Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011 - rees2009

Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) Página 853 de 957
Difficulty accessing the problems
The ambiguity found in the open-ended problem statements created a challenge for many
participants as they sought to access the problems and find a starting point for their
problem solving. Many students felt that the problem statements provided insufficient
context. After reading one of the problem statements, Nick engaged in a process of selfquestioning
asking, “I don‘t, well, what do I, what am I supporting? Like am I supporting
wood? Or am I, what‘s the weight of this platform? Does it matter?” Other students
responded to the perceived lack of context by connecting the problem to a context with
which they were familiar. Andrew, for example, explained, “I‘m trying to think how such a
bridge would be designed and I don‘t see it in my head. So, truss bridge. It‘s got something
to do with the term truss’ which I think of as house trusses which are designed similar to
this.”
After reading the problem statements many students were troubled by the lack of
constraints and/or evaluation criteria that were provided to them. Some of these students
believed that critical information was missing from the problem statements. After
reading one problem statement, James argued, “dIt says it‘s a thin strand, so you have to
assume some kind of area for that which I‘m not sure how much of a thin strand for
something that can withstand that kind of force would be. They really should‘ve specified
that in the problem.” Daniel, in contrast, wondered if the lack of constraints was a result of
failing to read the problem statement carefully, explaining, “I would still need the
dimensions of the member for that and all I know is the length. Trying to figure out if I am
missing something in the problem. I‘m reading again.”
Several students exhibited considerable uncertainty as they approached the open-ended
problems. Some of these students felt overwhelmed by the ambiguous nature of these
problems. Sarah‘s approach to one of the problems was to begin searching through the
materials properties tables in the back of the supplied textbook. After a quick scan through
the materials in the tables she exclaimed, “There‘s a lot! I don‘t really know where to
start.” Ryan‘s approach to one of the problems was similar. He explained, “It‘s like a vague
problem so you can really go a lot of different ways with it, so I‘m just like looking at
materials properties.” For other students, the feeling that they were missing something in
the problem statement—as described in the previous category—was the source of their
uncertainty. While solving one problem Daniel said, “Um, my plan is to try to figure out if
maybe I can look through the table of contents and find something that will help jog my
brain—try to get me on—because I know there‘s something here that I‘m missing and I
can‘t quite figure out what it is. It seems like I don‘t have enough information to solve the
problem right now.”
Processes used to deal with ambiguity
Students described using different kinds of plans, or processes, to deal with the ambiguity
they found in the problems. Some students used an equation-oriented plan, or process,
in response to the ambiguity in the problems. Daniel, for example, worked through the
various knowns and unknowns that he encountered in one problem and searched through
the textbook to find equations that he could use to relate them together, explaining, “So we
Proceedings of Research in Engineering Education Symposium 2011
Madrid, 4 th - 7 th October 2011