PROBLEM SOLVING BASED TECHNICAL DRAWING EDUCATION

PeterT6th
Institute for Engineering Education
BBnki Donat Faculty of Budapest Polytechnic
NepszinMz u. 8, H-I081 Budapest, Hungary
Toth.Peter@bgk.bmfhu

Abstract - My examination focuses on the skills involved in Complex methods

the process of problem solving. In pa rticul ar, a distinction is
Problem-solving Decision-making
made between general problem solving processes and those
relating to various types of specific problems. The role of
•
knowledge, motivation, disposition and meta cognitive style
The "tool" skills
played in problem solving is also to be discussed. I interpret
problem solving as a complex method in which creative and Creative (divergent) Critical (convergent)
critical thinking play determinative roles. I would like to thinking thinking
underline the significance of heuristic and algorithmic J

approaches in thinking-development from the point of view of

The Foundations
the concrete engineering problem.

I I
Knowledge base Motivation and Metacognitive
dispositions systems

I. INTRODUCTION Fig. 1. Overall model of productive thinking

With the help of factor analysis, Guilford organized the According to Lipman superior thinking is under the
intellectual abilities into a unified system. [I] According to "wings" of imagination balanced by common sense and
this, the aspects of catego-rization are the following: the reality (practicability). He considers the classroom
nature, the operations (cognition, recollection, divergent development of superior thought important. As long as the
thinking, conver-gent thinking and evaluation) of, the syllabus is processed with regard to the development of
contents (figural, symbolic, semantic, behavioural) of, and students' problem solving thinking, problems will have to
the products (the representation of information in units, be solved with the active participation of the whole class in
categories, connections, systems, transformations and which the dialogues between students (argumentation,
implications) of the thinking process. According to refuta-tion, debate) have an inunense significance. All this
Guilford, operati o nal factors correspond with defmite may successfully contribute to the development of
abilities. In the course of problem solving both convergent students' cognitive abilities and, as it has been mentioned
and divergent thinking may simul-taneously play a earlier, simple cogmtlve abilities and cogmtlve
defming part, which he regards the components of components serve as the foundation for the development of
superior thought. [4]
productive thinking, hereby created the possibility of the
complex explanation of productive thinking. According to
this, problem solving as productive thinking may be
explained as a complex procedure, the determining factors
of which are the so-called "tool skills" and the foundations.
Guilford terms thinking in different directions and the
search for different possibilities of solution divergent
thinking, while he calls the search for exclusively correct
and optimal solutions convergent thinking (Fig. I). As the
preconditions for all these, men-tion may be made of
quality and quantity, practical knowledge, a fIrm dedica­
tion to problem solving (mo tivation and dispositions) as
well as metacogni-tive system. [2]
Lipman talks of superior thought, which includes critical
and creative thinking (Fig. 2). According to him, the two
types of thought mentioned above comprise similar
components, however, these elements are organized in
different ways in either case. He explains creative thinking
as one directed by intellectual con-nections, trying to
trans cend itself, sensitive to con-tradictory crit eri a, and
leading to judgement. It is important to state that no
Fig. 2. The explanation ofhigh�rder thinking
creative thinking exists without being combined with
critical judgement and no critical thinking exists without
Algorithms, which decrease the necessity of crea-tive
creative judgement to play a role in it, either. [4]
judgements but are still indispensable in the course of
problem solving, have a crucial role in the development of

0-7803-8588-8/04/$20.00 ©2004IEEE. 405

students' critical thinking. [4] However, in the
development of problem solving thinking emphasis has to
be laid on the creation of algorithms rather than on their
application. Students may be invited to participate - with
con-tinuous and appropriate help in the exploration of
- the
individual steps of algorithm, thus gradualness in
education for independence is ensured. Many times we
experience that understanding is not necessarily to be
considered knowledge. It can easily be checked if we ask
our students to reproduce the solution to a problem earlier
jointly done and understood. We often see that this kind of
self-test fails. The question arises as to what the teacher or
the student is to do in this case. It is the review of the
correct solution, in the course of which it may transpire
that even understanding has not been well-founded at
certain points. [8]
As we have earlier said, critical judgement plays a
decisive part in creative thinking, or the reverse, whereas
for discoveries creative thinking is primarily required.
According to Polya, modem heuristics is the science,
which wishes to explore the process of problem solving
together with its essential thought operations. [5]
In summary it can be said that algorithm is a method or
a rule which results in the solution of a problem in any
case, while heuristic methods apply practical rules that do
not guarantee the successful solution of a problem, but
once they prove successful, they save a lot of time and
energy for the person solving the problem.
II. THE ACCEPTATION OF THOUGHT
OPERATIONS
Thought moves according to their function are to be
interpreted from the point of view of the entire process
(thought phase) and its minor partial domains (thought
operation). Whereas the collection of thought phases
comprises the macrostructure of the process, the total of
thought operations comprises the microstructure of it. Each
thought move that is independent and cannot be divided
any further is to be considered a thought operation.
Thought operations are to be interpreted within the narrow
environment of the thought process (two or three moves).
Elementary (eg abstraction) and complex (analogy = making decisions and passing judgement that appear in the
relation + relation) thought operations can be
distinguished, the efficient interaction of which results in
the solution of the given problem. Some thought operations
can be interpreted as the reverse of another operation (eg
analysis - synthesis). The following thought operations are
to be distinguished: analysis, synthesis, abstraction,
comparison, comprehension of connections (relation),
completion, generalisation, concretisation, arrangement
and analogy. [6]
Bartlett made an attempt to ascribe most thought
operations to completion, considering generalisation and
concretisation its basic forms. [7]
Arrangement includes grouping, systematization and
classification as well, therefore the operations of
completion, abstraction, analysis and synthesis are implied
in it. The operation of analogy is to be regarded such a
complex thought operation in which the comprehension of
connections (relation) and completion are applied
successively. In the course of his research, Ferenc Lenard
distinguished further connections, laying emphasis on, for
406
example, the recognition of multiple connections, the
accentuation of essence, knowledge transfer, etc. In the
course of his research he supposed that the examination of
thought operations would lead to the exploration of
correlation between problem solving thought and
intelligence. Having studied the minutes of the
examinations, he came to the conclusion that thought
phases in the thought process are easier to recognise than
organically related thought operations are. However, the
examination can be performed more easily if the
experimentees are to solve problems which are solvable by
the application of one or two thought operations. On
studying the examination minutes, he arrived at the
conclusion that "thought operations (analysis, synthesis,
etc) in the process of problem solving prepare the
successful application of thought phases (establishment of
facts, modification, proposal for solution, critique, etc),
and thus pave the way for the more successful solution of
problems". [6]
In the case of appropriate activation, the emergence of
the problem provokes in the memory the activation of
information necessary to the solution: the comprehension
of the problem, the composition of questions arising in
connection with the problem, the presentation of the
problem, and the arrangement of skills necessary to the
solution. Skills evoked comprise the foundation of partial
thought processes. The following can be considered such
partial processes: perception, abstraction, differentiation
and generalisation, cognition, categorization (classi­
fication), recognition, comparison of newly acquired skills
with ones learnt earlier and stored, judgement and
conclusion. The adequate combination of thought
operations applied in partial thought processes makes it
possible to take into account strategies leading to the
solution. Operations of the thought may be partly logical
and algorithmic, partly intuitive and heuristic and partly
symbolic. We are talking of rational thought if the rules of
logic are applied in the course of thought (deductive and
inductive thought). The fundamental operations of rational
thought are analysis and synthesis, which fonn the basis of
complex operations such as generalisation, abstraction and
analogy. Heuristic thought plays an important role in
course of problem solving. The last phase of problem
solving is "retrospection".
Lenard makes a distinction between the logical and
psychological interpretations of the thought process. While
the thought process (train) interpreted so far involved the
mistakes and ramblings of the experimentee, the logical
train of thought is free of these. being the chain of
particular thought moves ".. .leading to the solution without
rupture". [6]
After all this it is worth examining what kind of
possibilities there are of the conscious application of
thought operations in the course of syllabus development
in the case of teaching particular subjects, such as technical
drawing. We can expound here only some of them in
greater detail.
III. ANALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS
In the course of analysis a workpiece is "disassembled"
into its constituents from a certain aspect. One of these
aspects may for example be taking to pieces of basic
bodies (Fig.3). The basic bodies gained this way fonn an
independent unit. It is not considered analysis proper if the
task is restricted to the characterisation of some workpiece,
because it does not fonn an independent unit. In the course
of reading drawings, the recognition, fixing, or verbal
description of basic bodies comprising the drawing of the
parts is an essential task. It may be practised through
modelling or drawing. The latter method may be the
following:
� preparation of a sketch for reading the drawing,
� specification of basic bodies,
different colouring of different geometric forms (Fig. 4).
-�-- ]J-��{)
-8=J I � () Fig. 3. Analysis and synthesis of the bolt
Synthesis is a thought operation contrary to analysis,
the course of which individual geometric forms are
connected into a workpiece.
Fig. 4. Analysis by colouring of different geometric forms
Analysis and synthesis are the most fundamental thought
operations, since more complex operations are based on
them.
IV. ABSTRACTION
In the course of abstraction the essential features and
characteristics of the given drawing are focussed on, in
which the above-mentioned analysis has great significance.
The objective of analysis together with its system of
aspects defme which feature is to be regarded important.
As shown in Fig. 5, if we want to focus on the operation of
the milling cutter we have to prepare the kinematic sketch
of the given equipment, in which essential features
comprise the relation to each other of the shafts forming
the running chain, the method of fixing the gears on them
(fixed wheels, slidable wheels), the transmission between
gears and the direction of rotation. In this case the shafts,
cylinder and bevel gears ail lost their unimportant features
from the point of view of analysis. They are symbolized by
emblematic representation.
Fig. 6 shows the abstracting process of a roller bearing:
detailed cross section view, simplified representation and
emblematic representation. The application of emblematic
representation was made possible by the fact that mainly in
assembly drawings it is sufficient to provide the
installation measures (outside and inside diameters, width)
of a standard machine part available in trade as well as the
indication of its connecting surface (essential features).
Fig. 5. Kinematic sketch of milling cutter by abstraction
in
Fig. 6. Abstraction phases of roller bearing
V. GENERALISATION - CONCRETISATION
Generalisation can be interpreted as synthesis
endeavouring to emphasize such generally valid features of
unique phenomenon (stressing the essence) as can be
referred to each inividual of a given class, and in this sense
it can be considered superordination. Besides abstraction, it
is one of the most important means of concept and theory
formation as well as legislation. Generalisation shows
similarity with abstraction, however, they are not identical.
Generalisation in every case implies abstraction, whereas
the latter does not necessarily imply the fonner. While
abstraction endeavours to stress essential features
(intension), generalisation does so to create concepts,
generic terms and categories (extension) on the basis of
essential features that have been focussed on.
Induction is an outstanding form of generalisation, being
a method of knowledge acquisition whereby stressing the
depicted common features and relations of unique
executions of operations (abstraction) one arrives at the
conclusion that they are valid for an entire group of
operations.
407
 Concretisation is in fact the contrary operation to section plane, the track of section plane, the direction of
generalisation, with deduction being its outstanding fonn. projection, cross section and revolved section. As the
In the course of deduction one approaches partial following step generalised concepts are concretised in the
judgements from general ones. Partial judgements derive course of solving concrete problems. Thus half cross
from the general, because the general includes the unique section, half view-half cross section and part section are
elements. Deduction explores the unique. Therefore derived (Fig. 8).
deduction applies general statements, laws and rules to the Inductive syllabus development is applied in, for
umque. example, the development of the topic of screw locking,
when the student arrives at generalisation after the
individual analysis of unique technical solutions (Fig. 9).
As a result, he is able to declare the objective of thread
locking as well as apply it in the course of various designs.

Ii4tI
t�.-t .",
nut locking with a jam nut thread loosing with lock washers

Fig. 7. General concept formation

A-A'

S-8 sheet locking castle nuts with a cotter pin

Fig. 9. Generalisation of concept of thread locking

SUMMARY

In my present study I have attempted through concrete

problems to show the possibilities of the conscious

"B +A application of thought operations (analysis, synthesis,

abstraction, concretisation, generalisation) in the process of
half cross section teachin g technical drawing as a subject. I think it important
to emphasize that our examples are applicable in a wide
variety of technical subjects, thus gre atly contributing to
the development of Our students' problem solving thought.

REFERENCES

[1] Guilford, J. P., Creative talents. Their Nature. Uses and

Development. Bearly Limit ed, Buffalo, 1986,p139.

half view - half cross section [2] Treffinger, D. J., - Feldhussen, J. F. - Isaksen, S. G., Organisation
and structure of productive thinking. Creative Learning Today, Vol.
4. No #2.,1990, pp6-8.

[3] Spceddie, S. M. - Houtz, J. C. - Ringenbach, S. - Feldhusen, J. F.,

Abilities Measured by the Purdue Elementary Problem Solvin g
Inventory. Psychological Report, Vol. 33, No #3.,1973, pp27-34.

[4] Lipman, M., Thinking in Education. Cambridge University Pre ss,

Cambridge, 1991, p271.
part sect ion
[5] Polya, Gy., How to Solve it? Princ eton University Press, Princeton,
Fig. 8. Concretisation of general concepts of cross section 1990, p253.

[6] Lenard, F., A Problemamegoldo Gondollwdas. Akadcmiai IGado,

In the course of deductive syllabus development our Budapest, 1978, p342.
students first acquire the process of creating simple cross [7] Bartlett, F. C., Thinking: An Experimental and Social Study. Allen
sections, in comparison with the process of the derivation and Unwinn, London, 1958, p204.
of projections (Fig. 7). In the course of solving the problem
[81 Pentelenyi, P., Development of algorithmic thinking. Ligatum LIn,
our students fonn such general concepts as for instance Budapest, p128.

408