Conceptual problem solving in high school physics

Abstract

Problem solving is a critical element of learning physics. However, traditional instruction often emphasizes the quantitative aspects of problem solving such as equations and mathematical procedures rather than qualitative analysis for selecting appropriate concepts and principles. This study describes the development and evaluation of an instructional approach called Conceptual Problem Solving (CPS) which guides students to identify principles, justify their use, and plan their solution in writing before solving a problem. The CPS approach was implemented by high school physics teachers at three schools for major theorems and conservation laws in mechanics and CPS-taught classes were compared to control classes taught using traditional problem solving methods. Information about the teachers' implementation of the approach was gathered from classroom observations and interviews, and the effectiveness of the approach was evaluated from a series of written assessments. Results indicated that teachers found CPS easy to integrate into their curricula, students engaged in classroom discussions and produced problem solutions of a higher quality than before, and students scored higher on conceptual and problem solving measures.

How prompting force diagrams discourages student use of adaptive problem-solving shortcuts

“…[2][3][4][5]. These frameworks, developed for introductory physics problem solving, typically require the construction of a diagram, selection of an appropriate physics concept, application of the concept to the specific problem, and evaluation of the final solution.…”

Analisis Hubungan antara Sikap Penyelesaian Soal dan Hasil Belajar Mahasiswa Calon Guru Fisika

“…Mulai dari langkah dan strategi dalam menyelesaikan soal, perbedaan ahli dan pemula dalam menyelesaikan soal, jenis soal yang diberikan, dan pengembangan pembelajaran untuk meningkatkan kemampuan pemecahan masalah atau menyelesaikan soal (Docktor, Strand, Mestre, & Ross, 2015;Heller, Keith, & Anderson, 1992;Hestenes, Wells, & Swackhamer, 1992;Huffman, 1997;Kuo, Hull, Gupta, & Elby, 2013;Leonard, Dufresne, & Mestre, 1996;Mestre, Docktor, Strand, & Ross, 2011). Namun hal ini berfokus pada kemampuan kognitif siswa sebagai langkah untuk membantu siswa dalam menyelesaikan soal atau mendapatkan jawaban yang tepat.…”

“…Salah satu penilaian dosen dalam mengevaluasi hasil belajar mahasiswa adalah dengan memberikan soal atau tes pada saat kuis, ujian tengah semester maupun akhir semester. Sehingga para ahli memperkenalkan beberapa strategi atau langkah-langkah untuk membantu mahasiswa saat menyelesaikan soal fisika (Docktor et al, 2015;Heller et al, 1992;Leonard et al, 1996). Hal lain yang tidak kalah menarik adalah dari sisi afektif mahasiswa ketika menghadapi soal baik ketika mengerjakan soal latihan atau pekerjaan rumah maupun ketika menghadapi ujian (ujian tengah semester dan ujian akhir).…”

“…Misalnya ketika diminta mengerjakan soal usaha dan energi, mahasiswa bisa menggunakan pendekatan lewat hukum Newton Volume 3 Nomor 2, Desember 2017 p-ISSN: 2461-0933 | e-ISSN: 2461-1433 Halaman 155 e-Jurnal: http://doi.org/10.21009/1 atau momentum. Disamping itu, para ahli telah memperkenalkan beberapa strategi pemecahan masalah diantaranya penyelesaian soal secara kualitatif (Leonard et al, 1996), penyelesaian soal secara konseptual (Docktor et al, 2015), penyelesaian soal secara explisit (Huffman, 1997), dan lima langkah dalam menyelesaian soal (Heller et al, 1992). Pernyataan lain juga menunjukkan bahwa ketika satu cara atau strategi tidak berhasil, mahasiswa memilih untuk mencari cara lain.…”

Class Tournament as an Assessment Method in Physics Courses: A Pilot Study

“…These include, in particular, different forms of a written test, extensively described and compared in the literature, such as free-and multipleresponse tests (Wilcox & Pollock, 2014), concept tests (such as the Test of Understanding Graphs in Kinematics (Maries & Singh, 2013), Force Concept Inventory (Hestenes et al, 1992) or Brief electricity and magnetism assessment (Ding et al, 2006) and others (Hitt et al, 2014;, constructed-response tests (Slepkov & Shiell, 2014), essay tests (Kruglak, 1955), laboratory skills tests (Doran et al, 1993) and others. Also, many modifications and extensions of these tests have already been proposed in the literature, improving upon their original form (Ding, 2014;Docktor et al, 2015;Wooten et al, 2014;Zwolak & Manogue, 2015). On the other hand, some authors propose to blend formative and summative assessment techniques.…”