Teaching algorithmic problem solving or conceptual understanding: Role of developmental level, mental capacity, and cognitive style

It has been shown previously that many students solve chemistry problems using only algorithmic strategies and do not understand the chemical concepts on which the problems are based. It is plausible to suggest that if the information is presented in differing formats, the cognitive demand of a problem changes. The main objective of this study is to investigate the degree to which cognitive variables, such as developmental level, mental capacity, and disembedding ability explain student performance on problems which: (1) could be addressed by algorithms or (2) require conceptual understanding. All conceptual problems used in this study were based on a figurative format. The results obtained show that in all four problems requiring algorithmic strategies, developmental level of the students is the best predictor of success. This could be attributed to the fact that these are basically computational problems, requiring mathematical transformations. Although all three problems requiring conceptual understanding had an important aspect in common (the figurative format), in all three the best predictor of success is a different cognitive variable. It was concluded that: (1) the ability to solve computational problems (based on algorithms) is not the major factor in predicting success in solving problems that require conceptual understanding; (2) solving problems based on algorithmic strategies requires formal operational reasoning to a certain degree; and (3) student difficulty in solving problems that require conceptual understanding could be attributed to different cognitive variables.

[1]  G. M. Seddon,et al.  The visualization of spatial transformations in diagrams of molecular structures , 1982 .

[2]  Dorothy L. Gabel,et al.  Problem‐solving skills of high school chemistry students , 1984 .

[3]  A. Lawson Predicting science achievement: The role of developmental level, disembedding ability, mental capacity, prior knowledge, and beliefs , 1983 .

[4]  Joseph Nussbaum,et al.  Junior high school pupils' understanding of the particulate nature of matter: An interview study , 1978 .

[5]  J. Pascual-Leone ORGANISMIC PROCESSES FOR NEO‐PIAGETIAN THEORIES: A DIALECTICAL CAUSAL ACCOUNT OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT , 1987 .

[6]  John R. Staver,et al.  The Influence of Cognitive Reasoning Level, Cognitive Restructuring Ability, Disembedding Ability, Working Memory Capacity, and Prior Knowledge On Students' Performance On Balancing Equations by Inspection. , 1988 .

[7]  Field independence, task ambiguity, and performance on a proportional reasoning task , 1981 .

[8]  John W. Renner The power of purpose , 1982 .

[9]  H. Simon,et al.  The mind's eye in chess. , 1973 .

[10]  H. A. Witkin A Manual for the embedded figures tests , 1971 .

[11]  Paul Ammon,et al.  Piagetian Theory and Neo-Piagetian Analysis as Psychological Guides in Education , 1978 .

[12]  J. Dudley Herron,et al.  Piaget for chemists. Explaining what "good" students cannot understand , 1975 .

[13]  Juan Pascual-Leone,et al.  The encoding and decoding of symbols by children: A new experimental paradigm and a neo-Piagetian model , 1969 .

[14]  G. M. Seddon,et al.  The Factor Structure for Mental Rotations of Three-Dimensional Structures Represented in Diagrams. , 1985 .

[15]  Mansoor Niaz The Relationship between M-Demand, Algorithms, and Problem Solving: A Neo-Piagetian Analysis. , 1989 .

[16]  M. Chapman Pascual-Leone’s Theory of Constructive Operators , 1981 .

[17]  William J. McIntosh,et al.  The effect of imagery generation on science rule learning , 1986 .

[18]  John J. Clement,et al.  Learning Without Understanding: The Effects of Tutoring Strategies on Algebra Misconceptions , 1980 .

[19]  Juan Pascual-Leone,et al.  A mathematical model for the transition rule in Piaget's developmental stages , 1970 .

[20]  Mansoor Niaz,et al.  Manipulation of M Demand of Chemistry Problems and its Effect on Student Performance: A Neo-Piagetian Study. , 1988 .

[21]  Anton E. Lawson,et al.  Predicting genetics achievement in nonmajors college biology , 1988 .

[22]  Mary B. Nakhleh,et al.  Concept learning versus problem solving: There is a difference , 1993 .

[23]  Bat-Sheva Eylon,et al.  Is an atom of copper malleable , 1986 .

[24]  Susan C. Nurrenbern,et al.  Concept Learning versus Problem Solving: Is There a Difference?. , 1987 .

[25]  Mansoor Niaz,et al.  The Role of Cognitive Factors in the Teaching of Science. , 1987 .

[26]  Michael Shayer,et al.  Towards a science of science teaching : cognitive development and curriculum demand , 1981 .

[27]  Barbara A. Sawrey Concept learning versus problem solving: Revisited , 1990 .

[28]  Mansoor Niaz,et al.  Relation between M space of students and M demand of different items of general chemistry and its interpretation based upon the neo-Piagetian theory of Pascual Leone , 1987 .

[29]  Mansoor Niaz Does Newton's Falling Apple Require an Explanation? Antecedent Variables in Cognitive Development: Controversy and Resolution , 1990 .

[30]  M. Niaz The Role of Cognitive Style and Its Influence on Proportional Reasoning. , 1989 .

[31]  M. Cherkes Cognitive Development and Cognitive Style , 1983, Journal of learning disabilities.

[32]  S. H. Kellington,et al.  Learning difficulties associated with the particulate theory of matter in the Scottish Integrated Science course , 1982 .

[33]  Anton E. Lawson,et al.  Balancing chemical equations: The role of developmental level and mental capacity , 1985 .

[34]  Miles Pickering Further studies on concept learning versus problem solving , 1990 .

[35]  Henry C. Griffin,et al.  Images in chemistry , 1987 .

[36]  Dorothy L. Gabel,et al.  Analyzing difficulties with mole-concept tasks by using familiar analog tasks , 1984 .

[37]  Mansoor Niaz Pascual‐Leone's Theory of Constructive Operators as an Explanatory Construct in Cognitive Development and Science Achievement , 1994 .

[38]  J Anamuah-Mensah Cognitive Strategies Used by Chemistry Students to Solve Volumetric Analysis Problems. , 1986 .

[39]  G. Bodner,et al.  COGNITIVE RESTRUCTURING AS AN EARLY STAGE IN PROBLEM SOLVING , 1986 .

[40]  David F. Treagust,et al.  The Role of Cognitive Factors in Chemistry Achievement. , 1987 .

[41]  A. Ribaupierre,et al.  Formal operations and M power: A neo-Piagetian investigation , 1979 .