Rigging the Deck: Selecting Good Problems for Expert-Novice Card-Sorting Experiments

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Rigging the Deck: Selecting Good Problems for Expert-Novice Card-Sorting Experiments
Language: English
Authors: Wolf, Steven F., Dougherty, Daniel P., Kortemeyer, Gerd
Source: Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research. Jul-Dec 2012 8(2):020116.
Availability: American Physical Society. One Physics Ellipse 4th Floor, College Park, MD 20740-3844. Tel: 301-209-3200; Fax: 301-209-0865; e-mail: assocpub@aps.org; Web site: http://prst-per.aps.org
Peer Reviewed: Y
Physical Description: PDF
Page Count: 7
Publication Date: 2012
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Evaluative
Descriptors: Physics, Novices, Expertise, Problem Solving, Problem Sets, Selection, Monte Carlo Methods, Classification, Accuracy, Experiments
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020116
ISSN: 1554-9178
Abstract: A seminal study by Chi "et al." firmly established the paradigm that novices categorize physics problems by "surface features" (e.g., "incline," "pendulum," "projectile motion," etc.), while experts use "deep structure" (e.g., "energy conservation," "Newton 2," etc.). Yet, efforts to replicate the study frequently fail, since the ability to distinguish experts from novices turns out to be highly sensitive to the problem set being used. Exactly what properties of problems are most important in problem sets that discriminate experts from novices in a measurable way? To answer this question, we studied the categorizations by known physics experts and novices using a large, diverse set of problems. This set needed to be large so that we could determine how well experts and novices could be discriminated by considering both small subsets using an exhaustive Monte Carlo approach and larger subsets using simulated annealing. We found that the number of questions required to accurately classify experts and novices can be surprisingly small so long as the problem set is carefully crafted to be composed of problems with particular pedagogical and contextual features. Finally, we found that not only was "what" you ask (deep structure) important, but also "how" you ask it (problem context). (Contains 3 tables and 3 figures.)
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 16
Entry Date: 2012
Accession Number: EJ987458
Database: ERIC
Be the first to leave a comment!
You must be logged in first