Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From Algorithmic Science Teaching to “Know” to Research-Based Transformative Inter-Transdisciplinary Learning to “Think”: Problem Solving in the STES/STEM and Sustainability Contexts

  • Chapter
Insights from Research in Science Teaching and Learning

Part of the book series: Contributions from Science Education Research ((CFSE,volume 2))

Abstract

Given the current striving for sustainability and the corresponding paradigm shift in science, technology, environment, perception, economy, and policies, the corresponding paradigm shift, at all levels of science, STES/STEM, environmental, and education at large, is unavoidable. A sound, meaningful, and coherent science education for ensuring global sustainability requires a revolutionized change in the guiding philosophy, rationale, and models of our thinking, behavior, and action. The related science literacy for sustainability in the science, technology, environment, society, economy, and policy (STESEP) interface contexts requires the cognitive capabilities of question asking, problem solving, decision-making, and other higher-order cognitive skills. This chapter focuses on problem solving (PS) within “traditional” science education, aiming at its research base transformatively implemented in contemporary science and future science/STES/STEM/STESEP education for “sustainability thinking.” The two main aims of the case study here presented are (a) contribution to the body of knowledge concerning PS in the context of HOCS promotion in college/university teaching and (b) fostering the (required) shift from the contemporary dominating science, chemistry STES/STEM “algorithmic teaching,” and assessment to a higher level of cognitive learning in PS, STSSEE, and STESEP contexts.

A chapter for 2013 ESERA conference book

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

HOCS:

Higher-order cognitive skills

LOCS:

Lower-order cognitive skills

PS:

Problem solving

STEM:

Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics

STES:

Science, technology, environment, and society

STESEP:

Science, technology, environment, society, economy, and policy

STSSEE:

Science, technology, STES, STEM, and environmental education

References

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R. (1980). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beall, H. (1995). Teaching problem solving and critical thinking in chemistry. NEACT Journal, 14(1), 16–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benglsson, S. L., & Ostman, L. O. (2012). Globalization and education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 19(4), 477–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, C. W., & Bolder, G. M. (1991). Problem solving processes used by students in organic synthesis. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 143–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunce, D. M. (1993). Introduction: Symposium: Lecture and learning: are they compatible? Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 179–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardellini, L. (2006). Fostering creative problem solving in chemistry through group work. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(2), 131–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • CSR. (2014). Sustainability: The concept for modern society. Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, 13–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danili, E., & Reid, N. (2004). Some strategies to improve performance in school chemistry, based on two cognitive factors. Research in Science and Technological Education, 22, 201–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujii, T. (1997). Solving homework in class and receiving lectures at home: Reversing the situation in an engineering technology class. Proceedings of the 17th annual Lilly conference on college teaching (p. 115).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabel, D. L., & Bunce, D. M. (1994). Research on problem solving: Chemistry. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 301–326). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J. R. (1981). The complete problem solver. Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holroyed, C. (1985). What is a problem? What is problem solving? In D. Palmer (Ed.) (2002). An annotated bibliography of research into the teaching and learning of physical sciences at the higher education level (p. 26). Hull: LSTN Physical Science Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, A. H. (1993). Introduction. In C. Wood & R. Sleet (Eds.), Creative problem solving chemistry. London: The royal Society of Chemistry.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones-Wilson, T. M. (2005). Teaching problem-solving skills without sacrificing course content. Journal of College Science Teaching, 35(1), 42–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kampourakis, C., & Tsaparlis, G. (2003). A study of the effect of a practical activity on problem solving in chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 4, 319–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N. G., Lederman, J. S., & Abd-El-Khalik, F. (2006). Alternative certification: Aspirations and Realities. In J. Rhoton, & P. Shane (Eds.), Teaching science in the 21st century (Part IV, Chap. 17, pp. 257–274).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyle, K. S., & Robinson, W. R. (2001). Teaching science problem solving: An overview of experimental work. The Journal of Chemical Education, 78, 1162–1163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakhleh, M. B. (1993). Are our students conceptual thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers? Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 52–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakhleh, M. B., & Mitchell, R. C. (1993). Concept learning versus problem solving: There is a difference. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(3), 190–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC). (2003). Evaluating and improving undergraduate teaching in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994–1020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perels, F., Gürtler, T., & Schmitz, B. (2005). Training of self-regulatory and problem-solving competence. Learning and Instruction, 15, 123–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raine, D., & Symons, S. (2005). PossiBiLities: A practice guide to problem-based learning in physics and astronomy. The Higher Education Academy Physical Sciences Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, N., & Yang, M. J. (2002). Open-ended problem solving in school chemistry: A preliminary investigation. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 1313–1332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawrey, B. A. (1990). Concept learning versus problem solving: Revisited. Journal of Chemical Education, 67, 253–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seghezzo, L. (2009). The five dimensions of sustainability. Environmental Politics, 18(4), 539–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, N., Jonassen, H. D., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 6–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamovlasis, D., & Tsaparlis, G. (2003). A complexity theory model in science education problem solving: Random walks for working memory and mental capacity. Nonlinear Dynamics, Psychology, and Life Sciences, 7, 221–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamovlasis, D., & Tsaparlis, G. (2005). Cognitive variables in problem solving: A nonlinear approach. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 3, 7–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamovlasis, D., Tsaparlis, G., Kamilatos, C., Papaoikonomou, D., & Zarotiadou, E. (2005). Conceptual understanding versus algorithmic problem solving: Further evidence from a national chemistry examination. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6, 104–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taconis, R., Ferguson-Hessler, M. G., & Broekkamp, H. (2001). Teaching science problem solving: An overview of experimental work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 442–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torres, J., Preto, C., & Vasconcelos, C. (2013). Problem based learning environmental scenarios: an analysis of science students and teachers questioning. Journal of Science Education, 14, 71–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treagust, D., Duit, R., & Fraser, B. (Eds.). (1996). Teaching and learning in science and mathematics. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsaparlis, G. (1998). Dimensional analysis and predictive models in problem solving. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 335–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsaparlis, G. (2005). Non-algorithmic quantitative problem solving in university physical chemistry: A correlation study of the role of selective cognitive factors. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23, 125–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsaparlis, G., & Zoller, U. (2003). Evaluation of higher vs. Lower-order cognitive skills-type examinations in chemistry: Implications for university in-class assessment and examinations. University Chemistry Education, 7, 50–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vals, A. E. E., Brody, M., Dillon, J., & Stevenson, R. B. (2014). Science Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheatley, G. H. (1984). Problem solving in school mathematics (MEPS technical report 84.01), School Mathematics and Science Center Purdue University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, C. (2006). The development of creative problem solving in chemistry. Chemistry Education and Practice, 7(2), 96–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wyckoff, S. (2001). Changing the culture of undergraduate science teaching. Journal of College Science Teaching, 30(5), 306–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A. (2004). Teachers’ metacognitive declarative knowledge and the teaching of higher order thinking. In A. Zohar (Ed.), Higher order thinking in science classrooms: Students learning and teachers’ professional development (pp. 177–196). Dordrecht: Kluver Academic Publication.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and low achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 145–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U. (1993). Lecture and learning: Are they compatible? Maybe for LOCS; unlikely for HOCS. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, 195–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U. (2000). Teaching tomorrow’s college science courses – Are we getting it right? Journal of College Science Teaching, 29, 409–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U. (2001). Alternative assessment as (critical) means of facilitating HOCS-promoting teaching and learning in chemistry education. Chemistry Education: Research and Practice in Europe, 2, 9–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U. (2012). Science education for global sustainability: What is necessary for teaching, learning and assessment strategies? Journal of Chemical Education, 89, 297–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U. (2013). Science, Technology, Environment, Society (STES) literacy for sustainability: What should it take in chem/science education? Education Quimica, 24(2), 207–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U., & Levy Nahum, T. (2012). From teaching to ‘know’-to learning to ‘think’ in science education. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & D. C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (Vol. 1, Chapter 16, pp. 209–330). New York: Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U., & Tsaparlis, G. (1997). Higher- and lower-order cognitive skills: The case of chemistry. Research in Science Education, 27, 117–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U., Ben-Chaim, D., Ron, S., Pentimally, R., & Borsese, A. (2000). The disposition towards critical thinking of high school and university science students, an inter-intra-Israeli- Italian study. International Journal of Science Education, 22(6), 571–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U., Dori, Y., & Lubezky, A. (2002). Algorithmic, LOCS and HOCS (chemistry) exam questions: Performance and attitudes of college students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(2), 185–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zoller, U., Blonder, R., Finlayson, O. E., Bogner, F., Lieflaender, A. K., & Kaiser, F. G. (2014). Research-based coherent science teaching – Assessment – Learning to think for global sustainability. In C. P. Constantinou, N. Papadouris & A. Hadjigeorgiou (Eds.), E-Book proceedings of the ESERA 2013 conference: Science education research For evidence-based teaching and coherence in learning. Part 2 (co-ed. J. Lavonen & A. Zeyer, pp. 418–429). Nicosia: European Science Education Research Association. ISBN: 978-9963-700-77-6.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Haifa-Oranim, Kiryat Tivon, 36006, Israel

    Uri Zoller

Authors
  1. Uri Zoller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Uri Zoller .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Educational Sciences, Learning in Science Group, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Nicos Papadouris

  2. Department of Educational Sciences, Learning in Science Group, University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Angela Hadjigeorgiou

  3. Department of Educational Sciences, Learning in Science Group, University of Cyprus Learning in Science Group, Nicosia, Cyprus

    Constantinos P. Constantinou

Appendix I: Sample Problems from the Pre-test

Appendix I: Sample Problems from the Pre-test

1.1 A.1. Rocket Fuels [HOCS Type]

Different fuels are used for different purposes and applications (coal for power plants, gasoline in cars, etc.). A fuel used in rockets is dimethylhydrazine (C2H8N2) according to the following reaction: (1) C2H8N2 + 2N2O4 → 3N2 + 4H2O + 2CO2

Hydrogen gas is also used as a rocket fuel as shown in the following reaction: (2) H2(g) + ½O2(g) → H2O(g).

(a) Do you think that there are similarities between reactions 1 and 2 and the one occurring during the burning of gasoline in a car? Gasoline can be represented by octane, C8H18 (the process of octane burning will be marked reaction no. 3). Explain your answer by comparing the three reactions. (b) Choose one of the three reactions mentioned previously and explain: what do you think are the main considerations in choosing that specific reaction as an energy source? (c) In your opinion which of the three reactions will be less and which will be most harmful to the environment? Explain. (d) Why, in your opinion, N2O4 is used in reaction 1 instead of oxygen? Explain.

1.2 A.2. Industrial Plant [HOCS Type]

An industrial plant is emitting combustion gases into the atmosphere as well as waste water, containing acids, oils, and fuels into the municipal sewage system. For the sake of coping with related problems and, hence, improving the quality of the environment, inside and outside the plant, the following suggestions were brought before the factory management:

  1. (a)

    Neutralization of the acidity in the factory waste effluents before their disposal into the municipal sewage system

  2. (b)

    Using kerosene, instead of water, as a solvent for the washing of the factory workers clothes

  3. (c)

    Heightening of the plant’s chimneys, in order to ensure a better dispersion of its emission gases in the atmosphere

  4. (d)

    An introduction of an alternative technology, for fuel combustion, into the plant, in order to obtain the energy required for production

With respect to each of the above suggestions think and explain briefly:

  1. 1.

    In your opinion, which of the proposals will it be reasonable to assume to be accepted by the management and why?

  2. 2.

    Which of the suggestions, if accepted and implemented, will indeed improve (or worsen) the quality of the environment inside and outside the plant?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zoller, U. (2016). From Algorithmic Science Teaching to “Know” to Research-Based Transformative Inter-Transdisciplinary Learning to “Think”: Problem Solving in the STES/STEM and Sustainability Contexts. In: Papadouris, N., Hadjigeorgiou, A., Constantinou, C. (eds) Insights from Research in Science Teaching and Learning. Contributions from Science Education Research, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20074-3_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20074-3_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-20073-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-20074-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation