Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing physics concepts through hands-on problem solving: a perspective on a technological project design

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In a contest featuring hands-on projects, college students were required to design a simple crawling worm using planning, self-monitoring and self-evaluation processes to solve contradictive problems. To enhance the efficiency of problem solving, one needs to practice meta-cognition based on an application of related scientific concepts. The objective of this study, then, was to analyze the physics concepts employed by the students as they completed a hands-on project named “Crawling Worm,” during which they had to overcome problems encountered by the requirements of their design as well as those brought on by competition. Based on the analysis of the participants’ working portfolios and on reviews and interviews by engineering professors, the results of this study show that the crawling worm design competition encouraged the practice of problem solving, and it facilitated the learning of physics concepts such as friction, torque, four bar link, material properties, and so on.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barab, S., Dodge, T., Thomas, M. K., Jackson, C., & Tuzun, H. (2007). Design research strand: Our designs and the social agendas they carry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(2), 263–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlex, D. M., & Trebell, D. (2008). Design-without-make: Challenging the conventional approach to teaching and learning in a design and technology classroom. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 18(2), 119–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baxter, L. A. (1991). Content analysis. In B. M. Montgomery & S. Duck (Eds.), Studying interpersonal interaction (pp. 239–254). New York: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E., & Mitgang, L. (1996). Building community: A new future for architectural education and practice. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cajas, F. (2001). The science/technology interaction: Implication for science literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 715–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crismond, D. (2001). Learning and using science ideas when doing investigation-and-redesign tasks: A study of naïve, novice, and expert designers doing constrained and scaffold design work. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 791–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Custer, R. L., Valesey, B. G., & Burke, B. N. (2001). An assessment model for a design approach to technological problem solving. Journal of Technology Education, 12(2), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLuca, V. W. (1992). Survey of technology education problem-solving activities. The Technology Teacher, 51(5), 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doppelt, Y. (2005). Assessment of project-based learning in a MECHATRONICS context. Journal of Technology Education, 16(2), 7–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Downe-Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: Method, applications, and issues. Health Care for Women International, 13(3), 313–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelson, D. C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 355–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, K. L., & Deng, Y. M. (2007). Supporting design decision-making when applying materials in combination. Materials and Design, 28(4), 1288–1297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feil, A. J. (2004). Talking physics: How the ability to communicate physics concepts affects learning. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

  • Goldstone, R. L., & Son, J. Y. (2005). The transfer of scientific principles using concrete and idealized simulations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(1), 69–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, R. (1997). The value of a utilitarian curriculum: The case of technological education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 111–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy, S., & McCormick, R. (1994). The general problem solving process in technology education: Myth or reality? In F. Banks (Ed.), Teaching technology (pp. 94–108). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy, S., & Murphy, P. (1999). The potential for collaborative problem solving in design and technology. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9, 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohn, S., & Husig, S. (2006). Potential benefits, current supply, utilization and barriers to adoption: An exploratory study on German SMEs and innovation software. Technovation, 26(8), 988–998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kondracki, N. L., Wellman, N. S., & Amundson, D. R. (2002). Content analysis: Review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behaviour, 34(4), 224–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kovach, C. R. (1991). Content analysis of reminiscences of elderly women. Research in Nursing and Health, 14(4), 287–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krippendorff, K. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leontiev, A. N. (1974). The problem of activity in psychology. Soviet Psychology, 13(2), 4–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, T. (2005). Coming to terms with engineering design as content. Journal of Technology Education, 16(2), 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichstein, P. R., & Young, G. (1996). My most meaningful patient: Reflective learning on a general medicine service. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 11(7), 406–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mioduser, D., & Betzer, N. (2007). The contribution of Project-based-learning to high-achievers’ acquisition of engineering knowledge and skills. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 18(1), 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muukkonen, H., Lakkala, M., & Hallarainen, K. (2005). Technology-mediation and tutoring: How do they shape progressive inquiry discourse? The Journal of the Leaning Sciences, 14(4), 527–565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century (NCOMST) (2000). Before it’s too late: A report to the Nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century. Retrieved 20 Nov 2010, from http://www2.ed.gov/inits/Math/glenn/report.pdf.

  • Pavlova, M. (2005). Knowledge and values in technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15(2), 127–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piaget, J. (1969). Judgment and reasoning in the child. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polit, D. F., & Hungler, B. P. (1999). Nursing research: Principles and methods (6th ed.). New York: J.B. Lippincott Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pucel, D. (1992). Technology education: In changing role within general education. Paper presented at the American Vocational Association Convention, St. Louis, MO. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED353400.

  • Roth, W. M. (2001). Learning science through engineering design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 768–790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowell, P. M., Gustafson, B. J., & Guilbert, S. M. (1999). Characterization of technology within an elementary science program. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 9, 37–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 135–148). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, T., & Lester, F. (1989). Developing understanding in mathematics via problem solving. In P. Trafton & A. Shulte (Eds.), New directions for elementary school mathematics (1989 Yearbook). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seiler, G., Tobin, K., & Sokolic, J. (2001). Design, technology, and science: Sites for learning, resistance, and social reproduction in urban schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7), 746–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidawi, M. M. (2005). Teaching science to 8th graders by engaging them in design and technology activities: A case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Drexel University, Philadelphia.

  • Stacey, K. (2005). The place of problem solving in contemporary mathematics curriculum documents. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24(3–4), 341–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Aalst, J., & Chan, C. K. K. (2007). Student-directed assessment of knowledge building: Using electronic portfolios. The Journal of the Leaning Sciences, 16(2), 175–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2007). Confronting analytical dilemmas for understanding complex human interaction in design-based research from a cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) framework. The Journal of the Leaning Sciences, 16(4), 451–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zubrowski, B. (2002). Integrating science into design technology projects: Using a standard model in the design process. Journal of Technology Education, 13(2), 47–67.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was sponsored by the National Science Council of Taiwan (NSC 96-2515-S-003-003-MY3, NSC 97-2515-S-003-017-MY3, and NSC 98-2511-S-003-026).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Taiwan Normal University, Room 506, No. 162, Ho-Ping E. Road, Sec. 1, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC

    Jon-Chao Hong, Mei-Yung Chen, Ashley Wong, Tsui-Fang Hsu & Chih-Chi Peng

Authors
  1. Jon-Chao Hong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mei-Yung Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ashley Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tsui-Fang Hsu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chih-Chi Peng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mei-Yung Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hong, JC., Chen, MY., Wong, A. et al. Developing physics concepts through hands-on problem solving: a perspective on a technological project design. Int J Technol Des Educ 22, 473–487 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9163-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-011-9163-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation