- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Assessing student expertise in introductory physics with isomorphic problems. I. Performance on nonintuitive problem pair from introductory physics

Chandralekha Singh

  • Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4, 010104 – Published 28 March, 2008

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.010104

Abstract

Investigations related to expertise in problem solving and ability to transfer learning from one context to another are important for developing strategies to help students perform more expertlike tasks. Here we analyze written responses to a pair of nonintuitive isomorphic problems given to introductory physics students and discussions with a subset of students about them. Students were asked to explain their reasoning for their written responses. We call the paired problems isomorphic because they require the same physics principle to solve them. However, the initial conditions are different, and the frictional force is responsible for increasing the linear speed of an object in one of the problems while it is responsible for decreasing the linear speed in the other problem. We categorize student responses and evaluate student performance within the context of their evolving expertise. We compare and contrast the patterns of student categorization for the two isomorphic problems. We discuss why certain incorrect responses were better than others and shed light on the evolution of students’ expertise. We compare the performance of students who worked on both isomorphic problems with those who worked only on one of the problems to understand whether students recognized their underlying similarity and whether isomorphic pairs gave students additional insight into solving each problem.

View figure in article

See Also

Assessing student expertise in introductory physics with isomorphic problems. II. Effect of some potential factors on problem solving and transfer

Chandralekha Singh
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4, 010105 (2008)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (27)

  1. A. Newell, Unified Theories of Cognition (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990).
  2. F. Reif, Teaching problem solving—A scientific approach, Phys. Teach. 19, 310 (1981); J. H. Larkin and F. Reif, Understanding and teaching problem solving in physics, Eur. J. Sci. Educ. 1, 191 (1979).
  3. D. Maloney, Research in problem solving: Physics, in Handbook of Research on the Teaching and Learning of Science, edited by D. Gabel (MacMillan, London, 1994).
  4. J. Touger, R. Dufresne, W. Gerace, P. T. Hardiman, and J. Mestre, How novice physics students deal with explanations, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 17, 255 (1995); J. P. Mestre, R. Dufresne, W. J. Gerace, P. T. Hardiman, and J. S. Touger, Promoting skilled problem solving behavior among beginning physics students, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 30, 303 (1993).
  5. A. Van Heuvelen, Learning to think like a physicist: A review of research based instructional strategies, Am. J. Phys. 59, 891 (1991); Overview case study physics, ibid. 59, 898 (1991).
  6. M. Chi, R. Glaser, and E. Rees, Expertise in problem solving. in Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, edited by R. J. Sternberg (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1982), Vol. 1, pp. 7–75.
  7. A. H. Schoenfeld, Mathematical Problem Solving (Academic, New York, 1985); A. H. Schoenfeld, Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics, in Handbook for Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, edited by D. Grouws (McMillan, New York, 1992), Chap. 15, pp. 334–370; A. H. Schoenfeld, Teaching mathematical thinking and problem solving, in Toward the Thinking Curriculum: Current Cognitive Research, edited by L. B. Resnick and B. L. Klopfer (ASCD, Washington, DC, 1989), pp. 83–103; A. Schoenfeld and D. J. Herrmann, Problem perception and knowledge structure in expert novice mathematical problem solvers, J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 8, 484 (1982).
  8. P. T. Hardiman, R. Dufresne, and J. P. Mestre, The relation between problem categorization and problem solving among novices and experts, Mem. Cognit. 17, 627 (1989).
  9. 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).
  10. T. de Jong and M. G. M. Ferguson-Hessler, Cognitive structure of good and poor problem solvers in physics, J. Educ. Psychol. 78, 279 (1986).
  11. J. Larkin, J. McDermott, D. Simon, and H. Simon, Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems, Science 208, 1335 (1980); J. Larkin, Understanding, problem representations, and skills in physics, in Thinking and Learning Skills, edited by S. F. Chipman, J. W. Segal, and R. Glaser (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1985), Vol. 2, pp. 141–159; Cognition of learning physics, Am. J. Phys. 49, 534 (1981).
  12. C. Singh, When physical intuition fails, Am. J. Phys. 70, 1103 (2002).
  13. P. W. Cheng and K. J. Holyoak, Pragmatic reasoning schemas, Cogn. Psychol. 17, 391 (1985); P. Johnson-Laird, Psychology of Reasoning, Structure and Content (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1972).
  14. J. J. Kaput, Representation and problem solving: Methodological issues related to modeling, in Teaching and Learning Mathematical Problem Solving: Multiple Research Perspectives, edited by E. A. Silver (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1985), pp. 381–398.
  15. J. Zhang, The nature of external representations in problem solving, Cogn. Sci. 21, 179 (1997).
  16. G. Hatano and K. Inagaki, Two courses in expertise, in Child Development and Education in Japan, edited by H. Stevenson, J. Azuma, and K. Hakuta (W. H. Freeman and Co., New York, 1986), pp. 262–272.
  17. H. A. Simon and J. R. Hayes, The understanding process: Problem isomorphs, Cogn. Psychol. 8, 165 (1976); J. R. Hayes, H. A. Simon, Psychological differences among problem isomorphs, in Cognitive Theory, edited by N. J. Castellan, D. B. Pisoni, and G. R. Potts (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1977).
  18. K. Kotovsky, J. R. Hayes, and H. A. Simon, Why are some problems hard? Evidence from the Tower of Hanoi, Cogn. Psychol. 17, 248 (1985).
  19. J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown, and R. R. Cocking, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School (National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1999).
  20. R. Bjork and A. Richardson-Klavhen, On the puzzling relationship between environment, context and human memory, in Current Issues in Cognitive Processes: The Tulane Flowerree Symposium on Cognition, edited by C. Izawa (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989).
  21. D. Godden and A. Braddeley, Context-dependent memory in two natural environments: On land and under water, Br. J. Psychol. 66, 325 (1975).
  22. S. K. Reed, G. W. Ernst, and R. Bannerji, The role of analogy in transfer between similar problem states, Cogn. Psychol. 6, 436 (1974).
  23. E. Saltiel and J. L. Malgrange, ‘Spontaneous’ ways of reasoning in elementary kinematics, Eur. J. Phys. 1, 73 (1980).
  24. J. Larkin, The role of problem representation in physics, in Mental Models, edited by D. Gentner and A. L. Stevens (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1983), pp. 75–98.
  25. J. Smith, A. diSessa, and J. Rochelle, Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition, J. Learn. Sci. 3, 115 (1994).
  26. C. Singh, Exploration Center for large introductory physics courses, Phys. Teach. 38 (3), 189 (2000).
  27. J. Sweller, Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning, Cogn. Sci. 12, 257 (1988); J. Sweller, R. Mawer, and M. Ward, Development of expertise in mathematical problem solving, J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 112, 639 (1983).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4, 010104– Published 28 March, 2008
  • Received 20 September 2006
Creative Commons Logo

This article is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation