U

sing the language of

knowledge states and
operators, how can we
characterize more precisely the
knowledge a scientist brings to
solving problems? A physicist
solving the sled problem might
begin a solution in the following
way.

In the vertical direction, the

downward force is equal to the
weight of the boy-sled system
(W). The upward force is a
combination of the vertical
component of the force due to
the rope, Frv, and the normal
force N exerted on the sled by
the snow.

The key thing is that the sled

(with the boy) moves at constant
speed. That means theres no
net force increasing or
decreasing the speed of this
system. So, in each direction, the
forces on the boy-sled system
must balance, yielding a zero net
force. I can therefore separately
add up the horizontal and
vertical components of the
forces on the boy-sled system
and make them balance. In the
horizontal direction, the forces
are the horizontal component of
force due to the rope Frh, and the
frictional force f. These forces
balance, so Frh = f.

he upward and downward

forces must balance, so N
+ Frv = W. [Note that the
expert picks up a point that the
student, simply juggling
symbols, missed: the normal
force alone does not balance the
full weight of the boy and sled,
because the boy is pulling up as
well as forward.] The frictional
force f depends on the normal
force N and the coefficient of
friction r. So f = rN. I can now
combine these equations to
solve for r in terms of Fr and W.
[Note that the expert has not yet
used specific numerical values
for any of the quantities, but first
solves the problem in general.]

Even these initial statements

soggiest a very different solution

process from that of typical

physics students. What can we
infer about the knowledge states
and operators used here? First,
the scientists initial state seems
to be quite different from the
symbol-quantity state
characteristic of students. The
physicists initial state, for
example, clearly contains the
information that the sleds speed
is constant and explicitly groups
the boys and sled, calling them
the boy-sled system. Then, the
physicist applies successive
operators, which

each add more information about

the system. The first operator

applied adds the information that

in every direction the forces on
this system must balance, or
yield a net force of zero. The
next operators add information
about the forces in the horizontal
and vertical direction. There is a
very visual or spatial flavor to
these comments, and physicist
solutions often contain diagrams
like that in Figure 8.3.
Using the language of knowledge
states and operators, how can
we characterize more precisely
the knowledge a scientist brings
to solving problems?