Department of Psychology, Florida State University.
Cogn Sci. 2021 Oct;45(10):e13048. doi: 10.1111/cogs.13048.
When, how, and why students use conceptual knowledge during math problem solving is not well understood. We propose that when solving routine problems, students are more likely to recruit conceptual knowledge if their procedural knowledge is weak than if it is strong, and that in this context, metacognitive processes, specifically feelings of doubt, mediate interactions between procedural and conceptual knowledge. To test these hypotheses, in two studies (Ns = 64 and 138), university students solved fraction and decimal arithmetic problems while thinking aloud; verbal protocols and written work were coded for overt uses of conceptual knowledge and displays of doubt. Consistent with the hypotheses, use of conceptual knowledge during calculation was not significantly positively associated with accuracy, but was positively associated with displays of doubt, which were negatively associated with accuracy. In Study 1, participants also explained solutions to rational arithmetic problems; using conceptual knowledge in this context was positively correlated with calculation accuracy, but only among participants who did not use conceptual knowledge during calculation, suggesting that the correlation did not reflect "online" effects of using conceptual knowledge. In Study 2, participants also completed a nonroutine problem-solving task; displays of doubt on this task were positively associated with accuracy, suggesting that metacognitive processes play different roles when solving routine and nonroutine problems. We discuss implications of the results regarding interactions between procedural knowledge, conceptual knowledge, and metacognitive processes in math problem solving.
学生在解决数学问题时何时、如何以及为何使用概念性知识还不太清楚。我们提出,当解决常规问题时,如果学生的程序性知识薄弱,而不是强,则更有可能在解决问题时利用概念性知识,并且在这种情况下,元认知过程,特别是怀疑感,会调解程序性知识和概念性知识之间的相互作用。为了检验这些假设,在两项研究(n1=64,n2=138)中,大学生在出声思考的同时解决分数和小数的算术问题;对口头报告和书面作业进行了编码,以显示对概念性知识的明显使用和怀疑感的表现。与假设一致,在计算过程中使用概念性知识与准确性没有显著的正相关,但与怀疑感呈正相关,而怀疑感与准确性呈负相关。在研究 1 中,参与者还解释了理性算术问题的解决方案;在这种情况下使用概念性知识与计算准确性呈正相关,但仅在计算过程中不使用概念性知识的参与者中,这表明这种相关性不反映使用概念性知识的“在线”影响。在研究 2 中,参与者还完成了一项非常规的解决问题任务;在这项任务中表现出怀疑感与准确性呈正相关,这表明元认知过程在解决常规和非常规问题时起着不同的作用。我们讨论了这些结果对程序性知识、概念性知识和元认知过程在数学问题解决中的相互作用的影响。