Testing a problem solving paradigm [engineering education]

In a paper at the 1996 FIE Conference, Morton, Thomas, Walker and Marr (MTWM) related the success of students in an elementary physics course to their use of a problem solving method. The paper suggested that stressing the use of the paradigm could improve student performance. The paradigm: (1) draw; (2) write general equations; (3) evolve operational equations; (4) get an answer; and (5) evaluate, is widely preached in many engineering courses. This paper reports the author´s attempts to replicate the results of the MTWM study. During the 1996 fall semester, the author collected copies of final examination papers in several courses, two in engineering mechanics and one in mechanical engineering. The problems selected were ones on which he felt the “expert method” could appropriately be applied. These papers were scored according to the MTWM criteria and the results correlated with the individuals´ overall performance. Correlations of the “method” score with “grade” on the same problem and overall examination grade were positive. At the same time, they were small enough to draw the conclusion that the “method” score is related to, but not predictive of overall success on a solution. Given these results, it is suggested that the paradigm not be used as a way of “measuring problem solving”. On the other hand, use of the paradigm for studying students´ work may be useful if it is done to help study and/or advise students on the communication of problem solutions