, Nebraska

A report on an action research project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for participation in the Math in the Middle Institute.
University of Nebraska-Lincoln

July 2006
 Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups:
Harboring Mathematical Thinking in the Middle School Classroom

Abstract

In this action research study of my classroom of 8th grade mathematics, I investigated the use of

daily warm-ups written in problem-solving format. Data was collected to determine if use of such

warm-ups would have an effect on students’ abilities to problem solve, their overall attitudes

regarding problem solving and whether such an activity could also enhance their readiness each day

to learn new mathematics concepts. It was also my hope that this practice would have some positive

impact on maximizing the amount of time I have with my students for math instruction. I discovered

that daily exposure to problem-solving practices did impact the students’ overall abilities and

achievement (though sometimes not positively) and similarly the students’ attitudes showed slight

changes as well. It certainly seemed to improve their readiness for the day’s lesson as class started in

a more timely manner and students were more actively involved in learning mathematics (or perhaps

working on mathematics) than other classes not involved in the research. As a result of this study, I

plan to continue using daily warm-ups and problem-solving (perhaps on a less formal or regimented

level) and continue gathering data to further determine if this methodology can be useful in improving

students’ overall mathematical skills, abilities and achievement.

1
 Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 2

As a participant in the Math in the Middle Institute Partnership designed to improve mathematics

education at the middle school level, we were asked to perform an action research project with one of

our classes. I teach middle school mathematics at Best Middle School. I’ve held this same position for

7 years and my assignments include three basic courses: 8th grade Pre-Algebra (5 sections), 7th grade

Advanced Math (1 section) and 8th grade General Math (1 section.) I selected one class of 8th grade

Pre-Algebra to focus my action research on since it was the most diverse grouping of students of any

of my classes with respect to gender, race, overall ability, socio-economic status and ethnicity.

Our school is currently in the process of seeking accreditation through NCA and as a part of that

process we have written specific school improvement plans. For the mathematics department, that

plan is to improve students’ problem-solving skills. With that being a major focus of instruction, I

elected to base my action research project on some activity that would hopefully enhance the problem-

solving instruction and help meet the goal of our improvement plan. By exposing the students to

problem solving on a daily basis I also sought to improve some daily instructional practices and

general classroom routines.

Since I was the chief investigator for this project and the students were already comfortable with me

as their daily math teacher, my role as the researcher in their eyes did not impact their comfort level or

behavior. I spent time explaining to the class what each of our roles would be in this process and how

it would be a great opportunity for us to learn from each other. I built up the idea of this group being

chosen and unique (we referred to the group as “The Problem Solvers”) and they were (for the most

part) excited to be a part of the project.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 3

2
 Problem of Practice

In looking at a normal routine in my daily mathematics classroom, a major concern about the

amount of class time that is taken up by my current practices include:

a) trying to meet our district-wide NCA goal of improving problem solving by giving

more exposure to and practice with problem solving one class period per week;

b) taking attendance while the students mill about and socialize and generally waste time; and

c) convincing students to attempt problem-solving and improve their overall attitudes and

perceptions of problem-solving in general.

Taking attendance generally only takes one or two minutes. I found that students, when left

without direct, explicit instruction or guidance, will use that time as “free” time or time to socialize.

Others see it as an opportunity to be tardy, since “we aren’t really doing anything for those first few

minutes anyway!” This seemed like a great deal of wasted time and opportunity, especially when you

consider how much time that is over the span of one school year! I needed to find a way to utilize this

time and help get my students in “math mode,” ready to learn the new day’s lesson when I was ready

to teach it without having to “call them to order” and wait for them to get situated.

Our school’s previous idea for offering more problem solving was to focus on strictly “problem

solving” (strategies, practice, etc.) one day each week. In observing this, I found I was losing about 3-

5 minutes each day of instructional time for attendance-taking and situating. I was also “losing” a day

of introducing or building upon new concepts by spending 20% of my week “problem solving.” I

continually felt like I was playing “Beat the Clock!” on a daily basis. A rushed or hurried lesson

cannot be the effective, meaningful lesson it should be. Rather than producing higher achieving

students, the “bare bones” or “minimum required” seemed to be a common result in my classroom.

I originally saw my problem as being “too much time away from actual instruction and student

interaction/involvement.” As I began to observe my practices (with what is expected of me in mind), I

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 4

3
began to wonder if a culmination of events/activities could remedy one or more of the areas concerning

me. As an ideal, I would like to see my classroom be one which is extremely efficient to maximize

the amount of time I have to help my students learn as much mathematics as possible.

As a major focus of “as much mathematics as possible,” I want to see my students show a

willingness to tackle problem solving situations with a more open mind, using a variety of strategies

effectively, and a willingness to do so without me having to lead them by hand through the process,

“get them started” and/or persuade them to attempt a problem before seeking my assistance. This

pertains to my personal and “local” goal and practice improvement within my classroom.

Additionally, I want to be fair in my grading by using a sampling of all work the students do in my

assessment of their learning. I want to reward and acknowledge students for the work they do while

emphasizing the need for and importance of it without it taking away from time I could be moving

them further along in their mathematics journey. I believe these areas indicate an ideal that relate more

to the community of teachers within my district/school.

As an aside to this, I want to set an example for them that regimented, organized and planned use of

time is beneficial and practical, efficient and effective. If I am able to “seize the moment,” perhaps

they will, too! I believe a more structured (and math-oriented) start-up routine can help accomplish

many of those things. My action research will help answer these questions for myself and hopefully

lend a strategy to others who struggle with these issues as well. This could help our district teachers as

well with our common NCA goal relating to problem solving and a possible technique enabling us to

meet that goal.

As a teaching strategy or practice, I do not recall ever having a teacher use “daily warm-ups,” nor

was I exposed to it by my supervising teachers during my student teaching experiences. That’s not to

say I wasn’t ever aware of daily warm-ups or never considered using them. I simply didn’t ever see

them as a solution to other problems. Rather, I saw them more as “one more thing to cram into

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 5

4
an already full class time schedule.” In rethinking this stance, I believe this may do just the opposite.

If a daily warm-up can actually replace (effectively and efficiently) one or two of the events that are

already “crammed” in, perhaps I can share this knowledge and inspire others to make changes as well.

As teachers are asked to accomplish more and more, often with the same amount of preparation

time, training and funding, finding ways to become more efficient and better manage time is

imperative. While this small amount of time saved (if, indeed, it does prove to increase instructional

time) may be only the beginning of accomplishing that, every minute is precious and valuable to an

educator trying to accomplish “more.” Ultimately, if more time is spent on instruction and learning,

students will become more successful mathematically, achieve more and be that much further along in

acquiring the necessary skills and mathematical knowledge sought, required or desired. This, I

believe, is paramount to all mathematics educators.

On a final note, as “problem solving” is central to the NCTM standards (in fact, it is central to what

mathematics education is supposed to be about), the larger community of educators can benefit from

the knowledge obtained in this research. Perhaps problem solving as a daily warm-up will prove to be

an effective strategy that improves problem solving across the board. As an educator, these are areas

in which I would find more information and ideas to be beneficial and worth knowing.

Literature Review

With the current focus of mathematics being on problem solving, there is much research regarding

various approaches, beliefs and interventions. With an idea of implementing daily warm-ups in

problem-solving form, however, there is little or no research available from which to compare, contrast

or glean information. Likewise, research and information regarding these warm-ups as a means of

effective time management was also difficult to find.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 6

5
 With a belief that all students need to be mathematically proficient and capable of solving math-

related problems they encounter in daily life, studies of students’ performance show a general lack in

their abilities and proficiency with problem-solving skills. The National Research Council (NRC,

1999) warned that mathematics skills of American children are woefully inadequate for the kinds of

problem solving required in the workplace. Supported by the 1992 results of the National Assessment

of Educational Progress (NAEP), which shows about 59% of 12th-grade students could solve problems

beyond whole-number computation, there seems to be just cause for the focus of mathematics

education to be making the shift to that of problem solving.

The shortcomings in adequately providing problem solving skills and abilities to students may stem

from the failure of teachers to generalize problem-solving skills which may, in turn, have been

“exacerbated by researchers and educators who have inadvertently stifled student interest by

smoothing out the curriculum into computational and simplistic formats, thereby limiting students’

autonomous learning capabilities” (Bottge, 1999, p. 82). In essence, the focus on algorithms and facts

seems to take precedence in many classrooms leaving a lack of educational opportunities to harbor

higher-level thinking and problem solving applications to the mathematics learned.

Much of student attitude regarding problem solving and mathematics is a direct reflection of that of

the teacher’s attitude and willingness to incorporate problem solving as a major part of mathematics

instruction. James A. Middleton (1995), in a research project regarding intrinsic motivation in the

mathematics classroom, found teachers generally ill-equipped and unable to predict or utilize current

student attitudes to help students turn the corner on improving their mathematics and problem solving

attitudes. “The lack of knowledge regarding motivation was also manifest in teachers’ attention to the

utility and importance of mathematics for students’ future lives.” (Middleton, 1995, p. 275). Similarly,

the motivation necessary to bring about and maintain deliberative processing is also evidenced in the

use of problem solving units according to a 2004 study of problem solving in middle school

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 7

6
mathematics (Leader & Middleton, 2004). In general, research resoundingly emphasizes how

increased and improved problem solving skills directly affect student attitude, and vice versa (Bottge,

1999; Hiebert, 1996; Higgins, 1997; Leader & Middleton, 2004; Middleton, 1995; Pape, 2003;

Resnick, 1989; Schoenfeld, 1989).

Overall, mathematics achievement and success also seems to be heavily related to the area of

problem solving. A study by Pape (2002) utilized different approaches and strategies to boost student

achievement. His findings, coupled with subsequent analyses of other researchers, seem to implicate

an improvement in student self-regulation as well. The link between attitude, success with problem

solving, and student independence to take on more rigorous problem solving appears in many research

articles (Leader, Middleton, 2004; Pape, 2002; Resnick, 1989; & Schoenfeld, 1989). However, there

seems to be a more prevalent connection to attitude and improved skills with problem solving with

overall mathematical achievement. The consensus of the research points to exposure to problem

solving and opportunities to practice the skills above all: students who are not afforded the opportunity

to attempt problem solving on a regular basis show less achievement growth than students regularly

exposed and expected to problem solve (Bottge, Heinrichs, 2004). The National Council of Teachers

of Mathematics (NCTM, 1989) recommends that teachers focus on tasks that encourage students “to

explore, to guess, and even make and correct errors so they gain confidence in their ability to solve

complex problems” (p. 5). One key point to problem solving improvement seems to lay in making the

problems relevant to the mathematics curriculum (Leader, Middleton, 2004; Pape, 2003).

While explicitly teaching problem solving skills has long been debated, Resnick (1989) claims

“becoming a good mathematical problem solver – becoming a good thinker in any domain - may be as

much a matter of acquiring the habits and dispositions of interpretation and sense-making as of

acquiring any particular set of skills, strategies or knowledge” (p. 58).

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 8

7
 As is always a concern with educators, instructional time impacts lessons of all calibers. Over a

five-week period, Higgins (1997) used a warm-up format to address problem solving, and while she

carefully mapped out time constraints for her problem solving activities, there was no real connection

to any implication that use of warm-ups increases instructional time. This is one area where research

was not found to coincide with my research project. While the topic was, in a round-about way,

addressed it was not an exact fit to my needs as a researcher. This leads me to believe my research

may be unique and informative.

With the research findings in mind, I have chosen to explore the possible impacts of staying within

the current trend and necessity to improve problem solving in an action research project in the spring

of 2006. While the review shows an abundance of discourse regarding problem solving in general, that

there is little evidence of studies involving use of daily problem solving warm-ups indicates such a

study may help fill a gap in the available research. This lack of readily available information has

prompted me to pursue this area with action research. With such a lack of information regarding this

practice, I believe it may prove to be an effective intervention that will afford students the experience

and opportunity to become better problem solvers while at the same time help other teachers who may

have similar concerns and needs for easily implemented strategies. Should the research findings not

show improvement and prove no academic or classroom management benefit exists, the study may

benefit others who might have considered trying this idea in their classrooms. Additionally, it may

provide a starting basis for continued research along similar lines that, through modification, may

prove beneficial to mathematics education as a whole.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 9

8
 Purpose Statement

The purpose of this study is to determine if a daily warm-up (which I previously did not use), posed

in “problem-solving” form, will be an effective strategy to:

a) offer the necessary exposure to “problem solving” and practical applications or

transference of mathematical concepts beyond computational practice to improve

problem-solving skills as set for the NCA goal to improve overall scores on

standardized and state tests.

b) to determine “improvement” in students’ problem solving by observing their

willingness and ability to approach problems on their own and noticing be-

havioral and “approach” changes regarding problem solving. (This may in-

clude areas of attitude, effort, variety of strategies students are able/willing

to use to solve in addition to finding a successful/correct solution.) While I

am also interested in seeing improvement in student competence with

communicating their processes and strategies or solutions, I am not particularly

focusing on that area with this study.

c) offer students a more structured, methodical approach that may encourage

better organization and time management in general.

d) free up more classroom instructional time (take attendance while students are

busy completing the daily warm-up, grade one or two warm-up problems each day

vs. 20+ homework problems, “spot-check” daily homework, etc.) Additionally,

to maximize instructional time by putting the students in a more “mathematical

frame of mind” sooner, thereby making them ready to learn the new

lesson or concept for that day.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 10

9
My action research project will involve the use of daily problem solving warm-ups to address the

questions of:

1) How can I best utilize the amount of instructional time I’ve been given?
2) How can I help students become better problem solvers?
3) Can daily warm-ups posed in problem-solving form simultaneously enhance classroom
management, improve grading practices and strengthen problem solving skills?
4) Is repeated exposure to problem solving situations an effective means of improving
student attitudes regarding problem solving in general?

Data collection in the form of daily problem-solving results, state assessments, an alternate assessment,

student interviews and attitude surveys as well as standardized (Terra-Nova) test scores occurred

during the spring semester of 2006 in the researcher’s 4th period 8th grade math classroom.

Method

Due to some unforeseen hold-ups with beginning the actual action research project, my initial

outline for procedure and timeline didn’t work out as I had planned. Variations and modifications

were necessary to fit the new needs of the time allowed for this study. In an effort to make the study as

valid as possible and show growth or change to some degree, I found it necessary to eliminate some

aspects of the study altogether and gather less data than anticipated.

The first type of data used was the culmination of daily problems kept in individual student

“Problem-Solving Notebooks.” I gave each student a small spiral notebook, color-coded for each

student to make grabbing the notebook upon entering the room easier. This also helped save time for

me as I didn’t have to file or alphabetize the notebooks each day after grading them. The notebooks

were stored in a file box by the door. As the students entered the room each day, they would find their

“color” and take their book to their table, open to the day’s problem and begin solving. Typically, the

problems were designed to take five minutes or less (to approximate amounts of time I’d spent prior to

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 11

10
the study taking attendance, etc.) but sometimes exceeded that. As they finished, they’d put the book

back in the file box and class would begin since I’d used the time they were solving to take care of pre-

instruction operations such as attendance, make-up work and any discussion that needed to occur with

the deaf education/sign language interpreter that is present every day for the deaf student in this class.

At the end of the day, I would grade the solutions using the rubric shown in Appendix A and enter the

new problem for the next day’s round. A record was kept throughout the time frame of the project for

each of the problem’s scores.

An alternate problem-solving assessment (see Appendix B) was given twice during the duration of

the study - once in the beginning phase in February and once near the end in April. Overall scores

(graded with the rubric) were recorded. Results of the two assessments were then compared to show if

growth or improvement was made in any or all areas of the problem-solving skills or abilities of the

students.

The standardized test (Terra-Nova) scores were gathered by the school’s counselor for the previous

year and the current year for the students in this test group. Areas compared were with the “Problem

Solving” and “Math Composite” strands for the two years. While other factors may affect

performance on these tests and changes may not be attributed wholly to the implementation of the

daily problem-solving activities, it is possible the changes found from one year to the next are due in

part to these instructional differences and are included for that reason.

It should be noted the students were de-identified by the counselor and placed in random order

assuring the researcher had no knowledge of what scores belonged to which student. Therefore, in the

data gathered for these tests the student numbers will not coincide with the student numbers used for

other areas of data collection. Whenever possible, student numbers are used as a means of comparing

various data types across the board. However, this will not be the case for the Terra-Nova data.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 12

11
As primary researcher, I administered a math problem-solving attitude survey (Appendix C ) near the

onset and the conclusion of the research period. The data gathered was used to track changes in

student attitudes and perceptions of problem-solving as a whole. Student interviews were used to

record data regarding feelings, beliefs and attitudes regarding problem solving in general as well as the

research project as a whole. Coupled with the Likert scale survey, the data generated was used to form

an overall idea of what the students believed would or could affect their understanding, comfort level

and use of problem solving skills and/or abilities.

The researcher also attempted to keep a weekly journal on thoughts and feelings about the project,

its general implementation process and progression, student reactions observed and overall progress of

the tasks being performed. Many times the journal acted as a means of clarifying what changes

needed to be made or what modifications were necessary. It was also used to help determine at what

points (specifically) it might be good to administer the attitude survey or assessments.

Analysis

Regarding student attitude, I found the data gathered from the Likert scale survey was quite difficult

to assess or analyze in its entirety. Thus, I chose to make comparisons based on each statement and

how it was answered by each student and then compared how this “averaged out” for the group. (See

Appendix D) For example, for statement one (“I like problem-solving.”) the response average for the

group was 3 or “ I Somewhat Disagree” in the first survey but fell just short of that at 2.7 for the

second survey. This would indicate the overall response became more negative at the end of the

research since the average would have fallen in the “I Strongly Disagree” range. Clearly this would

mean student attitude did not improve as a result of this study. However, when looking at other

statements and the responses recorded this was not necessarily the case. In statement 7 (“Daily warm-

ups help prepare me for the new lesson.”) the initial average was within the “I Strongly Disagree”

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 13

12
range but the final average fell within the “I Somewhat Disagree” range which would indicate an

improved attitude or appreciation. With this in mind, I would question the make-up of my survey and

believe a better model would alleviate some of this confusion. This format (and perhaps the questions

themselves) did not lend well to easy or clear analysis of the data the survey rendered. Keeping all the

statements as clearly “positive” (or negative) a more definite reading or result may occur (or at least be

easier to analyze.) Also, the number of statements on the survey may have been too large for the

purpose of this study. It is likely that by limiting the number of survey statements to 10 rather than 20

would have been adequate for gathering the information I wanted to find. While I attempt to use what

data I can from this survey in conjunction with other data, I was unable to concisely represent the

findings based on this survey. (Appendix D shows the spreadsheet data for the survey statements.)

In turning to the other methods of assessing student attitude, my journal entries of “meeting with

some resistance and even some defiance regarding problem solving” and “students are beginning to

complain about having to do problem-solving every day” or “This is stupid! Why do we have to do this

again?” and comments from student interviews such as “I hate it. I wish we didn’t have to do it.” “I

don’t really like it, but I guess it’s okay. I don’t think it’s really helping anything, though.” would

steer me to believe such a thing as “overexposure” may be indicated. (Overall, the negative comments

outnumbered the positive comments. In tallying the comments from my journal and the taped student

interviews, there were 27 negative comments, 14 indifferent comments and 12 positive comments.

However, it should be noted that this may be misleading as for whatever reason my tendency to journal

regarding negative comments seemed to take precedence to journaling about the positive ones.) My

general assertion regarding student attitude is one of a very tentative nature. In some aspects, attitude

or opinion was improved and in some areas they were diminished. Overall, I would have to say the

change in attitude (either positively or negatively) was not terribly significant within the time frame of

this study. (Other data from the Likert scale survey can be seen in Appendix E .)

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 14

13
 Can daily problem-solving warm-ups improve student performance? By looking at the data

gathered from test results and the warm-ups themselves, I’m encouraged and inclined to answer yes,

they can! That is to say, sometimes and for some students. Not all students in my 8th grade class took

to the task with resolve and determination. (Is this not true of any middle school class, though?) For

those who took the new routine seriously and gave it at least some effort (worked on the problems with

or without arriving at a solution), the results were encouraging. For those who gave minimal or no

effort (wrote “I don’t know” or simply guessed a number) the results were to be expected: little or no

improvement could be noted. While I expected this, I still found it disappointing. Six or seven

students showed a marked improvement and interest in problem solving skills and abilities. Some

students (eight or nine overall) showed slight improvements. And, unfortunately, some students (3

based on the data) seemed to lose some of their ability or skills. As shown in the charts below, these

growth (or lack of growth!) patterns can be seen based on the various methods of data comparisons.
Alternate Assessment Line Graph

30

25

20

Score
Test 1
15
Test 2

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Student

This line graph shows the comparison of the alternate assessment given the first time in February and the second time in April. The
graph shows there were three students whose scores decreased, one student whose score remained the same and the remaining students’
scores improved. The bar graph below shows the same data but is included for those who visually prefer this type of graph.
Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 15

14
 This bar graph is intended to better show at a glance student improvement and to what degree the scores changed from
one assessment to the other. While the line graph above readily shows the different abilities among the students in general,
the bar graph displays the data with more of a focus on growth or decline for the individual students.

Alternate Assessment Scores

30
25
20
Score

Test 1
15
Test 2
10
5
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Student

This bar graph and line graph below show the rate of change in scores for each student. Again, the four students who
did not improve their scores are shown as those points plotted at zero or below.

Rate of Change from Test 1 to Test 2

40

30

20

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
-10

-20

Rate of Change in Alternate Assessment Scores

40

30
Rate of Change

20

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
-10

-20
Student

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 16

15
 Alternate Assessment Data

Student Test 1 Score Test 2 Score Rate of Change

2-23-06 4-12-06
1 4 8 + 10%
2 16 26 + 25%
3 14 17 + 7.5
4 13 7 - 15%
5 15 24 + 22.5%
6 8 10 + 5%
7 13 19 + 15%
8 9 17 + 20%
9 14 27 + 32.5%
10 17 14 - 7.5%
11 7 11 + 10%
12 17 19 + 5%
13 9 19 + 25%
14 13 22 + 22.5%
15 17 15 - 5%
16 7 11 + 10%
17 11 13 + 5%
18 14 14 0
19 8 10 + 5%
SUM 226 303 192.5
MEAN 11.89474 15.94737 10.13158%
MEDIAN 13 15 10%
MODE 13, 14, 17 19 5%
RANGE 13 20 17.5%
Standard Deviation 3.94257 5.939264 12.37363

This table of data was used to generate the charts to reflect patterns of growth (or decreases) and
rates of change in scores from Test 1 to Test 2. Other measures of central tendency and standard
deviations are included as notes of interest in comparing the data. Clearly, movement was more
significant for some students than for others. The students who showed the most improvement tend to
be the students who put forth the most sincere effort and are typically considered “top” students in the
class regardless of the content or activity.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 17

16
 The following data from the Terra-Nova standardized test was used to make the charts depicting
rate of change from 7th to 8th grade for the students in this research project. Data from two strands
from this test were gathered: Problem Solving and Math Computation. The researcher elected to not
use the data for math computation as part of this research project.

Terra-Nova Data: Problem Solving Strand

Student Percentile
Number 7th Grade 8th Grade Change
1 36 24 -12
2 39 61 22
3 67 67 0
4 2 26 24
5 48 61 13
6 89 82 -7
7 74 65 -9
8 13 30 17
9 31 63 32
10 29 23 -6
11 56 48 -8
12 54 42 -12
13 32 13 -19
14 89 85 -4
15 70 73 -3
16 56 65 9
17 48 66 18
18 52 47 -5
19 60 61 1
Mean 49.73684 52.73684 2.684211
St. Dev. 23.12008 21.06825 14.4147

A Comparison of Terra Nova Scores: Problem Solving Strand

100

80
Percentile

60 7th Grade
40 8th Grade

20

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Student

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 18

17
 Here, the “Problem Solving” strand compares student performance over the span of one year based on
percentiles. The bar graph above shows the two years of testing side-by-side. The line graph shows
the rate of change from one year to the next. Again, movement seemed to be significant for some
students while less significant for others. This data indicates there were more students who did not
improve or actually decreased their scores than there were based on the alternate assessment scores.

Terra-Nova Problem Solving Percentile Change

40
30
Percentile Change

20
10
Percentil Change
0
-10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

-20
-30
Student

Finally, the state “STARS” assessment 8.2.2 was used to compare student growth or improvement
with problem-solving skills. The students were given the assessment once in March and once in May.
The data gathered is summarized in the chart below using the tabled data.

State STARS Assessment 8.2.2

12
10
8
Score

Test 1
6
Test 2
4
2
0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19
Student

This graph compares the two assessment scores and shows that many students improved their
scores when taking the assessment the second time while some remained the same. Only one student
scored lower on the second assessment.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 19

18
 Data for Assessment 8.2.2

Data Data
Arranged Arranged
From From
Student Test 1 Test 2 Least to Least to
Score Score Difference Greatest Greatest
1 1 4 +3 0 0
2 6 10 +4 1 1
3 3 7 +4 1 1
4 3 5 +2 1 2
5 9 11 +2 2 3
6 2 2 +0 2 4
7 7 9 +2 2 5
8 4 6 +2 3 5
9 5 11 +6 3 6
10 1 5 +4 3 6
11 0 0 +0 4 7
12 5 9 +4 5 8
13 5 8 +3 5 8
14 3 6 +3 5 8
15 7 10 +3 5 9
16 1 1 +0 6 10
17 2 3 +1 7 10
18 5 8 +3 7 11
19 2 1 -1 9 11
2.368421 3.736842 6.052632 mean
3 3 6 median
3 5 8 mode
7 9 11 range
St.
2.445906 3.503549 Dev.

Student attitudes may not have changed greatly (they still may not “like” problem solving) but their

comfort level when presented with problem solving may have increased. I did feel that students didn’t

approach the problem solving with as much trepidation and doubt as they did prior to this study, but I

still saw an overall dislike for and dread of having to do the work. Many of the students did not

believe the daily warm-ups made a difference (as seen in the survey results, researcher’s journal and

the student interviews) and preferred we didn’t do them.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 20

19
 Students no longer “milled around” when coming into class, tardies were less frequent and when it

was time to start the lesson students were seated, in “work” mode and ready to learn. Tardies were

indeed less frequent, students did come into class and get right to work and generally they were much

more prepared for the content of the day’s lesson because their minds were already in “math mode.”

This was a “sometimes” situation, though. While I did see some improvement with these things, it

didn’t become an everyday occurrence and it was definitely not ALL students. Several journal entries

included comments such as, “Wow! Every student was at their table working on their problem-solving

before class time actually started!” and “They’ve gotten so good at just coming into the room, grabbing

their notebook and beginning their work! There’s some grumbling and complaining as they do it,

but they’re doing it!” In looking at the attendance record, I found there were typically four or five

tardies recorded each week prior to the problem-solving research. During the span of the study, tardies

were generally less than two per week. For the few weeks of school remaining after the wrap-up of the

research, tardies began to rise again.

Many students showed an overall improvement in their problem-solving skills. Some students (due

to attitude or willingness to work or put forth effort) did not show growth while some even appeared to

lose some of their ability to successfully problem-solve throughout the study. One student in particular

continued to answer the daily problems with “I don’t know!” or “I don’t get it!” as their answer, with

no evidence of even trying to solve the problem or apply a strategy of any kind. Could this growth be

attributed to the extra efforts brought about by implementing daily problem-solving warm-ups? The

scores for assessments and standardized tests indicate growth did occur for many students. Whether

this growth is a “normal” or expected amount of growth for students of this age in a one-year span is

unknown to this researcher. I would surmise a “normal” growth would show the students maintaining

nearly the same level of proficiency (or falling in approximately the same percentile ranking) as they

did the previous year since the tests are targeted for grade appropriateness.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 21

20
Growth or improvement beyond those levels would indicate the skills were enhanced beyond what

would be customary for that one-year span. Students who markedly changed their level of proficiency

or percentile ranking could then be viewed as evidence the daily warm-ups did indeed impact their

problem-solving skills.

Interpretation

Based on my findings and the data gathered throughout this study, I am still not exactly sure to what

extent the implementation of daily warm-ups affected the students’ abilities to problem-solve. This

may be due in part to the short duration of the study and time frame within which it fell. While it

seems logical to believe an impact was made for many students, to what extent that impact can be

directly related to the warm-ups remains unknown to this researcher. Having observed the students

throughout the study, witnessed their work and the changes in their work or results and listening to

their comments I could say the project definitely affected some students and their problem-solving

abilities. As I’ve mentioned, some students approached the process with enthusiasm and a will to

succeed. Others saw it as a necessary evil. The others fell somewhere between the two opinions.

As with any classroom learning, some techniques, procedures or methods are very effective for

some students while failing miserably to reach others. This could certainly be the case for using daily

warm-ups of a problem-solving nature. Some students find a change in the customary routine

refreshing while others view it as a hindrance or “extra work.” Could this have been the case with the

problem-solving activity this study presented? I would have to say for some more than likely. But I’m

still plagued by the question of, “Exactly how much impact did the actual warm-ups have on the

overall problem solving skills and abilities?” Therefore, I feel compelled to continue testing the

proposal that this strategy will make a difference. I believe, given more time to collect greater

amounts of data and make further observations (as well as affording more time for the greater exposure

of daily problem-solving), I will be able to answer that question more definitively.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 22

21
 To make broad and sweeping statements regarding the success or failure of this study to produce

the desired results after only a few months would be irresponsible. However, I did find the results

compelling and encouraging enough to believe it has merit and deserves further attention.

In conferring with Dr. Heaton throughout the duration of the study I commented several times that I

viewed this initial study as a “trial run” (mainly due to the time constraints and unforeseen hold-ups or

setbacks) by which I could determine what worked and what didn’t. Having practiced the procedure

for this short time period, I believe I now have a better idea of what needs to take place at what times,

what modifications need to be made and how to best organize the various aspects of the study. Data

collection, the survey and interview schedules and formats of the forms and notebooks used are crucial

to making the study (and ultimately the results of the study) more reliable and evidentiary. It is my

intention to make these changes and further explore the possibilities and outcomes a similar study may

hold for my students in the upcoming year. The sheer fact that I remain intrigued, interested and

compelled to maintain a focus on the potential growth opportunities use of daily problem-solving

warm-ups can have on overall student performance assures me that there is still much to learn

regarding this idea.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 23

References
22
Bottge, B. A. (1999). Effects of contextualized math instruction on problem solving of average
and below-average achieving Students. Journal of Special Education, 33(2), 81-92.

Bottge, B. A., Heinrichs, M., Mehta, Z. D., Rueda, E., Hung, Y., & Danneker, J. (2004).
Teaching mathematical problem solving to middle school students in math, technology
education, and special education classrooms. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 27 (1).

Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Human, P., Murray, H., Oliver, A., &
Wearne, D. (1996). Problem solving as a basis for reform in curriculum and instruction: the case
of mathematics. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 12-21.

Higgins, K. M.; (1997). The effect of year-long instruction in mathematical problem solving
on middle-school students’ attitudes, beliefs, and abilities. Journal of Experimental
Education, 66(1), 5-28.

Leader, L. & Middleton, J. (2004). Promoting critical-thinking dispositions by using problem

solving in middle school mathematics. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 28(1).

Middleton, J. A. (1995). A study of intrinsic motivation in the mathematics classroom: a

personal constructs approach. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(3),
254-279.

National Research Council. (1999). Everybody counts: a report to the nation on the future of
mathematics education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Council for Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Evaluation Standards: Curriculum and
Evaluation For School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

Pape, S. (2003). Middle school children’s strategic behavior: classification and relation to
academic achievement and mathematical problem solving. Instructional Science, 31(6),
419-449.

Resnick, L. B. (1989). Treating mathematics as an ill-structured discipline. In R. Charles & E.

Silver (Eds.), The Teaching and Assessing of Mathematical Problem Solving, pp. 32-60.
Reston VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Schoenfeld, A. II (1989). Teaching mathematical thinking and problem solving. In L. B.

Resnick & L. E. Klopfer (Eds.). Toward the Thinking Curriculum: Current Cognitive
Research, pp. 83-103. [ASCD Yearbook]. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 24

23
 APPENDIX A

Math - Problem Solving General Rubric

Teacher Name: Mrs. French Student Name: ________________________________________

CATEGORY 4 3 2 1
Mathematical Explanation Explanation shows Explanation shows Explanation shows
Concepts shows complete substantial some understanding very limited
understanding of understanding of the of the mathematical understanding of the
the mathematical mathematical concepts needed to underlying concepts
concepts used to concepts used to solve the problem(s). needed to solve the
solve the solve the problem(s). problem(s) OR is not
problem(s). written.

Mathematical Uses complex Uses effective Some evidence of Little evidence of

Reasoning and refined mathematical mathematical mathematical
mathematical reasoning reasoning. reasoning.
reasoning.

Mathematical Errors 90-100% of the Almost all (85-89%) Most (75-84%) of the More than 75% of the
steps and of the steps and steps and solutions steps and solutions
solutions have solutions have no have no mathematical have mathematical
no mathematical mathematical errors. errors. errors.
errors.

Explanation Explanation is Explanation is clear. Explanation is a little Explanation is difficult

detailed and difficult to understand, to understand and is
clear. but includes critical missing several
components. components OR was
not included.

Strategy/Procedures Typically, uses Typically, uses an Sometimes uses an Rarely uses an

an efficient and effective strategy to effective strategy to effective strategy to
effective strategy solve the problem(s). solve problems, but solve problems.
to solve the does not do it
problem(s). consistently.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 25

24
 Appendix B

Alternate Assessment – Page 1

1. If a gardener has 28 feet of lumber to build a flower box that must be a minimum of 4 feet
wide, what are the possible lengths of the flower box? (Assume that each length and width
must be in whole feet lengths with no fractions used.)

2. Five friends meet for lunch. Each friend says “Hello!” to each other person as they arrive.
How many “Hellos” are said by the five friends combined? What if there were 10 friends
who met for lunch? What if there were “n” friends?

3. Find the next three terms in the sequence 2, 4, 3, 6, 5...

4. Here is a multiplication problem that was partially erased.

1 __

x __
____________

9 __

Can you fill in a possible set of missing digits?

How many possible answers are there? What are they?

5. Bill walks 5 blocks to school each day. Some days, he walks two blocks north and 3 blocks east.
Sketch a map of John’s house in relation to the school and determine the total number of ways John
could walk to school without backtracking or going out of his way.

25
 Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 26

Appendix B (continued)

6. Marietta’s favorite cookie recipe calls for 1 ½ cups of sugar to make 18 cookies. She has enough of
the other ingredients to make however many cookies she wants, but she only has 2 ¾ cups of sugar. If
she uses all her sugar, how many cookies can Marietta make? Will there be “partial” cookies?

7. John has 4 pets; a bird, a fish, a cat and a dog. Their names, in no particular order, are Skittles,
Blue, Mack and Daisy. Each pet is housed in a different room of the house. Determine each pet’s
name and where it “lives” in the house using the clues and chart below.

Daisy and the pet who lives in the living room are the only females.
Skittles lives in the kitchen, but he often sneaks in to visit Mack in the den.
John’s dog and the other male pet do not live in the bedroom.
The bird and dog both live in rooms that start with the same letter as their species.
Skittles likes to watch the fish.

Skittles Mack Blue Daisy Living Room Bedroom Den Kitchen

Bird
Cat
Fish
Dog
Living Room
Bedroom
Den
Kitchen

8. Arrange the squares to form one regular polygon (sides must match up by their entire length as
shown below.) Find the maximum perimeter and area that can be made for each polygon. Find the
minimum perimeter and area. Explain what you notice about area and perimeter for the number of
squares given.

a) Example:

b)

c) NOT like this:

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 27

26
 Appendix C

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-ups Survey

Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability to accurately describe your thoughts and feelings regarding
our use of daily math warm-ups and problem-solving. Mark ONE answer for each question. Place your completed
survey in the “SURVEY BOX”. Thank you for helping me to understand your thoughts.

Question Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly I Don’t

Agree Agree Disagree Disagree Know
1. I like problem-solving.

2. I feel confident when problem-solving.

3. Problem-solving is easier when working with a
group/partner.
4. I can get the correct solution most of the time.
5. Problem solving everyday has helped me
become a better problem solver.
6. I feel more ready to learn math after working on
problem-solving warm ups.
7. Daily warm-ups help prepare me for the new
lesson.
8. Problem-solving is an important skill that relates
math to the real world.
9. I don’t usually know where to start when
problem-solving.
10. There is more than one way to solve most
problems.
11. I use different strategies to solve problems
depending on the type of problem.
12. I want to be a better problem solver.

13. Most people in this class are better problem

solvers than me.
14. Most students cannot be successful problem-
solvers because it is too hard.
15. I will not use problem-solving once I’m no
longer taking a math class.
16. Problem-solving helps me understand why I
have to learn certain math concepts.
17. Problem-solving is a better way to practice and
understand math concepts.
18. Daily warm-ups take too much class time.

19. I would prefer to do more problem-solving, but

it takes too much time.
20. I don’t understand how problem-solving will
help me learn mathematics.

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 28

27
 Appendix D - Survey Spreadsheet

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

SURVEY 1 (2-9-06) 1 1 2 1 1 1
2 2 3 1 1 1
2 3 4 2 2 1
2 3 5 3 2 2
2 3 5 3 3 2
2 4 5 3 3 2
3 4 5 3 3 3
3 4 5 3 3 3
3 4 5 3 3 3
3 4 5 4 3 3
3 4 5 4 4 3
3 4 5 4 4 3
4 4 5 4 4 3
4 4 5 4 4 3
4 4 5 4 4 3
4 4 5 4 4 3
4 4 5 4 4 4
4 4 5 4 4 4
4 4 5 5 4 5
Mean 3 3.578947368 4.684210526 3.315789474 3.157894737 2.736842105
Strongly Agree 0 0 16 1 0 1
Somewhat Agree 7 14 1 9 9 2
Somewhat Disagree 6 3 1 6 6 10
Stongly Disagree 5 1 1 1 2 3
I don't know 1 1 0 2 2 3

Survey 2 (4-10-06) 2 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 2 1 1 1
2 2 2 2 2 1
2 2 2 2 2 2
2 3 2 3 2 2
2 3 4 3 2 2
2 3 5 3 3 2
2 3 5 3 3 2
3 3 5 3 3 2
3 3 5 3 3 3
3 3 5 4 3 3
3 4 5 4 4 3
3 4 5 4 4 3
3 4 5 4 4 3
3 4 5 4 4 3
4 4 5 4 4 3
4 4 5 4 4 4
4 4 5 5 4 4
4 4 5 5 5 4
Mean 2.789473684 3.157894737 4.105263158 3.263157895 3.052631579 2.444444444
Strongly Agree 0 0 13 2 1 0
Somewhat Agree 4 8 1 7 7 3
Somewhat Disagree 7 7 0 6 5 7
Stongly Disagree 8 3 4 2 4 6
I don't know 0 1 1 2 2 3

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 29

28
 Appendix D – Survey Spreadsheet (continued)

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13

1 1 2 2 1 1 1
1 1 2 3 2 2 1
1 1 2 3 3 2 2
2 2 3 3 3 2 2
2 3 3 3 3 3 2
2 3 3 3 3 3 2
2 3 3 4 3 3 3
3 3 3 4 3 3 3
3 4 3 4 4 3 3
3 4 3 4 4 3 3
3 4 3 4 4 4 3
3 4 3 4 4 4 3
3 4 4 4 4 4 3
3 4 5 4 4 4 3
4 5 5 4 4 4 4
4 5 5 5 5 4 4
4 5 5 5 5 5 5
4 5 5 5 5 5 5
4 5 5 5 5 5 5
2.736842105 3.473684211 3.526315789 3.842105263 3.631578947 3.368421053 3
0 1 6 4 4 3 4
5 4 1 9 7 6 8
7 6 9 5 6 6 2
4 5 3 1 1 3 3
3 3 0 0 1 1 2

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 2 1 2 1 1
2 2 2 3 3 2 2
2 2 3 4 3 2 2
3 3 3 4 3 2 2
3 3 3 4 3 2 2
3 3 3 4 3 3 2
3 3 3 4 4 3 3
3 4 3 4 4 3 3
3 4 3 4 4 4 3
3 4 4 4 4 4 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 3
4 4 4 5 4 4 4
4 4 4 5 4 4 4
4 5 4 5 4 5 4
4 5 4 5 5 5 4
5 5 5 5 5 5 4
5 5 5 5 5 5 4
3.210526316 3.473684211 3.368421053 3.947368421 3.631578947 3.315789474 2.842105263
2 4 2 6 3 4 5
6 7 7 10 9 6 6
7 4 7 1 5 3 6
2 2 2 0 1 4 0
2 2 1 2 1 2 2

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 30

29
 Appendix D – Survey Spreadsheet (continued)

Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 2 1 1 1
1 1 1 2 2 3 1
1 2 1 2 3 3 2
3 2 2 3 3 4 2
4 2 3 3 3 4 4
4 3 3 4 3 4 4
4 3 3 4 3 4 4
4 3 3 4 4 5 4
4 4 4 4 4 5 4
4 4 4 4 4 5 4
4 4 4 4 4 5 4
4 4 4 4 5 5 4
4 4 4 4 5 5 5
5 5 4 4 5 5 5
5 5 4 4 5 5 5
5 5 4 5 5 5 5
5 5 4 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5
3.578947368 3.315789474 3.105263158 3.578947368 3.684210526 4.157894737 3.631578947
0 5 1 3 1 0 2
1 5 9 2 5 2 0
9 3 4 10 4 4 8
5 3 1 3 7 11 6
4 3 4 1 2 2 3

1 1 1 2 1 3 1
1 1 1 2 2 3 1
1 3 1 2 2 4 2
2 3 1 3 2 4 2
3 3 1 3 2 4 2
3 4 2 3 3 4 3
3 4 2 3 3 4 3
4 4 3 4 4 5 3
4 4 3 4 4 5 4
4 4 3 4 4 5 4
4 4 3 4 4 5 4
4 4 4 4 4 5 4
4 4 4 4 4 5 4
4 4 4 4 4 5 4
4 5 4 4 4 5 4
5 5 4 4 4 5 5
5 5 4 4 4 5 5
5 5 4 4 5 5 5
5 5 5 4 5 5 5
3.473684211 3.789473684 2.842105263 3.473684211 3.421052632 4.526315789 3.421052632
1 0 1 0 4 0 3
3 3 7 12 2 2 3
8 9 4 4 10 5 7
4 5 2 3 2 12 4
3 2 5 0 1 0 2

Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 31

30
 Appendix E

Other Survey Data

Question Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student
# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 4 4 4
2 2 4 4 4 4 3 3 4 4 4
3 2 5 5 5 5 3 5 5 5 5
4 3 4 4 3 4 4 4 4 4 4
5 3 3 4 3 4 3 2 1 4 4
6 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 1 4 5
7 3 3 3 3 4 2 3 4 4 4
8 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 1 5 4
9 2 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 5 2
10 3 5 4 4 5 4 3 4 5 3
11 3 5 3 3 4 4 4 3 4 5
12 4 4 5 3 3 3 2 4 3 2
13 5 5 3 1 3 2 4 1 3 3
14 4 4 4 1 4 4 5 4 5 3
15 1 2 5 5 3 4 3 4 5 3
16 1 4 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 4
17 4 3 3 4 2 4 2 4 5 4
18 5 3 5 3 1 4 3 4 5 5
19 5 5 3 5 1 5 5 4 4 3
20 4 5 4 4 1 4 2 4 5 2
Sum 63 78 75 66 62 69 62 67 87 73
Question Student student student student student student student student student student
# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 4
2 2 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 4 4
3 2 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5 5
4 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 5 4
5 4 4 3 4 2 4 4 3 5 3
6 2 3 3 4 2 1 2 3 1 2
7 4 4 3 5 2 1 3 4 4 3
8 4 5 4 4 3 4 3 4 5 1
9 3 5 3 4 4 3 3 1 5 4
10 4 5 4 5 4 4 3 4 4 5
11 5 4 3 5 4 1 4 3 4 4
12 4 4 3 3 2 5 2 3 5 4
13 2 4 1 3 3 3 4 4 . 2
14 5 5 1 3 4 5 3 1 4 4
15 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 1 5 3
16 2 4 3 4 3 1 4 1 1 4
17 2 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 4 3
18 2 4 3 4 2 4 2 4 4 4
19 5 5 5 4 5 4 5 4 3 5
20 2 5 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 1
Sum 63 83 66 77 67 66 68 63 76 69
Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 32

31
 Appendix E – (continued)

Other Survey Data

Question Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student Student
# 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 3 1
2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3
3 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
4 3 3 3 1 5 4 3 1 2
5 4 4 4 4 3 4 3 1 2
6 3 1 3 3 3 4 2 1 2
7 3 1 2 1 3 4 2 1 2
8 4 5 3 5 1 5 1 3 5
9 5 3 4 3 5 5 5 3 2
10 4 5 4 3 3 2 4 4 4
11 5 5 3 4 4 4 3 1 2
12 4 4 5 2 1 4 3 3 5
13 4 2 3 3 5 3 3 2 2
14 4 5 5 1 1 4 1 4 5
15 4 5 5 4 1 4 2 1 2
16 4 1 4 1 4 4 2 1 5
17 4 4 4 5 4 4 2 1 5
18 4 5 4 3 3 5 2 1 5
19 5 5 5 5 5 4 1 4 5
20 4 5 5 4 4 5 1 1 5
Sum 80 76 78 65 67 82 52 44 69
Questions student student student student student student student student student
# 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
1 4 2 3 3 2 3 2 2 3
2 3 2 3 4 4 3 1 3 2
3 2 5 5 2 5 2 5 5 1
4 4 2 4 1 5 2 4 4 1
5 4 2 4 1 2 3 1 3 2
6 4 2 3 3 4 3 3 2 1
7 4 3 3 1 5 2 3 4 3
8 4 4 3 5 2 2 1 3 5
9 4 3 4 3 2 3 4 4 2
10 5 4 4 5 1 4 4 1 5
11 4 4 4 5 4 3 3 3 2
12 3 4 3 1 2 2 1 5 5
13 4 2 3 1 4 4 2 3 2
14 1 4 4 5 4 3 4 4 2
15 5 4 4 4 3 5 1 4 5
16 4 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 5
17 4 2 4 4 2 4 3 4 4
18 1 4 5 5 3 2 4 4 4
19 3 5 4 5 5 5 4 5 5
20 5 2 4 5 3 2 1 3 3
sum 72 63 75 64 64 60 55 67 62
Daily Problem-Solving Warm-Ups 33

32
 Appendix E – (continued)

Other Survey Data

Question # Sum per MEAN per

Survey 1 question question
1 57 3
2 70 3.684211
3 89 4.684211
4 63 3.315789
5 60 3.157895
6 52 2.736842
7 52 2.736842
8 66 3.473684
9 67 3.526316
10 73 3.842105
11 69 3.631579
12 64 3.368421
13 57 3
14 68 3.578947
15 63 3.315789
16 59 3.105263
17 68 3.578947
18 70 3.684211
19 79 4.157895
20 69 3.631579
1315
Survey 2
1 53 2.789474
2 60 3.157895
3 78 4.105263
4 62 3.263158
5 58 3.052632
6 48 2.526316
7 61 3.210526
8 66 3.473684
9 64 3.368421
10 75 3.947368
11 69 3.631579
12 61 3.210526
13 51 2.833333
14 66 3.473684
15 72 3.789474
16 54 2.842105
17 66 3.473684
18 65 3.421053
19 86 4.526316
20 65 3.421053
1280

33