Enhancing the Teaching of Problem-Solving in Technology Education

  • Thomas DelahuntyEmail author
Part of the Contemporary Issues in Technology Education book series (CITE)


Problem-solving skills are a critical element of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education, and improving students’ capability is a contemporary focus. Traditional research in this area has emphasised processes and heuristic approaches to solving problems while neglecting the early stages such as problem conceptualisation. This chapter will discuss a research study aimed at addressing this knowledge gap in technology education using a novel approach adapted from the field of cognitive neuroscience. Findings are then discussed in the context of enhancing pedagogical practice around the framing of problem-solving tasks on the part of the teacher and the student. This chapter will be of interest to a wide audience of educators in STEM disciplines.


  1. Arrowsmith-Young, B. (2012). The woman who changed her brain. London: Square Peg.Google Scholar
  2. Byrnes, J. P., & Miller, D. C. (2007). The relative importance of predictors of math and science achievement: An opportunity-propensity analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(4), 599–629.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Delahunty, T. (2014) Investigating conceptualisation and the approach taken to solving convergent problems: Implications for instructional task design. Unpublished thesis (Ph.D), University of Limerick.Google Scholar
  4. Delahunty, T., Seery, N., & Lynch, R. (2018). Exploring the use of electroencephalography to gather objective evidence of cognitive processing during problem solving. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27, 114–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis. Journal of Neuroscience, 134, 9–21.Google Scholar
  6. Entwistle, N. J. (2000, November). Promoting deep learning through teaching and assessment: Conceptual frameworks and educational contexts. Teaching and learning research paper conference, Leicster, England.Google Scholar
  7. Feilzer, M. Y. (2010). Doing mixed methods research pragmatically: Implications for the rediscovery of pragmatism as a research paradigm. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(1), 6–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hahn, U., & Chater, N. (1998). Similarity and rules: Distinct exhaustive empirically distinguishable? Cognition, 65(2), 197–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jakel, F., & Schreiber, C. (2013). Introspection in problem solving. Journal of Problem Solving, 6(1), 20–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  11. Jonassen, D. H., Strobel, J., & Lee, C. B. (2006). Everyday problem solving in engineering: Lessons for engineering educators. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 139–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kalyuga, S., & Singh, A.-M. (2016). Rethinking the boundaries of cognitive load theory in complex learning. Educational Psychological Review, 28, 831–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kitchner, K. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition. Human Development, 26(4), 222–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Markauskaite, L., & Goodyear, P. (2017). Epistemic fluency and professional education. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McCormick, R., & Davidson, M. (2009). Problem solving and the tyranny of product outcomes. Journal of Design and Technology Education, 1(3), 230–241.Google Scholar
  16. O’Donoghue, J., & Kooij, H. V.-D. (2007). Assessing adults’ quantitative skills – The INULIS project (pp. 251–263). The 14th international conference of adult learning mathematics (ALM), Limerick.Google Scholar
  17. Ohlsson, S. (2012). The problems with problem solving: Reflections on the rise, current status, and possible future of a cognitive research paradigm. The Journal of Problem Solving, 5(1), 101–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Payne, T. C., Gallagher, K., Eck, J. E., & Frank, J. (2013). Problem framing in problem solving: A case study. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 36(4), 670–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory: Explorations in the learning sciences, instructional systems and performance technologies. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University College CorkCorkIreland

Personalised recommendations