
The ability to solve problems is
a basic life skill and is essential to understanding technical subjects. Problem-solving
is a subset of critical thinking and employs the same strategies. Although the
line between the two is fuzzy, in general, the goal of problem-solving is to
adduce correct solutions to well-structured problems, whereas the goal of critical
thinking is to construct and defend reasonable solutions to ill-structured problems.
Basically, problem-solving is the process of reasoning to solutions using more
than simple application of previously learned procedures.
There are several reasons that college students often fail to reach a satisfactory
level of proficiency in problem-solving. They frequently suffer from fears and
anxieties, especially fear of failure, that hamper their efforts to solve problems.
Particular learning styles may make it harder to learn to solve problems. Also,
general thinking patterns may inhibit student's problem-solving ability. Below,
we examine these problems and explore several strategies that students and instructors
can use to address them.
There is also evidence that some thinking styles that affect the ability to solve problems are gender-linked (Kimura, 1992). For example, a marked discrepancy exists between males and females in visualizing the structure of chemical molecules because males are better able to manipulate 3-dimensional objects in space. However, females organize and relate data more efficiently than males.
In addition to the emotional and psychological issues outlined above, there are numerous cognitive barriers to mastering problem-solving. The primary difficulty for many students is the inability to identify and use concepts and procedures in analogous but novel situations. The lack of transfer of structure between problems is a significant cognitive difficulty, not only for inexperienced problem-solvers but also for experts. Successful transfer rests on the ability to recognize analogies, but even when given an analogy, students often fail to see how to employ it.
In order to understand this phenomenon more concretely, consider the following problem:
A patient has a cancerous tumor. Beams of radiation will destroy the tumor, but in high doses will also destroy healthy tissue surrounding the tumor. How can you use radiation to safely eradicate the tumor?
This structure of this problem follows the general pattern common to all problems. It has a set of facts (tumor, radiation, tissue) and unknowns (ways to administer radiation), together with relationships between them (radiation destroys tumor and tissue).
Gick and Holyoak (1983) gave volunteers the story below and then asked them to solve the tumor problem.
The story and the problem have exactly the same logical structure, but only a small percentage of subjects were able to solve the tumor problem after being told the story. The solution is to bombard the tumor from different directions with low-intensity radiation so as not to harm healthy tissue. The convergence of the beams at the tumor provides sufficient intensity to destroy it. Only when the subjects were overtly prompted to use the story as an analogy to help them solve the problem were most of them able to solve it. The inability to transfer in the absence of prompting may be one of the greatest hurdles for student and instructor.A fortress surrounded by a moat is connected to land by numerous narrow bridges. An attacking army successfully captures the fortress by sending only a few soldiers across each bridge, converging upon it simultaneously.
A lack of transfer skills is frequently
marked by functional fixedness, the perception that a particular object or concept
has only one use. For example, in the tumor problem students might interpret
the word "dose" as implying oral medication. Or they may believe, erroneously,
that the word "beam" implies that there can be only one direction from which
radiation can be applied. Since successful transfer may require seeing a familiar
concept or procedure in a new way, functional fixedness handicaps the transfer
process. Another handicap for students is superficial transference, where students
identify and link words or variables between problems instead of linking deeper,
more meaningful structures. For example, physics experts represent problems
in terms of the laws or principles needed to solve them, e.g., energy equations
or Newton's laws of motion. Novices, on the other hand, categorize problems
on the basis of superficial features such as whether they involve pulleys, inclined
planes or other objects (Kurfiss, 1988).
Different learning styles as well as gender-specific differences in thinking can be addressed by employing a variety of activities and approaches in teaching. The traditional instructional mode of lecturing and explaining is effective for only one learning style. To address other learning styles, you might use graphics to illustrate concepts, provide opportunities for practice in class, ask for student interpretations of data, and require students to work on problems in groups. Making students aware of their learning styles and preferences can also be helpful. The following Web site, developed by Prof. Richard Felder of North Carolina State University, provides an explanation as well as a self-test for learning styles:
An algorithmic procedure is a "step-by-step prescription for achieving a goal" (Woolfolk, 1993). The mnemonic PEMDAS (Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, and Subtraction) is an algorithm that math students use to remember the order of operations used in simplifying algebraic expressions. Students appreciate algorithms because they are easily applied. However, students may "algorithmize" methods they have observed others using and bring them to bear in a given situation whether applicable or not. Algorithmic methods are limited to low-level tasks and tend to be domain-specific.
Heuristic methods, general schemes
used to derive solutions to problems, are more useful than algorithms. There
are a variety of heuristics that can be useful to students. Bransford and Stein
(1984) use the acronym IDEAL to represent the five steps usually contained in
many solution strategies.
| Identify the problem. |
| Define and represent the problem. |
| Explore possible solution strategies. |
| Act on the strategies. |
| Look back and evaluate. |
Dialogue can also be useful in promoting transfer by highlighting the differences between the problem-solving techniques used by experts and novices. In order to solve a problem, both experts and novices follow the same pattern: they read and analyze, plan a strategy, act on that strategy to produce a solution, and then try to verify it. But experts work harder on the initial stage than do inexperienced problem-solvers, and inappropriate or superficial transfer frequently characterizes the novice. Getting students to talk through the differences between problems that have similar superficial structures but different deep structures decreases the risk of incorrect transfer.
Having students work on numerous
problems individually and in groups also facilitates transfer. The traditional
method of giving two examples in class and assigning twenty exercises for homework
fails to give students a sufficient base from which to work. Once students have
mastered problems of a particular type, they can begin to tackle problems of
a more general nature. Choosing problems which evolve from simple and well-defined
to complex and ill-defined will help them develop transfer skills. Using real-world
data in sample problems will also help facilitate the transfer process, since
students can more easily identify with the context of a given situation. Using
these strategies, students will learn the relevance of course material to daily
life and will begin to transfer concepts between disciplines, moving toward
a more cohesive understanding of the real world.
home / fyc index / publications / email