Year 2005, Volume 25 , Issue 1, Pages 123 - 147 2005-03-01

How do Elementary School Students Solve Ill Structured Problems
İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor

Nurdan KALAYCI [1]


This paper is based on research that evaluated strategies used by elementary school students (K-5) for solutions to “diagnosis-solution” problems and “design” problems, mainly categorized as ill-structured problems. The differences in the applications of these strategies by students in different grades were analyzed. The research was based on face-to-face interviews. The analysis of the responses of K-3 students showed that most of them did not apply the general steps of problem-solving such as identification of the problem, data collection, generating possible solutions and evaluation steps. Instead, they immediately skipped to the step of selecting the best solution after the problems were posed to them. Some of the students in the 4th and 5th grades mentioned that it was important to define the problem first and then solve the problem. This group was also able to identify multiple resources for data collection, whereas thProblem, Problem Çözme, Kötü Yapılanmış Problem, Tasarım Problemleri, Teşhis Et Çöz Problemleri.Problem, Problem Solving, Ill structured Problem, Design problem, Diagnosis- Solution Problems. Tam Metin
Bu çalışma, anaokulundan altıncı sınıfa kadar olan öğrencilerin, kötü yapılandırılmış olarak kategorize edilen tasarım ve teşhis et- çöz problemlerini çözerken, kullandıkları stratejilerin belirlenmesi ve değerlendirilmesine dayalıdır. İlkokullarda, farklı sınıf düzeylerindeki öğrenciler tarafından kullanılan bu stratejilerin uygulanmasındaki farklılıklar analiz edildi. Bu araştırmada veriler yüz yüze yapılan görüşmelerden elde edildi. Veri analizleri, anaokulu, birinci, ikinci ve üçüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin çoğunluğunun, genel problem çözmenin adımları olan, problemi tanımlama, veri toplama, çözümler üretme ve değerlendirme basmağını uygulamadıklarını gösterdi. Onun yerine, öğrenciler, onlara sorulan problemlerden sonra hiç düşünmeksizin en iyi çözümü se&cceThis paper is based on research that evaluated strategies used by elementary school students (K-5) for solutions to “diagnosis-solution” problems and “design” problems, mainly categorized as ill-structured problems. The differences in the applications of these strategies by students in different grades were analyzed. The research was based on face-to-face interviews. The analysis of the responses of K-3 students showed that most of them did not apply the general steps of problem-solving such as identification of the problem, data collection, generating possible solutions and evaluation steps. Instead, they immediately skipped to the step of selecting the best solution after the problems were posed to them. Some of the students in the 4th and 5th grades mentioned that it was important to define the problem first and then solve the problem. This group was also able to identify multiple resources for data collection, whereas thProblem, Problem Çözme, Kötü Yapılanmış Problem, Tasarım Problemleri, Teşhis Et Çöz Problemleri.Problem, Problem Solving, Ill structured Problem, Design problem, Diagnosis- Solution Problems. Tam Metin
  • Baker, L. (1989). Metacognition, Comprehension Monitoring, and the Adult Reader. Educational Psychology Review, 1, 3-38.
  • Biehler, R.F., & Snowmen, J. (1993). Psychology Applied to Teaching. Houghton Mifflin Com., Boston.
  • Bransford, J., & Stein, B. (1984). The Ideal Problem Solver. New York: Freeman. USA.
  • Brunnig, R., Schraw, G., & Ronning, R. (1995). Cognitive Psychology and Instruction. Upper Saddle River, NJ; Prentice Hall. USA.
  • Cohen, M.R. (1981). The Journal Of Environmental Education, 13, 1.
  • Cooper, G., & Sweller,J.,(1987) Effect Of The Schema Acquisition and Rule Automation on Mathematical Problem Solving Transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79,347-362.
  • Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think. New York: Heath. USA.
  • Dixon,D.N.(1987). A History of Counseling Psychology. In J. A Glover & R.R.Ronning(Eds.), Historical Foundations of Educational Psychology. 62- 63. NewYork : Tudor.
  • Dunkle, G., Schraw, G., & Bendixen, L. (1995) Cognitive Processes in Well–Defined And Ill Defined Problem-Solving. Paper Presented at The Annual Meeting of The American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
  • Eggen, P., Kauchak, D. (1999). Educational Psychology. Windows on Classroom. Prentice Hall, Inc. USA.
  • Eysenck, M., & Keane, M. (1990). Cognitive Psychology: A Student’s Handbook. Hillsdale, NJ:Elrlbaum. USA.
  • Frederiksen, N. (1984). Implication of Cognitive Theory for Instruction in Problem- Solving, Review of Educational Research, 54(3), 363-408.
  • Fuson, K.C. (1992). Research on Whole Number Addition and Subtraction. In Handbook Of Research On Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 243- 75.NewYork: Macmillan Publishing Co.,
  • Gagne, R.M. (1980). The Condition of Learning. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
  • Gustafson, B.J., Rowell, & P.M. (1998). Elementary Children’s Technological Problem- Solving: Selection an Initial Course of Action. Research in Science &Technological Education.16(2), 151-164.
  • Harty, H, Kloosterman, P.& Matkin, J. (1991). Science Problem-Solving Approaches in Elemantary School Classrooms, School Science and Mathematics, 91,10-14.
  • Hayes, J. (1988). The Complete Problem Solver. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. USA.
  • Jonassen, D.H. (2000). Toward a Design Theory of Problem-Solving. E.T.R&D Vol: 48, No. 4. pp.63-65. Technology: Research & Development, 48 (4), 63-85.
  • Kalayci, N., & Cohen, M. (2003). Integrating Problem-Solving with Theme-Based Learning in the Key Learning Community, Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Education of Teacher in Science. St.Louis, Missouri.
  • Lee, L., Goh, N., Chia, L., Chin, C., & Tan, L. (2000). Science Teachers and Problem- Solving in Elementary Schools in Singapore. Research In Science &Technological Education, 18(1), 113.
  • Martines, M.E. (1998). What Is Problem-Solving? Phi Delta Kappan, 79(8).
  • Mayer, R. (1992). Thinking, Problem-Solving, Cognition, 2nd ed., NY: Freeman Company.
  • Mayer, R., & Wittrock, M. (1996). Problem-Solving Transfer. in Berliner, D.C., Calfee, R.C. (Eds), Handbook of Educational Psychology, (pp.47-62). New York: Macmillan, Nov., Vol.16, issue2, p.151.
  • Namsoo Shin Hong. (1998). The Relationship Between Well- Structured and Ill- Structured Problem Solving in Multimedia Simulation. Doctoral Dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University. College of Education. U.S.A.
  • O’Neil, J. (1991). Building Lings Between School nd The Workplace. ASCD Curriculum Update, 1-8.
  • Peery, M., Vanderstoep, S, & Yu, S. (1993). Asking Question in First-Grade Mathematics Classes: Potential Influences on Mathematical Though. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1), 31-40.
  • Robitalle, D., & Kenneth, J. (1992). International Studies Of Achievement In Mathematics. In Handbook of Research On Mathematics Teaching And Learning, New York: Macmillan Publishing Co.
  • Rothstein ,P.R. (1990). Educational Psychology. New York: Mcgraw-Hill. USA.
  • Schoenfeld, A.H. (1989). Teaching Mathematical Thinking And Problem-Solving. In L. Resnick & L. Klopfer, Toward the Thinking Curriculum; Current Cognitive Research. 83-103. Alexandria, V.A. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
  • Schunk, D. (1994). Goal Self-Evaluative Influences During Children’s Mathematical Skill Acquisition. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of The American Research Association, New Orleans.
  • Simon, H. (1988). Information-Processing Theory of Human Problem-Solving. In W. Estes (Ed.), Handbook of Learning And Cognitive Processes: (5). Human Information Processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Sinnot, J, D (1975). A Model For Solution of Ill Structured Problems: Implication For Everyday and Abstract Problem Solving. In J.D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday Problem Solving: Theory and Application.72-99. Newyork:Praeger.
  • Stevenson, H.W., & Stigler, J.W. (1992). The Learning Gap. N.York: Summit Books.
  • Spiro ,R.J.,Vispoel,W., Schmitz,J.,Samarapungavan,A.,& Boerger,A.(1987).Knowledge Acquisition for Application: Cognition Flexibility and Transfer in Complex Content Domains. In BC.Brintton(Ed.), Executive Control Process. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence
  • Spiro.R.J., Coulson,RL.,Feltovich,P.J.(1990). Cognitive Flexibility Theory: Advance Knowledge Acquisition in Ill Structured Domains. Cognitive Science, 12,257-285.
  • Voss,J.F.,&Post,T.A(1988). On The Solving of Ill Structured Problems. In MTA.Chi, Glaser&M.J.Farr(Eds)The Nature of Expertise. Hilldale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Wood, P.K.(1993).Inquiry Systems and Problem Structured: Implication for Cognitive Development. Human Development, 26,249-265.
  • Zimmerman, B. (1990). Self- Regulated Academic Learning and Achievement: The Emergence of A Social Cognitive Perspective. Educational Psychology, 71, 503-513.
Primary Language tr
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Author: Nurdan KALAYCI

Dates

Publication Date : March 1, 2005

Bibtex @ { gefad90871, journal = {Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi}, issn = {1301-9058}, address = {}, publisher = {Gazi University}, year = {2005}, volume = {25}, pages = {123 - 147}, doi = {}, title = {İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor}, key = {cite}, author = {KALAYCI, Nurdan} }
APA KALAYCI, N . (2005). İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi , 25 (1) , 123-147 . Retrieved from http://www.gefad.gazi.edu.tr/en/issue/6757/90871
MLA KALAYCI, N . "İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor". Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 25 (2005 ): 123-147 <http://www.gefad.gazi.edu.tr/en/issue/6757/90871>
Chicago KALAYCI, N . "İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor". Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 25 (2005 ): 123-147
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor AU - Nurdan KALAYCI Y1 - 2005 PY - 2005 N1 - DO - T2 - Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 123 EP - 147 VL - 25 IS - 1 SN - 1301-9058- M3 - UR - Y2 - 2019 ER -
EndNote %0 Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor %A Nurdan KALAYCI %T İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor %D 2005 %J Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi %P 1301-9058- %V 25 %N 1 %R %U
ISNAD KALAYCI, Nurdan . "İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor". Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 25 / 1 (March 2005): 123-147 .
AMA KALAYCI N . İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2005; 25(1): 123-147.
Vancouver KALAYCI N . İlköğretim Okulu Öğrencileri Kötü Yapılandırılmış Problemleri Nasıl Çözüyor. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi. 2005; 25(1): 147-123.