Complex Problem Solving and Worked Examples

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-138 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Schmidt-Weigand ◽  
Martin Hänze ◽  
Rita Wodzinski
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Learning Experience ◽  
Worked Examples ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Complex Problem Solving ◽  
Strategic Learning ◽  
Learning Behavior ◽  
Worked Example ◽  
8Th Grade

How can worked examples be enhanced to promote complex problem solving? N = 92 students of the 8th grade attended in pairs to a physics problem. Problem solving was supported by (a) a worked example given as a whole, (b) a worked example presented incrementally (i.e. only one solution step at a time), or (c) a worked example presented incrementally and accompanied by strategic prompts. In groups (b) and (c) students self-regulated when to attend to the next solution step. In group (c) each solution step was preceded by a prompt that suggested strategic learning behavior (e.g. note taking, sketching, communicating with the learning partner, etc.). Prompts and solution steps were given on separate sheets. The study revealed that incremental presentation lead to a better learning experience (higher feeling of competence, lower cognitive load) compared to a conventional presentation of the worked example. However, only if additional strategic learning behavior was prompted, students remembered the solution more correctly and reproduced more solution steps.

scholarly journals Advancing the Design of Self-Explanation Prompts for Complex Problem-Solving

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (11) ◽  
pp. 88-108
Author(s):  
Hyun Joo ◽  
Jinju Lee ◽  
Dongsik Kim
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Interaction Effect ◽  
Conceptual Knowledge ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
The Self ◽  
Complex Problem Solving ◽  
Low Level ◽  
High Level

This research investigated the effects of focus (inference vs. inference followed by integration) and level (low vs. middle vs. high) in self-explanation prompts on both cognitive load and learning outcomes. To achieve this goal, a 2*3 experiment design was employed. A total of 199 South Korean high school students were randomly assigned to one of six conditions. The two-way MANOVA was used to analyse the effects of the self-explanation prompts on learning outcomes. Results showed that there was an interaction effect between focus and level of self-explanation prompts on delayed conceptual knowledge, suggesting that the focus of self-explanation prompts could be varied depending on their level. Second, learners who were given a high level of prompts scored higher on the immediate conceptual knowledge test than those who received a low level of prompts. A two-way ANOVA was conducted to analyse the effects of the self-explanation prompts on cognitive load and showed no significant interaction effect. However, there was a main effect in the level of the prompt that a high level of self-explanation prompts imposed a lower cognitive load compared to a low level of prompts. In sum, the design and development of self-explanation prompts should consider both focus and level, especially to improve complex problem-solving skills.

scholarly journals Efektivitas worked example dengan strategi pengelompokan siswa ditinjau dari kemampuan pemecahan masalah dan cognitive load

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-74
Author(s):  
Muhammad Ferry Irwansyah ◽  
Endah Retnowati
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Cognitive Load ◽  
Learning Strategies ◽  
Worked Example ◽  
Grouping Strategy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grouping Students ◽  
8Th Grade ◽  
Problem Solving Strategies ◽  
Study Participants

Pada penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mendeskripsikan dan membandingkan efektivitas strategi pembelajaran worked example dan problem solving dengan strategi pengelompokan siswa (kolaboratif dan individual) ditinjau dari kemampuan pemecahan masalah dan cognitive load. Penelitian ini melibatkan 64 siswa kelas 8 sebagai partisipan penelitian yang dibagi menjadi empat kelompok secara acak dengan menggunakan desain eksperimen 2 × 2 (worked example vs. problem solving) × kolaboratif vs. individual). Hasil penelitian ini mengindikasikan bahwa tidak terdapat perbedaan signifikan penerapan strategi worked example dengan pengelompokan kolaboratif dan individual ditinjau dari kemampuan pemecahan masalah. Ditinjau dari cognitive load, strategi worked example efektif ketika siswa belajar individual, namun tidak efektif ketika siswa belajar secara kolaboratif. Ketika siswa belajar secara individual, strategi worked example dapat mengaktifkan cognitive load lebih rendah daripada strategi problem solving, sedangkan ketika siswa belajar secara kolaboratif, strategi worked example dan problem solving tidak berbeda dalam mereduksi cognitive load. The effectiveness of worked example with students’ grouping strategy viewed from problem-solving abilities and cognitive load AbstractThe study aimed to describe and compare the effectiveness of learning strategies (worked example and problem-solving) with the strategy of grouping students (collaborative and individual) viewed from problem-solving abilities and cognitive load. There were 64 of 8th-grade students as study participants divided into four groups randomly using experimental design 2 × 2 (worked example vs. problem-solving × collaborative vs. individual). The results of the study indicate that there is no significant difference implementation of worked example strategy between the collaborative strategies and individuals viewed from problem-solving abilities. Viewed from the cognitive load, the worked example strategy was effective when students learn individually, but it was not effective when students learn collaboratively. When students learn individually, worked example strategies could activate cognitive load lower than problem-solving strategies, whereas when students learn collaboratively, worked example strategies and problem-solving were no different in reducing cognitive load.

The Prediction of Problem-Solving Assessed Via Microworlds

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 298-306 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Greiff ◽  
Katarina Krkovic ◽  
Jarkko Hautamäki
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Two Dimensions ◽  
Assessment Instruments ◽  
Complex Problem Solving ◽  
Visual Spatial ◽  
Rule Knowledge ◽  
Rule Application ◽  
Fluid Reasoning

Abstract. In this study, we explored the network of relations between fluid reasoning, working memory, and the two dimensions of complex problem solving, rule knowledge and rule application. In doing so, we replicated the recent study by Bühner, Kröner, and Ziegler (2008) and the structural relations investigated therein [ Bühner, Kröner, & Ziegler, (2008) . Working memory, visual-spatial intelligence and their relationship to problem-solving. Intelligence, 36, 672–680]. However, in the present study, we used different assessment instruments by employing assessments of figural, numerical, and verbal fluid reasoning, an assessment of numerical working memory, and a complex problem solving assessment using the MicroDYN approach. In a sample of N = 2,029 Finnish sixth-grade students of which 328 students took the numerical working memory assessment, the findings diverged substantially from the results reported by Bühner et al. Importantly, in the present study, fluid reasoning was the main source of variation for rule knowledge and rule application, and working memory contributed only a little added value. Albeit generally in line with previously conducted research on the relation between complex problem solving and other cognitive abilities, these findings directly contrast the results of Bühner et al. (2008) who reported that only working memory was a source of variation in complex problem solving, whereas fluid reasoning was not. Explanations for the different patterns of results are sought, and implications for the use of assessment instruments and for research on interindividual differences in complex problem solving are discussed.

scholarly journals Working Memory, Fluid Reasoning, and Complex Problem Solving: Different Results Explained by the Brunswik Symmetry

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
André Kretzschmar ◽  
Stephan Nebe
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Latent Variables ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Equation Modeling ◽  
Complex Problem Solving ◽  
Symmetry Principle ◽  
Fluid Reasoning ◽  
The Impact

In order to investigate the nature of complex problem solving (CPS) within the nomological network of cognitive abilities, few studies have simultantiously considered working memory and intelligence, and results are inconsistent. The Brunswik symmetry principle was recently discussed as a possible explanation for the inconsistent findings because the operationalizations differed greatly between the studies. Following this assumption, 16 different combinations of operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were examined in the present study (N = 152). Based on structural equation modeling with single-indicator latent variables (i.e., corrected for measurement error), it was found that working memory incrementally explained CPS variance above and beyond fluid reasoning in only 2 of 16 conditions. However, according to the Brunswik symmetry principle, both conditions can be interpreted as an asymmetrical (unfair) comparison, in which working memory was artificially favored over fluid reasoning. We conclude that there is little evidence that working memory plays a unique role in solving complex problems independent of fluid reasoning. Furthermore, the impact of the Brunswik symmetry principle was clearly demonstrated as the explained variance in CPS varied between 4 and 31%, depending on which operationalizations of working memory and fluid reasoning were considered. We argue that future studies investigating the interplay of cognitive abilities will benefit if the Brunswik principle is taken into account.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document