Enhancing physics problem-solving skills through guided discovery and scaffolding strategies: Evidence from Saudi technical colleges

Abdulaziz Alanazi; Kamisah Osman; Lilia Halim

doi:10.31129/LUMAT.12.4.2329

Authors

Abdulaziz Alanazi Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia and Riyadh Technical College, Technical and Vocational Training Corporation, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia https://orcid.org/0009-0005-3995-5802
Kamisah Osman Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia
Lilia Halim Faculty of Education, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi, Malaysia https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2746-2021

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.12.4.2329

Keywords:

problem solving, scaffolding strategies, guided discovery, science education, technical education

Abstract

Problem-solving skills empower students to deal with challenges efficiently, think critically, and craft effective solutions. This translates to their academic success and fosters their adaptability, resilience, and critical thinking, all required to thrive in the ever-changing professional world. This study investigates the effectiveness of guided discovery and scaffolding strategies in enhancing problem-solving skills among students in Physics courses in Saudi technical and vocational colleges. Those pedagogical strategies aim to create higher-order thinking skills required for problem-solving within technical and science education, as well as in the professional life that the students must live after leaving college. Correspondingly, we designed a quasi-experiment with a pre- and post-intervention assessment involving 104 students enrolled in a Physics course within a technical diploma program. The results indicated a significant difference in students' problem-solving skills between those instructed in the traditional teaching condition and those who received guided discovery and scaffolding strategies as major instructional components. The findings suggest that guided discovery and scaffolding improve students' problem-solving skills and promote their engagement and motivation to develop effective solutions. This study contributes to developing existing literature on successful teaching strategies in technical and science education. It also provides practical implications for educators seeking to establish problem-solving competencies among students.

References

Akinbobola, A. O., & Afolabi, F. (2010). Constructivist practices through guided discovery approach: The effect on students’ cognitive achievement in Nigerian senior secondary school physics. International Journal of Physics and Chemistry Education, 2(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.51724/ijpce.v2i1.180

Al-Harbi, K. A.-S. (2011). e-Learning in the Saudi tertiary education: Potential and challenges. Applied Computing and Informatics, 9(1), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aci.2010.03.002

Al-Seghayer, K. (2021). Characteristics of Saudi EFL Learners’ Learning Styles. English Language Teaching, 14(7), 82–94.

Al‐Zahrani, A. M. (2015). From passive to active: The impact of the flipped classroom through social learning platforms on higher education students’ creative thinking. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(6), 1133–1148. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12353

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021017

Alharthi, M., & Alsufyani, N. (2020). Constructivism as a learning theory applied to thinking in solving physics problems: An interpretive study. International Journal of Education and Research, 8(3), 59–76. http://www.ijern.com

Asenahabi, B. M. (2019). Basics of research design: A guide to selecting appropriate research design. International Journal of Contemporary Applied Researches, 6(5), 76–89.

Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing results from empirical research on computer-based scaffolding in STEM education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309–344. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316670999

Collins, A. (2013). Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology. In Educational Values and Cognitive Instruction: Implications for Reform (pp. 224–254). Routledge.

Davis, E. A. (2015). Scaffolding learning. Encyclopedia of Science Education, 21(2), 362–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2150-0

Enijuni, A. T. (2022). Effects of Guided-Discovery and Scaffolding Teaching Methods on Business Education Students’ Academic Performance in Financial Accounting (Doctoral dissertation, Kwara State University (Nigeria)).

Fernandes, F. A., Rodrigues, C. S. C., Teixeira, E. N., & Werner, C. M. (2023). Immersive learning frameworks: A systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 16(5), 736-747. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2023.3242553

Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.

Garrett, R. M. (1987). Issues in science education: Problem‐solving, creativity and originality. International Journal of Science Education, 9(2), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069870090201

Heppner, P. P., & Petersen, C. H. (1982). The development and implications of a personal problem-solving inventory. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 29(1), 66–75. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.29.1.66

Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3

Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368

Hortigüela, D., Fernández-Río, J., & Pérez-Pueyo, A. (2016). Long-term effects of the pedagogical approach on the perceptions of physical education by students and teachers. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 16(4), 1326–1333. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2016.04210

Jonassen, D. (2011). Supporting problem solving in PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 5(2), 95–119. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1256

Kiong, T. T., Saien, S., Rizal, F., Yee, M. H., Mohamad, M. M., Othman, W., Azman, M. N. A., & Azid, N. (2020). Design and technology teacher in TVET: A view on thinking style and inventive problem-solving skill. Journal of Technical Education and Training, 12(1), 197–203.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1

Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14

Muhali, M., Prahani, B. K., Mubarok, H., Kurnia, N., & Asy’ari, M. (2021). The Impact of Guided-Discovery-Learning Model on Students’ Conceptual Understanding and Critical Thinking Skills. Jurnal Penelitian Dan Pengkajian Ilmu Pendidikan: E-Saintika, 5(3), 227–240. https://doi.org/10.36312/esaintika.v5i3.581

Ormrod, J. E., Anderman, E. M., & Anderman, L. H. (2023). Educational psychology: Developing learners. Pearson.

Prince, M. J., & Felder, R. M. (2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95(2), 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00884.x

Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4001_1

Ramadhaniyati, R., Siregar, K. D. P., Muhammad, I., & Triansyah, F. A. (2023). Guide discovery learning (gdl) in education: A bibliometric analysis. Journal on Education, 5(4), 11473-11484.

Reichardt, C. S. (2009). Quasi-Experimental Design. In The SAGE Handbook of Quantitative Methods in Psychology (pp. 46–71). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857020994.n3

Reiser, B. J. (2018). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. In Scaffolding (pp. 273–304). Psychology Press.

Roth, W.-M., & Radford, L. (2010). Re/thinking the zone of proximal development (symmetrically). Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(4), 299–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749031003775038

Rowe, A. J. (2004). Creative Intelligence: Discovering the innovative potential in ourselves and others. Prentice Hall.

Snyder, L. G., & Snyder, M. J. (2008). Teaching critical thinking and problem solving skills. The Journal of Research in Business Education, 50(2), 90–99.

Soomro, K. A., Kale, U., Reagan, C., Akcaoglu, M., & Bernstein, M. (2018). Development of an instrument to measure Faculty’s Information and Communication Technology Access (FICTA). Education and Infor-mation Technologies, 23(1), 253-269. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9599-9

Soomro, K. A., Ansari, M., Bughio, I., & Nasrullah, N. (2024). Examining gender and urban-rural divide in digi-tal competence among university students. International Journal of Learning Technology, 19(3), 380-393. https://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2024.142512

van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271–296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6

van Geert, P., & Steenbeek, H. (2005). The dynamics of scaffolding. New Ideas in Psychology, 23(3), 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2006.05.003

Villanueva, C. L. (1976). On the effectiveness of the discovery approach as a teaching method for population education. Population Information Division, Population Center Foundation.

Vision 2030. (2016). Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Vision 2030.

Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Xu, E., Wang, W., & Wang, Q. (2023). The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1