|
In two experiments, differential performance on chemistry problems was obtained for two training strategies: text editing and conventional problem solving. Text editing requires students to scan the text of problem statements and specify whether it provides sufficient, missing or irrelevant information for solution. It was hypothesized that text editing, which emphasizes gaining familiarity with schematic knowledge, would lead to higher achievement than conventional problem solving.Experiment one indicated that text editing was superior to conventional problem solving in learning to solve molarity and dilution problems. In particular, students who were trained in text editing skipped some intermediate steps while solving molarity problems. In contrast, using stoichiometry problems, experiment two showed that students who are trained in text editing performed worse than students given conventional problems to solve. An error analysis suggested that because of its failure to direct students' attention to the coherent problem structure in the first instance, text editing has no advantage over conventional problem solving in the domain of stoichiometry problems. It was concluded that the suitability of a text editing training strategy depends on the learning materials. |
|