Part 2A:

a model for Design Process ,

for Problem-Solving Process.

Part 2 — in Parts 2A, 2B, 2C (what's in each part?) — begins with a process of understanding 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:

Here is a “big picture” overview of Design Process, when you Define and Solve.  When you study this overview-diagram, I think you'll understand it.  But here is a mystery question:  Why does the cycle have arrows on both sides?  On the cycle's left side it's obvious, because you must Generate An Option before you can Evaluate This Option.  But why does its right-side arrow point from Evaluate to Generate?  After you've thought about this mystery (and maybe solved it by discovering why), continue onward.

The left-side diagram combines the process-overview with essential process-details.  It's more complex than most of my verbal-visual models for Design Process, 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 The Actions 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 Tab (or New Window), 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...

Design 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.  You then can use your Quality Check with...

Guided Generation:  What?  You do Guided Generation by combining critical thinking with creative thinking when you use critical Evaluation to stimulate-and-guide your creative Generation.  This critical-and-creative process is summarized on the diagram's far-left side – "use a P-Based Design Cycle" – to describe how you can "use a P[redictions]-Based [Quality Check in a] Design Cycle" to ask "revise [this 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 (that you're Predicting) 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 and how can it 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?  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 you use critical Evaluation to stimulate-and-guide your creative Generation.     { some details of Guided Generation }

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 to Generate?  You can do creative Guided Generation and/or creative Free Generation.  How to Evaluate?  First do Individual Evaluations (to estimate an overall Quality Status for each Option) that let you 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 subconsciously-and-quickly when quick action is necessary, like during an emergency-situation while driving.   /   * 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.

three 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.

You 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.

In 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 useful.  I 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 Functional 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 can develop a recognition 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 Functional Actions form a logical framework that shows how we Make Information & Use Information.  This framework can help us recognize the descriptive accuracy of Design Process.     {  our 9 Functional Actions 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 Functional Actions in Design Process, and students often do these Functional 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}

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 models ➜ a 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 Process — constructing 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 Functional 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:

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);  you Evaluate Options one at a time (i.e. you Choose an Option and Evaluate This Option);  you continue to 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, Define-Solve-Solve) and the evaluation criteria for Choosing An Option, the central role of Decision Making in Problem Solving (for General Design & Science-Design), and viewing Phase 3 – when you "Actualize This Option with Actions" – 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 well because (in the wise words of Ben Franklin) "do not squander time, for it'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 Metacognitive Checklist for Problem-Solving Actions.     { I'm trying to use it consistently in most 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 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 education.  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 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 Generation.  During 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}

This 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 both.  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.

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.  When it's done well, Evaluative Thinking should promote logically appropriate humility (with a confidence that is not too little and not too much) so we can accurately estimate the truth-status of claims that are made by ourselves and by others.     {more}

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}

This 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.

doing 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.

    • 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 Functional 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 Functional 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 Functional 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-DO:  During life we usually alternate between Planning and Doing, between Imagining and Actualizing in our Mental Experimenting and Physical Experimenting.

When 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.

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 Functional 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 Functional Actions and 8 Ways to Use Experiments – Designing Experiments that Produce Experiences – Design Process accurately describes what really happens – Coordinating your Process by Using Modular Strategies to produce Variations on a Theme.

9 Functional 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 Functional Actions of four kinds (1 2 3 - 4)* that we typically USE while solving problems:

1.  First you USE an Experiment — you DO the Experiment by “running” the Experiment-Situation (that includes An Option), either Mentally (by imagining the E-S) or Physically (by actualizing the E-S) — and USE the Experiment-Experience 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 This Option by comparing Predictions with Goals (in a Quality Check) or comparing Observations with Goals (in a Quality Check), or comparing Predictions with Observations (in a Reality Check).

3.  And maybe you USE your Experiment-Based Evaluation (from #2 in a Quality Check or Reality Check, a QC or RC) to guide you in revising an Old Option to Generate a New Option, when you "use QC" by asking "revise Option?" (as shown on the left side & right side, 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, or 3. }

9 Functional Actions we USE in 4 Ways:  This diagram is a visually-organized summary of 8 Functional Actions, showing how you USE an Experiment to make Experimental Information (to make Predictions or make Observations) in #1,  and typically 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) maybe we indirectly USE Experiment-Based Evaluation (from #2) to Design a new Experiment in #4 that you can use in a future #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".    { I say "is USED" for each Action in 1,2,3, but “can be USED” would be more accurate because you don't have to do 1-then-2-then-3, instead you could do only 1, or only 1-2, or all in 1-2-3. }   /   On the right side, these 3 Ways (1,2,3) become 8 Ways (= 2+3+3) because there are 2 Ways to do a 1-Action, 3 Ways to do a 2-Action, and 3 Ways to do a 3-Action.  i.e.,  For 1 we can Do a Mental Experiment (by imagining) and/or Do a Physical Experiment (by actualizing) to Make Information;  and in 2 we can Use Information for Evaluating in General Design (by doing a Quality Check and/or Quality Check) and/or Science-Design (by doing a Reality Check);  and in 3 we can Generate a New Option by Revising An Old Option, guided by any of the 3 Evaluations in 2.

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 a future #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 a future 1-2 or 1-2-3) by following 4 with 1-2 or 1-2-3.   /   In 1,2,3 you USE an existing Old Experiment, while in 4 you DESIGN a New Experiment that you then can USE in a future 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 potentially-useful 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?”  An early phase of mental imagining often 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 may want to build a prototype of a Solution-Option (the 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.  I've written descriptions of useful creative-and-critical strategies that are basic (for Designing plus Predicting & Observing) or are 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 Functional 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?” (it's The Design Question, aka The Engineering Question) — 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?” (The Science Question) — during a process of Science-Design.  {Design Question & Science Question}   You also actually do the other Functional 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 — so these actually ARE the Actions 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 Functional 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 Functional Actions — 1) 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 Functional 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 Functional 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.

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 Functional 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 Functional 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 video – the 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:

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 EiE.  In 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 Functional 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 ages.  CC 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. )

Originally these were the main content-sections in my original HomePage — and I think you will find it useful now — before it was expanded to make the current version:

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 everyday strategy:  Every day, a strategy for “using time effectively” is an important part of living well, because your time is limited.  Therefore when asking “what is the best use of my time now? and later?” you want to choose wisely because (in the words of Ben Franklin) "do not squander time, for it's the stuff life is made of."  • 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? 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.

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?).   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  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.  [[ iou – Currently 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...        • 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 including deep dives into understanding Design & Science} * 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. 

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://educationforproblemsolving.net/design-thinking/index.htm

Copyright © 1978-2024 by Craig Rusbult.  All Rights Reserved.