Site-Using Tips  –   open only this page   –   put page into left frame 
 
How can we use Design-Thinking Process

to improve Problem Solving and Education?

 
teachers doing DEEPdt Design ThinkingThis is the home-page for a website – developed by Craig Rusbult (PhD in C&I)* during life on a road less traveled – about Education for Problem Solving.
 
The page begins with an Introductory Overview, to describe educational strategies & activities that we — me and other educators with similar goals, using your ideas and mine,* cooperatively working together — can develop and use, to help students improve their problem-solving skills in all areas of life, by helping them get more experiences (with problem solving) and (by using my model for problem solving) learn more from their experiences.     { contact-email:  craigru57-att-yahoo-daut-caum }
 

* at the U of Wisconsin my PhD project was constructing a model for “scientific method” – describing how science uses logical Reality Checks plus other factorsStudents doing Design Thinkingand using this model to help us analyze & improve our science education.  Since then, I've generalized this model (for Science Process) to form a model for Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process that is mostly a process of making decisions), aka Design-Thinking Process.     {so @DTprocess was my username in Twitter – when I still used it – and YouTube}

* your ideas and mine include your ideas (for your schools) and my ideas (for using Design Process plus models constructed by others) to improve our education for creative-and-critical problem solving.

 
also:  We can help people (especially the young & old) enjoy improvising music when they make harmonious melodies by playing chord-notes that are logically colorized – with red, blue, green – on a keyboard, and enjoy improvising conversation.
 
viewing tips:  If possible, view this page on a large screen so when you put page into left frame (if it isn't there already) the links will work better because linked-to sections appear in the right frame, and you still can see this page in the left frame.  But if you have a small screen, you can open only this page and then links will open in a new frame.     { links to pages in external websites always open in a new tab or new window. }

 
Two Overviews – Short and Longer
Most of this home-page is an Introductory Overview that combines a Short Overview (to help you see “the big picture” by summarizing key ideas) and Longer Overview (to help you understand in more depth).     { Links with shading - gold or green - go to sections in the Short Overview or Longer Overview. }
 

These overviews have two parts — with each covering different aspects of my model for Design Process — and you can read either part first.

 

Part 1 describes educational goals – and strategies for achieving these goals – that are generally accepted, that you (as an experienced educator) already know and probably accept, so while reading you'll be thinking “yes” because you mainly agree.*  But I also explain how using Design Process can help us achieve our goals, and for these claims you'll want to carefully evaluate before deciding “yes” or “probably” or “maybe” or “no”.  Or you may think “I don't know” is your best response now, because you want to see more evidence.   /    I suggest reading Part 1 in the Short Overview, and then (for “more”) click a green-shaded link for that section in the Longer Overview.   /   * Sometimes you'll see my ideas (about goals, strategies & actions, reasons for using Design Process,...) and will think “yes” because you mainly agree, or maybe “yes and...” by adding your ideas, or “yes but...” when you mostly agree but think modified ideas would be better, or even “no because...”, and all of these responses can be useful in a collaboration.    { the purposes of Parts 1 & 2 }

 

3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) used in 3 Evaluative Comparisons, during General Design and Science-DesignPart 2 is about my innovative model for Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process, aka Design-Thinking Process) that is descriptively accurate and educationally beneficial, that can help us achieve the worthy educational goals in Part 1.  In the Longer Overview, Part 2 has three sub-parts:  2A helps you understand what Design Process IS (it's a goal-oriented flexible process) and ISN'T (it's not a rigidly choreographed method), and helps you discover its principles by exploring its verbal-visual diagrams — this one (Logically Using 3 Elements in 3 Comparisons, for Two Kinds of Design) and others — while I'm guiding you with tips & explanations;  2B examines the model more deeply;  2C has ideas for designing instruction that effectively combines Design Process with other Models-for-Process.   /    I recommend reading 2A in the Longer Overview (where you can quickly learn from your discoveries and my explanations) plus 2C in the Short Overview and then, if you want, 2B or 2C.     { the Short Overview has only 2C, the Longer Overview has 2A-2B-2C }

 

My goals are different for Parts 1 & 2, although with overlaps.  I want to work with other educators,* so I'm hoping you'll see our “common ground” in Part 1, and will be thinking “Craig is one of us, is with us and for us, he understands, is similar to us.”  And during Part 2, “he is a little different, with an innovative model — that describes (verbally & visually) problem-solving actions, to help students understand these actions and improve them — that will contribute useful ‘added value’ to education, so working with him will help us improve education, so we can be...”

 

co-creating better education:  I'm an enthusiastic educator who enjoys talking with other educators, simply to share ideas and learn from each other.  But (as explained in Working Together) "I also want to collaborate on projects of mutual interest — and doing this as a free volunteer will be fine with me — working cooperatively to develop our ideas for how to help students improve their creative-and-critical thinking skills and their effective using of problem-solving process in all areas of life" because we think "strategies for improving our problem-solving education are worth developing and (by converting our strategy-ideas into classroom-actions) actualizing.  To do this developing-and-actualizing, collaboration is necessary because although I have some understandings and skills, I need help from other educators who have developed other understandings and skills,... who understand the perspectives of classroom teachers [and students] more accurately & thoroughly, or are skilled activity developers, and have other kinds of useful experience & expertise, so that by working together with coordinated cooperation, creatively combining your understandings-and-skills with mine, we can design curriculum & instruction that is a good match for how students like to learn (and are able to learn), and how teachers like to teach. .....  I want to see my ideas actualized in practical ways, by combining them with your ideas, working together to achieve your goals."

 

education for all ages:  While writing this homepage (and website) I'm thinking mostly about education in K-12 schools, but the strategies & model - in Parts 1 & 2 - also are useful for younger children in pre-school, and older students in college, and everyone in everyday life.     { who I'm writing for – it's other educators }

 


 open only this page   –   put page into left frame 
 
Short Overview
Here I'll describe reasons for concluding that Design Process might be very useful in education, so its possibilities are worth exploring and developing, because (although not certain) it's “a good way to bet.”     { Design Process is my model for Problem-Solving Process.  The best way to understand the model is with Learning by Discovery (+ Explanations). }

 

Part 1:
Ideas for Education

 

Will two wide scopes of Design Process

increase Transfers of Learning and thus

help make education Personally Useful?

My ideas will be educationally beneficial IF using Design Process will increase transfers-of-learning Between Areas (in School & in Life) and Through Time (from Present into Future), because these transfers will provide many practical benefits for students.  And IF students persuade themselves about this, so they believe that their learning will be personally useful because it will transfer from School into Life, and into their Future — so a student is thinking “when I improve my School-Learning, it will improve my Life-Living, it will help me achieve my goals for Life” — their beliefs will be giving them personal motivations to learn in school.  Students will convert their own education into a problem-solving project (when their problem-solving objective is making things better in their own life) — because they believe that making their education better will help to make their life better — and they will be motivated to pursue their own personal education.

But there are two IF-conditions, thus two questions:  Why should we expect transfersHow can we help students persuade themselves?   These questions are important, and the answers are not obvious.  Therefore the next two sections (1 and 2) explain some logical reasons to predict that using Design Process will increase transfers of learning – and will help us persuade students that these transfers are personally useful because of connections between

Wide Scopes (for problem solving) in "1" below, and

Scientific Knowledge (about transfers) in "2" below.

 

1 – Two Wide Scopes for Problem Solving:

When we use Design Process (my model for Problem-Solving Process) to design our Education for Problem Solving, we have logical reasons to expect that the result will be very useful for K-12 (but also for younger and older) because with Design Process there is a wide scope for Activities and for Process.  There is...

 
1-A)  a wide scope for Problem-Solving Activities
(these include almost everything people do)

because when educators choose to use broad definitions — a problem is any opportunity to make things better, and problem solving occurs whenever we do make something better — almost everything students do can be a PS-Activity.  And there is...

 
1-B)  a wide scope for Problem-Solving Process
(it's similar for almost everything people do)

because during Design Process (as described in my simplest model) students just Generate Ideas & Evaluate Ideas, and we use these mental actions often, for almost everything in life.  And we find other similarities when we dig deeper.  But also differences, because – for different people & different situations – the process is similar but not identical.  Why?

There are similarities because 9 essential Problem-Solving Actions (they're the core of Design Process) are used while solving almost all problems.

But differences occur when each problem-solving person flexibly coordinates their problem-solving process by asking “what is the best way to make progress in our process?” so they can make strategic Action-Decisions about “what to do next,” about which Actions to use, when, and how.  The flexible goal-directed improvising of a problem solver is analogous to the goal-directed flexible improvising of a hockey player.  But not the rigid choreography of a figure skater.

Or consider the modular process-of-building when a few kinds of simple Lego Bricks are used to build many different complex structures.  By analogy, with a modular process-of-solving we can use 9 simple Actions to form many variations of Problem-Solving Process.  We build a Process that "is similar [but not identical] for almost everything we do" because each Process is a variation (improvised with modular flexibility) on a basic theme, made by combining the same Actions in different ways.

{ more about The Wide Scope of Process }  { also, whether our “thinking” is conscious and/or subconscious, we use a similar process of Learn & Observe & Predict, Generate & Evaluate, Decide & Do }   {  If you're wondering “what is Design Process?” you can Learn by Discovery }

 

2 – Scientific Knowledge about Increasing Transfer:

Why should we expect transfers-of-skills to increase when we use Design Process?  Some logical science-based reasons come from How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (a highly respected book, commissioned by the National Research Council, about using educational research to improve educational practice) when – after saying "the ultimate goal of learning" is transfer, so it's "a major goal of schooling" – the authors recommend that to increase transfer, we should:

2-A)  teach knowledge in multiple contexts, and...  1-A) this is allowed by the wide scope of Problem-Solving Activities that includes almost everything students do;

2-B)  teach knowledge in an easily-generalizable form, and...  1-B) this can be done by using Design Process to show students the wide scope of Problem-Solving Process that is similar for almost everything they do, for most of their Problem-Solving Activities in all areas of life.

{more}

 


 open only this page   –   put page into left frame 
 

Indirect Benefits of Increasing Transfer, with

Personal Education and Educational Bridges:

Based on what we know about how people learn, we should expect Design Process to help increase transfers Across Areas (between subjects in School and areas in Life) and Through Time (from Past to Present into Future).  When this happens,...

Students will get direct benefits when these transfers improve their problem-solving abilities (and other abilities) in a wider variety of situations, in their School-Life and NonSchool-Life, with School-Life + NonSchool-Life = Whole-Life.  When they have better transfer, students get direct benefits that produce changes in their external results, in their abilities to Learn AND Perform.

Students also get indirect benefits when they improve their internal attitudes.  This will happen IF students persuade themselves – with us helping them by showing the two wide scopes (for Problem-Solving Activities & Problem-Solving Process) – to believe that their Problem-Solving Activities in School will be personally useful in Life.  We want students to be motivated because they are thinking “when I improve in School NOW, this will help me improve in Life LATER.”  ( where "later" is after school today, and next year, and when they're an adult – so it's a little later and a lot later. )

Motivations for Personal Education:  We want to help students develop personal motivations to pursue their personal goals by using personal education that is proactive problem solving when they decide “I want to solve a problem by making my education better because this will make my life better, will help me achieve my goals for life.”     { Be Proactive is the foundational Habit 1A  B  C  D  E – in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. }

Motivations from Building Bridges:  We can use the wide scopes of PS-Activities & PS-Process to help students expect transfers (with their internal attitudes) and actualize these transfers (in their external results).  We can help them build bridges – in their expectations for what will occur, and the realities of what does occur – with two-way Transfers Across Areas (from School-Life into NonSchool-Life, and from NonSchool-Life into School-Life) and Transfers Through Time (from their Present into their Future).  These bridges can improve their Transfers of Learning (Across Areas & Thru Time) and also their Transitions of Attitudes (by improving their motivations for wanting to learn, and their confidence in being able to learn).    {more about building bridges and encouraging transitions of attitudes}

 


Now we'll shift from the WHY (with Reasons for Using Design Process) to general principles for WHAT-and-HOW.


 

present-to-future Transfers

by using a Growth Mindset

An excellent way to learn more effectively is by developing-and-using a better growth mindset so – when a student asks themself “how well am I doing in this area of life?”* and honestly answers “not well enough” – they are thinking “not yet” (instead of “not ever”) because they are confident that in this area they can “grow” by improving their skills, when they invest intelligent effort.  With this attitude they're supplementing current self-perception (based on what they've done in the past) with optimism (about what they can do now & in their future) to build a more useful self-perception.  This optimistic view-of-self will help students develop a justifiable confidence in their ability to improve now, so they can “do things better” in their future.  Regarding two kinds of Objectives – to connect their present and future – they will be trying to improve their present-time Learning so they can improve their future-time Performing.  This long-term perspective will motivate them because they have a confident belief that their efforts to self-improve (as in personal education for life) will be rewarded.

* A reason to ask “how well am I doing?” is to learn from experience, for self-education.  When I make a mistake, I want to learn from the experience so I can “do it better” the next time.  Therefore I ask myself “why?” and often the answer is “my process wasn't effective,” so (in an effort to do better) I've found it beneficial to develop-and-use a Checklist for Problem-Solving Process.

 

trying to improve in your

Present and/or Future with

time-related Objectives for

Performing and/or Learning:

When you want your best possible performance now, you have a Performance Objective.  When you want your best possible learning now, so you can improve your best possible performance later, you have a Learning Objective.   For example, compare a basketball team's early-season practice (with a Learning Objective, wanting to learn NOW so they can perform better LATER) and late-season tournament game (with a Performance Objective, wanting to play their best NOW).   /   It's "and/or" because your highest priority can be to maximize your learning now, or your performing now, or both.

In your future this "do better" will happen in two ways.  First, you will "know better" because you have learned from experience, so your potential performing has improved, and you can do better.  Second, this potential must be actualized by converting “can do better” into “are doing better” with high-quality actual performing.   /   a summary:  After your past learning has improved your present potential performing, this potential (in principle, as a possibility) to “do it better” will be actualized (in reality) when you do present actual performing with high quality, so you're combining past learning (wanted in previous Learning Objectives) with present performing (wanted in your current Performance Objective).     { more about performing and/or learning with two ways – by improving your past-to-present Learning, and present Performing – to perform better in your future, as expressed in the "know better, do better" of Angela Mayou. }

 

students can learn more from their

problem-solving experiences

by using Design Process and

metacognitive Thinking Strategies

Students will learn more when they get more experiences (of the kinds that are educationally useful) and learn more from their experiences.  Well-designed uses of Design Process can be especially useful for helping students learn more from their experiences.  How?  A teacher can promote educationally useful cognition-and-metacognition with reflection activities by asking students to reflect on (to observe or remember, and think about) their experiences while solving a problem — by asking “what did I do, and think?” (or “what am I now doing and thinking?”) and “then what happened,” and also “with different actions & thinking, could the results have been better?” — so they can learn more from the experience and do things better the next time, to improve their performing and/or learning and enjoying.  When a teacher wants to help students learn Principles for Problem Solving (that are accurately described in a model for Design Process), this Reflection is the central part of Experience + Reflection ➞ Principles that uses a process-of-inquiry to help students learn principles-for-inquiry.  Usually students will learn more, and will think more effectively, when they develop-and-use strategies for thinking to effectively regulate their metacognition by deciding when to avoid it or use it, and how.     {getting more experiences}

 

 

improving Diversity, Equity, Inclusion:

Student Diversity:  All students are similar in the most important ways, but each has a personal history that makes them unique.  Each has their own complex blend of abilities they inherit, plus attitudes (like motivations & confidences) and skills (using multiple “intelligences” in many areas of life) they develop, with personal growth (mental, emotional, social, physical) affected by characteristics (gender, race,...) and situations (produced by family, friends, community, school) in their whole-life experiences (in school and outside).

Activity Diversity:  There are logical reasons to conclude that "we should try to design eclectic instruction by creatively combining the best features of different approaches into a synergistic blend that produces an optimal overall result (a greater good for a greater number) in helping students achieve worthy educational goals."  One reason is that, due to many kinds of diversity, some students will experience more success in problem-solving activities than in other activities, and they will enjoy the emotional & motivational rewards of success.  But some won't.  We want to minimize those who "won't" so we should be...

 

Can we help more students build better lives?Designing for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion:  We want to design activities that provide opportunities for all students to succeed, and help more students succeed, so more will experience the benefits (in school & life) of success.  We want to design curriculum-and-instruction (including activities) that actually does help more students, with wider diversity, more fully actualize their whole-person potentials.  We should try to “open up the options” for all students, so each will say “yes, I can do this” for a wider variety of subject-options in school and career-options in life.  We want to help students choose wisely by asking “among my many options — with career choices (for “what I want to DO”) and life choices (for “who I want to BE”) — what are the goals I want to pursue (and the roads I want to travel, in school & outside, now and later) so I can build a better life?”     {more}

 

the importance of timings:  Because we want to “keep options open” for more students, we should try to improve K-12 education, especially in the elementary grades.  When we help more students develop personally-useful skills (for problem solving & in other areas) and attitudes (motivations & confidence) at an early age, they will receive the benefits during more of their schooling, and will be able to more fully develop their whole-person potentials.  But we also should help students who already are older (are now in middle school, high school, college) so – before they leave school – they will get more problem-solving experiences and will learn more from their experiences.

options for timings:  We ask “when is the best time to plant a fruit tree?” and answer “the best time was 20 years ago, the second best time is now.”  OK.  But should we focus our now-responses on elementary (to get more benefits for young students) or secondary & college (to get benefits for more students)?  Each option has reasons (logical & ethical) to prefer it, with differing payoffs and time scales, so “do both” is the best response.

 


 open only this page   –   put page into left frame 
 

Will our Overall Education improve if we

improve our Problem-Solving Education?

limitations:  Although we would like our Overall Education to achieve multiple goals — by helping students improve in a variety of ways, in many areas of life – we have limited educational resources (of time, people, money,...) so we must make tough choices about goals by asking “what resources should be invested in each kind of goal?”

a claim:  I think one of our goals — helping students improve their Problem-Solving Skills (so they are able to solve problems) and Problem-Solving Motivations (so they want to solve problems, to make things better) — is currently under-emphasized in most schools, and we will increase the quality of our Overall Education if we increase our emphasis on Problem-Solving Education.  I claim that this shift-of-emphasis will “make things better” by producing better Overall Education – because what we gain (in the shift) will be more valuable than what we lose – so improving our Education for Problem Solving is a worthy Educational Goal.

two principles and a tool:  The quality of a student's education for problem solving will improve when they get more educationally-useful experiences with problem solving, and they learn more from their experiences.  We have logical reasons to conclude that Design Process is a tool we can use to help students learn more from their experiences with metacognitive thinking strategies.

a fact, and obstacles:  An activity will produce large-scale improvements only if the activity is educationally effective AND is widely adopted by teachers, schools, districts, and states.  When making a decision (yes or no) whether to use more resources for problem-solving activities, many factors are considered, including some rational reasons to say No.  These reasons can make it difficult to convert potentially-beneficial activities (that IF done would help students get more experiences & learn more from experiences) into actually-beneficial activities (that are done and are experienced by students, so their problem-solving skills & motivations can improve).

 

a plan:  We should think about possible “reasons for No” (these & others) and whether trying to reduce their impact would make our decisions more educationally productive.

 

Knowledge and Basic Skills plus Problem-Solving Skills:  The beginning of my simplest model for Design Process is Students doing Design Thinkingto "learn so you understand more accurately-and-thoroughly," because productive problem solving is the result of effectively combining creative-and-critical thinking with relevant knowledge.  Thus, one benefit of better subject-area knowledge is better problem-solving skills.  In this way & others, knowledge-and-skills are mutually supportive in a student's personal education.   /   In our whole-person goals for education, problem-solving skills should supplement – not replace – basic skills of reading & math, and knowledge in sciences, history, social studies, literature.  We should try to help students improve in multiple ways, in their skills (with reading, math, problem solving) and knowledge (in many areas of life).    { and we can help students use Design Process to develop-and-use thinking strategies for how to learn basic skills & knowledge more effectively, as in strategies for Self-Regulated Learning. }    { more about Rational Reasons to Avoid Problem-Solving Activities in Schools plus experiences (getting more & learning more) with 4 Levels of Problem-Solving Activities that promote Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles }

But despite these reasons for wanting knowledge-and-skills, thinking it's knowledge-versus-skills is one of the...

rational reasons to avoid Problem-Solving Activities:  These reasons pose a challenge for educators who are trying to design C&I that is educationally effective AND is widely adopted by teachers & schools.  When making decisions about Problem-Solving Activities, some of the strongest reasons for NO come from perceptions of "competition between ideas and skills" leading to concerns that become especially important "when quality of teaching is defined mainly by students’ performance on standardized exams that emphasize knowledge & basic skills (in reading & math)" so "teachers (and their schools) who want a high rating will ‘teach to the exam’ by emphasizing knowledge & basic skills."  What can we do?  Maybe we also can use...

Conceptual Evaluation of Instruction:  Although "accurate [quantitative] assessment of higher-level thinking skills is difficult," maybe we should supplement quantitative assessments of knowledge with qualitative assessments of problem-solving skills by using Conceptual Evaluation of Instruction.  This kind of evaluation is given more credibility if we accept a claim — made by David Perkins (a Professor at Harvard) in a 1992 book, Smart Schools: From Training Memories to Educating Minds — that "people learn much of what they have a reasonable opportunity and motivation to learn.If we want students to learn problem-solving skills, we must give them opportunities (and motivations) to learn these skills.  When we examine the C&I of a school, we can evaluate the quantity & quality of opportunities for problem-solving experiences.  If students have plenty of opportunities to learn skills, almost certainly (in “a good way to bet”) there will be more learning-of-skills.  Conceptual Evaluation of Instruction will promote better education if it encourages teachers & administrators to ask “how can we design curriculum-guided instruction that will be more beneficial for more students?” instead of just “how can we get more points on the standardized exams?”   /   When we're doing conceptual evaluation, one useful tool is the integrative analysis of instruction — it's a systematic way to find opportunities for students to practice & improve their problem-solving skills — that helps us understand the structure of instruction more accurately & thoroughly, so we can improve the instruction to make it more effective in achieving our educational goals.

 


 

Goal-Directed Designing

of Curriculum & Instruction:

To use this problem-solving strategy, we...

• DEFINE GOALS for desired outcomes of our CURRICULUM, for ideas-and-skills we want students to learn,

• DESIGN INSTRUCTION with learning activities (and associated teaching activities) that will provide opportunities for experience with these ideas & skills, and will help students learn more from their experiences.

 

a Coordinated Wide-Spiral Curriculum

has Wide Scope with Spiral Repetitions:

If your school decides “yes” for Problem-Solving Education, one way to pursue it with enthusiastic dedication – with a Big YES – Students doing Design Thinking is by designing and using a Wide Spiral for Curriculum & Instruction.

When we're designing C&I that is “wide” the wide scope of problem solving (it includes almost everything students do) is useful because it lets teachers use problem-solving activities in all subject areas – in sciences & engineering, business, humanities, and arts, in STEAM and beyond – to produce an ideas-and-skills curriculum with wide scope, so in every area students can have similar experiences with Problem-Solving Process, using a process of General Design and/or Science-Design that they can adapt to match their problem-solving Objectives.  These experiences can be part of a wide spiral curriculum that spans many grades in K-12, that has wide scope (so related learning experiences are coordinated across different areas) and uses spiral repetitions (so learning experiences are coordinated over time) to help all students (of all ages) improve their problem-solving skills and their basic skills & knowledge.     {more:  Goal-Directed Designing of a Wide-Spiral Curriculum – What, Why, Who, How – using instruction spirals that are short-term narrow, short-term wide, long-term wide.}

 

We have reasons to expect that using Design Process might be very useful in a Wide Spiral Curriculum, that it's “a good way to bet” for improving students' problem-solving education, and (especially when we build two-way bridges between school & life) their overall education.     { The best way to understand Design Process – it's my model for Problem-Solving Process – is with Learning by Your Discovery & My Explanations. }

 

Instruction — Activities ( Fun and Useful )

Students doing Design ThinkingWe want to design Problem-Solving Activities that are FUN for students, and personally USEFUL for them, with...

    FUN intrinsically when a student enjoys the experience because they think the problem-topic is interesting, and their own actions are interesting.  This will stimulate their curiosity, can inspire a love of learning.
   
FUN due to satisfaction when a student anticipates success, and does succeed.  We want to help them develop confidence with a growth mindset.  One way is to design activities with a “just right” level of challenge, like a good mystery story, so students won't be bored (if too easy) or discouraged (if too difficult), so they will be challenged but will succeed and will enjoy the satisfactions of success.    {more about levels}
    USEFUL as defined by a student who thinks it will be personally useful, will help them achieve their personal goals.  We can try to understand students (with empathy), and then consider their goals when defining our goals, to guide our goal-directed designing of their activities.  We want them to think “this school-activity will be a useful part of my personal education, will help me achieve my personal goals for life.”

 


 open only this page   –   put page into left frame 
Part 2C:
combining different
Models-for-Process
 
I'm not thinking “my model versus other models” because instead of making either-or choices between models, we should be inventing creative strategies to effectively combine models, so it's “my model plus other models.”  We can design instruction to include different models so our models will interact in ways that are synergistically supportive — that make the combination of models better than any single model by itself — because Design Process (DP)...

• is similar to other models — with basic agreement about the productive thinking & actions we use during a creative-and-critical process of problem solving — so DP is educationally compatible with other models and it “plays well” with them.  DP can be smoothly blended into most systems of instruction, using common methods for teaching inquiry, whether the instruction currently does or doesn't use another model.  This offers practical benefits, because we don't have to design DP-specific activities, instead we can just add DP to already-available activities using other models.

• is distinctive in important ways,* with special features that produce added valueDP can be especially valuable in a well-designed combination of models, contributing to a synergism that provides extra benefits for students.

Together it's “yes and” with “yes” due to similarities, with “and” for distinctive added value.

 

* Here are three distinctive features of Design Process (DP).     { You can quickly learn DP – and these features – with your discoveries plus my explanations. }

DP logically integrates Design and Science, because the core of its evaluation-logic (when 3 Elements are used in 3 Comparisons) leads naturally to it being used for both General Design (aka Design, the usual term) and Science-Design (aka Science, usually).  By contrast, most other models are for a process of either Design or Science, but not both.  When students understand the smooth integrating of design-with-science in my model this will help them develop a smooth integrating of design-with-science in their thinking while they're solving problems.     {more about the differences when we're comparing my model for Design-AND-Science with other models that are Design-OR-Science}

DP is a family of models:  One reason for the educational utility of DP is because it's a Model (capitalized) that is a logically organized family of models.  This logical “family structure” lets a teacher use different models in a 4-Stage progression of learning so students can begin with simplicity and gradually learn the complexities in an intuitive progression.  The progression is intuitive and it works well, because each model is a different version of the same Model.  Each model is "a different version" of the Model, with a different description of the same process;  each model features different aspects of the Model.    { due to these differences, each model accurately describes in different ways, and each model is educationally useful in different ways. }

DP is modular:  Another distinctive of Design Process (DP) is how its modularity encourages a flexibly customized coordinating of problem-solving process.*  DP describes our problem-solving process with short-term Actions (that can be functionally connected to form short-term Sequences) but other models typically describe longer-term Phases that contain the shorter-term Actions & Sequences of DP;  using DP can help students understand how their creative-and-critical productive thinking happens during the short-term Actions & Sequences of DP.  And because our Models (my DP and another Model) operate at different “levels” (with short-term in DP, long-term in other Models) it's less likely that our Models will compete with each other to perform the same teaching-functions during instruction.  Instead we can use the different Models for different functions, so they will be supportive instead of competitive, with each contributing to the instruction.*   For thinking about DP's modularity, a useful analogy is using LEGO Bricks (the short-term Actions & Sequences of DP) to make LEGO Objects (the longer-term Phases of other Models),  or using small atoms & molecules (the Actions & Sequences of DP) to form larger objects (the Phases of other Models).     {* Wikipedia says "modularity is the degree to which a system's components may be separated and recombined, often with the benefit [thus produced] of flexibility and variety in use." }

* Structures and Strategies:  Typically a model-for-process is educationally useful in two ways, by providing structures (for instruction) and strategies (for thinking).  Each model has its own structures & strategies, so each offers its own benefits for students.  When we effectively combine the structures & strategies from two (or more) models, we combine their benefits.

 

The full-length Part 2C ends by describing possibilities for combining DP with other Models, especially with POE (Predict-Observe-Explain) and CER (Claim-Evidence-Reasoning) but also with others.

 

[[ iou – During mid-June I'll add a little more content, either above or below this point. ]]

 


 

 

Longer Overview

Both overviews, Short & Longer, have two partsPart 1 describes "educational goals (and strategies for achieving these goals) that are generally accepted" and "how using Design Process can help us achieve our goals."  Part 2 explains what Design Process (my model for Problem-Solving Process, aka Design-Thinking Process) is & isn't, and how it can serve a useful function in our overall strategies for achieving the worthy goals in Part 1.   /   You can quickly understand Design Process by learning from your discoveries and my explanations in the beginning of Part 2.

 

 

Part 1 – Ideas about Education

These ideas are summarized in the Short Overview (so it should be read first) and are examined in more depth below, to help you understand more thoroughly-and-accurately.

 

Education for Problem Solving should have

a Wide Scope for Problem-Solving Activities

When we decide to reject the restrictions of un-necessarily narrow thinking, we can creatively use broad definitions for education (it's just learning from experience) and for problem-solving experiencesa problem is an opportunity to make things better in any area of life, and whenever you try to make things better you are problem solving, so your problem-solving experiences include almost everything you do in life.*   This wide scope makes it easier for teachers to find problem-solving activities (= problem-solving experiences) that are fun and life-relevant, that will help students improve their problem-solving skills for everyday living.  And it lets us build two-way educational bridges between school and life, to increase the motivations of students.  Because solving problems (by making things better) is useful in all areas of life, improved problem-solving skills are useful in all areas, producing (with widespread agreement) many benefits that improve our quality of life.

* 5 objectives and 2 ways:  The wide scope (including almost everything) occurs because you can define a problem-solving objective by deciding to improve a product, activity, relationship, strategy,* and/or theory.  Or you can classify-and-label objectives in a different way that's a better fit for your educational situation, that will motivate more of your students to improve their own personal education so with personal problem solving they can "make things better" in their own lives.   /   Also, we can solve a problem by “making things better” when we increase quality for any aspect of life, or maintain quality by minimizing a potential decrease of quality;  i.e. we can make life better than it otherwise would be (without our problem-solving actions) by making a helpful change or by resisting a harmful change.   /   We can show students the wide scope by describing the variety of problem-solving objectives (for a product, activity, relationship, strategy, theory) and the two basic ways to get better quality (by increasing beneficial, decreasing detrimental).  We can help students recognize the many ways that they often, throughout every day, are trying to “make things better” or “not make things worse” or “not let things get worse,” trying to make wise decisions about use-of-time so they can do the actions that are needed to make life run smoothly.  A student can make things better by increasing life-quality or maintaining it, for themself and/or others, with effects that are small or large, are quickly achieved or require a long-term commitment, for all aspects of life.

* Decision Making is Problem Solving:  One reason for the wide scope of Problem-Solving Activities is because our strategies include the many strategic decisions (small & large) we continually make in everyday life.  These often begin by asking yourself “what is the best use of my time right now” and deciding what to do now.  You can improve your quality of life (now & later) in many ways, including your decisions to be personally proactive by designing strategies to improve your performing and learning.  And you can develop-and-do strategies for helping other people improve their quality of life.

 

education:  In another broad definition, education is learning from life-experiences.

educators:  With this view of education, each person is an educator-of-self, and (in many situations) an educator-of-others.  You are a learner (doing internal education) and a teacher (doing external education).  You are being a teacher whenever you help another person get more life-experiences, and/or learn more from their life-experiences.  This happens whether or not you're doing it consciously, whether or not you're doing it as a profession.  During our daily living, every person does some teaching, sometimes, informally.*  But instead of viewing our actions as “teaching others” a humble perspective that's useful because it's more respectful (and more accurate) is “helping others learn” due to their own actions, with us merely serving as facilitators who provide useful experiences.   /   * Most of the time we're serving as amateur teachers, with varying levels of skill.  Sometimes, some people are professional teachers (being paid) with levels of skill that vary, but on average are higher than those of amateur teachers.  In my opinion, being a professional teacher is one of the most challenging careers;  people who do it – especially when they do it skillfully – should be highly respected, and greatly appreciated because what they do is so important for individuals and for society.

 

better living:  More people will have better lives when we're trying to “make things better” for them, wanting to affect their lives in ways that are beneficial for them, that make life better.  We can do this in many ways.  But it's especially useful when we help a person more fully develop their whole-person potentials, so they are becoming a better version of themself, growing into the kind of “ideal person” they want to be.     { more: Kind Empathy in Thinking-and-Actions that – as in my favorite movie, and ideas from my sister – Help Others achieve Their Goals with Empathy in Relationships }

better education:  When we're teaching others we can produce better education, with better learning, when students get more experiences and we help them learn more from their experiences.  {more about getting more and learning more}    Because we want students to have problem-solving experiences that are better for learning, their...

 

Problem-Solving Activities should be FUN and USEFUL:     {short version}

We want to develop activities that are fun for students, and will be useful for them.

    • FUN in Two Ways:   An activity will be fun when students enjoy the experience – due to the intrinsic nature of the activity (because the problem-objective is interesting for them, and so are their own actions)* – AND when they anticipate success & do succeed.  We can help students increase their anticipating-and-actualizing of success by using a series of activities with gradually increasing appropriate difficulty,* aiming for levels of challenge that are always “just right” with a well-designed problem (as in a well-written mystery story) so students won't be bored if it's too easy, or discouraged if it's too difficult, so they will be challenged but they will succeed and will enjoy the satisfaction of success.     {* when a problem is interesting it will stimulate their curiosity, providing intrinsic motivation that reinforces with their humanly-innate love of learning, and if repeated experiences show them “learning is fun” they will develop a desire for lifelong learning that's driven by their continuing curiosity.}    {an average level-of-difficulty can be increased in a progression, and the level can be adjusted for individual students with adaptive computer technologies, or customized guiding by a teacher, and in other ways.}

    • USEFUL for Students  We want activities to be educationally useful for students, and this means personally useful for them, with "useful" defined by their goals.  We should try to understand the goals of students – by learning their perspectives, thinking with empathy – so we can use their goals to guide our goals for their education, in our goal-directed designing of their problem-solving activities and (in broader planning) their curriculum & instruction.  When we effectively use two wide scopes – for problem-solving objectives and process – we can show students how their problem-solving skills will transfer from school into their lives.  If they believe that these transfers will occur, we can build educational bridges that motivate them to pursue their own...

Personal Education:   We can help students develop personal motivations to pursue their personal goals by using education, so they make it their personal education.  We can ask students to think about their personal goals for life, and help them develop a proactive problem-solving approach for their own personal education when they ask “how can I solve a problem – by making my education better so I can make my life better – by learning more from my experiences, both inside & outside school, to make things better for myself (and for others),* to help me achieve my goals for life?”   /   * With whole-person education we can help students develop virtuous goals that will promote long-term deep satisfactions because they have win-win goals in life, wanting to make things better for themselves and also for other people.     {students with stories - personal diversity & activity diversity for success}

 

Two Wide Scopes – for Activities and Process:  A student will be more motivated to pursue their own personal education when – by using Design Process – we show them the wide scopes of Problem-Solving Activities (that include almost everything they do in their school-life and non-school-life) AND of Problem-Solving Process (that is similar for almost everything they do).  These two wide scopes help us...

 

Build EDUCATIONAL BRIDGES

Students doing Design ThinkingMy simplest model for problem-solving Design Process* – showing how we Define a Problem and then try to Solve this Problem by creatively Generating Ideas and critically Evaluating Ideas – helps us show students how they use a similar process of problem solving for almost everything they do in life, in their school-life and nonschool-life.  This broad scope lets us build two-way bridges for students – from life into school, and school into life – that will improve their transfers of learning (inside & outside school) and transitions of attitudes (by improving their motivations for wanting to learn, and their confidence in being able to learn).    {more about building bridges}

* my models range from simple to more-complete, with each model being educationally useful in different ways.    {using Models-for-Process}

 

Building Bridges with a Wide-Spiral Curriculum:  One effective way to build bridges is with a Goal-Directed Designing of Curriculum & Instruction — by Defining Goals for desired outcomes (for ideas-and-skills we want students to learn) and Designing Instruction (to give students useful experiences, and help them learn more from their experiences) — to design a wide spiral curriculum that has wide scope (so related learning experiences are coordinated across different areas) and uses spiral repetitions (so learning experiences are coordinated over time).    {more}

 

Building Bridges between

Problem-Solving Skill and

Subject-Area Knowledge:

The beginning of my simplest model for Design Process is to "learn so you understand more accurately-and-thoroughly," because productive problem solving is the result of effectively combining creative-and-critical thinking with relevant knowledge.  Thus, one benefit of better subject-area knowledge is better problem-solving skills.  IF students want to improve their problem-solving skills – because they believe this will improve their lives – and IF they think improved knowledge will help them improve their skills, THEN they will be motivated to improve their knowledge, as part of their personal education.   /   In our whole-person goals for education, problem-solving skills should supplement – not replace – basic skills of reading & math, and knowledge in sciences, history, literature, social studies.    {and we can help students use Design Process to develop-and-use thinking strategies for how to learn basic skills & knowledge more effectively, as in strategies for Self-Regulated Learning.} 

 
 
my philosophy of writing:   Education is complex.  In our efforts to understand it more thoroughly-and-accurately, many ideas are useful.  In this Longer Overview I'm not “keeping it short & simple” by eliminating useful ideas;  instead I'm just aiming for high ratios of my ideas/words and your learning/time.

 
 

Working Together to Improve Education

by combining our Understandings & Skills

 

I'm an enthusiastic educator who enjoys talking with other teachers, simply to share ideas and learn from each other.

I also want to collaborate on projects of mutual interest — and doing this as a free volunteer will be fine with me — working cooperatively to develop our ideas for how to help students improve their creative-and-critical thinking skills and their effective using of problem-solving process in all areas of life.  I think many other educators also are deciding (like I have) that strategies for improving our problem-solving education are worth developing and (by converting our strategy-ideas into classroom-actions) actualizing.  To do this developing-and-actualizing, collaboration is necessary because although I have some understandings and skills, I need help from other educators who have developed other understandings and skills.

I recognize that compared with me, many others have deeper understandings of...  classroom teaching and student attitudes & behaviors, motivations & confidences;   and the educational culture that is created by people (students, teachers, administrators, parents, community) who feel & think & do, individually and together, to produce the systems ecology and learning atmosphere in our schools;*   and how these cultures-ecologies-atmospheres are experienced differently, and have different effects, on students with differing backgrounds;   and because of this, how we can develop strategies that are more effective for improving diversity and equity in our schools;   and how we can use evidence-based strategies to promote effective learning and to improve transfers of skills & transitions of attitudes.   Or they have developed practical skills in finding and/or designing enjoyable problem-solving activities (involving challenges, developing computer-based games, telling stories or mysteries,... plus discussions) and doing them in fun ways.  Or in coordinating the activities of many teachers into a synergistically supportive wide-spiral curriculum.  And they have the authority to decide (in their positions as teachers, curriculum developers, administrators) that “yes, we'll do these activities.”     {* my ideas about educational ecologies }

Collaboration is necessary because although I feel skilled in some ways (like developing the ideas in this website), I need help from educators with other skills — from those who understand the perspectives of classroom teachers more accurately & thoroughly, or are skilled activity developers, and have other kinds of useful experience & expertise — so that by working together with coordinated cooperation, creatively combining your understandings-and-skills with mine, we can design curriculum-and-instruction that is a good match for how students like to learn (and are able to learn), and how teachers like to teach.   /   You can contact me by email, craigru57-att-yahoo-daut-caum.    { another description of possibilities for collaborating }

 

co-creating better education:  Earlier I explain how Part 1 is mostly ideas "you already know and probably accept" so you're thinking “yes” or “yes and” or (especially when I make claims about my model-for-process) maybe “yes but” or “no because,” and Part 2 is about "my innovative model for Design Process (i.e. for Problem-Solving Process, aka Design-Thinking Process) that... can help us achieve the worthy educational goals in Part 1."  In the two parts, my goals are similar – to show the educational benefits of using Design Process – yet different.  My main goal in Part 1 is to describe a “common ground” for us, where we mostly agree (but with some differences) about shared goals that we can pursue with strategies-and-actions.  And in Part 2, hopefully you'll see how my understandings and skills will be useful when we're working together, because my models (in Part 2) can help us achieve our goals (in Part 1).  With collaborations that combine our understandings and skills we can build a creative community for the purpose of pursuing shared goals, working cooperatively to co-create goals-directed curriculum & instruction that is a better match for how students like to learn (and are able to learn), and how teachers like to teach.     { it's important to consider "how teachers [and schools] like to teach" because Teachers Have Rational Reasons to Not Teach Thinking Skills }

As explained earlier, my goal is "to help students improve their problem-solving skills in all areas of life."  ASAP, I want to begin working as an enthusiastic volunteer (willing to be an unpaid co-developer) with other dedicated educators.  I want to see my ideas actualized in practical ways, by combining them with your ideas, working together to achieve your goals.  Or you may want to just use the ideas, without me, working among yourselves.

When we're pursuing shared goals, maybe one useful tool is using my model (for Design Process) to help students learn principles for problem-solving process.  Maybe.  You can think about what your school is now, and how you would like it to change, and ask...  What kinds of problem-solving “inquiry experiences” should our school (or my classroom) provide for students?  How can we help them learn more from their experiences? will we supplement their Experiences (of Doing Inquiry) with Reflections (on their Experiences), to teach Principles (for Doing Inquiry), so they have Experience + Reflection ➞ Principles?   Will we organize these Principles into a Model for Problem-Solving Process?  If yes, how? (by using a process-of-inquiry to learn principles-for-inquiry, with E + R  P ?)   If yes, why? (i.e. what are the educational benefits of organizing Principles into a Model?)   Will we use Craig's model-for-process? and combine his model with other models?  What kinds of experiences should we give students, in their activities? 

 


 

4 Levels of Problem-Solving Activities:

During their school activities a student can have Experiences (of Doing Inquiry with Design-Inquiry and/or Science-Inquiry when they are solving problems), and do Reflections (on their Experiences), and learn Principles (for Doing Inquiry) like those in my models-for-process, with a possible result of Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles.   /   Of course, students can get valuable experiences in all three ways, when they do an activity (Experiences) and reflect on it (Reflections) and learn from it (Principles).     {what is inquiry?}

For each aspect of problem-solving Inquiry, a classroom teacher can decide Yes or No, choosing whether to add Experience and Reflection and Principles.  Their choices about ERP lead to 4 levels of Problem-Solving Activities, by giving students no Experiences;  or only Experiences;  or Experiences + Reflections;  or (as I think is best) Experiences + Reflections + Principles.     {* of course, students can get “E's and R's and P's” on their own, so this table shows only teacher-planned E's and R's "in a classroom", and explicitly-taught P's.}

 0 
no Experiences (in a classroom)*
1
 Experiences   
2
 Experiences +Reflections
3
 Experiences +Reflections+Principles 
 

Above I describe some questions you can ask — about ERP-Activities {do you want none, or only-E, or E+R, or E+RP?} and Principles {is Experience-plus-Principles better than only-Experience?  and is it useful to organize Principles-for-process into a Model-for-process?} — and here are my responses:

If students use my Model of Design Process (in a system of Experience + Reflection ➞ Principles), will this help them develop a better understanding of problem-solving process?  Certainly.  But... will this improved understanding-of-process help students improve their doing-of-process?  Probably.

Why just "probably" instead of Yes or No?  Because currently I don't know enough about evidence for (or against) a claim that a better understanding of thinking-process (gained by using a model for thinking-process) will help students improve their performing of thinking-process.  And I'm certain there is no empirical data about the effects of using Design Process, because it has never been used (afaik) in a classroom or school.  But in this page (Parts 1 & 2) a section about why educators should use Design Process I explain why many benefits for students should be expected, with realistically-optimistic predictions based on what we know about thinking (including the cognition & metacognition that students regulate with thinking strategies for learning and/or performing) and transfers of learning plus motivations to learn & confidence about learning and visually-logical organizing of knowledge and more.  Based on what we know, we should expect an effectively-designed combination of “experience plus reflection-and-principles” to be more educationally effective than experience by itself, to help students improve their creative-and-critical thinking skills and their whole-process skills when they are solving problems (with General Design) and understanding the world (with Science-Design).  And we have reasons to expect that when Principles are organized into a Model (like my Model for Design Process) this will be useful for education, so the possibilities are worth exploring and developing.

 

rational reasons to not teach thinking skills:     {short version}

An instruction method will produce large-scale improvements only if the method is educationally effective AND is widely adopted by teachers, schools, districts, and states.  When making a decision (yes or no) whether to use instruction for thinking skills, many factors are considered, including some rational reasons to say No.  These could involve...

   Ideas versus Knowledge:  With limited teaching time, maybe* there will be competition between ideas and knowledge.  If teachers want to teach lots of knowledge, they will not want to invest the classroom time that is required to also teach skills.    /   Or maybe not, if developing-and-using strategies for thinking leads to improved learning of knowledge.

  Definitions for Quality:  If the quality of teaching is defined mainly by students’ performance on standardized exams that emphasize knowledge and basic skills (in reading & math),* teachers (and their schools) who want a high rating will “teach to the exam” by emphasizing knowledge and basic skills, even if they personally would rather increase the emphasis on problem-solving skills.     {* By using these narrow definitions, we're “hoping for A, but rewarding B.” }

  Preparation Time:  Even if a teacher does want to “go for it” with a new way to teach skills, becoming effective with the new method may require more preparation time than they would want to invest.  (or should be asked to invest, with reasonable expectations)

  Measuring Thinking Skills:  Accurate assessment of higher-level thinking skills is difficult and it requires more time, with subjective judgments that many teachers don't enjoy.

  Classroom Management:  Teachers may imagine that during problem-solving activities (to help students improve thinking skills) their classroom discipline will be more complex and difficult, with possibilities for problems.     { But if problem-solving activities lead to increased motivation, the result can be more cooperation with fewer disruptions. }

 

reducing the impact of reasons:  We can think about possible “reasons for No” (these & others) and whether trying to reduce their impact would make our decisions more educationally productive.     { more about reasons – a context and some details }    { Challenges in K-12 Engineering Education by Jonathan Dietz }

 

my humility about reasons:  As explained above, "I recognize [with justifiable humility] that compared with me, many others have deeper understandings" of many things, including the reasons for decisions (made by teachers & schools) about what to teach and how.  I realize that the ideas above will need to be revised, so I want to learn from others and then do the revising, in an effort to more accurately describe the decision-making of teachers & schools.

 


 

• Learning for Their Future:   We can help students want to learn for their future, to invest in their own personal education.  How?  Teachers can build-and-use educational bridges to promote transitions of attitudes (for improved motivation & confidence) and transfers of ideas-and-skills to different situations (this is the usual meaning of transfer) and also (in the essential purpose of education) between different times.  With a transfer-of-learning from past to present, the ideas & skills you learned in the past are helping you now. {imagine that "you" are a student who is learning for their future}   With a transfer-of-learning from present to future, what you're learning now will help you in the future.  Maya Angelou described how your learning (in the past and present) affects your performance in the present & future, now & later:  Based on what you've learned in the past, you "Do the best you can [now] until you know better. Then [later] when you know better, do better."  How?  Later, when you have learned from experience (you have been educated) so you "know better," you can "do better."  When you learn, in your future you can be more effective in "making things better," and this improved problem-solving skill will be a beneficial result of your education, of your learning from experience in the past.   /   How?  As explained below, you can "do better" in two ways, by improving your potential performing (with better learning) and your actual performing (with better performing).

 

• present and/or future – Performing and/or Learning:   When you want your best possible performance now, you're on-task with a Performance Objective.  When you want your best possible learning now, so you can improve your best possible performance later, you're on-task with a Learning Objective.  How do you improve your future performing?  The past-and-present process is described by Maya Angelou, "when you know better, [you] do better."  In your future this "do better" will happen in two ways, with past-to-present Learning and present Performing.  First, you will "know better" because you have learned from experience, so your potential performing has improved, and you can do better.  Second, this potential must be actualized by converting “can do better” into “are doing better” with high-quality actual performing.   When {due to learning skillfully} you know better, you can do better, and maybe {if you are performing skillfully} you will do better.   /   a summary:  After your past learning has improved your present potential performing, this potential (in principle, as a possibility) to “do it better” will be actualized (in reality) when you do present actual performing with high quality.  To perform well, you combine past learning with present performing.

Why is "and/or" in the title of this section?  Because when you're doing an action, you can try to maximize your learning now, or your performing now, or both.  For example, think about the goals for a basketball player, and team, during an early-season practice (when the main goal is to learn better now, to prepare for their future, so they can perform better later) compared with a late-season tournament game (when the main goal is to perform better now, in their present), and how this difference-in-objective affects everything.   /   trade-offs between now & later:  Sometimes it's useful to tolerate a decrease in present performance (short-term excellence, now) if this will increase future performance (for long-term excellence, later), as in changing my tennis backhand.    {more about performing and/or learning and/or enjoying and student motivations from short-term enjoyings and long-term satisfactions}

   

• present-to-future transfer with Growth Mindset:     {short version}

Sometimes a student is motivated to improve their learning-and-performing, but doesn't feel confident about their ability to succeed.  Teachers should encourage students to supplement their current self-perception (based on what they've done in the past) with optimism (about what they can do now & in the future) by persuading them that they actually are able to improve now, so they really can “do things better” in their future.  This optimistic view-of-self is a growth mindset.  When they ask themself “how well am I doing in this area of life?”* — and answer “not well enough” with honestly accurate self-awareness — they are thinking “not yet” (instead of “not ever”) because they are confident that in this area of life (as in most areas, including the most important areas) they can “grow” by improving their skills, when they invest intelligent effort in improving.  When they develop-and-use a better growth mindset, this motivates them because they have a confident belief that their efforts to self-improve (as in personal education for life) will be rewarded.     {much more - practical utility - instead of a theory that personal intelligence is fixed, develop an incremental theory of intelligence - we can help students develop a growth mindset - e.g. with a simplistic analogy of brain-as-muscle to describe how our muscles & brains both improve/grow when they are used.}

* A reason to ask “how well am I doing?” is to learn from experience, for self-education.  Personally, I like to learn.  When I make a mistake, I want to learn from the experience so I can “do it better” the next time.  Therefore I ask myself “why?” and often the answer is “my process wasn't effective.”  Therefore, in an effort to do better I've found that it's beneficial to develop-and-use a Checklist for Problem-Solving Process.

 

area-to-area transfers,

from School into Life:

I claim that a major benefit of using Design Process will be transfers of problem-solving skills between areas, AND that if we can persuade students about this claim – so they think their learning in school-areas will transfer into life-areas – they will be motivated to pursue their own personal education by adopting a problem-solving goal of making their own education better, because they are imagining how improving their present School-Learning will improve their future Life-Living.

 

Is this claim-for-transfer justified?  I think “yes” due to logic:     { This logic is organized as “1A+1B, 2A+2B” in the Short Overview. }

A highly respected book — How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience and School, commissioned by the National Research Council to help teachers convert educational research into effective educational practice — says "the ultimate goal of learning" is transfer, so it's "a major goal of schooling," and two of their recommendations (based on scientific research about learning) are that to increase transfer, we should:  A) teach knowledge in multiple contexts, and   B) teach knowledge in a form that can be easily generalized.  Both of these can be improved by using Design Process:

A) When we choose to define it broadly a problem is any opportunity to make things better, and our problem-solving activities can include almost everything in life.  This wide scope lets our students do problem-solving activities in multiple contexts, to increase transfers of problem-solving skills.    { And it helps us build bridges to increase motivations of students when they believe that – due to transfers from school into life – improving their School Life NOW will improve their Whole Life LATER. }

B) with Design Process the problem-solving process is similar for most problem-solving objectives, so we can teach knowledge – The Principles of Design Process that are The Principles of Problem Solving – in a form that is easily generalized.

IF these claims of How People Learn (about A & B) are justified – and “yes” is the conclusion of most experts in the field of Learning Transfer – and IF my claims (about A & B) are justified, THEN we can logically predict that using Design Process should help a student transfer their problem-solving skills Across Areas (from their School-Life into their Whole-Life) and Through Time (from Past to Present and into their Future).   /   When we show students how their problem-solving skills can transfer from School into Life – so they're thinking “a better Education NOW will help me have a better Life LATER” – they will be motivated to pursue their own personal education.

{ We also can help students develop-and-use metacognitive thinking strategies for increasing transfer. }

 

Better Education – More and More:   Your education is your learning from life-experiences so you can learn how to improve, how to become more effective at “making things better” in all areas of your life.  You can produce better education by getting more experiences (in Step 1) and (Step 2 below) learning more from your experiences.  In each step, learning is promoted by developing-and-using a growth mindset so you are expecting to learn from your experiences (with intentional learning), and you are investing the intelligent effort that will help you learn more effectively from all experiences – whether you view the result as a failure or success or (more likely) some of each – in all areas of life.

 

Step 2Learning More from Experiences, with Thinking Strategies:   You often can learn more when you develop-and-use strategies for thinking to effectively regulate your metacognition by deciding when to avoid it or use it, and how.  In a metacognitive reflection activity, a teacher asks students to reflect on – to observe and think about – “what did I do, and think?” and “then what happened,” and also “with different actions, could the results have been better?” so they can learn more from the experience and do things better the next time, to improve their performing-learning-enjoying.  Of course, Reflection is the central part of Experience-Reflection-Principles when you're using a process-of-inquiry to help students learn principles-for-inquiry.      {other valuable thinking strategies are Self-Regulated Learning and Coordinating Your Process by Making Action-Decisions}    {more about Cognitive-and-Metacognitive Thinking Strategies and Using Metacognition to Increase Transfer}

 

Step 2 – Thinking Strategies for using Conscious-and-Subconscious:  Scientists have discovered that in many situations of daily life, much of our thinking and decision making is done subconsciously.  Our system of conscious-and-subconcious thinking is a complex integrating of conscious mental cognition with subconscious mental processing.  In this system our subconscious offers benefits (by doing some things extremely well) but also has disadvantages.  You can use executive control to optimize your thinking system (so your conscious & subconscious can each do what it does best) if you develop-and-use a variation of the thinking strategy above – with metacognition changed to subconscious processing – so you are “effectively regulating your subconscious processing by deciding when to reduce it or increase it,” with you reducing its effects (this is possible) instead of avoiding it (which is impossible for subconscious processing, although it's a realistic goal for conscious metacognition).   /   Here are a few possible ways to imagine relationships between your executive controller & your subconscious processor:  as supervisor & valuable worker;  coach & valuable player;  craftsman & useful tool.   /   note: Some people distinguish between subconscious & unconscious, but I won't do that here, instead will use subconscious to mean any kind of non-conscious processing.

note:  This is a long sub-section;  it continues inside this gray box so you can easily see “how long it is” and “what follows” (it's Step 1 - getting more Experiences, more Adventures) if you want to move on.

You can use executive control to optimize your thinking system:

How?  You begin by understanding that each kind of thinking (your conscious mental cognition and subconscious mental processing) is strong-and-beneficial in some ways but is weak-and-detrimental in other ways, and using this knowledge effectively.  Then you can develop-and-use thinking strategies by consciously deciding — based on accurate knowledge of principles (about both kinds of thinking) generally, and specifically of yourself and your situation — the ways you want to optimize your thinking system.     {note:  In this section, for simplicity I often say "you" when I should say “you, me, and others” because the principles are similar for all of us.}

What?  I claim that problem-solving objectives include almost everything we do because we're usually trying to “make things better” — or at least “not make things worse,” and also make wise decisions about use-of-time so we can “do the actions that are needed to make life run smoothly” — in a variety of ways, with problem-solving objectives for a product, activity, relationship, strategy, and/or theory.  I also claim that we use a similar problem-solving process for almost everything we do.  But if "much of our thinking and decision making is done subconsciously," we should ask “do we use a similar process for both conscious and subconscious?

What?  I think a “yes” is justifiable IF we view the process generally, as in my model's simplest Stage 1:  you Learn (more) so you can Understand (more), Define an Objective (for what you want to make better), Define Goals (for what "better" would be), then creatively Generate Ideas (that are Options for a Problem-Solution) and critically Evaluate Ideas, then Make Decisions and Do Actions.  Or if our view of the process is Stage 2: you Evaluate an Option by remembering Observations (of what happened in the past with similar Situations & Options) or making Observations (of what's happening now) and making Predictions (by imagining what would happen in the future if you actualize this Option, or what will happen if you don't).  Or we can view with Stage 3 when you also are motivated to do a Reality Check if you're “surprised” because what happens isn't what you expected to happen, isn't what you predicted would happen, based on your theories about “what happens in the world.”  Together, these Stages can help us understand how we use a similar problem-solving process (with Learn & Observe & Predict, Generate & Evaluate, Decide & Do) for processing that is subconscious and/or conscious.   /   I claim that your “subconscious thinking” does all of these things – usually very quickly – when you get Information (from our senses) about what is happening and you process this Information (trying to understand), and you define what you want (it's your Goals), and Generate Ideas-for-Options (ways to get what you want) and (by remembering & predicting) you Evaluate Ideas, make a decision, and do action(s).

How?  You should try to have conscious control of your subconscious processing, with your Executive Functioning.  You should regulate your subconscious (as with your metacognition) by deciding when to use it, and how.

Why?  Your subconscious needs supervision because it's “primitive” in its goals, with survival (plus genes-transmission) as primary evolutionary driving forces, but these primitive goals won't necessarily lead to wise decisions in our modern world.  Too often your subconscious wants win-lose (if the short-term result will benefit yourself) instead of aiming for win-win (if it's possible, and it would produce better long-term results).  And you can have semi-rational motives for psychological self-protection, e.g. reducing cognitive dissonance by using motivated reasoning with bias.  And allowing our subconscious to make decisions can be detrimental in other ways.     {a reminder: "you" means “you, me, us”}

How?  It can be useful to “effectively regulate [but not eliminate] your subconscious processing by deciding when to reduce it or increase it.”  You should not try to “eliminate your subconscious” because it's impossible, AND because your subconscious thinking often produces beneficial results.  Here are two examples (of many possible) from very different areas of life.

    problem solving:  Experts in stimulating creativity recommend using a subconscious process of creative incubation.  You do this by first consciously giving your subconscious mind useful information (knowledge about a problem-area, and goals for a satisfactory solution,...) plus an intention to creatively Generate Ideas for a Solution;  then you do something else, i.e. you delay your “conscious work on solving the problem” so your subconscious thinking can work on solving the problem;  then you return to consciously trying to solve the problem;  if necessary, you continue cycles of conscious effort and unconscious incubation.  This strategy often works well, by promoting productive interactions between levels of thinking (modes of thinking) that are conscious & subconscious, with your subconscious processing of ideas being stimulated-and-guided (but not consciously) by conscious thinking, during the time you are subconsciously Generating Ideas and Evaluating Ideas.  You first do the conscious foundation, then let your subconscious freely do its work.   {more about creative incubation}
    playing tennis:  Timothy Gallwey – who wrote The Inner Game of Tennis (and of Skiing, Golf, Winning, Music, Work, Stress) – recommends having some conscious control, but mostly using your subconscious “tennis player” (with lots of playing experience & muscle memories, able to effectively coordinate the actions of all your body parts plus your eyes & brain) by “letting the player do the playing” with minimal hindering by your conscious “tennis teller” (that gives slow-and-clumsy verbal explanations of how to play).  The inner game is summarized (by Wikipedia) as making "non-judgmental observations" and then "if the observations are accurate, the person's body will adjust and correct automatically to achieve best performance."

 

Step 1Getting More Experiences, with Adventuring:   By getting more experiences, you can learn more.  If you're not overly worried about making mistakes when it doesn't matter much – by contrast with “don't make a mistake” situations like mountain climbing or car driving – you can decide to “go for it” in a wider range of situations.  By doing this you'll get a wider range of experiences, with more opportunities for lifelong learning in your personal education.  You'll be using an adventurous “wanting to learn” strategy to increase your experience-and-learning, like Pablo Picasso who wanted to “often be doing what I cannot do now, so I may learn how to do it.”  You also can use this strategy, so you can get more experiences and learn more.  In school, teachers can help students look forward to challenging activities, including their problem-solving adventures, with a growth mindset.  As one aspect of their personal education, we can encourage students to view their experiences as opportunities for intentional learning (defined as "the practice of treating every experience as an opportunity to learn something") and to seek opportunities for learning that will help them achieve their personal goals for life.     {we can learn from both failure and success, as illustrated in activities of solving, improvising, driving, juggling, skiing, backhanding, pronouncing, and welding}    {but... when you try something new, you may wonder if "cannot do now" will become “cannot do ever” so we ask... in a student's thinking & feeling, what are the interactions between an adventurous attitude, with a desire to get more experiences, and a desire to avoid failure?}     { Step 2 }

 

Getting Useful Experiences  In every classroom, students have stories.  These cause variations, from one student to another, in the usefulness of experience-producing activities that are opportunities for learning.  Although all people are similar in the most important ways, each student has a personal history that makes them unique, with their own distinctives.  The “story” of each student is formed by the complex blending of abilities they inherit, plus attitudes (like motivations & confidences) and skills (using multiple “intelligences” in many areas of life) they develop, with personal growth (mental, emotional, social, physical) affected by characteristics (gender, race,...) and situations (produced by family, friends, community, school) that affect their support (practical & emotional, by family, social groups, school), feelings of love & security, and quality of previous education (re: decisions about instruction by schools, attitudes & actions of teachers and peers,...), with their personal growth affected by their whole-life experiences in their school-life plus nonschool-lifeWe see mutual interactions between psychologies & sociologies in stories of whole persons & their whole communities.   /   By using your own rememberings (of past students) and imaginings (of possible stories, such as a before-and-after story of how a teacher helped make life better for a student) you can see how multiple factors combine to produce a wide variety of student attitudes, abilities & skills, and whole-life situations.  And you can see why, due to this variety, we should think about the beneficial connections between...

Student Diversity and Activities Diversity:   All of us are similar in the most important ways, but "each student has a personal history that makes them unique," and some students will experience more success in problem-solving activities than in other kinds of activities.*  The emotional & motivational rewards of success – and we want to promote this for more students, with wider diversity – will improve their self-image, and their motivations for learning if they see their schoolwork as part of a personal education that is personally useful, is motivated and guided by their pursuit of personal goals for life.  We can use our observations — that students differ,  and whole-person education has many kinds of goals,  and different goals are better taught with different teaching approaches,  and each approach has (as in 80-20) diminishing “marginal returns” — plus logic, to conclude that "we should try to design eclectic instruction by creatively combining the best features of different approaches into a synergistic blend that produces an optimal overall result (with greater good for a greater number) in helping students achieve worthy educational goals."    {* and "more success" often co-occurs with “more intrinsic enjoying” for two kinds of fun}   {of course, an eclectic blend should include inquiry activities and also other activities that have been shown to be beneficial for students, based on our experiences}   {more - an overview and 5-step progression}

Improving Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion  Although "some students will experience more success in problem-solving activities than in other kinds of activities," others won't.  We want to design activities that will help more students, with wider diversity, "experience more success."  We want to provide opportunities for all to succeed, and design activities so more will succeed.  While we're designing activities, we should consider the personal histories & current situations of students and we should use the results of experience (first-hand & second-hand) when we have observed the results of different actions – by asking “what was done (by us or by others) and what happened?” – in order to be more effective in promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion.  {a personal perspective: For doing these things, with appropriate humility I recognize that I'll need lots of help from other educators.}   We should design coordinated systems of evidence-based actions — with productive actions at levels ranging from larger scales (for institutions, to improve societal systems & educational systems) to smaller scales (for students, to improve their educational experiences & outcomes, by carefully designing important details of instruction, regarding what is done and how it's done, including interpersonal interactions) — in our efforts to improve the performing and learning of all students.  One kind of productive action is building two-way bridges (past-to-present from Life into School, and present-to-future from School into Life) that will improve transfers of learningin time (past-to-present & present-to-future) and between areas (in school-life & nonschool-life) — and transitions in attitudes by improving student motivations (wanting to learn for personal education) and confidences (expecting to learn, with a growth mindset).  We want to increase transfers & transitions for more students, to help them experience success in school and (the ultimate goal) achieve success in life.  Education should help all students more fully actualize their whole-person potentials.  We want to “open up the options” for all students, so each will say “yes, I can do this” for a wider variety of subject-options in school and career-options in life, so they can choose wisely by asking “among my many options in school & life, what are the roads I want to travel (and the goals I want to pursue) so I can build a better life?”

 
Our creative-and-logical process of
building Educational Bridges now
will be explored more deeply than in
the introductory summary by asking...
Why should we build bridges, and How?
What should the bridges do for students?

 

short version & overview-summary
 
Why – Some Benefits of Two-Way Educational Bridges:   We can help students improve their motivations and confidence, when we...

build present-to-future bridges from school into life to show students how they are using (and will be using) their improved problem-solving skills for almost everything they do in their life, because the skills they're learning in school transfer into life, helping them "make things better" in life and achieve their goals for life.  When students want to learn in school because they are learning for life, this will improve their Motivations to Learn.    /    What students are learning now in school (and in life),* they will use later in life (and in school, for awhile).*

build past-to-present bridges from life into school to show students that in school they are not learning new skills, instead they are improving familiar skills they have been using in everyday life.  This familiarity can give them confidence when they think “I've done this before in life, so I also can do it in school,” to increase their Confidence about Learning, because they believe – with a Growth Mindset – that they will grow (by improving their skills) when they invest intelligent effort in their learning.    /    What students learned in the past in life (and in school),* they're using now in school (and in life).*     { * each "and" is true because, of course, learning occurs in school and life, and uses-of-learning occur in school & life. }    { school life + nonschool life ➞ whole life and, with my abbreviating, life can mean either nonschool life or whole life }

 
Whyto promote Transfers and Transitions:   The two-way bridges we build can improve...

transfers of learning,  with better transfers of ideas-and-skills to different situations (between school-life & nonschool-life, and within each part of life) and to different times (from past to present, and from present to future) so in addition to helping students improve their current performing, they also (by learning now) can improve their future performing, so they can get more satisfactions now and also later.   /   motivation for time-transfer:  We can help students be motivated so they want better future performing, when we encourage them to do intentional learning for themselves (so it's goal-directed personal education) by defining worthy goals-for-life (to improve themselves and their life-situations) and making practical plans for achieving their goals, by pursuing their goals with effective activities and intelligent effort.   /   Students can be motivated by two kinds of fun in school activities, by experiencing short-term enjoyment & success, and anticipating long-term satisfactions, with satisfactions achieved more effectively when they develop-and-use growth mindsets.   /   We can encourage intentional learning by promoting...

transitions in attitudes,  by improving motivations (to learn) and confidence (about learning) for a broader diversity of students, providing a wider variety of opportunities for learning in school, and success in school.  We can help more students develop their whole-person potentials so they will say “yes, I can do this” for a wider variety of options in their lives, in their career choices (for “what they want to do”) and life choices (for “who they want to be”).

 

a flexible metaphor:  People can build bridges between school-life and nonschool-life, between times (past & present, present & future), between attitudes (e.g. moving to higher levels of motivation or confidence), between people (to build better relationships), between locations (e.g. a bridge over a river), and in other situations for other purposes.

 

What – Goals for Whole-Person Education:   We want to provide whole-person education for whole life, to help students improve their knowledge & skills in many areas of life,* using multiple intelligences.  We want to Define Goals for Whole-Person Knowledge & Skills, so we can Design Instruction using Goal-Directed Activities.  Due to the wide range of possible goals for whole-person education, we must ask “how much of our educational resources (time, people, money,...) should be invested in each kind of goal?”

* problem-solving skills should supplement – not replace – basic skills of reading/writing & math, and knowledge in sciences, history, literature, social studies.  In fact, an important educational objective is to help students develop-and-use thinking strategies for how to more effectively learn basic skills & knowledge, and Self-Regulated Learning (with Design Process) can help them do this.  Also, one aspect of problem-solving skill is having content-knowledge that is relevant for solving a particular problem, because the productive thinking we use in solving problems (and thus in almost everything we do) combines relevant subject-area knowledge with creative thinking & critical thinking.     {more: thinking about “whole life” for whole-person students, when we're building educational bridges}

After you have defined goals, you can do a...

 
WhatGoal-Directed Designing of Curriculum & Instruction:   To use this strategy, we...

DEFINE GOALS for desired outcomes of our CURRICULUM, for ideas-and-skills we want students to learn,

DESIGN INSTRUCTION with learning activities (and associated teaching activities) that will provide opportunities for experience with these ideas & skills, and will help students learn more from their experiences.  The activities can have a goal-directed purpose that is narrow — as with Aesop's Activities that (analogous to Aesop's Fables) are designed to teach a specific idea or skill — or is broad, to teach general skills that are useful in many areas of life.

 
What – Designing a Coordinated Wide-Spiral Curriculum:   The wide scope of problem solving (it includes almost everything students do) lets teachers use problem-solving activities in all subject areas — in sciences, engineering, business, humanities, and arts, in STEAM and beyond, in an ideas-and-skills curriculum with wide scope — so in every area students can have analogous experiences with problem-solving Design Thinking, using a process of General Design and/or Science-Design that adapts to match their problem-solving Objectives.  These experiences can be part of a wide spiral curriculum that has wide scope (so related learning experiences are coordinated across different areas) and uses spiral repetitions (so learning experiences are coordinated over time), for helping all students (of all ages) improve their problem-solving skills and their basic skills & knowledge.     {more:  Goal-Directed Designing of a Wide-Spiral Curriculum – What, Why, Who, How – using instruction spirals that are short-term narrow, short-term wide, long-term wide.}

 

Howby using Broad Definitions and a Simple Model:   We can build bridges...

• by creatively using broad definitions for problem (it's "any opportunity to make things better, in any area of life") and problem solving (it's "whenever you try to make things better") so we can show students that "their problem-solving activities include almost everything they do in life," both inside school and outside school, and

• by logically using my models for Design Process — when students Define a Problem, then try to Solve this Problem with creative-and-critical thinking, by creatively Generating Ideas and (with basic logic) critically Evaluating Ideas — teachers can show students how they use the same basic process to solve problems (to "make things better") in "almost everything they do," in school-life and everyday life, so we can build connecting bridges between school and life.

How can a teacher "show" students the connections between the problem solving they do in school and in life?  One useful teaching strategy is to use...

 

Discovery Learning for Process, with

Experience + Reflection ➞ Principles:   How can teachers help students recognize the problem-solving process they do in everyday life, and are doing in school?  With a series of ERP Discovery-Activities, by using a process of inquiry — with Experience (when students are solving problems, in an activity of Design-Inquiry or Science-Inquiry)* plus Reflections (on their Experience) that help them recognize Principles (for their problem-solving process) — to teach principles for inquiry, to help students improve their process of problem solving.    { Reflection Activities can promote reflection-on-experience individually, and also in discussions with peers & teacher. }   {more about learning by discovery with ERP}

repeated Experiences-and-Reflections:  In a coordinated Wide-Spiral Curriculum that uses Design Process in spiral repetitions (so students have problem-solving experiences in all grades), what a student learns in 1st Grade will affect their “discovery learning” in 2nd Grade, so instruction with ERP will have to be adjusted, especially for Reflections.    {and also adjusted for a student who moves into your school from a school that doesn't use Design Process}

Experience before Principles:   In ERP, notice that E comes before P.  This sequencing is important, so it's emphasized in prominent theories of learning.  And it's supported by abundant evidence in educational research.  Doing E-before-P is one reason that when students are first beginning to do Inquiry Activities (with Design-Inquiry or Science-Inquiry) a teacher can choose to use either of two models – either the simplest model of Design Process or another model – to provide a structure for their “do, think, and learn” inquiry.

* What is inquiry?  Opportunities for inquiry occur whenever a gap in knowledge — in conceptual knowledge (so students don't understand) or procedural knowledge (so they don't know what to do, or how) — stimulates action (mental and/or physical) and students are allowed to do-think-learnOf course, activities to do-think-learn go beyond inquiry — because students can do-think-learn when they listen and talk, read and write, question and answer, explore and observe, investigate, analyze, and solve —but include inquiry activities with Design-Inquiry & Science-Inquiry, with Design Thinking.  Due to the wide scope of design, students are using the problem-solving process of Design Thinking for almost everything they do in everyday life and in school, so...

Discovering is Recognizing:   When students are using ERP Activities to observe (and learn from) their own problem-solving actions, instead of discovering they are recognizing.  Because of this focus on their own actions,  Discovery Learning – that actually is Recognition Learning – can work much better for learning-about-process than it does for a learning-of-concepts.    /    This familiarity is why earlier I said that in Part 2 you'll see my "innovative [new] ideas about how we can verbally-and-visually describe familiar [old] actions."   Soon you'll have an opportunity to do your own Discovery Learning, to recognize - and thus discover - useful insights about problem-solving process.

 
 
 open only this page   –   put page into left frame 

 

Part 2A:
a model for Design Process ,

for Problem-Solving Process.

   
You can understand my model for Design Process (i.e. for Problem-Solving Process, aka Design-Thinking Process, that is mostly a process of making decisions) by using your discoveries plus my explanations, beginning with...
 

Your Discoveries:

Action Diagram - showing Evaluation-of-Option with Quality Check by comparing Information (Predictions or Observations) with Solution-GoalsThis diagram combines a “big picture” process-overview with essential process-details.  It's the most complex of my verbal-visual models, but you'll be able to understand it when you thoroughly explore it.  You will develop an understanding of the parts and how they fit together to form the whole.

It's an Actions Diagram that shows what you do while you're trying to find a Problem-Solution that will achieve the GOALS you want.  While you're studying this diagram – exploring it by thinking about what each part is (i.e. what action is being done) and how the parts interact – you can do recognition by thinking about your experiences, asking “what part of my own problem-solving process is in each part of the diagram?”  Doing this will show you that your learning by discovery is actually learning by recognition.     { If a diagram is too small, right-click it – and open in a new window or tab – or “expand it” on a touch-screen. }

 

some tips-for-timing:

     Begin at the top with "Learn... Define... Define..." plus "GENERATE..." and "EVALUATE..."

    • Continue downward on the left side with "evaluate by doing a Mental Experiment" thru "PREDICTIONS... compare... GOALS," and then move upward on the far-left with "use a... Design Cycle" to ask "revise Option?" and "GENERATE."

    • Shift from the left side to right side, and study the analogous process of "evaluate by doing a Physical Experiment" thru "OBSERVATIONS... compare... GOALS" and then "...Design Cycle" to ask "revise Option?" and "GENERATE."

 

using discoveries + explanations:  Your process of learning will be more enjoyable & satisfying if you first do this learning by discovering-and-recognizing for awhile, before you read my explanations and you use...

a “slow reading” strategy:  Below, the section with my explanations is highly condensed, is densely packed with a lot of information, describing (briefly yet thoroughly) complex combinations of problem-solving actions.  It's intended to be thoughtfully processed with slow reading, while you're continuing to carefully study the diagram.  But probably you already have discovered so much that usually you'll be thinking “of course” while you're reading, because you already know it.  Or you will think “of course” about a concept, and then (with new learning) you will connect it with my term for the concept, which I'm sure will happen (for example) when you see "Actual Properties" and "Desired Properties" used as term-labels for two concepts you already know.

 

All diagrams are Copyright ©1997-2024 by Craig Rusbult.

 

My Explanations:

A problem-solving process typically begins when you "Learn [about a Problem-Area] so you understand more accurately-and-thoroughly."  Then you "Define your Objective" for the Problem you want to solve (for “the thing you want to make better”) and "Define your GOALS for [the Desired Properties you want in] a Solution."  After you Define a Problem (by defining its Objective and your GOALS for a Solution), you try to Solve this Problem when you...

 

"GENERATE Options" that are "(old [previously Generated by you or others, currently Remembered by you] or new [currently Generated by you or others]) for a Problem-Solution" and "Choose an Option to evaluate" and then "EVALUATE this Option."   { Notice that you first "Generate Options" – either one Option or (as in brainstorming) many Options – and then "Choose an Option to Evaluate". }    How do you evaluate?  Usually the first step is to...

Action Diagram - showing Evaluation-of-Option with Quality Check by comparing Information (Predictions or Observations) with Solution-GoalsDesign an Experiment – it's a Situation involving the Option – and do a "Mental Experiment" by imagining “what will happen” so you can make "PREDICTIONS" about The Actual Properties of this Option.  Then you "compare [these PREDICTIONS of Actual Properties with The Desired Properties you have defined as GOALS] in a Predictions-Based QUALITY CHECK."  In this Quality Check — made by comparing PREDICTIONS (of Actual Properties) with GOALS (for Desired Properties) — the Quality is defined by your GOALS.

Then you can "use a P[redictions]-Based [Quality Check in a] Design Cycle" to ask "revise [this Old Option]?" to GENERATE a New Option if you think the New Option will have higher Quality because there is a closer match between its Actual Properties (that you're Predicting) and the Desired Properties (that you're defining as GOALS for a satisfactory Solution).  Asking "revise?" is an essential part of the Design Cycles (when you Generate-Evaluate-Generate-Evaluate-...) in Design Process, with productive interactions between critical thinking and creative thinking when with Guided Generation your critical Evaluation stimulates-and-guides your creative Generation.  How?  During your critical Evaluation in a Quality Check, when you notice differences – between Actual Properties (of This Option) and Desired Properties (in your Goals) – this produces motivation that will stimulate you to Generate, and will guide you to ask “what is unsatisfactory and how can it be improved?” so you can creatively Generate a New Option whose Actual Properties come closer to your GOALS, thus coming closer to being a satisfactory Problem-Solution.

Of course, while solving a problem you also can use the analogous right-side Actions* by "doing a Physical Experiment" by actualizing the Experiment-Situation so you can Make "OBSERVATIONS" and "compare [OBSERVATIONS with GOALS] in an Observations-Based QUALITY CHECK" and then maybe "use an O-Based Design Cycle" to ask "revise?" and decide whether you want to revise the Old Option to "GENERATE" a New Option.    {* notice the symmetry between how you use Mental Experiments and Physical Experiments. }    /    Observations can be old and/or new:  analogous-in-time to how you "GENERATE Options (old or new)" you can “Make OBSERVATIONS (old or new)” because Observations can be old (previously Made by you or others, currently Remembered by you) or new (currently Made by you or others).

first Generate Options and then Evaluate Options:  Instead of Generating one Option and immediately Evaluating This Option, you can first Generate many Options* and then Evaluate these Options.  How do you Evaluate?  First you do Individual Evaluations (to estimate an overall Quality Status for each Option) that you then combine to do Comparative Evaluation of multiple Options by using the results of many Experiments (run Mentally and/or Physically) that allow many Quality Checks (Predictions-Based and/or Observations-Based) to estimate the Quality of many Options, with each Quality Check using many Evaluation Criteria (if you have many Goals).   /   Sometimes your Multiple Evaluations occur very quickly, especially when [[e.g. urgency of sudden emergency-situation while driving #mcsub, or situation that's relatively trivial thus not worth much investment of ps-time, like choosing what kind of --- to eat]]   /   * When you first "Generate many Options" (individually or in a group) before you "Evaluate these Options" you are using brainstorming (it's one kind of creativity-stimulating strategy) while you're trying to optimize its effectiveness by maximizing its benefits and minimizing its disadvantages.

 

actually Solving the Problem:  At some point during your Design Cycles of Generating-and-Evaluating, hopefully you will actually Solve the Problem if you compare the Actual Properties (of An Option) and Desired Properties (in your Goals) and decide the match is “close enough to be satisfactory” so you Choose This Option to be The Solution, and then Actualize The Solution with Actions that convert your Potential Solution (it's The Option you have chosen) into an Actual Solution.  Because you must Choose an Option in order to Solve the Problem, Decision Making is a central action in Problem Solving.

basic Problem-Solving Process, with 3 Phases: Define, try to Solve (by Generating-and-Evaluating), actually Solvethree phases of Problem Solving:  We can think of actually Solving the Problem as a third phase of Design Process, when you Define a Problem and then try to Solve this Problem until you actually Solve the Problem.

Old Problem or New Problem:  You can view your problem-solving process of Actualizing The Solution (after you Choose An Option to be The Solution) as being either a continuation of your original Old Problem, or the start of a New Problem that overlaps with the Old Problem yet is different, with its own new challenges.   i.e., Maybe you will Define a New Problem — by Learning about the New Problem-Area (when you Define the New Objective as Actualizing The Solution) and Defining new GOALS (for a New Solution, for a Strategy to Actualize) — and then try to Solve this New Problem by Generating Options & Evaluating Options, until you actually Solve this New Problem by Actualizing The Solution.

 

Problem Solving requires Decision Making:  During a process of problem solving, you decide “what to do next” when coordinating your process, and eventually a decision is necessary to choose a Problem-Solution and Actualize this Solution.     { what are the connections between problem solving and decision making? }

delay working or stop working:  Instead of continuing until you solve, maybe you'll decide to delay working on this problem-solving project for awhile — so you can use your valuable time in other ways, including subconscious creativity-stimulating incubation ( A  B  C  D ) that is especially useful for tough problems — or to stop working on the problem, to abandon it.

 

 

two kinds of design:

Above you did Step 1 of learning (by discoveries & explanations) for Design Process.  Below, Step 2 is similar, but the diagram's center now includes a "REALITY CHECK".  Compare it with each "QUALITY CHECK" and think about what is different in the things being compared and the purpose of comparing.

3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) used in 3 Evaluative Comparisons, during General Design and Science-DesignYou use a Quality Check to determine the Quality of An Option, by comparing its Actual Properties (that you have Predicted or Observed) with Desired Properties (that you have defined as your Solution-Goals) while you're trying to find a Solution for a Problem, during General Design.  You use a Reality Check to test a Model — it's a Theory intended to describe (and maybe explain) “what happens” (and maybe “how & why”) in one part of the world — to get knowledge about “what the world is and how it works” during Science-Design, when you're trying to understand the what-how-why of Reality more completely & accurately.

3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) used in 3 Evaluative Comparisons, during General Design and Science-DesignIn a variety of ways, Design Process (DP) is an educationally-useful model for Problem-Solving Process.  One way is by showing how the central evaluation-strategies we use for General Design and Science-Design are logically integrated into "a unified functioning whole."  How?  In the right-side diagram, DP shows how 3 Elements (Predictions & Observations, Goals) are used in 3 Comparisons (to Evaluate with a Reality Check, Quality Check, Quality Check) during Science-Design {using the Reality Check} and General Design {using the two Quality Checks}.  We use these Checks to ask The Science Question {“am I surprised?”} and The Design Question {“what is the Quality?”}.     {more about The “Big Picture” Context of Designing and Two Questions during Two Kinds of Design}

 

Problem Solving and Decision Making:

These have two kinds of relationships, because...

Sometimes, Decision Making is the main Objective of Problem Solving, when it's the purpose of your Process.  In these situations the Problem-Solving Process (with Learning, Generating Ideas & Evaluating Ideas,...) helps you Make a Decision that is wise and effective, because "making decisions is an action based on [useful] insights derived during the problem-solving process."   We frequently Make Decisions, and this is one reason for the wide scope of Problem-Solving Activities.

Always, Decision Making is a very important kind of Action that is a useful tool during your Process.  The usefulness happens in two ways.  First, during the Problem-Solving Process you must make many Process-Decisions about “what to do next,” to coordinate your Process.  Second, whenever you use critical thinking (it's evaluative thinking, is logical thinking) to Evaluate an Option, you are Making Decisions;  eventually in order to actually Solve the Problem you must (based on your comparative Evaluations of Options) "Choose an Option to be your Problem-Solution.”  But long before this, your Evaluating-and-Deciding begins when (as shown in the diagram) you are Making Decisions about how to effectively Learn, and Define your Objective & Define your GOALS;   then during creative thinking (sub-conscious & conscious) to Generate Options you imagine many ideas and you Decide which ideas have enough Quality Status to become consciously defined as Options;   in order to Evaluate an Option you need Information, so you DESIGN an Experiment (by Deciding between many possibilities) and Decide whether a particular Option-for-Experiment is worthy enough to DO the Experiment;   then during a Design Cycle – after Evaluating with a Quality Check or Reality Check – you Decide whether to "revise?"  In many ways, Decision-Making Actions are essential parts of Problem-Solving Process.     [[ useful for metacognition and for education ]]

* The importance of Decision Making is obvious during General Design – when “the thing you're making better” is a product, activity, relationship, and/or strategy – because a Solution requires Choosing an Option to be Your Solution.  But even though it's less obvious, Decision Making also is important during Science-Design when “what you're making better” is your knowledge of the world (re: what is happening, how-and-why) because you want to understand the world more thoroughly & accurately.

 

 

two goals:

My model for Design Process is intended to be accurate and usefulI think these goals have been achieved, so...

 

Design Process will be Educationally Useful How?  Two reasons (among many) are because its two wide scopes (for Problem-Solving Activities and Problem-Solving Process) promote transfers of skills & transitions of attitudes, and because it logically integrates the process we use during General Design and Science-Design.  A third reason is that...

 

Design Process is an Accurate Description:  A model for problem-solving process should accurately describe what happens.  Design Process does this, because...  While you're solving problems, you actually do use the logic of a Quality Check – by comparing Predictions with Goals, or Observations with Goals — to Evaluate an Option during General Design.  And you do use the logic of a Reality Check – by comparing Predictions with Observations – during Science-Design.  And you actually do the other Essential Actions* when you make Predictions (by imagining) and make Observations (during actualizing);  when your Evaluation stimulates you to ask “can I improve This Option by revising it?” and you revise;  and when you design new Experiments.   /   an educational benefit:  Due to this descriptive accuracy, when students get Problem-Solving Experiences and then Reflect on their Experiences, they will observe themselves doing the Actions of Design Process, and this recognition lets them use a Process-of-Inquiry to discover Principles-of-Inquiry, with Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles.  And a student will know that they're using a similar process of thinking for almost everything they do;  this produces benefits that are direct (transfers between areas & thru time,...) and indirect (increased motivation with personal education and building bridges,...) in school and life.   /   * During our process of solving problems, our 9 Essential Actions form a logical framework – showing how we Make Information & Use Information (even subconsciously?) – that helps us recognize the descriptive accuracy of Design Process.     { it also seems accurate for subconscious processing-thinking }

 


 

timings and flexibility:   each Actions Diagram shows the multiple Actions that occur at different times – not simultaneously – during a process of problem solving.  Therefore a diagram IS NOT a snapshot photo of what is happening at any specific time.  Instead, each multi-action diagram IS like a photo that shows all Actions in a time-lapse video of “the Action being done now” (at many different now-times) during an entire process of problem solving.  For each process-of-solving the sequence of actions can be different, because making Action-Decisions about "what to do next" IS analogous to the goal-directed flexible improvising of a hockey player, but IS NOT like the rigid choreography of a figure skater.

 

using a progression of learning:  For your own learning, I think it's better to begin with Stage 3, as you did above by studying diagrams in Steps 1 & 2.  But if you're teaching others, usually it's best to use a progression of learning that begins with Stage 1 (basics & more) — when students "Define A Problem... before they try to Solve This Problem by Generating Options & Evaluating Options" and maybe actually Solve This Problem — and moves on to Stage 3 Stage 2 when they Evaluate an Option by using Mental Experiments & Physical Experiments.  You can help students gain a deeper understanding of each Stage, including “the complete process of problem solving” in Stage 3 (basics & more) so they'll understand (basics & more) how they're using 3 Comparisons (in a Quality Check, Quality Check, Reality Check) during their process of doing General Design and/or Science-Design;  these 3 Comparisons (the       Checks) are 3 of the 9 Essential Actions in Design Process, and students often do these Essential Actions in their everyday lives.

 

more opportunities for discovering:   You can explore Stages 1-4 of my Model for Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process, aka Design Thinking Process) by finding Action Diagrams – four are above and others are below and studying them, searching for meaning verbally (in the diagram's words) and visually (in its spatial organization & symbolic colors).  When you then combine your discoveries with my explanations, your overall process-of-learning will be more diverse & thorough, and you'll be personally constructing a deeper understanding of Problem-Solving Process.     {and you can explore by using a page with 11 visually-logical Action Diagrams}

 


Size-Adjusting Options:  If an Actions Diagram is too small, with a touch-screen “squeeze outward” to expand the size.  Or you can right-click on the image, choose "Open Image in New Window", then adjust the window's size & location;  but if you can only choose "Open Image in New Tab," do this plus another right-click to move it into a New Window.  Or use one of the color-shaded links – for open only this page (in its own full-width window) or put page into left frame – that are at the top-of-page and other places, like below.  And you can use a bigger screen, preferably a computer monitor, but at least a laptop or large tablet.

open only this page  –   put page into left frame 
 
Part 2B:
my Model for Design Process is...
 

a Model with models

Design Process is a Model containing many models.  Each model is an Actions-Diagram that is accurate in different ways – because each model selects different Actions to include & exclude – and is educationally useful in different ways.  Having a variety of models gives teachers flexibility in their instruction.  And it's practical for students, encouraging them to “think in different ways” for different problems, because their problem-solving process varies from one life-situation to another.

a family of related modelsa Model Each model is a simplified representation of problem-solving process (it's a simplification of the complex actions that are used by people during our process of solving a problem), so each is a model for problem-solving process.  They are part of “a family of related models” that combine to form my overall Model, as explained later.  All of my models are "related" because they all describe the same process;  but each model emphasizes different aspects of the overall process, and this makes the models educationally useful in different ways.

complexity and simplicity:  Although your actual process of thinking is complex — as in the blending of conscious with subconscious when you're Generating-and-Evaluating Ideas or Coordinating Your Processconstructing simplified models is useful for thinking about thinking, for learning (in education) and doing (in problem solving).

 

models and stages

By creatively using different models (in the family of models for Design Process) a teacher can design a logical progression of instruction that begins with simplicity and gradually makes complexity easy to understand.  For example,

Above you studied two complex models that visually-and-verbally (in diagrams for Stage 3) show the Actions a person does while they are Evaluating an Option, during their process of Solving a Problem.  Of course, Stage 1 and Stage 2 use models that are simpler.

Below, while you're increasing your own understanding of the Stages (1,2,3,4) you can be thinking about how to design activities that will help students understand Problem Solving, and improve their Problem-Solving Skills.  An effective way to help students understand is by providing Experiences (in Solving Problems) plus Reflections (on their Experiences) and gently guided Discussions, to help them discover Principles (of Design Process, and thus Problem-Solving Process), with Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles.  In a progression of instruction, during each stage you “keep it simple” (by focusing on essential Actions) to help students understand that stage.  Moving from one stage to the next, you gradually increase the levels-of-complexity they can understand.  The overall result is that eventually students will be able to “cope with complexity” at higher levels, and the complex process-of-solving will seem simple because they understand it.  When this happens, the complex process has become (in their thinking) a “simplicity” because all parts are fitting together in ways that make sense for them, so their view of Problem-Solving Process is logically simple, psychologically intuitive.

the educational benefits of logically organized knowledge:  When principles for process (it's procedural knowledge) are verbally-and-visually organized – as in my Model for Design Process – this produces many kinds of educational benefits.

 

In the sections below (for Stages 1,2,3,4) you can learn – with your discoveries and my explanations – the Principles of Design Process.  My own favorite is the elegant beauty of Symmetry, for the Experiments we do Mentally & Physically, in Stage 2.

 

 

Stage 1

a simple model — solving problems

by using problem-solving strategies:

basic Problem-Solving Process, with 3 Phases: Define, try to Solve (by Generating-and-Evaluating), actually Solve Much of the time during life, you “just do things” without using any kind of strategy, and often this works well.  But in many situations your problem-solving skills will improve (especially in the long run) when you use problem-solving strategies.  For example, this Actions Diagram shows how you can decide that you will...

1 – DEFINE a Problem (Learn about a Problem-Area, Define your Objective,* Define your Goals for a Satisfactory Solution) and...

2 – try to SOLVE this Problem with creative-and-critical thinking by Generating-and-Evaluating Options (for a Problem-Solution that achieves your Goals) when you Generate-and-Evaluate-and-Generate-and-Evaluate-and... (and so on) in repeating Cycles of Design, until you...

3 – actually SOLVE the Problem by Choosing An Option to be a Solution, and Actualizing This Solution with Actions that convert your Potential Solution (i.e. The Option you have chosen) into an Actual Solution.

three phases of Problem Solving:  A detailed overview of Phase 3 (when you "actually Solve the Problem") describes the three Phases (1-2-3 above), and the evaluation criteria for Choosing An Option, the central role of Decision Making in Problem Solving (for General Design & Science-Design), viewing Phase 3 in two ways (as a continuation of the original Old Problem, or a New Problem that is actually Solving the Old Problem),

 

* Each minute of every day, Defining your Objective is an important step in your practical living.  You can “make things better” with many different Choices of An Objective (for The Problem To Solve, for What To Make Better) but your time is limited.  Therefore when you ask “what is the best use of my time now? and later?” you always want to choose wisely because (as Benjamin Franklin advised) "do not squander time, for that's the stuff life is made of."

 

Using a CHECKLIST

for Problem-Solving Actions

to improve Problem-Solving Process:

In the past, when I've made a mistake and then asked “why?” my answer often was “ineffective process” because I had not done some problem-solving action(s) well, or had not even done the action(s).  Often I could have “done it better” and avoided a “did it worse-than-best” mistake, with better process.  Therefore – in an effort to grow by learning from experiences – I've found it beneficial to develop-and-use a Checklist for Problem-Solving Actions.     { with "use" meaning “use consistently” in all areas of life }

How?  The simplest model of Design Process (with 1 2 3) has worked well as a checklist, when I've used it to ask “Have I done        ” for each essential Problem-Solving Action on the list, to ask “Have I...

    defined a worthy Area-of-Life and Problem-Solving Objective?   (would pursuing this problem-solution be a wise use of my time?)
    learned enough to understand the Problem-Situation? 
    defined Goals for what I want in a Problem-Solution? 

    creatively Generated Options for a Solution? 
    critically/logically Evaluated these Options? 

    chosen an Option to be a Solution? 
    actualized this Solution with Actions?   (how? make it and/or do it)
 

Why?  I've received benefits from this checklist — especially when it's used during a Problem-Solving Process (so the process is being done better) instead of only afterward (so I can just say “oops” and try to do a better process the next time) — and I think you will, too.  And our students will benefit from checklists when we encourage them to develop-and-use their own lists, and they understand the self-benefits that they will produce by consistently using a better process.

 

 

Stage 2

SIMPLICITY and SYMMETRY

 

a Simplicity of Process:   Above you see my simplest model for problem solving, when you Define a Problem and try to Solve this Problem by Generating-and-Evaluating Options (for a Problem-Solution) in iterative Cycles of Design, until you Choose a Solution and Actualize the Solution.  This simplicity (Define & Solve, Choose-and-Actualize) lets a teacher SHOW students how they use a similar process-of-thinking for almost everything they do in life.  This wide scope – and the simplicity of "generate and evaluate" when they solve problems – lets us build educational transfer-bridges between life and school, with transfers (of knowledge & skills) and transitions (of attitudes) in both directions, to improve the problem-solving abilities & confidence & motivations of students, for better diversity & equity in educationLater, for deeper understanding, you can help students discover...

 

Diagram 2a - showing Symmetry of Design Processa Symmetry of Process:   During their process of problem solving, students Design and Do two kinds of experience-producing Experiments* (done mentally to make PREDICTIONS & physically to make OBSERVATIONS as shown on the left side & right side of the diagram) so they can Use their PREDICTIONS & OBSERVATIONS by comparing these with GOALS in two kinds of evaluative QUALITY CHECKS that we use during General Design.  In every Check-for-Quality, students are asking (for the Option being evaluated) The Design Question:  “how close is the match between this Option's actual properties (that they have predicted or observed) and their desired Goal-properties?” which is asking “how high is the quality?” because Quality is defined by their Goals for a satisfactory Problem-Solution.  Then they can use Evaluation to guide their GenerationDuring their Guided Generation the differences (between actual properties and desired properties when these are compared in an evaluative Quality Check and this critical Evaluation stimulates-and-guides them to creatively Generate a new Option whose properties will come closer to their Goal.     {also: during Science-Design we do a REALITY CHECK when PREDICTIONS & OBSERVATIONS are compared, as shown by the yellow-green dashed line connecting them, – – – – – }   {you do creative Guided Generation of Options with Retroductive Logic by “trying out” multiple Options while you're Evaluating each Option with Quality Checks and/or Reality Checks}

* Experiments (Mental or Physical) can be Old or New, done by You or by Others:  In a Quality Check you can use old Observations (made in the distant past) or new Observations (from the recent past).  Also, your total experiences include your first-hand experiences with events you personally Observe (that you remember in your Personal Memory, from your own experience in the distant past or recent past) plus the second-hand experiences (found in our Collective Memory) that were Observed by someone else, then later (in a report or recording) you hear it and/or see it, or (in a web-page, tweet, book,...) you read about it.  And a Prediction (of what will happen) can be made in the past or present, by you or by others.

 

also:  Design Cycles (in Stage 2) can be used in Plan-and-Do Cycles, with Planning (by Mental Experimenting) followed by Doing (in a Physical Experiment), as explained in Stage 4.

 

 

Stage 3

Design Process describes how we ask...

Two Questions during Two Kinds of Design

People use two kinds of design, trying to achieve two different objectives:  during General Design we're trying to design (to find, invent, or improve) a better product, activity, relationship, and/or strategy;  during Science-Design we're trying to design a better explanatory theory, so we can understand the what-how-why of reality more completely and accurately.    {more about similarities and differences – in objectives & process – between General Design and Science-Design}

3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) used in 3 Evaluative Comparisons, during General Design and Science-DesignThis diagram shows how we use 3 Elements (Predictions & Observations, Goals) in 3 Comparisons to ask Two Kinds of Questions:

    • The Design Question (used in two Quality Checks during General Design) asks “how close is the match?” when Goals are compared with Predictions or Observations — i.e. “how well would This Option achieve My Goals?” or “how high is its Quality?” with Quality defined by Goals — and...

    • The Science Question (used in a Reality Check during Science-Design) asks “am I surprised?” and answers “yes” if there is a mis-match when Predictions & Observations are compared.

But... The Science Question also can be useful during General Design, if the results of a Physical Experiment are surprising because Observations (of an Option's actual properties) are not what you expected, are not a close match with your Predictions (of the Option's actual properties).  When this happens – with an unplanned Reality Check during your process of General Design – is the most common way for people to do science, because...

During everyday life we usually don't use planned Reality Checks.  We rarely design an Experiment to intentionally test (and possibly falsify) one of our many theory-beliefs about “how the world works,” because we usually don't want to discover that one of our beliefs is wrong;  each of has a psychological preference for retaining our current beliefs.  We often don't want to change a belief so we find ways to defend the belief, even if a Reality Check indicates that we should change it.  Why?  In some areas of life – especially areas that are personally important – we resist change due to a psychological motivation of wanting to reduce our cognitive dissonance.  But even if we don't intentionally test our beliefs, we often “do science” unintentionally while we're trying to make things better (with General Design) when we Predict-then-Observe and are surprised when they don't match, in an unplanned Science Question.

Science-during-Design:  Design Process accurately describes the common way we use science-and-design together.  Our everyday “science during life” is naturally explained by the integrative structure of Design Process because the central core of its evaluative logic (when 3 Elements are used in 3 Comparisons) shows the way we naturally do both General Design (aka Design, the usual term) and Science-Design (aka Science, usually) together.  By contrast, most other models-for-process describe a process of either Design or Science, but not bothThe smooth integrating of Design-AND-Science (in Design Process) will help students develop a smooth integrating of Design-AND-Science (in their thinking) while they are solving problems.

This is one difference between Design Process and Other Models.  In the most ways Design Process is similar to other models (so it's compatible with them), but it's distinctive in important ways (so it offers “added value” when we design instruction by combining models).

 

Preparing Students for Life, with

skills in using Two Kinds of Design:

Schools cannot prepare students for every challenge they will face.  But we can help them cope with challenges by improving their problem-solving skills and their ability to learn new skills-and-ideas whenever it's necessary.    { Instead of just giving fish to students, we teach them how to fish. }

Transfers of Designing Skills into Life:  A student uses problem-solving General Design for almost everything they do in life (when they're trying to design a better product, activity, relationship, or strategy) so schools can build educational bridges – from life into school (in all subjects with a wide-spiral curriculum) and back into life – to increase transfers of learning and motivations for learning.

Transfers of Sciencing Skills into Life:  All of us, including students, use scientific thinking often in life, whenever we hear a claim {or make a claim} and ask {or explain} “what is the evidence-and-logic supporting this claim?”  In all areas of life, students can use Science-Design to improve their theories about “how the world works” so they can better understand “what is happening, how, why” and can better imagine “what will happen.”  When their theories about the world become more complete & accurate, this improved understanding will help them make wise decisions while pursuing their goals in life.

 

a personal context:  My PhD Project was developing-and-using a Model for Scientific Method* — its logical foundation is comparing Predictions with Observations (in a Reality Check), but in real-life science we also see other factors & activities — that I later generalized into a Model for Problem Solving that will help students understand the similarities & differences between Science-Design (asking The Science Question) and General Design (asking The Design Question) and will help them improve their skills in doing both kinds of problem-solving Design Thinking.  My project was "developing-and-using" with two parts, by first developing the Model and then using it with integrative analysis of instruction (it's a systematic way to find opportunities for students to practice-and-improve their problem-solving skills, including those of Scientific Method) that is useful for conceptual evaluation because when we understand the structure of instruction more accurately & thoroughly, we can improve the instruction to make it more effective in achieving our educational goals.

 

 

Reality Checks:  the logic of Science-Design

Above – in Symmetry of Process – I describe General Design when students are evaluating an Option for a Problem-Solution.  Now we'll examine the process of Science-Design when they are evaluating an Option for an Explanatory Model.     { two options for instruction:  In the classroom, a teacher can begin with activities for either kind of design. }

 

But first it will be useful to see the “big picture” context of Reality Checks, with a review of how...

People use two kinds of design, trying to achieve two different objectives:  during General Design we're trying to design (to find, invent, or improve) a better product, activity, relationship, and/or strategy;  during Science-Design we're trying to design a better explanatory theory, so we can understand the what-how-why of reality more completely and accurately.    {more about similarities and differences – in objectives & process – between General Design and Science-Design}

3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) used in 3 Evaluative Comparisons, during General Design and Science-DesignThis diagram shows how we use 3 Elements (Predictions & Observations, Goals) in 3 Comparisons to ask Two Kinds of Questions:

    • The Design Question (used in two Quality Checks during General Design) asks “how close is the match?” when Goals are compared with Predictions or Observations — i.e. “how well would This Option achieve My Goals?” or “how high is its Quality?” with Quality defined by Goals — and...

    • The Science Question (used in a Reality Check during Science-Design) asks “am I surprised?” and answers “yes” if there is a mis-match when Predictions & Observations are compared.

 

Diagram 2c - showing The Logic of Science-Design, by using Reality Checksdoing a Reality Check:   Science-Design (commonly called science) uses logical Reality Checks to construct a theory-based Explanatory Model – that describes “how the world works” in a particular Experimental Situation – with a goal of explaining the reality of what is happening, how, and why.  As shown in this action-diagram, during a Reality Check you compare Predictions (made in a Mental Experiment by "using Model + logic" to imagine what will happen in the Experimental Situation, or* by remembering-and-assuming) with Observations (made in a Physical Experiment by actualizing the Experimental Situation and "using Observation Detectors") to see how closely they match.  In other words, you logically apply an Explanatory Model (for “how you think the world works” in this Experiment) to make Predictions that you compare with Observations (of “how the world really works”) to check the accuracy of Predictions based on this Option for a Model.  By doing this, you're using Experimental Information (Predictions & Observations) to get knowledge about your theory-based Model for “how the world works” so your understanding of the world can become more accurate-and-complete.

using a Reality Check:   If you ask The Science Question and respond “yes, I am surprised” you can revise the old Model to make a new Model.  Why?  So you can produce a better match between your Model-based Predictions and Reality-based Observations.  How?  With critical-and-creative Guided Generation by using critical Evaluation to stimulate-and-guide your creative Generation of a revised Explanatory Model that (when you "use Model + logic" to make a Prediction) will produce a closer match with the known Observations    /   Guided Generation is aka Retroductive Generation (or just Retroduction) because in a Science Cycle you are revising the Model so its Predictions will match the already-known Observations.  A Prediction & Retroduction (made before & after Observations are known) are both equally valid logically, but psychologically there is a difference because you are motivated to find a Model that makes accurate Predictions;  this motive can lead to ad-hoc adjustments so you should test each Model for ad-hocness by checking its compatibility (with other Models) and accuracy (in other Experiments) in your noble attempt to find truth, to correctly understand the what-how-why of reality.    {more: a diagram that shows - with more detail - the logic of Reality Checking}   {we should consider the many possible reasons for a mismatching surprise – in addition to an incorrect theory-based Explananatory model, it could be a faulty Experimental Design, e.g. using inaccurate Observation-detector, or... some other non-Model reason.} 

evaluating multiple Models:   In each Science Cycle, you choose a different Model to Evaluate with a Reality Check.  You can do many Science Cycles, each time “trying out” a different Model-Option, with the goal of finding a Model whose Predictions will match the known Observations.     { you can test multiple Options in multiple Experiments, to do multiple Checks - with Reality, or for Quality - in Science-Design or General Design}

 

* two ways to Predict:   You can make a Prediction in two main ways,...  1) by simply remembering a similar Experimental Situation in the past, and assuming “what happened before will happen again” or   2) by constructing an Explanatory Model (typically it's a Mental Model) for the Experimental Situation, and using IF-then logic, by thinking “IF my Model is correct, then       will happen,” and the filled-in blank is your Prediction.   Method 2 is more scientifically-logical, and is the solid foundation of scientific understanding & progress.    {more - details about how we make Predictions and how we make Observations }

 

Using Model to teach Science-Inquiry:  One effective way to structure an Experience of Science-Inquiry (when students are using the logic of Science-Design) is with the model of Predict-Observe-Explain, aka POE.  And by combining POE with ERP (Experience + Reflections ➞ Principles) students can learn Principles of Design Process.  Or use a model of CER (Claim, Evidence, Reasoning) that is similar to POE, but (unlike POE) CER can be used to teach a process of Science-Design and also General Design.

 

 

Stages 1-3

The Actions of Design Process

Design Process is a Model containing many models.  Each model is accurate in different ways – because it selects different actions to include & exclude – and is educationally useful in different ways.  Here are summaries for two stages, and an in-depth look at Stage 3.

    Stage 1 shows the Simplicity of Defining a Problem and then trying to Solve this Problem with cycles of critical Evaluation and creative Generation.  It's useful as an overview-of-actions, and to help students recognize how their school-Actions are also life-Actions they use outside school in their everyday living.  This recognition can help them understand some of the many connections between school-life and everyday life, so they can build two-way educational bridges

    Stage 2 supplements this by showing the Symmetry when students Do-and-Use Mental Experiments & Physical Experiments to Evaluate an Option by generating Predictions & Observations that they Use in Quality Checks by comparing Actual Properties (Predicted or Observed) with the Desired Properties defined by their Goals for a Problem-Solution.   /   also:  Stage 2 (as in Diagram 2b) helps them see how they can use metacognitive thinking strategies (as in Self-Regulated Learning) to improve their learning and/or performing of basic skills & problem-solving skills, making decisions about “what to do, when, and how” by shifting between Imagining and Actualizing in their Mental Experimenting and Physical Experimenting.

 

3 Cycles - 2 using Quality Checks, 1 using Reality Check    Stage 3 is a deeper examination, especially in Diagram 3b (at right) that – as you discovered in your explorations of 3b – shows two Design Cycles (each saying "use QC" [use Quality Check] and asking "revise Option?" during General Design) and one Science Cycle (saying "use RC" [use Reality Check] and asking "revise Model?" during Science-Design.   /   The Science Cycle is explained above.   /   In a Design Cycle during General Design, critical Evaluation (in a Quality Check) leads students to ask "revise Option" and maybe to creatively Generate a New Option.  If they do this, they are doing Guided Generation because their creative Generation is guided by their critical Evaluation.  Diagram 3b shows this productive interaction – between critical thinking and creative thinking – to help students understand the and in Evaluate-and-Generate during each Cycle of Design.  How does guiding occur?  A student's Evaluation of an Option helps them decide whether to reject it or accept it as-is, or modify it by critically asking “in what ways do This Option's actual properties (predicted or observed) differ from the desired properties I have defined as Goals?” and then creatively asking “how can I creatively modify This Option to Generate a New Option with actual properties that will more closely match the desired properties I want?”  In this way, their critical Evaluative Thinking stimulates-and-guides their creative Generative Thinking, with continuing Cycles of Design in which the Quality of their Options improves because they are Evaluating-and-Generating by using critical-and-creative Guided Generation.       {more: creativity in guided generation-by-revision} {you do creative Guided Generation of Options (using creative-and-critical Retroductive Logic) by “trying out” multiple Options while you're Evaluating each Option with Quality Checks}   {four ways to use experiments}   /   Diagram 3a (a simplified version of 3b) makes it easier to see the main difference between General Design & Science-Design.  In every Quality Check, students ask The Design Question (“how close is the match?” when Desired Properties & Actual Properties are compared) during General Design.  And during Science-Design they ask The Science Question (“am I surprised?” when Predictions & Observations are compared) in every Reality Check.

 

 

Stage 4

Design-and-Do Experiments

so you can Use Experiments

 

All of the Essential Actions of Design Process are in Stage 3 so there are no new actions in Stage 4.  Instead the objective is deeper understanding, especially for how we Design Experiments so we can DO Experiments (Mentally & Physically) and USE the Experimental Information (Predictions or Observations) for Evaluation & for Generation, during two kinds of design, General Design and Science-Design.

In this section, Stage 4 is described with less detail than for Stages 1-3.  Here I'll just summarize basic ideas, and provide links to sections where you can learn more about the ideas, beginning with a condensed description of Design Process:

In one of the 9 Essential Actions of Design Process, you DESIGN an Experiment that you can DO when you either DO a Mental Experiment (by imagining the Experiment-Situation so you can make Predictions) or DO a Physical Experiment (by actualizing the Experiment-Situation so you can make Observations).  Then you can USE this Experimental Information (Predictions or Observations) in 3 Comparisons (when you compare or compare or compare, in a Quality Check or Quality Check or Reality Check) for Experiment-Based Evaluation, and then maybe USE Experiment-Based Evaluation(s) for Experiment-Based Generation (when you ask revise? or revise? or revise? to Generate a New Option by revising an Old Option).   /   an option:  If this paragraph is too condensed,,...

You may find it easier to understand a longer explanation of the 9 Essential Actions, and to appreciate the importance of Experimenting.  This appreciation will happen naturally because while you're reading-and-thinking, you'll notice the central functional roles of Experiments that you DESIGN and DO (Mentally and/or Physically) and then functionally-USE for Experiment-Based Evaluation of an Option and maybe Experiment-Based Generation of another Option.

also:  You can learn more about Designing Experiments and (from my “main page-with-details”) Experiment-Situations for General Design & Science-Design and Designing Experiments & Making Predictions & Making Observations plus info in other pages and summaries (short & long) of my dissertation – in Chapter 1 (pages 23-25, 50-52, 66, 96-97, 114-127) – from my PhD work.

 

A practical application of Experimenting – commonly used as a metacognitive thinking strategy in K-12 and College – is Self-Regulated Learning.  Basically it's a logical sequence of two action-modes (mental then physical) when we...

PLAN-and-DODuring life we usually alternate between Planning and Doing, between Imagining and Actualizing in our Mental Experimenting and Physical Experimenting.

Cycles of Plan-and-Monitor (aka Plan-and-Do) for Self-Regulated LearningWhen we Plan-and-Do, a key principle is the fact that Mental Experiments are usually quicker-and-cheaper than Physical Experiments.  So to reduce our investments of time and/or money, we first PLAN by running many quick-and-cheap Mental Experiments — to imagine many possible Experimental Systems (for testing an Option for a Problem-Solution when we're trying to “make things better” by designing a better product, activity, relationship, and/or strategy (in General Design) and/or (in Science-Design) an explanatory theory — while asking “if we do a Physical Experiment with this Experimental System, what kinds of things might happen, and what could we learn that might be interesting or useful?”  Then we DO by choosing an Experimental System and using it to run a Physical Experiment.    {this part of problem-solving process is Experimental Design - overview & details}

 

Self-Regulated Learning is a practical application of Plan-and-Do (and thus of Design Process)* that is especially useful for education.  How?  We show students how to use strategies for Self-Regulated Learning (in the context of Design Process) so they can develop-and-use metacognitive thinking strategies to improve their learning and/or performing.

In this way, students can use their problem-solving skills to improve their learning-and-using of basic skills like reading & math, and their content-knowledge.  Because we want whole-person education for whole students, we want all aspects of our curriculum & instruction – including activities designed to improve problem-solving skills & basic skills & content-knowledge – to be mutually supportive.  Students can use their problem-solving skills to improve their basic skills & knowledge, by using Self-Regulated Learning (plus Design Process) and in other ways.  And their problem-solving skills will improve when they have better basic skills;  and the productive thinking they use for solving problems (and thus for almost everything they do) combines relevant content-knowledge with creative thinking & critical thinking.   /   Diagram 2b shows a Cycle of Plan-and-Do (aka Plan-and-Monitor) that's almost identical to a typical Cycle of Self-Regulated Learning, as explained here.

 

 


open only this page   –   put page into left frame 
   

The Wide Scope of Problem-Solving Process

I claim that if teachers use Design Process this will help their students recognize-and-use the two wide scopes of Problem Solving – for its Activities and Process – and it will be beneficial for their motivation & education.  How?  It will help students increase their transfers of skills through time (from the present into their future) and between areas (in their school-life & nonschool-life), and improve their motivations so they want to proactively pursue their own personal education, because they believe that improving their problem-solving skills (inside school) will improve their quality of life (outside school) now and in their future.

But why should we think both wide scopes really do occur?

It seems easy to understand-and-accept the wide scope of Problem-Solving Activities that include almost everything a student does.

We also can understand-and-accept the wide scope of Problem-Solving Process that is similar for almost everything a student does.  But the logical reasons for accepting this are less obvious, so a clear understanding of “why” will be useful.  Earlier I claim that we solve almost all problems "with creative-and-critical thinking, by creatively Generating Ideas and (with basic logic) critically Evaluating Ideas."  This is a simple explanation that I think is satisfactory.  But we can teach better when we understand the “why” more deeply.

Therefore the following sections – that expand the brief outline in a summary – explain the “what and why” by showing how 9 Essential Actions (that we combine in a variety of ways to form common Action-Sequences) are used in similar ways while we're improvising many different Action-Sequences to solve many different kinds of Problems.

 

To help you get a “big picture overview” of the sections, here is...

a simplified version:  While solving problems, people “do experiments” so we can get Information (by making Predictions or making Observations) that we use to Evaluate a Solution-Option, and then we use our Evaluation to Generate a better Solution-Option.

and a Table of Contents:  9 Essential Actions and 8 Ways to Use ExperimentsDesigning Experiments that Produce Experiences – Design Process accurately describes what really happensCoordinating your Process by Using Modular Strategies to produce Variations on a Theme.

 

 

9 Essential Actions  and
8 Ways to USE Experiments
 
In this diagram for Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process, aka Design-Thinking Process) you can find the 9 Essential Actions of four kinds (1 2 3 - 4)* that we typically USE while solving problems:

3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) used in 3 Evaluative Comparisons, during General Design and Science-Design1.  First you USE an Experiment — you DO it by “running the Experiment-Situation, either Mentally (by imagining it) or Physically (by actualizing it) — and USE it to make Experimental Information (you make Predictions or make Observations).

2.  Then you USE this Experimental Information (from #1 when you made Predictions or made Observations) to do an Experiment-Based Evaluation in order to Evaluate an Option — by comparing Predictions with Goals, or comparing Observations with Goals, or comparing Predictions with Observations — in a Quality Check, or Quality Check, or Reality Check.

3.  And maybe you USE your Experiment-Based Evaluation (from #2 in a       Check) to guide you in revising an Old Option to Generate a new Option, when you "use QC" by asking "revise Option?" or you "use QC" by asking "revise Option?" (in the two Design Cycles of General Design) or (in the Science Cycle of Science-Design) you "use RC" by asking "revise Model?"

 

4.  Later, maybe you USE your Experiment-Based Evaluation (from #2 in a       Check) to help you Design a new Experiment to USE in your next #1.     {* Action 4 is important, but is different than 1-2-3. }

 

9 Essential Actions we USE in 4 Ways:  This diagram is a visually-organized summary of 8 Essential Actions, showing how you USE an Experiment to make Experimental Information (to make Predictions or make Observations) in #1,  3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) used in 3 Evaluative Comparisons, during General Design and Science-Designand USE Experimental Information (from #1) to Evaluate (to compare or compare or compare) in #2,  and maybe directly USE Experiment-Based Evaluation (from #2) to Generate a new Option (to revise or revise or revise),  and (not shown in diagram because it's different) maybe indirectly USE Experiment-Based Evaluation (from #2) to Design a new Experiment in #4 that you can use in the next #1.

The diagram clearly describes "3 Ways to USE Experiment in 3 Ways:  in 1, "Experiment [designed in 4] is USED to make INFORMATION",   so in 2, "INFORMATION [made in 1] is USED to do EVALUATION",   so in 3, "EVALUATION [done in 2] is USED to guide GENERATION".   /   On the right side, these 3 Ways become 8 Ways because we can Do a Mental Experiment (by imagining) and/or a Physical Experiment (by actualizing) to Make Information;  and we can Use Information for the purpose of General Design (to do a Quality Check for Evaluation that is Used to guide Generation) and/or Science-Design (to do a Reality Check for Evaluation that is Used to guide Generation).

These 9 Actions are the “functional units” of Design Process (of Problem-Solving Process).  Or with a “big picture” perspective, these Actions are how you MAKE Information (in #1) so you can DO Evaluation (in #2) and (in #3 or #4) USE Evaluation.

 

sequences:  A common short-term sequence is 1-2-3 when you Make Information, Evaluate an Option, Revise an Option.  Or maybe you just do 1-2, with no Revision.  Or you do 1-2-3,4 (or just 1-2,4) when in #4 you Design an Experiment that you can use in #1, with 1-2,4,1-...

two kinds of Objectives:  Action 4 is important (it's needed so you can do 1 and thus 1-2 or 1-2-3), but is different than 1 or 2 or 3.  How?  Your purpose in doing 1-2 or 1-2-3 is to directly pursue your Main Objective of finding an Option that will be a Solution for the Problem.  To directly pursue this Main Objective, in 3 you directly USE Experiment-Based Evaluation of This Option (from #2) by asking “what is wrong with This Option?” (in 2) and then (in 3) “how can I revise This Option to make it less-wrong?”  Your focus is This Option.   /   By contrast, in #4 you indirectly USE Experiment-Based Evaluation of This Option (from #2) by asking “what is wrong with the Experimental Information?  what kind(s) of Information is missing?”  4 is indirect in two ways, with its indirect use of Evaluation (by focusing on The Information, not on This Option), and also its function of indirectly pursuing the Main Objective because your purpose in doing 4 is achieving a Sub-Objective of being able to continue directly pursuing your Main Objective (with 1-2 or 1-2-3) by following 4 with 1-2 or 1-2-3.   /   In 1,2,3 you USE an Old Experiment, while in 4 you DESIGN a New Experiment that you then can USE in a new 1,2,3.

motivation and guidance:  Usually 4 is preceded by an Action Sequence (1-2 or 1-2-3) that provides motivation and guidance.  You are motivated when you indirectly USE Experiment-Based Evaluation to conclude that “some Information is missing” so getting more Information (with 4) will help you continue making progress in your Problem-Solving Process.  You are guided by asking “what is missing?” so you recognize a knowledge-gap that can be the basis of a strategy for...

 

Designing Experiments:  Be aware of your Problem-Solving Situation, and ask “what do we want to know?  what additional Information (Predictions or Observations, made in #1) would be useful for Evaluation (when you compare in #2)” and then “what Experiments will produce this Information, by letting me make Predictions or Observations?”  Or with minimal guiding, just creatively ask (for a variety of Experiment-Options) “if I do       , what kinds of things might happen, and what could we learn that might be interesting or useful?”

Mental before Physical:  Early in a process of Designing an Experiment, you try to creatively imagine a wide variety of different Options for Experimental Systems, asking “if we do this, what might happen, and what could we learn?”  This early phase of mental imagining is a creatively divergent search, a quick-and-cheap way to Evaluate many different Options for E-Systems.  Then you can decide whether, for some Experimental Systems, you want to invest more effort in a careful planning of details (re: what to observe and how), or in making Predictions that are more thorough and precise/accurate, or doing a Physical Experiment that usually requires a larger investment of time and money.  To reduce the investment, you can build a prototype of a Solution-Option (what+how and why of proto-typing) to allow quicker/cheaper Physical Experimenting.

more:  Designing an Experiment — it's an Option-in-a-Situation (for General Design) or a Theory-Using Situation (for Science-Design) — can be easy, but consistently doing it well is challenging, is a valuable skill for a scientist or designer.  Some useful creative-and-critical strategies are... basic (for Designing plus Predicting & Observing) and deep & deeper plus summaries (short & long)* from my PhD dissertation (in pages 23-25, 50-52, 66, 96-97, 114-127).   /   * For example, you can design a crucial experiment that will help you distinguish between competing Model-Options (in Science-Design) or (in General Design) competing Solution-Options.

 

Experiments produce Experiences:  Choosing to broadly define Problem & Problem Solving, and Education is useful for building bridges that motivate students so they want to pursue their own personal education.  In another educationally-useful broad definition, an Experiment is any situation that produces Experience, that provides an opportunity to get Experimental Information when you make Predictions (by imagining in a Mental Experiment) or make Observations (during the actualizing in a Physical Experiment).  Every Prediction-Situation and Observation-Situation is an Experiment, so these include many things you do, and most things you experience.  Your total experiences include your first-hand experiences with events you personally Observe (that you remember in your Personal Memory, from your own experience in the distant past or recent past) plus the second-hand experiences (found in our Collective Memory) that were Observed by someone else, then later (in a report or recording) you hear it and/or see it, or (in a web-page, tweet, book,...) you read about it.   /   But broad doesn't mean sloppy;  disciplined creative-and-critical thinking is required to consistently Design Experiments that are scientifically useful, as described in the resources above.

 

Design Process has Accurate Descriptions:  If you think carefully about the 9 essential Actions of Design Process, you'll see that these accurately describe what people do while we're solving problems.  You actually do use the logic of a Quality Check – by comparing Predictions with Goals (or comparing Observations with Goals) while asking “how close is the match?” — to Evaluate an Option during a process of General Design.  And you do use the logic of a Reality Check – by comparing Predictions with Observations, asking “am I surprised?” — during a process of Science-Design.  And the other Essential Actions — when you make Predictions (by imagining) and make Observations (during actualizing);  when your Evaluation stimulates you to ask “can I improve This Option by revising it?”;  and when you design new Experiments — actually ARE the Actions that you do while you're solving problems.   /   an educational benefit:  Due to this descriptive accuracy, when students get Problem-Solving Experiences and then Reflect on their Experiences, they will observe themselves doing the Essential Actions of Design Process, and this recognition lets them use a Process-of-Inquiry to discover Principles-of-Inquiry, with Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles.     { well-designed uses of Design Process can help students learn more from their problem-solving experiences by developing-and-using metacognitive thinking strategies. }

 

 

Coordinating your Process:  You intuitively Coordinate your Problem-Solving Process by making Action Decisions about “what to do next.”  How?  During skillful coordination-of-process you combine cognitive-and-metacognitive awareness of your situation (of “where you are” and “where you want to go” in your process, of what you've done and still need to do) with conditional knowledge of your action-options (by knowing how each action could help you make progress toward a solution, and the conditions when this action can be useful).  Your flexible goal-directed coordinating IS analogous to the flexible goal-directed improvising of a hockey skater, but IS NOT like the rigid choreography of a figure skater.  A section about Two Skaters (and strategic maps, tools, principles) says problem-solving process "is analogous to an expert hockey player's goal-directed structured improvisation that is guided by principles but is continually open to real-time adjustments due to changes in the situation, because even though hockey skaters have a strategic plan, this plan is intentionally flexible, with each skater improvising in response to what happens during the game."    /    You also can coordinate your collaboration, for effective work individually-and-cooperatively, to increase the overall productivity of your group with optimal performing-learning-enjoying.    /    educational value:  Teachers can use the principles of Design Process to help students improve the valuable skill of using “executive control” to regulate their thinking (both conscious and subconscious) by developing-and-using metacognitive thinking strategies to effectively coordinate their thinking skills (creative & critical) into productive process skills.

 

Using Modular Strategies to Coordinate Process

Actions and Sequences:  As outlined above, Design Process shows how 9 essential Actions1) USE an Experiment (to make make),  2) DO Evaluation (compare compare compare),  3) DO Generation (revise revise revise),  4) Design Experiment — are used for Problem-Solving Process.  And it shows how we combine these Actions to form common Action Sequences, as in 1-2,  1-2-3,  1-2,4,  1-2-3,4.   These essential Actions and common Sequences can be used flexibly, without rigid choreography, so each person can flexibly Coordinate their Problem-Solving Process – by making Action-Decisions about “what to do next” – trying to optimally customize their process for each problem they solve.  How?  By flexibly using...

Modular Coordination Strategies:  While you're solving a problem, there are MANY different ways to combine the 9 Actions into functionally-useful Sequences, and to combine Sequences into an overall Process.  Because in Design Process the Actions are semi-independent, they can be combined in many different sequences.  It's analogous to modular construction using the independent units of LEGO Bricks that can be combined in many ways to form many different structures.  Another useful analogy is quarks-atoms-molecules-objects, with Actions & Sequences at the analogous levels of atoms & molecules {but not quarks} because there are...

    many ways to combine atoms-and-molecules (with each combination forming a different object), and
    many ways to combine Actions-and-Sequences (with each combination forming a different Process).
 

Variations on a Theme:  For most problems, your process is similar because there is a basic theme that is used in many variations.  The basic process-theme is formed by the modular “units” of the essential Actions you use for all problem solving.  But these Actions are used in many process-variations, with modular combining of Actions in many different ways, with improvisation that is structured yet flexible.  The improvising is guided by goal-directed coordinating so it has structure, but is intentionally flexible, is open to real-time adjustments in response to what is happening — that you use (by making improvised Action-Decisions) to customize your process for each different Problem-Situation.

 


 
open only this page   –   put page into left frame 

Part 2C:

combining Models (mine + others)

in Education for Problem Solving

 

Before thinking about ways to effectively combine Models we'll first look at...

 

My Model for Design Process

(for Problem-Solving Process)

two goals:   my Model-for-process* is intended to be accurate and useful, so it will...

    accurately describe the process that people use when we are solving problems, and
    be educationally useful by helping people improve their understanding-of-process and (more important) their performing-with-process when they are solving problems.
 

* this Model is called Design Process (DP).    { or less often, Design-Thinking Process }

 

my Model is a family of models:   My overall Model (capitalized) is a systematically organized family of models – used in a 4-Stage progression of learning – with each model being a different version of the same Model.   { i.e. each different model is a different description of the same process, with each model featuring different aspects of the Model.}   { due to these differences, each model accurately describes in different ways, and each model is educationally useful in different ways }

In Part 2A (and 2B) you've seen many models (they're sub-Models) that are part of the overall Model for Design Process:  the first two models are complex (they're both Stage 3b) and I encourage you to “study them, creatively explore them” with discovery learning so you'll understand them;   later, Stage 3a focused on how-and-why we do 3 Comparisons of 3 Elements (Predictions & Observations, Goals) for Science-Design and General Design;   other models are Define-and-Solve (showing Simplicity of Process, in Stage 1) and Evaluating an Option (showing Symmetry of Process – with Mental Experiments & Physical Experiments, to use in two Quality Checks & Design Cycles during General Design, in Stage 2) and Evaluating a Model (in Stage 3c by using a Reality Check & Science Cycle during Science-Design);  Stage 3b contains all Essential Actions, including the basic connections between General Design & Science-Design (in the 3 Comparisons of Stage 3a) that in Stage 4 (which contains no new actions) are explored more deeply, along with in-depth examinations of Designing Experiments in the contexts of General Design & Science-Design, including Plan & Do (with Mental Experiments & Physical Experiments) in Stage 2b.

Each of these models (in Stages 1-2-3 & 4) is represented in a visual-and-verbal Actions Diagram (for 1,2,2b,3a,3b,3b,3c) that shows some of the essential Actions (usually mental, sometimes also physical) that we use while we're solving problems.   In these models, the same Model-process is being viewed from different model-perspectives and is described in different ways, with differing levels of detail, by including some problem-solving actions, but not other actions.    {how sub-models form a total-Model of Design Process}

 

In Stages 1-2-3-4 the models feature verbal descriptions plus verbal-and-visual descriptions with Action Diagrams.  I've also written 10 Modes of Problem-Solving with verbal description.  These functionally-related Modes of Action (mental and/or physical) become the Model for Design Process when the 10 Modes are logically organized to show the coherent integration of productive actions (in these Modes) to form a productive process.also:  Other people have developed other models for problem-solving process.  Our models – those developed by me & by others – all describe the same process of problem solving, and we can work together to develop strategies for using My Model along with Other Models in creative ways that make the combination of Models better than any single Model by itself.

 

 What-and-Why?  —   4 Stages 

What?   Design Process is a Model containing many models.  Each model is accurate in different ways – by selecting different actions to include & exclude, and because problem-solving process varies from one life-situation to another – and is educationally useful in different ways.Why?   Students get long-term educational benefits when they combine Principles from all models into a Model of Design Process, because they are constructing a deeper understanding of problem-solving process.  But will better understanding-of-process help students improve their doing-of-process, so they have better overall problem-solving skills (for General Design & Science-Design) because they have better creative-and-critical thinking skills and whole-process skills?  I think "yes" for reasons explained here.

How?   Students cannot immediately construct a "deep understanding" of problem solving.  Their process of understanding requires time.  A basic strategy for “how” is to use progressions of learning – beginning with a simple model, then (as in Stages 1,2,3,4 described above) gradually increasing the complexity – so we can help students gradually construct increasingly deeper understandings of their problem-solving process, of their own personal Model that is useful for them, is being used by them.  One teaching method is discovery learning when students use a process of inquiry to learn principles for inquiry.     {of course, a progression of learning is necessary for everyone, for students & teachers, for me & you & others;  e.g. I described your "creative exploration" of an Actions Diagram for Stage 3 as "a challenging example of Discovery Learning" }   {more about using a process of inquiry to teach principles for inquiry}

 

What?   Is my Model a Method?  No and Yes.*  How can it be both?  Because my Model (for Design Process) IS NOT a rigid step-by-step Method (with steps used in the same sequence for every problem), but IS a flexible “Method” if this is defined as a logical framework that shows – as in a time-lapse videothe actions that people typically use when we're solving problems.  How is flexibility produced?  By using Conditional Knowledge when you Coordinate your Problem-Solving Process by making Action Decisions about “what to do next.”  The result is analogous to the flexible goal-directed improvising of a hockey player, but not the rigid choreography of a figure skater.

 


 

combining my Model with other Models

Design Process can be the only Model that's used for problem-solving instruction with inquiry activities, or it can be combined with other Models.

Educators have developed many Models for problem-solving process.  When we're working together to co-pursue our goals for improving education, one productive action is developing instruction methods that creatively combine two (or more) Models-for-process, so the combination is more effective for teaching ideas-and-skills.  We want the Models to interact in ways that are synergistically supportive, that make the combination of Models better than any single Model by itself.

 

During a process of creative combining, Design Process (DP) can “play well with other Models” with a “yes and” relationship, because DP...

• is similar to currently used Models (and strategies) for teaching inquiry, so it's educationally compatible;

• is distinctive in important ways,* so it offers special added value, with extra benefits for students.

Because it's similar, Design Process can be combined with other Models now being used by teachers;   and it's distinctive, so it can be especially effective for adding synergistic value in a well-designed combination of Models;  instead of a competition for the doing same function during instruction, we can design instruction that uses DP & other models to do complementary functions, with each contributing to the overall instruction.    {one part of a "well-designed combination" is using Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles to help students discover Principles of Design Process, and of other Models}

 

* One distinctive feature of Design Process is its accurate description of the common way we use design-and-science together.  Our everyday “science during life” is naturally explained by the integrative structure of Design Process because the central core of its evaluative logic – when 3 Elements are used in 3 Comparisons, as in the left-side diagram below – shows the way we naturally do both General Design (aka Design, the usual term) and Science-Design (aka Science, usually) together.  By contrast, most other models describe a process of either Design or Science, but not both.  For example, Science Buddies has one model for Scientific Method and another model for Engineering Design Process.  But instead of keeping them separate, Design Process logically integrates Science with Design, showing us the most common way we use Science during our everyday problem-solving Design and also in the technical problem-solving Design of engineering or business.  Here is my model, and their models:

 
3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) used in 3 Evaluative Comparisons, during General Design and Science-Design   Science Buddies - model for Scientific Method Science Buddies - model for Engineering Design Process
 

The smooth integrating of Design-AND-Science (in Design Process) will help students develop a smooth integrating of Design-AND-Science (in their thinking) while they are solving problems.

 

short-term and long-term:  Another major difference is that in Design Process the focus is short-term Actions — and connecting these to form short-term Sequences (as when we make and use Goals-Predictions-Observations in Quality Checks & Reality Checks that can be used in Design Cycles & Science Cycles) — while other Models often describe longer-term phases that contain the shorter-term actions & sequences in Design Process.  For example, some other Models-for-Design have phases for Mental Ideation and Physical Testing, which correspond to Predictions-Based Design Cycles and Observations-Based Design Cycles in Design Process.  I've made tables to compare the structures of Design Process and many Models that include Stanford's d.school and Engineering is Elementary (EiE), with a detailed examination of EiEIn doing this my goal is to show how Other Models can be combined with Design Process, so we can help students understand how their creative-and-critical productive thinking happens during the short-term Actions and short-term Sequences that are the focus of Design Process.   /   iou – Later, I'll describe the modular structure of Design Process (working it into the paragraph above), using analogy of quarks-atoms-molecules-objects, with most other models on the "objects" end of the range;  Design Process in the middle with its Actions & Sequences like atoms & molecules;  at smaller levels, our creative-and-critical thinking (used in Actions & Sequences) is analogous to subatomic particles (protons, neutrons, electrons);  and neurochemical “sub-thinking actions” are like quarks.

Structures and Strategies:  Typically, a Model-for-process is educationally useful in two ways, by providing structures (for instruction) and strategies (for thinking).  Each model has its own structures & strategies, so each offers its own benefits for students.  When we effectively combine the structures & strategies from two (or more) models, we combine their benefits.  For example, a teacher can use Long-Term Phases (in another model) to structure their instruction during a problem-solving activity;  then after the activity, students Reflect on their Experiences, so they will recognize the Essential Actions and Short-Term Sequences of Design Process.   /   My page about using Other Models examines the structures & strategies (and framework + supplements) of Stanford's d.school.  Another option to learn from, and consider using, is in a page (from ThoughtfulLearning.com) describing problem-solving instruction in a different way by telling a story (about a creative-and-critical collaboration) and continuing with strategy-principles & instruction-activities (for critical thinking, and for creative thinking) plus a Model with a problem-solving structure of "the back-and-forth interplay of critical and creative thinking" with a chart showing "how these two types of thinking [can] interact" during a process of problem solving.   And there are many other fascinating ways to creatively design activities that will be fun & useful and will motivate students to pursue their own personal education.

 

Thinking Strategies to Improve Many Skills:  We can help students “make things better in many ways” by helping them develop-and-use strategies for Self-Regulated Learning (i.e. for Plan-and-Do and Adjust)* with metacognitive thinking strategies that improve their learning and/or performing for problem-solving skills plus basic skills (like reading & math) and content-knowledge.    {* basically, Plan-and-Do is just making decisions about “what to do, when, and how” by shifting between Planning and Doing – between Imagining and Actualizing – with Mental Experimenting and Physical Experimenting.}

 

Above I explain how "other Models often describe longer-term phases that contain the shorter-term actions & sequences in Design Process."  But for some process-Models (e.g. POE & CER) we don't need to distinguish between short-term actions and long-term phases.  For these Models – especially for POE – the connections with Design Process (re: short-term actions) are direct and simple.

Short-Term Actions:  As described below (at the second part of a section about the logic of Science-Design), there is a direct correspondence between the short-term actions in POE & CER (Predict-Observe-Explain & Claim-Evidence-Reasoning) and in Design Process.  But we get synergistic added value when students understand these actions within the logical structure of Design Process, which shows a problem-solving context when the short-term actions combine to form short-term sequences.  Two analogous sequences occur for Science {or Design} when Predictions & Observations are compared in an evaluative Reality Check {or Quality Check} that prompts a student to ask "revise?" in a Cycle of Science {or Cycle of Design} and maybe do critical-and-creative guided Generation by using critical Evaluation to stimulate-and-guide their creative Generation of a revised Explanatory Model {or revised Option-for-Solution} that comes closer to achieving their Goals during a project of Science-Design {or General Design}.

 

Science-and-Design:  POE is an excellent Model for only-Science.  But CER is more flexible, because (like Design Process, DP) it's a Model that can be used for only-Science or only-Design, or Design-and-Science.  Due to this flexibility in both Models, CER and DP can be used effectively in a coordinated Wide-Spiral Curriculum.  I think this should be done, and it now is being done by using CER;  Heather Cianci says "science classes use [CER] frequently, but it works well in any content area.  In fact, my entire school uses it.  ...  A C-E-R writing framework works especially well for teachers adhering to the Common Core State Standards.  The words ‘claim’, ‘evidence’, and ‘reasoning’ are directly from the standards themselves." (with emphasis added by me)

Standards and Models:  The major USA standards — Common Core (CC, for language & math) and Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS, for science & engineering)form a well-designed framework for curriculum & instruction that is coordinated [as in what I call a Wide-Spiral Curriculum] across subject areas and student agesCC and NGSS have been designed so they're compatible with each other.  And both are compatible with CER;  Heather reports that CER is used in science classes [NGSS], and "the words" of CER "are directly from the [CC] standards."  And I've explained (in a summary & in depth) how Design Process is compatible with NGSS, and why using DP would produce “added value” during instruction that's guided by NGSS.  In the context of CC+NGSS, I think that if we provide structures for activities (of science-inquiry & design-inquiry) by creatively designing a combination of Models – for example, with DP and CER, plus SRL and another Model for Design, as described below* – and we try to optimize their synergistically-productive interactions, the combination-of-Models would produce significant added value for students.   This confidence is based on a belief that it's possible to help all students (of any age) learn basic Principles of Problem Solving.

Two Structures for Instruction:  We can design instruction that begins with an activity of Design-Inquiry, using the simplest model of Design Process to show students how they are just Generating Ideas and Evaluating Ideas (in continuing Cycles of Design);  then the teacher uses other Models for Design-Inquiry and/or Science-Inquiry, and later uses more-complete models of Design Process (DP) for deeper understandings.  But some teachers may find it easier (and more effective) to begin with another Model – instead of the simplest DP – to provide a structure for their do-think-learn activities when they do science-inquiry or design-inquiry, as in this combination of activities and Models:

* To design standards-based C&I, one possibility is combining DP with POE & CER, plus one Model for Design, and SRL.   Begin with the simple POE (for Science),* and use DP with Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles (ERP) to help students discover (recognize) Principles for POE-Process that is basic Science Process;   then connect POE with CER by showing how POE & CER are similar (but also with some differences);   use ERP to teach Principles of POE-CER-DP;   use CER+DP to generalize skills-doing-Science (with POE+DP and POE+CER+DP) into skills-doing-Design (with CER+DP).   Sometime – either soon after beginning with POE to structure activities of Science-Inquiry, or later – begin doing Design-Inquiry with another Model, such as Engineering is Elementary or (for older students?) the d.school of Stanford, or a similar Model.   {* or a teacher can begin with Design-Inquiry, and later do Science-Inquiry with POE}  {and maybe also use another Model for Science-Inquiry to supplement POE+DP+CER}

 

an Instruction Model for teaching Science-Inquiry:   In a classroom (for K-12 or college), one effective way to structure an Experience of Science-Inquiry (when students are using the logic of Science-Design) is with the method of Predict-Observe-Explain, aka POE.  How?  The teacher describes an Experimental Situation, and asks students to Predict what will happen and thus what they will Observe;  then the Experiment is done (by teacher, or students, or in a video) and students Observe what really happens;  then they try to Explain their Observations — in a process that's logically the same as when they Predict, except now they can use Observations from the new Experiment, not just previous Experiments — by describing what happened, how, and why.    {two ways to Predict}    /    In a minor variation, a teacher may want students to Predict and then Explain (for themselves and/or for others) the thinking they're using to Predict, so the activity becomes Predict-Explain-Observe-Explain, PEOE.

POE + ERP + Design Process:   Teachers can combine POE with ERP – for Experience + Reflections ➞ Principles – to learn Principles of Design Process.  How and Why?  Experiences (of doing POE) can be supplemented by Reflections (on the Experiences) to help students learn Principles (of doing POE in Science-Design) that are logically organized in Design Process, as they can see in the actions-diagram for how (by using two kinds of Experiments, by mentally imagining & physically actualizing) they make Predictions & Observations, and then compare them in a Reality Check, so they can ask "revise?" and decide whether a Science Cycle (using a revised Model) is logically justified.  The connection between actions in Design Process and POE – especially Predict & Observe, but also Explain ("using Model + logic") – is direct and obvious.  When students do POE-plus-ERP to learn Principles of Design Process, this will help them understand (at a deeper level) the logical process-of-thinking they use while they're doing an activity of Science-Design that is structured with POE, like two kinds of Experimenting (done Mentally & Physically, by imagining & actualizing) and Reality Checks, plus Science Cycles (to maybe "revise Model"), and more.

two similar models – POE and CER:   A model of CER (Claim, Evidence, Reasoning) is similar to POE,* but – unlike POE that is used for only Science-Design – CER can be used for Science-Design and General Design.  In this way, with its wide scope, CER is similar to Design Process.     {more: the benefits of combining POE & CER with each other, and with Design Process including their uses in C&I that's designed to achieve goals for the learning standards of Common Core (for Language & Math) and NGSS (for Science & Engineering) }    {* POE & CER have similarities and also differences}

 

 

  This is the end of my Introductory Overview.

 

  Everything below here is in a BLUE BOX or GRAY BOX.

( I think the BLUE-BOX parts will be more useful for most teachers. )


 

 

open only this page  –   put page into left frame 

Exploring the Website

You can begin in four ways:

 

by studying a table of contents to get a “big picture” view of the website.    {note: below here inside the gray-box, all links open in this frame, replacing it.}

  Then you can learn more deeply by clicking the table's links to explore and discover.  But before doing in-depth explorations, you probably will want to get an overview of the main ideas,...

 

by reading (or re-reading) the introductory overview in this Homepage.

 

by reading a page about Building Educational Bridges that explains how we can use the wide scope of problem-solving Design Thinking (it includes almost everything we do in life) to build two-way bridges — from life into school, and back into life — that will improve transfers of learning and transitions of attitudes.  These bridges will help a wider diversity of students (each with their own personal story) improve their confidence & motivations and problem-solving skills, for better educational equity.  Basically, we can (and should) help more students improve themselves, by giving them a wider variety of experiences, and helping them learn more from their experiences.

 

and by using the rest of this home-page, by reading its text and (to learn more about the ideas) clicking its links;  the main content...

begins with...
a brief Website Overview,
and continues with overview-summaries about...
[ iou - the order-of-summaries has changed, and I'll revise it here during Summer 2023: ]
    Defining Our Goals  and  Pursuing Our Goals,
followed by
        4 Ways to Use Experiences (that come from Experiments);
    why broad definitions are useful for problem-solving education,
    Learn by Discovery (use inquiry-Process to teach inquiry-Principles),
 
    my model for how we use Design Process to solve problems,
        Simplicity  +  Symmetry (with verbal/visual thinking) and
    Combine Experience with Reflection and Principles, (why?)
    Combine Design Process with Other Models-for-Process, (how?)
and then more about the main topics.
 

 



 

 
This brief Website Overview summarizes the main ideas.    /    tips:  When you click links, they'll open on the right side, so (if necessary) you should put this page on the left side.  And you can use the right-side's colorized Table of Contents to get another kind of Website Overview.
 

During my PhD project I designed a model of Science Process.  It has been generalized into a broader model of Design Process (including updated Science Process) that describes the flexibly improvised creative-and-critical productive thinking we use for doing almost everything in life when we solve problems by designing better products, activities, relationships, strategies, and explanatory theories.This wide scope of design thinking (used for Science-Design & General Design) lets teachers coordinate design activities across all subject areas and student ages, designing goal-directed curriculum & instruction to improve ideas-and-skills in each area and to build educational bridges that promote transfers of learning (between areas and into life) and transitions of attitudes (to improve educational equity).  Students’ motivations to learn increase when they recognize the personal benefits of skillful design thinking, including its use for cognitive-and-metacognitive Thinking Strategies to improve their learning & performing & enjoying in all areas of life.experience + principles:  I think students can learn more from their inquiry experiences (in design-inquiry and science-inquiry that's blended into eclectic instruction) if we teach inquiry principles using Design Process.*  How?  With wise guiding and metacognitive reflection plus verbal/visual explanations of Design Process` while trying to maintain flow-and-fun.   /   * e.g., We can show students 4 Ways to Use Experiences (to Use Experiments) that include Comparing Goals with Predictions or with Observations in Quality Checks (so their critical idea-Evaluation can guide their creative idea-Generation in Cycles of General Design) and Comparing Predictions with Observations in Reality Checks (used for Science-Design).collaboration:  I want to work cooperatively with other educators, developing creative uses of Design Process to improve education for thinking skills-and-process at all levels, in K-12 through college and with informal education.

This summary is expanded in a longer Website Overview.
 

 

 

 

Who?  —  I'm writing for Other Educators.

This website is designed for educators, so "we" refers to teachers, curriculum designers, policy deciders, parents, and researchers.   /   Some parts of the website might also be directly useful for students “as-is” but... almost all of the ideas must be adapted by a teacher, for effective learning by students.  Yes, I want to design instruction-applications that will be useful for students (and their teachers), but to do this I will need to collaborate with other educators.

Why?  —  I want to help us improve our Education for Problem Solving.

This website explores educational strategies & activities that we – myself and other educators with similar goals (your ideas and mine), cooperatively working together – can develop and use, to help students improve their problem-solving skills (in all areas of life) by increasing their problem-solving experiences and helping them learn more from their experiences.

 
 

How?  —  A Website for Efficient Learning

My website (including this homepage) is large, with lots of ideas.  Some people will think it's TMI, but I think a sharing of relevant Information is useful, so instead of "keeping it simple" by reducing the number of ideas,...I'm aiming for a high ratio of ideas / words, to help busy people like you – with lots to do, and not enough time to do it – learn efficiently with a high ratio of learning / time.

I want to help you learn a lot quickly, so I'm trying to explain ideas quickly (yet clearly & thoroughly), and provide links to places where the ideas are examined in more depth.  With this structure it's easier for you to make decisions (about how many links to click, and how much to read) and to learn as much as you want — in 1 minute, 10 minutes, 100 minutes, or more, in whatever time you want to invest, now and later — about the combination-of-ideas you choose.

   

 

open only this page   –   put page into left frame 

Experiences and Experiments

Learning from Experience:  A worthy goal for education is trying to help students learn how to learn more from their experiences so they can improve their performing-and-learning.

Experiences and Experiments:  In my broad definition,* an Experiment is any situation that produces Experience, that provides an opportunity to get Experimental Information by making Predictions (in an imagined Mental Experiment) or making Observations (in an actualized Physical Experiment),  so an Experiment is any Prediction-Situation or Observation-Situation,  so Experiments include almost everything people do, and are involved in almost everything we experience.  Your total experiences include your first-hand experiences with events you personally Observe (that you remember in your Personal Memory), plus your second-hand experiences (that you find in our Collective Memory) Observed by someone else, then later (in a report or recording) you hear it and/or see it, or (in a web-page, tweet, book,...) you read about it.* Why are broad definitions useful for education?

 

 4 Ways to USE Experiments  (i.e. to USE Experiences)Design Process shows the central role of Experiments (Mental & Physical)* in problem solving, when you Design Experiments so you can...

    1.  USE an Experiment (Mental or Physical) to make Information (Predictions or Observations)
         { you “run” the experiment-situation mentally (by imagining it) or physically (by actualizing it) };
    2.  USE this Experimental Information to do Evaluation of an Option (e.g. of an Action, or...);
    3.  USE this Experiment-Based Evaluation to guide Generation of another Option.
 

* Mental & Physical EXPERIMENTS produce Mental & Physical EXPERIENCES , as explained above.    { Information can be old and new, made by yourself & others }

 

Below, when a box (1 2 3 3) is activated – by touching it or moving your mouse over it – you can see four isolation diagrams that show only the problem-solving actions for Use #1 (make Information) and Use #2 (do Evaluation) and Uses #3 (guide Generation for Science-Design & General Design).     {or you can see a larger diagram, but without mouse-overs}

 

In addition to 1 2 3, you can...

4.  USE the Experiment-Based Evaluation (from #2 above) to guide Generation of more Information (in #1).  This action is analogous to #3, except instead of Generating new Options (in #3) you are now (in #4) Generating new Information.   How?  You get new Information from new Experiments.  First you ask “what additional Information (Predictions or Obervations) would be useful for Evaluation?” and then, in a question to stimulate ideas for Experimental Design, “what Experiments will produce this Information?” (in 1) that you can Use in 2 & 3.

 

Of course, you will use these sequences flexibly during your problem-solving process, as described in the Introductory Overview.

 8 Ways to Use Experiments:  In the diagram below, the left side shows "3 Ways to Use Experiments" in a simplified summary of actions in the diagram above.  And there are "8 Ways to Use Experiments" if we distinguish between 2 kinds of Information (made Mentally or Physically) and 3 kinds of Evaluation (when we "compare" in a Quality Check or Reality Check or Quality Check) to do 3 kinds of Generation (by asking revise? or revise? or revise?).

Many Ways (3 or 8) to USE EXPERIMENTS

 

INFORMATION can be old and new, made by yourself & others:  Your OBSERVATIONS can be "made when you observe what is happening in the present (new) or (old) remember what has happened in the past."  You also can use OBSERVATIONS-of-past or PREDICTIONS-for-future that are made by other people.  Thus, by combining "old and new" with "yourself & others," you can MAKE knowledge-information (OBSERVATIONS or PREDICTIONS) that is new,  and you can FIND knowledge-information that is old {is already existing} by REMEMBERING it in your personal memory or LOCATING it in our collective memory, in what is recorded {is culturally remembered} in books, web-pages, journals, audio & video recordings, etc.   Combining the two options for timing (old and new) plus sources (you & others), here are the four combinations, four ways to get Information:

 

 
made by
YOURSELF
made by
OTHER PEOPLE
 OLD
(Remember or Find)
OBSRVN or PREDN
  are in your memory  
OBSRVN or PREDN
  are in cultural memory  
 NEW
(Make in Experiment)
OBSRVN or PREDN
by doing Experiment
OBSRVN or PREDN
by doing Experiment

 

And viewing things from another perspective, you can...

Learn More from Your Experiments/Experiences:  using Design Process can help you learn more from your experiences so you can improve your performing and/or learning (+ enjoying) in many areas of life.

{more about Old & New Information}

 

 

 

 open only this page   –   put page into left frame 
 

Strategies for Instruction  —  WHY and HOW

WHY should we use "experience + reflection + principles" to help students improve their problem-solving skills?     { what are the benefits of supplementing inquiry-experiences with inquiry-principles? }

HOW can we design multi-model instruction that effectively combines the benefits offered by Design Process and by other models? 

MORE — To get a more comprehensive overview, you can read Page-Summaries that include these ideas:

 

Problems and Objectives:   A problem is "any opportunity, in any area of life, to make things better,"* and  problem solving is "converting an actual current situation into a better future situation."   In a wide range of design fields that include engineering & sciences, humanities & arts, the objective is to design (to find, invent, or improve) a better product, activity, relationship, strategy, and/or explanatory theory.  These objectives include almost everything we do in life.     {* You can make things better when you either increase quality for any aspect of life, or maintain quality by minimizing a potential decrease of quality,  when you either promote a helpful change, or resist a harmful change. } • An Overview of Design Process describes — with a brief introduction to summarize its goals, then visually-and-verbally in five stages of a progression for learning — what it IS.*     {Simplicity & Symmetry in Design Process}

• But to avoid inaccurate stereotypes, it's also important to know what it ISN'T.  Design Process is not a step-by-step rigid method.  Instead it's a flexible framework that can help students master the typical thinking-and-actions used by experts when they solve problems.  Experts often use long-term planning, and always use short-term planning (for deciding “what to do next”) to coordinate their process of design.  Their short-term process is analogous to the flexible goal-directed improvising of a hockey player, but not the rigid choreography of a figure skater.  When we ask “Is there a method?”, why is the best answer No and Yes?     {long-term phases and short-term sequences} We should think with empathy (what is it?) in projects and relationships. Collaboration and Communication in a Productive Community 

Success and Failure:  I have two goals for my Model(s) of Design Process.  I think one goal (for accurate description) has been achieved, but another (for effective education) has not, but I think it will be later.   Why do I think this?

teacher enjoying Design Thinking

Exploring Possibilities:  Should we creatively combine ideas from different models-for-process?

Objectives for Educational Design:  I want to work cooperatively with other educators to develop instruction for teaching Design Process (along with other models?) using teacher-guided classroom activities and/or computer-based interactive modules.  But, responding to an obvious question,...

 

WHY we should teach Design Process explains why — due to benefits arising from increased motivation, transfer, metacognition, organization, and design/science connections — "using Design Process might be very useful in education, so the possibilities are worth exploring and developing."WHY — Experience plus Principles:  When we ask “why teach Design Process?” an important sub-question is whether a well-designed combination of experience plus principles (along with reflection) will be more educationally effective than experience by itself, to help students improve their skills in creative-and-critical productive thinking and their ability to combine thinking skills into a thinking process* that is more effective for solving problems.  I think we should answer YES.     {* A better understanding of process-principles can help students improve their use of conditional knowledge to coordinate their problem-solving process by making action-decisions in a way that is analogous to the flexible goal-directed improvising of a hockey player, but not the rigid choreography of a figure skater.}• WHAT — Teachers can provide their students with 4 Levels of Learning from Inquiry.  What usually happens?  Teachers often decide (for unfortunately rational reasons) to give students no experiences (or very few) with design-inquiry and science-inquiry.  Or, for reasons that are better (especially in the long term), students can get experiences;  or experiences + reflection;  or, as I think is best, experiences + reflection + principles.

• HOW — While thinking about instruction, we can ask, “is experience + principles better than just experience?”  I think we should answer YES, and then ask “what model(s) of principles-for-process should we use?”,* and “how can we design goal-directed instruction that matches the ways teachers like to teach and students like to learn (and are able to learn)?”

 

• HOW* We should search for effective ways to combine models, to pursue our goal of improving education for ideas-and-skills.  We should try to design curriculum & instruction that creatively combines long-term phases (used in all models-for-process, including Design Process) and short-term sequences (in Design Process)* to produce model-interactions that are synergistically supportive, that make a combination-of-models better than any model by itself.   /   Two key sequences show the Quality Checks & Reality Checks we use when Thinking for Design & Thinking for Science.

• WHY — Typically, models-for-process are educationally useful in two ways, by offering structures (for instruction) and strategies (for thinking).  Each model has its own structure & strategies, so each offers its own distinctive benefits for students.  When we effectively combine the structures & strategies from two (or more) models, we combine their benefits.  We can design effective ways to combine structures, and combine strategies.

• WHAT — One “strategy for combining” is showing how short-time sequences (in Design Process) occur within longer-time phases (in all models, including Design Process), to help students understand how their creative-and-critical productive thinking actually occurs in these short-time actions & sequences.   /   Two “ways to combine” are to use Design Process early-and-late (early with my simplest model and later for deeper understanding), or to use it after instruction begins with another model.   {descriptions of these two ways}

 

• WHAT — More generally, Design Process (and other models) can be used in a wide-spiral curriculum because the wide scope of problem solving lets teachers use inquiry activities in all subject areas — in sciences, engineering, business, humanities, and arts, in an ideas-and-skills curriculum with wide scope — so in every area students can have analogous problem-solving experiences.  These experiences can be one part of a wide spiral curriculum that has wide scope (so related learning experiences are coordinated across different areas) and uses spiral repetitions (so learning experiences are coordinated over time).• HOW should we teach Design Process?  Teachers develop strategies for teaching (and coaching) that can include guiding students to help them use a process of inquiry to discover principles of inquiry.

 

 

 

 

BROAD DEFINITIONS in Problem-Solving Education

Why are broad definitions useful for Problem-Solving Education?

By using BROAD DEFINITIONS (of problem & problem solving, education & experiment)* we can help students discover that their problem-solving experiences include almost everything they do in life.  This WIDE SCOPE lets us build two kinds of educational bridges — between life & school, and between subject areas in a wide-spiral curriculum — to improve transfers (of ideas-and-skills) and transitions (of attitudes).  By building-and-using these bridges, we can help a wider diversity of students (for better educational equity) by giving them a wider variety of experiences, and showing them how to learn more from their experiences, to improve their attitudes (confidence, motivations,...) and problem-solving skills in all areas of life.

* This homepage begins with definitions — of problem {as any opportunity to make things better} and problem solving {whenever you try to make things better, in any area of life} and education {it's learning from your experiences (in all areas of life, not just in school) so you can improve, so you can be more effective in making things better} — and continues with my broad defining of experiment {as any situation that produces experience, that lets you mentally make predictions or physically make observations, so an experiment is any prediction-situation or observation-situation, which includes almost everything in your own first-hand experiences and in the second-hand experiences of others}. 

Each of us is a learner, and (in many situations) a teacher.  Broadly defined, you are being a teacher whenever you help another person get more life-experiences, and/or learn more from their life-experiences, whether or not you're doing this consciously, whether or not you're doing it as your profession.  And if you are a professional teacher, you'll have many opportunities to help others learn more.   {my goal for this website is to help you teach more effectively, so == iou [to be continued]}

 

more:  It's educationally useful to combine broad definitions with the simplicity of Design Process* so we can more effectively show students the WIDE SCOPE of problem-solving experiences.  Later, when we help them learn-and-use the symmetry of Design Process (with analogous Mental Experiences & Physical Experiences) we are helping them develop a deeper UNDERSTANDING of their problem-solving process, and this Understanding also (along with Wide Scope) promotes transfers of ideas-and-skills in school* and into everyday life.

EXTRAS  —  The main benefits of broad definitions are summarized above.  Other benefits & broad definitions are examined in other parts of the website:  My broad definition of strategy (it's one kind of problem-solving objective, along with products, activities, relationships, and explanatory theories) includes all of the decisions (small & large, in personal and professional contexts) that you frequently make in everyday life.

* With a broad definition of design thinking, students frequently use a creative-and-critical process of design thinking — a Design-Thinking Process (a Design Process) that is Problem-Solving Process — whenever they DEFINE a Problem and try to SOLVE the Problem by creatively Generating Options (for a Problem-Solution) and critically Evaluating Options, in iterative Cycles of Design.If we broadly define our goals (for the performing & learning & enjoying of students) this can stimulate creativity in our goal-directed designing of curriculum & instruction.

A broad definition of engineering (even wider than in the NGSS Standards) will help us integrate education for STEM & non-STEM in a wide-spiral curriculum that will encourage more students to broaden their perspectives so they become open to “careers in STEM” when they improve their self-image, reduce the self-limitations on their personal goals, and this will improve educational equity.

 

 

open only this page   –   put page into left frame 
 

Learning by Discovery

Students can use inquiry Process to discover inquiry Principles.  How?  In a 4th Level of Learning-from-Inquiry (by combining Experience + Reflection + Principles into sequences of E+R+P)* a teacher can guide students to help them use a process-of-inquiry to DISCOVER principles-of-inquiry.* A typical ERP-sequence (with E+R+P) begins with students getting Experiences by doing design, followed by Reflections-on-experience that help them discover Principles of Design Process, with a teacher sometimes guiding students while they experience and reflect/discover.During the process of repeating ERP over & over, eventually — but not too early, because the process of learning principles should be “ideas first” followed later by naming & organizing — a teacher can use the structure of Design Process to guide the reflections and discoveries of students.  For example,...

    students (and teachers) can study any diagram – such as the four above – and reflect on their experiences with solving problems, asking “what part of my problem-solving process is in each part of the diagram?”
   * They (and you) can study this diagram while thinking about 3 Ways We Use Experiments (search the diagram to find "using" & "Use" & "use", 8 times) and how these 3 Ways (but it's actually 8 Ways) are connected in flexibly improvised sequences.  Also, a 4th Way to Use Experiments happens when they ask “what do we want to know?  what additional information would be useful for us?” so they can Get More Experiences by Designing More Experiments.
    Then they (and you) can click areas in this Diagram 3b` and learn more by reading my explanations of what's happening in each area.     {learning by discovery and with explanations}  
 

During their teacher-guided reflections & discussions, classroom (with Students & Teachers) actively doing Design Thinking instead of “discovering” a student is “recognizing” that during a process of design they are using skills they already know, because they already have used Design Thinking to do almost everything in their life.  When students discover (when they recall-and-recognize), they are just making their own experience-based prior knowledge — of how they have been solving problems — more explicit-and-organized within the logical framework of Design Process.     {learning by “discovery” is more effective for learning their own internal Process than for learning external Concepts}   {  Will improving their knowledge-of-process help them improve their skills in problem-solving Design Thinking?  Yes.  }

 

{note: Below is another version of these ideas, and later I'll combine these two paragraphs}

In many ways this method of learning-by-inquiry is similar to “discovery learning” for CONCEPTS, when teachers give students experiences and promote reflections-on-experience by helping them ask “what did I (or we) do, and why?”  But compared with learning external Concepts, using this method-of-learning for their own internal PROCESS can be much more effective, because* a student is not “discovering” new actions, instead they are “recognizing” old actions, they are realizing that during a process of problem solving they are using actions-and-process they already know.  When teachers have constructed transfer-bridges from school into life, students will recognize that they already are using familiar problem-solving actions & process to do almost everything in their life.  Due to their prior experience, when we help them learn principles for process (as in Design Process) we are just directing their attention to their prior knowledge — of how they have been solving problems — and we're making this knowledge more explicit-and-organized within the logical framework of Design Process.     {improving knowledge-of-process can lead to improving skills-with-process} Teachers also can Learn-by-Discovering:  Earlier I say "if you want to fully explore the diagram so you can ‘discover more’ on your own, do it now... before you read my descriptions of problem-solving process... maybe using these questions to stimulate your thinking."3 Elements in 3 Comparison-Checksquestions to guide your exploring:  While you're studying the diagram, you may find it helpful to think about these questions:  How do you make PREDICTIONS about what will happen?  How many ways can you get OBSERVATIONS about what did happen (in the past) and is happening (in the present)?    /    Are you ever surprised by a REALITY CHECK?  if yes, why? (you can ask different levels of why-questions)   In what ways can you respond – by thinking about possible reasons for surprise (i.e. by examining all factors involved in this Reality Check) and adjusting – so you can get a better match between your PREDICTIONS and OBSERVATIONS?    /    What are the similarities & differences between the two kinds of QUALITY CHECKS?  In the context of trying to Solve a Problem, what are your GOALS?  How does a QUALITY CHECK help you determine quality? (and what defines quality?)    /    When you compare Science-Design with General Design, in what ways are the objectives (i.e. how you're trying to make things better) similar and different?   why are different comparisons used in each kind of problem-solving design?    {there is parallel symmetry between the ways we use Experience-Information that we get from imagined Mental Experiments and actualized Physical Experiments }interactions:  In your creative-and-critical cycles of ...Generate-Evaluate-Generate-Evaluate-Generate-... how can your critical Evaluation stimulate-and-guide your creative Generation of a new Option (often made by revising an old Option) that you think might be a better match with your GOALS for a Solution, in a QUALITY CHECK?    {or might produce a better matching between PREDICTIONS & OBSERVATIONS in a REALITY CHECK.}questions you can generate:  What else can you ask, and what other things can you wonder about (re: your process of problem solving) when you reflect on your personal experiences plus the verbal-and-visual information in this section?Your studying of this diagram can help you develop a better understanding of problem-solving process.  And below, two results of my studying (in Methods 1 & 2) explain how Evaluation stimulates-and-guides Generation.

 3 Elements in 3 Comparison-ChecksMethod 1 – my BASIC descriptions of this model:  When you're doing creative-and-critical cycles of Generate-Evaluate-Generate-Evaluate-... (these cycles are the focus of my simplest model) an effective way to Evaluate is to use evaluative comparisons.  How?  This diagram shows how 3 Elements are used in 3 Comparisons.  During a problem-solving process of General Design, usually you critically Evaluate an Option (for a Problem-Solution) by comparing your Goals (for the properties you want in a satisfactory Problem-Solution) with two kinds of Information about this Option — your PREDICTIONS (made when you imagine what will happen in the future) or your OBSERVATIONS (made when you observe what is happening in the present or you remember what has happened in the past) — in two kinds of Comparative Evaluations, in a Predictions-Based QUALITY CHECK or Observations-Based QUALITY CHECK.Your evaluation of this option will help you decide whether to reject it or to accept it as-is;  or you can modify it by asking “in what ways do this option's properties (predicted or observed) differ from the desired properties that I have defined as Goals?” and then “how can I creatively modify This Option so its properties will more closely match the desired properties of my Goals?”  In this way, feedback from your critical Evaluation of This Option stimulates-and-guides your creative Generation of a New Option during your next Design Cycle in your critical-and-creative process of ...-Evaluate-and-Generate-... using interactive Cycles of Design.

In a similar way, during Science-Design the feedback from your critical Evaluation (in a Reality Check for an Explanatory Theory about “how the world works” for this aspect of Reality) can lead you to think this Theory should be revised.  Why?  If you are “surprised” because the PREDICTIONS (based on a Theory) and OBSERVATIONS (of Reality) don't match well, even though you think each kind of Information is reliable.  As in General Design, then you ask “how can I creatively-and-wisely modify This Theory so its PREDICTIONS will more closely match OBSERVATIONS of Reality?”     {or... instead of focusing only on the Theory, you can question ALL factors involved in the Reality Check – the Predictions & Observations, and their logical comparison – and for each of these, ask “what could cause errors that produced the not-close-enough matching?”}   {more about Reality Checks}

 

Guided Generation:   During both kinds of problem solving — for General Design or Science-Design, when you're trying to find a better Option (that could be a better Theory) — critical Evaluative Thinking stimulates-and-guides creative Generative Thinking, in critical-and-creative Guided Generation when you modify an Old Option to make a New Option.  This often is an effective way to creatively generate new ideas, but it isn't the only way.  For example, instead of trying to modify an Old Idea so it becomes a similar New Idea that's only slightly modified, you may want to try generating a “newer” New Idea;  you can do this by trying to reduce restrictions on your thinking – by not assuming “the way things have been” is “the way things must be” – to allow a freely creative Generation of New Ideas.    {e.g. for a way of not-assuming that is personally useful, you can develop & use a growth mindset.}When you effectively combine creative thinking and critical thinking with relevant knowledge, the result is productive thinking.  During a process of problem solving, generative creative thinking and evaluative critical thinking can interact in mutually supportive ways, in creative-and-critical Guided Generation and in other ways.    {productive thinking}

 Method 2 – my DETAILED descriptions of this model:  The ideas above (in Method 1) are explained with more depth in “specialty sections” you'll find by clicking on any of the 23 link-areas in a Clicker Map (made from a supplemented version of this diagram) that will open in a new pair of left-and-right pages when you click this link`.

 

 

open only this page   –   put page into left frame 

Defining Our Goals for Teaching Ideas-and-Skills

We should design curriculum & instruction that will help students improve not just their knowledge of ideas, but also their creative-and-critical thinking skills and problem-solving process. 

[[ iouCurrently two overviews have newly-created versions of most ideas below.  Eventually I'll revise these sections by condensing & revising, and will eliminate most of the writing. ]]

 

Why?  The Many Benefits of Problem-Solving Skills 

[[ iou – soon, maybe in Summer 2024, I'll write a brief summary — to describe the widespread agreement about the many benefits of problem-solving skills in all areas of life, because making things better is always useful — and I'll make links to resources about this agreement, like the previous 4 links ("the many benefits...problem-solving skills...all areas...life") and to some parts of my 3 pages about "___ in Education" where "___" is Creative Thinking, Critical Thinking, Problem Solving. ]]

 

How?  We can...

2-Step Cycle of Design (simple diagram)
        Show students how to combine their thinking skills (creative-and-critical) into a flexible thinking process (also creative-and-critical) that is more effective for solving problems, for "making it better" in any area of life.  We begin by helping students discover the Simplicity-of-Process [summarized in the diagram] when they DEFINE a Problem, and then to SOLVE the Problem they creatively GENERATE Options (for a Problem-Solution) and critically EVALUATE Options, in creative-and-critical Cycles of Design.
        then, for deeper understanding, we let students see (as in Diagram 2 - described here) the Symmetry-of-Process when they do a Mental Experiment & do a Physical Experiment to produce the Predictions & Observations they use for 3 Comparisons in evaluative Quality Checks (for General Design) and evaluative Reality Checks (for Science-Design).     { I define Experiment broadly – it's any situation that produces Experience, that allows Predicting or Observing (more) – because this is educationally useful, and so are broad definitions for problem & education. }   {General Design and Science-Design}
 
    help students discover how they Use Experiences in 4 Ways and how they ask The Design Question (“how well does This Option match my Goals?”) in every Quality Check, and they ask The Science Question (“am I surprised?” because Observations don't match Predictions) in every Reality Check;  when educators do this, we help students discover (and improve) the process of thinking they use for General Design (with Quality Checks) and for Science-Design (with Reality Checks), we help them discover their essential Process-of-Thinking for Design and their essential Process-of-Thinking for Science, or simply their Thinking for Design and Thinking for Science.     {in STEM Education, The Design Question can be called The Engineering Question, because Engineering is one type of General Design}
    design thought-stimulating inquiry activities involving science-inquiry & design-inquiry and argumentation and thinking strategies.*  We can make these activities life-relevant for students by showing them how they use design thinking for almost everything in life.*  This wide scope of design thinking lets us...
    build integrative educational bridges to promote transfers-of-learning and transitions-of-attitudes.  We can build two-way bridges — from life into school, and back into life, spanning all subject areas (including engineering & science) — that will improve students' motivations to learn and their transfers of learning from school into life.  When these bridges improve their motivations & learning-transfers, and promote attitude-transitions, this will...
    help a wider range of students (for better diversity & equity) improve important ideas-AND-skills that include thinking with empathy` in relationships and projects
 

* Students can use Design Process to develop strategies for thinking so they can more effectively regulate their cognition/metacognition (by deciding when to avoid metacognition or use it, and how) and use reflection to help them learn more from their experiences in a wide range of activities to improve their performing and/or learning (+ enjoying) in many areas of life.  One valuable thinking strategy is coordinating their thinking-and-actions by making decisions (how?) about “what to do next” during a process of design.    {MORE about Cognitive-and-Metacognitive Thinking Strategies}

* I use a wide-scope definition of design thinking.  Is this justifiable? (probably)  And is it useful for education? (yes)  –  What is Design Thinking? (criteria & definitions)     /     But... although for many years I've claimed "we use design thinking for almost everything in life" I'm now thinking that either this claim should be narrowed, or "design thinking" should be more broadly defined so it includes two interactive aspects of thinking (conscious & subconscious) that we typically combine when we're generating-and-evaluating ideas.     {i.o.u. – Soon, in late-December 2022, these ideas will be examined more thoroughly, here. } LINKS  —  This homepage has lots of links that you can choose to ignore or explore.   {most links open on the right side, so if necessary you should (why?) put this page on the left side by using the link here or in the upper-right corner of page}

 

Pursuing Our Goals for Ideas-and-Skills Education

Because we have reasons to expect that using Design Process (so we're combining experience with principles) might help us achieve our worthy goals more effectively, the possibilities for using Design Process are worth exploring and developing.  I want to collaborate with other educators so we can explore possibilities and develop our ideas, especially by developing strategies for creatively combining different models-for-process in ways that are synergistically supportive, that make a combination of models better than any model by itself.How and Why?  We can show students how short-term sequences (in Design Process) occur within long-term phases (used in all models for process, including Design Process);  this awareness will help students understand how their creative-and-critical productive thinking occurs in the context of these short-term actions & sequences.     {more about HOW to effectively combine structures (for instruction) and strategies (for thinking)}  {two sequencing-strategies for combining models}

Collaboration is necessary because although I feel skilled in some ways (like developing the ideas in this website),  I definitely need help — from those who understand the perspectives of classroom teachers more accurately & thoroughly, or are skilled story tellers or game developers, or have other kinds of useful experience and expertise — so that by working together with coordinated cooperation we can design curriculum-and-instruction that is a good match for how students like to learn (and are able to learn), and how teachers like to teach.  Here is a beginning for ideas about collaborating.   /   You can contact me by email (craigru57-att-yahoo-daut-caum), and on twitter I'm @DTprocess)

 

  Stories of Students & their Communities, with mutually interactive Psychologies & Sociologies:

I.O.U. – Later, maybe starting in Summer 2024, to supplement my section about students with stories (and how this student variety should lead to activity variety) I'll find web-pages with stories written by others, then will summarize them here, and link to them so you can read the full story.  When it's useful for drama, I'll try to avoid “spoilers” that would reduce your real-time enjoying as you're reading the story and are gradually gathering information (about people and situations), are mentally “putting together” the sequence of what is happening.  I'll be looking for stories that illustrate the fascinating-and-important relationships between students & communities, re: the complex mutually co-influencing interactions that occur between whole-persons & whole-communities, with each having “stories” that are psychological & sociological, with two-way interactions between the psychologies & sociologies of individuals & communities.    {maybe I'll add a few stories of my own, but the emphasis will be other authors who are more skilled at telling stories that are meaningful for education, for teachers, parents, students, and others}   —  introduction - stories of whole-person students and their whole-life situations & communities.


If necessary, you can put this page into the left frame`Why?    Or you can put this page into its own full-width window

 
Design Process — What is it?   For a quick overview of Design Process (it's my model for Problem-Solving Process), see-and-read Stage 1` in a 4-stage family of related models that has...
 

Simplicity and Symmetry    {this section is similar to Simplicity and Symmetry in the Introductory Overview, but reviewing it now will be useful in your “spiral of learning” – and here it's similar yet different – and because its links go to pages where the ideas are explored with more depth.}

• a Simplicity of Process:  Diagram 1` shows — in its top & bottom parts, to Define & Solve — how you Define a Problem (Learn about Problem-Situation, Define your Objective, Define your Goals) and try to Solve this Problem by simply Generating-and-Evaluating Options (for a Problem-Solution) in iterative Cycles of Design.  This simplicity lets a teacher SHOW students how they use design thinking for almost everything they do in life.  This wide scope — and the simplicity of “generate and evaluate” when they solve problems — helps us build educational Transfer Bridges between life and school, with transfers (of knowledge & skills) and transitions (of attitudes) in both directions, to improve the problem-solving abilities & confidence & motivations of students, for better diversity & equity in educationDiagram 2a - showing Symmetry of Design Process Later, for deeper understanding, you can help students discover...

• a Symmetry of Process:  During their process of problem solving, students Design and Do two kinds of experience-producing Experiments (done mentally to make PREDICTIONS & physically to make OBSERVATIONS as shown on the left side & right side of the diagram) so they can Use their PREDICTIONS & OBSERVATIONS by comparing them with GOALS in evaluative QUALITY CHECKS, as you see in Diagram 2a.  In every Check-for-Quality they are asking (for the Option being evaluated) The Design Question:  “how close is the match between this Option's actual properties (that we have predicted or observed) and our desired Goal-properties?” which is asking “how high is the quality?” because Quality is defined by our Goals for a satisfactory problem-Solution.     /     When we show students this symmetry of Experimenting (done Mentally & Physically) it's an educationally useful visual organization of principles-for-process.     { We use 3 Elements (Predictions, Observations, Goals) in 3 Comparisons to ask Two Kinds of Questions:  The Design Question (in a Quality Check), and The Science Question (in a Reality Check, symbolized by the yellow-green dashed line, – – – – – , between Predictions & Observations). }an option:  If a diagram is too small to see the details clearly, in this page it will span the full screen.As explained below, students can learn by discovery to develop a deeper understanding of these principles for Design Process, for the elegant beauty they can see in its simplicity and symmetry.

A Family of Related Models:   My model for Design Process can be represented in many ways;  you can see three of them in the introduction.  This allows educational flexibility, as in a progression of learning that begins with simplicity and gradually move into deeper understanding. {iou – The rest of this subsection will be revised later, maybe in Summer 2023. Basically, a process of design is simple;  you define a problem, and try to solve the problem by creatively generating ideas and critically evaluating these ideas in creative-and-critical Cycles of Design, as described in Stage 1.  But the process is full of interesting details that you can explore more deeply in later stages.  When teachers use this progression of learning, Design Process is not just a single model, instead it's...

   All 5 stages describe the same process of design, so Stage 1 = Stage 2a = Stage 2b = Stage 3 = Stage 4.  But each stage looks at this process from a different perspective and with a different level of detail.  These perspectives produce models-for-process that are different yet related, to help you progressively construct a deeper understanding of Design Process.*   /   And for another perspective:  These models for the overall process contain smaller modes of action (that can be mental and/or physical, to Define, Generate & Evaluate, and to Coordinate) that form a semi-model.  For education, both models and semi-models are useful.   /   And we can combine principles from Design Process and other models, to construct hybrid models-for-process.

 

By combining practice (in solving problems) with principles (for solving problems)* we can help students learn how to learn more from their experiences (mental & physical) so they can improve their performing (now) and their learning (for later).     {Students can learn principles of Design Process, plus mutually supportive principles from other models-for-process.

 

 

TERMS – in my Model for Problem-Solving Process

note:  This is an earlier version of the section about my Model that includes the concepts of "sub" and "total" in sub-models forming a total-Model.  Maybe (but probably not) I'll include these two terms in later descriptions of models & Models.Here is an explanation of terms:  my Model is a system of closely related models that are sub-models of the total-Model;  in this section, when I write model & Model (with & without capitalizing), these mean sub-model & total-Model, with model = sub-model, and Model = total-Model.   /   The Model is a family of models (i.e. the total-Model is a family of sub-models).  The models are closely-related versions of the same Model, but each model emphasizes (to focus attention on) different aspects of the Model.a clarification:  Of course, instead of being “total” my “total Model-for-process” is a simplification of the actual “total process.”  Simplifying is a necessary part of making models, because the purpose of every model-for-process is to allow our human brains – with limited capabilities for memory & processing – to cope with the complexity of the total process, helping us “make sense of it” by constructing understandings that are simplified yet useful, that we can use to improve our problem-solving process (for self) and problem-solving education (for others).

* Why only "in this section"?  Until late 2021, I hadn't defined these m-and-M terms, so they aren't used consistently in the website because most parts of it were developed earlier, and haven't yet been revised.  But you know the terms, so you can think consistently when you see "model".

 


 

 

Motivation – Learning from Partially-Successful Experiences: 

I.O.U. – I'll return to developing this "gray box" later, maybe in Summer 2024.  I've already written a lot about this fascinating-and-important topic, so temporarily I'll just link to these places and quote some ideas, before eventually making an overview-summary here.  Some places-with-ideas are...

 

Moving Beyond Simple Motivation asks “What should we do if a student is motivated, but doesn't feel confident about their ability to succeed?”  We can help students develop accuracy (in self-perception) plus optimism (about their potential for improvement and growth) with a “not yet” attitude toward failure so they can learn from all of their experiences and “do it better” in their future.   /   This optimism is easier if students have a growth mindset based on an incremental theory of intelligence — believing that their intelligence (and intellectual performance) can be improved, can “grow” through their efforts — because an "incremental" view-of-self promotes a confident belief that their efforts to self-improve will be rewarded.    { iou - later there also will be a paragraph about students being motivated by short-term pleasures and long-term satisfactions}

 

Learning from ALL Experience (from failure and success):  You can learn from ALL experience, whether you view the result as a failure or success, or (more likely) some of each. [i.e. in most areas there is a continuum-range from total failure to total success]  A feeling that “I could have done better, and I want to do better” can motivate you to reflect on what happened (the situation, your actions, the results) so you will learn more from the experience.  You can say, along with Maya Angelou, "I did then what I knew how to do. Now that I know better, I do better."  And a feeling that “I did it well” can inspire you to eagerly look for more problems to solve, in school and life.

 

Learning from Partial Success:  We are educated when we learn from life-experiences.  We can learn from ALL experience, from both failure and success.  Below you'll find examples from my experiences (first-hand & second-hand, personal & vicarious) with solving, improvising, driving, juggling, skiing, backhanding, pronouncing, and welding.   /   iou - Later, I'll “say a little” about each paragraph (re: solving, improvising,... welding) and there will be more old ideas (about motivated reasoning & changing-of-views) plus a few new ideas.improvising music -- My page about Music Improvisation encouraging you to "Experiment... just Relax and Learn:  You may feel more free to creatively explore different ways of making your own music if you experiment in low-risk situations — when nobody (not you or anyone else) cares about the quality or klunkers — and listen carefully for feedback, to discover what does and doesn't work well, to gain valuable experience.  Instead of worrying about the possibility of mistakes, just relax-and-do, listen and learn."

driving a car -- distinguish between situations when a mistake won't matter much (so take risks, relax, enjoy, learn) and when a mistake would be costly (so avoid a mistake);  but you can mentally practice (with mental rehearsal) to prepare for dangerous situations, so IF one of them happens, you'll be prepared to respond correctly;  and to improve some skills, you can physically practice in low-risk situations; 

 


Control of iFrames:  A link at the top-right corner of each page lets you put it into the left frame or into the right frame if it isn't already there.*   Why is this useful?   Because when a page is on its proper side, the page remains visible while you explore its links, which open in the other frame;  this lets you click links without “losing your place” in the current page.   And because you can see both pages at the same time, you can more easily combine (in your thinking) what both pages are saying about related aspects of a topic;  seeing both pages is always useful, but is especially valuable for mentally combining visual & verbal information, as in the Overview of Design Process`.

* Or use the first link in every page (or occasional links later in the page) that look like this` with an extra ` at the end, as in the link above, for "Overview of...".


 

I.O.U. - Please ignore what's in this gray box until later, when (maybe in late 2024) these “rough notes for myself” will be used to write a section for an earlier part of this page.stdp2 [enginrg] // short-term strategy-actions in DP, longer phases in other modelsmcpaldef cmgobroad definitions are especially useful for promoting transfers of learning.understanding [quote] -- ws#trorg

{* a teacher can use personally-customized guiding to adjust the difficulty level for different students}  

 

EXTRAS:coordination -- argmtn [where?]transition -- The educational usefulness of broad definitions is emphasized throughout this website, because broad definitions detailed @ NGSS -- st-te.htm#map -- in the context of Next Generation Science Standards, NGSS. -- observation & prediction & experiments

EXPERIMENT -- We can stimulate the creative thinking of students — by letting them reduce restrictive assumptions about what an "experiment" is, thus encouraging them to explore this wide variety of Options for Experimental Systems — by using a simple, broad, minimally restrictive definition:

 

use earlier, for 123-4 --> MORE ---- with clear, less condensed (i.e. using more words, thus requiring less “discovery” by a reader) descriptions of 4 Ways to Use Experiments (or is it 8 ways?)* in flexibly improvised short-term Functional Sequences – and how critical Evaluation of Ideas stimulates-and-guides creative Generation of Ideas in Design Cycles & Science Cycles.photos:  Soon, I want to put more pictures (of students & teachers) into this website to further “humanize” it, because Design Thinking — and education for Design Thinking — is about people with stories.     { The current photos are from DEEPdt - DEEP design thinking: a human-centered approach to learning, creating, & being through Empathy. }

Link for Verbal-and-Visual Overview

 

 

 
Extras:  Tips for Using This Website plus information about
the website and me (Craig Rusbult) and my Ideas for Education.
If you want to discuss any of these ideas,
you can contact me, craigru57-att-yahoo-daut-caum
 
Craig Rusbult, Ph.D. - my life on a road less traveled
URLs for the two pages in this left/right frameset are:
left side - https://educationforproblemsolving.net/design-thinking/home.htm
right side - https://educationforproblemsolving.net/design-thinking/ws.htm
frameset - https://mywebspace.wisc.edu/crusbult/web/design/index.htm
 
Copyright © 1978-2023 by Craig Rusbult.  All Rights Reserved.