What can we learn from how gifted/average pupils describe their processes of problem solving?

Gorodetsky, Malka; Klavir, Rama

doi:10.1016/s0959-4752(02)00005-1

Cited by 15 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The enhancement of heterogeneity between the low-and high-use student groups after the attendance of the course could be attributed to differences in student learning capacity (Gorodetsky & Klavir, 2003) or motivation (Windschitl & Andre, 1998). Future research should clarify this issue.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Word associations as a tool for assessing conceptual change in science education

Hovardas

Korfiatis

2006

Learning and Instruction

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Word associations as a tool for assessing conceptual change in science education

Hovardas

Korfiatis

2006

Learning and Instruction

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Sternberg and Davidson (1983) have identified three major cognitive components that are responsible for the solutions of insight problems by the gifted: encoding, combination, and comparison. Gorodetsky and Klavir (2003) suggested extending the model and incorporating in it two additional components-retrieval and goal directness.…”

Section: Five-factor Model Of Intellectual Giftednessmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Do Gifted High School Students Use Geometry to Solve Geometry Problems?

Koichu

Berman

2005

Journal of Secondary Gifted Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes the following phenomenon: Gifted high school students trained in solving Olympiad-style mathematics problems experienced conflict between their conceptions of effectiveness and elegance (the EEC). This phenomenon was observed while analyzing clinical task-based interviews that were conducted with three members of the Israeli team participating in the International Mathematics Olympiad. We illustrate how the conflict between the students’ conceptions of effectiveness and elegance is reflected in their geometrical problem solving, and analyze didactical and epistemological roots of the phenomenon.

show abstract

“…Based on these five sub-processes, middle high school students (gifted and average) solved insight problems, without and with analogical learning, and were asked to report on the solution process they undertook. Though both the gifted and the average were able to arrive at correct solutions, the study shows that they employed different sub-processes in doing so (Gorodetsky and Klavirb 2003). Usiskin (2000) has devised an eight-tiered hierarchy, which ranges from Level 0 to Level 7, to classify mathematical talent.…”

Section: What Are the Differences Between Mathematicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Research on the cognitive sub-processes involved in the expert problem solving of the gifted, as compared to the problem solving of the average person, has attributed the difference between these two populations to selectivity in their encoding, comparison and combination sub-processes. Gorodetsky and Klavirb (2003) extend this list by adding two sub-processes that are imported from the literature on experts and novices: namely, retrieval and goal directness. Based on these five sub-processes, middle high school students (gifted and average) solved insight problems, without and with analogical learning, and were asked to report on the solution process they undertook.…”

Section: What Are the Differences Between Mathematicalmentioning

confidence: 99%