- 50 Problem-solving Lessons, Grades 1-6: The Best from 10 Years of Math...
- ›
- Customer Reviews

109 of 110 people found this helpful

ByBruce A. Bucholzon February 11, 2000

As a classroom special education teacher with 20 years of experience I have found this book to be a refreshing approach to teaching students. Marilyn Burns describes the lesson plans in this book as how they were actually presented to the students in the classroom. Marilyn uses a dialogue approach in showing teachers how to implement a given lesson. She also connects each math lesson to a writing exercise where the students have to explain the process that they used when solving the given math problem. Marilyn also gives examples of the students writing for each lesson. The lesson plans in this math book are based on Constructivist Theory. Jean Piaget's work forms the basis for Constructivist Theory. I have tried 10 of the Problem Solving lessons in my class from this book. Each lesson has captured the interest of the students and helped experience a basic math concept. Usually after I have done one of the lessons from this book the students always tell me how much fun the math class was and that they would like to do that given activity again. I also enjoy teaching the math lessons. Although as a special education teacher I did make a few modifications to the lesson before I presented it in my classroom. I highly recommend this book to any math teacher.

2 of 6 people found this helpful

ByA. Chongon May 24, 2014

California tried reform math back in the 1990's. After dropping to 50th in the nation, they dropped it.

But it's creeping back in.

If you think that "deep understanding" of how to do multiplication or long division is important, well, it's not. It's one of those things you learn quickly and well before moving on to real problem solving with abstract concepts--algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus. And the single biggest thing I see preventing kids from problem solving at the algebra/geometry level, is lack of fluency and practice at basic computation and pre-algebra problems. It really isn't that important to understand why.

I went to a little technical school in Cambridge, MA, and a holistic understanding of computation was just not important. Problem solving on difficult high school and college math type problems, math team style, was.

I think the problem with these approaches is what the Russians recognize as cognitive overload. If you type by thinking about where the letters are, you'll never type fast. And it's not important. What is important is having the letters and words automatic enough that you can think about the plot development of the great American novel that you're typing.

From another website critiquing reform math:

Marilyn Burns is vague about specific math learning objectives. But she's clear that children shouldn't learn standard arithmetic. Here are quotes from Teaching Arithmetic, Part III of in About Teaching Mathematics: A K-8 Resource.

--"Facility with standard paper-and-pencil arithmetic is no longer the measure of arithmetic understanding and competence." Page 139

--"Because of the present availability of calculators, having children spend more than six years of their schooling mastering paper-and-pencil arithmetic is as absurd as teaching them to ride and care for a horse in case the family car breaks down." Page 142

--"There is no way for all students to do arithmetic calculations in the same way any more than it is essential for all children to develop identical handwriting or writing styles." Page 153

--"the emphasis of arithmetic instruction should be on having students invent their own ways to compute, rather than learning and practicing procedures introduced by teacher or textbook." Page 154

--"The change from teaching time-honored algorithms to having children invent their own methods requires a major shift for most teachers. It requires, foremost, that teachers value and trust children's ability and inventiveness in making sense of numerical situations, rather than on their diligence in following procedures." Page 156

--"In all activities, the emphases are on having children invent their own methods for adding and subtracting . . . the standard algorithms are not taught." Page 183

--"Also, rather than teaching the standard computational algorithm for multiplying, the activities give students the challenge of creating their own procedures for computing." Page 194

--"A great deal of emphasis traditionally has been put on paper-and-pencil algorithms for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of fractions. Too much focus is often on 'how to do the problem' rather than on 'what makes sense'. The following suggestions offer ways to have students calculate mentally with fractions. The emphasis shifts from pencil-and-paper computation with the goal of arriving at exact answers to mental calculations with the goal of arriving at estimates and being able to explain why they're reasonable." Page 232 [Bold emphasis added].

Comment: Mastery of exact computations with fractions is the number one predictor of later success in algebra.

--On page 241 we have a statement that is almost identical to quote #8, the quote just given for fractions. The difference? Two occurrences of "decimals" replace the two occurrences of "fractions."

But it's creeping back in.

If you think that "deep understanding" of how to do multiplication or long division is important, well, it's not. It's one of those things you learn quickly and well before moving on to real problem solving with abstract concepts--algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus. And the single biggest thing I see preventing kids from problem solving at the algebra/geometry level, is lack of fluency and practice at basic computation and pre-algebra problems. It really isn't that important to understand why.

I went to a little technical school in Cambridge, MA, and a holistic understanding of computation was just not important. Problem solving on difficult high school and college math type problems, math team style, was.

I think the problem with these approaches is what the Russians recognize as cognitive overload. If you type by thinking about where the letters are, you'll never type fast. And it's not important. What is important is having the letters and words automatic enough that you can think about the plot development of the great American novel that you're typing.

From another website critiquing reform math:

Marilyn Burns is vague about specific math learning objectives. But she's clear that children shouldn't learn standard arithmetic. Here are quotes from Teaching Arithmetic, Part III of in About Teaching Mathematics: A K-8 Resource.

--"Facility with standard paper-and-pencil arithmetic is no longer the measure of arithmetic understanding and competence." Page 139

--"Because of the present availability of calculators, having children spend more than six years of their schooling mastering paper-and-pencil arithmetic is as absurd as teaching them to ride and care for a horse in case the family car breaks down." Page 142

--"There is no way for all students to do arithmetic calculations in the same way any more than it is essential for all children to develop identical handwriting or writing styles." Page 153

--"the emphasis of arithmetic instruction should be on having students invent their own ways to compute, rather than learning and practicing procedures introduced by teacher or textbook." Page 154

--"The change from teaching time-honored algorithms to having children invent their own methods requires a major shift for most teachers. It requires, foremost, that teachers value and trust children's ability and inventiveness in making sense of numerical situations, rather than on their diligence in following procedures." Page 156

--"In all activities, the emphases are on having children invent their own methods for adding and subtracting . . . the standard algorithms are not taught." Page 183

--"Also, rather than teaching the standard computational algorithm for multiplying, the activities give students the challenge of creating their own procedures for computing." Page 194

--"A great deal of emphasis traditionally has been put on paper-and-pencil algorithms for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of fractions. Too much focus is often on 'how to do the problem' rather than on 'what makes sense'. The following suggestions offer ways to have students calculate mentally with fractions. The emphasis shifts from pencil-and-paper computation with the goal of arriving at exact answers to mental calculations with the goal of arriving at estimates and being able to explain why they're reasonable." Page 232 [Bold emphasis added].

Comment: Mastery of exact computations with fractions is the number one predictor of later success in algebra.

--On page 241 we have a statement that is almost identical to quote #8, the quote just given for fractions. The difference? Two occurrences of "decimals" replace the two occurrences of "fractions."

ByBruce A. Bucholzon February 11, 2000

As a classroom special education teacher with 20 years of experience I have found this book to be a refreshing approach to teaching students. Marilyn Burns describes the lesson plans in this book as how they were actually presented to the students in the classroom. Marilyn uses a dialogue approach in showing teachers how to implement a given lesson. She also connects each math lesson to a writing exercise where the students have to explain the process that they used when solving the given math problem. Marilyn also gives examples of the students writing for each lesson. The lesson plans in this math book are based on Constructivist Theory. Jean Piaget's work forms the basis for Constructivist Theory. I have tried 10 of the Problem Solving lessons in my class from this book. Each lesson has captured the interest of the students and helped experience a basic math concept. Usually after I have done one of the lessons from this book the students always tell me how much fun the math class was and that they would like to do that given activity again. I also enjoy teaching the math lessons. Although as a special education teacher I did make a few modifications to the lesson before I presented it in my classroom. I highly recommend this book to any math teacher.

0Comment109 of 110 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse

ByShannon Randolphon September 14, 2006

I have used this book as a teacher of Kindergarteners, 1st Graders, and 2nd Graders. I now use it as a Homeschooling mom of 3. It seems that chikdren no longer "learn by doing". Marilyn Burns reminds us that the "process" tells us as much as the final result when it comes to how children process math knowledge. You will not regret this purchase.

11 comment19 of 19 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

ByK. P.on December 30, 2008

I love this book...I have used it with grades 2-5 and have found great success. As with all Marilyn Burns/Math Solutions publications, this is a must have resource for all teachers.

0Comment12 of 12 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

ByJOSE CARLOS SUZUKIon January 31, 2013

I liked it so much that I'm looking for more publications on problem-solving.

I'm a math teacher in a public school in São Paulo, Brazil, and just finished a small study on problem solving in my graduate.

Now I will apply some lessons with my students.

Thanks a lot.

I'm a math teacher in a public school in São Paulo, Brazil, and just finished a small study on problem solving in my graduate.

Now I will apply some lessons with my students.

Thanks a lot.

0Comment4 of 4 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

ByLisa Wyatton August 20, 2015

Love this book! I teach math for grades 4-6, and these lesson are excellent for multiple ages and emphasize problem-solving skills. I love the format with materials needed, description of lesson, and examples of student work. Excellent resource.

0Comment1 of 1 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

ByDeb Reynoldson October 7, 2014

Love the lessons

0Comment0 of 1 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

Bydarleneon August 14, 2014

Great Experience

0Comment0 of 1 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

Bykmilleron August 30, 2014

Great lessons.

0Comment0 of 1 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

ByA. Chongon May 24, 2014

California tried reform math back in the 1990's. After dropping to 50th in the nation, they dropped it.

But it's creeping back in.

If you think that "deep understanding" of how to do multiplication or long division is important, well, it's not. It's one of those things you learn quickly and well before moving on to real problem solving with abstract concepts--algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus. And the single biggest thing I see preventing kids from problem solving at the algebra/geometry level, is lack of fluency and practice at basic computation and pre-algebra problems. It really isn't that important to understand why.

I went to a little technical school in Cambridge, MA, and a holistic understanding of computation was just not important. Problem solving on difficult high school and college math type problems, math team style, was.

I think the problem with these approaches is what the Russians recognize as cognitive overload. If you type by thinking about where the letters are, you'll never type fast. And it's not important. What is important is having the letters and words automatic enough that you can think about the plot development of the great American novel that you're typing.

From another website critiquing reform math:

Marilyn Burns is vague about specific math learning objectives. But she's clear that children shouldn't learn standard arithmetic. Here are quotes from Teaching Arithmetic, Part III of in About Teaching Mathematics: A K-8 Resource.

--"Facility with standard paper-and-pencil arithmetic is no longer the measure of arithmetic understanding and competence." Page 139

--"Because of the present availability of calculators, having children spend more than six years of their schooling mastering paper-and-pencil arithmetic is as absurd as teaching them to ride and care for a horse in case the family car breaks down." Page 142

--"There is no way for all students to do arithmetic calculations in the same way any more than it is essential for all children to develop identical handwriting or writing styles." Page 153

--"the emphasis of arithmetic instruction should be on having students invent their own ways to compute, rather than learning and practicing procedures introduced by teacher or textbook." Page 154

--"The change from teaching time-honored algorithms to having children invent their own methods requires a major shift for most teachers. It requires, foremost, that teachers value and trust children's ability and inventiveness in making sense of numerical situations, rather than on their diligence in following procedures." Page 156

--"In all activities, the emphases are on having children invent their own methods for adding and subtracting . . . the standard algorithms are not taught." Page 183

--"Also, rather than teaching the standard computational algorithm for multiplying, the activities give students the challenge of creating their own procedures for computing." Page 194

--"A great deal of emphasis traditionally has been put on paper-and-pencil algorithms for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of fractions. Too much focus is often on 'how to do the problem' rather than on 'what makes sense'. The following suggestions offer ways to have students calculate mentally with fractions. The emphasis shifts from pencil-and-paper computation with the goal of arriving at exact answers to mental calculations with the goal of arriving at estimates and being able to explain why they're reasonable." Page 232 [Bold emphasis added].

Comment: Mastery of exact computations with fractions is the number one predictor of later success in algebra.

--On page 241 we have a statement that is almost identical to quote #8, the quote just given for fractions. The difference? Two occurrences of "decimals" replace the two occurrences of "fractions."

But it's creeping back in.

If you think that "deep understanding" of how to do multiplication or long division is important, well, it's not. It's one of those things you learn quickly and well before moving on to real problem solving with abstract concepts--algebra, geometry, trigonometry, calculus. And the single biggest thing I see preventing kids from problem solving at the algebra/geometry level, is lack of fluency and practice at basic computation and pre-algebra problems. It really isn't that important to understand why.

I went to a little technical school in Cambridge, MA, and a holistic understanding of computation was just not important. Problem solving on difficult high school and college math type problems, math team style, was.

I think the problem with these approaches is what the Russians recognize as cognitive overload. If you type by thinking about where the letters are, you'll never type fast. And it's not important. What is important is having the letters and words automatic enough that you can think about the plot development of the great American novel that you're typing.

From another website critiquing reform math:

Marilyn Burns is vague about specific math learning objectives. But she's clear that children shouldn't learn standard arithmetic. Here are quotes from Teaching Arithmetic, Part III of in About Teaching Mathematics: A K-8 Resource.

--"Facility with standard paper-and-pencil arithmetic is no longer the measure of arithmetic understanding and competence." Page 139

--"Because of the present availability of calculators, having children spend more than six years of their schooling mastering paper-and-pencil arithmetic is as absurd as teaching them to ride and care for a horse in case the family car breaks down." Page 142

--"There is no way for all students to do arithmetic calculations in the same way any more than it is essential for all children to develop identical handwriting or writing styles." Page 153

--"the emphasis of arithmetic instruction should be on having students invent their own ways to compute, rather than learning and practicing procedures introduced by teacher or textbook." Page 154

--"The change from teaching time-honored algorithms to having children invent their own methods requires a major shift for most teachers. It requires, foremost, that teachers value and trust children's ability and inventiveness in making sense of numerical situations, rather than on their diligence in following procedures." Page 156

--"In all activities, the emphases are on having children invent their own methods for adding and subtracting . . . the standard algorithms are not taught." Page 183

--"Also, rather than teaching the standard computational algorithm for multiplying, the activities give students the challenge of creating their own procedures for computing." Page 194

--"A great deal of emphasis traditionally has been put on paper-and-pencil algorithms for addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division of fractions. Too much focus is often on 'how to do the problem' rather than on 'what makes sense'. The following suggestions offer ways to have students calculate mentally with fractions. The emphasis shifts from pencil-and-paper computation with the goal of arriving at exact answers to mental calculations with the goal of arriving at estimates and being able to explain why they're reasonable." Page 232 [Bold emphasis added].

Comment: Mastery of exact computations with fractions is the number one predictor of later success in algebra.

--On page 241 we have a statement that is almost identical to quote #8, the quote just given for fractions. The difference? Two occurrences of "decimals" replace the two occurrences of "fractions."

11 comment2 of 6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

ByA customeron May 25, 1999

The author sells herself as a concerned teacher but what is obvious from the book is that she is just another businesswoman trying to sell some vague pontifications to the general public.

22 comments18 of 175 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse#### There was a problem loading comments right now. Please try again later.

Please write at least one word

You must purchase at least one item from Amazon to post a comment

A problem occurred while submitting your comment. Please try again later.

Show more comments

Let us know here.

There's a problem loading this menu right now.

Get free unlimited photo storage with Amazon Prime

Prime members also enjoy FREE Two-Day Shipping and exclusive access to music, movies, TV shows, and Kindle books.

Back to top

Get to Know Us | Make Money with Us | Amazon Payment Products | Let Us Help You |

- Conditions of Use
- Privacy Notice
- Interest-Based Ads
- © 1996-2016, Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates