| Abstract: | The purpose of this investigation was to identify and describe the differences in the methods used by faculty teaching introductory chemistry and students enrolled in an introductory chemistry course at the university level to solve paired algorithmic and conceptual problems. Of the 180 students involved, the problem-solving schemas of 20 selected students and 2 professors were evaluated using a graphical method to dissect their think-aloud interviews into episodes indicative of solutions to paired problems on density, stoichiometry, bonding, and gas laws. The interviewed students were classified into four different problem-solving categories (i.e., high algorithmic/high conceptual, high algorithmic/low conceptual, low algorithmic/high conceptual, and low algorithmic/low conceptual), and composite graphs of their problem-solving schemas were compared to those representative of members of the faculty experts' category. Results of these comparisons indicated that as the students' ability to solve both algorithmic and conceptual problems improved, less time and fewer transitions between episodes of the problem-solving schemas were required to complete the problems. Regardless of the students' problem-solving ability, algorithmic-mode problems always required more time and a greater number of transitions for completion than did the paired conceptual-mode problems. However, regardless of topic, all students more frequently correctly solved the algorithmic-mode problems than the corresponding paired conceptual-mode problems. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 34: 905–923, 1997. |
