PHYSICS PROBLEM SOLVING

(^)
Minnesota. Smith has made extensive use of cooperative learning in college engineering
classes. His techniques, are based on the cooperative learning theoretical research,
especially that of Roger and David Johnson. In a research summary, coupled with
arguments for the use of active learning strategies, Smith (1988) makes a strong
statement for the efficacy of cooperative learning in engineering education. Although he
specifically addresses engineering education, many of his findings and proposals can be
transferred to science education in general.
Engineering education and physics education share an important goal: Movement
towards becoming an “expert”. They also share a common obstacle: Students’
misconceptions. Based on Smith's actual classroom experience, one might conclude
cooperative learning may indeed be the best way to teach problem solving and overcome
misconceptions at the same time (Smith, 1987). This is due to the way students develop
expertise.
Smith (1987) points out that the rehearsal aspect of cooperative learning is an
effective means of developing expertise. This relates to the theory of encoding ideas in
long term memory. The process of discussing a concept, or solving a problem, with peers
allows for instant feedback. There is a higher probability the "proper" connections will
be made among ideas. This is the opposite of generating misconceptions. There is, of
course, the possibility all students in a learning group will share and reinforce the same
misconception or naive, novice approach. The monitoring function of the instructor serve
as a check on student-generated misconceptions. While this may occasionally make
more work for the instructor, it permits the assessment and addressing of misconceptions,
observation of conceptual maturation, and ensures quality.