PHYSICS PROBLEM SOLVING

This was not the first research to use the episode as a unit of analysis. However, as far as
I know, it is the first to use episodes in a qualitative case study of cooperative group problem
solving. The episode is a valid unit of analysis because a group co-constructs an argument by
conversing, and conversations consists of multiple statements and sentences. Thus, it was better,
in this case, to use episodes instead of just counting statement types. The use of this technique is
further warranted because using episodes revealed important patterns. Even so, the episodes are
composed of statements and it was important to carefully classify individual statements. One
could see the statements as a micro-context and the episode as a mini-context.
I also feel confident that beginning with the Toulmin categories yielded rich insights. As
I found, students in a problem-solving group do not strictly follow the Toulmin argument
structure and thus, other statement types must be considered. In addition, their patterns do not
always lead to the claim. Even so, the Toulmin structure is a valid and useful analysis tool for
studying the process of cooperative group problem solving. Part of the usefulness is the manner
in which the additional statement types complement the Toulmin statements.
Students in a problem-solving group are engaged in co-constructing an argument. That
means the product, i.e., the problem solution, is a group product and not the work of an
individual. This is a finding in this study that supports previous research. We frequently hear
the criticism of cooperative group problem solving, especially from physics professors, that the
best student in the group solves the problem. I believe, post research, that this is not the case.
Even the least involved student contributed some idea that lead to the solution. I might even
argue in the case of Group 4D that ST’s insistence that there is no normal force lead to a much
better understanding of the forces acting on the sign. In Group 4A, RM who was very quiet,
frequently asked the skeptical questions or requested clarification because he did not understand.