This page has not been revised
since January 2001. But in my current
website these ideas are in pages that have been revised many times
since 2001, with more ideas, expanded and rearranged into many
pages. Therefore I recommend reading the REVISED VERSIONS
in MY NEW WEBSITE (with 2 pages side-by-side, left & right)
beginning with “What is a problem?” (in right-side page)
plus the home-page (on left side) that you see below,
followed by the old un-revised version of this page
.
Here is the beginning of my new website:
How can we use Design-Thinking Process
to improve Problem Solving & Education?
This is the home-page for my website about Education for Problem Solving, about educational strategies & activities that can help students improve their problem-solving skills in all areas of life.
Problems and Problem Solving: A problem is an opportunity, in any area of life, to make things better. Whenever you try to “make it better” you are problem solving, so this includes almost everything you do in life. { You can make things better if you increase quality for any aspect of life, or maintain quality by minimizing a potential decrease of quality. }
Education: In another broad definition, it's useful to view education as learning from life-experiences, learning how to improve, to become more effective in making things better.
Craig Rusbult, PhD (contact)
my life on a road less traveled
You can begin exploring the website in three ways:
• by looking at a table of contents .....
• with a quick elevator talk about .....
• and by using this home-page, by .....
[ then the home-page continues with lots of ideas ! ]
And here is the
Old Un-Revised Version:
Introduction
A central goal of education is to help students learn
how to think more effectively. In our efforts to achieve this goal,
one valuable teaching tool is the problem-solving methods used in design
and science, as represented in my models of Integrated
Design Method (IDM) and Integrated
Scientific Method (ISM). {update: Since 2001, these models have been re-named to be Design Process (instead of IDM) and Science Process (not ISM).
There are two objectives for IDM-and-ISM: to allow an accurate description of methods (of what designers and scientists
think and do when they are solving problems), and to be useful for education.
And there are two parts of this website: methods for problem solving, and education. The first part, beginning
with An Introduction to Design and continuing
with overviews of design method and scientific method, shows how the mutually
supportive skills of creativity and critical thinking (i.e., thinking that
generates and evaluates ideas) are integrated in the methods used by designers
and scientists. The second part begins with principles of goal-directed
education in Searching for Insight and Aesop's Activities and continues with this page,
which combines ideas from both parts of the website by exploring creative
ways to use IDM-ISM in education. I hope it will
be interesting and useful for problem solvers, for learners and teachers
(and this includes you, since each of us is a learner, a self-teacher, and
a teacher of others), for everyone who enthusiastically appreciates the
art and joy of thinking.
The ideas in this page are shared
with optimistic humility. I'm optimistic because there are reasons
to expect that IDM-ISM will help students improve their
thinking skills, thereby producing life-long benefits. But so far,
this potential has not been adequately developed or empirically tested for
effectiveness. Therefore, this page should be viewed as an outline
of potential applications in the future, offered with confident optimism
but appropriate humility.
I think IDM-ISM
could be useful in mainstream education or by playing a functional role
in "thinking skills" programs. In either context, developing
IDM-ISM and integrating it into instruction will require
a cooperative effort with other educators, especially those who, compared
with myself, have more experience and expertise with the principles, details,
and practicalities of curriculum development. I'm looking forward
to working as part of a collaborative team.
Recently, on June 20 [2001], I discovered
a very interesting book, Design as a Catalyst for Thinking, that examines
many of the ideas that are also in this paper, especially regarding a Wide
Spiral Curriculum. This book seems to be well written, with lots of
excellent ideas, and I'm looking forward to seeing what they say about design
and education.
In fact, in the near future I hope to
read much more widely in the area of "design methods." The
process of development has been very different for ISM and IDM. I
constructed ISM first by synthesizing ideas -- mainly from scientists and
philosophers, but also from historians, sociologists, psychologists, and
myself -- into a coherent system for use in education. But for IDM
there has been very little use of external sources; mainly I've just thought
about the process of design, in isolation from what others have done.
To avoid time-wasting reloads of this page, click this link.
Table of Contents:
1. Contexts for Thinking (how IDM fits into
"thinking skills" education)
2. Design Before Science (the many benefits
of beginning with design)
3. A Wide Spiral Curriculum (using design
and science in education)
4. Coping with Complexity (some strategies for effective
teaching)
5. The Challenge of Educational Design
Appendix
Conceptual Evaluation of Instruction
from the "Introduction to Design" page:
What is design? What is a problem?
Design and Science
Design before Science
Is There a Method?
from the "Aesop's Activities" page:
A Goal-Directed Approach to Education
Exploring and Improving the Structure of Instruction
1. Contexts for Thinking
Integrated Design Method (IDM) is a model for problem solving. It is a simple, clearly organized framework for thinking: IDM is an integrated system that shows how different aspects of thinking are related and how they can be effectively coordinated. Another level of integration occurs when IDM provides a "common context" by showing that similar thinking skills and methods are used in a wide variety of activities. If IDM is used in a wide variety of areas, then (especially when teachers call attention to the transitive logic that "if science uses IDM and history uses IDM and another area uses IDM, then the thinking methods used in science and history and the other area are related) students will recognize that much of what they are learning in one area of school can be transferred to other areas and can be used in practical real-life situations.
comment for the reader: The rest of Section 1 is a description of three frameworks for thinking, and a comparison of these frameworks with IDM. I think you'll enjoy it, because it provides three fascinating new perspectives on education and connects them with IDM and with each other. But in the hope that it will help you feel more free to look at Sections 2-5, which are much shorter, the remainder of this section has been moved to a special location after Section 5.
If you want to continue with Section 1, there is a link to it after the next two paragraphs, which are the conclusions for two of the subsections:
This paragraph concludes the first
description-and-comparison:
As discussed above, there is a close connection between
the thinking skills and methods in IDM and in Dimensions of Thinking:
A Framework for Curriculum and Instruction. Thus, it seems likely
that IDM could be smoothly integrated with the type of "education in
thinking" recommended by the authors of Dimensions and by many
other educators. Because it provides a common context that is shared
by many areas, the transitive nature of IDM (which connects with many areas,
thus connecting them with each other) might help students understand the
similarities between thinking methods in different areas of the curriculum,
and might promote a transfer of skills from one area to another.
And this paragraph concludes the entire
section, after three descriptions-and-comparisons:
This section has examined three frameworks for thinking
skills and methods -- Dimensions of Thinking, Infusion of Thinking Skills,
and Four Frames of Knowledge -- to show that these frameworks are compatible
with IDM-and-ISM and with each other. In fact, all four frameworks
are mutually supportive, and these approaches (along with others) could
be creatively blended to form a powerful cooperative team, operating synergistically
to improve education both before and during instruction, in curriculum development
and in the classroom.
2. Design before
Science
As a concept, scientific method
is more familiar than design method. But as an activity, design is
more familiar, for most students, in what they have experienced and what
they can imagine doing. Design makes a concrete connection with the
past (so students can use what they already know) and the future (so they
are motivated to learn skills that will help them achieve their own goals
for life). Design education also connects the past and future with
the present, with activities in the classroom.
connecting the past and present:
The framework of IDM will help students recognize the "design logic"
they use in everyday activities. This familiarity makes a Design Method
seem less intimidating, when students realize they are working with methods
of thinking they already know, instead of learning something new and strange.
This familiarity will help to reduce the feelings that "I can't do
this," the emotionally based obstacles to learning that are caused
by low self-esteem in school. Establishing connections with the past
is also pedagogically sound because, consistent with constructivist approaches
to education, students can build on the foundation of their prior knowledge.
Design activities give students a chance to use what they know, to practice
and improve old thinking skills, and to expand into new areas of application.
connecting the present and future:
In design the goal can be an improved product, strategy, or theory.
Since this includes almost everything in life, students can see that design
education is practical, that it will be useful in "real life"
outside school, both now and in their future. When they realize this,
and if they truly appreciate the value of what they can gain, "Students
will be excited about learning. They will invest extra mental effort
because they are motivated by a forward-looking expectation that what they
are learning will be personally useful in the future, that it will improve
their lives. They will wisely ask, 'What can I learn now that will
help me in the future?' They will discover that thinking is fun, and
they will want to do it more often and more skillfully!" {quoted
from Aesop's Activities: A Goal-Directed Approach to
Education }
connecting design and science:
IDM and ISM have been designed to
work together as a cooperative team in problem-solving education, to show
the connections between design and science. By comparing IDM and ISM,
we -- as teachers, learners, and problem solvers -- can recognize the similarities
and differences between design and science. In many ways, both logically
and motivationally, IDM can serve as a bridge from design method to scientific
method, from design education to science education.
To show the similarities between design
and science, I have intentionally made IDM and ISM similar in content (both
are based on the same logical foundation) and expression (both use similar
verbal terminology and visual symbolism). In content and expression
these models are often identical, and are always similar or at least analogous.
One set of symbols is color. In
each model, the generation of ideas (red) is
guided by goals (gold) for the desired characteristics
of a product, strategy, or theory. A problem solver does mental experiments
to produce predictions (yellow) and does physical
experiments to produce observations (green)
which are compared in hypothetico-deductive logic
(yellow-green) to test a theory. Predictions and observations and
goals are compared to produce evaluative inputs
(light blue) that are used in evaluation (blue).
Creative generation (red) and critical evaluation (blue) are combined in
design (purple).
There is also spatial symbolism.
For example, on both diagrams the production of predictions (by mental experiments
on the left side) and observations (by physical experiments on the right
side) is vertical, while the comparison of predictions with observations
in a "reality check" is horizontal. The visual logic of
these diagrams, using spatial symbolism to represent conceptual relationships
between thinking skills, can help students construct their own mental models
of conceptual relationships. The diagrams, functioning as visual
models for thinking methods, lead to mental
models for thinking methods, to help a student understand how creativity
and criticality are coherently combined in the problem-solving methods used
by designers and scientists. { Of course, critical
thinking is simply evaluative thinking;
criticality is not necessarily negative or "critical", and critical
thinking can lead to an evaluative conclusion that is either positive or
negative. }
The similarities between design and science
let us connect experiences in design (and IDM) with experiences in science
(and ISM) that are similar although not as familiar. It can be useful
to view science as a specialized type of design in which the main objective
is to construct an improved theory, in contrast with other types of design
in which the main objective is an improved product or strategy. {For
a more detailed discussion, check an introductory comparison
of design and science and (for more depth) Design
and Science and Should Scientific Method be
X-Rated? and Is There a Scientific Method?
}
Using IDM and ISM together can help us
understand the many similarities (and the differences) between design and
science, and between various types of design or types of science.
It can be useful to study both similarities and differences. The similarities
call attention to opportunities for transfer, and the differences help us
appreciate the unique characteristics of each area. When comparing
areas, it can be useful to study various levels of thinking. We can
examine the individual thinking actions used
in each area, and how these actions are combined into methods
for solving problems.
It is usually more effective to teach
design before science, for reasons that are logical and also, as discussed
below, motivational.
Due to its wide scope, design includes
future activities that every student can imagine, especially if their imaginations
are stimulated by a teacher who helps them see that what they are learning
in school can be used outside the classroom, that it can help them achieve
their personal goals for life.
{note: This concluding part of Section
1 will be completed eventually, but probably not before late in 2001.
If you want, you can skip to Section 4,
3. A Wide Spiral Curriculum
IDM and ISM, creatively combined,
could be useful in a wide spiral curriculum
designed to teach thinking skills. This approach to education would
have a wide scope due to a coordination of learning over a range of subject
areas, including all science and some non-science areas. It would
be a "spiral" due to the distribution of learning over time.
Learning occurs in a short-term narrow
spiral when activities with similar educational functions are repeated and
coordinated (with respect to different types of experience, levels of sophistication,
and contexts) in one course. If the learning experiences in this course
are coordinated with those in other courses a student is currently taking,
and if this wide approach continues for a long time, the result will be
a long-term wide spiral. A well designed spiral curriculum has a carefully
planned sequencing and coordinating of activities within each course and
between courses, in science and in other areas, to form a synergistic system
(with mutual support between different aspects of instruction) for helping
students learn higher-level thinking skills.
During the process of planning a wide
spiral that combines individual activities into a coordinated goal-oriented
curriculum, IDM-ISM can serve valuable functions by
stimulating a search for ideas and by providing a coherent structure for
integrating the skills that are being learned during activities in different
areas of the curriculum. The use of IDM-ISM as
a framework for analytical design and evaluation is described in Exploring and Improving the Structure of Instruction and Conceptual Evaluation of Instruction.
The process of designing a wide spiral
involves three modes of action: define goals, design
activities (to provide experience), and develop methods (to help students
learn from experience). As mentioned earlier, I am optimistic about
the potential for using IDM and ISM in education, but am deservedly humble
about the current state of developing this potential. Of course, any
attempt to use ISM/IDM for instruction should be coordinated with the work
of other educators, especially those who are devoted to the integration
of thinking skills into the general curriculum, and who, compared with myself,
have much more expertise and experience in this area. For example,
Marzano (1988) and Beyer (1997) have developed frameworks for the teaching
of thinking, Perkins (1992) proposes "Smart Schools" that educate
minds, and Swartz & Parks (1992) describe practical methods for "infusing
critical and creative thinking into content instruction." {references}
Eclectic Diversity, Central Location,
and Stimulating Discussion
The eclectic nature of ISM and IDM-ISM could help these models play a useful role in a
collaborative effort among scholars. Because ISM is a synthesis of
ideas from many fields, it is centrally located at the intersection of many
disciplines and the diverse perspectives they encompass. When IDM
is included, the diversity is even greater. The centrality of ISM
(and IDM-ISM) could facilitate a cooperative sharing
of ideas among scholars involved in science, the study of science, and science
education. ISM can easily connect with the large amount of thinking
that has been done about the methods of science and their application to
education. The widespread familiarity of "scientific method"
as a concept (and of design activity as an experience) will make it easier
to use ISM (and IDM) for communicating ideas. Of course, familiarity
can also lead to disagreements about assumptions and conclusions, but once
these are in plain view they can become the focus for stimulating discussions
among scholars and for exciting activities in a classroom.
Following an interlude with tips for
"how to cope with complexity," the discussion above (in Sections
1-3) continues in Section 5, "The Challenge of Educational Design."
{
A. Strategies for
Effective Teaching
When a complex process (like
design or science) is described in a model (like IDM or ISM) there is a
tension between the conflicting criteria of simplicity and completeness.
When a model is more complete it allows a more accurate description, but
the resulting complexity can make the model less useful for education if
students feel overwhelmed and confused because too many concepts are presented
too quickly.
But this potential difficulty can be
minimized -- thus allowing a model to be used for teaching students of different
ages and experience, abilities and interests -- if the information content
of the model is adjusted by simplification and enrichment. For example,
in two pages (Introduction to Design and
Overview of Design) IDM is described in three
different ways, using discussions and diagrams (two are shown below) that
vary in detail, beginning with simplicity and building toward completeness
and complexity.
Of course, these descriptions of design
could be further enriched by including more details in a diagram or discussion,
or by supplementing IDM with ideas from other sources.
To help students cope with complexity
while you are helping them develop an understanding that is deeper and more
complete, a useful teaching tool is an isolation
that makes it easier for students to focus their attention on one part of
the IDM diagram. This can be done by using a special diagram that
has one part highlighted with a white background, as shown below, or by
using a regular diagram and covering everything except the part that is
the current focus of attention.
Isolations can be used in a whole-part-whole
teaching method that shifts back and forth between the whole diagram and
isolations. Used skillfully, this method will help students learn
more about each part of IDM and its relationship to other parts and to the
whole, as they learn to understand and appreciate the organized complexity
of design. A whole-part-whole approach is useful for gradually building
complexity while avoiding an information overload. It can also help
students improve their ability to interpret visual symbolism and to understand
the logical relationships within complex systems of concepts. Just
as important, they can gain confidence in their ability to cope with complexity.
Another principle for effective teaching
is to use IDM in the context of student actions and experiences. Instead
of lecturing about "design method" as an abstract concept that
students have little reason to care about, IDM can be an integral part of
students' personal experience. After they have worked on a design
project, a teacher can help them think about what they have done, why it
worked, and how they can improve it for their projects in the future.
The ideas in IDM should be connected with what students recently have experienced,
now are experiencing, or soon will experience. When a designing
activity is accompanied by a reflection activity
that encourages introspective metacognition, the combination is more effective
than either the designing or the reflection would be by itself. Ideally,
intrinsically interesting design activities and reflection activities will
be coordinated into a spiral curriculum (as discussed in Section
3) that integrates design with science (as in Section 1).
Strategies for effective teaching --
such as simplifying and enriching, building complexity in gradual steps,
showing whole-part-whole relationships, and connecting action with reflection
-- are used daily by good teachers. Effective instruction of any type
requires wise "adjustment" decisions about selection and sequencing,
with the goal of maintaining an appropriate pace (not too slow, not too
fast) and level (not too easy, not too difficult) for the majority of students
in a classroom. The same sensitive awareness and improvising skill
that allows effective teaching in other areas will also make it possible
to teach effectively using IDM and ISM. { The rest of this section
is optional. If you're interested in strategies for trying to represent
a complex process in a simple model, you can read Part B below. Or
you can skip directly to Section 5. }
B. Essential Tensions
in Models
In the early days of developing
ISM, when I showed people the ISM-diagram a common criticism was that "There
are too many ideas, and students will feel overwhelmed." My response
to this valid concern, which has influenced the subsequent development of
ISM and then IDM, is based on three principles. First, because the
process of science is complex, an accurate model of science must be complex.
Second, a model is a simplified representation of reality, and each model
contains many factors that can be adjusted in an attempt to achieve various
goals. Third, in order to achieve common educational goals we need
effective teaching strategies for coping with complexity, as discussed above.
This subsection examines the second principle, the goal-directed construction
of models. Let's imagine that, in a series of case studies, we are
analyzing fifty examples of problem solving across a wide range of design
and science. We will find that some core actions
occur in all cases, while some auxiliary actions
vary from one case to another. If we want to construct a general model
that is always applicable, we include only the core actions. But for
a model that allows a complete description of specific cases, we also need
auxiliary actions. Thus, our judgments about whether we have constructed
an optimally useful model will depend on how we have defined our goals.
In a model, should we aim for maximum
generality, maximum specificity, or an optimal balance? And how should
we define optimality? When constructing models, it is often difficult
to achieve a balance between conflicting goals and the associated conflicting
criteria. And a desirable balance varies with context. A good
balance between simplicity and completeness will be different for education
in elementary school, high school, and college. And it will differ
for basic education and for scholarly research.
{a note for the reader: This subsection,
which is being temporarily abandoned, will eventually include the following
topics: why I began with ISM and then constructed IDM; why IDM
is simpler than ISM even though design is not simpler than science;
relationships between generalizing, core actions and simplicity, and between
specificity, auxiliary actions, completeness and complexity, and between
all of these and the flexible improvising (like a hockey skater instead
of a figure skater) discussed in the "Intro to Design" page;
viewing IDM as a "family of models" differing in level of detail;
defining "importance" in two ways, for problem solving and for
education; how generality and specificity are related to transfer
of skills; and more. }
5. The Challenge of Educational Design
Sections 1-4 have described
IDM's connections with the work of other educators (in Section 1) and with
students' past experience and future plans (in 2), how IDM-and-ISM could
serve as a bridge from design to science (in 2) and could be used in a wide
spiral curriculum (in 3), plus principles for coping with complexity (in
4). I have tried to show how IDM-ISM can be used
in education, either directly (during instruction) or indirectly (while
planning instruction). This section discusses a few more possibilities.
For the design of education, challenges
are posed by three practical constraints. First, a curriculum and
the accompanying instruction should be flexible so it can accommodate a
wide range of learning styles and teaching styles. Second, we should
make it easy for teachers to teach well and to learn new methods quickly
with a minimum of extra preparation time. Third, if teachers feel
obligated to cover a large amount of subject-area content, they may be reluctant
to invest the classroom time required to teach thinking skills. Many
educators have been (and will be) struggling with ways to achieve satisfactory
solutions for these problems and for other challenges. I don't claim
to have any easy answers, but the IDM-ISM system does
have features indicating that it is worth exploring and developing.
Developing a general curriculum in the
culturally diverse, decentralized system of American education is especially
important and difficult. But the wide scope of design -- it covers
almost everything in life! -- should help IDM connect with the experience
of students (and teachers) from a wide range of sociocultural backgrounds.
Due to the wide scope and familiarity
of design, I think teachers will quickly feel comfortable with IDM.
It is fairly simple and intuitive, yet offers plenty of room for creative
intellectual growth, so it should be appealing for teachers. Even
though IDM is new, it won't feel strange. And it provides a bridge
to scientific methods, making them seem more familiar and intuitive.
By helping teachers develop a more coherent understanding of design and
science, the integrated structure of IDM-ISM could serve a valuable function,
consistent with proposals (e.g., Matthews, 1994) that teacher education
would be improved by a more effective use of insights from the history and
philosophy of science.
All educators agree that we should
help students improve their conceptual understanding and also their methods
of thinking. These two types of knowledge are related, as in "theoretical
thinking" that generates and evaluates concepts, and "application
thinking" that requires an understanding of concepts. But with
limited time available, we cannot maximize both a mastery of concepts and
a mastery of methods, so we must aim for an optimal balance. What
is this balance and how can we achieve it? For these important questions
there is no consensus of agreement, but my own opinion is that we should
recognize the importance of high-quality thinking and should decide it is
worth a significant investment of time.
In addition to special activities in
which the focus is directly on thinking, teachers can make conventional
activities more effective by using IDM as a tool to help students learn
more from their experiences, thereby taking advantage of the many opportunities
for learning that exist but are often missed. Similarly, ISM can be
used in science labs to help students be more aware of what they are doing
and what they can learn. And students' personal experience can be
supplemented with stories, from history or current events, about scientists
and designers. Another option is to adopt an STS (Science, Technology,
and Society) approach and to use ISM and IDM for analyzing the characteristics
of science and technology, including their mutual interactions with each
other and with society.
Here is all of Section 1, in its full uncut state:
To illustrate the unifying potential
of IDM, we'll begin by examining Dimensions of Thinking: A Framework
for Curriculum and Instruction (1988), an excellent book written by
seven educators: Marzano, Brandt, Hughes, Jones, Presseisen, Rankin, and
Suhor. A summary of Chapters 1-4 and (in a little more depth) Chapter
5 will show how actions in Dimensions of Thinking
are related to actions in IDM, how these two "frameworks for
thinking" are compatible and mutually supportive, and how IDM could
serve as a unifying structure for our teaching of thinking skills and methods:
In Dimensions, Chapter 1 -- Thinking
as the Foundation of Schooling -- emphasizes the centrality and importance
of thinking in education.
In Chapter 2, the authors define metacognition as "being aware of our thinking
as we perform specific tasks and then using this awareness to control what
we are doing." { All quotations in this section are from Dimensions
of Thinking. }
Chapter 3 explains how creative
thinking and critical thinking
operate as a cooperative team: "They complement each other, share many
attributes,... and both are necessary to achieve any worthy goal."
Creativity is "the ability to form new combinations of ideas to fulfill
a need," to produce ideas that will be useful. Critical thinking,
defined broadly, is "reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused
on deciding what to believe or do." { It is important to recognize
that critical thinking is not necessarily negative and does not always lead
to criticism. Critical thinking can also lead to an enthusiastically
positive conclusion about the idea being evaluated. }
Chapters 2 and
3 of Dimensions describe two broad functions of IDM: to promote
metacognitive "thinking about thinking" and to provide a structure
that shows how creativity and criticality can be fluently combined in problem
solving.
Chapters 4 and 5 distinguish between
a skill and a process: "What we call thinking
skills are simpler cognitive operations such as observing, comparing,
or inferring." A thinking process
"involves using a sequence of skills intended to achieve a particular
outcome." A process "orchestrates numerous skills"
and is directed toward achieving an objective. Compared with a skill,
a process "is broader in scope, and takes a longer time to complete."
Chapter 4 describes three types of Thinking
Process: Knowledge Acquisition
by Concept Formation, Principle Formation, and Comprehension; and
Knowledge Production or Knowledge
Application by Problem Solving, Decision Making, Research (Scientific
Inquiry), Composition ("the process of conceiving and developing a
product"), or Oral Discourse (dialog).
The essence of
IDM, its main function and purpose, is to serve as a framework for understanding
and mastering the applications of knowledge that occur in problem solving, decision making,
research, and composition. But IDM can also be useful in promoting
the production
and acquisition
of knowledge, as explained in the discussion of Chapter 5 that follows.
Chapter 5 examines 21 thinking
skills in 8 categories. After
a brief description of the skills in each category (slightly
rearranged by me) I'll explain how the skills in Dimensions are
related to actions in IDM.
Focusing Skills
are used to stimulate and guide action "after an individual senses
a problem, an issue, or a lack of meaning." Focusing can take
the form of Defining Problems (to clarify
what, why, who, when,...), Setting Goals
(to "establish direction and purpose") or Formulating
Questions (to "clarify issues and meaning through inquiry;
good questions focus attention on important information and are designed
to generate new information").
Information-Gathering
Skills are "used to bring to consciousness the content to
be used for cognitive processing." The information "may
already be stored, or may be newly collected." Recalling
is retrieving old information from long-term memory. Elaborating
"involves adding details, explanations, examples, or other relevant
information from prior knowledge in order to improve understanding."
Observing is obtaining new information
"from the environment... through one or more senses."
As explained in
an outline of IDM
, the process of design begins by recognizing
a problem (which, broadly defined, is an opportunity to make things better
or to prevent things from getting worse) and defining an overall objective.
Following this, you can define goals for the desired characteristics
of the product, strategy, or theory that is the objective. As defined
in Dimensions of Thinking, the Focusing Skills deal primarily with
defining the objective(s) that will motivate and guide all actions during
the process of design.
The first
action -- which begins before objectives are defined because observational
information provides the basis for recognizing that a problem/opportunity
exists -- is to gather information. Dimensions emphasizes that
information can be old or new. In IDM these two ways to gather occur
in the SEARCH mode (to remember old observations) and TEST mode (to produce
new observations).
In the diagram
below, two skills from Dimensions (focus and gather information) are correlated with the corresponding actions in IDM
(define overall objective and the four-step process of producing
observations).
Generating
Skills that "add information beyond what is given"
are "essentially constructive, as connections among new ideas and prior
knowledge are made by building a coherent organization of ideas (i.e., schema)
that holds the new and old information together." Predicting
is usually done "by assessing the likelihood of an outcome based on
prior knowledge of how things usually turn out" to produce "a
statement anticipating the outcomes of a situation." Inferring involves "going beyond available
information to identify what reasonably may be true. ... Deductive
reasoning is the ability to extend an existing principle or idea in a logical
manner; inductive reasoning refers to making generalizations and logical
statements based on observation or analysis of various cases."
The skill of "generate, by using logic
and creativity" (from Dimensions)
appears on the left side of the IDM diagram above, because predicting (in Dimensions)
is the four-step process of producing predictions (in IDM), and
inferring (in Dimensions) occurs in the retroductive logic
(in IDM) that creatively generates a theory (by aiming for predictions that
match known observations) or a product-idea (by aiming for predictions that
match your goals for a product). { Retroduction is discussed
in the "Goal-Oriented Invention of Products" part of Section 2B
in An Overview of Design Method. }
Evaluating
Skills are used to "assess the reasonableness and quality
of ideas." Establishing Criteria
is "setting standards for judging the value or logic of ideas.
These criteria are rational principles derived from culture, experience,
and instruction." Verifying
(or falsifying) can be the result of evaluating "the truth of an idea,
using specific standards or criteria of evaluation." Identifying Errors "involves detecting
mistakes in logic, calculations, procedures, and knowledge, and where possible,
identifying their causes and making corrections or changes in thinking."
The action of establishing criteria
(in Dimensions) is setting goals (in IDM), and verifying (in Dimensions)
corresponds (in IDM) to evaluate theory and (if we stretch the scope
of Dimensions to include more than just theories) evaluate product.
The action of identifying errors is implicit in IDM; if evaluation leads you and
another person to reach different conclusions, then either one of you has
made an error, or each of you has reached a valid "alternative conclusion."
The skills in the next three categories
-- organizing, analyzing, and integrating -- are useful for gaining a deeper
understanding of concepts:
Organizing Skills
are used to "arrange information so it can be understood or presented
more effectively." Comparing
is "identifying similarities and differences between or among entities."
Classifying is "grouping items
into categories on the basis of their attributes." Ordering
is "sequencing entities according to a given criterion."
Representing occurs when "a learner
makes information more meaningful and cohesive" by "changing its
form to show how critical elements are related." Encoding
is the process of organizing information in memory so it can be recalled.
Analyzing Skills
"are used to clarify existing information by examining parts and relationships.
A thinker can identify Attributes and Components
("the parts that together constitute a whole"), Relationships
and Patterns (that can be "causal, hierarchical, temporal,
spatial, correlational, or metaphorical" or...), and Main
Ideas (plus key details). When applied to a theory, analysis
helps us understand. When applied to an argument, analysis helps us
think about the credibility of assumptions, observations, reasonings, and
claims.
As partners of analyzing skills, Integrating Skills involve "putting together
the relevant parts or aspects of a solution, understanding, principle, or
composition... by building meaningful connections between incoming information
and prior knowledge, incorporating this integrated information into a new
understanding." Summarizing
"is combining information efficiently into a cohesive statement."
Restructuring "is changing existing
knowledge structures to incorporate new information. Because of new
insights, the learner actively modifies, extends, reorganizes, or even discards
past understandings. ... This recasting of ideas is a major part of
conceptual growth, and ultimately of cognitive development."
In IDM the focal
point for all of these skills is theory, which is defined broadly
so it includes organized systems of concepts in science (physical, biological,
social, economic,...) and in math, business, and other areas, and also interpretations
of events in real life (in current or historical situations) and in fiction.
IDM can help students understand how theories are constructed (by inference),
why they are accepted or rejected (due to evaluation), and how they can
be useful (for predicting) during the process of solving problems in many
types of design. Because IDM is closely related
to ISM (Integrated Scientific Method) and because
scientific method is the process of designing theories the potential educational value of IDM-and-ISM in promoting
the learning of theories (i.e., concepts, principles, comprehensions,...)
is further enhanced. IDM and/or ISM can also help students understand
the relationships between conceptual knowledge (gaining a deeper,
more accurate understanding of concepts and situations) and procedural
knowledge (in a wide variety of activities that include, but are not
limited to, the production and utilization of conceptual knowledge).
As discussed
above, there is a close connection between the thinking skills and methods
in IDM and in Dimensions of Thinking: A Framework for Curriculum and
Instruction. Thus, it seems likely that IDM could be smoothly
integrated with the type of "education in thinking" recommended
by the authors of Dimensions and by many other educators. Because
it provides a common context that is shared by many areas, the transitive
nature of IDM (which connects with many areas, thus connecting them with
each other) might help students understand the similarities between thinking
methods in different areas of the curriculum, and might promote a transfer
of skills from one area to another.
This concludes Section 1 and the main body of this page. top of page
Appendix
Conceptual Evaluation
of Instruction
The purpose of instructional
evaluation is to estimate the extent to which a particular program of instruction
achieves an educational objective, such as helping students improve their
thinking skills. Evaluation provides essential input for developing
new approaches to instruction, and for making policy decisions about instruction.
Of course, instructional development
and policy decisions should be based on reliable knowledge, including data
about instructional activities (what students
are asked to do), student actions (what students
actually do), and learning outcomes (what students
learn). Based on this data, an evaluation of instructional effectiveness
can be mainly empirical or conceptual.
An empirical evaluation
occurs by gathering and interpreting outcome-data in order to estimate the
effectiveness of a program. Empirical evaluation can be useful, but
doing it well is often difficult and time consuming.
A conceptual evaluation
is based on data about either activities or activities -and-actions.
For example, consider an extreme case where the dual objectives of instruction
are to help students learn about the nature of science and improve their
thinking skills, yet the activities-data shows that there is no discussion
of either science or thinking, and students have no opportunities to solve
problems. Even with no outcome-data it is easy to predict that this
program, due to the mismatch between objectives and activities, will not
achieve its objectives.
But real-life situations are more complex,
so a conceptual evaluation is more difficult, its meaning is open to a wider
range of interpretations, and its conclusions are justifiably viewed with
caution. And a conclusion may be indefinite. This occurs when
we claim to know a "necessary but maybe not sufficient" condition
(such as a match between objectives and activities) that seems necessary
for success, but even if this condition is present there is no guarantee
of success because other conditions that also influence the outcome may
be needed for effective instruction.
Conceptual evaluation should be based
on a deep, accurate understanding of instruction, and this essential knowledge
base can be improved by using a coherent analytical framework, such as an
activity-and-experience grid that includes IDM and/or
ISM. If ISM is useful for describing the integrated structure of scientific
methods, it should also be useful for describing the integrated structure
of "thinking skills" instruction in which students learn and use
scientific methods. Similarly, IDM can be useful for understanding
the structure of instruction about design.
The following excerpts
are from Introduction to Design (mostly) and An Overview of Design Method (for one section):
What is design? It is the process of using creativity and critical thinking to solve a problem.
What is a problem? In the context of design, a problem is any situation where you have an opportunity to make a difference, to make things better. Whenever you are thinking creatively and critically about ways to increase the quality of life (or to avoid a decrease in quality), you are actively involved in problem solving. The overall goal of design can be a product, strategy, or theory. Broadly defined, this includes almost everything in life.
The "Introduction to Design"
page, using my model of Integrated Design Method (IDM) as a framework, describes
a general process of design, and illustrates with an imaginary situation
in which the objective is a minivan, and the goals are the
desired properties for a minivan.
The process of design is also described
below, more briefly and in a new way, in terms of six modes of action: DEFINE
GOALS, SEARCH, IMAGINE, TEST, EVALUATE, and THEORIZE. Initially we'll
focus on the design of products, although eventually the scope of "design
method" will be increased to include theories and strategies.
A Brief Outline of Integrated Design Method
DEFINE OBJECTIVE
Based on known observations (based
on everything you already know about "what now is"), define an
overall objective by deciding what you want to design.
DEFINE GOALS
Based on a knowledge of what is,
and inspired by ideas of what could be, define the goals for a product by
defining the desired properties -- the composition (what it is), functions
(what it does), and performances (how well it does) -- of a satisfactory
product.
These goals are the focus of action during
the process of design, because goals guide the generation of ideas for products,
and [as shown below] the evaluation of a potential product is done by comparing
goals with predictions (from imaginary mental experiments) or observations
(from actual physical experiments).
SEARCH (gather
old information)
Usually the first step in design
is to understand the current situation. Search for old products (those
now existing) that are similar to your goal product. For each old
product, gather observations that already are known, and ask "What
are this product's properties, and how closely do these properties match
my goals?"
IMAGINE (generate
new ideas)
Think about possibilities for creating
new products (by modifying an existing product, or...) and run "thought
experiments" to predict how these changes would affect composition,
functions, and performances. Would the predicted properties of any
new product more closely match your goals?
TEST (do
"reality checks")
For each product (old or new) being
considered, get the product by acquiring it (if possible) or constructing
it (if necessary), design experiments that will show you its actual properties,
then compare these properties with your goals.
EVALUATE (and
decide)
The process of design requires generation
and evaluation. Each potential product (old or new, existing in the
mind or in reality) is evaluated by comparing predicted properties with
goals (for predictive feedback) or by comparing observed properties
with goals (for empirical feedback). Eventually, you may find a product
that satisfactorily achieves your goals, and you consider the problem solved.
Or you continue searching, or abandon the search.
THEORIZE
In an optional mode of action, it
may be useful to do a Reality Check by comparing predictions with observations
so you can evaluate your theories, to see whether "the way you think
it is" matches "the way it really is."
Design and Science
{imported from Introduction to Design
}
What is the connection between design
and science? A designer is anyone who tries to improve a product,
strategy, or theory. Since the main objective of science is to improve
our theories about nature, science is just a special type of design, devoted
to solving one kind of problem. But when we are studying the methods
used by problem solvers over a wide range of areas, it is useful to distinguish
between two types of objectives: the designing of products or strategies
(which I'll simply call design) and
the designing of theories (which I'll call science).
As described above, goals and predictions and observations can be compared in three ways: two are the main strategies in design, and one is the main strategy in science.
In science, our overall long-term
objective is to search for the truth, to develop theories that are accurate
representations of reality. During this search our most useful tool
is a "reality check" that compares theory-based predictions
with observations.
In conventional design, the main objective
is to develop an improved product or strategy, and our most useful tools
are comparisons of goals with predictions,
and goals with observations. Although
in design it may be useful to get feedback about theories by comparing predictions
and observations, this is not the central focus of action, as it is in science.
Despite this difference in objectives,
there are many similarities between the methods of thinking used in science
and design. In both activities, there is goal-directed action with
a creative generation and critical evaluation of ideas, and mental and physical
experimentation that produces predictions and observations. Ultimately,
both fields depend on observations and reality checks, but there is an important
difference. In science, observations are compared with predictions.
In design, observations are compared with goals.
When we're searching for similarities
and differences between science and design, although it can be interesting
to compare science with a wide range of design fields, it seems most immediately
useful to compare science with its closest cousin in design, which is engineering.
By contrast with science, which tries to understand nature, engineering
tries to improve human technology.
Notice the two differences: between understanding
and improvement, and between nature
and technology. But there are many interactions
and overlaps between science and engineering. The understanding gained
by science is often applied in technology, and science often relies on products
of technology, especially for instruments used to collect data. And
because I am choosing to define science and engineering in terms of functions,
not careers, a scientist sometimes does engineering, and an engineer
sometimes does science. ..... { the discussion
continues for two more paragraphs }
Design before Science
{imported from An Introduction to Design
}
An important function of education is
helping students learn how to think more effectively. In our efforts
to achieve this goal, design and science -- and their methods of thinking,
as represented in my models of Integrated Design Method
(IDM) and Integrated
Scientific Method (ISM) -- could play
valuable roles. .....
In education, initially the logical framework
of IDM will help students recognize the logic they use in their everyday
"design" thinking, and will help them improve the quality of their
thinking by building on what they already know. Later, IDM can serve
as a bridge from design to science, from familiar experiences in design
(and IDM) to experiences in science (and ISM) that, although not as familiar,
have a similar logical structure.
To show the similarities between design
and science, I have intentionally made IDM and ISM similar in content (both
are based on the same logical foundation) and expression (both use similar
verbal terminology and visual symbolism). IDM and ISM have been designed
to operate fluently as a cooperative team, which will make these "strategies
for problem solving" more useful in education.
Is there a method?
{imported from An Introduction to Design
}
Is there a "method" in design
and science, as implied by IDM and ISM? And if a method does exist,
can it be taught? In my opinion, the answer to these questions is
YES.
My model of Integrated Design Method
(IDM) is a "framework for action" that describes the activities
of designers -- what they think about and what they do -- when they are
designing. IDM shows how the mutually supportive skills of creativity
and critical thinking are integrated in the problem-solving methods used
by designers.
But the methods used in design (and described
in IDM) are flexible, not rigid. As an illustration, think about two
types of ice skaters. The actions of a figure skater are precisely
planned and, if there are no mistakes, predictable. By contrast, 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. In IDM (and ISM) the "method" is similar to the
goal-directed "structured improvisation" of a hockey skater.
It is most useful to view IDM, not as a rigid pathway to follow, but as
a roadmap that shows possibilities for creatively rational wandering.
The following excerpts are from the Aesop's Activities page:
A Goal-Directed Approach to Education {imported from Aesop's Activities }
Aesop's Fables are designed to teach lessons about life. By analogy, Aesop's Activities can help students learn ideas and thinking skills. In an Aesop's Approach to improving education, the basic themes are simple: a teacher should provide opportunities for educationally useful experience, and help students learn from their experience. .....
An Aesop's Approach to instructional design involves a goal-directed coordination of activities and methods, with three modes of action: 1) define goals for education in terms of the knowledge (the ideas and skills) to be learned by students, 2) design activities that provide experience with this knowledge, 3) develop methods of teaching that help students learn more by directing attention to "what can be learned" from their experience. .....
A goal-directed approach to instruction
has two main components: activities
that promote educationally useful experience (as discussed in Sections 1
and 2), and (in this section) methods
that help students learn from their experience -- and remember what they
have learned, and transfer this knowledge to new situations -- by directing
their attention to "what can be learned" from each experience.
How? By using reflection activities that
encourage students to think about what they are doing and why, about the
possibilities for learning. .....
In an explicit
reflection activity, a teacher directs attention to what can be learned,
and explains why a student should want to take advantage of this valuable
opportunity. In an implicit reflection activity,
a teacher directs attention to a learning opportunity by a request for action,
such as discussing a question, that shifts a student from a minimally aware
"going through the motions" mode to a more aware "active
thinking" mode.
Exploring and Improving the Structure
of Instruction {imported from Aesop's Activities
}
Opportunities for educationally functional
experience can be analyzed using an activity-and-experience grid (as shown
below), with student ACTIVITIES in the top row and thinking EXPERIENCES
in the left column.
student activities |
| science experiences | # 1 | # 2 | # 3 | # 4 | # 5 |
| A. generate experiments | yes | yes | |||
| B. do an experiment | yes | yes | yes | ||
| C. use scientific logic | yes | yes | yes | ||
| D. generate theories | yes | yes |
This grid clearly shows multi-function
activities (scanning vertically down the second column, we see that
Activity #2 provides Experiences B and C) and repeated
experiences (scanning the C-row horizontally, we see that experience
with C occurs in Activities 2, 3 and 5). A grid may reveal gaps that
will guide the designing of new activities. For example, an earlier
version of this grid might have motivated a teacher, who noticed that after
Activities 1-3 the students have no experience doing A, to add Activities
4 and 5.
Of course, a "yes" does not
tell the whole story. A grid with larger cells could show more details,
such as the differences between a student's experience with scientific logic
in Activities 2 and 3.
In a grid, the visual organization of
information can improve our understanding of the educationally functional
relationships between activities, between experiences, and between activities
and experiences. This knowledge about the structure of instruction
can help us creatively coordinate -- with respect to types of experience,
levels of sophistication, and contexts -- the activities that promote experiences.
The goal of a carefully planned selection and sequencing of activities is
to develop a mutually supportive synergism between the activities, to build
a coherent system for teaching each type of thinking skill, to produce a
more effective environment for learning.
REFERENCES:
written by four authors (1998). Design as a Catalyst for Thinking.
Marzano, R. J., R. S. Brandt, C. S. Hughes, B. F. Jones, B. Z. Presseisen, S. C. Rankin, & C. Suhor (1988). Dimensions for Thinking: A Framework for Curriculum and Instruction.
Barry Beyer (1997). Improving Student Thinking: A Comprehensive Approach.
David Perkins (1992). Smart Schools: From Training Memories to Educating Minds.
Robert Swartz & Sandra Parks (1992). Infusing Critical and Creative Thinking into Content Instruction.
the URL of this page is
http://www.sit.wisc.edu/~crusbult/methods/ed.htm
copyright 2000 by Craig Rusbult
OFF-PAGE LINKS:
Aesop's Activities
Searching for Insight
An Introduction to Design
An Overview of Design Method
An Overview of Scientific
Method
Design and Science (available later)
Should Scientific Method be X-Rated?
Is There a Scientific Method?
Using Labs to Teach Thinking Skills
OFF-SITE LINKS:
The links below will open in a new window.
Then this page and each new page will
both be open, in separate windows.
home-page for
the National Center for Teaching Thinking
An Introduction
to Infusion Instruction (Chapter 1 of Swartz & Parks)
Sample Lessons
that use an "Infusion" Instructional Approach