Therriault, D., & Douglas, E., & Buten, E., & Bates, E., & Waisome, J., & Berry, M. (2022, August), Characterization of Problem Types in Engineering Textbooks  Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. 10.18260/1-2--40557

\bibitem{asee_peer_40557}
  Therriault, D., \& Douglas, E., \& Buten, E., \& Bates, E., \& Waisome, J., \& Berry, M. (2022, August), \emph{Characterization of Problem Types in Engineering Textbooks}
  Paper presented at 2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Minneapolis, MN.
  10.18260/1-2--40557

David Therriault, Elliot Douglas, Emily Buten, Elizabeth Bates, Jeremy Waisome, and Marah Berry.  "Characterization of Problem Types in Engineering Textbooks".  2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Minneapolis, MN, 2022, August.  ASEE Conferences, 2022.  https://peer.asee.org/40557 Internet.  16 Apr, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_40557}
  David Therriault, Elliot Douglas, Emily Buten, Elizabeth Bates, Jeremy Waisome, and Marah Berry.
  "Characterization of Problem Types in Engineering Textbooks".
  \emph{2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Minneapolis, MN, 2022, August}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2022.
  https://peer.asee.org/40557 Internet.  16 Apr, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_40557
author = "David Therriault, Elliot Douglas, Emily Buten, Elizabeth Bates, Jeremy Waisome, and Marah Berry"
title = "Characterization of Problem Types in Engineering Textbooks"
booktitle = "2022 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2022"
month = "August"
address = "Minneapolis, MN"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/40557}
number = {10.18260/1-2--40557}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  - This work in progress research paper considers the question, what kind of problems do engineering students commonly solve during their education? Engineering problems have been generally classified as ill-structured/open-ended or well-structured/closed-ended. Various authors have identified the characteristics of ill-structured problems or presented typologies of problems. Simple definitions state that well-structured problems are simple, concrete, and have a single solution, while ill-structured problems are complex, abstract, and have multiple possible solutions (Jonassen, 1997, 2000). More detailed classifications have been provided by Shin, Jonassen, and McGee (2003), Voss (2006), and Johnstone (2001). It is commonly understood that classroom problems are well-structured while workplace problems are ill-structured, but we cannot find any empirical data to confirm or deny this proposition. Engineers commonly encounter ill-structured problems such as design problems in the field therefore problem-solving skills are invaluable and should be taught in engineering courses.

This research specifically looks at the types of problems present in the two most commonly used statics textbooks (Hibbeler, 2016; Beer, et al., 2019). All end-of-chapter problems in these textbooks were classified using Jonassen’s (2000) well-known typology of problem types. Out of 3,387 problems between both books, 99% fell into the algorithmic category and the remaining fell into the logic category. These preliminary results provide an understanding of the types of problems engineering students most commonly encounter in their classes. Prior research has documented that textbook example problems exert a strong influence on students' problem-solving strategies (Lee et al., 2013). If instructors only assign textbook problems, students in statics courses do not see any ill-structured problems at that stage in their education. 

We argue that even in foundational courses such as statics, students should be exposed to ill-structured problems. By providing opportunities for students to solve more ill-structured problems, students can become more familiar with them and become better prepared for the workforce. Moving forward, textbooks from several other courses will be analyzed to determine the difference between a fundamental engineering course such as statics and upper-level courses. This research will allow us to determine how the problem types differ between entry level and advanced classes and reveal if engineering textbooks primarily contain well-structured problems.

Keywords: problem solving, textbooks, ill-structured problems

Beer, F., Johnston, E., & Mazurek, D. (2019). Vector mechanics for engineers: Statics New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
Hibbeler, R. C. (2016). Engineering mechanics: Statics. New York: Pearson.
Johnstone, A. H. (2001). Can problem solving be taught. University Chemistry Education, 5(2), 69-73. 
Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65-94. 
Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85.
Lee, C. S., McNeill, N. J., Douglas, E. P, Koro-Ljungberg, M. E., & Therriault, D. J. (2013). Indispensable Resource? A Phenomenological Study of Textbook Use in Engineering Problem Solving.  Journal of Engineering Education 102(2), 269-288. 
Shin, N., Jonassen, D. H., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 6-33. 
Voss, J. (2006). Toulmin's model and the solving of ill-structured problems. In D. Hitchcock & B. Verheij (Eds.), Arguing on the Toulmin model: New essays in argument analysis and evaluation (pp. 303-311). New York: Springer.


AU  - David Therriault
AU  - Elliot Douglas
AU  - Emily Buten
AU  - Elizabeth Bates
AU  - Jeremy Waisome
AU  - Marah Berry
CY  - Minneapolis, MN
DA  - 2022/08/23
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Characterization of Problem Types in Engineering Textbooks
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/40557
DO  - 10.18260/1-2--40557
ER  -