Strong preference among graduate student teaching assistants for problems that are broken into parts for their students overshadows development of self-reliance in problem-solving

Different physics problem types, i.e., the same physics scenario posed as a problem in different ways, can emphasize different learning goals for students and can be used in diverse situations to meet various instructional goals. We examined graduate teaching assistants' (TAs') views about broken-into-parts introductory physics problems within the context of a semester-long TA professional development course. The TAs were asked to list the pros and cons of the broken-into-parts problem type, rate this type of problem in terms of its instructional benefit and the level of challenge it might produce for their students, and describe when and how often they would use broken-into-parts problems in their own classes in different situations if they had complete control of teaching the class to meet different instructional goals. We find that TAs reported the broken-into-parts problem type to be the most instructionally beneficial out of all the problem types and would use a broken-intoparts problem type often and in a variety of ways (e.g., homework assignments, exams, and quizzes). Written explanations and interviews suggest that they preferred to use a broken-into-parts problem type more often than other problem types in various instructional contexts because of the guidance such problems offer. While providing guidance to students is an appropriate instructional approach, our findings from interviews suggest that many TAs may be motivated to assign broken-into-parts problems out of a desire to make the problem-solving process easy and/or less stressful for students, especially because they felt that introductory students may not be capable of breaking a problem into sub-problems on their own. The instructional benefits of gradually removing the scaffolding support to help students develop self-reliance in solving problems appeared to be overlooked by most TAs. This lack of awareness or reflection on the important role that removing scaffolding support gradually and providing adequate challenge can play in helping introductory students develop self-reliance and become independent, expert-like problem-solvers has implications for the professional development of TAs.