Changing Answer-Oriented Students to Problem-Oriented Thinkers
The challenge of freshman chemistry in schools of relatively low pre- and post-enrollment selectivity is in changing the orientation and motivation of intelligent, but marginal, students. Orientation and motivation are interrelated. A student that is answer-oriented is not going to be motivated towards a problem-oriented subject. Not understanding the mental processes of the discipline, he is repelled by them. During my first semester of teaching in Kansas, I became distressed by the relatively small number of students fitting between clusters of the good and the had. My more experienced colleagues, however, assured me that the gulf was normal, that there were a lot of good students and a lot of bad students a t the college, but few of intermediate quality. Their rationale was that good students and bad students came to the college, but the average went to the state university. I n 1969 I plotted frequency distributions of examination grades for my freshman chemistry classes and found the same phenomenon in North Carolina. Two major groupings appeared on the histograms, one for low grades and one for high grades, with few in between. I was obviously measuring two different things. The chief cause of the two-group nature of frcshman chemistry classes appears to be the mental orientation of the students. Students can he classified as problem oriented or answer oriented. This has been observed even among elementary school students.' A prohlemoriented student looks within the problem for its solution. An answer-oriented student looks without; he depends upon memory of things past. The problemoriented student will attempt to analyze the problem and thereby produce a solution. The answer-oriented student expects to look at the problem and have the answer jump at him from his memory bank. He does little or no reflective thinking. Prior to the third hour examination of winter quarter, 1969, my freshman class studied equilibrium reactions. Our textbook used the high temperature dissociation of HI gas as a model reaction. Considerable lecture time was spent on one particular problem from the text. On the third hour examination, this same problem was included-except two data were changed enough to destroy the easy symmetry of the problem. Eight students out of thirty definitely attacked the problem in a problem-oriented manner. All, however, did not get the right answer. Seven students, after considerable scribbling, wrote 2.40 moles HI, 0.30 mole
' HOLT,JOHN,"HOWChildren Fail," Pitman Publishing Corporat,ion, New York, 1964, pp. 88-91.
provocative opinion H2, and 0.30 mole II. There was no mathematical basis for their answers, except the remembered answer to the example that had become so familiar to them. They simply pulled an answer from their answer hank. Of the remaining fifteen students, their answers were so poor as to make analysis impossible. Their ignorance concealed their mental orientation. Similar results have subsequently been observed. The small size of my classes, however, has prevented a statistical study of the phenomenon and its resolution. Although a quantitative answer is not at hand, apparently between thirty and fifty percent of our freshman chemistry students are problem-oriented and the remainder are answer-oriented. This estimate probably holds for many colleges and universities. Problem oriented groups make higher grades than answer-oriented groups, although each group has its own unique distribution of ability. Our high D's and low C's frequently are B's and A's in answer-oriented courses. To help these students, the desire t o indoctrinate a freshman with a given amount of codified information must be subjugated to a desire to change his way of thinking. If I can teach a student during his freshman year to see and solve problems instead of looking for stored answers, he will go to his sophomore year armed with a more viable way of life, plus enough information to see him through the remainder of his curriculum. Students come out of most high schools with the idea that to he educated requires one to memorize a great array of facts in a somewhat haphazard manner. Little has been done towards teaching them to solve problems. Perhaps many problems have been solved for them, but they never see the challenge nor the technique of prohlem solving. Many students hate any problem if the answer will not jump out of their mishmash of information. No amount of federal support for new equipment and entertaining demonstrations will help until somebody teaches students to react to problems with something other than irritation. Books have been written on how to solve problems. The trouble with such books is that a book is generally a poor medium for teaching a technique. It requires too much effort and time for success. Most techniques are learned by experience, that of the student and a teacher working together to make the student adept. To simply work a problem for a student may not be educational at all. The student should be taught the process used in the solution. This is what will make him educated or help him to educate himself. A problem is specific; specific operations bring about its solutions. These should be taught in the context of generalities. It is his knowledge of these generalities and all his Volume 48, Number 6, June 1977
/
387
experience with specifics that will make the student adept a t solving problems. A framework is needed that the student can use. It should be simple, easy to learn, and easy to relate to new experience. It should be general and flexible. I try to teach problem solving around the following questions and rules. Though not derived from Polya's book, they could be subdivided into his four phases of problem ~ o l v i n g . ~Many professors may be able to devise a better outline, but most students cannot or will not. Changing mental orientation requires some coercion. 1) First ask what the problem requires as a solution. This requires a careful and thorough reading of the problem. Study the meaning and content of each word,,phrase, and clause. Write things down when possible. Think pntb pencil and paper as tools. 2) Next ask what information the problem contains that will help in its solution. 3) What do you know that might help in tbe solution of the oroblem? Formulas. data. solutions to similar ~rohlems.factual relationships, etc. 4) What other resources do you have a t your command? Handbooks, texts, references, friends, etc. Use these. 5) How might all your information be fitted together to produce a solution to your problem? Think of possible solutions. Try them. Keep looking for relationships that will produce a solution. Don't let the problem stun your brain into immobility. Keep turning things over and looking s t them differently until vou have a satisfactom solution.
sents or suggests.
Although the last step may seem irrelevant to the solution of a particular problem, it is important to the development of ability to see relationships and to see beyond the immediate problem a t hand. I n learning to criticize current knowledge and generate research ideas, it seems invaluable. My experience indicates that an answer-oriented attiPOLYA, GYORGY,"HOW to Solve It,'' Princeton University Prezw, Princeton, New Jersey, 1948, pp. 5-21.
388
/
Journal of Chemicol Education
tude can be changed. Holt accomplished this with his elementary students. But one can't do much teaching of problem solving techniques and at the same time get on with the day's lecture. Drill in problem solving requires time, and not much new material can be introduced during a drill period. Faced with the inherent choices, most professors get on with the day's lecture covering new material. Many schools, however, have credit or non-credit recitation periods as part of the freshman courses. These periods afford an opportunity to work on the mental orientation of students. A procedural framework should be chosen and adhered to until students use it with success and confidence. This requires much drill and sequential probing along the steps of the outline as the students, not the teacher, work problems. The temptation to telescope or ignore the outline should be vigorously resisted. Necessary or desirable departures should be fully justified. When it becomes apparent that a class is becoming bored, increasingly difficult problems help maintain interest. This also permits introduction of increasingly sophisticated ideas about problem solving. Problem solving technique is a tool of learning. With most students, it is learned haphazardly or not at all. To teach it well should be about the most rewarding academic activity. This requires persistence, dedication, and analytical understanding of problem solving. Those who learn to use the methods of science are motivated towards science and do well in science studies. A year of stressing methods of problem solving would alter the orientation and motivation of many students we now call poor. Hubert 1. Youmans Western Carolina University Cullowhee, North Carolina 28723
