PHYSICS PROBLEM SOLVING

(^)
construction of an argument. Hence, I knew I should define criteria (Chapter 3) for
recognizing evidence of co-construction of an argument. These results, plus my own
experience with cooperative learning, suggested that I should be attentive to not only
what was being said, but how it was said and who was saying it. Thus, in the transcripts
of the groups’ conversations reproduced in this dissertation, there will be numerous
annotations indicating tone of voice or body language, as well as the identity of the
speaker.
DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURES
In this section I will discuss the procedures used to gather the “raw” data. The
videotaping of the groups began with the second graded problem. I felt the students
needed at least one chance to experience a graded problem situation before experiencing
the taping process. Also, the first taping session was not included in the analysis of the
data. It served to solve logistical and technical problems associated with the taping. The
original research plan called for the taping of 24 different groups working six unique
problems. However, due mainly to technical problems (poor sound quality, equipment
failure or unavailability), only 14 groups solving the six problems were actually included
in the final study.
I visited the entire class before the first taping session and explained the nature
and purpose of my research. All students in a group had to agree to be taped and signed
consent forms. The other videographers (other graduate students, a munificent advisor)
and I, remained passive observers of the groups as they were videotaped, but at times we
made verbal or written comments about something interesting that had transpired in a