| This exploratory study was designed to ascertain: (1) how students solve chemistry problems; (2) to identify indicators or a group of indicators that might be used as predictors of the strategy a student may use; and (3) to determine if some strategies are more successful (produce correct answers) and/or efficient (require fewer steps) than others in solving chemistry problems. Qualitative, information processing, techniques were employed. Twenty-four high school chemistry students were individually interviewed while solving selected chemistry problems. These interviews were transcribed and coded using a classification scheme developed by the researcher. This study was designed to learn from the students what strategies they actually employ in chemistry problem solving. These strategies were compared to independent variables, gender, SAT scores, Raven Matrix, Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, chemistry achievement, spatial ability and Piagetian development (ATFR), to determine if the strategy a student uses can be predicted by some commonly used measures. These strategies are also compared to determine if one strategy is more efficient or successful than another strategy. This was done by comparing the mean of the strategy group to the mean of the student population for this study.;The students were clustered into seven different strategy groups (A-G) based on their individual codings from the classification scheme using SAS Factor Analysis. Strategy Groups A and G correlate with high SATM and ATFR but differ in that Strategy Group G also correlates with high SATV and "thinking" Myers-Briggs types. Strategy Group F correlates with low Raven, SATM, SATV, and ATFR scores and all members of the group are female and have "sensing" and "feeling" Myers-Briggs types. Strategy Group B differs from the population only in lower SATV and Group C in higher Cubes. Each strategy group identified was compared by success rate on the twelve chemistry problems used in the interview and by the efficiency with which they solved those problems. Strategy groups A and G are both successful and efficient and Strategy Groups B, C, and F are unsuccessful and not efficient. Groups D and E were not significantly different from the research population. |
