Where Are The Problem Finders?
Where Are The Problem Finders?
Problem finding means problem discovery. It is part of the larger problem process that includes problem shaping and problem solving. Problem finding requires intellectual vision and insight into what is missing. This involves the application of creativity. It requires Higher Order Thinking (HOT)...
We are so consumed with problem solving that we are not taking enough time to ask whether we are solving the right problem to begin with or why did the problem even arise in the first place? As current problems are being solved, what are the chances that it may lead to other problems? These are questions worth pondering.
Developing Problem Finders Framework
Develop Lateral Thinking
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Dynamic Type 2’s
"You cannot dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper"
"The brain as a self-organising information system forms asymmetric patterns. In such systems there is a mathematical need for moving across patterns. The tools and processes of lateral thinking are designed to achieve such 'lateral' movement. The tools are based on an understanding of self-organising information systems."
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
"In any self-organising system there is a need to escape from a local optimum in order to move towards a more global optimum. The techniques of lateral thinking, such as provocation, are designed to help that change."
http://edwdebono.com/lateral-thinking
To use your inspiration and imagination to solve problems by looking at them from unexpected perspectives. Lateral thinking involves discarding the obvious, leaving behind traditional modes of thought, and throwing away preconceptions.
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Develop Lateral Thinking
Reframe
Avoid
Preconception
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
A frame, or frame of reference is a complex schema of unquestioned beliefs, values and so on that we use when inferring meaning. If any part of that frame is changed (hence 'reframing'), then the meaning that is inferred may change.
To reframe, step back from what is being said and done and consider the frame, or 'lens' through which this reality is being created. Understand the unspoken assumptions, including beliefs and schema that are being used.
Then consider alternative lenses, effectively saying 'Let's look at it another way.' Challenge the beliefs or other aspects of the frame. Stand in another frame and describe what you see. Change attributes of the frame to reverse meaning. Select and ignore aspects of words, actions and frame to emphasise and downplay various elements.
R
E
F
R
E
A
M
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
Thus, for example, you can reframe:
A problem as an opportunity
A weakness as a strength
An impossibility as a distant possibility
A distant possibility as a near possibility
Oppression ('against me') as neutral ('doesn't care about me')
Unkindness as lack of understanding
Bizer, G. Y., & Petty, R. E. (2005). How we conceptualize our attitudes matters: The effects of valence framing on the resistance of political attitudes. Political Psychology, 26, 553-568
Hale, K. (1998) The Language of Cooperation: Negotiation Frames, Mediation Quarterly, 16(2), 147-162
Phillips, B. (1999). Reformulating Dispute Narratives Through Active Listening, Mediation Quarterly,17(2), 161-180
Watzlawick, P., Weakland, J. and Fisch, R. (1974). Change: Principles of Problem Formation and Problem Resolution, NY: Norton
http://changingminds.org/techniques/general/reframing.htm
R
E
F
R
A
M
E
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
Reframing Matrix
Checkland, P.B. (1987). The Application of Systems Thinking in Real-world Problem situations: the Emergence of Soft Systems Methodology. From: Jackson, M.C., Keys, P. (Eds). New Directions of Management Science. Gower Press.
R
E
F
R
A
M
E
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
Within Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) we are advised to improve our understanding of the real world by making models of it.
Roles and the worldview of the humans involved, and, in addition, in the context of the systems environment (Root Definition)
R
E
F
R
A
M
E
Customers | Who are they, and how does the issue affect them? |
Actors | Who is involved in the situation? Who will be involved in implementing solutions? And what will impact their success? |
Transformation Process | What processes or systems are affected by the issue? |
World View | What is the big picture? And what are the wider impacts of the issue? |
Owner | Who owns the process or situation you are investigating? And what role will they play in the solution? |
Environmental Constraints | What are the constraints and limitations that will impact the solution and its success? |
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
Lateral Thinking Techniques
Alternatives: Use concepts to breed new ideas.
Focus: Sharpen or change your focus to improve your creative efforts.
Challenge: Break free from the limits of accepted ways of operating.
Random Entry: Use unconnected input to open new lines of thinking.
Provocation: Move from a provocative statement to useful ideas.
Harvesting: Select the best of early ideas and shape them into useable approaches.
Treatment of Ideas: Develop ideas and shape them to fit an organization or situation.
R
E
F
R
A
M
E
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
R
E
F
R
A
M
E
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
The human brain is capable of 10 processes per second(*), which makes it far more powerful than any computer currently in existence. But that doesn't mean our brains don't have major limitations. The lowly calculator can do math thousands of times better than we can, and our memories are often less than useless — plus, we're subject to cognitive biases, those annoying glitches in our thinking that cause us to make questionable decisions and reach erroneous conclusions.
16
,
* Moravec, H. (2000). Robot: Mere machine to transcendent mind. Oxford University Press.
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
Develop Lateral Thinking
L
Design Productive Failures
Avoid Preconception
“An opinion formed beforehand without adequate evidence”
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
With problem finding, however, the problem itself is not known. We may not even have enough knowledge to solve the problem, which is the case in many of the challenges we encounter in life.
We have a very good sense of the processes of problem solving, but we don’t quite have a theory or an understanding of what the process of finding a good problem looks like.
We know a lot about the processes of problem solving in the cognitive and the learning sciences, but not about problem finding. Yet every time we talk about innovation, inventiveness, or breakthroughs, people say it’s thinking about a problem to solve that’s more important than actually solving the problem.
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
“If you look at the history of scientific revolution, or the history of innovation, invariably it’s about finding a good problem to solve, and yet we don’t have an understanding of that process,” explains *Manu.
Interestingly, the process of solving a problem is much easier than finding a useful problem to solve. Problem finding is a very long, divergent and iterative process – you don’t know until you try many things, until you finally stumble upon a good problem to solve.
Once you’ve defined a good problem to solve, it’s easy to solve the problem! Not that solving a problem is not difficult. But it’s not as difficult as finding an inventive, original and meaningful problem to solve.
Associate Professor Manu Kapur, Head of NIE’s Learning Sciences Lab
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
These findings are consistent with the general math education literature that emphasizes the role of struggle in learning (e.g., Hiebert & Grouws, 2007). Findings are also consistent with and build upon recent work showing that problem solving prior to instruction is more effective than the other way around (DeCaro & Rittle-Johnson, 2012; Schwartz et al., 2011).
There is a growing body of research that emphasizes the need to understand conditions under which delaying structure during instruction can enhance learning (e.g., diSessa, Hammer, Sherin, & Kolpakowski, 1991; Lesh & Doerr, 2003; Slamecka & Graf, 1978).
Why Floundering is Good...
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
Taken together, these findings emphasize the need to design and understand conditions under which delaying structure in learning and problem-solving activities can enhance learning (Kapur, 2008, 2009, 2010).
Why Floundering is Good...
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
PF requires engaging students in a learning design that embodies four core interdependent mechanisms:
(a) activation and differentiation of prior knowledge in relation to the targeted concepts,
(b) attention to critical conceptual features of the targeted concepts,
(c) explanation and elaboration of these features, and
d) organization and assembly of the critical conceptual features into the targeted concepts.
Why Floundering is Good...
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
(a) the problem must admit multiple solutions, strategies, and representations, that is, afford sufficient problem and solution spaces for exploration,
(b) the problem should activate learners prior knowledge - formal as well as intuitive - to solve the problem. Whether or the extent to which the learner is able to correctly solve the problem will depend in part upon the amount and nature of guidance provided,
(c) students must themselves generate and explore solutions and not simply be presented with peers’ solutions
Why Floundering is Good...
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
This notion also resonates well with Brown’s (2008) notion of tinkering as a mode of knowledge production, that is, designing learning in ways that provides opportunities to “play” with knowledge, generate ideas, share and critique, and ultimately strive to understand the effectiveness of one’s ideas (Bielaczyc & Kapur, 2010). Having opportunities to engage in processes that afford such tinkering, processes that Scardamalia (2009) referred to as epistemic invention, may have helped students expand their repertoire of epistemic resources situated within the context of classroom-based problem-solving activities (Hammer, Elby, Scherr, & Redish, 2005).
Why Floundering is Good...
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
Let us call such design efforts designing for productive success (PS).
Both PF as well as PS and that a dual focus stands to advance the field in ways that neither single focus alone can (Kapur & Rummel, 2009).
Why Floundering is Good...
Design Productive Failures
PF
Design Productive Failures
Dynamic Type 2’s
“Put simply, because many professionals are almost always successful at what they do, they rarely experience failure. And because they have rarely failed, they have never learned how to learn from failure. … [T]hey become defensive, screen out criticism, and put the “blame” on anyone and everyone but themselves. In short, their ability to learn shuts down precisely at the moment they need it the most.”
― Laszlo Bock, Work Rules!: Insights from Inside Google That Will Transform How You Live and Lead
Why Floundering is Good...
Dynamic Type 2s
T2
Dynamic Type 2’s
Case Study: (Csikszentmihalyi & Getzels, 1976, p. 79)
Read Report
T2
How might we incorporate this nugget of research into our teaching?
Allow for additional time in the early stage of a project for students to arrange and rearrange the components, before requiring them to jump in to "solve" the problem.
Talk to students about the problem finding process. Sometimes students who exhibit behaviors like the Type 2 artists feel like they are “spinning their wheels.” Teachers can help these students understand the importance of problem finding. Teachers can also help students develop strategies to move on to the next phase of a project when it is time.
Build flexibility into an assignment, but also consider how you will support students through the problem finding phase of a project. Consider having students work on problem finding individually for a week, then come together as a class to develop a consensus problem. This way, students who do not have strong problem finding skills will not start out the project at a disadvantage.
Dynamic Type 2s
adapted from Sawyer, R. Keith. Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation. New York: Oxford UP, 2012. Print. P. 91-92
T2
What if a Type 2 person walks in for an Interview?
Dynamic Type 2s
T2
What are the implications to classroom instruction? How do we design and assess student tasks?
Dynamic Type 2s
FW
Problem Finding Framework
Mess Analysis
Ask Questions
Identify the Problems
Interconnection
Root Canal
Emperor's Clothing
Solve
T2
Critical T vs Creative T
Diverge vs Converge
Design Thinking
FW
Chances are students are still going to be given problems to solve. By training them to develop problem finding skills, student can apply the the framework to analyse the problem itself before proceeding to solve them.
Dynamic Type 2s
FW