Abstract
Well-specified problems of the type presented boxed in the introduction to this article are extremely common in science courses. Unfortunately, this does not mean that students find them easy to solve, even when a teacher provides model answers to problems which differ only marginally (in the teacher's eyes) from those put before the students. The central difficulty with such courses is that they do not embody instructional principles that reflect students' need for “direction” in problem solving. In this article, we describe how the necessary heuristics and strategic knowledge were built into the remake of a conventional thermodynamics course. In contrast to mainstream American work on learning problem solving we chose to direct our curriculum reconstruction using the Gal'perin theory of stage-by-stage formation of mental actions and Landa's description of the “through” systematization of knowledge. As indicated by both, we first developed an integrated system of instructional objectives: a programme of actions and methods (PAM) to solve problems in thermodynamics. Then the plan of instruction was designed. This plan indicates which instructional procedures and materials should be used to realize the instructional functions, derived from the learning theory. The evaluation design contained two control and three experimental courses. In discussing our main findings, we consider the generalizability of the procedures we followed in constructing the PAM and the instructional plan.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Angoff, W. H. (1971). “Scales, norms and equivalent scores,” in R. L. Thorndike, Educational Measurement. Washington: American Council on Education.
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Bloom, B. S. (1976). Human Characteristics and School learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Bloom, B. S., Hastings, J. T. and Madaus, G. F. (1971). Handbook on Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Carroll, J. B. (1963). “A model of school learning,” Teachers College Record 64: 723–733.
Carroll, J. B. (1971). “Problems of measurement related to the concept of learning for mastery,” in J. H.Block (ed.), Mastery Learning, Theory and Practice, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Davis, R. H., Alexander, L. T. and Yelon, S. L. (1974). Learning System Design: An Approach to the Improvement of Instruction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
DeCorte, E. (1980). “Processes of problem solving: Comparison of an American and a European View,” Instructional Science 9: 1–13.
DeGroot, A. D. (1965). Thought and Choice in Chess. The Hague: Mouton.
Dubin, R. and Taveggia, Th. C. (1969). The Teaching-Learning Paradox. A Comparative Analysis of College Teaching Methods. Oregon: University of Oregon, Center for Advanced Study of Educational Administration.
Dubovskaja, V. I. (1967). “Programming of the section of ‘Electricity and Magnetism’ in the course of General Physics in High School,” in Theory of Stage-by-Stage Formation of Mental Actions and the Controlling of the Learning Process. Reports of the Scientific Conference. Moscow: State University Press.
Duncker, K. (1945). “On problem-solving.” Psychological Monographs, 58. Washington D. C.: The American Psychological Association. (Original 1935.)
Gagné, R. M. (1977). The Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, third edition.
Gagné, R. M. and Briggs, L. J. (1974). Principles of Instructional Design. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Greeno, J. G. (1980). “Trend in the theory of knowledge for problem solving,” in D. T.Tuma and F.Reif (eds.), Problem Solving and Education: Issues in Teaching and Research. New York: Wiley.
Kramers-Pals, H., Lambrechts, J. and Wolff, P. J. (1980). Systematically Solving Chemistry Problems in the Training of Laboratory Technicians. Enschede: Twente University of Technology.
Landa, L. N. (1975). “Some problems in algorithmization and heuristics in instruction,” Instructional Science 4: 99–112.
Larkin, J. H. (1980). “Teaching problem solving in physics: The psychological laboratory and the practical classroom,” in D. T.Tuma and F.Reif (eds.), Problem Solving and Education: Issues in Teaching and Research. New York: Wiley.
Marples, D. L. (1974). Argument and Technique in the Solutions of Problems in Mechanics and Electricity. University of Cambridge: Department of Engineering.
Mettes, C. T. C. W. and Pilot, A. (1980). “Over het leren oplossen van natuurwetenschappelijke problemen (On teaching and learning problem solving in science).” Ph. D. thesis. Enschede: Twente University of Technology.
Mettes, C. T. C. W., Pilot, A., Roossink, H. J. and Kramers-Pals, H. (1980). “Teaching and learning problem solving in science. Part I: general strategy,” Journal of Chemical Education 57: 882–885.
Mettes, C. T. C. W., Pilot, A., Roossink, H. J. and Kramers-Pals, H. (1981). “Teaching and learning problem solving in science. Part II: learning problem solving in a Thermodynamics course,” Journal of Chemical Education 58: 51–55.
Newell, A. and Simon, H. A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Obuchowa, L. F. (1973). “Die Ausbildung eines Systems physikalischer Begriffe unter dem Aspekt des Lösens von Aufgaben (the formation of a system of physical concepts for problem solving)” (original publication: Moscow 1968), in J. Lompscher, Sowjetische Beiträge zur Lerntheorie. Die Schule P. J. Galperins. Köln: Pahl-Rugenstein.
Plomp, Tj., Pilot, A. and Rookhuyzen, R. F.van (1978). “Individual study systems in Dutch-speaking higher education,” Journal of Personalized Instruction 3/2: 98–108.
Polya, G. (1957). How to Solve It. New York: Doubleday.
Provus, M. (1973). “Evaluation of ongoing programs in the public school system,” in B. R.Worthen and J. R.Sanders (eds.), Educational Evaluation: Theory and Practice. Belmont: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Scriven, M. (1974). “Evaluation perspectives and procedures,” in W. J.Popham (ed.), Evaluation in Education. Berkeley: McCutchan.
Stufflebeam, D. L., Foley, W. J., Gephart, W. J., Guba, E. G., Hammond, R. L., Merriman, H. O., and Provus, M. M. (1971). Educational Evaluation and Decision Making. Itasca IL: F. E. Peacock.
Talyzina, N. F. (1973). “Psychological bases of programmed instruction,” Instructional Science 2: 243–280.
VanWeeren, J. H. P., Kramers-Pals, H., Mul, F. F. M.de, Peters, M. J. and Roossink, H. J. (1980). Teaching Problem Solving in Physics, A Course in Electromagnetism. Enschede: Twente University of Technology.
Wallen, N. A. and Travers, R. M. W. (1963). “Analysis and investigation of teaching methods,” in N. L.Gage (ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago: Rand-McNally.
Willems, J. (1981). “Problem-based (group) teaching: a cognitive science approach to using available knowledge,” Instructional Science 10: 1–17.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mettes, C.T.C.W., Pilot, A. & Roossink, H.J. Linking factual and procedural knowledge in solving science problems: A case study in a thermodynamics course. Instr Sci 10, 333–361 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00162732
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00162732