PHYSICS PROBLEM SOLVING

(^)
collaborative processes within groups and examined the negotiation of meaning that
occurs” (Tobin, Tippins, and Gallard; 1994; p.45, emphasis added). And, “although
studies of cooperative learning in the context of science education abound,... the focus of
these studies has not been so specifically on the learning process” (Tobin, 1990; p. 418,
emphasis added).
These findings suggest there is something about the group process that, for
example, facilitates the co-construction of an effective physics description. Somehow,
the group process guides the translation of the problem statement into a physics
description that properly depicts the conceptual basis of the problem. Thus, what we
already know about physics problem solving in cooperative groups is that groups co-
construct a superior solution that is not merely the work of the best individual in the
group. What is not known is how this occurs. That is, what is not well-understood is the
sequence of behaviors and actions that lead to a superior product.
Toulmin Argument Structure
In a major summary of cooperative learning practice and research, Ann L. Brown
and Annemarie Palincsar suggest a reason for the superior product of a group: There is
“distributed thinking” and a “joint management of argument construction” in
cooperative groups (Brown and Palinscar, 1989; p. 400). There are three terms that recur
in this dissertation and there is a precise sense in which I am using them. Argument
implies the students are engaged in developing an idea. It is very important to understand
that argument doesn’t mean arguing. An argument is a logical, thought-out conceptual
statement, and as such, it has a structure. Construction implies the students “build” or