PHYSICS PROBLEM SOLVING

(^)
claim. But, verbal arguments often begin with the claim. It will be seen that the groups
also use statements that are clearly not Grounds, Warrants, Backings, or Claims. Thus, I
will define additional statement categories. This again is characteristic of the qualitative
design: Analysis categories grow out of the data.
Validity, Reliability, Generalizability
If this research is to be meaningful and add to the sum of what we know about
cooperative group physics problem solving, then it must have meaning beyond this
discussion of these 14 groups. This issue generally is discussed in terms of validity,
reliability and generalizability. Quantitative research is replete with statistical measures,
such as analysis of variance (ANOVA), that allow for an objective determination of
validity, reliability and generalizability. The validity, reliability and generalizability of a
qualitative study are much more subjective, and hence open to different interpretations.
Statistics are not always useful. The careful reader of this dissertation will uncover the
single ANOVA buried within these pages. Even so, qualitative researchers have found
ways to establish validity, reliability and generalizability (Wolcott, 1990; Maxwell,
1992).
A study, method, or technique is said to be valid if it actually measures what it
claims to measure. One technique researchers have used to promote the internal validity
of a study is triangulation. This research technique uses two or more data collection
methods to study some phenomena or process. The term originates in navigation where
two bearings are used to locate one’s position (Stake, 1988; Cohen and Manion, 1994).
There is only a limited degree of triangulation possible in this study because there is only