CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION OF RESULTSRESEARCH SUMMARY
This chapter will briefly summarize the research setting and procedures and then discuss
the meaning of the results. The purpose of this research was to undertake a systematic “fine-
grained examination” of what students actually do in cooperative problem-solving groups. The
research explored the process of argument co-construction, using Stephen Toulmin’s argument
structure, in fourteen cooperative problem-solving groups while they completed their qualitative
analysis of physics problems. The physics courses used for this study were the algebra-based,
introductory two-quarter sequence Physics 1041 and 1042, taught winter and spring quarters
1991, at the University of Minnesota.
Students were taught a problem solving strategy (Heller and Hollabaugh, 1992). They
were expected to use this five-step strategy in the recitation period when solving a complex
problem as a cooperative group. The students were introduced to the four roles of Manager,
Recorder, Skeptic and Engergizer. It was intended that there would be a heterogeneous mix
within a group in terms of the students’ performance in the class (high, medium, low). Also, it
was intended that there would be all groups of three, and no groups where the number of men
was greater than the number of women. However, the teaching assistants only occasionally
followed this plan. In reality, of the 14 groups in this study, there were 11 groups of three, only
four of these groups met the gender criteria, and of these four, only one met the ability
composition criteria.