The Role of Content Knowledge in Ill-Structured Problem Solving for High School Physics Students
- 339 Downloads
While Physics Education Research has a rich tradition of problem-solving scholarship, most of the work has focused on more traditional, well-defined problems. Less work has been done with ill-structured problems, problems that are better aligned with the engineering and design-based scenarios promoted by the Next Generation Science Standards. This study explored the relationship between physics content knowledge and ill-structured problem solving for two groups of high school students with different levels of content knowledge. Both groups of students completed an ill-structured problem set, using a talk-aloud procedure to narrate their thought process as they worked. Analysis of the data focused on identifying students’ solution pathways, as well as the obstacles that prevented them from reaching “reasonable” solutions. Students with more content knowledge were more successful reaching reasonable solutions for each of the problems, experiencing fewer obstacles. These students also employed a greater variety of solution pathways than those with less content knowledge. Results suggest that a student’s solution pathway choice may depend on how she perceives the problem.
KeywordsPhysics Science education Problem-solving Ill-structured problem solving
Compliance with Ethical Standards
In submitting the paper “The Role of Content Knowledge in Ill-Structured Problem Solving for High School Physics Students,” there are no conflicts of interests involved, no financial support was involved, the listed authors are the sole authors of this paper, and there are no other ethical issues. Subjects of this research were consented and research methodologies utilized approved by the host institution’s Institutional Review Board.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Human Animal Rights
Research with human participants was conducted in this reported research and approved by our overseeing Institutional Review Board.
All human participants in this study provided informed consent.
- Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1984). The ideal problem solver: a guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
- Chi, M. T., & Glaser, R. (1985). Problem solving ability. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Human abilities: an information processing approach (pp. 227–250). New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
- College Board (2006). Advanced Placement Report to the Nation. New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Lynch, S., & Bryan, L. (2014). Supporting the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) through research: introduction to NARST position papers. Retrieved from https://narst.org/ngsspapers/
- Milbourne, J., & Wiebe, E. N. (2013). How do high school students approach ill-defined physics problems? Presented at the NARST Annual Meeting, Rio Del Mar, PR.Google Scholar
- National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- NGSS Lead States (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: for states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- Reitman, W. (1965). Cognition and thought. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Sinnott, J. D. (1989). A model for solution of ill-structured problems: implications for everyday and abstract problem solving. In J. D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: theory and applications (pp. 72–99). New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
- Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Voss, J. F., & Post, T. A. (1988). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar