Abstract
In this study, we examine introductory physics students' ability to perform analogical reasoning between two isomorphic problems which employ the same underlying physics principles but have different surface features. Three hundred and eighty two students from a calculus-based and an algebra-based introductory physics course were asked to learn from a solved problem provided and take advantage of what they learned from it to solve another isomorphic problem (which we call the quiz problem). The solved problem provided has two sub-problems while the quiz problem has three sub-problems, which is known to be challenging for introductory students from previous research. In addition to the solved problem, students also received extra scaffolding supports that were intended to help them discern and exploit the underlying similarities of the isomorphic solved and quiz problems. The results suggest that students had great difficulty in transferring what they learned from a 2-step problem to a 3-step problem. Although most students were able to learn from the solved problem to some extent with the scaffolding provided and invoke the relevant principles in the quiz problem, they were not necessarily able to apply the principles correctly. We also conducted think-aloud interviews with 6 introductory students in order to understand in-depth the difficulties they had and explore strategies to provide better scaffolding. The interviews suggest that students often superficially mapped the principles employed in the solved problem to the quiz problem without necessarily understanding the governing conditions underlying each principle and examining the applicability of the principle in the new situation in an in-depth manner. Findings suggest that more scaffolding is needed to help students in transferring from a two-step problem to a three step problem and applying the physics principles appropriately.
Highlights
Identifying the relevant physics principles involved is one important component of problem solving in physics
Some of them wrote down some potentialenergy-like or kinetic-energy-like terms separately without writing any equation. (These mistakes were all classified in category CME_5 ‘‘other structural mistake’’ in Table XII.) The fact that with the solved problem provided most of the algebra-based students were able to invoke either one or both of the correct principles is the main reason why all three intervention groups performed significantly better than the comparison group in the algebra-based courses
We found that it is very challenging for introductory physics students to transfer what they learned in the two-step snowboard problem to solve the three-step putty problem
Summary
Identifying the relevant physics principles involved is one important component of problem solving in physics. One major goal of many physics courses, is to help students learn to discern the deep similarities between the problems that share the same underlying physics principles but have different surface features, so that students can transfer what they learn from one context to another. It is well known that two physics problems that look very similar to a physics expert because both involve the same physics principle do not necessary look similar to the beginning students [1,10].
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore 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.
