Site-Using Tips  –   open only this page   –   put page into left frame 

Education for Problem Solving

This is the Home-Page for a website of Craig Rusbult, an enthusiastic educator with a PhD in C & I.*  I'm optimistically excited when thinking about activities and strategies that we — using your ideas (for your schools) and my ideas, 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 learn more from their experiences.

* During life on a road less traveled my PhD project (at U of Wisconsin) was constructing a model for “scientific method” — to describe how science uses logical Reality Checks plus other factors — and using this model to help us analyze & improve our education.  Since then I've generalized this model (for Science Process) to form a model for Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process).     { contact-email:  craigru57-att-yahoo-daut-caum }

my philosophy of writing:  As you know, education is complex;  in order to understand it more thoroughly-and-accurately, we must combine many ideas.  Therefore, in my website I don't want to “keep things simple” if this makes it oversimplistic by ignoring useful ideas.  Instead I'm trying to help you learn more time-efficiently (so you learn a lot in a little time, with a high ratio of “your learning / your time”) because your time is valuable,* and I want to help you use your time more effectively.     { * In the wise words of Ben Franklin, "Do not squander time, for it's the stuff life is made of." }    /    In this page the ideas are not oversimplified, but they are incomplete intentionally, so you can get a "big-picture overview" more quickly & easily.

This new short-HomePage contains ideas from the original long-HomePage of my large website about Education for Problem Solving.  I want to show you how Design Process (my model for Problem-Solving Process) might be very useful in education, so its possibilities are worth exploring and developing, because (although not proved with certainty) this is “a good way to bet.”

The long-HomePage has two parts:

Part 1 describes educational goals that are generally accepted, that you (as an experienced educator) already know and probably accept, so while reading you'll be thinking “yes”.  But I also explain how using Design Process can help us achieve our goals, and for these claims you might think “yes” (or “yes and...” by adding your own ideas) or “maybe” (or “maybe but...” with questions) or “no because...” (with reasons to reject).     { my goals for Parts 1 & 2 ➞ us co-creating better education }

Part 2 is about my model for Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process) that is descriptively accurate and educationally beneficial,  that – especially when it's effectively combined with other models – can help us achieve the worthy educational goals in Part 1.

What is problem solving?  When educators choose to use broad definitions, a problem is an opportunity (in any area of life) to make things better, and problem solving (PS) occurs when we do make something better.  For a design project (i.e. for a problem-solving project) the objective can be to design (to find, invent, or improve) a better product, activity, relationship, and/or strategy (in General Design) and/or (in Science-Design) a better explanatory theory.  These objectives – extending far beyond traditional “design fields” – include almost everything we do in life.

Why do people solve problems?  Because we want to make things better.

How do people solve problems?  At the right is an overview of our problem-solving process, when we Define and Solve.  To make this diagram more concrete, you can imagine that your design objective is to design a better product by improving an old product.  When you study this overview-diagram and think about the actions, you'll understand the cycles of creative-and-critical thinking by Generating-and-Evaluating-and-Generating-and-Evaluating-and-...   /   But here is a mystery question:  Why does the cycle have arrows on both sides?  On the cycle's left side the arrow (from Generate to Evaluate) has a reason that's obvious, because you must Generate An Option before you can Evaluate This Option.  But why does the cycle have a right-side arrow, from Evaluate to Generate?  {a related clue-question} 

While you're thinking about this mystery question, you may find it useful to study the left-side diagram.  It describes the logic when – after "Choosing an Option" to evaluate – you are "Evaluating This Option" by imagining The Option {in a Mental Experiment} or actualizing The Option {in a Physical Experiment} so you can make { PREDICTIONS } or { OBSERVATIONS } about The Actual Properties of This Option for a Problem-Solution.  By contrast, your GOALS define the Desired Properties you want in a New Product that will be your Problem-Solution.  Why is each of these comparisons a QUALITY CHECK?     { an option:  You also can think about why a comparison of PREDICTIONS with OBSERVATIONS is a REALITY CHECK that helps you test the adequacy of an explanatory Theory. }

Observe the words, colors, and spatial relationships in this diagram.  Your studying may stimulate you to think about the process of “doing evaluations for problem solving” in new ways, or maybe it will show what you already have been thinking.   /   two ways to learn:  I thnk you'll enjoy your discoveries, and also my explanations.     { btw, I'm fascinated by verbal-and-visual representations.  For showing the process of problem solving in General Design & Science-Design, this diagram is my favorite – 🙂 – and I hope you also will like it, will appreciate what can be learned from it. }  

This diagram shows how people typically Evaluate An Option.  And how my model smoothly-and-logically integrates Design with Science because the core of its evaluation logic (when we use 3 Elements in 3 Comparisons) leads naturally to the logical evaluations that we use for both General Design (aka Design, the usual term) and Science-Design (aka Science, usually);  people intuitively use Quality Checks for Design, and Reality Checks for Science, by asking the Design Question and Science Question.*  When students understand the logical integrating of design-with-science in my model this will help them develop a logical integrating of design-with-science in their thinking while they're solving problems.

* the questions:  In a Design Question you ask “how high is the Quality?” with Quality defined by your Goals.  In a Science Question you ask “am I surprised?” when comparing Predictions with Observations.

a clue:  While you're thinking about the mystery question a related question is...  “When you critically EVALUATE an Old Option, how can this help you creatively GENERATE a New Option?”

Both diagrams (Define-and-Solve, 3 Comparisons) are combined in the right-side diagram that answers the mystery question by showing why the cycle has a right-side arrow.   /   what, why, and how:   What?  You do Guided Generation by using critical Evaluation to stimulate-and-guide your creative Generation.  This critical-and-creative process becomes part of a "Design Cycle" when you ask "revise Option? [do you want to revise the Old Option]" to GENERATE a New Option.   Why?  You do Guided Generation when you think a New Option might have higher Quality because there will be a closer match between its Actual Properties (in your Predictions or Observations) and the Desired Properties (that you're defining as GOALS for a satisfactory Solution).   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 about This Option, and how can these deficiencies be improved?” so you can creatively Generate a New Option (or multiple New Options) whose Actual Properties come closer to your GOALS, thus coming closer to being a satisfactory Problem-Solution.   What?  In your creative-and-critical Design Cycles (when you Generate-Evaluate-Generate-Evaluate-...) there are productive interactions between your critical thinking and creative thinking when with Guided Generation you use critical Evaluation to stimulate-and-guide your creative Generation.     { more about Guided Generation }    { and more about Design & Science that use Quality Checks & Reality Checks to help you ask-and-answer Design Questions & Science Questions }

two ways to learn:  You can improve your understandings — as when you're learning about my models in this page (above) and the long-HomePage (Part 2) — from your discoveries and my explanations.  A classroom teacher can help students learn Principles for Problem Solving in both ways – from discoveries & explanations – when they do classroom activities that guide them in a process of Experience + Reflection ➞ Principles that uses a process-of-inquiry to help students discover principles-for-inquiry.

My goals for Parts 1 & 2 are different yet related, with overlaps.  I want to work with other educators, and I'm hoping you will see our “common ground” in Part 1, so you will be thinking “Craig understands education, is with us and for us, wants what we want, is similar to us.”  And in Part 2 “he is a little different, with an innovative model — to describe (verbally & visually) human problem-solving actions, to help students understand these actions and improve their own actions — that will contribute useful ‘added value’ to education, so working with him will help us improve education.”  I'm hoping you will want to discuss possibilities, and maybe do actions, for...

co-creating better education:

I'm an enthusiastic educator who enjoys talking with other educators, simply to share ideas and learn from each other, with informal discussions.  But as explained in Working Together,

"I also want to collaborate on projects of mutual interest – and doing this unofficially as a free volunteer will be fine with me – with us working cooperatively to develop our ideas for helping students improve their creative-and-critical thinking skills and their effective using of problem-solving process in all areas of life."  Why?  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.  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."

[[ iou – to supplement what you already are doing with metacognition (not to begin mc) during education ]]

this new page:  In mid-October 2024, I began condensing the original long-HomePage into this short-HomePage that now is the “read me first” page, so it's linked-to in my personal HomePage.  When you want to learn more, links with blue shading keep you inside this page, and green-shaded links go to sections in the HomePage (in its Longer Overview or Part 2) plus “even more” with yellow-shaded links in a Detailed Overview-Page;  and links to “much more” in other pages.

You can get different kinds of understanding...

in the community of educators:  [[ iou – This will be written soon, April 17-21. ]]

in this website:  Compared with printed material – in articles, magazines, books,... – in my web-pages (and other pages) a major benefit is the flexibility of clicking links that let you explore topics to gain different kinds of understanding (e.g. with different depths of examining, or different perspectives on a topic, or with other differences) by clicking a link when you want understanding that is deeper-and-wider, or is just different.  In my website, for example, you can gain different kinds of understanding for all important topics, including these:   [[ iou – I'll continue writing this section soon, probably April 17-21. ]]   [[ @#phil, this page is intentionally incomplete to make it shorter so you can get a "big picture overview" more quickly & easily. ]]

• Building Bridges in this short-HomePage & the long-HomePage & Details-Page & another page/eTalk/eTalk-Page/eltalk-Page. (e is elevator not electronic - its usual modern meaning)

• Transfers of Learning in this page & long HomePage & Details-Page &

• Metacognition & Thinking Strategies in

• Learning More from Experiences in

• my Model-for-Process in

  and other models in

• Designing C&I in

• and many other topics.  [[ iou – I'll link to a page with some topics that aren't covered in this short-HomePage. ]]

[[ iou – and I'll describe/link-to an "appendix page" with selected sections from the Detailed Overview-Page. ]]

Table of Contents

You can read the rest of this page in any order, by going to any part that looks interesting:

Design Process has Two Wide Scopes that increase Transfers of Learning  -  Two Wide Scopes (for Activities and Process)  -  Scientific Knowledge about Increasing Transfer  —  when students expect Transfers (because we Build Educational Bridges from School into Life and into Their Future) this will improve their Motivations and Confidences.

Develop-and-Use a Growth Mindset  –  Improve in the Present and/or Future with Objectives for Performing and/or Learning  –  Help Students Learn More from their Problem-Solving Experiences by combining Design Process with Metacognitive Thinking Strategies.

Goal-Directed Designing of Curriculum & Instruction  –  designing a coordinated Wide-Spiral Curriculum with Wide Scope and Spiral Repetitions  –  designing Instruction Activities that are Fun (in two ways) and Personally Useful  —  connections between Problem-Solving Education and Overall Education  —  Improving Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.

combining different Models-for-Process.

Now we'll shift from WHY (with Reasons for Using Design Process because this can Increase Transfers (because of Two Wide Scopes) and Build Bridges that improve Confidences & Motivations) to WHAT-and-HOW, beginning with three related ways — with a Growth Mindset + Learning that Improves Performing + Learning More From Experiences — to use metacognitive Thinking Strategies.  One useful Thinking Strategy is the productive attitude of...

Learning with Transfers

(Across Areas, thru Time)

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.

A personal experience of growth mindset was learning to swim in 5 seconds when my thinking changed from “I'll never be able to do it” to “yes, I will” during a failed Reality Check that – due to observing a surprising result – falsified my theory about “my body's behavior in water.”

Are there two kinds transfer?  Although present-to-future learning typically isn't considered to be transfer, there are connections between “two kinds of transfer” because Transfers Through Time are necessary to produce most Transfers Across Areas, and for inspiring self-motivated Personal Education.  It can be educationally useful to think about transfers-thru-time as being transfers-of-learning, e.g. when you are...

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).   /   The title is "and/or" because your highest priority can be to maximize your learning now, or your performing now, or both.  And by adding an important aspect of life, it's Performing and/or Learning, plus Enjoying.

In your future, your better performing can 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 better now in these two ways – by using your past-to-present Learning, and present Performing – as in the “know better, do better” of Angela Mayou. }    { Mahatma Gandhi, "Live as if you were to die tomorrow.  Learn as if you were to live forever." }    { a friend became – by learning in the present – a better-performing welder in his future }

helping students learn more from

their problem-solving experiences

by combining Design Process and

metacognitive Thinking Strategies:

getting more and learning more:  A useful definition of education is learning from experience.  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 problem-solving experiences.  How ?  With...

skillful regulation of metacognition:  A teacher can promote educationally useful cognition-and-metacognition with reflection activities by asking students to reflect on (to remember or observe, and think about) their experiences while solving a problem — by asking “what did I think, and do?” (or “what am I now thinking and doing?”) and “then what happened,” and also “with different thinking & 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 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.  A main goal of Thinking Strategies is to help students become expert learners.     { getting more experiences by adventuring }    { a common Thinking Strategy is Self-Regulated Learning }

Education with Metacognition,

including Problem-Solving Activities

plus Metacognitive Thinking Strategies

[[ iou – Below are ideas that will be developed soon, April 20-25. ]]

As described throughout this page, we can help students ----

[get more] - provide a variety of Problem-Solving Activities that are fun and useful so students can get more educationally-valuable experiences,

and metacognitive Thinking Strategies that will help a student learn more from their experiences (in their present & future, in their Whole Life inside & outside school)

Whole-Person Education for Multiple Intelligences, including Social-Emotional Intelligence

with a complete/comprehensive set of tools, an Ideas-and-Skills Curriculum that [includes] Ideas & Skills and Skills-with-Ideas @ws#cm---

WSpCm for mcive WHole-P Edu

improving Emotional Intelligences:  In two of the most important ways we can help students improve their lives, we can help them learn how to use self-aware metacognition for intrapersonal intelligence and use other-aware empathy for interpersonal intelligence.  We can motivate students to use a growth mindset for improving both, so we'll develop better metacognition (to understand self) and better empathy (to understand others).   [[ I'll connect these with Multiple Intelligences (Howard Gardner) and Social-Emotional Intelligence (commonly used term) ]]

INSTRUCTION — skillfully design

Problem-Solving Activities that

are Fun and Personally Useful:

A holistically integrated strategy for designing effective Instruction – by trying to do everything that will help achieve the goals for effective Curriculum – will include Problem-Solving Activities that motivate students because what they're doing is FUN for students, and is personally USEFUL for them, is...

    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 personal 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}   [[ iou – to be engaged in learning (nec?), motivated to learn, view as useful -- zone of proximal development, Vygotsky}
    USEFUL as perceived by a student who thinks it will be personally useful, will help them achieve their personal goals, short-term and long-term, including intrinsic fun and satisfaction.  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.”

combining different

Models-for-Process

I'm not thinking “my model versus other models” because we don't have to make either-or choices between models;  we can invent 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, or using no models.

    • is distinctive in important ways,* with special features that produce added value;  DP 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. }   /   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.

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 section 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 – April 21-26, I'll write an INTRO that links back to "different kinds of understandings" ]]

Below, the 10 Modes of Action are detailed descriptions — showing WHAT is being done and HOW to do it better — of the main Actions that are functionally organized to form my model for problem-solving Design Process. 

 ▓  10 Modes of Action    (into left frame`)

iou – April 21-26, this subsection – ending at "Here are 10 modes of Action..." – will continue being revised-and-condensed:

Actions and Process:  This page supplements a family of models for Design Process by offering a different perspective. 

Actions ➞ Process:  My model(s) for Process is a system of functionally related Actions that are logically organized in educationally productive ways to show the coherent integration of productive actions to form a productive process.  It's educationally useful for students to see (in verbal-and-visual diagrams) how the 10 modes of Problem-Solving Actions are organized into a model for Problem-Solving Process.  (actually it's a family of related models that students can explore in a 5-stage progression for learning)

You can see how the 10 Modes of Problem-Solving Actions are organized into a "thinking process" model (actually it's a family of related models that students can explore in a 5-stage progression for learning) in diagrams that show relationships between models and modes`.

Actions and Process:  Or, when we ask “converting Problem-Solving Skills into a Problem-Solving Process”, Design Process shows how productive design-actions (in the Modes) — which include creative-and-critical productive design-thinking and more — are coordinated (by making action-decisions about “what to do next”) to form a productive design-process.

What is an "action"?  Productive Actions are "mental and/or physical" because an ACTION can be mainly mental, or mainly physical, or... mental-and-physical.    { more about Mental-and-Physical }

a system of functionally related modes of action — that becomes an overall model of Design Process when the modes are logically organized in educationally productive ways to show the coherent integration of productive actions (in these modes) to form a productive process. dynamic model0

Here are 10 Modes of Action – organized into 4 categories with colorizing – that people use during Problem-Solving Process:

1. DEFINITION  (at top of Diagram 1`):

1A. Define an Objective (what you want to design) for a Design Project,

1B. Define Goals (for the desired properties of a problem-Solution),

2. GENERATION  (to get information, both old & new) (in Diagrams 1, 2a, 3b, 4a/4b)

2A. Learn (find old information about Options & Predictions/Observations, Models),

2B. Invent Options (modify old Options, or innovate with new kinds of options),

2-CDE. Experiments (to MAKE Information that we USE) play key roles in Design Process:

      2C. Design Experiments (for Mental Experimenting, Physical Experimenting, or both),

      2D. Predict (imagine in a Mental Experiment, to MAKE Predictions for USE in 3A & 3B),

      2E. Observe (actualize in Physical Experiment, MAKE Observations to USE in 3A & 3B),

3. EVALUATION  (in Design Cycles and Science Cycle of Diagram 3b):

3A. Evaluate Solution-Options using Quality Checks

3A. (by COMPARING Goals with Predictions or Observations),

3B. Evaluate Model-Options using Reality Checks

3B. (by COMPARING Predictions with Observations),

4. COORDINATION  (often including Communication & Collaboration)

4A. Evaluate the Process and Make Action-Decisions (for what to do and when)

4A. as an individual or (in a group project) using Communication for Collaboration.

These 10 modes are not 10 steps, because Design Process is not a rigid sequence of steps.  Instead we see interactions between thinking in different modes, in productive thinking that skillfully blends a knowledge of ideas with creativity and critical thinking.

For each mode, the section below describes WHAT is being done and HOW to do it better.