Chemistry Education

Research and Practice

View Article Online
PAPER View Journal

A study of approaches to solving open-ended

Cite this: DOI: 10.1039/c3rp00028a
problems in chemistry
Tina Overton,* Nicholas Potter and Christopher Leng

This paper describes the outcomes of a qualitative investigation into the range of different approaches
that students use to solve open-ended, context rich problems. The study involved a small cohort of
Published on 07 June 2013. Downloaded on 14/06/2013 14:15:09.

Received 18th February 2013,
Accepted 31st May 2013
DOI: 10.1039/c3rp00028a
www.rsc.org/cerp
students individually solving open-ended, context-rich problems using a think aloud protocol. The
problems required the students to develop a strategy, to identify data required and to make
estimations. The problems did not lead to a single correct answer but rather a range of acceptable
answers. Analysis of the transcripts and recordings of the sessions resulted in a limited number of
categories of approaches to solving the problems. Applications of these approaches to individual
students showed that there were three different types of problem-solver, described here as novice,
expert and transitional. The results provide insight that will help tutors change how they, and
subsequent students, approach problem solving.

Introduction Problems requiring the application of HOCS demand more

We have previously reported how the three cognitive variables,
working memory, M capacity and field dependence, effect
students’ achievement in solving open-ended, content-rich
problems (Overton and Potter, 2011). The results of that study
showed a difference between the cognitive variables required
for success in traditional algorithmic problems and open-end
problems, with field dependence crucial for solving open-ended
problems. Overall degree scores correlated strongly with algo-
rithmic problems solving scores and much more weakly with
scores on open-end problems solving. Interestingly, the con-
text-rich open-ended problems significantly shifted students’
attitudes making them more positive disposed towards problem
solving. This qualitative study investigates the different ways in
which students approach such problems, providing insight into
the distinct strategies used.
Problem solving has been defined as ‘what you do, when you
don’t know what to do’ (Wheatley, 1984). Anderson (2005)
described problem solving as ‘any goal-directed sequence of
cognitive operations’. The types of problems set in examina-
tions or assessments in higher education chemistry are largely
algorithmic (Bennett, 2008; Pappa and Tsaparlis, 2011). Algo-
rithmic problems use mainly lower order cognitive skills
(LOCS), whereas more open ended problems call upon higher
order cognitive skills (HOCS) (Zoller and Pushkin, 2007).
kenapa gitu?
algoritmik hanya mengingat rumus lalu menerapkan pada soal
University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK.
E-mail: t.l.overton@hull.ac.uk
than just knowledge to reach a solution. Knowledge or known
theory must be applied in unfamiliar contexts using such
skills as analysis, connection making, synthesis and critical
thinking. Bodner (1986) suggest that the difference between
an exercise and a problem is the result of differences in the
level of familiarity with similar tasks the individual brings to a
given task. Funke (2010) describes problem solving as an
activity that requires more than routine action and thinking
and states that complex cognition is required to solve complex
problems. Funke views complex problem solving as involving
intransparency, dynamics (underlying psychological forces, such
as motivation and emotion), or polytely (multiple simultaneous
goals).
More than 50 years ago, Polya proposed a model of problem
solving that consists of four steps or stages (Polya, 1945);
understand the problem, devise a plan, carry out the plan, look
back. Bodner and Domin (1991) reports a much less structured
approach to solving problems and identified many more steps.
His model consisted of the following steps; read the problem,
read the problem again, write down what you hope is the
relevant information, draw a picture, make a list, or write an
equation or formula to help you begin to understand the
problem, try something, try something else, see where this gets
you, read the problem again, try something else, see where this
gets you, test intermediate results, read the problem again,
write down ‘an’ answer, test the answer to see if it makes sense.
This is obviously a more iterative and reflective approach to
that proposed by Polya and the difference between them may

This journal is c The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013 Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.

Paper
reflect the difference between expert and novice problem
solvers.
Developing problem solving skills has been the subject of
much research into science education (Zoller et al., 1999; Dori
and Hameiri, 2003). Gabel and Bunce (1994) proposed that the
factors affecting students’ success in problem solving are
threefold: the type of problem and the underlying concepts of
the problem; the learner characteristics (including cognitive
styles and knowledge base); learning environment factors such
as individual or group activity. Bunce attempted to enhance
chemistry students’ skill in problem solving through problem
categorization. Students were taught how to solve problems
using the explicit method of problem solving (EMPS) (Bunce
and Heikkinen, 1986). The EMPS involves encoding the infor-
mation given in a problem, relating this to what is already
known, and planning a solution. This study showed that
Published on 07 June 2013. Downloaded on 14/06/2013 14:15:09.
training in categorization skills and the EMPS can lead to
higher achievement in problem solving. However, there was
no link between understanding of the chemical concepts
involved and the problem-solving skills ability.
Johnstone and El-Banna (1986) stressed the importance of
working memory capacity in learning science and Reid (2009)
suggested that problems that place a high load on working
memory may be a better measure of a student’s working
memory capacity than of problem solving ability. Tsaparlis
(2005) investigated the effect of several cognitive variables on
students’ ability to solve open-ended problems in physical
chemistry. The results showed a strong correlation between
M-capacity and disembedding ability and problem solving
scores. In a study by St Clair-Thompson et al. (2012) it was
found that the best predictors of algorithmic and open-ended
problem solving abilities were tests that measured different
elements of working memory. Performance on algorithmic
problems was predicted by the counting recall tests for working
memory which utilises lower order cognitive skills. Perfor-
mance on open-ended problems was predicted by the figural
intersection test and backwards digit recall test. These which
measure mental capacity which utilises higher order cognitive
skills. These results demonstrated that different cognitive
resources are required for solving algorithmic and open-ended
problems. In a study of online problem solving, Bühner et al.
(2008) found that the working memory component of intelli-
gence is the relevant aspect in predicting problem-solving
ability. The nature of the task, its verbal, figural, or numerical
content, might play an important role in explaining this rela-
tionship. When a task requires information to be stored and
processed as well as integrated with elements held in memory,
the aspects of intelligence that are related to working memory
become most influential.
Kapa (2007) studied the effect of providing metacognitive
support mechanisms (MSM) to students during their problem
solving activities. MSMs are verbal prompts such as ‘‘What
are you asked to find?’’ ‘‘What is given in the problem?’’ The
study showed that these prompts were effective in helping
students transfer from solving structured, closed problems to
open-ended problems. Cooper (2009) studied the influence of
Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
View Article Online
Chemistry Education Research and Practice
students’ metacognitive behaviours on their ability to solve ill
defined problems in chemistry. Using an automated online
instrument that collected and analysed students actions, a
significant correlation was found between the use of meta-
cognitive strategies and the complexity of the problems stu-
dents could handle effectively. Scherer and Tiemann (2012)
investigated the relationship between problem solving ability
and metacognitive strategy knowledge within an online
environment. Their subjects were solving analytical, or closed,
problems in which all the required data are provided, and
complex problems, in which all required information is not
korelasi besar
provided. The study showed substantial correlation between
strategy knowledge and analytical problem solving, but not
with complex problem solving. The authors report that the
ability to solve analytical problems can be distinguished from
the ability to solve complex problems and that fostering pro-
blem-solving skills has to move beyond the development of
strategy knowledge. Chen and Wu (2012) also found that
metacognitive strategies did not lead to higher performances
with complex problems in online environments. In a study of
chemistry students’ ability to solve quantitative, closed pro-
blems, Taasoobshirazi and Glynn (2009) found that their ability
to develop a successful strategy was influence by students’
conceptualization of the problem and their self-efficacy, or
belief in their own ability to succeed. konseptualisasi masalah, cari hubungannya
dengan ESII
Walsh et al. (2007) carried out a phenomenographical study
of problem solving approaches used by physics undergradu-
ates. They found that four different approaches were observed:
a scientific approach, which includes qualitative analysis of the
situation, planning and execution of a solution, and evaluation
of the solution; a structured plug-and-chug approach, which
includes qualitative analysis based on formulas; unstructured
plug and chug, which has a focus on required variable and
lacks evaluation; a memory-based approach which uses analy-
sis of previous examples and lacks evaluation; and no clear
approach. The students who adopted a scientific approach were
able to adopt the plug-and-chug approach when tackling less
complex problems but plug-and-chug students were unable to
adopt the scientific approach.
Thus, much of the published evidence in the area of
problem solving in chemistry has focussed how students tackle
algorithmic or structured problems or on what factors affect
their performance in more open-ended problems. Our focus in
this study is on the approaches that students adopt when faced
with open-ended or complex problems in chemistry.
Methodology
The study involved individual students solving three open-
ended, context-rich problems using a think aloud protocol.
Think aloud protocols involve participants verbalising their
thoughts whilst completing a task and have a long tradition
in chemistry education research (Bowen, 1994; Cheung, 2009).
The researcher may take notes or record the session in order to
capture the evidence. The participant is encouraged to verbalise
their thoughts but the researcher must take care to remain
This journal is c The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013
 View Article Online

Chemistry Education Research and Practice Paper

Table 1 Types of problems (Johnstone, 1993)

Type Data Methods Outcomes Skills

1 Given Familiar Given Recall of algorithms
2 Given Unfamiliar Given Looking for parallels to known methods
3 Incomplete Familiar Given Analysis of problem to decide what further data are required
4 Incomplete Unfamiliar Given Weighing up possible methods and deciding on data required.
5 Given Familiar Open Decision making about appropriate goals. Exploration of knowledge networks.
6 Given Unfamiliar Open Decisions about goals and choices of appropriate methods. Exploration of knowledge
and technique networks.
7 Incomplete Familiar Open Once goals have been specified, the data are seen to be incomplete.
8 Incomplete Unfamiliar Open Suggestion of goals, methods, consequent need for additional data. All of the above skills.

impartial and objective. The method enables the process of
completing a task to be observed and analysed, rather than just
the product of the task. There are several factors which affect
the validity of think aloud techniques. The number of people
Published on 07 June 2013. Downloaded on 14/06/2013 14:15:09.
generating any data to enable application of any algorithmic
operations.
Johnstone (1993) has previously categorised problems according
to whether the strategy required is familiar to the students,

being simultaneously studied can affect validity because of the
possibility of social interactions and the influence of others on
a participant’s thoughts and actions. The degree of researcher
intervention can have a great influence on the quality of the
data gathered. Asking a simple question such as ‘Why do you
think that?’ can invoke metacognition, causing the participant
to reflect on the activity and thus modify outcomes. Partici-
pants may exhibit atypical behaviour and responses if they are
in an uncomfortable environment or if they are trying second
guess the motivations of the researcher. How participants
report verbally can influence the data gathered; if participants
report back at the end of a problem solving activity they can
post-rationalise their approach and appear to be more coherent
and strategic than they actually were. There are also task-
specific variables which influence the data gathered. These
include items such as calculators, paper, pens and textbooks.
The think aloud method was chosen for this study to enable
analysis of the process of solving problems, rather than focuss-
ing on the problem solutions or scores, that is, approach rather
than ability. The study took place through one to one sessions
with the researcher. Students were encouraged to verbalise
their thoughts and to write as much as possible whilst solving
the problems. Intervention from the researcher was kept to a
minimum and care was taken not to provide help with the
problems themselves. The sessions were audio recorded and all
problem solving scripts retained for later analysis.
The problems used all used a real-life context, did not
provide the students with all the data required to solve them,
and did not lead to a single correct answer. Although the
chemistry content would be familiar to most students entering
higher education, it became clear during the sessions that the
style of the problem was unfamiliar to them. Students were not
allowed to use calculators or to look up any information that
they thought they required. This constraint was applied in
order to study whether students were able to make sensible
estimations and carry out approximate or order of magnitude
calculations. Therefore, in order to solve the problems students
would have produce a strategy, make sensible estimations and
approximations and carry out simple ‘back of the envelope’
calculations and think qualitatively about the problem before
whether they are provided with all required data, or whether
there is a clear goal (Table 1). Algorithmic problems are defined
as type 1, as all required data is given, the method is well known
and there is a single correct answer. At the other extreme of this
categorisation are type 8 problems, in which data are incom-
plete, the strategy is unfamiliar and has to be developed, and
the goal is ill-defined or there is no single correct answer. The
problems used in this study are described as type 8 as, even
though there may be some element of algorithmic calculations
involved, students cannot use a well know routine and have to
develop their own strategy, the data is not all given in the
problem and they have to make estimations in order to develop
their own data, and there is not a single correct answer to any of
the problems. According to Funke (2010) these would be classed
as complex problems.
The problems used have been used in previous studies
(Overton and Potter, 2011) and are given below.
Problem 1: You’ve been on ‘Who Wants To Be a Millionaire’
and won d64 000. You decide to treat yourself and some friends
to a holiday in America. The flight from Heathrow to New York
is 7 hours. To provide breathable air on an aircraft recirculation
cells containing KO2 are used. Potassium dioxide reacts with
the exhaled carbon dioxide as follows:
4KO2 + 2CO2 - K2CO3 + 3O2
K2CO3 + CO2 + H2O - 2KHCO3
What mass of KO2 would be needed on a Boeing 747 for this
flight?
Problem 2: On November 13 2005 an explosion at a chemical
plant in Jilin City in north eastern China released 100 tonnes of
benzene and nitrobenzene into the Songhua River. Two weeks
later, nearly 700 miles downstream, the spill flowed into the
Amur river flowing through the Russian city of Khabarovsk. The
Chinese and Russian authorities used activated carbon in water
treatment facilities to stop the contaminants getting into the
municipal water supplies. Quantities of carbon were also
dumped in the river. Below is a table giving the specifications
of activated carbon typically used for water treatment.

This journal is c The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013 Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.

Paper
Grade Filtracarb FY5 Filtracarb CC65/1240
Type Granular Granular
Surface area BETN2 1150 1050
(m2 g 1)
CTC (%) 55 65
Bulk density (g cm 3 ) 0.49 0.45
Hardness (%) 99 90
Iodine no. (mg g 1) 1100 1050
What mass of activated carbon would be required to comple-
tely eliminate the pollutants from the water in the affected areas?
Problem 3: Many commercial hair-restorers claim to stimu-
late hair growth. If human hair is composed mainly of the
protein a-keratin, estimate the rate of incorporation of amino
Published on 07 June 2013. Downloaded on 14/06/2013 14:15:09.
acid units per follicle per second.
The student participants were volunteers drawn from years
1, 2 and 3 of full-time undergraduate chemistry programmes.
They covered a range of abilities, gender and ethnic back-
grounds. The sessions were not time limited but all students
solved three problems within one hour. The interviews were
conducted over two academic years, with 15 students involved
in year 1 and 12 in year 2. The study in year 1 led to a limited
number of approaches being identified so the second study was
carried in order to verify those results.
Analysis
Clement (2000) states that there are two ways to interpret think
aloud studies or interview. Generative studies aim to identify
observational categories or elements if a theoretical model by
intensive interpretation of relatively large sections of the tran-
script. Convergent studies are confirmatory rather than explora-
tory in nature and apply predefined codes in order to obtain
information about the frequency of certain observations. A
generative study can provide a sound basis for the design of a
convergent study. This current study was generative, as the
aims were to explore the approaches that undergraduates take
when solving open-ended problems and to produce observa-
tional categories.
The students’ scripts were analyzed along with the audio
recordings of the interviews by each researcher in order to
identify the approaches used as each student solved each
problem. Qualitatively distinct approaches were identified for
each solution and each recording. Several different approaches
could be identified for each student as each individual segment
of activity was analysed separately. This process was carried out
independently by each researcher (Armstrong et al., 1997) and a
high degree of consensus was found between the themes
and approaches identified by each, thus providing confidence
in the categorisation. The individual interpretations of the
protocols was compared and discussed and a common set of
observational categories emerged from that process. This initial
set of categories was refined by collapsing together categories of
a similar nature.
Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
View Article Online
Chemistry Education Research and Practice
Table 2 Initial categories of description
Category Code
Makes estimations, approximations, generates data E+
Unable to make estimations, approximations or generate data E
Understands problem, what needs to know or do P+
Can’t get started, can’t identify what needs to know or do P
Logical approach and reasoning L+
Not logical, gaps in reasoning L
Makes sensible assumptions A+
Guesses A
Evaluates answer, aware of limitations EV
Seeks algorithmic approach AL
Distracted by context of problem CO
Lack of knowledge a barrier KN
Each identified category was given an appropriate code to
allow further analysis of each participant’s data. For categories
that described an ability and its corresponding inability, the code
was given the notation of a single letter and a ‘+’ or ‘ ’ sign, any
other codes were given a two letter notation. For example, the
ability to make estimations and approximations was given the
code E+ whereas an inability to make estimations and approx-
imations was given the code E . The categories identified from
the analysis of the students scripts and recordings are shown in
Table 2. Once the initial categories had been identified and coded
then the individual student transcripts and recordings were
analysed and these codes were applied.
Results
The results of the coding of individual students are shown in
Table 3. The data in the table is organised with the codes
representing those approaches that are considered to be sup-
portive of positive outcomes in open-ended problem solving
placed at the top of the table. These are approaches that could
lead to the development of a feasible solution and include; an
ability to estimate and generate data (E+), an ability to identify
the problem (P+), use of logical approach and reasoning (L+),
an ability to make reasonable and sensible assumptions (A+),
and evaluation of the problem solution (EV). Those approaches
that are considered to be unsupportive of open-ended problem
solving are listed in the bottom half of the table. These
approaches hinder the process of reaching a solution to the
problem and include; an inability to estimate (E ), an inability
to identify the problem (P ), a lack of logical approach and
reasoning (L ), an inability to make reasonable or sensible
assumptions (A ), seeking an algorithmic approach (AL), being
distracted by the context of the question (CN) and lacking
sufficient knowledge to progress the problem (KN).
A shaded cell in the table indicates that this approach was
observed for that participant whilst solving any one of the pro-
blems. The supportive, or positive, approaches have been shaded in
light grey, unsupportive, or negative, approaches in dark grey.
Table 4 presents the results for the individual students re-ordered
in such a way that students who exhibited predominantly negative
approaches and those who exhibited predominantly positive
approaches are grouped together. Those that remain used a variety
This journal is c The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013

Chemistry Education Research and Practice
Table 3 Participant results
Published on 07 June 2013. Downloaded on 14/06/2013 14:15:09.
Table 4 Participants results grouped by common approach
of approaches across the three problems. On viewing this presenta-
tion of the data it became clear that the students could be
organised into three broad groupings based on the combination
of approaches they used; those that use predominantly positive
approaches like students 1, 11, 12, and 13, those that use pre-
dominantly negative approaches like students 6, 8, 10 and 15, and
those that use a mixture of the all approaches depending upon the
problem, such as students 2, 3, 5 and 7.
The students who adopted mostly negative approaches were
typically unable to identify what they problem was asking them
to do and were unable to make estimations or to generate their
own data. This approach is typified by student 11 in the extract
from their interview:
Student: One follicle per second. . .I can’t even answer that, I
don’t know where to start. I don’t how long a protein takes. . .I don’t
even understand it
This journal is c The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013
View Article Online
Paper
Researcher: Well what do you think it means?
Student: I know you want the number of amino acid units going
into a follicle; an answer in unit per second. From this. . ..no idea how
to get those numbers. I have no idea where to get any numbers from.
Student 12 also demonstrates negative approaches and
guesses at an answer:
Student: I don’t understand the question.
Researcher: What do you think it means?
Student: I think it’s about the rate of hair growing. It must be
rate. . ., nothing comes to mind.
Researcher: What do you think you need to know?
Student: The speed that hair grows. . .or I think how many
amino acids get into hair.
Researcher: That’s what you have to work out.
Student: That’s a funny question. Something like 5 or 6 amino
acids a second. . .yeah, that’s my answer.
Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.

Paper
Students who adopted mostly positive approaches could
typically clarify the aims of the problem and were comfortable
identifying what data were needed and making estimations.
They were also likely to explore different strategies and evaluate
their answers. This is illustrated by this extract form the inter-
view from student 6:
Student: The basic knowledge I have is 12 amino acids make up
polypeptide. So I need to know the rate of amino acid production I
suppose . . .have to be average wouldn’t it? Unless I work back-
wards from a bald patch and work out how fast hair grew, how long
from start to finish and work backwards. I’d need a designated site
to measure and need to know how many follicles in that. or I could
do it on how fast hair grows which is directly proportional to the
rate of amino acid production. Yeah, that’s how I’d go about it. Go
for one hair. How fast does that grow? A length, a time and
composition. I say 2 days to grow 2 mm and need certain number
Published on 07 June 2013. Downloaded on 14/06/2013 14:15:09.
of amino acids a to produce that. So.
Researcher: So what are you thinking now?
Student: I’m thinking about estimating the volume of the hair
and an amino acid and then I can use that with the volume of hair.
So if I say an amino acid is diameter 10 nm and that hair is 0.1 mm
thick. So I can find how many can fit in that volume of hair.
So, I’ve worked out the volume of an amino acid molecule and
divided volume of hair which gives me this answers. That seems a
lot to me. I’ll do that again.
Student 8 also demonstrated these positive attitudes and
developed an effective strategy very quickly and was very com-
fortable making estimations.
Student: So I guess hair grows around 1cm a month. . .so that’s
0.03 cm a day. . .and 3.85  10 7 cm a second. So if hair has a
diameter of, say, 0.1 mm that’s 0,01 cm..and I can find the volume
of hair per second.
Researcher: What are you doing now?
Student: I’m mapping out spherical amino acid units. If I know
the width of a unit I can work out the volume and then can divide
into the volume of hair to find the answer. An amino acid is, let’s
say, 10 nm, that’s 10 8 m, ah, 10 6 m, no it must be smaller, it’s
10 10 cm. . .
Students who adopted a mixture of approaches demon-
strated behaviours typical of both these situations described
above and their approach varied with the problem. They seem
to be more influenced by the context of the problems, as
illustrated by this extract from the interview of student 7:
Student: Follicle per second? I need the formula of keratin. It
says it in the question. So do you want a rate equation? Or a
number?
Researcher: Well, how would you work that out?
Student: I need to know what k looks like. Is it an amino acid?
But just trying to work out the way to go.
Researcher: What have you written there?
Student: A rate equation and so I want the concentration of the
product. . . So suppose I could guess how much amino acid there is,
how much hair restorer you could put on your head at one
time. . .guestimate how much keratin. . .could shave my head and
work it out. What is concentration of keratin in my hair? Half a
kilo? A follicle? How do you think of these questions? Well, it’s
Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
View Article Online
Chemistry Education Research and Practice
supposed to stay in your hair and make it grow not to come out, so
it must be a low rate.
Student 5 typified how some students became distracted by
their own prior knowledge and the context of the problem.
Student: How do you monitor that? You’d have to take a hair
out each second. The best way to monitor amino acids is by mass
spec. . .keratin is a helix, a regular helix, it’s hollow too, I’ve done
this before. . .amino acid per follicle per second?. . .it will have to be
a really rough estimate unless..this is awkward because if you pull
out hairs they’ll all be different lengths, they won’t all grow at the
same rate. How can we monitor hair growth? If you get someone
with hair and cut it off to the skin and then let it grow and, measure
the rate of growth. . .then pluck out one hair and analyse it by mass
spec because it’s really sensitive.
The focus of this study was an exploration of the approaches
students used when tackling problems of this type rather than
problem solving ability. Therefore, the problem solutions were not
formally marked. However, it was clear that only those students
exhibiting predominantly positive approaches produced satisfac-
tory solutions to one or more of the problems. Those using negative
approaches rarely made progress towards a solution and the
performance of those using a mixture of approaches varied from
student to student and with the individual problems.
Discussion
On viewing Table 4 it is clear that students fall into three broad
categories when solving open-ended problems; those that
adopt largely positive strategies, those that adopt largely nega-
tive strategies and those that utilise a wide range of both
positive and negative approaches.
Those students who adopt the positive approaches could be
described as taking a scientific approach; they can understand
a problem, are logical, make estimations, can handle a lack of
data and evaluate their solution. This description corresponds
to one of the types of problem solver described in Walsh’s
(2007) study of solving algorithmic problems in physics.
Those students that adopt negative or unhelpful approaches
to solving open-ended problems take an unscientific approach
and are unable to define for themselves what the problem is
about and find dealing with a lack of data or a lack of relevant
background knowledge particularly difficult to cope with. These
students never evaluate their solution are often distracted by
the context of the problem and seek an algorithmic solution.
This class of students corresponds to Walsh’s ‘no clear
approach’ in the study of physics students.
Perhaps the most interesting group of students is the third
group. These students use a wide range of approaches depending
on the problem encountered, and often within a single problem.
Whether they could identify the problem and handle lacking data
seemed to depend on the individual context. These students
usually evaluated their solutions but they also sought algorithmic
approaches. That students seek algorithmic routes through these
problems is not surprising when most of their previous experi-
ence in problem solving has been of the algorithmic, structured
type (Bennett, 2008; Pappa and Tsaparlis, 2011).
This journal is c The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013

Chemistry Education Research and Practice
Bodner and Domin (1991) and Cartrette and Bodner (2010)
describes students who take an unstructured approach to
problem solving as novices and those that take a structured
or scientific approach, as experts. It would seem reasonable to
assume that the students in this study who exhibited all
positive approaches are indeed functioning as expert problem
solvers. Those who adopted only unhelpful approaches are
clearly novice problem solvers as they find solving these
complex problems challenging and have little success. Those
who use the wide variety of approaches depending on context
may be in a transition phase from being novice to expert
problem solvers. The three types of problem solvers did not
correlate with age or year of study, so this transition, if indeed it
is a transition, must be related to intellectual development,
practice or cognitive factors.
Published on 07 June 2013. Downloaded on 14/06/2013 14:15:09.
Implications for teaching
These finding have implications for teaching and learning.
Problem-based pedagogies are increasingly popular in under-
graduate chemistry education (Belt et al., 2002; Hick and
Bevsek, 2012; Tosun and Taskesenligli, 2013). Problem-based
learning utilises open-ended problems with real-life contexts
and students have to develop a strategy, find missing informa-
tion and data and seldom use an algorithmic approach. Our
study indicates that, within a student cohort, there will be a
significant proportion of students who are unable to identify
the details of a problem, who have great difficulty dealing with
a lack of data, who will be distracted by the context and by their
own lack of knowledge and will be unable to evaluate their
progress. These students will require additional support and
facilitation if they are to succeed in problem-based activities.
The use of group work may over come, or mask, these issues
somewhat if randomised groups contain students from all
three of our identified groupings.
Conclusions
A think aloud protocol has been used to identify approaches to
open-ended problem solving in undergraduate chemistry stu-
dents. Students fall into three categories; those who adopt a
scientific approach and use approaches supportive of solving
the problems, those who use only negative and unhelpful
approaches and a group who use all the observed strategies
within and between problems. These groupings may be
described as expert, novice and transitional.
There are, of course, limitations to this study. This was a
small investigation of 27 students solving just three problems.
The sample is size is small from which to generalise and the
individual problems selected could have influenced the out-
come of the study. As with any qualitative study, the role of the
investigator can influence the data collected and all interpretive
methodologies are subjective to some extent. The sample will
be extended in order to further validate these findings. The
issue of whether our three types of students constitute novice,
expert and transitional problem solvers will be investigated by
This journal is c The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013
View Article Online
Paper
identification of the characteristics of experts and novices.
Longitudinal studies of the development of approaches to
solving complex, open-ended problems will be carried out in
order to ascertain whether these approaches are fixed for
individuals or whether, with intervention, they can be acceler-
ated to the expert/scientific stage.
References
Anderson J. R., (2005), Cognitive psychology and its implications,
6th edn, New York: Worth.
Armstrong D., Gosling A., Weinman J. and Marteau T., (1997),
The place of inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: an
empirical study, Sociology, 31(3), 597–602.
Belt S. T., Evans E. H., McCreedy T., Overton T. L., Summerfield,
S., (2002), A Problem Based Learning Approach to Analytical
and Applied Chemistry, Univ. Chem. Educ., 6(2), 65–72.
Bennett S. W., (2008), Problem solving: can anybody do it?
Chem. Educ. Resc. Pract., 9, 60–64.
Bodner G., (1986), Constructivism: a theory of knowledge, J.
Chem. Educ., 63, 873–878.
Bodner G. and Domin D., (1991), Towards a Unifying Theory of
Problem Solving: A View from Chemistry, in Smith M. (ed.),
Towards a unified theory of problem solving: views from the
content domain, Hillesdale, NJ: Lawrence Erblaum
Associates.
Bowen C. W., (1994), Think-aloud methods in chemistry education:
understanding student thinking, J. Chem. Educ., 71(3), 184–190.
Bühner M., Kröner S. and Ziegler M., (2008), Working memory,
visual–spatial-intelligence and their relationship to problem-
solving, Intelligence, 36, 672–680.
Bunce D. M. and Heikkinen H., (1986), The effects of an explicit
problem solving approach on mathematical chemistry
achievement, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 23(1), 11–20.
Cartrette D. P. and Bodner G. M., (2010), Non-mathematical
problem solving in organic chemistry, J. Res. Sci. Teac., 47(6),
643–660.
Chen C. H. and Wu I., (2012), The interplay between cognitive
and motivational variables in a supportive online learning
system for secondary physical education, Comput. Educ.,
58(1), 542–550.
Cheung D., (2009), Using think-aloud protocols to investigate
secondary school chemistry teachers’ misconceptions about
chemical equilibrium, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 10(2), 97–108.
Clement J. (2000), Analysis of clinical interviews: Foundation
and model viability, ed. Kelly A.E. and Lesh R., 547-589, NJ,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cooper M. M., Sandi-Urena S. and Stevens R., (2009), Reliable
multi method assessment of metacognition use in chemistry
problem solving, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 9(1), 18–24.
Dori Y. J. and Hameiri M., (2003), Multidimensional analysis
system for quantitative chemistry problems – symbol,
macro, micro and process aspects, J. Res. Sci. Teach., 40(3),
278–302.
Funke J., (2010), Complex problem solving: a case for complex
cognition? Cognit. Process., 11(2), 133–142.
Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.

Paper
Gabel D. and Bunce D. M., (1994), Research on chemistry
problem solving, in Gabel D. (ed.), Handbook of Research
on Teaching and Learning Science, New York: MacMillan.
Hick R. W. and Bevsek H. M., (2012), Utilizing problem-based
learning in qualitative analysis lab experiments, J. Chem.
Educ., 89(2), 254-257.
Johnstone A. H., (1993), Introduction, in Wood C. and Sleet R.
(ed.), Creative Problem Solving in Chemistry, London: The
Royal Society of Chemistry.
Johnstone A. H. and El-Banna H., (1986), Capacities demands
and processes: a predictive model for science education,
Educ. Chem., 23, 80–84.
Kapa E., (2007), Transfer from structured to open-ended pro-
blem solving in a computerized metacognitive environment,
Learn. Instruct., 17(6), 688–707.
Overton T. L. and Potter N. M., (2011), Investigating students’
Published on 07 June 2013. Downloaded on 14/06/2013 14:15:09.
success in solving and attitudes towards context-rich open-ended
problems in chemistry, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract, 12, 294–302.
Pappa E. T. and Tsaparlis G., (2011), Evaluation of questions in
general chemistry textbooks according to the form of the
questions and the question-answer relationship (QAR): the
case of intra- and intermolecular chemical bonding, Chem.
Educ. Res. Pract, 12, 262–270.
Polya G., (1945), How to Solve it: A New Aspect of Mathematical
Method, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Reid N., (2009), Working memory and science education:
conclusions and Implications, Res. Sci. Technol. Educ.,
27(2), 245–250.
St Clair-Thompson H., Overton T. and Bugler M., (2012), Mental
capacity and working memory in chemistry: algorithmic
Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.
View Article Online
Chemistry Education Research and Practice
versus open-ended problem solving, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract.,
13(4), 484–489.
Scherer R. and Tiemann R., (2012), Factors of problem-solving
competency in a virtual chemistry environment: the role of
metacognitive knowledge about strategies, Comput. Educ.,
59(4), 1199–1214.
Taasoobshirazi G. and Glynn S.M., (2009), College students
solving chemistry problems: a theoretical model of expertise,
J. Res. Sci. Teach., 46(10), 1070–1089.
Tosun C. and Taskesenligli Y., (2013), The effect of problem-
based learning on undergraduate students’ learning about
solutions and their physical properties and scientific proces-
sing skills, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract., 14, 36.
Tsaparlis G., (2005), Non -algorithmic quantitative problem
solving in university physical chemistry: a correlation study
of the role of selective cognitive variables, Res. Sci. Technol.
Educ., 23, 125–148.
Walsh L. N., Howard R. G. and Bowe B., (2007), Phenomeno-
graphic study of students’ problem solving approaches in
physics, Phys. Rev. Spec. Top. Phys. Educ. Res., 3(2), 1–12.
Wheatley, G. H., (1984), MEPS Technical Report, Mathematics
and Science Centre, Purdue University.
Zoller U., Fastow M., Lubezky A. and Tsaparlis G., (1999),
College students’ self-assessment in chemistry examinations
requiring higher and lower-order cognitive skills: an action-
oriented research, J. Chem. Educ., 76, 112–113.
Zoller U. and Pushkin D., (2007), Matching Higher-Order
Cognitive Skills (HOCS) promotion goals with problem-
based laboratory practice in a freshman organic chemistry
course, Chem. Educ. Resc. Pract., 8(2), 153–171.
This journal is c The Royal Society of Chemistry 2013