UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES - DILIMAN

The Application of the Bar Model Strategy in Problem Solving and How it Improves
Students’ Learning in Elementary Math

In partial fulfillment of the

requirements in EDRE 201

by

Mariela Reyes

2nd Semester AY 2017 - 2018

 CHAPTER 1
Introduction

Background of the Study

A 21st century learner is expected to demonstrate critical thinking. The Department of
Education adapted this skill in its twin goals for basic education levels - critical thinking and
problem solving (DepEd, 2016).
Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully
conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from,
or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to
belief and action. (Scriven& Paul, 1987) Also, most formal definitions characterize critical
thinking as the intentional application of rational, higher order thinking skills, such as analysis,
synthesis, problem recognition and problem solving, inference, and evaluation (Angelo, 1995).
These twin goals are not only emphasized in Mathematics but in other subjects area as well for
the 21st century learners holistic development.
As defined by Polya (1981), problem solving is finding a way around an obstacle and
finding a solution to a problem that is unknown.Nowadays, students show difficulty in solving a
word problem in Mathematics as shown in the works of Dela Cruz &Lapinid (2014), Siniguian
and Seifi, Haghverdi&Azizmohamad (2012). The results of their studies showed that the
students’ difficulties are on the inability to translate problem intomathematical form and inability
to use correct mathematics. In translating word problems, some difficulties encountered were
lack of comprehension,interchanging values, and unfamiliar words. This scenario stimulates the
researcher to find ways in helping students have a better understanding of a word problem and
find a logical way of solving it.
The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics or NCTM (2000) suggests that
representations are fundamental to mathematical understanding as they provide students with
opportunity to expand their capacity to think mathematically. Students conceptual understanding
must be evident in their use of representation to communicate mathematical ideas, solve
problems and model mathematical phenomena.

1
Statement of the Problem
The main objective of this study is to find out which strategy is more effective in teaching
ways of problem solving – the traditional strategy or the use of bar method. Specifically, this
study will attempt to answer the following:
1. How does the mean achievement test score of the students in the class taught using the
bar method compare to that of the students in the class taught using the traditional
method?
2. Does the mean achievement test score of the students in the class taught using the bar
method is greater than that of the students in the class taught using the traditional
method?

Significance of the Study

This study will benefit students because it will help them establish a better understanding
of what is given and what is asked in a word problem. It will also aid them in processing the
different steps of their solution to arrive at the accurate answer.
The findings of this study will also enable teachers to enhance their teaching skills and
competencies. It will allow them to be more creative in presenting and solving a word problem in
class. Moreover, it can help them identify and understand the student’s reasoning in every steps
of the solution. It can also help the teachers and students realize that there are different ways of
approaching the problem rather than having one, ultimate solution to find the exact answer.
The results of this study will also give insights to curriculum planners and school
administrators on how to improve certain aspects of the curriculum. It will enable them to
explore new and interesting methods, approaches and/or activities that will foster better
understanding and learning of the students.
The changes in curriculum and instruction will help develop the students’ process of
critical thinking in learning concepts in mathematics and its applications to real-life situations.

Scope and Delimitation

The study focus on the effect of using the bar model strategy in problem solving
performance of elementary students in Mathematics.
The researcher will use two approaches in teaching how to do problem solving – one is

2
using the traditional strategy in problem solving and the other one is using the bar model strategy
in problem solving.
The researcher will teach 2 classes of grade 5, with 40 students in each class, for a period
of 5 weeks in a private school in Quezon City.
The study will be limited to the application of the strategy on problem solving on the
topics of Ratio, Percent and Proportion.

3
 CHAPTER 2
Review of Related Literature

Related Literature

Theories of Learning
Understanding the developmental nature of how students learn and construct their own
knowledge will help educators or teachers in planning a more effective approach or instruction.
It will also help teachers to easily deliver an abstract and complex subject-matter, like
Mathematics, into a more concrete and meaningful lesson.
According to the Meaning Theory of William Brownell (1986), children have a need to
understand what they are learning for it to be permanent. In mathematics, it is shown when
students use manipulatives and other learning aids to investigate mathematical concepts and
create understanding of it.
Active learning builds mental structures. These mental structures are formed or composed
of networks of complex neural connections that helps a person learn and remember. Jean Piaget
(1980) conducted an extensive research on the development of children’s cognitive abilities. He
believed that people go through different developmental stages which are:
a. Sensorimotor Stage - infants and toddlers acquire knowledge through sensory
experiences and manipulating objects. His or her entire experience at the earliest period
of this stage occurs through basic reflexes, senses, and motor responses. This stage
exemplifies children’s actions on objects.
b. Preoperational Stage - children begin to think symbolically and learn to use words and
pictures to represent objects at this stage. This stage shows children’s actions on reality
through pretend plays yet they still think concretely about the world around them.
c. Concrete Operational Stage – at this stage, children’s thinking become more logical and
organized, but still concrete. Action on operations is shown in this stage. They may
struggle with abstract and hypothetical concepts.
d. Formal Operational Stage – abstract thoughts emerge to children at this stage. They begin
to think abstractly and reason with hypothetical problems. At this point, children explore
operations on operations.

4
 Children can be guided to better mathematical understanding as they progressively
analyze complex skills on their own (Snowman & Biehler, 2002).
In Information Processing Theory, each person uses sensory pathways in order to learn
new things. The pathway starts with concrete experiences where a person is freely exploring
logical relations among objects through manipulation. Afterwards, concrete representations
move to visual or pictorial representations. A person do familiar activities with iconic
representations and a higher level of abstraction can be observed. Lastly, pictorial representations
move to symbolic process. The emphasis is now on the use of symbols and what can be learned
from them . There is a gradual progression from concrete to abstract learning (Miller, 1960).
Learning and representation of concepts comes in three stages. The first is enactive where
a person manipulates an object. Second is iconic where objects are drawn in realistic
representations. Last is the symbolic level where it involves the use of words, numerals and other
symbols to represent the original object. (Bruner, 1966)
In Mathematics, students learn first through the use of manipulatives, then by visual or
pictorial representations and lastly by the use of symbols, numerals and other variables - the last
being the most commonly used way to solve problems. In order to achieve the efficient use of
symbols, one must have a good understanding of its essence and value.

Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge

Conceptual knowledge, also known as conceptual understanding or principled

knowledge, as often referred to, is the basically the knowledge of concepts. (e.g. Byrnes &
Wasik, 1991; Canobi, 2009; Rittle-Johnson, Siegler, & Alibali, 2001). In Mathematics, it is
defined as the comprehension of mathematical concepts, operations, and relations (Kilpatrick,
Swafford, & Findell, 2001, p. 5). Conceptual knowledge provides meaning for procedures. Star
(2005) noted that the term conceptual knowledge is not limited only to what is known
(knowledge of concepts) but also includes ways those concepts can be known. In teaching
conceptual knowledge, students a given a problem that requires flexibility of thinking and
connecting relations to what they previously learned. This situation allows them to expand their
prior knowledge and apply it in new situations (NCTM, 2000).

5
 Procedural knowledge is the recognition of symbols and learning of rules that go with
them. (Hiebert & Lefevre, 1986). Procedures include the use of constructs as skills, strategies,
productions, and interiorized actions (Byrnes & Wasik, 1991, p. 777). The procedures can be:
1) algorithms—a predetermined sequence of actions that will lead to the correct answer when
executed correctly, or
2) possible actions that must be sequenced appropriately to solve a given problem (e.g.
equation-solving steps).
This knowledge develops through problem-solving practice, and thus is tied to particular
problem types. Further, ‘It is the clearly sequential nature of procedures that probably sets them
most apart from other forms of knowledge’ (Hiebert & LeFevre, 1986, p. 6). In teaching
procedural knowledge, the focus is just on the terminology, symbols and different skills. There is
no further development of understanding in relation to associated concepts (Skemp, 1987).
Byrnes & Wasik (1991) suggest that conceptual knowledge means that a student must
view mathematics as a meaningful topic. With conceptual knowledge, applications are
introduced at the beginning of the chapter and then relations and principles follow. Conceptual
knowledge and procedural knowledge are basic and important components, however, learning
conceptual knowledge first leads to the acquisition of procedural knowledge, but not vice versa
(Kashan, 2014).

Problem Solving
Problem solving pervades all topics of Mathematics (NCTM, 2000). It is one of the twin
goals of the Department of Education for the basic education levels (DepEd, 2016). Branca
(1980) agreed that problem solving should be a primary developed because it is not only a
method to give meaning to a circumstance but also a kind of thinking that is used to solve non-
algorithmic situations.
Problem solving is also known as a scientific research method (Charles, Lester &
O’Daffer, 1987). It is also a teaching method that requires thinking mathematically (Baroody,
1993). Mathematical problem solving is finding a fitting action to reach a desired outcome but
being unable to reach an expected end (Polya, 1962). Charles et al. (1987) countered that it is not
rjust a matter of reaching a solution by applying procedures or rules but it entails a far more
complex process. Problem solving helps develop logic and reasoning of an individual.

6
 If mathematics is problem solving, then problem solving can be defined as eliminating
the problem situation by using critical reasoning processes and required knowledge (Avcu &
Avcu, 2010). There are different approaches in teaching mathematical problem solving.
According to Hatfield (1978), there are three basic approaches for problem solving instruction:
teaching via problem solving, teaching for problem solving and teaching about problem solving.
In 1989, Schroeder and Lester reemphasized these three approaches. In teaching via problem
solving, topics are introduced with a problem. Problems are utilized to introduce and study on a
mathematical task (Manuel, 1998). In teaching for problem solving, students apply the
knowledge that is learned in the lessons to solve problems. Mathematics is used as a tool to teach
and develop problem solving skills of students. In teaching about problem solving, the strategies
and process of problem solving are taught. The students learn and follow the different phases or
stages in tackling the word problem.
The procedure in problem solving has 4 stages:
1. Understanding the problem,
2. Devising a plan using strategies,
3. Carrying out the plan, and
4. Looking back to see if you arrived at the correct answer; if not, you try again the
procedure.

Related Studies

Middleton, Heuvel-Panhuizen and Shew (1998) explored the use of bar representations as
a model for connecting concepts of rational numbers. They found out that students show
understanding when the numeric strategies are paired with visual strategies. The bar model, as an
extension of fraction strips and ruler, translates the number sense of a rational number and it can
still be developed to include more complex situations other than making numbers sense.
de Guzman&Belecina (2012) saw a significant difference between the problem solving
performance of the group taught using the traditional method and the group taught using the bar
model. Moreover, the latter one performed better than the first group.The use of block model
approach helps the student’s problem solving skills andenhances the retention of concepts
learned. Thus, Block Model Approach helps the pupils to performed better in the problem

7
solving performance.Block Model Approach as perceived by the pupils were useful in solving
wordproblems in mathematics and easy to use.
Galen, F. van &Eerde, D. van (2013)focused on the lesson of percentages in Math.
They observed that the use of percentagebar offers support because it helps students to oversee
the relations between the given numbers. Also, the students need to be given time to be familiar
and appreciate the bar as a mathematical tool that can be applied in all situations. It will soon
become to function as a model of thinking afterwards. It will help develop understanding that is
basically needed in solving all kinds of problems.
Bao (2016), in his research conducted on three fourth grade classes in a public school in
Victoria, concluded that the model (bar) method not only provides students withan opportunity to
interpret the problem by drawingthe rectangular bar but also helps students to visually represent
problem situations and relevant relationshipson the bar and choose the correct operations to
solvethe problem. The purpose of drawing the models isnot to teach students to follow specific
rules but toprovide them with a tool to support the understandingof the problem, identify the
relationship and operationsthey need and hence work out a strategy for finding the answer.
Morin & Watson et.al. (2017) instructed children with mathematics difficulties (MD)
using the bar model drawing as a strategy in problem solving. The results showed that the bar
model is an effective strategy in increasing the students accuracy in problem solving. Moreover,
it also helps develop the students’ ability to use cognitive strategies when solving problems.

8
Conceptual Framework

This study investigated the two methods in solving word problems. These are the
traditional method in solving word problem and the other using the bar model. The objective of
the study was to find out which method produced better achievement in the performance of the
students.

Problem Solving Problem Solving

using using
Traditional Method Bar Model Method

vs

Achievement Achievement

Fig.1 Conceptual Approach

The independent variable is the use of bar model method in problem solving while the
dependent variable is the use of traditional method in problem solving.
The researcher will teach each group, the experimental and the control, with the same
topics and flow of instruction but will differ only in the method of approaching the word
problems that will be presented. Figure 2 below presents a detailed flow of instruction for the
two groups.

9
 The teacher will explain the objectives of the lesson for the day.

The teacher will check for prior knowledge and skills needed for the word problem through a
short activity (individual or group).

The teacher will present a word problem in class.

The teacher will demonstrate the use of Bar The teacher will demonstrate the use of
Model Method in answering the word 0 Traditional Method in answering the word
problem. problem.

The class will be divided into small groups to work on the word problem given.

The groups will present their solution to the The groups will present their solution to the
word problem using the bar model method. word problem using the traditional method.

The teacher will check the solution and answer presented by the groups. Discussion of correct
answers will follow if the group did not arrive at the correct answer.

The teacher will give the students word problems to answer on their own as individual practice.

The teacher will generalize the lesson by asking the students summary and realization of the
lesson.

Homework will be given.

Fig.2 Flowchart of the Lesson Proper

10
Research Hypothesis
The research hypothesis of this study is:
 The achievement of students that were taught to use the bar model method in problem
solving differ to that of students taught to use the traditional method in problem solving.
The null hypothesis is:
 The achievement of students that were taught to use the bar model method in problem
solving is the same to that of students taught to use the traditional method in problem
solving.

Definition of Terms
The following terms are defined as used in the study:
 Problem solving –
 Traditional method – refers to a systematic approach in solving word problem where one
identify all the given in the problem, examine what is being asked to find out, identify and
utilize an algorithm to arrive at the answer.
 Bar model method – refers to the use of unit cubes, strips or boxes as visual representation of
numerical values given in a word problem in order to comprehend and solve it.
 Achievement – refers to the concepts and skills learned and acquired as demonstrated in the
post test of the experiment as shown by scores on an achievement test measuring their
abilities and skills in problem solving.

11
 CHAPTER 3
Methodology

Introduction
In this chapter, the research design is presented, including a description of the sample size
and the condition of the locality where the experiment was carried. It also includes the discussion
of the different instruments, data gathering and data analysis procedures.

Research Method
A quantitative approach will be followed in this research. Creswell (2008) defined
quantitative research as a means for testing objectives theories by examining relationship among
variables.

Research Locale
The research was conducted in a private school in the third district of Quezon City. The
school was chosen for its full accessibility to the researcher. The researcher randomly asked the
grade level coordinator for two heterogeneous sections of grade 5 in the morning session. The
two sections or classes given are handled by the same teacher.
The two classes were categorized randomly as the experimental and control group. The
experimental class was taught using the bar model method while the control group was taught
using the traditional method. The topics taught in problem solving are Ratio, Percent and
Proportion, which are the proceeding topics for the quarter. The instruction, together with the
pre-test and achievement test, was conducted in a span of 5 weeks.

Research Participants
The participants to this research were conveniently selected because they were naturally
formed by their classes. The two classes given must be comparable in terms of academic ability.
The researcher developed and conducted a pre-test on basic concepts in mathematics for the two
groups. The items in the pre-test were based on the topics previously taught at the start of the
school year.

12
 The researcher analyzed the mean scores using t-test to match the samples. The t-value
calculated is beyond a probability of 0.05 which implied the comparability of the two groups in
terms of academic ability.
The researcher was the one who developed all the lesson plans and instructed the two
classes with different methods in problem solving for the entire duration of the research.

Research Variables
The researcher identified two variables for the experiment which are:
• independent variable – the use of bar model method in problem solving and its effect to the
students’ achievement
• dependent variable – the use of traditional method in problem solving and its effect to the
students’ achievement

Research Design
The researcher used a quasi-experimental research involving two approaches on teaching
problem-solving in elementary mathematics. The experimental design is quasi-experiment
because the researcher will use control and experimental group but does not randomly assign
participants to groups. The participants are grouped in a class following the students’ selection
procedure of the school.
The researcher used a Nonequivalent (Pretest and Posttest) Control - Group Design
because the experimental Group A and the control Group B are selected without random
assignment. Both groups take a pretest and posttest and only the experimental group receives the
treatment. (Creswell, 2014)

Group A O _______ X _______ O _______

Group B O _______ O
Fig.1 Nonequivalent (Pretest and Posttest) Control - Group Design

The experiment sought to determine which of the two strategies, the traditional method or
the use of bar model method, would have a better effect on the achievement of concepts taught.
80 students, 40 students for each class, were taught using lesson plans with the same

13
instructional content but with different strategies in solving word problems. Other sources of data
were the pre-test and achievement test.

Data Gathering Procedures

The researcher wrote a letter to the school principal asking permission to conduct an
experiment to two classes in the fifth grade. The researcher was referred to the grade level
coordinator to identify the two classes that will be used. Then, the researcher was asked to have a
conference with the grade level coordinator and subject teacher to fully explain the details and
scope of the experiment. The researcher was asked to send an electronic mail of letter asking for
permission of the parents of the students to participate. After a week of compiling all the replies
of the parents, the researcher was granted permission to start conducting the experiment.
In the construction of pre-test, lesson plans and achievement test, the researcher consulted
the subject teacher for the format and appropriate content. After the instruments we’re subjected
to content validity by the experts, the researcher conducted the pre-test to the identified, two
classes. The researcher calculated their mean scores and found out that the classes are
comparable in terms of academic ability. The researchers taught the two classes from Monday to
Friday, 8am to 8:55am for the control group and 10:15am to 11:10am for the experimental
group, for a span of 4 weeks. At the end of the instruction for the three topics – ratio, percent,
and proportion, an achievement test was administered to the two classes. The outcomes of the
achievement test were computed and compared using tests of statistical significance.

Research Instruments
The following instruments are used in the research:
 Lesson plan for two approaches–two kinds of lesson plans were created for the two groups
– one utilized the use of bar model strategy and the other one used the traditional strategy
when solving word problems. Both lesson plans focused on Ratio, Percent and Proportion.
Each lesson plan was subjected to content validity by the master teachers of the school in
the Math Department and by the researcher’s Math professors in the college. The
researcher adjusted the lesson plans according to the revisions suggested by the five experts
consulted.

14
  Pre-test - the pre-test was patterned after the school’s format and was based on the topics
previously taught at the start of the school year. The same pool of master teachers and
professors was consulted for further revisions. The test was given to a grade 5 class in a
private school in Metro Manila for further modifications and validation of the test items.
 Achievement Test – the achievement test was patterned after the school’s format and was
based on the topics taught during the period of experimentation. The same pool of master
teachers and professors was consulted for further revisions. The test was given to a grade 5
class in a private school in Metro Manila for validation of the test items. The data obtained
in the pilot testing were used to obtain a reliability coefficient for the test.

Data Analysis Procedure

The researcher used the following types of statistical analysis:
 T-test – the statistical test, an independent sample t-test, is used to find the difference
between the mean scores of the pre-test of the two groups.
 T-test – the statistical test, an independent sample t-test, is used to find the difference
between the mean scores of the achievement test of the two groups.
 Z-test – the statistical test is used to identify the significance of the difference of the two
groups because the sample is greater than 30 and under the central limit theorem, as the
number of samples gets larger, the samples are considered to be approximately normally
distributed. The null hypothesis (H0) for the test is that the two groups are significantly
different in terms of academic ability. The alternate hypothesis (H1) is that the two groups
are not significantly different in terms of academic ability. The researcher used a 5%
alpha level. With = .05, the critical values of z are -1.96 and +1.96. We reject H0 if z <
-1.96 or z > +1.96. In the calculation, the z score is 2.34, therefore, the null hypothesis
was rejected. The two groups does not show significant difference in their academic
ability.
 Cronbach Alpha – the statistical test is used to identify the reliability coefficient of the
pre-test and achievement test. The questionnaire, with 30 test items, showed a cronbach
alpha value of 0.77, which is between 0.7 and 0.8, meaning that the items are acceptable.

15
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

(2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association 6th Ed. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association

(2016). DepEd K-12 Curriculum Guide in Mathematics. Retrieved from

http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/page/2016/Math%20CG_with%20tagged%20math%
20equipment.pdf

Avcu, S. Avcu, R. (2010). Pre-service elementary mathematics teachers’ use of strategies in

mathematical problem solving. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9, pp.1282–1286.
DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.321

Bao, L. (2016). The effectiveness of using the model method to solve word problems.Australian
Primary Mathematics Classroom, 21(3), pp.26-31 Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1115069

Creswell, J.W. (2014.) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative & Mixed Methods
Approaches 4th Ed. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications

de Guzman, N.J.P &Belecina, R.R. (2012). Block model approach in problem solving: effects on
problem solving. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mathematics Education Research
Group of Australasia (MERGA) 35th Congress, Singapore, Jul 2-6, 2012

Dela Cruz, J.K.B. &Lapinid, M.R.C. (2014).Students’ difficulties in translating worded problems
into mathematical symbols. Paper presented at DLSU Research Congress, DLSU Manila, March
6-8, 2014

Galen, F. van &Eerde, D. van (2013).Solbing problems with the percentage bar. IndoMS Journal
on Mathematics Education, 4(3), pp.1-8. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1078914.pdf

16
Hatfield, M.M. (1943). Mathematics methods for elementary and middle school teachers.
Boston, Massachussets : Allyn and Bacon

Johnson, B.R. & Schneider, M. Developing conceptual and procedural knowledge of

mathematics. Retrieved from https://www.uni-
trier.de/fileadmin/fb1/prof/PSY/PAE/Team/Schneider/RittleJohnsonSchneiderInPress.pdf

Khashan, K.H. (2014). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of rational numbers for riyadh
elementary school teachers. Journal of Education and Human Development, 3(4), pp. 181-197.
DOI: 10.15640/jehd.v3n4a17

Marks, J.I. et.al. (1975). Teaching elementary school mathematics for understanding. New York:
McGraw-Hill

Middleton, J.A., Heuvel - Panhuizen, M. van den &Shew, J.A. (1998). Using bar representations
asamodel forconnecting concepts of rational number. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle
School, 3(4), pp.302-312. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41180408

Morin, L.L, Watson, S.M.R. et.al. (2017). The use of a bar model drawing to teach word problem
solving to students with mathematics difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1-14. DOI:
10.1177/0731948717690116

Musser, G.L. & Burger, W.F. (1991). Mathematics for elementary teachers: a contemporary
approach. New York, USA : Macmillan Publishers

Post, T. (1981). The role of manipulative materials in the learning of mathematical concepts.
Retrieved from http://www.cehd.umn.edu/ci/rationalnumberproject/81_4.html

Tipps, S. (2011). Guiding children's learning of mathematics. Australia: Wadsworth/Cengage

Learning

17