Advertisement

The Development, Implementation, and Evaluation of a Problem Solving Heuristic

  • Mercedes LorenzoEmail author
Open Access
Article

Abstract

Problem-solving is one of the main goals in science teaching and is something many students find difficult. This research reports on the development, implementation and evaluation of a problem-solving heuristic. This heuristic intends to help students to understand the steps involved in problem solving (metacognitive tool), and to provide them with an organized approach to tackling problems in a systematic way. This approach guides students by means of logical reasoning to make a qualitative representation of the solution of a problem before undertaking calculations, using a ‘backwards strategy,’ which thus comprises a cognitive tool. The findings of the study suggest that students found the heuristic useful in setting up and solving quantitative chemical problems, and helped them to understand the phases of the problem solving process. Possible applications of the heuristic in the classroom include its use in formative assessment, to identify and to overcome student alternative conceptions, problem-solving in a cooperative environment, and to reduce the gender gap in science.

Keywords

backwards strategy cooperative learning formative assessment gender gap heuristic misconception problem-solving qualitative representation 
Download to read the full article text

References

  1. Ashmore, A.D., Frazer, M.J. & Cassey, R.J. (1979). Problem-solving and problem-solving networks in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 56, 377–379. Google Scholar
  2. Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Google Scholar
  3. Ausubel, D.P. & Robinson, P.G. (1971). School learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Google Scholar
  4. Bodner, G.M. (1987). The role of algorithms in teaching problem solving. Journal of Chemical Education, 64, 513–514. Google Scholar
  5. Dalgety, J. & Coll, R.K. (2003). Development of chemistry attitudes and experiences questionnaire (CAEQ). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 10, 649–668. Google Scholar
  6. Fensham, P., Gunstone, R. & White, R. (1994). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. London: Falmer Press. Google Scholar
  7. Finegold, M. & Mass, R. (1985). Differences in the process of solving physics problems between good physics problem solvers and poor physics problem solvers. Research in Science and Technological Education, 3, 59–67. Google Scholar
  8. Gabel, D.L. & Bunce, D.M. (1994). Research on problem solving: Chemistry. In Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning: A project of the national science teachers association (pp. 301–326). New York: Macmillan. Google Scholar
  9. Gagne, R.M. (1985). The conditions of learning, 4th edn. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Google Scholar
  10. Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  11. Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin & Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Google Scholar
  12. Hand, B. & Prain, V. (1995). Teaching and learning in science: The constructivist classroom. Sydney: Harcout Brace. Google Scholar
  13. Hayes, J.R. (1981). The complete problem solver. Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Press. Google Scholar
  14. Heyworth, R.M. (1999). Procedural and conceptual knowledge of expert and novice students for the solving of a basic problem in chemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 195–211. Google Scholar
  15. Kahle, J.B. & Meece, J. (1994). Research on gender issues in the classroom. In Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning: A project of the national science teachers association (pp. 542–557). New York: Macmillan. Google Scholar
  16. Kempa, R.F. & Nicholls, C.E. (1983). Problem-solving ability and cognitive structure: An exploratory investigation. European Joumal of Science Education, 5, 171–184. Google Scholar
  17. Kramers-Pals, H., Lambrechts, J. & Wolff, P.J. (1983). The transformation of quantitative problems to standard problems in general chemistry. European Journal of Science Education, 5, 275–287. Google Scholar
  18. Kramers-Pals, H. & Pilot, A. (1988). Solving quantitative problems: Guidelines for teaching derived from research. International Journal of Science Education, 10, 511–521. Google Scholar
  19. Larkin, J.H. (1983). The role of problem representation in physics. In Gentner & Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 75–98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  20. Larkin, J. & Reif, F. (1979). Understanding and teaching problem solving in physics. European Journal of Science Education, 7, 191–203. Google Scholar
  21. Lee, L. & Fensham, P.J. (1996). A general strategy for solving high school electrochemistry problems. Journal of Science Education, 18, 543–555. Google Scholar
  22. Maloney, D.P. (1994). Research on problem solving: Physics. In Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning: A project of the national science teachers association (pp. 327–354). New York: Macmillan. Google Scholar
  23. McCalla, J. (2003). Problem solving with pathways. Journal of Chemical Education, 80, 92–98. Google Scholar
  24. McMillan, C. & Swadener, M. (1991). Novice use of qualitative versus quantitative problem solving in electrostatics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 661–670. Google Scholar
  25. Merriam, S.B. (1988). Case study research in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Google Scholar
  26. Mettes, C.T.C.W., Pilot, A., Roossink, H. & Kramers-Pals, H. (1980). Teaching and learning problem solving in science, part I: A general strategy. Journal of Chemical Education, 57, 882–885. Google Scholar
  27. Mettes, C.T.C.W., Pilot, A., Roossink, H. & Kramers-Pals, H. (1981). Teaching and learning problem solving in science, part II: Learning problem solving in a thermodynamic course. Journal of Chemical Education, 58, 51–55. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Newell, A. & Simon, H.A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Google Scholar
  29. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it. New York: Doubleday & Company. Google Scholar
  30. Reif, F. (1983). How can chemists teach problem solving? Journal of Chemical Education, 60, 948–953. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Simon, D.P. & Simon, H.A. (1978). Individual differences in solving physics problems. In Siegler (Ed.), Children’s thinking: What develops? (pp. 325–348). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  32. Vulliamy, G. (1990). The potential of qualitative educational research strategies in developing countries. In Vulliamy, Lewin & Stephens (Eds.), Doing educational research in developing countries (pp. 7–27). London, UK: The Falmer Press. Google Scholar
  33. Zohar, A. & Sela, D. (2003). Physics, his physics: Gender issues in Israeli advanced placement physics classes. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 245–268. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.I.E.S. “Universidad Laboral”AlbaceteSpain

Personalised recommendations