Table Of ContentHISTORICAL VERSUS CONTEMPORARY PROBLEM-SOLVING USE
OF THE COLLEGE PHYSICAL SCIENCE LABORATORY PERIOD
FOR GENERAL EDUCATION
A Thesis
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty
of the
University of Minnesota
by
James S. Perlman
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements
for
the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
June, 1952
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The writer feels strong personal gratitude to his adviser,
Professor Palmer 0. Johnson. Devoted as Professor Johnson is to
progress in science educational methods as well as to furtherance
of latest designs and statistical techniques in educational research,
his suggestions, counsel and Judgment were invaluable, his support
stimulating, solid and constant throughout.
To Deans Russell Cooper and J. W. Buchta, the writer is
especially thankful for the opportunity to conduct this investiga
tion. As Chairman of the General Studies Program, Dean Cooper was
genuinely interested in the college general education research
represented in this study. Although under heavy pressure of
responsibilities at the time as Acting Dean of the College of
Science, Literature and the Arts, Dean Buchta was particularly
kind in conducting one of the five groups of the study during the
first quarter,
Mr. William Moonan assisted considerably and dependably in
the statistical treatment of the data.
Professor Cyril Hoyt had an ever-willing ear and valuable
suggestions in problems of compiling a written test in scientific
thinking.
Acknowledgments are due to Stanford University Press, Stanford,
California, to the Cooperative Test Service, New York City, and to
the State Department of Education, Columbus, Ohio, for their
cooperation in the use of items from the Stanford Scientific Aptitude
Test of Dr. David Zyve, from the P. E. A. Interpretation of Data
Test #2.51, 1939, used in the Eight Year Study, and from the Every
Pupil Scientific Thinking Test, 1938, respectively.
Without the general encouragement, cooperation and devotion
of his wife, Beatrice B. Perlman, this study would hardly have
been possible.
James S. Perlman
June, 1952
TABLE GF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ................. -....- -.................. vi
Chapter
I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS LITERATURE ..... ................... 1
Introduction •••••...••..... ....... .......... 1
The Problem............................ 2
Statement of the Problem • 2
Significance and Scope of This Stnxdy . . * ........... 3
Assumptions of This Investigation 3
General Limitations of This Study . .................. 5
The Literature ....................... 5
General Character of Previous Research on
Laboratory Period Use ........... 5
The Issue of Lecture Demonstration vs#
Individual Laboratory .... 7
Research in College Science for General Education •••••# 10
Scientific Problem-Solving as an Issue in Education •••• 12
ProblenHSolving Research • •••••.••••••••.... lU
High School Studies on Automatic Acquisition of
Scientific Approaches ••••••.••••••••• 16
High School Studies Involving Special Teaching
for Scientific Thinking ...... 19
Evaluative Summary of High School Studies .... 26
College Level Investigation Relevant to our
Problem-Solving Assumptions ...... 27
Summary................ 38
II. THE EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN AND THE INSTRUMENTS OF EVALUATION • • UO
Introduction: The Experimental Objective, the Population,
the Course .... UO
General Design of the Experiment ............. Ul
General Character of the Testing Instx-uments .......... U3
The Pre-tests ...... Ui
Outside Criterion Tests ... ....... ............. hh
Written Test on Scientific Thinking and Its Validity ••• U5
Performance Test in Scientific Problem-Solving
and Its Validity................. 5U
Reliability of the Tests • • ............. 56
Sunmary.......... 57
III. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES............ 59
Sampling Procedures....... ...... . 59
Control of Non-Experimental Factors ............ 63
General Differentiation of Methods •••••••••.... 61;
General Procedures and Materials of Instruction 65
iii
Page
Testing Procedures • •••............................ 69
General Statistical Techniques and Procedures.......... 70
Summary ................................... 70
IV. THE PROBLEM-SOLVING LABORATORY PROCEDURES AND
MATERIALS IN DETAIL................ 72
Introduction .... 72
Similarities Between Historical and Contemporary
Methods Used ....•........... 72
Schedules of the Class Problems of Study ....... 77
Log of Problem-Solving Procedures and Activities ......... 77
Summary .......................... 109
V. AN ANALYSIS OF THE EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS.................. 110
Introduction •••••.... 110
Primary Test Statistics for all Three Treatments ............ 110
Analysis of First Quarter Written Laboratory Test
Results for Main Study........... 112
Analysis of First Quarter Written Laboratory Test
Results for the Secondary Study ••••... IH4.
Analysis of First Quarter Subject Matter Test
Results for Both Studies •••....... 115
Comparison of Written Pre-test to Post-test on
Scientific Thinking .............. 115
Analysis of Final Written Scientific Thinking Test
for the Main Study 117
Analysis of Final Written Scientific Thinking Test
for all Three Groups ............ 119
Analysis of Final Performance Test on Scientific
Thinking for Main Study ...... 120
Analysis of Final Performance Test for Secondary Study •••••• 12l|
Analysis of Final Outside Criterion Test on Science Theory .. 125
Summary............................................ 127
VI. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................. 128
Summary............................................. 128
The Problem .... 128
The Design ..... 129
The Experimental Methods ......................... 129
The Tests ........ 130
Findings and Conclusions .... 131
Implications and Recommendations for Further Study .......... 133
BIBLIOGRAPHY......................................... 137
iv
Page
APPENDIX A
Primary Data .................................... 11*2
APPENDIX B
Calculations of Welch's for Testing the Homogeneity
of Variances ....... 1U6
Results of T-Tests of Significance Between Pre-tests
and First Quarter Written Laboratory
Tests According to Group •••••••••••••• ll;6
APPENDIX C
Validity Data and Coefficients for Written Scientific
Thinking Test................... 153
Test Reliability Coefficients by the Jackson and by
the Hoyt Methods ......... 15U
APPENDIX D
Scientific Problem-Solving Performance Test •••••••••*.•••• 158
Scientific Problem-Solving Written Pre-test and Test •••••• l6l
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1* Validity Coefficients for "Written Scientific Problem-
Solving Test and Pre-test .......................... 53
2# Classification of Morning and Afternoon Classes of
Historical and C on temporary Methods According to
Employed and Unemployed Students ........ 6l
3* Schedule of Problems of Historical and Contemporary
Groups During Fall, 1950 ................•.... •..... 78
U# Schedule of Problems of Historical and Contemporary
Groups During Winter, 1951 •••••••••••...... 79
5* Primary Test Statistics for the Three Treatments .........Ill
6. Analysis of Variance of the First Quarter Written Laboratory
Test Scores — Historical and Contemporary Methods ••••••.. 113
7. Analysis of Variance of the First Quarter Written Laboratory
Test Scores — Historical, Contemporary and Lecture
Demonstration Methods ............ llli
8* First Quarter Science Theory Test — 2x2 Design
Calculation of L^ for the Test of the Hypothesis
Hi Sigmaa - Sigma ........................ 116
O 8 •
9* Analysis of Variance and Covariance for the Final Written
Scientific Thinking Test Scores - Historical and
Contemporary Groups Only - A.C.E. Scores and Pre-test
Held Constant ................... 118
10# Analysis of Variance for the Final Performance Test Scores
on Scientific Thinking - Historical and Contemporary
Groups Only - A.C.E. Scores and Pre-test Held Constant •••• 121
11# Analysis of Variance for Each of the Three Separate Parts
of the Performance Test in Scientific Thinking Scores -
Historical and Contemporary Groups Only ................122
12# Adjusted Analysis of the Final Performance Test Scores,
Part II, for the Historical and Contemporary Groups with
the A.C#E# Scores and Scientific Thinking Pre-test
Held Constant..................................... 123
13# Analysis of Variance of Final Science Theory Test -
Historical and Contemporary Groups................... 126
lU. Analysis of Variance of Final Science Theory Test -
All Three Methods................................. 126
vi
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM AND ITS LITERATURE
Introduction
With the lives of all of us a never-ending succession of
problems, both personal and social, it would seem that an invaluable
function of the school would be the development of open-minded,
systematic and critical approaches to problems* We, therefore, on
a problem-solving basis, are posing the question of the effective
use of the laboratory period in science courses for college general
education* Particularly for training that, along with critical
discrimination in use of authority, emphasizes the students going
out and getting for themselves first hand facts and evidence, there
is perhaps no better opportunity than in the science laboratory
period* With its first hand materials and experiences, for example,
it would seem to afford an invaluable and effective bridge between
the subject matter of the science course and various life problems
involving science materials as evidence* In such a problem-solving
use of the laboratory period, however, there arises the question as
to what would be the most effective class room procedures or methods
for the purpose*
The investigation outlined here is a first step in answering
such a question of effective class room methods for problem-solving
objectives* It attempts to determine the comparative values of a
developmental case-history problem-solving and a direct contemporary
problem-solving use of the laboratory period* The former would
involve an appreciative, developeiental laboratory treatment of
science methodology as revealed in case-histories of the past with
emphasis upon the problem-solving involved* The latter would
emphasise teacher-pupil planning and investigation in direct contemp
orary problem-solving involving use of everyday home, shop or
laboratory materials as evidence in problems in various areas of
living* In other words, narrowed down to conditions of this investi
gation! Can we better develop problem-solving abilities, attitudes
and resourcefulness for contemporary living by appreciatively and
realistically duplicating and analyzing the problem-solving of some
of the outstanding scientific thinkers of the past, or by working
directly with students in their own immediate problems involving
science in various areas of living? Any preliminary or tentative
answers determined here will be relative to the particular conditions
set up in this study, as well as to the fact that the laboratory
period alone is being used for this general education purpose on a
college level*
The Problem
Statement of Problem
The problem of this study may be stated as follows:
1* To develop special teaching procedures for scientific problem
solving outcomes in areas of living far use in the college physical
science laboratory period for general education*
2* To test further the assumption that such scientific problem
solving for areas of living is leamable*
3* If so, to determine the relative effectiveness of a case-
history problem-solving versus a direct contemporary problem-solving
use of such a laboratory period for such problem-solving outcomes«
These outcomes are to be measured by written and by performance tests
based upon life problem situations*
Scientific problem-solving is defined here as that open-minded,
systematic and critical approach to problems that emphasizes empirical
verifi cation *
Significant Features of This Study
We briefly indicate the significance of this study to be that:
1* The effective use of the physical science laboratory is being
posed on a problem-solving basis*
2* In so doing, the emphasis is upon differentiating between
different problem-solving methods rather than between a problem-solving
method and a conventional method. Our intention is to provide a start
to the determination of the most effective class roam problem-solving
methods and of the conditions of their effectiveness*
3* This study in its emphasis upon scientific problem-solving
outcomes in areas of living is orientated toward college general
education,
U* The problem-solving methods chosen for comparison involve a
critical issue in college general education: an historical problem
solving approach as against a contemporary one*
Assumptions of This Study
We concisely present the assumptions underlying this study accord
ing to whether they are problem-solving, transfer of training or
testing assumptions. The main problem-solving assumptions are:
-u-
1* The study of science subject natter does not automatically
result in improved abilities and developed habits of approaching
problems open-mindedly, systematically and critically*
2. Scientific problem-solving outcomes can best be attained by
problem-solving approaches and problem-solving experiences*
Transfer of training assumptions involved in this study are:
1* Problem-solving is universal not only in learning but In
living.
2. Therefore, the problem-solving steps outlined by Dewey*-, but
in various combinations and orders, provide an approach to problems
of all kinds, and consequently a basis for transfer of various
critical, generalizing, interpretive and other abilities and habits.
These aspects involve a felt difficulty, problem clarification and
definition, a search for clues, suggestions for solution and accept
ance or rejectance of suggestions through evaluation or test. Dewey
could have added a sixth aspect: application or retesting of an
accepted suggestion or continued efforts with new suggestions after
rejectance or even acceptance of earlier ones.
3. Transfer of training assumptions of the historical method
used are that various case-histories in science properly chosen enable
(a) problem—solving generalizations for automatic transfer to modem
life, (b) insights on modem life through historical perspectives as
well as through historical similarities.
U. Transfer of training assumptions of the contemporary method
used are that contemporary problems (a) afford problem-solving general
izations through accumulative direct experience for further application,
^Dewey, How We Think, Ch. VI, 1910.
