A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Assessment Frameworks of Mathematical Problem-Posing Skills

Problem-Posing is one of the most important topics in mathematics education research today. One of the challenges researchers faces after investigating problem-posing skills and thinking processes is how to evaluate them. The present study investigated the content and methodology of these studies to determine their structure. This study presents a qualitative meta-analysis of the major frameworks that researchers have used to evaluate the posed problems in order to provide a comprehensive picture of how these studies have turned out. To this purpose, 25 studies on evaluating Problem-Posing Skills were selected from 83 research studies between 1994 and 2020 and analyzed descriptively and instrumentally. Students presenting a solution, adaptability, mathematical expression, linguistic knowledge and expression, solvability, quantity, and quality of data, Open-Ended and generalizable problems, solution strategies, and multiple solutions are among the nine common criteria identified by the meta-analysis findings. In addition, after reviewing the research, a framework with 11 criteria was created, with an emphasis on mathematical problem-posing and problem-solving. With the aid of generalizability theory, this framework has been validated by experts in mathematics and mathematics education, as well as teachers from all three grades, and has been evaluated in two stages.