Abstract
Although much is known about the differences between expert and novice problem solvers, knowledge of those differences typically does not provide enough detail to help instructors understand why some students seem to learn physics while solving problems and others do not. A critical issue is how students access the knowledge they have in the context of solving a particular problem. In this paper, we discuss our observations of students solving physics problems in authentic situations in an algebra-based physics class at the University of Maryland. We find that when these students are working together and interacting effectively, they often use a limited set of locally coherent resources for blocks of time of a few minutes or more. This coherence appears to provide the student with guidance as to what knowledge and procedures to access and what to ignore. Often, this leads to the students failing to apply relevant knowledge they later show they possess. In this paper, we outline a theoretical phenomenology for describing these local coherences and identify six organizational structures that we refer to as epistemic games. The hypothesis that students tend to function within the narrow confines of a fairly limited set of games provides a good description of our observations. We demonstrate how students use these games in two case studies and discuss the implications for instruction.
Highlights
Students learning physics at the college level often have considerable difficulty with problem solving despite the fact that problem solving is an integral part of most physics classes.[1]
As part of a project to reform introductory algebra-based physics,[2] we have collected extensive data of students learning physics and solving physics problems in a variety of environments. These data include some familiar but remarkable student behavior, such asifailing to use their personal knowledge in favor of misinterpretations of authority-based knowledge when reasoning in a formal context; ͑iiusing incorrect qualitative arguments to rebut a qualitative argument even when they know the correct formal argument
We propose that a useful way to analyze some of the common associational structures in student approaches to physics problem solving is to describe them in terms of locally coherent, goal-oriented activities
Summary
Students learning physics at the college level often have considerable difficulty with problem solving despite the fact that problem solving is an integral part of most physics classes.[1]. As part of a project to reform introductory algebra-based physics,[2] we have collected extensive data of students learning physics and solving physics problems in a variety of environments These data include some familiar but remarkable student behavior, such asifailing to use their personal knowledge in favor of misinterpretations of authority-based knowledge when reasoning in a formal context; ͑iiusing incorrect qualitative arguments to rebut a qualitative argument even when they know the correct formal argument. In order to make sense of these data, we propose a useful way of analyzing students’ problem solving behavior in terms of locally coherent goal-oriented activities that we refer to as epistemic games These games both guide and limit what knowledge students think is appropriate to apply at a given time. Much of the work described here is taken from the dissertation of Jonathan Tuminaro and more detail can be found there.[14]
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.