Building an Interactive Mobile Application to Enhance Students’

Problem Solving Skills in Higher Education Physics

Ehab Malkawi

1 a

, Shaikha Alhadrami

and Afaf Aljabri

Department of Physics, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, U.A.E.

Department of Computer Science, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, U.A.E.

Department of Biology, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, U.A.E.

Keywords: Problem Solving, Physics Education, Mobile Application, Educational Technology, Science Education.

Abstract: Problem solving is a major part of the learning process that students need to acquire in their university

education as it combines several skills within, such as comprehension, memory recall, critical thinking, and

mathematical skills. Even though instructors and students recognize the importance of problem solving,

generally both groups fail to culminate this corner step in the learning process. Students fail to realize that it

is not the final answer of an assignment that is the important outcome, but rather the learning process and

skills that are gained through problem solving. Technology and mobile applications can harvest the students’

attention in the process of problem solving and make them more willing to learn. We discuss the case of

building an interactive mobile application that fosters the major steps in problem solving. The application is

built to guide, help, encourage, motivate the students, and create a more interactive and exciting environment.

It is built on an algorithm that relies on the major steps of problem solving. The first version of the mobile

(Android) application is produced.

1 INTRODUCTION

Problem solving in the education field of science &

engineering is an indispensable part of the learning

process that students need to acquire in their

university education, (see (Gabel, 1994), (Ramsden,

2003), and references therein). Almost all

undergraduate programs in university setting list

problem solving skills and critical thinking as a major

program learning outcome. Most of science and

engineering courses include the same item in their

course learning outcomes.

Definition of problem solving process varies in

the literature, for example according to (Ausubel,

1963), problem solving is a form of discovery

learning. While (Gagne, 1970) views the process as

assembling rules to create a new superior rule that

allows a solution. The process can also be viewed as

a cognitive process directed as achieving a goal when

no solution is obvious (Mayer, 1992). Students face

considerable difficulty in the process of problem

solving for several reasons; such as lack of

understanding the basic concepts and lacking the

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6461-3741

appropriate knowledge structure related to a specific

content (Nakhleh, 1993).

Literature on the issue of problem solving

identifies few major steps in the process of learning

(Fraser and Butts, 1982), (Greeno, 1973), (Polya,

1945), (Simon, 1980). With few differences between

different viewpoints in literature, we can identify the

following major steps that are contained in the

process; understanding the language structure of the

problem (especially important for students with

English as a second language), defining the problem

and being able to recognize its elements, selecting the

appropriate information, being able to make some

prediction beforehand, constructing a solution plan,

implementation and evaluation. During this process,

students are expected to face challenge and many

students easily quit and run for the short exit.

Even though instructors and students recognize

the importance of problem solving; generally, both

groups fail to build on this corner step in the learning

process. For students the process is difficult,

confusing, and challenging. Critical thinking is not

acquired by students in schools and it is considered a

highly challenging and time consuming process.

550

Malkawi, E., Alhadrami, S. and Aljabri, A.

Building an Interactive Mobile Application to Enhance Students’ Problem Solving Skills in Higher Education Physics.

DOI: 10.5220/0007780105500555

In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2019), pages 550-555

ISBN: 978-989-758-367-4

Math skills are generally weak and not integrated well

in the learning process. In many cases, students fail to

understand the details of the problem they want to

solve and are unable to link it to their shaky

understanding of the class material, not to mention the

insufficient mathematical skills students have. For

educators, lack of time and large number of students

force the problem solving part to be minimized.

Educators rely on traditional assigned homework but

this rarely builds the critical thinking and other

important skills. From our experience, students

consider homework a burden to be submitted with

minimum effort. Some students rely on plagiarism,

copy assignment from other students, or simply

perform a messy mathematical manipulation to

produce the required final numerical answer of a

problem. Students fail to realize that it is not the final

answer of the problem that is the important outcome

of the assignment, but rather the learning process, the

critical thinking, and other skills that are gained

through problem solving. On the other hand,

educators do not spend enough time on this part of

learning due to lengthy content and large number of

students. Many instructors feel very skeptic about

students’ effort in problem solving. Sadly, the claim

that college education aims at fostering critical

thinking skills turns out to have little ground proof.

Research on the different aspects of problem solving

in science is abundant in literature, examples include

(Larkin, 1979), (Stewart, 1982), (Woods, 1975),

(Ferreira and Trudel, 2012), (Duch,1996),

(Fuller,1982).

We believe that technology and mobile

applications can harvest the students’ attraction and

attention in the process of problem solving (see

(Martin-Blas, 2009), (Childress, 1996) and references

therein). Technology motivates students become

more receptive and even more willing to participate

in learning (Kim and Hannafin, 2011), (Shurygin et

al., 2016), (Walker and Shelton, 2008). Technology

has already found its place in education for young

learners (Papadakis and Kalogiannakis, 2017) and

higher education (Kikilias et al, 2009), (Papadakis et

al, 2017) with several existing platforms, solutions,

and applications. Available solutions can be divided

into two groups; Comprehensive Educational

platforms and stand-alone applications:

The Comprehensive Educational Platforms

includes but not restricted to Blackboard, Desire to

Learn, Moodle, and Masteringphysics. Those

platforms are based on a Learning Management

System (LMS). LMS allows instructors to carry out

learning activities, make announcements and assess

student work. LMSs store and deliver materials

developed in a variety of different formats. They

support interactions between faculty and students.

Online learning management systems can be hosted

locally or remotely. On those powerful platforms

students can access resources online, solve questions,

exercises, and problems with the ability to browser

through textbooks, videos, conceptual pre-lectures,

and other material and hints. New features are added

regularly as publishing companies invest heavily in

such applications. United Arab Emirates University,

our institution, is already using Blackboard and

Masteringphysics.

LMS platforms are very powerful and the only

limitation we have experienced is regarding guided

problem solving. Many instructors rely on those

platforms to generate simple exercises, multiple-

choice questions, true-false questions, and so on.

Those platforms offer students a small window to

enter equations and their final answers. For the more

involved problems such platforms remain of little use

and value as they are missing on the important feature

of enhancing and guiding the critical thinking process

itself. As stressed before it is not the final answer that

is the goal, rather it is shaping the critical thinking

skills of students. Therefore, those platforms are still

short of value for problem solving as they lack

interactive personalized support and guidance. Our

proposed application can make an important addition

to those platforms as it can fill the gap we are

experiencing in problem solving skills.

There are few stand-alone applications of physics

including but not limited to Physics Solver, Learn

Physics, Visual Physics, Physical Mechanical

problems. However, existing stand-alone mobile

applications in the market are of little value. They are

simply performing as a calculator aiming at

calculating a number to one of the most used

equations in physics or mathematics. Some

applications are offering explanations to various

topics but all lack an interactive guided support in

problem solving. Such applications provide minor

value to the process of critical thinking and problem

solving in general.

In this paper, we discuss the case of building an

interactive mobile application based on an algorithm

that relies on the major steps of problem solving. The

application should serve to guide, help, encourage,

and motivate students. The application should create

a more interactive and exciting environment for

students. This mobile application should foster the

problem solving skill among students and create a

supportive environment for critical thinking. This

application is not a type of calculator or plugin tool to

find a final numerical value; rather it is a guide for

Building an Interactive Mobile Application to Enhance Students’ Problem Solving Skills in Higher Education Physics

551

students to utilize and improve the thinking process

and their strategies to solve challenge problems. It

will encourage students to reflect on their approach

and will provide a help connection with their

instructors. Later, the application will be tested on a

sample of students and based on results; a plan to

upgrade the first version to include more capabilities

could be performed. The application will link

students with their instructor at the major obstacles

students face, allowing for real time interaction. In

addition, the application should be able to save

students interactive history and allow instructor to

browse through and give feedback. This application

will be of important addition to education technology

as it lacks such product.

2 METHODOLOGY AND

FRAMEWORK

The major step in creating this application is to build

an algorithm that can guide and support students in

the process of problem solving. The algorithm does

not provide direct solution to problems that students

want to solve, but rather it provides guidance,

support, and opportunity to reflect on the major sub

steps of the whole process. The algorithm also directs

students for help and support in situations where a

student is stuck or unable to proceed to the next step.

The algorithm is implemented as a mobile application

that gives students a personal guide and support

during the problem solving process. We produce a

simple first version with has direct features that tackle

the major cornerstones of the problem solving

process. The important features of the application are

listed below:

1) An administrator is required to monitor and

control the application use (to be implemented in

higher versions).

2) The application is built based on the major

corner steps of problem solving according to faculty

experience, literature, and students’ feedback.

3) The application creates an interactive and

exciting environment for students. We expect

students become more receptive and even more

willing to learn.

4) It aims at attracting students to use and link the

process of problem solving with their instructor,

allowing for real time interaction. Students can send

questions and request meeting with their instructor.

Group discussion and chatting among students,

enrolled in the same course (to be implemented in

higher versions).

5) The application should provide clear advice

and start with a famous encouraging quote to keep

student enthusiastic and encouraged.

6) The application will link to valuable resources

on the internet, such as dictionaries, youtube, and

other free resources.

7) The application will not solve assigned

problems for students; however, it aims at enhancing

the students’ critical thinking and all related skills.

8) The application will suggest possible hints for

students once stuck at a given step. It may direct

students for additional help from the internet or from

their instructor.

9) The application will guide the students to

reflect at each major step of the problem-solving

process. It will ask students to comment and answer

few directed questions before moving to the next step.

10) The application can save students interactive

history and allow instructor to browse through, thus

instructors can monitor students’ progress.

Instructor’s feedback is also possible (to be

implemented in higher versions).

11) The application should be of a valuable

addition to the current education technology. The

current education market lacks such innovation and

the hope is to succeed in convincing students and

educators to implement the use of such product. The

real success of the project will come from the

apparent help this tool will provide in the learning

process of physics and science in general.

12) The first version will be tested on group of

students and based on results; an upgraded version

incorporating more features can be developed.

The application is to be constructed based on 7 major

parts. The first three parts will be implemented in

later versions; namely, Part I (Create Profile), Part II

(Create/Join Class), and Part III (Create Assignment).

These parts are technical and will handled later. In

fact, these parts could be integrated with the

Blackboard platform already used at UAEU. The

other four important parts are discussed below.

2.1 Comprehension Part

This is the most important part especially for English

as second language students. Students start problem

solving with this part. Student will view first problem

only. They will need later to request viewing next

problems. Students start this part by reading the first

problem carefully and slowly for several times, then

they are asked to highlight/type important words and

other irrelevant words with justification. Next

students will specify any word/phrase they do not

understand and then will be directed to dictionary,

CSEDU 2019 - 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

552

internet, textbook, notes, or seek help from other

students. A similar step for any sentence they do not

understand and seeking possible help from instructor.

Students are encouraged to picture the problem in

their head and think of all its details. This part is very

important before they move to the next part, as it aims

to foster language and contextual structure of the

problem. With sufficient practice, students will

acquire the skill to fluently comprehend the language

structure of given problems in their textbooks and

exams. A flowchart of this part is provided below in

Figure 1.

2.2 Analysis Part

This part is also very important before students

actually start solving the problem. Students should

spend enough time to think about each part of the

question and what it requires, Students are asked to

summarize the question in a short sentence and in

their own words. Students are asked to explain the

question to other peers. This part aims at preparing

the student to be confident in understanding the

question. Students should not move to the next part

until they feel confident they understand the question.

Students are reminded that understanding a problem

constitutes a big part of finding a solution. A

flowchart of this part is also provided below in Figure

Figure 1: The comprehension Part.

Figure 2: The Analysis Part.

2.3 Solving Part

In this part students plan their solution and reflect at

each step. This part aim at improving mathematical and

organization skills. Students make a plan for solution

and then follow through. Once stuck, students are

encouraged to rethink about the problem and seek help

from instructor. The application does not solve the

problem but it encourages the students to think about

their solving strategy. Students are reminded that it is

not only the final answer that they are looking for, but

rather the whole learning process. We show below very

few lines of the computer source code written for this

part.

<Label Text="Comprehension Part 1"

HorizontalOptions="Center"

VerticalOptions="Center"

TextColor="Black"

BackgroundColor="LightGray"

Style="{DynamicResource

TitleStyle}"/>

</StackLayout>

<Label Text="Read the first problem

carefully and slowly at least 2 times,

then click NEXT"

LineBreakMode="WordWrap"

2.4 Evaluation Part

This is the last part where students reflect on the pro-

Building an Interactive Mobile Application to Enhance Students’ Problem Solving Skills in Higher Education Physics

553

cess of problem solving. Students are asked to check

their solution for correct dimensions and compare it

with the correct answer, if given. Students are asked to

make sense of their final answer. This part forces

students to think about the validity of the solution and

check their understanding. Students rate the

application at the end of the process. A flowchart of

this part is not shown but is available and has been

implemented in the source code.

This is the end of the proposed algorithm for the

application with specific details on each step. The

source code has been written in JavaScript as Android

application. The source writing has been mainly done

by students coauthoring this project. Currently all parts

of the application have been completed except the first

few technical parts which should be done once

adequate technical support is available. The

application was created with the aim at helping

students during the process of problem solving offering

guidance and support. It provides a companion for

students to rely on in the process of critical thinking

and helping in acquiring problem solving skills. The

application should be tested later on a group of

students; it can be updated based on students’ feedback

and instructors’ feedback too.

3 CONCLUSIONS

This project was initiated as an undergraduate research

project at UAEU. The importance of the application

stems from the observed struggle that students face in

problem solving. We aim at helping and guiding

students through the problem-solving process through

a mobile application, that may trigger interest among

students. Through literature review and based on our

own experience we divided the process of problem

solving into several parts that students need to go

through. A flow chart for each process has been

developed. Next the non-technical parts of the flow

charts have been written in a JavaScript to initially

generate an Android-based mobile application. Since

the project has been developed by undergraduate

students, few technical parts have been postponed till

adequate technical support is available. The

application has been named “Physible” and the first

version is at its final stage. The application should be

available on Google Play Store within one month. We

plan to test the application next fall semester at UAEU

on a group of students in multi-sections introductory

physics course. We plan to use the application on few

sections in the course while other sections will keep

using the same methodology. By analyzing grades of

problem solving part of assessment and through

developed surveys of students and faculty members,

we will test the application and its benefits. We claim

that the application will enhance students grades and

improve attitudes and motivation toward learning

physics, such claim will be tested next fall semester.

Results on using the application will be then presented

and hopefully we can test our claims. Based on testing

the application and feedback from students and

instructors we plan to upgrade the application to

include more capabilities. The Logo of the application

is show below in Figure 3. In addition, we show a

screenshot of one of the application pages, see Figure

Figure 3: Logo of the Application.

Figure 4: A screen shot of one page of the application.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank the United Arab

Emirates University for their financial support under

Grant G00002752.

CSEDU 2019 - 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Education

554

REFERENCES

Ausubel, D. P., 1963. The Psychology of Meaningful Verbal

Learning, Grune and Stratton, New York.

Bolton J. and Ross S., 1997. Developing students' physics

problem-solving skills. Physics Education, Volume

32, Number 3.

Childress, VW., 1996. Does Integrating Technology,

Science, and Mathematics Improve Technological

Problem Solving? A Quasi-Experiment. Journal of

Technology Education. Vol. 8 No. 1.

Duch, BJ., 1996. Problem-Based Learning in Physics: The

Power of Students Teaching Students. Journal of

College Science Teaching, v15 n5, p326-29.

Ferreira, M. and Trudel A., 2012. The Impact of Problem-

Based Learning (PBL) on Student Attitudes Toward

Science, Problem-Solving Skills, and Sense of

Community in the Classroom. The Journal of

Classroom Interaction, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 23–30.

Fraser, B J and Butts, W L., 1982. Relationship between

perceived levels of classroom individualization and

science related attitudes. Journal of Research in

Science Teaching 19.2 , 143-154.

Fuller, RG, 1982. Solving Physics Problems--How Do We

Do It? Physics Today, v35 n9, p43-47.

Gabel Dorothy, 1994. Handbook of research on science

teaching and learning, Macmillan, New York.

Gagne, R. M., 1970. The conditions of learning. Holt,

Rinehart & Winston, 2

edition, p. 407.

Greeno, James G., 1973. The structure of memory and the

process of solving problems. Contemporary issues in

cognitive psychology: The Loyola Symposium. V. H.

Winston & Sons, p.348.

Kikilias, P., Papachristos, D., Alafodimos, N.,

Kalogiannakis, M. & Papadakis, St. (2009). An

Educational Model for Asynchronous E-Learning. A

case study in a Higher Technology Education, In D.

Guralnick (ed.) Proceedings of the International

Conference on E-Learning in the Workplace (ICELW-

09), 10-12 June 2009, New York: Kaleidoscope

Learning (CD-Rom).

Kim MC. and Hannafin MJ., 2011. Scaffolding problem

solving in technology-enhanced learning environments

(TELEs): Bridging research and theory with practice.

Computers & Education, Volume 56, Issue 2, pp403-

417.

Larkin, JH., 1979. Processing Information for Effective

Problem Solving. Engineering Education, v70 n3

pp285-88.

Martin-Blas, T., 2009. E-learning Platforms in Physics

Education, Technology Education and Development.

Aleksandar Lazinica and Carlos Calafate, ISBN 978-

953-307-007-0.

Mayer, Richard E., 1992. Thinking, problem solving,

cognition. W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt &

Co, 2

edition, p.560.

Nakhleh, Mary B., 1993. Are our students conceptual

thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers? Identifying

conceptual students in general. Journal of Chemical

Education, Volume 70, Issue 1.

Papadakis, S., and Kalogiannakis, M. (2017). Mobile

educational applications for children. What educators

and parents need to know. International Journal of

Mobile Learning and Organisation (Special Issue on

Mobile Learning Applications and Strategies), 11(3),

256-277.

Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., Sifaki, E., and Vidakis,

N. (2017). Access moodle using smart mobile phones.

A case study in a Greek University. In Interactivity,

Game Creation, Design, Learning, and Innovation (pp.

376-385). Springer.

Polya, G., 1945. How to solve it, Princeton University

Press, New York.

Ramsden P., 2003, Learning to teach in higher education,

RoutledgeFalmer, 2

edition.

Shurygin, V., Yurjevich, K., and Lyubov A., 2016.

Electronic Learning Courses as a Means to Activate

Students' Independent Work in Studying Physics.

International Journal of Environmental and Science

Education, v11 n8, pp1743-1751.

Simon, H., 1980. Problem solving and education. In F. Reif

and D. Tuma (Eds.), Problem solving and education:

Issues in teaching and research. Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 81-

96.

Stewart, J., 1982. Two Aspects of Meaningful Problem

Solving in Science. Science Education, v66 n5, p731-

49.

Walker, A. and Shelton, BE., 2008. Problem-Based

Educational Games: Connections, Prescriptions, and

Assessment. Journal of Interactive Learning Research.

19 (4), pp. 663-684.

Woods, DR., 1975. Teaching Problem Solving Skills.

Engineering Education, 66, 3, pp.238-243.

Building an Interactive Mobile Application to Enhance Students’ Problem Solving Skills in Higher Education Physics

555