Fen Bilimlerinde Analojik ve Seçici Düşünme: Seçici Problem Çözme Modelinin Fen Bilimlerine Uyarlanması
Keywords:
Analojik düşünme, seçici düşünme, Seçici Problem Çözme, Yaratıcı problem çözme, Analogical thinking, selective thinking, selective problem solving, creative problem solvingAbstract
Abstract
Problem solving can be considered as an integral part of our everyday life. Some of the solutions produced to the problems can be evaluated in the context of creativity in terms of being unique, novel and inspiring new ideas, whereas others are ordinary. In fact, according to some researchers, creativity is defined as problem solving process. Along with many problem- solving approaches, the use of analogies that re- sult in inventions or discoveries in areas such as science and mathematics, is a frequently used method. In this study, Selective Problem Solv- ing (SPS) model, a creative problem-solving model developed by Sak (2011), was examined in detail and applied the science. SPS is a prob- lem-solving model developed to help students to improve their creative problem-solving skills and to provide transferable knowledge to different problem situations. The model focuses on analogical thinking and selective thinking skills. The theoretical background of SPS model is based on Polya's (1957) problem solving model, Davidson and Sternberg’s (1984) in- sightful thinking model and research findings in the field of creativity.
Öz
Problem çözme günlük yaşantımızın ayrılmaz bir parçası olarak değerlendirilebilir. Problem- lere üretilen çözümlerin bazıları sıradan, bazı- ları ise insanları şaşırtmaları ve yeni fikirlere ilham olmaları bakımından yaratıcılık bağlamında değerlendirilebilir. Hatta bazı araştırma- cılara göre yaratıcılık problem çözme süreci ola- rak tanımlanmaktadır. Birçok problem çözme yaklaşımı olmakla birlikte fen bilimleri gibi alanlarda bir buluş veya icatla sonuçlanan problem çözme analoji kullanımı sıklıkla kullanılan bir yöntemdir. Bu çalışmada Sak (2011) tarafından geliştirilen bir yaratıcı problem çözme modeli olan Seçici Problem Çözme (SPÇ) mo- deli detaylı bir şekilde incelenerek fen bilimleri alanından bir uygulama örneği verilmiştir. SPÇ yaratıcı problem çözme becerilerini geliştirmek, farklı problem durumlarına transfer edilebilir bilgi birikimi sağlamak amacıyla geliştirilmiş bir problem çözme modelidir. Modelde analojik düşünme ve seçici düşünme becerilerine odak- lanılmaktadır. SPÇ modeli kuramsal olarak ünlü matematikçi Polya’nın (1957) problem çözme modeli, Davidson ve Sternebeg’in (1984) iç görüsel düşünme teorisi ve yaratıcılık alanın- daki araştırma bulgularının sentezlenmesi so- nucunda geliştirilmiştir.
References
Bal-Sezerel, B. & Sak, U. (2013). The Selective Problem Solving Model (SPS) and its social vali- dity in solving mathematical problems. The International Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving, 23(1), 71-87.
Boden, M. A. (2004). The creative mind: Myths and mechanisms (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Byers, W. (2007). How mathematicians think: Using ambiguity, contradiction and paradox to create mathematics. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Davidson, J. E. & Sternberg, R. J. (1984). The role of insight in intellectual giftedness. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28, 58-64.
Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories.
In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds), The nature of insight, (pp. 365-395). Cambridge:MIT Press.
Dunbar, K. (1999). Science. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds), Encyclopedia of creativity, vol 2, (pp. 525-531). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Einstein, A. & Infeld, L. (1938). The evolution of physics. New York: Simon and Schuster. Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D., & Law, K. (1995). MAC/FAC: A model of similarity based retrieval.Cognitive Science, 19, 144-206.
Gentner, D., Jeziorski, M. (1993). The shift from metaphor to analogy in western science. In A.Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought (2nd ed) (pp. 447-480). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gentner, D. (2002). Analogy in Scientific Discovery: The Case of Johannes Kepler. Model-Based Reasoning: Science, Technology, Values, 21-39.
Getzels, J. W. (1979). Problem finding: A theoretical note. Cognitive Science, 3, 167- 172. Getzels. J. W. & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1976). The creative vision: A longitudinal study of problem finding in art. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Gick, M. L. & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive psychology, 12(3),306-355.
Gould, S. J. (Ed.). (2001). The value of science: Essential writings of Henri Poincare. New York: The Modern Library.
Gust, H., Krumnack, U., Kühnberger, K.-U., & Schwering, A. (2008): Analogical reasoning: A core of cognition. KI - Zeitschrift Künstliche Intelligenz 1, 8-12.
Hadamard, J. (1945). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Holyoak, K. J. & Nisbett, R. E. (1988). Induction. In R. J. Sternberg & E. E. Smith (Eds.), The psychology of human thought (pp. 50-91). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Holyoak, K. J. & Thagard, P. (1995). Mental leaps. MIT Press. Cambridge: MA.
Holyoak, K. J., & Koh, K. (1987). Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer. Memory & Cognition, 15, 332-340.
Holyoak, K. J. & Nisbett, R. E. (1988). Induction. In R. J. Sternberg & E. E. Smith (Eds.), The psychology of human thought (pp. 50-91). Cambridge: Cambrdige University Press. John-Steiner, V. (1997). Notebooks of the mind: explorations of thinking (Rev. Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Mumford, M. D. & Porter, P. P. (1999). Analogies. In M. A. Runco & S.R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 71-77). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Nhu, B. H. & Yeung, A. H. (2012). Fostering analogical transfer: The multiple components approach to algebra word problem solving in a chemistry context. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37, 14-32.
Pereira de Barros, D., Primi, R., Koich Miguel, F., & Almeida, L. S. (2010). Metaphor creation: A measure of creativity or intelligence? European Journal of Education and Psychology, 3, 1,103-115.
Polya, D. (1957). How to solve it (2nd Ed). NJ: Princeton University Press.
Richland, L. E. & McDonough, I. M. (2010). Learning by analogy: Discriminating between analogs. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35, 28-43.
Runco, M. A. (1994). Conclusions concerning problem finding, problem solving, and creativity. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), Problem finding, problem solving, and creativity, 272-290. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
Runco, M. A. (2006). Creativity theories and themes: Research, development, and practice. San Diego,CA: Academic Press.
Runco, M. A., & Dow, G. (1999). Problem finding. In M. A. Runco & S.R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity (Vol. 2, pp. 443 - 445). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Sak, U. & Duman, F. (2012). [A study on the effectiveness of the SPS on students’ achievement in mathematics]. Unpublished raw data.
Sak, U. (2011). Selective Problem Solving (SPS): A model for teaching creative problem solving,Gifted Education International, 27(3), 349-357.
Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Explaining creativity: The science of human innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schank, R. C. (1982). Dynamic memory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simonton, D. K. (2009). Genius 101. New York, NY: Springer.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). Toward a unified theory of human reasoning. Intelligence, 10, 281-314.
Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Creativity: Understanding innovation in problem solving, science, invention,and the arts. New Jersey: Wiley.
