An Analysis on Problem-Finding Patterns of Well-Known Creative Scientists

잘 알려진 창의적 과학자들의 과학적 문제 발견 패턴 분석

  • Received : 2013.07.21
  • Accepted : 2013.12.10
  • Published : 2013.12.31


Nurturing students' scientific creativity is considered an important element in science education in Korea. The study aims to explore patterns displayed by well-known scientists in their quest for problem finding. Each case of scientists' course of problem solving is described in terms of historical background, a process of problem finding, and a process of problem solving. There are five patterns from ten scientists which are as follows: Pattern 1 is that scientists find problems from insufficiencies and/or errors from explanation of theories at the time and the related cases are A. Lavoisier, G. Mendel, and J. Watson. Pattern 2 shows that scientists find a problem because of strange phenomena unexplained by theories at the time, and here important case studies are E. Rutherford and W. R$\ddot{o}$ntgen. Pattern 3 demonstrates that scientists find a problem from analogical reasoning between known theories and unknown science phenomena. The cases include S. Carnot and T. Young. Pattern 4 points to the fact that scientists find a problem while they utilize a newly invented experimental instrument. Here, G. Galilei is an important example. Pattern 5 establishes that scientists happen to find a problem while they conduct research projects. The works of M. Faraday and J. Kepler are prominent case studies related to this pattern.


Supported by : 한국학술진흥재단


  1. Baily, C. (2013). Early atomic models - From mechanical to quantum (1904-1913). European Physical Journal H, 38, 1-38.
  2. Carnot, S. (1824). Reflections on the motive power of fire. In E. Mendosa (Ed.) (1988), Sadi Carnot: Reflections on the Motive Power of Fire. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
  3. Cho, C. M. (1997). Discovery of oxygen. Journal of Basic Science (Basic Science Research Institute, Sungshin Women's University), 15, 1-15.
  4. Cohen, I. B. (1985). The birth of a new physics. New York: W W Norton & Company.
  5. Crombie, A. C. (1990). Science, optics and music in medieval and early modern thought. London: The Hambledon Press.
  6. Drake, S. (1957). Discoveries and opinions of Galileo. New York: Doubleday Anchor Books.
  7. Einstein, A., & Infeld, L. (1938). The evolution of physics. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  8. Faraday, M. (2005). Experimental researches in electricity, vol III.1, London: Elibron Classics.
  9. Feldhusen, J. F., & Treffinger, D. J. (1985). Creative thinking and problem solving in gifted education (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
  10. Ferguson, K. (2002). Tycho & Kepler. New York: Walker & Company.
  11. Friedman, G., & Friedman, M. (1998). Medicine's 10 greatest discoveries. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  12. Getzels, J. W. (1979). Problem finding: A theoretical note. Cognitive Science, 3, 167-172
  13. Halliday, D., Resnick, R., & Walker, J. (2006). Fundamentals of physics (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  14. Hartl, D., & Orel, V. (1992). What did Gregor Mendel think he discovered? Genetics, 131, 245-253.
  15. Henle, M. (1971). The snail beneath the shell. Abraxas, 1, 119-133.
  16. Hong, S. O. (1986). Research on the development of Michael Faraday's concept of lines of magnetic force. Journal of the Korean History of Science Society, 8(1), 48-70.
  17. Hudson, J. (1992). The history of chemistry. London: Macmillan Press Ltd.
  18. Iliffe, R., & Mandelbrote, S. (2013). AHRC Newton Papers Project. East Sussex: University of Sussex.
  19. Im, G. S. (2001). Pioneers of modern physics. Seoul: Dasan Publishing Co.
  20. Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. New York: Routledge.
  21. Kevles, B. H. (1996). Naked to the bone medical imaging in the twentieth century. Camden, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
  22. Kim, H. S. (1988). Lavoisier's combustion theory. Physics Education, 16(1), 44-49.
  23. Kim, Y. (2006). Kepler's scientific problem finding and the abductive reasoning in his discovery of the retinal image formation. Journal of the Korean Association for Science Education, 26(7), 835-842
  24. Kim, Y. (2010). Abductive Reasoning and Creativity in Physics and Physics Education. Sae Mulli, 60(7), 689-701.
  25. Kragh, H. (2010). Before Bohr: Theories of atomic structure 1850-1913. Reposs #10, University of Aarhus, Denmark.
  26. Klug, A. (1968). Rosalind Franklin and the discovery of the structure of DNA. Nature, 219, 808-810, +843.
  27. Langley, P., Simon, H., Bradshaw, G., & Zytkow, J. (1987). Scientific discovery: Computational explorations of the creative processes. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  28. Lee, P. L. (1997). Lavoisier's oxidation theory. Science Thoughts (Byumyang Publishing Ltd.), 20, 137-146.
  29. Lindberg, D. C. (1976). Theories of vision from al-Kindi to Kepler. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  30. Mason, S. F. (1962). A History of the Sciences. NY: Collier Books.
  31. McCormack, A. J., & Yager, R. E. (1989). A new taxonomy of science education. Science Teacher, 56 (2), 47-48.
  32. Meadows, J. (1987). The great scientists. New York: Oxford University Press.
  33. Mendel, G. (1909, 2008). Experiments in plant hybridisation. New York: Cosimo, Inc.
  34. MEST (Ministry of Education, Science, & Technology). (2011). Science curriculum. MEST Notification No. 2011-361, Supplement 9.
  35. Orel, V. (1996). Gregor Mendel: The first geneticist. London: Oxford University Press.
  36. Pauling, L., & Corey, R. B. (1953). A proposed structure for the nucleic acids. PNAS, 39(2), 84-97.
  37. Polanyi, M. (1958). Personal Knowledge: "Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  38. Russell, P., Wolfe, S., Hertz., P., & Starr, C. (2009). Biology: The dynamic science. Seoul: Life Science Publishing Co.
  39. Rutherford, E. (1906). Radioactive transformations. London: Constable & Co.
  40. Rutherford, E. (1911). The scattering of -and -articles and the structure of the atom. Philosophical Magazine, 21, 669-688.
  41. Stern, C., & Sherwood, E. (1966). The origin of genetics: A Mendel source book. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
  42. Thomson, J. J. (1904). On the structure of the atom: An investigation of the stability and periods of oscillation of a number of corpuscles arranged at equal intervals around the circumference of a circle. Philosophical Magazine, 7, 237-265.
  43. Wade, N. J. (1998). A natural history of vision. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  44. Watson, J., & Crick, F. (1953). A structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature, 3(171), 737-738.
  45. Yang, J. S., & Koo, M. J. (2005). The changes in the view of life from the Mendelian genetics age to the biotechnology age. Journal of the Korean History of Science Society, 27(1), 87-107.
  46. Yoo, J. Y. (1990). Prestley and Lavoisier: Conservatism and progressivism in science thoughts. Journal of the Korean History of Science Society, 12(1), 158-165.
  47. Young, T. (1800). Outlines of experiments and inquiries: Respecting sound and light. In G. Peacock (1855), Miscellaneous Works of the late Thomas Young. London: John Murray. pp. 64-98.
  48. Young, T. (1804). Dr. Young's reply to the animadversions of the Edinburgh Reviewers, on some papers published in the Philosophical Transaction. In G. Peacock (1855), Miscellaneous Works of the late Thomas Young. London: John Murray. pp. 192-215.

Cited by

  1. Implications of Science Education as Interdisciplinary Education through the Cases of Scientists and Artists in the Modern Era: Focus on the Relationship Between Science and the Arts vol.34, pp.8, 2014,