![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world loading](https://www.mindtools.com/start_loading.png)
- Utility Menu
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world University Logo](https://bokcenter.harvard.edu/profiles/openscholar/themes/hwpi_basetheme/images/harvard-logo.png)
![](http://serviteca.online/777/templates/cheerup2/res/banner1.gif)
GA4 Tracking Code
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Home](https://bokcenter.harvard.edu/sites/projects.iq.harvard.edu/files/styles/os_files_xxlarge/public/shadowbok/files/logo_w.png?m=1515696160&itok=gqVvaoQZ)
fa51e2b1dc8cca8f7467da564e77b5ea
- Make a Gift
- Join Our Email List
- Problem Solving in STEM
Solving problems is a key component of many science, math, and engineering classes. If a goal of a class is for students to emerge with the ability to solve new kinds of problems or to use new problem-solving techniques, then students need numerous opportunities to develop the skills necessary to approach and answer different types of problems. Problem solving during section or class allows students to develop their confidence in these skills under your guidance, better preparing them to succeed on their homework and exams. This page offers advice about strategies for facilitating problem solving during class.
How do I decide which problems to cover in section or class?
In-class problem solving should reinforce the major concepts from the class and provide the opportunity for theoretical concepts to become more concrete. If students have a problem set for homework, then in-class problem solving should prepare students for the types of problems that they will see on their homework. You may wish to include some simpler problems both in the interest of time and to help students gain confidence, but it is ideal if the complexity of at least some of the in-class problems mirrors the level of difficulty of the homework. You may also want to ask your students ahead of time which skills or concepts they find confusing, and include some problems that are directly targeted to their concerns.
You have given your students a problem to solve in class. What are some strategies to work through it?
- Try to give your students a chance to grapple with the problems as much as possible. Offering them the chance to do the problem themselves allows them to learn from their mistakes in the presence of your expertise as their teacher. (If time is limited, they may not be able to get all the way through multi-step problems, in which case it can help to prioritize giving them a chance to tackle the most challenging steps.)
- When you do want to teach by solving the problem yourself at the board, talk through the logic of how you choose to apply certain approaches to solve certain problems. This way you can externalize the type of thinking you hope your students internalize when they solve similar problems themselves.
- Start by setting up the problem on the board (e.g you might write down key variables and equations; draw a figure illustrating the question). Ask students to start solving the problem, either independently or in small groups. As they are working on the problem, walk around to hear what they are saying and see what they are writing down. If several students seem stuck, it might be a good to collect the whole class again to clarify any confusion. After students have made progress, bring the everyone back together and have students guide you as to what to write on the board.
- It can help to first ask students to work on the problem by themselves for a minute, and then get into small groups to work on the problem collaboratively.
- If you have ample board space, have students work in small groups at the board while solving the problem. That way you can monitor their progress by standing back and watching what they put up on the board.
- If you have several problems you would like to have the students practice, but not enough time for everyone to do all of them, you can assign different groups of students to work on different – but related - problems.
When do you want students to work in groups to solve problems?
- Don’t ask students to work in groups for straightforward problems that most students could solve independently in a short amount of time.
- Do have students work in groups for thought-provoking problems, where students will benefit from meaningful collaboration.
- Even in cases where you plan to have students work in groups, it can be useful to give students some time to work on their own before collaborating with others. This ensures that every student engages with the problem and is ready to contribute to a discussion.
What are some benefits of having students work in groups?
- Students bring different strengths, different knowledge, and different ideas for how to solve a problem; collaboration can help students work through problems that are more challenging than they might be able to tackle on their own.
- In working in a group, students might consider multiple ways to approach a problem, thus enriching their repertoire of strategies.
- Students who think they understand the material will gain a deeper understanding by explaining concepts to their peers.
What are some strategies for helping students to form groups?
- Instruct students to work with the person (or people) sitting next to them.
- Count off. (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4; all the 1’s find each other and form a group, etc)
- Hand out playing cards; students need to find the person with the same number card. (There are many variants to this. For example, you can print pictures of images that go together [rain and umbrella]; each person gets a card and needs to find their partner[s].)
- Based on what you know about the students, assign groups in advance. List the groups on the board.
- Note: Always have students take the time to introduce themselves to each other in a new group.
What should you do while your students are working on problems?
- Walk around and talk to students. Observing their work gives you a sense of what people understand and what they are struggling with. Answer students’ questions, and ask them questions that lead in a productive direction if they are stuck.
- If you discover that many people have the same question—or that someone has a misunderstanding that others might have—you might stop everyone and discuss a key idea with the entire class.
After students work on a problem during class, what are strategies to have them share their answers and their thinking?
- Ask for volunteers to share answers. Depending on the nature of the problem, student might provide answers verbally or by writing on the board. As a variant, for questions where a variety of answers are relevant, ask for at least three volunteers before anyone shares their ideas.
- Use online polling software for students to respond to a multiple-choice question anonymously.
- If students are working in groups, assign reporters ahead of time. For example, the person with the next birthday could be responsible for sharing their group’s work with the class.
- Cold call. To reduce student anxiety about cold calling, it can help to identify students who seem to have the correct answer as you were walking around the class and checking in on their progress solving the assigned problem. You may even want to warn the student ahead of time: "This is a great answer! Do you mind if I call on you when we come back together as a class?"
- Have students write an answer on a notecard that they turn in to you. If your goal is to understand whether students in general solved a problem correctly, the notecards could be submitted anonymously; if you wish to assess individual students’ work, you would want to ask students to put their names on their notecard.
- Use a jigsaw strategy, where you rearrange groups such that each new group is comprised of people who came from different initial groups and had solved different problems. Students now are responsible for teaching the other students in their new group how to solve their problem.
- Have a representative from each group explain their problem to the class.
- Have a representative from each group draw or write the answer on the board.
What happens if a student gives a wrong answer?
- Ask for their reasoning so that you can understand where they went wrong.
- Ask if anyone else has other ideas. You can also ask this sometimes when an answer is right.
- Cultivate an environment where it’s okay to be wrong. Emphasize that you are all learning together, and that you learn through making mistakes.
- Do make sure that you clarify what the correct answer is before moving on.
- Once the correct answer is given, go through some answer-checking techniques that can distinguish between correct and incorrect answers. This can help prepare students to verify their future work.
How can you make your classroom inclusive?
- The goal is that everyone is thinking, talking, and sharing their ideas, and that everyone feels valued and respected. Use a variety of teaching strategies (independent work and group work; allow students to talk to each other before they talk to the class). Create an environment where it is normal to struggle and make mistakes.
- See Kimberly Tanner’s article on strategies to promoste student engagement and cultivate classroom equity.
A few final notes…
- Make sure that you have worked all of the problems and also thought about alternative approaches to solving them.
- Board work matters. You should have a plan beforehand of what you will write on the board, where, when, what needs to be added, and what can be erased when. If students are going to write their answers on the board, you need to also have a plan for making sure that everyone gets to the correct answer. Students will copy what is on the board and use it as their notes for later study, so correct and logical information must be written there.
For more information...
Tipsheet: Problem Solving in STEM Sections
Tanner, K. D. (2013). Structure matters: twenty-one teaching strategies to promote student engagement and cultivate classroom equity . CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(3), 322-331.
- Designing Your Course
- A Teaching Timeline: From Pre-Term Planning to the Final Exam
- The First Day of Class
- Group Agreements
- Classroom Debate
- Flipped Classrooms
- Leading Discussions
- Polling & Clickers
- Teaching with Cases
- Engaged Scholarship
- Devices in the Classroom
- Beyond the Classroom
- On Professionalism
- Getting Feedback
- Equitable & Inclusive Teaching
- Advising and Mentoring
- Teaching and Your Career
- Teaching Remotely
- Tools and Platforms
- The Science of Learning
- Bok Publications
- Other Resources Around Campus
Login to your account
Change password, your password must have 8 characters or more and contain 3 of the following:.
- a lower case character,
- an upper case character,
- a special character
Password Changed Successfully
Your password has been changed
Create a new account
Can't sign in? Forgot your password?
Enter your email address below and we will send you the reset instructions
If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to reset your password
Request Username
Can't sign in? Forgot your username?
Enter your email address below and we will send you your username
If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world World Scientific](https://worldscientific.com/pb-assets/releasedAssets/images/WSPC-LOGO-250.png)
- Institutional Access
Cookies Notification
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world CONNECT Login Notice](https://worldscientific.com/pb-assets/wspc-site/icons/i-icon-1692342767720.png)
Our site uses Javascript to enchance its usability. You can disable your ad blocker or whitelist our website www.worldscientific.com to view the full content.
Select your blocker:, adblock plus instructions.
- Click the AdBlock Plus icon in the extension bar
- Click the blue power button
- Click refresh
Adblock Instructions
- Click the AdBlock icon
- Click "Don't run on pages on this site"
uBlock Origin Instructions
- Click on the uBlock Origin icon in the extension bar
- Click on the big, blue power button
- Refresh the web page
uBlock Instructions
- Click on the uBlock icon in the extension bar
Adguard Instructions
- Click on the Adguard icon in the extension bar
- Click on the toggle next to the "Protection on this website" text
Brave Instructions
- Click on the orange lion icon to the right of the address bar
- Click the toggle on the top right, shifting from "Up" to "Down
Adremover Instructions
- Click on the AdRemover icon in the extension bar
- Click the "Don’t run on pages on this domain" button
- Click "Exclude"
Adblock Genesis Instructions
- Click on the Adblock Genesis icon in the extension bar
- Click on the button that says "Whitelist Website"
Super Adblocker Instructions
- Click on the Super Adblocker icon in the extension bar
- Click on the "Don’t run on pages on this domain" button
- Click the "Exclude" button on the pop-up
Ultrablock Instructions
- Click on the UltraBlock icon in the extension bar
- Click on the "Disable UltraBlock for ‘domain name here’" button
Ad Aware Instructions
- Click on the AdAware icon in the extension bar
- Click on the large orange power button
Ghostery Instructions
- Click on the Ghostery icon in the extension bar
- Click on the "Trust Site" button
Firefox Tracking Protection Instructions
- Click on the shield icon on the left side of the address bar
- Click on the toggle that says "Enhanced Tracking protection is ON for this site"
Duck Duck Go Instructions
- Click on the DuckDuckGo icon in the extension bar
- Click on the toggle next to the words "Site Privacy Protection"
Privacy Badger Instructions
- Click on the Privacy Badger icon in the extension bar
- Click on the button that says "Disable Privacy Badger for this site"
Disconnect Instructions
- Click on the Disconnect icon in the extension bar
- Click the button that says "Whitelist Site"
Opera Instructions
- Click on the blue shield icon on the right side of the address bar
- Click the toggle next to "Ads are blocked on this site"
System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Solving Everyday Problems with the Scientific Method cover](https://worldscientific.com/cms/10.1142/7032/asset/18ee7efd-f218-e7ef-0f21-ee7efd0f218e/7032.cover.jpg)
Solving Everyday Problems with the Scientific Method
- By (author):
- Don K Mak ,
- Angela T Mak , and
- Anthony B Mak
- Add to favorites
- Download Citations
- Track Citations
- Recommend to Library
- Description
- Supplementary
This book describes how one can use The Scientific Method to solve everyday problems including medical ailments, health issues, money management, traveling, shopping, cooking, household chores, etc. It illustrates how to exploit the information collected from our five senses, how to solve problems when no information is available for the present problem situation, how to increase our chances of success by redefining a problem, and how to extrapolate our capabilities by seeing a relationship among heretofore unrelated concepts.
One should formulate a hypothesis as early as possible in order to have a sense of direction regarding which path to follow. Occasionally, by making wild conjectures, creative solutions can transpire. However, hypotheses need to be well-tested. Through this way, The Scientific Method can help readers solve problems in both familiar and unfamiliar situations. Containing real-life examples of how various problems are solved — for instance, how some observant patients cure their own illnesses when medical experts have failed — this book will train readers to observe what others may have missed and conceive what others may not have contemplated. With practice, they will be able to solve more problems than they could previously imagine.
Sample Chapter(s) Chapter 1: Prelude (83 KB) Chapter 2: The Scientific Method (173 KB)
- The Scientific Method
Observation
Recognition, problem situation and problem definition, induction and deduction, alternative solutions, mathematics, probable value.
- Demonstrates how to cope with problems in both familiar and unfamiliar situations, using The Scientific Method
- Redefines problems by viewing the problem situation from different levels and perspectives
- Formulates solution methodology by borrowing ideas from economics, philosophy, logic, statistics, probability theory and scientific research
- Offers test-driven recommendations, supported with real-life examples
Type on 09/06/2008
Updated pp & pub date on 7/1/2009
Added s/c updated to systems price on 09/11/2009
Added review on 14/10/2010
Added review on 7/3/2011
FRONT MATTER
- Pages: i–xiii
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_fmatter
- Claimers and Disclaimers
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0001
The father put down the newspaper. It had been raining for the last two hours. The rain finally stopped, and the sky looked clear. After all this raining, the negative ions in the atmosphere would have increased, and the air would feel fresh. The father suggested the family of four should go for a stroll. There was a park just about fifteen minutes walk from their house…
- Pages: 3–16
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0002
- Edwin Smith papyrus
- Greek philosophy (4 th century BC)
- Islamic philosophy (8 th century AD–15 th century AD)
- European Science (12 th century AD–16 th century AD)
- Scientific Revolution (1543 AD–18 th century AD)
- Humanism and Empiricism
- Application of the Scientific Method to Everyday Problem
- Pages: 17–44
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0003
- Missed information
- Misinformation
- Hidden information
- No information
- Unaware information
- Evidence-based information
- Self-denied information
- Biased information
- Unexploited information
- Peripheral information
- Pages: 45–63
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0004
- Wild conjectures
- Albert Einstein (1879–1955)
- Pages: 65–82
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0005
- Experiment versus hypothesis
- Platonic, Aristotelian, Baconian, and Galilean methodology
- Pages: 83–95
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0006
- John Nash (1928– )
- Pages: 97–105
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0007
- Perspectives on different levels
- Perspectives on the same level
- Pages: 107–117
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0008
- Pages: 119–138
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0009
- Lotion bottle with a pump dispenser
- Pages: 139–167
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0010
- Ordinary thinking
- Unconscious mind
- Genetic material
- Watson and Crick at Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge
- Rosalind Franklin at King's College, London
- The triple helix model
- The double helix model
- Creative thinking and Ordinary thinking
- Scientific Research and Scientific Method
- Can we be more creative?
- Pages: 169–194
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0011
Mathematics, even some simple arithmetic, is so important in solving some of the everyday problems, that we think a whole chapter should be written on it.
Let us take a look at an example. When we see an advertisement which says "Buy one, get the second one at half price", we should be able to figure out what exactly does it mean, and how much discount are we actually getting. Is it a better deal than another company that advertises 30% off?…
- Pages: 195–207
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0012
For a certain problem, we may come up with several plausible solutions. Which path should we take? Each path would only have certain chance or probability of success in resolving the problem. If each path or solution has a different reward, we can define the probable value of each path to be the multiplication of the reward by the probability. We should, most likely, choose the path that has the highest probable value. (The term "probable value" is coined by us. The idea is appropriated from the term "expected value" in Statistics. In this sense, expected value can be considered as the sum of all probable values.)…
- Pages: 209–212
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_0013
We run into problems every day. Even when we do not encounter any problems, it does not mean that they do not exist. Sometimes, we wish we could be able to recognize them earlier. The scientific method of observation, hypothesis, and experiment can help us recognize, define, and solve our problems…
BACK MATTER
- Pages: 213–220
https://doi.org/10.1142/9789812835109_bmatter
- Bibliography
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/sda/1488/busmgmtsubscribe.png)
Related Books
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2016/10061/10061/20160229/10061.cover.jpg)
Inspirations of a Nation
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/1992/1359/1359/production/1359.cover.jpg)
Fivefold Symmetry
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/1995/2670/2670/production/2670.cover.jpg)
In the Wings of Physics
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/1996/2695/2695/production/2695.cover.jpg)
A Scientist Speaks Out
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/1995/2937/2937/production/2937.cover.jpg)
An Outline of Scientific Writing
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2003/5178/5178/production/5178.cover.jpg)
The Science of Financial Market Trading
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/rssilspr/2006/5923/5923/production/5923.cover.jpg)
The Road to Scientific Success
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2006/6055/6055/production/6055.cover.jpg)
Mathematical Techniques in Financial Market Trading
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2007/6286/6286/production/6286.cover.jpg)
Scientific Writing: A Reader and Writer's Guide
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2008/7029/7029/production/7029.cover.jpg)
A Second Genesis
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2009/7198/7198/production/7198.cover.jpg)
When the Scientist Presents
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2010/7583/7583/production/7583.cover.jpg)
The Tools of Science
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2011/7732/7732/production/7732.cover.jpg)
Exercise Personal Training 101
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2013/8508/8508/production/8508.cover.jpg)
Science Sifting
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/1999/p077/p077/20121228-01/p077.cover.jpg)
Enjoy Writing Your Science Thesis or Dissertation!
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2015/p1025/p1025/20150908-01/p1025.cover.jpg)
The Grant Writer's Handbook
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://worldscientific.com/na101/home/literatum/publisher/wspc/books/content/books/2006/p441/p441/production/p441.cover.jpg)
Survival Skills for Scientists
- A to Z Guides
What Is the Scientific Method?
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://img.lb.wbmdstatic.com/vim/live/webmd/consumer_assets/site_images/articles/biographies/sheikh_zilpah_382x382.jpg?resize=51px:51px&output-quality=75)
The scientific method is a systematic way of conducting experiments or studies so that you can explore the things you observe in the world and answer questions about them. The scientific method, also known as the hypothetico-deductive method, is a series of steps that can help you accurately describe the things you observe or improve your understanding of them.
Ultimately, your goal when you use the scientific method is to:
- Find a cause-and-effect relationship by asking a question about something you observed
- Collect as much evidence as you can about what you observed, as this can help you explore the connection between your evidence and what you observed
- Determine if all your evidence can be combined to answer your question in a way that makes sense
Francis Bacon and René Descartes are usually credited with formalizing the process in the 16th and 17th centuries. The two philosophers argued that research shouldn’t be guided by preset metaphysical ideas of how reality works. They supported the use of inductive reasoning to come up with hypotheses and understand new things about reality.
Scientific Method Steps
The scientific method is a step-by-step problem-solving process. These steps include:
Observe the world around you. This will help you come up with a topic you are interested in and want to learn more about. In many cases, you already have a topic in mind because you have a related question for which you couldn't find an immediate answer.
Either way, you'll start the process by finding out what people before you already know about the topic, as well as any questions that people are still asking about. You may need to look up and read books and articles from academic journals or talk to other people so that you understand as much as you possibly can about your topic. This will help you with your next step.
Ask questions. Asking questions about what you observed and learned from reading and talking to others can help you figure out what the "problem" is. Scientists try to ask questions that are both interesting and specific and can be answered with the help of a fairly easy experiment or series of experiments. Your question should have one part (called a variable) that you can change in your experiment and another variable that you can measure. Your goal is to design an experiment that is a "fair test," which is when all the conditions in the experiment are kept the same except for the one you change (called the experimental or independent variable).
Form a hypothesis and make predictions based on it. A hypothesis is an educated guess about the relationship between two or more variables in your question. A good hypothesis lets you predict what will happen when you test it in an experiment. Another important feature of a good hypothesis is that, if the hypothesis is wrong, you should be able to show that it's wrong. This is called falsifiability. If your experiment shows that your prediction is true, then your hypothesis is supported by your data.
Test your prediction by doing an experiment or making more observations. The way you test your prediction depends on what you are studying. The best support comes from an experiment, but in some cases, it's too hard or impossible to change the variables in an experiment. Sometimes, you may need to do descriptive research where you gather more observations instead of doing an experiment. You will carefully gather notes and measurements during your experiments or studies, and you can share them with other people interested in the same question as you. Ideally, you will also repeat your experiment a couple more times because it's possible to get a result by chance, but it's less possible to get the same result more than once by chance.
Draw a conclusion. You will analyze what you already know about your topic from your literature research and the data gathered during your experiment. This will help you decide if the conclusion you draw from your data supports or contradicts your hypothesis. If your results contradict your hypothesis, you can use this observation to form a new hypothesis and make a new prediction. This is why scientific research is ongoing and scientific knowledge is changing all the time. It's very common for scientists to get results that don't support their hypotheses. In fact, you sometimes learn more about the world when your experiments don't support your hypotheses because it leads you to ask more questions. And this time around, you already know that one possible explanation is likely wrong.
Use your results to guide your next steps (iterate). For instance, if your hypothesis is supported, you may do more experiments to confirm it. Or you could come up with a hypothesis about why it works this way and design an experiment to test that. If your hypothesis is not supported, you can come up with another hypothesis and do experiments to test it. You'll rarely get the right hypothesis in one go. Most of the time, you'll have to go back to the hypothesis stage and try again. Every attempt offers you important information that helps you improve your next round of questions, hypotheses, and predictions.
Share your results. Scientific research isn't something you can do on your own; you must work with other people to do it. You may be able to do an experiment or a series of experiments on your own, but you can't come up with all the ideas or do all the experiments by yourself .
Scientists and researchers usually share information by publishing it in a scientific journal or by presenting it to their colleagues during meetings and scientific conferences. These journals are read and the conferences are attended by other researchers who are interested in the same questions. If there's anything wrong with your hypothesis, prediction, experiment design, or conclusion, other researchers will likely find it and point it out to you.
It can be scary, but it's a critical part of doing scientific research. You must let your research be examined by other researchers who are as interested and knowledgeable about your question as you. This process helps other researchers by pointing out hypotheses that have been proved wrong and why they are wrong. It helps you by identifying flaws in your thinking or experiment design. And if you don't share what you've learned and let other people ask questions about it, it's not helpful to your or anyone else's understanding of what happens in the world.
Scientific Method Example
Here's an everyday example of how you can apply the scientific method to understand more about your world so you can solve your problems in a helpful way.
Let's say you put slices of bread in your toaster and press the button, but nothing happens. Your toaster isn't working, but you can't afford to buy a new one right now. You might be able to rescue it from the trash can if you can figure out what's wrong with it. So, let's figure out what's wrong with your toaster.
Observation. Your toaster isn't working to toast your bread.
Ask a question. In this case, you're asking, "Why isn't my toaster working?" You could even do a bit of preliminary research by looking in the owner's manual for your toaster. The manufacturer has likely tested your toaster model under many conditions, and they may have some ideas for where to start with your hypothesis.
Form a hypothesis and make predictions based on it. Your hypothesis should be a potential explanation or answer to the question that you can test to see if it's correct. One possible explanation that we could test is that the power outlet is broken. Our prediction is that if the outlet is broken, then plugging it into a different outlet should make the toaster work again.
Test your prediction by doing an experiment or making more observations. You plug the toaster into a different outlet and try to toast your bread.
If that works, then your hypothesis is supported by your experimental data. Results that support your hypothesis don't prove it right; they simply suggest that it's a likely explanation. This uncertainty arises because, in the real world, we can't rule out the possibility of mistakes, wrong assumptions, or weird coincidences affecting the results. If the toaster doesn’t work even after plugging it into a different outlet, then your hypothesis is not supported and it's likely the wrong explanation.
Use your results to guide your next steps (iteration). If your toaster worked, you may decide to do further tests to confirm it or revise it. For example, you could plug something else that you know is working into the first outlet to see if that stops working too. That would be further confirmation that your hypothesis is correct.
If your toaster failed to toast when plugged into the second outlet, you need a new hypothesis. For example, your next hypothesis might be that the toaster has a shorted wire. You could test this hypothesis directly if you have the right equipment and training, or you could take it to a repair shop where they could test that hypothesis for you.
Share your results. For this everyday example, you probably wouldn't want to write a paper, but you could share your problem-solving efforts with your housemates or anyone you hire to repair your outlet or help you test if the toaster has a short circuit.
What the Scientific Method Is Used For
The scientific method is useful whenever you need to reason logically about your questions and gather evidence to support your problem-solving efforts. So, you can use it in everyday life to answer many of your questions; however, when most people think of the scientific method, they likely think of using it to:
Describe how nature works . It can be hard to accurately describe how nature works because it's almost impossible to account for every variable that's involved in a natural process. Researchers may not even know about many of the variables that are involved. In some cases, all you can do is make assumptions. But you can use the scientific method to logically disprove wrong assumptions by identifying flaws in the reasoning.
Do scientific research in a laboratory to develop things such as new medicines.
Develop critical thinking skills. Using the scientific method may help you develop critical thinking in your daily life because you learn to systematically ask questions and gather evidence to find answers. Without logical reasoning, you might be more likely to have a distorted perspective or bias. Bias is the inclination we all have to favor one perspective (usually our own) over another.
The scientific method doesn't perfectly solve the problem of bias, but it does make it harder for an entire field to be biased in the same direction. That's because it's unlikely that all the people working in a field have the same biases. It also helps make the biases of individuals more obvious because if you repeatedly misinterpret information in the same way in multiple experiments or over a period, the other people working on the same question will notice. If you don't correct your bias when others point it out to you, you'll lose your credibility. Other people might then stop believing what you have to say.
Why Is the Scientific Method Important?
When you use the scientific method, your goal is to do research in a fair, unbiased, and repeatable way. The scientific method helps meet these goals because:
It's a systematic approach to problem-solving. It can help you figure out where you're going wrong in your thinking and research if you're not getting helpful answers to your questions. Helpful answers solve problems and keep you moving forward. So, a systematic approach helps you improve your problem-solving abilities if you get stuck.
It can help you solve your problems. The scientific method helps you isolate problems by focusing on what's important. In addition, it can help you make your solutions better every time you go through the process.
It helps you eliminate (or become aware of) your personal biases. It can help you limit the influence of your own personal, preconceived notions . A big part of the process is considering what other people already know and think about your question. It also involves sharing what you've learned and letting other people ask about your methods and conclusions. At the end of the process, even if you still think your answer is best, you have considered what other people know and think about the question.
The scientific method is a systematic way of conducting experiments or studies so that you can explore the world around you and answer questions using reason and evidence. It's a step-by-step problem-solving process that involves: (1) observation, (2) asking questions, (3) forming hypotheses and making predictions, (4) testing your hypotheses through experiments or more observations, (5) using what you learned through experiment or observation to guide further investigation, and (6) sharing your results.
Top doctors in ,
Find more top doctors on, related links.
- Health A-Z News
- Health A-Z Reference
- Health A-Z Slideshows
- Health A-Z Quizzes
- Health A-Z Videos
- WebMDRx Savings Card
- Coronavirus (COVID-19)
- Hepatitis C
- Diabetes Warning Signs
- Rheumatoid Arthritis
- Morning-After Pill
- Breast Cancer Screening
- Psoriatic Arthritis Symptoms
- Heart Failure
- Multiple Myeloma
- Types of Crohn's Disease
![Plan to Attend Cell Bio 2024 Plan to Attend Cell Bio 2024](https://www.lifescied.org/sda/101228/24-ASCB-054-CellBio24RegGraphics468x90.jpg)
Change Password
Your password must have 8 characters or more and contain 3 of the following:.
- a lower case character,
- an upper case character,
- a special character
Password Changed Successfully
Your password has been changed
- Sign in / Register
Request Username
Can't sign in? Forgot your username?
Enter your email address below and we will send you your username
If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username
Teaching Creativity and Inventive Problem Solving in Science
- Robert L. DeHaan
Division of Educational Studies, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322
Search for more papers by this author
Engaging learners in the excitement of science, helping them discover the value of evidence-based reasoning and higher-order cognitive skills, and teaching them to become creative problem solvers have long been goals of science education reformers. But the means to achieve these goals, especially methods to promote creative thinking in scientific problem solving, have not become widely known or used. In this essay, I review the evidence that creativity is not a single hard-to-measure property. The creative process can be explained by reference to increasingly well-understood cognitive skills such as cognitive flexibility and inhibitory control that are widely distributed in the population. I explore the relationship between creativity and the higher-order cognitive skills, review assessment methods, and describe several instructional strategies for enhancing creative problem solving in the college classroom. Evidence suggests that instruction to support the development of creativity requires inquiry-based teaching that includes explicit strategies to promote cognitive flexibility. Students need to be repeatedly reminded and shown how to be creative, to integrate material across subject areas, to question their own assumptions, and to imagine other viewpoints and possibilities. Further research is required to determine whether college students' learning will be enhanced by these measures.
INTRODUCTION
Dr. Dunne paces in front of his section of first-year college students, today not as their Bio 110 teacher but in the role of facilitator in their monthly “invention session.” For this meeting, the topic is stem cell therapy in heart disease. Members of each team of four students have primed themselves on the topic by reading selected articles from accessible sources such as Science, Nature, and Scientific American, and searching the World Wide Web, triangulating for up-to-date, accurate, background information. Each team knows that their first goal is to define a set of problems or limitations to overcome within the topic and to begin to think of possible solutions. Dr. Dunne starts the conversation by reminding the group of the few ground rules: one speaker at a time, listen carefully and have respect for others' ideas, question your own and others' assumptions, focus on alternative paths or solutions, maintain an atmosphere of collaboration and mutual support. He then sparks the discussion by asking one of the teams to describe a problem in need of solution.
Science in the United States is widely credited as a major source of discovery and economic development. According to the 2005 TAP Report produced by a prominent group of corporate leaders, “To maintain our country's competitiveness in the twenty-first century, we must cultivate the skilled scientists and engineers needed to create tomorrow's innovations.” ( www.tap2015.org/about/TAP_report2.pdf ). A panel of scientists, engineers, educators, and policy makers convened by the National Research Council (NRC) concurred with this view, reporting that the vitality of the nation “is derived in large part from the productivity of well-trained people and the steady stream of scientific and technical innovations they produce” ( NRC, 2007 ).
For many decades, science education reformers have promoted the idea that learners should be engaged in the excitement of science; they should be helped to discover the value of evidence-based reasoning and higher-order cognitive skills, and be taught to become innovative problem solvers (for reviews, see DeHaan, 2005 ; Hake, 2005 ; Nelson, 2008 ; Perkins and Wieman, 2008 ). But the means to achieve these goals, especially methods to promote creative thinking in scientific problem solving, are not widely known or used. An invention session such as that led by the fictional Dr. Dunne, described above, may seem fanciful as a means of teaching students to think about science as something more than a body of facts and terms to memorize. In recent years, however, models for promoting creative problem solving were developed for classroom use, as detailed by Treffinger and Isaksen (2005) , and such techniques are often used in the real world of high technology. To promote imaginative thinking, the advertising executive Alex F. Osborn invented brainstorming ( Osborn, 1948 , 1979 ), a technique that has since been successful in stimulating inventiveness among engineers and scientists. Could such strategies be transferred to a class for college students? Could they serve as a supplement to a high-quality, scientific teaching curriculum that helps students learn the facts and conceptual frameworks of science and make progress along the novice–expert continuum? Could brainstorming or other instructional strategies that are specifically designed to promote creativity teach students to be more adaptive in their growing expertise, more innovative in their problem-solving abilities? To begin to answer those questions, we first need to understand what is meant by “creativity.”
What Is Creativity? Big-C versus Mini-C Creativity
How to define creativity is an age-old question. Justice Potter Stewart's famous dictum regarding obscenity “I know it when I see it” has also long been an accepted test of creativity. But this is not an adequate criterion for developing an instructional approach. A scientist colleague of mine recently noted that “Many of us [in the scientific community] rarely give the creative process a second thought, imagining one either ‘has it’ or doesn't.” We often think of inventiveness or creativity in scientific fields as the kind of gift associated with a Michelangelo or Einstein. This is what Kaufman and Beghetto (2008) call big-C creativity, borrowing the term that earlier workers applied to the talents of experts in various fields who were identified as particularly creative by their expert colleagues ( MacKinnon, 1978 ). In this sense, creativity is seen as the ability of individuals to generate new ideas that contribute substantially to an intellectual domain. Howard Gardner defined such a creative person as one who “regularly solves problems, fashions products, or defines new questions in a domain in a way that is initially considered novel but that ultimately comes to be accepted in a particular cultural setting” ( Gardner, 1993 , p. 35).
But there is another level of inventiveness termed by various authors as “little-c” ( Craft, 2000 ) or “mini-c” ( Kaufman and Beghetto, 2008 ) creativity that is widespread among all populations. This would be consistent with the workplace definition of creativity offered by Amabile and her coworkers: “coming up with fresh ideas for changing products, services and processes so as to better achieve the organization's goals” ( Amabile et al. , 2005 ). Mini-c creativity is based on what Craft calls “possibility thinking” ( Craft, 2000 , pp. 3–4), as experienced when a worker suddenly has the insight to visualize a new, improved way to accomplish a task; it is represented by the “aha” moment when a student first sees two previously disparate concepts or facts in a new relationship, an example of what Arthur Koestler identified as bisociation: “perceiving a situation or event in two habitually incompatible associative contexts” ( Koestler, 1964 , p. 95).
In this essay, I maintain that mini-c creativity is not a mysterious, innate endowment of rare individuals. Instead, I argue that creative thinking is a multicomponent process, mediated through social interactions, that can be explained by reference to increasingly well-understood mental abilities such as cognitive flexibility and cognitive control that are widely distributed in the population. Moreover, I explore some of the recent research evidence (though with no effort at a comprehensive literature review) showing that these mental abilities are teachable; like other higher-order cognitive skills (HOCS), they can be enhanced by explicit instruction.
Creativity Is a Multicomponent Process
Efforts to define creativity in psychological terms go back to J. P. Guilford ( Guilford, 1950 ) and E. P. Torrance ( Torrance, 1974 ), both of whom recognized that underlying the construct were other cognitive variables such as ideational fluency, originality of ideas, and sensitivity to missing elements. Many authors since then have extended the argument that a creative act is not a singular event but a process, an interplay among several interactive cognitive and affective elements. In this view, the creative act has two phases, a generative and an exploratory or evaluative phase ( Finke et al. , 1996 ). During the generative process, the creative mind pictures a set of novel mental models as potential solutions to a problem. In the exploratory phase, we evaluate the multiple options and select the best one. Early scholars of creativity, such as J. P. Guilford, characterized the two phases as divergent thinking and convergent thinking ( Guilford, 1950 ). Guilford defined divergent thinking as the ability to produce a broad range of associations to a given stimulus or to arrive at many solutions to a problem (for overviews of the field from different perspectives, see Amabile, 1996 ; Banaji et al. , 2006 ; Sawyer, 2006 ). In neurocognitive terms, divergent thinking is referred to as associative richness ( Gabora, 2002 ; Simonton, 2004 ), which is often measured experimentally by comparing the number of words that an individual generates from memory in response to stimulus words on a word association test. In contrast, convergent thinking refers to the capacity to quickly focus on the one best solution to a problem.
The idea that there are two stages to the creative process is consistent with results from cognition research indicating that there are two distinct modes of thought, associative and analytical ( Neisser, 1963 ; Sloman, 1996 ). In the associative mode, thinking is defocused, suggestive, and intuitive, revealing remote or subtle connections between items that may be correlated, or may not, and are usually not causally related ( Burton, 2008 ). In the analytical mode, thought is focused and evaluative, more conducive to analyzing relationships of cause and effect (for a review of other cognitive aspects of creativity, see Runco, 2004 ). Science educators associate the analytical mode with the upper levels (analysis, synthesis, and evaluation) of Bloom's taxonomy (e.g., Crowe et al. , 2008 ), or with “critical thinking,” the process that underlies the “purposeful, self-regulatory judgment that drives problem-solving and decision-making” ( Quitadamo et al. , 2008 , p. 328). These modes of thinking are under cognitive control through the executive functions of the brain. The core executive functions, which are thought to underlie all planning, problem solving, and reasoning, are defined ( Blair and Razza, 2007 ) as working memory control (mentally holding and retrieving information), cognitive flexibility (considering multiple ideas and seeing different perspectives), and inhibitory control (resisting several thoughts or actions to focus on one). Readers wishing to delve further into the neuroscience of the creative process can refer to the cerebrocerebellar theory of creativity ( Vandervert et al. , 2007 ) in which these mental activities are described neurophysiologically as arising through interactions among different parts of the brain.
The main point from all of these works is that creativity is not some single hard-to-measure property or act. There is ample evidence that the creative process requires both divergent and convergent thinking and that it can be explained by reference to increasingly well-understood underlying mental abilities ( Haring-Smith, 2006 ; Kim, 2006 ; Sawyer, 2006 ; Kaufman and Sternberg, 2007 ) and cognitive processes ( Simonton, 2004 ; Diamond et al. , 2007 ; Vandervert et al. , 2007 ).
Creativity Is Widely Distributed and Occurs in a Social Context
Although it is understandable to speak of an aha moment as a creative act by the person who experiences it, authorities in the field have long recognized (e.g., Simonton, 1975 ) that creative thinking is not so much an individual trait but rather a social phenomenon involving interactions among people within their specific group or cultural settings. “Creativity isn't just a property of individuals, it is also a property of social groups” ( Sawyer, 2006 , p. 305). Indeed, Osborn introduced his brainstorming method because he was convinced that group creativity is always superior to individual creativity. He drew evidence for this conclusion from activities that demand collaborative output, for example, the improvisations of a jazz ensemble. Although each musician is individually creative during a performance, the novelty and inventiveness of each performer's playing is clearly influenced, and often enhanced, by “social and interactional processes” among the musicians ( Sawyer, 2006 , p. 120). Recently, Brophy (2006) offered evidence that for problem solving, the situation may be more nuanced. He confirmed that groups of interacting individuals were better at solving complex, multipart problems than single individuals. However, when dealing with certain kinds of single-issue problems, individual problem solvers produced a greater number of solutions than interacting groups, and those solutions were judged to be more original and useful.
Consistent with the findings of Brophy (2006) , many scholars acknowledge that creative discoveries in the real world such as solving the problems of cutting-edge science—which are usually complex and multipart—are influenced or even stimulated by social interaction among experts. The common image of the lone scientist in the laboratory experiencing a flash of creative inspiration is probably a myth from earlier days. As a case in point, the science historian Mara Beller analyzed the social processes that underlay some of the major discoveries of early twentieth-century quantum physics. Close examination of successive drafts of publications by members of the Copenhagen group revealed a remarkable degree of influence and collaboration among 10 or more colleagues, although many of these papers were published under the name of a single author ( Beller, 1999 ). Sociologists Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar's study ( Latour and Woolgar, 1986 ) of a neuroendocrinology laboratory at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies make the related point that social interactions among the participating scientists determined to a remarkable degree what discoveries were made and how they were interpreted. In the laboratory, researchers studied the chemical structure of substances released by the brain. By analysis of the Salk scientists' verbalizations of concepts, theories, formulas, and results of their investigations, Latour and Woolgar showed that the structures and interpretations that were agreed upon, that is, the discoveries announced by the laboratory, were mediated by social interactions and power relationships among members of the laboratory group. By studying the discovery process in other fields of the natural sciences, sociologists and anthropologists have provided more cases that further illustrate how social and cultural dimensions affect scientific insights (for a thoughtful review, see Knorr Cetina, 1995 ).
In sum, when an individual experiences an aha moment that feels like a singular creative act, it may rather have resulted from a multicomponent process, under the influence of group interactions and social context. The process that led up to what may be sensed as a sudden insight will probably have included at least three diverse, but testable elements: 1) divergent thinking, including ideational fluency or cognitive flexibility, which is the cognitive executive function that underlies the ability to visualize and accept many ideas related to a problem; 2) convergent thinking or the application of inhibitory control to focus and mentally evaluate ideas; and 3) analogical thinking, the ability to understand a novel idea in terms of one that is already familiar.
LITERATURE REVIEW
What do we know about how to teach creativity.
The possibility of teaching for creative problem solving gained credence in the 1960s with the studies of Jerome Bruner, who argued that children should be encouraged to “treat a task as a problem for which one invents an answer, rather than finding one out there in a book or on the blackboard” ( Bruner, 1965 , pp. 1013–1014). Since that time, educators and psychologists have devised programs of instruction designed to promote creativity and inventiveness in virtually every student population: pre–K, elementary, high school, and college, as well as in disadvantaged students, athletes, and students in a variety of specific disciplines (for review, see Scott et al. , 2004 ). Smith (1998) identified 172 instructional approaches that have been applied at one time or another to develop divergent thinking skills.
Some of the most convincing evidence that elements of creativity can be enhanced by instruction comes from work with young children. Bodrova and Leong (2001) developed the Tools of the Mind (Tools) curriculum to improve all of the three core mental executive functions involved in creative problem solving: cognitive flexibility, working memory, and inhibitory control. In a year-long randomized study of 5-yr-olds from low-income families in 21 preschool classrooms, half of the teachers applied the districts' balanced literacy curriculum (literacy), whereas the experimenters trained the other half to teach the same academic content by using the Tools curriculum ( Diamond et al. , 2007 ). At the end of the year, when the children were tested with a battery of neurocognitive tests including a test for cognitive flexibility ( Durston et al. , 2003 ; Davidson et al. , 2006 ), those exposed to the Tools curriculum outperformed the literacy children by as much as 25% ( Diamond et al. , 2007 ). Although the Tools curriculum and literacy program were similar in academic content and in many other ways, they differed primarily in that Tools teachers spent 80% of their time explicitly reminding the children to think of alternative ways to solve a problem and building their executive function skills.
Teaching older students to be innovative also demands instruction that explicitly promotes creativity but is rigorously content-rich as well. A large body of research on the differences between novice and expert cognition indicates that creative thinking requires at least a minimal level of expertise and fluency within a knowledge domain ( Bransford et al. , 2000 ; Crawford and Brophy, 2006 ). What distinguishes experts from novices, in addition to their deeper knowledge of the subject, is their recognition of patterns in information, their ability to see relationships among disparate facts and concepts, and their capacity for organizing content into conceptual frameworks or schemata ( Bransford et al. , 2000 ; Sawyer, 2005 ).
Such expertise is often lacking in the traditional classroom. For students attempting to grapple with new subject matter, many kinds of problems that are presented in high school or college courses or that arise in the real world can be solved merely by applying newly learned algorithms or procedural knowledge. With practice, problem solving of this kind can become routine and is often considered to represent mastery of a subject, producing what Sternberg refers to as “pseudoexperts” ( Sternberg, 2003 ). But beyond such routine use of content knowledge the instructor's goal must be to produce students who have gained the HOCS needed to apply, analyze, synthesize, and evaluate knowledge ( Crowe et al. , 2008 ). The aim is to produce students who know enough about a field to grasp meaningful patterns of information, who can readily retrieve relevant knowledge from memory, and who can apply such knowledge effectively to novel problems. This condition is referred to as adaptive expertise ( Hatano and Ouro, 2003 ; Schwartz et al. , 2005 ). Instead of applying already mastered procedures, adaptive experts are able to draw on their knowledge to invent or adapt strategies for solving unique or novel problems within a knowledge domain. They are also able, ideally, to transfer conceptual frameworks and schemata from one domain to another (e.g., Schwartz et al. , 2005 ). Such flexible, innovative application of knowledge is what results in inventive or creative solutions to problems ( Crawford and Brophy, 2006 ; Crawford, 2007 ).
Promoting Creative Problem Solving in the College Classroom
In most college courses, instructors teach science primarily through lectures and textbooks that are dominated by facts and algorithmic processing rather than by concepts, principles, and evidence-based ways of thinking. This is despite ample evidence that many students gain little new knowledge from traditional lectures ( Hrepic et al. , 2007 ). Moreover, it is well documented that these methods engender passive learning rather than active engagement, boredom instead of intellectual excitement, and linear thinking rather than cognitive flexibility (e.g., Halpern and Hakel, 2003 ; Nelson, 2008 ; Perkins and Wieman, 2008 ). Cognitive flexibility, as noted, is one of the three core mental executive functions involved in creative problem solving ( Ausubel, 1963 , 2000 ). The capacity to apply ideas creatively in new contexts, referred to as the ability to “transfer” knowledge (see Mestre, 2005 ), requires that learners have opportunities to actively develop their own representations of information to convert it to a usable form. Especially when a knowledge domain is complex and fraught with ill-structured information, as in a typical introductory college biology course, instruction that emphasizes active-learning strategies is demonstrably more effective than traditional linear teaching in reducing failure rates and in promoting learning and transfer (e.g., Freeman et al. , 2007 ). Furthermore, there is already some evidence that inclusion of creativity training as part of a college curriculum can have positive effects. Hunsaker (2005) has reviewed a number of such studies. He cites work by McGregor (2001) , for example, showing that various creativity training programs including brainstorming and creative problem solving increase student scores on tests of creative-thinking abilities.
Model creativity—students develop creativity when instructors model creative thinking and inventiveness.
Repeatedly encourage idea generation—students need to be reminded to generate their own ideas and solutions in an environment free of criticism.
Cross-fertilize ideas—where possible, avoid teaching in subject-area boxes: a math box, a social studies box, etc; students' creative ideas and insights often result from learning to integrate material across subject areas.
Build self-efficacy—all students have the capacity to create and to experience the joy of having new ideas, but they must be helped to believe in their own capacity to be creative.
Constantly question assumptions—make questioning a part of the daily classroom exchange; it is more important for students to learn what questions to ask and how to ask them than to learn the answers.
Imagine other viewpoints—students broaden their perspectives by learning to reflect upon ideas and concepts from different points of view.
How Is Creativity Related to Critical Thinking and the Higher-Order Cognitive Skills?
It is not uncommon to associate creativity and ingenuity with scientific reasoning ( Sawyer, 2005 ; 2006 ). When instructors apply scientific teaching strategies ( Handelsman et al. , 2004 ; DeHaan, 2005 ; Wood, 2009 ) by using instructional methods based on learning research, according to Ebert-May and Hodder ( 2008 ), “we see students actively engaged in the thinking, creativity, rigor, and experimentation we associate with the practice of science—in much the same way we see students learn in the field and in laboratories” (p. 2). Perkins and Wieman (2008) note that “To be successful innovators in science and engineering, students must develop a deep conceptual understanding of the underlying science ideas, an ability to apply these ideas and concepts broadly in different contexts, and a vision to see their relevance and usefulness in real-world applications … An innovator is able to perceive and realize potential connections and opportunities better than others” (pp. 181–182). The results of Scott et al. (2004) suggest that nontraditional courses in science that are based on constructivist principles and that use strategies of scientific teaching to promote the HOCS and enhance content mastery and dexterity in scientific thinking ( Handelsman et al. , 2007 ; Nelson, 2008 ) also should be effective in promoting creativity and cognitive flexibility if students are explicitly guided to learn these skills.
Creativity is an essential element of problem solving ( Mumford et al. , 1991 ; Runco, 2004 ) and of critical thinking ( Abrami et al. , 2008 ). As such, it is common to think of applications of creativity such as inventiveness and ingenuity among the HOCS as defined in Bloom's taxonomy ( Crowe et al. , 2008 ). Thus, it should come as no surprise that creativity, like other elements of the HOCS, can be taught most effectively through inquiry-based instruction, informed by constructivist theory ( Ausubel, 1963 , 2000 ; Duch et al. , 2001 ; Nelson, 2008 ). In a survey of 103 instructors who taught college courses that included creativity instruction, Bull et al. (1995) asked respondents to rate the importance of various course characteristics for enhancing student creativity. Items ranking high on the list were: providing a social climate in which students feels safe, an open classroom environment that promotes tolerance for ambiguity and independence, the use of humor, metaphorical thinking, and problem defining. Many of the responses emphasized the same strategies as those advanced to promote creative problem solving (e.g., Mumford et al. , 1991 ; McFadzean, 2002 ; Treffinger and Isaksen, 2005 ) and critical thinking ( Abrami et al. , 2008 ).
In a careful meta-analysis, Scott et al. (2004) examined 70 instructional interventions designed to enhance and measure creative performance. The results were striking. Courses that stressed techniques such as critical thinking, convergent thinking, and constraint identification produced the largest positive effect sizes. More open techniques that provided less guidance in strategic approaches had less impact on the instructional outcomes. A striking finding was the effectiveness of being explicit; approaches that clearly informed students about the nature of creativity and offered clear strategies for creative thinking were most effective. Approaches such as social modeling, cooperative learning, and case-based (project-based) techniques that required the application of newly acquired knowledge were found to be positively correlated to high effect sizes. The most clear-cut result to emerge from the Scott et al. (2004) study was simply to confirm that creativity instruction can be highly successful in enhancing divergent thinking, problem solving, and imaginative performance. Most importantly, of the various cognitive processes examined, those linked to the generation of new ideas such as problem finding, conceptual combination, and idea generation showed the greatest improvement. The success of creativity instruction, the authors concluded, can be attributed to “developing and providing guidance concerning the application of requisite cognitive capacities … [and] a set of heuristics or strategies for working with already available knowledge” (p. 382).
Many of the scientific teaching practices that have been shown by research to foster content mastery and HOCS, and that are coming more widely into use, also would be consistent with promoting creativity. Wood (2009) has recently reviewed examples of such practices and how to apply them. These include relatively small modifications of the traditional lecture to engender more active learning, such as the use of concept tests and peer instruction ( Mazur, 1996 ), Just-in-Time-Teaching techniques ( Novak et al. , 1999 ), and student response systems known as “clickers” ( Knight and Wood, 2005 ; Crossgrove and Curran, 2008 ), all designed to allow the instructor to frequently and effortlessly elicit and respond to student thinking. Other strategies can transform the lecture hall into a workshop or studio classroom ( Gaffney et al. , 2008 ) where the teaching curriculum may emphasize problem-based (also known as project-based or case-based) learning strategies ( Duch et al. , 2001 ; Ebert-May and Hodder, 2008 ) or “community-based inquiry” in which students engage in research that enhances their critical-thinking skills ( Quitadamo et al. , 2008 ).
Another important approach that could readily subserve explicit creativity instruction is the use of computer-based interactive simulations, or “sims” ( Perkins and Wieman, 2008 ) to facilitate inquiry learning and effective, easy self-assessment. An example in the biological sciences would be Neurons in Action ( http://neuronsinaction.com/home/main ). In such educational environments, students gain conceptual understanding of scientific ideas through interactive engagement with materials (real or virtual), with each other, and with instructors. Following the tenets of scientific teaching, students are encouraged to pose and answer their own questions, to make sense of the materials, and to construct their own understanding. The question I pose here is whether an additional focus—guiding students to meet these challenges in a context that explicitly promotes creativity—would enhance learning and advance students' progress toward adaptive expertise?
Assessment of Creativity
To teach creativity, there must be measurable indicators to judge how much students have gained from instruction. Educational programs intended to teach creativity became popular after the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) was introduced in the 1960s ( Torrance, 1974 ). But it soon became apparent that there were major problems in devising tests for creativity, both because of the difficulty of defining the construct and because of the number and complexity of elements that underlie it. Tests of intelligence and other personality characteristics on creative individuals revealed a host of related traits such as verbal fluency, metaphorical thinking, flexible decision making, tolerance of ambiguity, willingness to take risks, autonomy, divergent thinking, self-confidence, problem finding, ideational fluency, and belief in oneself as being “creative” ( Barron and Harrington, 1981 ; Tardif and Sternberg, 1988 ; Runco and Nemiro, 1994 ; Snyder et al. , 2004 ). Many of these traits have been the focus of extensive research of recent decades, but, as noted above, creativity is not defined by any one trait; there is now reason to believe that it is the interplay among the cognitive and affective processes that underlie inventiveness and the ability to find novel solutions to a problem.
Although the early creativity researchers recognized that assessing divergent thinking as a measure of creativity required tests for other underlying capacities ( Guilford, 1950 ; Torrance, 1974 ), these workers and their colleagues nonetheless believed that a high score for divergent thinking alone would correlate with real creative output. Unfortunately, no such correlation was shown ( Barron and Harrington, 1981 ). Results produced by many of the instruments initially designed to measure various aspects of creative thinking proved to be highly dependent on the test itself. A review of several hundred early studies showed that an individual's creativity score could be affected by simple test variables, for example, how the verbal pretest instructions were worded ( Barron and Harrington, 1981 , pp. 442–443). Most scholars now agree that divergent thinking, as originally defined, was not an adequate measure of creativity. The process of creative thinking requires a complex combination of elements that include cognitive flexibility, memory control, inhibitory control, and analogical thinking, enabling the mind to free-range and analogize, as well as to focus and test.
More recently, numerous psychometric measures have been developed and empirically tested (see Plucker and Renzulli, 1999 ) that allow more reliable and valid assessment of specific aspects of creativity. For example, the creativity quotient devised by Snyder et al. (2004) tests the ability of individuals to link different ideas and different categories of ideas into a novel synthesis. The Wallach–Kogan creativity test ( Wallach and Kogan, 1965 ) explores the uniqueness of ideas associated with a stimulus. For a more complete list and discussion, see the Creativity Tests website ( www.indiana.edu/∼bobweb/Handout/cretv_6.html ).
The most widely used measure of creativity is the TTCT, which has been modified four times since its original version in 1966 to take into account subsequent research. The TTCT-Verbal and the TTCT-Figural are two versions ( Torrance, 1998 ; see http://ststesting.com/2005giftttct.html ). The TTCT-Verbal consists of five tasks; the “stimulus” for each task is a picture to which the test-taker responds briefly in writing. A sample task that can be viewed from the TTCT Demonstrator website asks, “Suppose that people could transport themselves from place to place with just a wink of the eye or a twitch of the nose. What might be some things that would happen as a result? You have 3 min.” ( www.indiana.edu/∼bobweb/Handout/d3.ttct.htm ).
In the TTCT-Figural, participants are asked to construct a picture from a stimulus in the form of a partial line drawing given on the test sheet (see example below; Figure 1 ). Specific instructions are to “Add lines to the incomplete figures below to make pictures out of them. Try to tell complete stories with your pictures. Give your pictures titles. You have 3 min.” In the introductory materials, test-takers are urged to “… think of a picture or object that no one else will think of. Try to make it tell as complete and as interesting a story as you can …” ( Torrance et al. , 2008 , p. 2).
![Figure 1. Figure 1.](https://www.lifescied.org/cms/10.1187/cbe.08-12-0081/asset/images/medium/cbe0030901980001.jpeg)
Figure 1. Sample figural test item from the TTCT Demonstrator website ( www.indiana.edu/∼bobweb/Handout/d3.ttct.htm ).
How would an instructor in a biology course judge the creativity of students' responses to such an item? To assist in this task, the TTCT has scoring and norming guides ( Torrance, 1998 ; Torrance et al. , 2008 ) with numerous samples and responses representing different levels of creativity. The guides show sample evaluations based upon specific indicators such as fluency, originality, elaboration (or complexity), unusual visualization, extending or breaking boundaries, humor, and imagery. These examples are easy to use and provide a high degree of validity and generalizability to the tests. The TTCT has been more intensively researched and analyzed than any other creativity instrument, and the norming samples have longitudinal validations and high predictive validity over a wide age range. In addition to global creativity scores, the TTCT is designed to provide outcome measures in various domains and thematic areas to allow for more insightful analysis ( Kaufman and Baer, 2006 ). Kim (2006) has examined the characteristics of the TTCT, including norms, reliability, and validity, and concludes that the test is an accurate measure of creativity. When properly used, it has been shown to be fair in terms of gender, race, community status, and language background. According to Kim (2006) and other authorities in the field ( McIntyre et al. , 2003 ; Scott et al. , 2004 ), Torrance's research and the development of the TTCT have provided groundwork for the idea that creative levels can be measured and then increased through instruction and practice.
SCIENTIFIC TEACHING TO PROMOTE CREATIVITY
How could creativity instruction be integrated into scientific teaching.
Guidelines for designing specific course units that emphasize HOCS by using strategies of scientific teaching are now available from the current literature. As an example, Karen Cloud-Hansen and colleagues ( Cloud-Hansen et al. , 2008 ) describe a course titled, “Ciprofloxacin Resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae .” They developed this undergraduate seminar to introduce college freshmen to important concepts in biology within a real-world context and to increase their content knowledge and critical-thinking skills. The centerpiece of the unit is a case study in which teams of students are challenged to take the role of a director of a local public health clinic. One of the county commissioners overseeing the clinic is an epidemiologist who wants to know “how you plan to address the emergence of ciprofloxacin resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae ” (p. 304). State budget cuts limit availability of expensive antibiotics and some laboratory tests to patients. Student teams are challenged to 1) develop a plan to address the medical, economic, and political questions such a clinic director would face in dealing with ciprofloxacin-resistant N. gonorrhoeae ; 2) provide scientific data to support their conclusions; and 3) describe their clinic plan in a one- to two-page referenced written report.
Throughout the 3-wk unit, in accordance with the principles of problem-based instruction ( Duch et al. , 2001 ), course instructors encourage students to seek, interpret, and synthesize their own information to the extent possible. Students have access to a variety of instructional formats, and active-learning experiences are incorporated throughout the unit. These activities are interspersed among minilectures and give the students opportunities to apply new information to their existing base of knowledge. The active-learning activities emphasize the key concepts of the minilectures and directly confront common misconceptions about antibiotic resistance, gene expression, and evolution. Weekly classes include question/answer/discussion sessions to address student misconceptions and 20-min minilectures on such topics as antibiotic resistance, evolution, and the central dogma of molecular biology. Students gather information about antibiotic resistance in N. gonorrhoeae , epidemiology of gonorrhea, and treatment options for the disease, and each team is expected to formulate a plan to address ciprofloxacin resistance in N. gonorrhoeae .
In this project, the authors assessed student gains in terms of content knowledge regarding topics covered such as the role of evolution in antibiotic resistance, mechanisms of gene expression, and the role of oncogenes in human disease. They also measured HOCS as gains in problem solving, according to a rubric that assessed self-reported abilities to communicate ideas logically, solve difficult problems about microbiology, propose hypotheses, analyze data, and draw conclusions. Comparing the pre- and posttests, students reported significant learning of scientific content. Among the thinking skill categories, students demonstrated measurable gains in their ability to solve problems about microbiology but the unit seemed to have little impact on their more general perceived problem-solving skills ( Cloud-Hansen et al. , 2008 ).
What would such a class look like with the addition of explicit creativity-promoting approaches? Would the gains in problem-solving abilities have been greater if during the minilectures and other activities, students had been introduced explicitly to elements of creative thinking from the Sternberg and Williams (1998) list described above? Would the students have reported greater gains if their instructors had encouraged idea generation with weekly brainstorming sessions; if they had reminded students to cross-fertilize ideas by integrating material across subject areas; built self-efficacy by helping students believe in their own capacity to be creative; helped students question their own assumptions; and encouraged students to imagine other viewpoints and possibilities? Of most relevance, could the authors have been more explicit in assessing the originality of the student plans? In an experiment that required college students to develop plans of a different, but comparable, type, Osborn and Mumford (2006) created an originality rubric ( Figure 2 ) that could apply equally to assist instructors in judging student plans in any course. With such modifications, would student gains in problem-solving abilities or other HOCS have been greater? Would their plans have been measurably more imaginative?
![Figure 2. Figure 2.](https://www.lifescied.org/cms/10.1187/cbe.08-12-0081/asset/images/medium/cbe0030901980002.jpeg)
Figure 2. Originality rubric (adapted from Osburn and Mumford, 2006 , p. 183).
Answers to these questions can only be obtained when a course like that described by Cloud-Hansen et al. (2008) is taught with explicit instruction in creativity of the type I described above. But, such answers could be based upon more than subjective impressions of the course instructors. For example, students could be pretested with items from the TTCT-Verbal or TTCT-Figural like those shown. If, during minilectures and at every contact with instructors, students were repeatedly reminded and shown how to be as creative as possible, to integrate material across subject areas, to question their own assumptions and imagine other viewpoints and possibilities, would their scores on TTCT posttest items improve? Would the plans they formulated to address ciprofloxacin resistance become more imaginative?
Recall that in their meta-analysis, Scott et al. (2004) found that explicitly informing students about the nature of creativity and offering strategies for creative thinking were the most effective components of instruction. From their careful examination of 70 experimental studies, they concluded that approaches such as social modeling, cooperative learning, and case-based (project-based) techniques that required the application of newly acquired knowledge were positively correlated with high effect sizes. The study was clear in confirming that explicit creativity instruction can be successful in enhancing divergent thinking and problem solving. Would the same strategies work for courses in ecology and environmental biology, as detailed by Ebert-May and Hodder (2008) , or for a unit elaborated by Knight and Wood (2005) that applies classroom response clickers?
Finally, I return to my opening question with the fictional Dr. Dunne. Could a weekly brainstorming “invention session” included in a course like those described here serve as the site where students are introduced to concepts and strategies of creative problem solving? As frequently applied in schools of engineering ( Paulus and Nijstad, 2003 ), brainstorming provides an opportunity for the instructor to pose a problem and to ask the students to suggest as many solutions as possible in a brief period, thus enhancing ideational fluency. Here, students can be encouraged explicitly to build on the ideas of others and to think flexibly. Would brainstorming enhance students' divergent thinking or creative abilities as measured by TTCT items or an originality rubric? Many studies have demonstrated that group interactions such as brainstorming, under the right conditions, can indeed enhance creativity ( Paulus and Nijstad, 2003 ; Scott et al. , 2004 ), but there is little information from an undergraduate science classroom setting. Intellectual Ventures, a firm founded by Nathan Myhrvold, the creator of Microsoft's Research Division, has gathered groups of engineers and scientists around a table for day-long sessions to brainstorm about a prearranged topic. Here, the method seems to work. Since it was founded in 2000, Intellectual Ventures has filed hundreds of patent applications in more than 30 technology areas, applying the “invention session” strategy ( Gladwell, 2008 ). Currently, the company ranks among the top 50 worldwide in number of patent applications filed annually. Whether such a technique could be applied successfully in a college science course will only be revealed by future research.
- Abrami P. C., Bernard R. M., Borokhovski E., Wadem A., Surkes M. A., Tamim R., Zhang D. ( 2008 ). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: a stage 1 meta-analysis . Rev. Educ. Res 78 , 1102-1134. Google Scholar
- Amabile T. M. ( 1996 ). Creativity in Context , Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Google Scholar
- Amabile T. M., Barsade S. G., Mueller J. S., Staw B. M. ( 2005 ). Affect and creativity at work . Admin. Sci. Q 50 , 367-403. Google Scholar
- Ausubel D. ( 1963 ). The Psychology of Meaningful Verbal Learning , New York: Grune and Stratton. Google Scholar
- Ausubel B. ( 2000 ). The Acquisition and Retention of Knowledge: A Cognitive View , Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Google Scholar
- Banaji S., Burn A., Buckingham D. ( 2006 ). The Rhetorics of Creativity: A Review of the Literature , accessed 29 December 2008 London: Centre for the Study of Children, Youth and Media, www.creativepartnerships.com/data/files/rhetorics-of-creativity-12.pdf . Google Scholar
- Barron F., Harrington D. M. ( 1981 ). Creativity, intelligence and personality . Ann. Rev. Psychol 32 , 439-476. Google Scholar
- Beller M. ( 1999 ). Quantum Dialogue: The Making of a Revolution , Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
- Blair C., Razza R. P. ( 2007 ). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten . Child Dev 78 , 647-663. Medline , Google Scholar
- Bodrova E., Leong D. J. ( 2001 ). The Tool of the Mind: a case study of implementing the Vygotskian approach In: American Early Childhood and Primary Classrooms , Geneva, Switzerland: UNESCO International Bureau of Education. Google Scholar
- Bransford J. D.Brown A. L.Cocking R. R. ( 2000 ). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School , Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Google Scholar
- Brophy D. R. ( 2006 ). A comparison of individual and group efforts to creatively solve contrasting types of problems . Creativity Res. J 18 , 293-315. Google Scholar
- Bruner J. ( 1965 ). The growth of mind . Am. Psychol 20 , 1007-1017. Medline , Google Scholar
- Bull K. S., Montgomery D., Baloche L. ( 1995 ). Teaching creativity at the college level: a synthesis of curricular components perceived as important by instructors . Creativity Res. J 8 , 83-90. Google Scholar
- Burton R. ( 2008 ). On Being Certain: Believing You Are Right Even When You're Not , New York: St. Martin's Press. Google Scholar
- Cloud-Hanson K. A., Kuehner J. N., Tong L., Miller S., Handelsman J. ( 2008 ). Money, sex and drugs: a case study to teach the genetics of antibiotic resistance . CBE Life Sci. Educ 7 , 302-309. Medline , Google Scholar
- Craft A. ( 2000 ). Teaching Creativity: Philosophy and Practice , New York: Routledge. Google Scholar
- Crawford V. M. ( 2007 ). Adaptive expertise as knowledge building in science teachers' problem solving accessed 1 July 2008 Proceedings of the Second European Cognitive Science Conference Delphi, Greece http://ctl.sri.com/publications/downloads/Crawford_EuroCogSci07Proceedings.pdf . Google Scholar
- Crawford V. M., Brophy S. ( 2006 ). Adaptive Expertise: Theory, Methods, Findings, and Emerging Issues; September 2006 In: accessed 1 July 2008 Menlo Park, CA: SRI International, http://ctl.sri.com/publications/downloads/AESymposiumReportOct06.pdf . Google Scholar
- Crossgrove K., Curran K. L. ( 2008 ). Using clickers in nonmajors- and majors-level biology courses: student opinion, learning, and long-term retention of course material . CBE Life Sci. Educ 7 , 146-154. Link , Google Scholar
- Crowe A., Dirks C., Wenderoth M. P. ( 2008 ). Biology in bloom: implementing Bloom's taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology . CBE Life Sci. Educ 7 , 368-381. Link , Google Scholar
- Davidson M. C., Amso D., Anderson L. C., Diamond A. ( 2006 ). Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4–13 years: evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching . Neuropsychologia 44 , 2037-2078. Medline , Google Scholar
- DeHaan R. L. ( 2005 ). The impending revolution in undergraduate science education . J. Sci. Educ. Technol 14 , 253-270. Google Scholar
- Diamond A., Barnett W. S., Thomas J., Munro S. ( 2007 ). Preschool program improves cognitive control . Science 318 , 1387-1388. Medline , Google Scholar
- Duch B. J., Groh S. E., Allen D. E. ( 2001 ). The Power of Problem-based Learning , Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishers. Google Scholar
- Durston S., Davidson M. C., Thomas K. M., Worden M. S., Tottenham N., Martinez A., Watts R., Ulug A. M., Caseya B. J. ( 2003 ). Parametric manipulation of conflict and response competition using rapid mixed-trial event-related fMRI . Neuroimage 20 , 2135-2141. Medline , Google Scholar
- Ebert-May D., Hodder J. ( 2008 ). Pathways to Scientific Teaching , Sunderland, MA: Sinauer. Google Scholar
- Finke R. A., Ward T. B., Smith S. M. ( 1996 ). Creative Cognition: Theory, Research and Applications , Boston, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar
- Freeman S., O'Connor E., Parks J. W., Cunningham M., Hurley D., Haak D., Dirks C., Wenderoth M. P. ( 2007 ). Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology . CBE Life Sci. Educ 6 , 132-139. Link , Google Scholar
- Gabora L. ( 2002 ). Hewett T.Kavanagh E. Cognitive mechanisms underlying the creative process Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Creativity and Cognition 2002 October 13–16 Loughborough University, United Kingdom 126-133. Google Scholar
- Gaffney J.D.H., Richards E., Kustusch M. B., Ding L., Beichner R. ( 2008 ). Scaling up education reform . J. Coll. Sci. Teach 37 , 48-53. Google Scholar
- Gardner H. ( 1993 ). Creating Minds: An Anatomy of Creativity Seen through the Lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Ghandi In: New York: Harper Collins. Google Scholar
- Gladwell M. ( 2008 ). In the air; who says big ideas are rare? The New Yorker accessed 19 May 2008 www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/05/12/080512fa_fact_gladwell . Google Scholar
- Guilford J. P. ( 1950 ). Creativity . Am. Psychol 5 , 444-454. Medline , Google Scholar
- Hake R. ( 2005 ). The physics education reform effort: a possible model for higher education . Natl. Teach. Learn. Forum 15 , 1-6. Google Scholar
- Halpern D. E., Hakel M. D. ( 2003 ). Applying the science of learning to the university and beyond . Change 35 , 36-42. Google Scholar
- Handelsman J. ( 2004 ). Scientific teaching . Science 304 , 521-522. Medline , Google Scholar
- Handelsman J, Miller S., Pfund C. ( 2007 ). Scientific Teaching , New York: W. H. Freeman and Co. Google Scholar
- Haring-Smith T. ( 2006 ). Creativity research review: some lessons for higher education. Association of American Colleges and Universities . Peer Rev 8 , 23-27. Google Scholar
- Hatano G., Ouro Y. ( 2003 ). Commentary: reconceptualizing school learning using insight from expertise research . Educ. Res 32 , 26-29. Google Scholar
- Hrepic Z., Zollman D. A., Rebello N. S. ( 2007 ). Comparing students' and experts' understanding of the content of a lecture . J. Sci. Educ. Technol 16 , 213-224. Google Scholar
- Hunsaker S. L. ( 2005 ). Outcomes of creativity training programs . Gifted Child Q 49 , 292-298. Google Scholar
- Kaufman J. C., Baer J. ( 2006 ). Intelligent testing with Torrance . Creativity Res. J 18 , 99-102. Google Scholar
- Kaufman J. C., Beghetto R. A. ( 2008 , Ed. R. L. DeHaanK.M.V. Narayan , Exploring mini-C: creativity across cultures In: Education for Innovation: Implications for India, China and America , Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 165-180. Google Scholar
- Kaufman J. C., Sternberg R. J. ( 2007 ). Creativity . Change 39 , 55-58. Google Scholar
- Kim K. H. ( 2006 ). Can we trust creativity tests: a review of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT) . Creativity Res. J 18 , 3-14. Google Scholar
- Knight J. K., Wood W. B. ( 2005 ). Teaching more by lecturing less . Cell Biol. Educ 4 , 298-310. Link , Google Scholar
- Cetina Knorr K. ( 1995 , Ed. S. JasanoffG. MarkleJ. PetersenT. Pinch , Laboratory studies: the cultural approach to the study of science In: Handbook of Science and Technology Studies , Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 140-166. Google Scholar
- Koestler A. ( 1964 ). The Act of Creation , New York: Macmillan. Google Scholar
- Latour B., Woolgar S. ( 1986 ). Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Google Scholar
- MacKinnon D. W. ( 1978 , Ed. D. W. MacKinnon , What makes a person creative? In: In Search of Human Effectiveness , New York: Universe Books, 178-186. Google Scholar
- Martindale C. ( 1999 , Ed. R. J. Sternberg , Biological basis of creativity In: Handbook of Creativity , Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 137-152. Google Scholar
- Mazur E. ( 1996 ). Peer Instruction: A User's Manual , Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Google Scholar
- McFadzean E. ( 2002 ). Developing and supporting creative problem-solving teams: Part 1—a conceptual model . Manage. Decis 40 , 463-475. Google Scholar
- McGregor G. D. ( 2001 ). Creative thinking instruction for a college study skills program: a case study. . Dissert Abstr. Intl 62 , 3293A UMI No. AAT 3027933. Google Scholar
- McIntyre F. S., Hite R. E., Rickard M. K. ( 2003 ). Individual characteristics and creativity in the marketing classroom: exploratory insights . J. Mark. Educ 25 , 143-149. Google Scholar
- Mestre J. P. ( 2005 ). Transfer of Learning: From a Modern Multidisciplinary Perspective , Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Google Scholar
- Mumford M. D., Mobley M. I., Uhlman C. E., Reiter-Palmon R., Doares L. M. ( 1991 ). Process analytic models of creative capacities . Creativity Res. J 4 , 91-122. Google Scholar
- National Research Council ( 2007 ). Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future, Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy In: Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Google Scholar
- Neisser U. ( 1963 ). The multiplicity of thought . Br. J. Psychol 54 , 1-14. Medline , Google Scholar
- Nelson C. E. ( 2008 ). Teaching evolution (and all of biology) more effectively: strategies for engagement, critical reasoning, and confronting misconceptions Integrative and Comparative Biology Advance Access accessed 15 September 2008 http://icb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/icn027v1.pdf . Google Scholar
- Novak G, Gavrin A., Christian W, Patterson E. ( 1999 ). Just-in-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology , San Francisco, CA: Pearson Benjamin Cummings. Google Scholar
- Osborn A. F. ( 1948 ). Your Creative Power , New York: Scribner. Google Scholar
- Osborn A. F. ( 1979 ). Applied Imagination , New York: Scribner. Google Scholar
- Osburn H. K., Mumford M. D. ( 2006 ). Creativity and planning: training interventions to develop creative problem-solving skills . Creativity Res. J 18 , 173-190. Google Scholar
- Paulus P. B., Nijstad B. A. ( 2003 ). Group Creativity: Innovation through Collaboration , New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
- Perkins K. K., Wieman C. E. ( 2008 , Ed. R. L. DeHaanK.M.V. Narayan , Innovative teaching to promote innovative thinking In: Education for Innovation: Implications for India, China and America , Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers, 181-210. Google Scholar
- Plucker J. A., Renzulli J. S. ( 1999 , Ed. R. J. Sternberg , Psychometric approaches to the study of human creativity In: Handbook of Creativity , Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 35-61. Google Scholar
- Quitadamo I. J., Faiola C. L., Johnson J. E., Kurtz M. J. ( 2008 ). Community-based inquiry improves critical thinking in general education biology . CBE Life Sci. Educ 7 , 327-337. Link , Google Scholar
- Runco M. A. ( 2004 ). Creativity . Annu. Rev. Psychol 55 , 657-687. Medline , Google Scholar
- Runco M. A., Nemiro J. ( 1994 ). Problem finding, creativity, and giftedness . Roeper Rev 16 , 235-241. Google Scholar
- Sawyer R. K. ( 2005 ). Educating for Innovation Thinking Skills Creativity accessed 13 August 2008 1 41-48 www.artsci.wustl.edu/∼ksawyer/PDFs/Thinkjournal.pdf . Google Scholar
- Sawyer R. K. ( 2006 ). Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation , New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
- Schwartz D. L., Bransford J. D., Sears D. ( 2005 , Ed. J. P. Mestre , Efficiency and innovation in transfer In: Transfer of Learning from a Modern Multidisciplinary Perspective , Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, 1-51. Google Scholar
- Scott G., Leritz L. E., Mumford M. D. ( 2004 ). The effectiveness of creativity training: a quantitative review . Creativity Res. J 16 , 361-388. Google Scholar
- Simonton D. K. ( 1975 ). Sociocultural context of individual creativity: a transhistorical time-series analysis . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol 32 , 1119-1133. Medline , Google Scholar
- Simonton D. K. ( 2004 ). Creativity in Science: Chance, Logic, Genius, and Zeitgeist , Oxford, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar
- Sloman S. ( 1996 ). The empirical case for two systems of reasoning . Psychol. Bull 9 , 3-22. Google Scholar
- Smith G. F. ( 1998 ). Idea generation techniques: a formulary of active ingredients . J. Creative Behav 32 , 107-134. Google Scholar
- Snyder A., Mitchell J., Bossomaier T., Pallier G. ( 2004 ). The creativity quotient: an objective scoring of ideational fluency . Creativity Res. J 16 , 415-420. Google Scholar
- Sternberg R. J. ( 2003 ). What is an “expert student?” . Educ. Res. 32 , 5-9. Google Scholar
- Sternberg R., Williams W. M. ( 1998 ). Teaching for creativity: two dozen tips accessed 25 March 2008 www.cdl.org/resource-library/articles/teaching_creativity.php . Google Scholar
- Tardif T. Z., Sternberg R. J. ( 1988 , Ed. R. J. Sternberg , What do we know about creativity? In: The Nature of Creativity , New York: Cambridge University Press, 429-440. Google Scholar
- Torrance E. P. ( 1974 ). Norms and Technical Manual for the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking , Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service. Google Scholar
- Torrance E. P. ( 1998 ). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking Norms—Technical Manual Figural (Streamlined) Forms A and B , Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service. Google Scholar
- Torrance E. P., Ball O. E., Safter H. T. ( 2008 ). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking: Streamlined Scoring Guide for Figural Forms A and B , Bensenville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service. Google Scholar
- Treffinger D. J., Isaksen S. G. ( 2005 ). Creative problem solving: the history, development, and implications for gifted education and talent development . Gifted Child Q 49 , 342-357. Google Scholar
- Vandervert L. R., Schimpf P. H., Liu H. ( 2007 ). How working memory and the cerebellum collaborate to produce creativity and innovation . Creativity Res. J 9 , 1-18. Google Scholar
- Wallach M. A., Kogan N. ( 1965 ). Modes of Thinking in Young Children: A Study of the Creativity-Intelligence Distinction , New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Google Scholar
- Wood W. B. ( 2009 ). Innovations in undergraduate biology teaching and why we need them . Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol in press. Medline , Google Scholar
- Research-based learning as an innovative approach for teaching students of environmental engineering: a case study of the emerging field of microplastics in soil 15 July 2024 | Discover Education, Vol. 3, No. 1
- ChatGPT improves creative problem-solving performance in university students: An experimental study 1 Jul 2024 | Computers & Education, Vol. 215
- Are we teaching novice instructional designers to be creative? A qualitative case study 16 January 2024 | Instructional Science, Vol. 52, No. 3
- Educators as agents of breadth-biased learning: using social reconstructionism as rationale for embracing media multitasking and enhancing teaching practices in higher education 3 April 2024 | Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 15
- Searching for creativity: How people search to generate new ideas 1 December 2023 | Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 75, No. 4
- Fostering creativity in low-engagement students through socratic dialogue: An experiment in an operations class 1 Mar 2024 | The International Journal of Management Education, Vol. 22, No. 1
- Cognitive flexibility and academic performance: Individual and cross-national patterns among adolescents in 57 countries 1 Feb 2024 | Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 217
- What's in a word? Student beliefs and understanding about green chemistry 1 January 2024 | Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 25, No. 1
- Preservice Physical Education Teachers’ Resistance to Change: The Importance of Occupational Socialization Experiences 26 October 2023 | Trends in Higher Education, Vol. 2, No. 4
- How can we measure metacognition in creative problem-solving? Standardization of the MCPS scale 1 Sep 2023 | Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 49
- TOWARDS ENHANCING CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION IN EDUCATION SYSTEM FOR YOUTH IN HAIL REGION 1 August 2023 | Advanced Education, Vol. 10, No. 22
- Investigating the impact of innovation competence instruction in higher engineering education 12 June 2023 | European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 10
- Regaining creativity in science: insights from conversation 17 May 2023 | Royal Society Open Science, Vol. 10, No. 5
- How transdisciplinary integration, creativity and student motivation interact in three STEAM projects for gifted education? 29 March 2023 | Gifted Education International, Vol. 39, No. 2
- Does creative coursework predict educational, career, and community engagement outcomes for arts alumni? 15 November 2022 | Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 35, No. 2
- Make science disruptive again 27 March 2023 | Nature Biotechnology, Vol. 41, No. 4
- Promoting Creativity in Undergraduate Recreation and Leisure Services Classrooms: An Overview 19 March 2021 | SCHOLE: A Journal of Leisure Studies and Recreation Education, Vol. 38, No. 1
- A Positive Association between Working Memory Capacity and Human Creativity: A Meta-Analytic Evidence 13 January 2023 | Journal of Intelligence, Vol. 11, No. 1
- Students Creativity Through Digital Mind Map 26 July 2023
- Pedagogical and School Practices to Foster Key Competences and Domain-General Literacy 23 August 2023
- Coping with Challenges and Uncertainty in Scientific Research 13 Dec 2022 | Asia-Pacific Science Education, Vol. 8, No. 2
- Teaching design thinking as a tool to address complex public health challenges in public health students: a case study 12 April 2022 | BMC Medical Education, Vol. 22, No. 1
- ‘Allowing them to dream’: fostering creativity in mathematics undergraduates 26 May 2022 | Journal of Further and Higher Education, Vol. 46, No. 10
- Interaction with metaphors enhances creative potential 1 July 2022 | Journal of Poetry Therapy, Vol. 35, No. 4
- Creative problem solving in knowledge-rich contexts 1 Oct 2022 | Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Vol. 26, No. 10
- Teaching Protein–Ligand Interactions Using a Case Study on Tau in Alzheimer’s Disease 1 July 2022 | Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 99, No. 8
- The Effectiveness of Collaborative Learning on Critical Thinking, Creative Thinking, and Metacognitive Skill Ability: Meta-Analysis on Biological Learning 15 July 2022 | European Journal of Educational Research, Vol. volume-11-2022, No. volume-11-issue-3-july-2022
- Student approaches to creative processes when participating in an open-ended project in science 30 June 2022 | International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 44, No. 10
- Arts, Machines, and Creative Education 24 Jun 2022
- Perceived Learning Effectiveness and Student Satisfaction 6 May 2022
- A Contribution to Scientific Creativity: A Validation Study Measuring Divergent Problem Solving Ability 3 September 2021 | Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 34, No. 2
- Problem Solving and Digital Transformation: Acquiring Skills through Pretend Play in Kindergarten 28 January 2022 | Education Sciences, Vol. 12, No. 2
- Growing Innovation and Collaboration Through Assessment and Feedback: A Toolkit for Assessing and Developing Students’ Soft Skills in Biological Experimentation 12 May 2022
- The Role of Creativity in Teaching Mathematics Online 1 December 2022
- Breathing Life Into Marketing Scholarship Through Creativity Learning and Teaching 1 Jan 2022
- Mobilizing Research-Based Learning (RBL) in Higher Education 1 Jan 2022
- Trends and opportunities by fostering creativity in science and engineering: a systematic review 2 September 2021 | European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 46, No. 6
- The effect of a scientific board game on improving creative problem solving skills 1 Sep 2021 | Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 41
- Create Teaching Creativity through Training Management, Effectiveness Training, and Teacher Quality in the Covid-19 Pandemic 6 August 2021 | Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Studies, Vol. 8, No. 4
- Creativity and technology in teaching and learning: a literature review of the uneasy space of implementation 11 January 2021 | Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 69, No. 4
- Üstün Yetenekli Öğrencilerin Bilimsel Yaratıcılık ve Bilimsel Problem Çözme ile İlgili Öz Değerlendirmeleri 15 July 2021 | Yuzunci Yil Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi
- Cultivating creative thinking in engineering student teams: Can a computer‐mediated virtual laboratory help? 23 November 2020 | Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 37, No. 2
- Entrepreneurial competencies of undergraduate students: The case of universities in Nigeria 1 Mar 2021 | The International Journal of Management Education, Vol. 19, No. 1
- Promoting Creativity in General Education Mathematics Courses 5 August 2019 | PRIMUS, Vol. 31, No. 1
- Methodological Considerations for Understanding Students’ Problem Solving Processes and Affective Trajectories During Game-Based Learning: A Data Fusion Approach 3 July 2021
- The main trends in the process of building the creative potential of engineering students 18 June 2021 | E3S Web of Conferences, Vol. 274
- Research on the Present Situation and Countermeasures of Cultivating Graduate Students’ Innovation Ability under Cooperative Innovation Environment 1 Jan 2021 | Creative Education Studies, Vol. 09, No. 02
- Innovation Centers and the Information Schools: The Influence of LIS Faculty 1 Dec 2020 | Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, Vol. 61, No. 4
- Biomimetics: teaching the tools of the trade 28 September 2020 | FEBS Open Bio, Vol. 10, No. 11
- STEM academic teachers’ experiences of undertaking authentic assessment-led reform: a mixed method approach 21 March 2019 | Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 45, No. 9
- Problems of forming marketing competencies in the digital economy 1 Sep 2020 | IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 940, No. 1
- Culturally Responsive Assessment of Physical Science Skills and Abilities: Development, Field Testing, Implementation, and Results 2 June 2020 | Journal of Advanced Academics, Vol. 31, No. 3
- Culturally Responsive Assessment of Life Science Skills and Abilities: Development, Field Testing, Implementation, and Results 3 June 2020 | Journal of Advanced Academics, Vol. 31, No. 3
- Curriculum Differentiation’s Capacity to Extend Gifted Students in Secondary Mixed-ability Science Classes 27 June 2020 | Talent, Vol. 10, No. 1
- Student Motivation from and Resistance to Active Learning Rooted in Essential Science Practices 23 December 2017 | Research in Science Education, Vol. 50, No. 1
- Integrating Entrepreneurship and Art to Improve Creative Problem Solving in Fisheries Education 27 February 2020 | Fisheries, Vol. 45, No. 2
- Concepts Re-imagined: Relational Signs Beyond Definitional Rigidity 15 August 2020
- Promoting Student Creativity and Inventiveness in Science and Engineering 24 October 2020
- Teaching for Leadership, Innovation, and Creativity 1 Jan 2020
- Problem Çözme Becerileri Eğitim Programının Çocukların Karar Verme Becerileri Üzerindeki Etkisi 30 December 2019 | Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Vol. 21, No. 3
- Mento’s change model in teaching competency-based medical education 27 December 2019 | BMC Medical Education, Vol. 19, No. 1
- The Effects of Individual Preparations on Group Creativity 21 January 2020
- The Value of Creativity for Enhancing Translational Ecologies, Insights, and Discoveries 9 July 2019 | Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 10
- Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health to Guide Students' Clinical Approach to Aging With Pathology 1 Jul 2019 | Topics in Geriatric Rehabilitation, Vol. 35, No. 3
- Impact of Brainstorming Strategy in Dealing With Knowledge Retention Skill: An Insight Into Special Learners' Needs In Saudi Arabia 1 January 2021 | MIER Journal of Educational Studies Trends & Practices
- The potential of students’ creative disposition as a perspective to develop creative teaching and learning for senior high school biological science 12 March 2019 | Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 1157
- Evaluating Remote Experiment from a Divergent Thinking Point of View 25 July 2018
- Exploring Creative Education Practices and Implications: A Case study of National Chengchi University, Taiwan 4 April 2022 | Journal of Business and Economic Analysis, Vol. 02, No. 02
- Exploring Creative Education Practices and Implications: A Case study of National Chengchi University, Taiwan 1 January 2020 | Journal of Business and Economic Analysis, Vol. 02, No. 02
- Diverging from the Dogma: A Call to Train Creative Thinkers in Science 14 September 2018 | The Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, Vol. 100, No. 1
- Comparison of German and Japanese student teachers’ views on creativity in chemistry class 16 May 2018 | Asia-Pacific Science Education, Vol. 4, No. 1
- The use of humour during a collaborative inquiry 27 August 2018 | International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 40, No. 14
- Connecting creative coursework exposure and college student engagement across academic disciplines 29 August 2019 | Gifted and Talented International, Vol. 33, No. 1-2
- Views of German chemistry teachers on creativity in chemistry classes and in general 1 January 2018 | Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 19, No. 3
- Embedding Critical and Creative Thinking in Chemical Engineering Practice 1 Jul 2018
- Introducing storytelling to educational robotic activities 1 Apr 2018
- Investigating Undergraduates’ Perceptions of Science in Courses Taught Using the CREATE Strategy 1 Mar 2018 | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, Vol. 19, No. 1
- Teachers’ learning on the workshop of STS approach as a way of enhancing inventive thinking skills 1 Jan 2018
- Creativity Development Through Inquiry-Based Learning in Biomedical Sciences 1 Jan 2018
- The right tool for the right task: Structured techniques prove less effective on an ill-defined problem finding task 1 Dec 2017 | Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 26
- The influential factors and hierarchical structure of college students’ creative capabilities—An empirical study in Taiwan 1 Dec 2017 | Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 26
- Teacher perceptions of professional role and innovative teaching at elementary schools in Taiwan 10 November 2017 | Educational Research and Reviews, Vol. 12, No. 21
- Evaluation of creative problem-solving abilities in undergraduate structural engineers through interdisciplinary problem-based learning 28 July 2016 | European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 42, No. 6
- What Shall I Write Next? 19 September 2017
- Inquiry-based Laboratory Activities on Drugs Analysis for High School Chemistry Learning 3 October 2017 | Journal of Physics: Conference Series, Vol. 895
- BARRIERS TO STUDENTS’ CREATIVE EVALUATION OF UNEXPECTED EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS 25 June 2017 | Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 16, No. 3
- Kyle J. Frantz ,
- Melissa K. Demetrikopoulos ,
- Shari L. Britner ,
- Laura L. Carruth ,
- Brian A. Williams ,
- John L. Pecore ,
- Robert L. DeHaan , and
- Christopher T. Goode
- Elizabeth Ambos, Monitoring Editor
- A present absence: undergraduate course outlines and the development of student creativity across disciplines 3 October 2016 | Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 22, No. 2
- Exploring differences in creativity across academic majors for high-ability college students 16 February 2018 | Gifted and Talented International, Vol. 32, No. 1
- Creativity in chemistry class and in general – German student teachers’ views 1 January 2017 | Chemistry Education Research and Practice, Vol. 18, No. 2
- IMPORTANCE OF CREATIVITY IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP 1 January 2017
- Accessing the Finest Minds 1 Jan 2017
- Science and Innovative Thinking for Technical and Organizational Development 1 Jan 2017
- Learning High School Biology in a Social Context 1 Jan 2017 | Creative Education, Vol. 08, No. 15
- Possibilities and limitations of integrating peer instruction into technical creativity education 6 September 2016 | Instructional Science, Vol. 44, No. 6
- Creative Cognitive Processes in Higher Education 20 November 2014 | The Journal of Creative Behavior, Vol. 50, No. 4
- An Evidence-Based Review of Creative Problem Solving Tools 6 April 2016 | Human Resource Development Review, Vol. 15, No. 2
- Case-based exams for learning and assessment: Experiences in an information systems course 1 Apr 2016
- Case exams for assessing higher order learning: A comparative social media analytics usage exam 1 Apr 2016
- Beyond belief: Structured techniques prove more effective than a placebo intervention in a problem construction task 1 Mar 2016 | Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 19
- A Belief System at the Core of Learning Science 1 Jan 2016
- Science and Innovative Thinking for Technical and Organizational Development 1 Jan 2016
- Student Research Work and Modeled Situations in Order to Bridge the Gap between Basic Science Concepts and Those from Preventive and Clinical Practice. Meaningful Learning and Informed beneficience 1 Jan 2016 | Creative Education, Vol. 07, No. 07
- FOSTERING FIFTH GRADERS’ SCIENTIFIC CREATIVITY THROUGH PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING 25 October 2015 | Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 14, No. 5
- Scaffolding for Creative Product Possibilities in a Design-Based STEM Activity 16 November 2014 | Research in Science Education, Vol. 45, No. 5
- Intuition and insight: two concepts that illuminate the tacit in science education 18 June 2015 | Studies in Science Education, Vol. 51, No. 2
- Arts and crafts as adjuncts to STEM education to foster creativity in gifted and talented students 28 March 2015 | Asia Pacific Education Review, Vol. 16, No. 2
- Initiatives Towards an Education for Creativity 1 May 2015 | Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 180
- Brian A. Couch ,
- Tanya L. Brown ,
- Tyler J. Schelpat ,
- Mark J. Graham , and
- Jennifer K. Knight
- Michèle Shuster, Monitoring Editor
- Kim Quillin , and
- Stephen Thomas
- Mary Lee Ledbetter, Monitoring Editor
- The Design of IdeaWorks: Applying Social Learning Networks to Support Tertiary Education 21 July 2015
- References 1 Jan 2015
- Video Games and Malevolent Creativity 1 Jan 2015
- Modelling a Laboratory for Ideas as a New Tool for Fostering Engineering Creativity 1 Jan 2015 | Procedia Engineering, Vol. 100
- “Development of Thinking Skills” Course: Teaching TRIZ in Academic Setting 1 Jan 2015 | Procedia Engineering, Vol. 131
- Leadership in the Future Experts’ Creativity Development with Scientific Research Activities 4 November 2014
- Developing Deaf Children's Conceptual Understanding and Scientific Argumentation Skills: A Literature Review 3 January 2014 | Deafness & Education International, Vol. 16, No. 3
- Leslie M. Stevens , and
- Sally G. Hoskins
- Nancy Pelaez, Monitoring Editor
- 2014 | Cortex, Vol. 51
- A Sociotechnological Theory of Discursive Change and Entrepreneurial Capacity: Novelty and Networks 1 Jan 2014 | SSRN Electronic Journal, Vol. 3
- GEOverse: An Undergraduate Research Journal: Research Dissemination Within and Beyond the Curriculum 1 August 2013
- Learning by Practice, High-Pressure Student Ateliers 2 August 2013
- Relating Inter-Individual Differences in Verbal Creative Thinking to Cerebral Structures: An Optimal Voxel-Based Morphometry Study 5 November 2013 | PLoS ONE, Vol. 8, No. 11
- 21st Century Biology: An Interdisciplinary Approach of Biology, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Education 1 Nov 2013 | Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 102
- Reclaiming creativity in the era of impact: exploring ideas about creative research in science and engineering 1 Nov 2013 | Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 38, No. 9
- An Evaluation of Alternative Ways of Computing the Creativity Quotient in a Design School Sample 1 Jul 2013 | Creativity Research Journal, Vol. 25, No. 3
- A.-M. Hoskinson ,
- M. D. Caballero , and
- J. K. Knight
- Eric Brewe, Monitoring Editor
- Understanding, attitude and environment 17 May 2013 | International Journal for Researcher Development, Vol. 4, No. 1
- Promoting Student Creativity and Inventiveness in Science and Engineering 1 Jan 2013
- Building creative thinking in the classroom: From research to practice 1 Jan 2013 | International Journal of Educational Research, Vol. 62
- A Demonstration of a Mastery Goal Driven Learning Environment to Foster Creativity in Engineering Design 1 Jan 2013 | SSRN Electronic Journal, Vol. 111
- The development of creative cognition across adolescence: distinct trajectories for insight and divergent thinking 8 October 2012 | Developmental Science, Vol. 16, No. 1
- A CROSS-NATIONAL STUDY OF PROSPECTIVE ELEMENTARY AND SCIENCE TEACHERS’ CREATIVITY STYLES 10 September 2012 | Journal of Baltic Science Education, Vol. 11, No. 3
- Evaluation of fostering students' creativity in preparing aided recalls for revision courses using electronic revision and recapitulation tools 2.0 1 Aug 2012 | Behaviour & Information Technology, Vol. 31, No. 8
- Scientific Creativity: The Missing Ingredient in Slovenian Science Education 15 April 2012 | European Journal of Educational Research, Vol. volume-1-2012, No. volume1-issue2.html
- Could the ‘evolution’ from biology to life sciences prevent ‘extinction’ of the subject field? 6 March 2012 | Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif vir Natuurwetenskap en Tegnologie, Vol. 31, No. 1
- Mobile innovations, executive functions, and educational developments in conflict zones: a case study from Palestine 1 October 2011 | Educational Technology Research and Development, Vol. 60, No. 1
- Informing Pedagogy Through the Brain-Targeted Teaching Model 1 Jan 2012 | Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education, Vol. 13, No. 1
- Teaching Creative Science Thinking 16 Dec 2011 | Science, Vol. 334, No. 6062
- Sally G. Hoskins ,
- David Lopatto , and
- Leslie M. Stevens
- Diane K. O'Dowd, Monitoring Editor
- Embedding Research-Based Learning Early in the Undergraduate Geography Curriculum 1 Aug 2011 | Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 35, No. 3
- Jared L. Taylor ,
- Karen M. Smith ,
- Adrian P. van Stolk , and
- George B. Spiegelman
- Debra Tomanek, Monitoring Editor
- 2010 | IFAC Proceedings Volumes, Vol. 43, No. 17
- Critical and Creative Thinking Activities for Engaged Learning in Graphics and Visualization Course
- Creativity Development through Inquiry-Based Learning in Biomedical Sciences
Submitted: 31 December 2008 Revised: 14 May 2009 Accepted: 28 May 2009
© 2009 by The American Society for Cell Biology
October 1, 2018
To Solve Real-World Problems, We Need Interdisciplinary Science
Solving today’s complex, global problems will take interdisciplinary science
By Graham A. J. Worthy & Cherie L. Yestrebsky
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://static.scientificamerican.com/sciam/cache/file/3E994D03-A92D-483B-A16723E237686C3F_source.jpg?w=600)
T he Indian River Lagoon, a shallow estuary that stretches for 156 miles along Florida's eastern coast, is suffering from the activities of human society. Poor water quality and toxic algal blooms have resulted in fish kills, manatee and dolphin die-offs, and takeovers by invasive species. But the humans who live here have needs, too: the eastern side of the lagoon is buffered by a stretch of barrier islands that are critical to Florida's economy, tourism and agriculture, as well as for launching NASA missions into space.
As in Florida, many of the world's coastlines are in serious trouble as a result of population growth and the pollution it produces. Moreover, the effects of climate change are accelerating both environmental and economic decline. Given what is at risk, scientists like us—a biologist and a chemist at the University of Central Florida—feel an urgent need to do research that can inform policy that will increase the resiliency and sustainability of coastal communities. How can our research best help balance environmental and social needs within the confines of our political and economic systems? This is the level of complexity that scientists must enter into instead of shying away from.
Although new technologies will surely play a role in tackling issues such as climate change, rising seas and coastal flooding, we cannot rely on innovation alone. Technology generally does not take into consideration the complex interactions between people and the environment. That is why coming up with solutions will require scientists to engage in an interdisciplinary team approach—something that is common in the business world but is relatively rare in universities.
On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
Universities are a tremendous source of intellectual power, of course. But students and faculty are typically organized within departments, or academic silos. Scientists are trained in the tools and language of their respective disciplines and learn to communicate their findings to one another using specific jargon.
When the goal of research is a fundamental understanding of a physical or biological system within a niche community, this setup makes a lot of sense. But when the problem the research is trying to solve extends beyond a closed system and includes its effects on society, silos create a variety of barriers. They can limit creativity, flexibility and nimbleness and actually discourage scientists from working across disciplines. As professors, we tend to train our students in our own image, inadvertently producing specialists who have difficulty communicating with the scientist in the next building—let alone with the broader public. This makes research silos ineffective at responding to developing issues in policy and planning, such as how coastal communities and ecosystems worldwide will adapt to rising seas.
Science for the Bigger Picture
As scientists who live and work in Florida, we realized that we needed to play a bigger role in helping our state—and country—make evidence-based choices when it comes to vulnerable coastlines. We wanted to make a more comprehensive assessment of both natural and human-related impacts to the health, restoration and sustainability of our coastal systems and to conduct long-term, integrated research.
At first, we focused on expanding research capacity in our biology, chemistry and engineering programs because each already had a strong coastal research presence. Then, our university announced a Faculty Cluster Initiative, with a goal of developing interdisciplinary academic teams focused on solving tomorrow's most challenging societal problems. While putting together our proposal, we discovered that there were already 35 faculty members on the Orlando campus who studied coastal issues. They belonged to 12 departments in seven colleges, and many of them had never even met. It became clear that simply working on the same campus was insufficient for collaboration.
So we set out to build a team of people from a wide mix of backgrounds who would work in close proximity to one another on a daily basis. These core members would also serve as a link to the disciplinary strengths of their tenure home departments. Initially, finding experts who truly wanted to embrace the team aspect was more difficult than we thought. Although the notion of interdisciplinary research is not new, it has not always been encouraged in academia. Some faculty who go in that direction still worry about whether it will threaten their recognition when applying for grants, seeking promotions or submitting papers to high-impact journals. We are not suggesting that traditional academic departments should be disbanded. On the contrary, they give the required depth to the research, whereas the interdisciplinary team gives breadth to the overall effort.
Our cluster proposal was a success, and in 2019 the National Center for Integrated Coastal Research (UCF Coastal) was born. Our goal is to guide more effective economic development, environmental stewardship, hazard-mitigation planning and public policy for coastal communities. To better integrate science with societal needs, we have brought together biologists, chemists, engineers and biomedical researchers with anthropologists, sociologists, political scientists, planners, emergency managers and economists. It seems that the most creative perspectives on old problems have arisen when people with different training and life experiences are talking through issues over cups of coffee. After all, "interdisciplinary" must mean more than just different flavors of STEM. In academia, tackling the effects of climate change demands more rigorous inclusion of the social sciences—an area that has been frequently overlooked.
The National Science Foundation, as well as other groups, requires that all research proposals incorporate a social sciences component, as an attempt to assess the broader implications of projects. Unfortunately, in many cases, a social scientist is simply added to a proposal only to check a box rather than to make a true commitment to allowing that discipline to inform the project. Instead social, economic and policy needs must be considered at the outset of research design, not as an afterthought. Otherwise our work might fail at the implementation stage, which means we will not be as effective as we could be in solving real-world problems. As a result, the public might become skeptical about how much scientists can contribute toward solutions.
Connecting with the Public
The reality is that communicating research findings to the public is an increasingly critical responsibility of scientists. Doing so has a measurable effect on how politicians prioritize policy, funding and regulations. UCF Coastal was brought into a world where science is not always respected—sometimes it is even portrayed as the enemy. There has been a significant erosion of trust in science over recent years, and we must work more deliberately to regain it. The public, we have found, wants to see quality academic research that is grounded in the societal challenges we are facing. That is why we are melding pure academic research with applied research to focus on issues that are immediate—helping a town or business recovering from a hurricane, for example—as well as long term, such as directly advising a community on how to build resiliency as flooding becomes more frequent.
As scientists, we cannot expect to explain the implications of our research to the wider public if we cannot first understand one another. A benefit of regularly working side by side is that we are crafting a common language, reconciling the radically different meanings that the same words can have to a variety of specialists. Finally, we are learning to speak to one another with more clarity and understand more explicitly how our niches fit into the bigger picture. We are also more aware of culture and industry as driving forces in shaping consensus and policy. Rather than handing city planners a stack of research papers and walking away, UCF Coastal sees itself as a collaborator that listens instead of just lecturing.
This style of academic mission is not only relevant to issues around climate change. It relates to every aspect of modern society, including genetic engineering, automation, artificial intelligence, and so on. The launch of UCF Coastal garnered positive attention from industry, government agencies, local communities and academics. We think that is because people do want to come together to solve problems, but they need a better mechanism for doing so. We hope to be that conduit while inspiring other academic institutions to do the same.
After all, we have been told for years to "think globally, act locally" and that "all politics is local." Florida's Indian River Lagoon will be restored only if there is engagement among residents, local industries, academics, government agencies and nonprofit organizations. As scientists, it is our responsibility to help everyone involved understand that problems that took decades to create will take decades to fix. We need to present the most helpful solutions while explaining the intricacies of the trade-offs for each one. Doing so is possible only if we see ourselves as part of an interdisciplinary, whole-community approach. By listening and responding to fears and concerns, we can make a stronger case for why scientifically driven decisions will be more effective in the long run.
Graham A. J. Worthy is founder and director of the National Center for Integrated Coastal Research at the University of Central Florida (UCF Coastal) and chairs the university's department of biology. His research focuses on how marine ecosystems respond to natural and anthropogenic perturbations.
Cherie L. Yestrebsky is a professor in the University of Central Florida's department of chemistry. Her research expertise is in environmental chemistry and remediation of pollutants in the environment.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Scientific American Magazine Vol 319 Issue 4](https://static.scientificamerican.com/sciam/cache/file/0FB6AFF4-F515-429C-93B754156A0B2A52_source.jpg)
Problem Solving in Science Learning
- Reference work entry
- First Online: 01 January 2015
- Cite this reference work entry
- Edit Yerushalmi 2 &
- Bat-Sheva Eylon 3
250 Accesses
1 Citations
3 Altmetric
Introduction: Problem Solving in the Science Classroom
Problem solving plays a central role in school science, serving both as a learning goal and as an instructional tool. As a learning goal, problem-solving expertise is considered as a means of promoting both proficiency in solving practice problems and competency in tackling novel problems, a hallmark of successful scientists and engineers. As an instructional tool, problem solving attempts to situate the learning of scientific ideas and practices in an applicative context, thus providing an opportunity to transform science learning into an active, relevant, and motivating experience. Problem solving is also frequently a central strategy in the assessment of students’ performance on various measures (e.g., mastery of procedural skills, conceptual understanding, as well as scientific and learning practices).
A problem is often defined as an unfamiliar task that requires one to make judicious decisions when searching through a problem...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Subscribe and save.
- Get 10 units per month
- Download Article/Chapter or eBook
- 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
- Cancel anytime
- Available as PDF
- Read on any device
- Instant download
- Own it forever
- Available as EPUB and PDF
- Durable hardcover edition
- Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
- Free shipping worldwide - see info
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Institutional subscriptions
Chi MTH (2000) Self-explaining expository texts: the dual processes of generating inferences and repairing mental models. In: Glaser R (ed) Advances in instructional psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 161–238
Google Scholar
Greeno JG, Simon HA (1984) Problem solving and reasoning. In: Atkinson RC, Herrnstein R, Lindzey G, Lute RD (eds) Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology. Wiley, New York
Paas F, van Gog T, Sweller J (2010) Cognitive load theory: new conceptualizations, specifications, and integrated research perspectives. Educ Psychol Rev 22:115–121
Article Google Scholar
Reif F (2008) Applying cognitive science to education: thinking and learning in scientific or other complex domains. MIT Press, Cambridge
Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13:273–304
Smith JP, DiSessa AA, Roschelle J (1993) Misconceptions reconceived: a constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. J Learn Sci 3:115–163
Download references
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Edit Yerushalmi
The Science Teaching Department, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Bat-Sheva Eylon
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Bat-Sheva Eylon .
Editor information
Editors and affiliations.
Emeritus Professor of Science and Technology Education, Faculty of Education Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia
Richard Gunstone
Rights and permissions
Reprints and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this entry
Cite this entry.
Yerushalmi, E., Eylon, BS. (2015). Problem Solving in Science Learning. In: Gunstone, R. (eds) Encyclopedia of Science Education. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2150-0_129
Download citation
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2150-0_129
Published : 04 January 2015
Publisher Name : Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN : 978-94-007-2149-4
Online ISBN : 978-94-007-2150-0
eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and Law Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Education
Share this entry
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Publish with us
Policies and ethics
- Find a journal
- Track your research
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world U.S. flag](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/coreutils/uswds/img/favicons/favicon-57.png)
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
- Publications
- Account settings
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
- Advanced Search
- Journal List
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Logo of jintell](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/corehtml/pmc/pmcgifs/logo-jintell.png)
Critical Thinking: A Model of Intelligence for Solving Real-World Problems
Diane f. halpern.
1 Department of Psychology, Claremont McKenna College, Emerita, Altadena, CA 91001, USA
Dana S. Dunn
2 Department of Psychology, Moravian College, Bethlehem, PA 18018, USA; ude.naivarom@nnud
Most theories of intelligence do not directly address the question of whether people with high intelligence can successfully solve real world problems. A high IQ is correlated with many important outcomes (e.g., academic prominence, reduced crime), but it does not protect against cognitive biases, partisan thinking, reactance, or confirmation bias, among others. There are several newer theories that directly address the question about solving real-world problems. Prominent among them is Sternberg’s adaptive intelligence with “adaptation to the environment” as the central premise, a construct that does not exist on standardized IQ tests. Similarly, some scholars argue that standardized tests of intelligence are not measures of rational thought—the sort of skill/ability that would be needed to address complex real-world problems. Other investigators advocate for critical thinking as a model of intelligence specifically designed for addressing real-world problems. Yes, intelligence (i.e., critical thinking) can be enhanced and used for solving a real-world problem such as COVID-19, which we use as an example of contemporary problems that need a new approach.
1. Introduction
The editors of this Special Issue asked authors to respond to a deceptively simple statement: “How Intelligence Can Be a Solution to Consequential World Problems.” This statement holds many complexities, including how intelligence is defined and which theories are designed to address real-world problems.
2. The Problem with Using Standardized IQ Measures for Real-World Problems
For the most part, we identify high intelligence as having a high score on a standardized test of intelligence. Like any test score, IQ can only reflect what is on the given test. Most contemporary standardized measures of intelligence include vocabulary, working memory, spatial skills, analogies, processing speed, and puzzle-like elements (e.g., Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Fourth Edition; see ( Drozdick et al. 2012 )). Measures of IQ correlate with many important outcomes, including academic performance ( Kretzschmar et al. 2016 ), job-related skills ( Hunter and Schmidt 1996 ), reduced likelihood of criminal behavior ( Burhan et al. 2014 ), and for those with exceptionally high IQs, obtaining a doctorate and publishing scholarly articles ( McCabe et al. 2020 ). Gottfredson ( 1997, p. 81 ) summarized these effects when she said the “predictive validity of g is ubiquitous.” More recent research using longitudinal data, found that general mental abilities and specific abilities are good predictors of several work variables including job prestige, and income ( Lang and Kell 2020 ). Although assessments of IQ are useful in many contexts, having a high IQ does not protect against falling for common cognitive fallacies (e.g., blind spot bias, reactance, anecdotal reasoning), relying on biased and blatantly one-sided information sources, failing to consider information that does not conform to one’s preferred view of reality (confirmation bias), resisting pressure to think and act in a certain way, among others. This point was clearly articulated by Stanovich ( 2009, p. 3 ) when he stated that,” IQ tests measure only a small set of the thinking abilities that people need.”
3. Which Theories of Intelligence Are Relevant to the Question?
Most theories of intelligence do not directly address the question of whether people with high intelligence can successfully solve real world problems. For example, Grossmann et al. ( 2013 ) cite many studies in which IQ scores have not predicted well-being, including life satisfaction and longevity. Using a stratified random sample of Americans, these investigators found that wise reasoning is associated with life satisfaction, and that “there was no association between intelligence and well-being” (p. 944). (critical thinking [CT] is often referred to as “wise reasoning” or “rational thinking,”). Similar results were reported by Wirthwein and Rost ( 2011 ) who compared life satisfaction in several domains for gifted adults and adults of average intelligence. There were no differences in any of the measures of subjective well-being, except for leisure, which was significantly lower for the gifted adults. Additional research in a series of experiments by Stanovich and West ( 2008 ) found that participants with high cognitive ability were as likely as others to endorse positions that are consistent with their biases, and they were equally likely to prefer one-sided arguments over those that provided a balanced argument. There are several newer theories that directly address the question about solving real-world problems. Prominent among them is Sternberg’s adaptive intelligence with “adaptation to the environment” as the central premise, a construct that does not exist on standardized IQ tests (e.g., Sternberg 2019 ). Similarly, Stanovich and West ( 2014 ) argue that standardized tests of intelligence are not measures of rational thought—the sort of skill/ability that would be needed to address complex real-world problems. Halpern and Butler ( 2020 ) advocate for CT as a useful model of intelligence for addressing real-world problems because it was designed for this purpose. Although there is much overlap among these more recent theories, often using different terms for similar concepts, we use Halpern and Butler’s conceptualization to make our point: Yes, intelligence (i.e., CT) can be enhanced and used for solving a real-world problem like COVID-19.
4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence
One definition of intelligence that directly addresses the question about intelligence and real-world problem solving comes from Nickerson ( 2020, p. 205 ): “the ability to learn, to reason well, to solve novel problems, and to deal effectively with novel problems—often unpredictable—that confront one in daily life.” Using this definition, the question of whether intelligent thinking can solve a world problem like the novel coronavirus is a resounding “yes” because solutions to real-world novel problems are part of his definition. This is a popular idea in the general public. For example, over 1000 business managers and hiring executives said that they want employees who can think critically based on the belief that CT skills will help them solve work-related problems ( Hart Research Associates 2018 ).
We define CT as the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. It is used to describe thinking that is purposeful, reasoned, and goal directed--the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions, when the thinker is using skills that are thoughtful and effective for the particular context and type of thinking task. International surveys conducted by the OECD ( 2019, p. 16 ) established “key information-processing competencies” that are “highly transferable, in that they are relevant to many social contexts and work situations; and ‘learnable’ and therefore subject to the influence of policy.” One of these skills is problem solving, which is one subset of CT skills.
The CT model of intelligence is comprised of two components: (1) understanding information at a deep, meaningful level and (2) appropriate use of CT skills. The underlying idea is that CT skills can be identified, taught, and learned, and when they are recognized and applied in novel settings, the individual is demonstrating intelligent thought. CT skills include judging the credibility of an information source, making cost–benefit calculations, recognizing regression to the mean, understanding the limits of extrapolation, muting reactance responses, using analogical reasoning, rating the strength of reasons that support and fail to support a conclusion, and recognizing hindsight bias or confirmation bias, among others. Critical thinkers use these skills appropriately, without prompting, and usually with conscious intent in a variety of settings.
One of the key concepts in this model is that CT skills transfer in appropriate situations. Thus, assessments using situational judgments are needed to assess whether particular skills have transferred to a novel situation where it is appropriate. In an assessment created by the first author ( Halpern 2018 ), short paragraphs provide information about 20 different everyday scenarios (e.g., A speaker at the meeting of your local school board reported that when drug use rises, grades decline; so schools need to enforce a “war on drugs” to improve student grades); participants provide two response formats for every scenario: (a) constructed responses where they respond with short written responses, followed by (b) forced choice responses (e.g., multiple choice, rating or ranking of alternatives) for the same situations.
There is a large and growing empirical literature to support the assertion that CT skills can be learned and will transfer (when taught for transfer). See for example, Holmes et al. ( 2015 ), who wrote in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , that there was “significant and sustained improvement in students’ critical thinking behavior” (p. 11,199) for students who received CT instruction. Abrami et al. ( 2015, para. 1 ) concluded from a meta-analysis that “there are effective strategies for teaching CT skills, both generic and content specific, and CT dispositions, at all educational levels and across all disciplinary areas.” Abrami et al. ( 2008, para. 1 ), included 341 effect sizes in a meta-analysis. They wrote: “findings make it clear that improvement in students’ CT skills and dispositions cannot be a matter of implicit expectation.” A strong test of whether CT skills can be used for real-word problems comes from research by Butler et al. ( 2017 ). Community adults and college students (N = 244) completed several scales including an assessment of CT, an intelligence test, and an inventory of real-life events. Both CT scores and intelligence scores predicted individual outcomes on the inventory of real-life events, but CT was a stronger predictor.
Heijltjes et al. ( 2015, p. 487 ) randomly assigned participants to either a CT instruction group or one of six other control conditions. They found that “only participants assigned to CT instruction improved their reasoning skills.” Similarly, when Halpern et al. ( 2012 ) used random assignment of participants to either a learning group where they were taught scientific reasoning skills using a game format or a control condition (which also used computerized learning and was similar in length), participants in the scientific skills learning group showed higher proportional learning gains than students who did not play the game. As the body of additional supportive research is too large to report here, interested readers can find additional lists of CT skills and support for the assertion that these skills can be learned and will transfer in Halpern and Dunn ( Forthcoming ). There is a clear need for more high-quality research on the application and transfer of CT and its relationship to IQ.
5. Pandemics: COVID-19 as a Consequential Real-World Problem
A pandemic occurs when a disease runs rampant over an entire country or even the world. Pandemics have occurred throughout history: At the time of writing this article, COVID-19 is a world-wide pandemic whose actual death rate is unknown but estimated with projections of several million over the course of 2021 and beyond ( Mega 2020 ). Although vaccines are available, it will take some time to inoculate most or much of the world’s population. Since March 2020, national and international health agencies have created a list of actions that can slow and hopefully stop the spread of COVID (e.g., wearing face masks, practicing social distancing, avoiding group gatherings), yet many people in the United States and other countries have resisted their advice.
Could instruction in CT encourage more people to accept and comply with simple life-saving measures? There are many possible reasons to believe that by increasing citizens’ CT abilities, this problematic trend can be reversed for, at least, some unknown percentage of the population. We recognize the long history of social and cognitive research showing that changing attitudes and behaviors is difficult, and it would be unrealistic to expect that individuals with extreme beliefs supported by their social group and consistent with their political ideologies are likely to change. For example, an Iranian cleric and an orthodox rabbi both claimed (separately) that the COVID-19 vaccine can make people gay ( Marr 2021 ). These unfounded opinions are based on deeply held prejudicial beliefs that we expect to be resistant to CT. We are targeting those individuals who beliefs are less extreme and may be based on reasonable reservations, such as concern about the hasty development of the vaccine and the lack of long-term data on its effects. There should be some unknown proportion of individuals who can change their COVID-19-related beliefs and actions with appropriate instruction in CT. CT can be a (partial) antidote for the chaos of the modern world with armies of bots creating content on social media, political and other forces deliberately attempting to confuse issues, and almost all media labeled “fake news” by social influencers (i.e., people with followers that sometimes run to millions on various social media). Here, are some CT skills that could be helpful in getting more people to think more critically about pandemic-related issues.
Reasoning by Analogy and Judging the Credibility of the Source of Information
Early communications about the ability of masks to prevent the spread of COVID from national health agencies were not consistent. In many regions of the world, the benefits of wearing masks incited prolonged and acrimonious debates ( Tang 2020 ). However, after the initial confusion, virtually all of the global and national health organizations (e.g., WHO, National Health Service in the U. K., U. S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) endorse masks as a way to slow the spread of COVID ( Cheng et al. 2020 ; Chu et al. 2020 ). However, as we know, some people do not trust governmental agencies and often cite the conflicting information that was originally given as a reason for not wearing a mask. There are varied reasons for refusing to wear a mask, but the one most often cited is that it is against civil liberties ( Smith 2020 ). Reasoning by analogy is an appropriate CT skill for evaluating this belief (and a key skill in legal thinking). It might be useful to cite some of the many laws that already regulate our behavior such as, requiring health inspections for restaurants, setting speed limits, mandating seat belts when riding in a car, and establishing the age at which someone can consume alcohol. Individuals would be asked to consider how the mandate to wear a mask compares to these and other regulatory laws.
Another reason why some people resist the measures suggested by virtually every health agency concerns questions about whom to believe. Could training in CT change the beliefs and actions of even a small percentage of those opposed to wearing masks? Such training would include considering the following questions with practice across a wide domain of knowledge: (a) Does the source have sufficient expertise? (b) Is the expertise recent and relevant? (c) Is there a potential for gain by the information source, such as financial gain? (d) What would the ideal information source be and how close is the current source to the ideal? (e) Does the information source offer evidence that what they are recommending is likely to be correct? (f) Have you traced URLs to determine if the information in front of you really came from the alleged source?, etc. Of course, not everyone will respond in the same way to each question, so there is little likelihood that we would all think alike, but these questions provide a framework for evaluating credibility. Donovan et al. ( 2015 ) were successful using a similar approach to improve dynamic decision-making by asking participants to reflect on questions that relate to the decision. Imagine the effect of rigorous large-scale education in CT from elementary through secondary schools, as well as at the university-level. As stated above, empirical evidence has shown that people can become better thinkers with appropriate instruction in CT. With training, could we encourage some portion of the population to become more astute at judging the credibility of a source of information? It is an experiment worth trying.
6. Making Cost—Benefit Assessments for Actions That Would Slow the Spread of COVID-19
Historical records show that refusal to wear a mask during a pandemic is not a new reaction. The epidemic of 1918 also included mandates to wear masks, which drew public backlash. Then, as now, many people refused, even when they were told that it was a symbol of “wartime patriotism” because the 1918 pandemic occurred during World War I ( Lovelace 2020 ). CT instruction would include instruction in why and how to compute cost–benefit analyses. Estimates of “lives saved” by wearing a mask can be made meaningful with graphical displays that allow more people to understand large numbers. Gigerenzer ( 2020 ) found that people can understand risk ratios in medicine when the numbers are presented as frequencies instead of probabilities. If this information were used when presenting the likelihood of illness and death from COVID-19, could we increase the numbers of people who understand the severity of this disease? Small scale studies by Gigerenzer have shown that it is possible.
Analyzing Arguments to Determine Degree of Support for a Conclusion
The process of analyzing arguments requires that individuals rate the strength of support for and against a conclusion. By engaging in this practice, they must consider evidence and reasoning that may run counter to a preferred outcome. Kozyreva et al. ( 2020 ) call the deliberate failure to consider both supporting and conflicting data “deliberate ignorance”—avoiding or failing to consider information that could be useful in decision-making because it may collide with an existing belief. When applied to COVID-19, people would have to decide if the evidence for and against wearing a face mask is a reasonable way to stop the spread of this disease, and if they conclude that it is not, what are the costs and benefits of not wearing masks at a time when governmental health organizations are making them mandatory in public spaces? Again, we wonder if rigorous and systematic instruction in argument analysis would result in more positive attitudes and behaviors that relate to wearing a mask or other real-world problems. We believe that it is an experiment worth doing.
![](http://serviteca.online/777/templates/cheerup2/res/banner1.gif)
7. Conclusions
We believe that teaching CT is a worthwhile approach for educating the general public in order to improve reasoning and motivate actions to address, avert, or ameliorate real-world problems like the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence suggests that CT can guide intelligent responses to societal and global problems. We are NOT claiming that CT skills will be a universal solution for the many real-world problems that we confront in contemporary society, or that everyone will substitute CT for other decision-making practices, but we do believe that systematic education in CT can help many people become better thinkers, and we believe that this is an important step toward creating a society that values and practices routine CT. The challenges are great, but the tools to tackle them are available, if we are willing to use them.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, D.F.H. and D.S.D.; resources, D.F.H.; data curation, writing—original draft preparation, D.F.H.; writing—review and editing, D.F.H. and D.S.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
No IRB Review.
Informed Consent Statement
No Informed Consent.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
- Abrami Philip C., Bernard Robert M., Borokhovski Evgueni, Wade C. Anne, Surkes Michael A., Tamim Rana, Zhang Dai. Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A Stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2008; 78 :1102–34. doi: 10.3102/0034654308326084. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Abrami Philip C., Bernard Robert M., Borokhovski Evgueni, Waddington David I., Wade C. Anne. Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. 2015; 85 :275–341. doi: 10.3102/0034654314551063. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Burhan Nik Ahmad Sufian, Kurniawan Yohan, Sidek Abdul Halim, Mohamad Mohd Rosli. Crimes and the Bell curve: Th e role of people with high, average, and low intelligence. Intelligence. 2014; 47 :12–22. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.08.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Butler Heather A., Pentoney Christopher, Bong Maebelle P. Predicting real-world outcomes: Critical thinking ability is a better predictor of life decisions than intelligence. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2017; 25 :38–46. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.06.005. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Cheng Vincent Chi-Chung, Wong Shuk-Ching, Chuang Vivien Wai-Man, So Simon Yung-Chun, Chen Jonathan Hon-Kwan, Sridhar Sidharth, To Kelvin Kai-Wwang, Chan Jasper Fuk-Wu, Hung Ivan Fan-Ngai, Ho Pak-Leung, et al. The role of community-wide wearing of face mask for control of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic due to SARS-CoV-2. Journal of Infectious Disease. 2020; 81 :107–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2020.04.024. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Chu Derek K., Aki Elie A., Duda Stephanie, Solo Karla, Yaacoub Sally, Schunemann Holger J. Physical distancing, face masks, and eye protection to prevent person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19: A system atic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2020; 395 :1973–87. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31142-9. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Donovan Sarah J., Guss C. Dominick, Naslund Dag. Improving dynamic decision-making through training and self-re flection. Judgment and Decision Making. 2015; 10 :284–95. [ Google Scholar ]
- Drozdick Lisa Whipple, Wahlstrom Dustin, Zhu Jianjun, Weiss Lawrence G. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition and the Wechsler Memory Scale—Fourth Edition. In: Flanagan Dawn P., Harrison Patti L., editors. Contemporary Intellectual as Sessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues. The Guilford Press; New York: 2012. pp. 197–223. [ Google Scholar ]
- Gigerenzer Gerd. When all is just a click away: Is critical thinking obsolete in the digital age? In: Sternberg Robert J., Halpern Diane F., editors. Critical Thinking IN Psychology. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 197–223. [ Google Scholar ]
- Gottfredson Linda S. Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence. 1997; 24 :79–132. doi: 10.1016/S0160-2896(97)90014-3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Grossmann Igor, Varnum Michael E. W., Na Jinkyung, Kitayama Shinobu, Nisbett Richard E. A route to well-being: Intelligence ver sus wise reasoning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2013; 142 :944–53. doi: 10.1037/a0029560. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Halpern Diane F. Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment. Schuhfried Test Publishers; Modling: 2018. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]. Available online: www.schuhfried.com [ Google Scholar ]
- Halpern Diane F., Butler Heather A. Is critical thinking a better model of intelligence? In: Sternberg Robert J., editor. The nature of Intelligence. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 183–96. [ Google Scholar ]
- Halpern Diane F., Dunn Dana S. Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. 6th ed. Taylor & Francis; New York: Forthcoming. in press. [ Google Scholar ]
- Halpern Diane F., Millis Keith, Graesser Arthur, Butler Heather, Forsyth Carol, Cai Zhiqiang. Operation ARA: A computerized learn ing game that teaches critical thinking and scientific reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity. 2012; 7 :93–100. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.03.006. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Hart Research Associates [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Employers Express Confidence in Colleges and Universities: See College as Worth the Investment, New Research Finds. 2018 Aug 29; Available online: https://hartresearch.com/employers-express-confidence-in-colleges-and-universities-see-college-as-worth-the-investment-new-research-finds/
- Heijltjes Anita, Gog Tamara van, Lippink Jimmie, Paas Fred. Unraveling the effects of critical thinking instructions, practice, and self-explanation on students’ reasoning performance. Instructional Science. 2015; 43 :487–506. doi: 10.1007/s11251-015-9347-8. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Holmes Natasha G., Wieman Carl E., Bonn DougA. Teaching critical thinking. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015; 112 :11199–204. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1505329112. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Hunter John E., Schmidt Frank L. Intelligence and job performance: Economic and social implications. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. 1996; 2 :447–72. doi: 10.1037/1076-8971.2.3-4.447. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Kozyreva Anastasia, Lewandowsky Stephan, Hertwig Ralph. Citizens versus the internet: Confronting digital challenges with cognitive tools. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2020 21 doi: 10.1177/1529100620946707. Available online: https://www.psychologi calscience.org/publications/confronting-digital-challenges-with-cognitive-tools.html [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Kretzschmar Andre, Neubert Jonas C., Wusternberg Sascha, Greiff Samuel. Construct validity of complex problem- solv ing: A comprehensive view on different facts of intelligence and school grades. Intelligence. 2016; 54 :55–69. doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2015.11.004. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Lang Jonas W.B., Kell Harrison J. General mental ability and specific abilities: Their relative importance for extrinsic career success. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2020; 105 :1047–61. doi: 10.1037/apl0000472. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Lovelace Berkeley., Jr. Medical Historians Compare the Coronavirus to the 1918 Flu Pandemic: Both Were Highly Political. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; CNBC. 2020 Available online: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/28/comparing-1918-flu-vs-corona virus.html?fbclid=IwAR1RAVRUOIdN9qqvNnMPimf5Q4XfV-pn_qdC3DwcfnPu9kavwumDI2zq9Xs
- Marr Rhuaridh. Iranian Cleric Claims COVID-19 Vaccine Can Make People Gay. [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Metro Weekly. 2021 Available online: https://www.metroweekly.com/2021/02/iranian-cleric-claims-covid-19-vaccine-can-make-people-gay/
- McCabe Kira O., Lubinski David, Benbow Camilla P. Who shines most among the brightest?: A 25-year longitudinal study of elite STEM graduate students. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2020; 119 :390–416. doi: 10.1037/pspp0000239. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Mega Emiliano R. COVID Has Killed more than One Million People. How Many more will Die? [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; Nature. 2020 Available online: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02762-y [ PubMed ]
- Nickerson Raymond S. Developing intelligence through instruction. In: Sternberg Robert J., editor. The Cambridge Handbook of Intelligence. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge: 2020. pp. 205–37. [ Google Scholar ]
- OECD . The Survey of Adult Skills: Reader’s Companion. 3rd ed. OECD Publishing; Paris: 2019. OECD Skills Studies. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Smith Matthew. Why won’t Britons Wear Face Masks? [(accessed on 30 March 2021)]; YouGov. 2020 Available online: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/health/articles-reports/2020/07/15/why-wont-britons-wear-face-masks
- Stanovich Keith E. What Intelligence Tests Miss: The Psychology of Rational Thought. Yale University Press; New Haven: 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
- Stanovich Keith E., West Richard F. On the failure of cognitive ability to predict my-side bias and one-sided thinking biases. Thinking & Reasoning. 2008; 14 :129–67. doi: 10.1080/13546780701679764. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Stanovich Keith E., West Richard F. What intelligence tests miss. The Psychologist. 2014; 27 :80–83. doi: 10.5840/inquiryctnews201126216. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Sternberg Robert J. A theory of adaptive intelligence and its relation to general intelligence. Journal of Intelligence. 2019; 7 :23. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence7040023. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Tang Julian W. COVID-19: Interpreting scientific evidence—Uncertainty, confusion, and delays. BMC Infectious Diseases. 2020; 20 :653. doi: 10.1186/s12879-020-05387-8. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
- Wirthwein Linda, Rost Detlef H. Giftedness and subjective well-being: A study with adults. Learning and Individuals Differences. 2011; 21 :182–86. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2011.01.001. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world medieval alchemist working in his lab with flasks in foreground](https://images.theconversation.com/files/611780/original/file-20240806-17-fe4y5p.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&rect=316%2C0%2C5096%2C3884&q=20&auto=format&w=320&fit=clip&dpr=2&usm=12&cs=strip)
Multiple goals, multiple solutions, plenty of second-guessing and revising − here’s how science really works
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://cdn.theconversation.com/avatars/385847/width170/image-20240515-16-57ue8l.jpg)
Professor of Philosophy, University of Montana
Disclosure statement
Soazig Le Bihan receives funding from the Maureen and Mike Mansfield Center at the University of Montana.
University of Montana provides funding as a member of The Conversation US.
View all partners
A man in a lab coat bends under a dim light, his strained eyes riveted onto a microscope. He’s powered only by caffeine and anticipation.
This solitary scientist will stay on task until he unveils the truth about the cause of the dangerous disease quickly spreading through his vulnerable city. Time is short, the stakes are high, and only he can save everyone. …
That kind of romanticized picture of science was standard for a long time. But it’s as far from actual scientific practice as a movie’s choreographed martial arts battle is from a real fistfight.
For most of the 20th century, philosophers of science like me maintained somewhat idealistic claims about what good science looks like. Over the past few decades, however, many of us have revised our views to better mirror actual scientific practice .
An update on what to expect from actual science is overdue. I often worry that when the public holds science to unrealistic standards, any scientific claim failing to live up to them arouses suspicion. While public trust is globally strong and has been for decades, it has been eroding. In November 2023, Americans’ trust in scientists was 14 points lower than it had been just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, with its flurry of confusing and sometimes contradictory science-related messages.
When people’s expectations are not met about how science works, they may blame scientists. But modifying our expectations might be more useful. Here are three updates I think can help people better understand how science actually works. Hopefully, a better understanding of actual scientific practice will also shore up people’s trust in the process.
The many faces of scientific research
First, science is a complex endeavor involving multiple goals and associated activities.
Some scientists search for the causes underlying some observable effect, such as a decimated pine forest or the Earth’s global surface temperature increase .
Others may investigate the what rather than the why of things. For example, ecologists build models to estimate gray wolf abundance in Montana . Spotting predators is incredibly challenging. Counting all of them is impractical. Abundance models are neither complete nor 100% accurate – they offer estimates deemed good enough to set harvesting quotas. Perfect scientific models are just not in the cards .
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world older woman holding pill bottle, medical worker in scrubs faces her](https://images.theconversation.com/files/611784/original/file-20240806-19-3c10gy.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip)
Beyond the what and the why, scientists may focus on the how. For instance, the lives of people living with chronic illnesses can be improved by research on strategies for managing disease – to mitigate symptoms and improve function, even if the true causes of their disorders largely elude current medicine.
It’s understandable that some patients may grow frustrated or distrustful of medical providers unable to give clear answers about what causes their ailment. But it’s important to grasp that lots of scientific research focuses on how to effectively intervene in the world to reach some specific goals.
Simplistic views represent science as solely focused on providing causal explanations for the various phenomena we observe in this world. The truth is that scientists tackle all kinds of problems, which are best solved using different strategies and approaches and only sometimes involve full-fledged explanations.
Complex problems call for complex solutions
The second aspect of scientific practice worth underscoring is that, because scientists tackle complex problems, they don’t typically offer one unique, complete and perfect answer. Instead they consider multiple, partial and possibly conflicting solutions.
Scientific modeling strategies illustrate this point well. Scientific models typically are partial, simplified and sometimes deliberately unrealistic representations of a system of interest. Models can be physical, conceptual or mathematical. The critical point is that they represent target systems in ways that are useful in particular contexts of inquiry. Interestingly, considering multiple possible models is often the best strategy to tackle complex problems.
Scientists consider multiple models of biodiversity , atomic nuclei or climate change . Returning to wolf abundance estimates, multiple models can also fit the bill. Such models rely on various types of data, including acoustic surveys of wolf howls, genetic methods that use fecal samples from wolves, wolf sightings and photographic evidence, aerial surveys, snow track surveys and more.
Weighing the pros and cons of various possible solutions to the problem of interest is part and parcel of the scientific process. Interestingly, in some cases, using multiple conflicting models allows for better predictions than trying to unify all the models into one.
The public may be surprised and possibly suspicious when scientists push forward multiple models that rely on conflicting assumptions and make different predictions. People often think “real science” should provide definite, complete and foolproof answers to their questions. But given various limitations and the world’s complexity, keeping multiple perspectives in play is most often the best way for scientists to reach their goals and solve the problems at hand.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world woman at podium with slides beside her, presenting to a room](https://images.theconversation.com/files/611786/original/file-20240806-23-jg19ob.jpg?ixlib=rb-4.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip)
Science as a collective, contrarian endeavor
Finally, science is a collective endeavor, where healthy disagreement is a feature, not a bug.
The romanticized version of science pictures scientists working in isolation and establishing absolute truths. Instead, science is a social and contrarian process in which the community’s scrutiny ensures we have the best available knowledge. “Best available” does not mean “definitive,” but the best we have until we find out how to improve it. Science almost always allows for disagreements among experts.
Controversies are core to how science works at its best and are as old as Western science itself. In the 1600s, Descartes and Leibniz fought over how to best characterize the laws of dynamics and the nature of motion.
The long history of atomism provides a valuable perspective on how science is an intricate and winding process rather than a fast-delivery system of results set in stone. As Jean Baptiste Perrin conducted his 1908 experiments that seemingly settled all discussion regarding the existence of atoms and molecules, the questions of the atom’s properties were about to become the topic of decades of controversies with the birth of quantum physics.
The nature and structure of fundamental particles and associated fields have been the subject of scientific research for more than a century. Lively academic discussions abound concerning the difficult interpretation of quantum mechanics , the challenging unification of quantum physics and relativity , and the existence of the Higgs boson , among others.
Distrusting researchers for having healthy scientific disagreements is largely misguided.
A very human practice
To be clear, science is dysfunctional in some respects and contexts. Current institutions have incentives for counterproductive practices, including maximizing publication numbers . Like any human endeavor, science includes people with bad intent, including some trying to discredit legitimate scientific research . Finally, science is sometimes inappropriately influenced by various values in problematic ways.
These are all important considerations when evaluating the trustworthiness of particular scientific claims and recommendations. However, it is unfair, sometimes dangerous, to mistrust science for doing what it does at its best. Science is a multifaceted endeavor focused on solving complex problems that typically just don’t have simple solutions. Communities of experts scrutinize those solutions in hopes of providing the best available approach to tackling the problems of interest.
Science is also a fallible and collective process. Ignoring the realities of that process and holding science up to unrealistic standards may result in the public calling science out and losing trust in its reliability for the wrong reasons.
- Philosophy of science
- Scientific research
- Science myths
- Trust in science
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://jobs.theconversation.com/uploads/job/logo/338086265/logo-1520549009.png)
Cybersecurity Specialist, Australian Biocommons
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://jobs.theconversation.com/uploads/job/logo/337873314/images.png)
Manager, Centre Policy and Translation
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://jobs.theconversation.com/uploads/job/logo/336998628/TC_rescaled_logo_for_Jobboard_copy_TRANSPARENT.png)
Newsletter and Deputy Social Media Producer
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://jobs.theconversation.com/uploads/job/logo/336930475/CC_logo.png)
College Director and Principal | Curtin College
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://jobs.theconversation.com/uploads/job/logo/335860244/AUT-logo-block-international.jpg)
Head of School: Engineering, Computer and Mathematical Sciences
Smart. Open. Grounded. Inventive. Read our Ideas Made to Matter.
Which program is right for you?
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world MIT Sloan Campus life](https://mitsloan.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/academics_overlay_desktop/public/2021-06/academics-overlay-default.png?itok=Q_WEj4_e)
Through intellectual rigor and experiential learning, this full-time, two-year MBA program develops leaders who make a difference in the world.
A rigorous, hands-on program that prepares adaptive problem solvers for premier finance careers.
A 12-month program focused on applying the tools of modern data science, optimization and machine learning to solve real-world business problems.
Earn your MBA and SM in engineering with this transformative two-year program.
Combine an international MBA with a deep dive into management science. A special opportunity for partner and affiliate schools only.
A doctoral program that produces outstanding scholars who are leading in their fields of research.
Bring a business perspective to your technical and quantitative expertise with a bachelor’s degree in management, business analytics, or finance.
A joint program for mid-career professionals that integrates engineering and systems thinking. Earn your master’s degree in engineering and management.
An interdisciplinary program that combines engineering, management, and design, leading to a master’s degree in engineering and management.
Executive Programs
A full-time MBA program for mid-career leaders eager to dedicate one year of discovery for a lifetime of impact.
This 20-month MBA program equips experienced executives to enhance their impact on their organizations and the world.
Non-degree programs for senior executives and high-potential managers.
A non-degree, customizable program for mid-career professionals.
Data literacy: The key to cracking the data culture code
How to build a successful multi-sided platform
5 insights into the digital economy from MIT researchers
Credit: Alejandro Giraldo
Ideas Made to Matter
How to use algorithms to solve everyday problems
Kara Baskin
May 8, 2017
How can I navigate the grocery store quickly? Why doesn’t anyone like my Facebook status? How can I alphabetize my bookshelves in a hurry? Apple data visualizer and MIT System Design and Management graduate Ali Almossawi solves these common dilemmas and more in his new book, “ Bad Choices: How Algorithms Can Help You Think Smarter and Live Happier ,” a quirky, illustrated guide to algorithmic thinking.
For the uninitiated: What is an algorithm? And how can algorithms help us to think smarter?
An algorithm is a process with unambiguous steps that has a beginning and an end, and does something useful.
Algorithmic thinking is taking a step back and asking, “If it’s the case that algorithms are so useful in computing to achieve predictability, might they also be useful in everyday life, when it comes to, say, deciding between alternative ways of solving a problem or completing a task?” In all cases, we optimize for efficiency: We care about time or space.
Note the mention of “deciding between.” Computer scientists do that all the time, and I was convinced that the tools they use to evaluate competing algorithms would be of interest to a broad audience.
Why did you write this book, and who can benefit from it?
All the books I came across that tried to introduce computer science involved coding. My approach to making algorithms compelling was focusing on comparisons. I take algorithms and put them in a scene from everyday life, such as matching socks from a pile, putting books on a shelf, remembering things, driving from one point to another, or cutting an onion. These activities can be mapped to one or more fundamental algorithms, which form the basis for the field of computing and have far-reaching applications and uses.
I wrote the book with two audiences in mind. One, anyone, be it a learner or an educator, who is interested in computer science and wants an engaging and lighthearted, but not a dumbed-down, introduction to the field. Two, anyone who is already familiar with the field and wants to experience a way of explaining some of the fundamental concepts in computer science differently than how they’re taught.
I’m going to the grocery store and only have 15 minutes. What do I do?
Do you know what the grocery store looks like ahead of time? If you know what it looks like, it determines your list. How do you prioritize things on your list? Order the items in a way that allows you to avoid walking down the same aisles twice.
For me, the intriguing thing is that the grocery store is a scene from everyday life that I can use as a launch pad to talk about various related topics, like priority queues and graphs and hashing. For instance, what is the most efficient way for a machine to store a prioritized list, and what happens when the equivalent of you scratching an item from a list happens in the machine’s list? How is a store analogous to a graph (an abstraction in computer science and mathematics that defines how things are connected), and how is navigating the aisles in a store analogous to traversing a graph?
Nobody follows me on Instagram. How do I get more followers?
The concept of links and networks, which I cover in Chapter 6, is relevant here. It’s much easier to get to people whom you might be interested in and who might be interested in you if you can start within the ball of links that connects those people, rather than starting at a random spot.
You mention Instagram: There, the hashtag is one way to enter that ball of links. Tag your photos, engage with users who tag their photos with the same hashtags, and you should be on your way to stardom.
What are the secret ingredients of a successful Facebook post?
I’ve posted things on social media that have died a sad death and then posted the same thing at a later date that somehow did great. Again, if we think of it in terms that are relevant to algorithms, we’d say that the challenge with making something go viral is really getting that first spark. And to get that first spark, a person who is connected to the largest number of people who are likely to engage with that post, needs to share it.
With [my first book], “Bad Arguments,” I spent a month pouring close to $5,000 into advertising for that project with moderate results. And then one science journalist with a large audience wrote about it, and the project took off and hasn’t stopped since.
What problems do you wish you could solve via algorithm but can’t?
When we care about efficiency, thinking in terms of algorithms is useful. There are cases when that’s not the quality we want to optimize for — for instance, learning or love. I walk for several miles every day, all throughout the city, as I find it relaxing. I’ve never asked myself, “What’s the most efficient way I can traverse the streets of San Francisco?” It’s not relevant to my objective.
Algorithms are a great way of thinking about efficiency, but the question has to be, “What approach can you optimize for that objective?” That’s what worries me about self-help: Books give you a silver bullet for doing everything “right” but leave out all the nuances that make us different. What works for you might not work for me.
Which companies use algorithms well?
When you read that the overwhelming majority of the shows that users of, say, Netflix, watch are due to Netflix’s recommendation engine, you know they’re doing something right.
Related Articles
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Hands reading a book filled with data imagery](https://mitsloan.mit.edu/sites/default/files/styles/multi_up_large_desktop/public/2024-08/data-literacy-book_0.jpg?h=1522696c&itok=lfY13VVX)
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/60e309c7ce945b7e2f4e4685/6464cc3f0704cf09046441df_New_phone_icon.png)
Parent Portal
Extracurriculars
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/60e309c7ce945b7e2f4e4685/629091c1db03af683ff75830_magnifying-glass.png)
Why Teaching Problem-Solving Skills is Essential for Student Success
Teaching the art of problem-solving is crucial for preparing students to thrive in an increasingly complex and interconnected world. Beyond the ability to find solutions, problem-solving fosters critical thinking, creativity, and resilience: qualities essential for academic success and lifelong learning.
This article explores the importance of problem-solving skills, critical strategies for nurturing them in students, and practical approaches educators and parents can employ.
By equipping students with these skills, we empower them to tackle challenges confidently, innovate effectively, and contribute meaningfully to their communities and future careers .
Why Teaching Problem-Solving Skills is Important
Problem-solving is a crucial skill that empowers students to tackle challenges with confidence and creativity . In an educational context, problem-solving is not just about finding solutions; it involves critical thinking, analysis, and application of knowledge. Students who excel in problem-solving can understand complex problems, break them down into manageable parts, and develop effective strategies to solve them. This skill is applicable across all subjects, from math and science to language arts and social studies, fostering a more profound understanding and retention of material .
Beyond academics, problem-solving is a cornerstone of success in life. Successful people across various fields possess strong problem-solving abilities. They can navigate obstacles, innovate solutions, and adapt to changing circumstances. In engineering and business management careers, problem solvers are highly valued for their ability to find efficient and creative solutions to complex issues.
Educators prepare students for future challenges and opportunities by teaching problem-solving in schools. They learn to think critically , work collaboratively, and persist in facing difficulties, all essential lifelong learning and achievement skills. Thus, nurturing problem-solving skills in students enhances their academic performance and equips them for success in their future careers and personal lives.
Aspects of Problem Solving
Developing problem-solving skills is crucial for preparing students to navigate the complexities of the modern world. Critical thinking, project-based learning, and volunteering enhance academic learning and empower students to address real-world challenges effectively. By focusing on these aspects, students can develop the skills they need to innovate, collaborate, and positively impact their communities.
Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is a fundamental skill for problem-solving as it involves analysing and evaluating information to make reasoned judgments and decisions. It enables students to approach problems systematically, consider multiple perspectives, and identify underlying issues.
Critical thinking allows students to:
- Analyse information : Students can assess the relevance and reliability of information to determine its impact on problem-solving. For example, in a science project, critical thinking helps students evaluate experimental results to draw valid conclusions.
- Develop solutions : Students can choose the most effective solution by critically evaluating different approaches. In a group project, critical thinking enables students to compare and refine ideas to solve a problem creatively.
Project-Based Learning
Project-based learning (PBL) is an instructional approach where students learn by actively engaging in real-world and personally meaningful projects. It allows students to explore complex problems and develop essential skills such as collaboration and communication.
Here is how project-based learning helps students develop problem-solving skills.
- Apply knowledge : Students apply academic concepts to real-world problems by working on projects. For instance, in designing a community garden, students use math to plan the layout and science to understand plant growth.
- Develop skills : PBL fosters problem-solving by challenging students to address authentic problems. For example, in a history project, students might analyse primary sources to understand the causes of historical events and propose solutions to prevent similar conflicts.
Volunteering
Volunteering allows students to contribute to their communities while developing empathy, leadership , and problem-solving skills. It provides practical experiences that enhance learning and help students understand and address community needs.
Volunteering is important because it allows students to:
- Identify needs : Students can identify community needs and consider solutions by working in diverse settings. For example, volunteering at a food bank can inspire students to address food insecurity by organising donation drives.
- Collaborate : Volunteering encourages teamwork and collaboration to solve problems. Students learn to coordinate tasks and resources to achieve common goals when organising a charity event.
The Problem-Solving Process
Problem-solving involves a systematic approach to understanding, analysing, and solving problems. Here are the critical steps in the problem-solving process:
- Identify the problem : The first step is clearly defining and understanding the problem. This involves identifying the specific issue or challenge that needs to be addressed.
- Define goals : Once the problem is identified, it's essential to establish clear and measurable goals. This helps focus efforts and guide the problem-solving process.
- Explore possible solutions : The next step is brainstorming and exploring various solutions. This involves generating ideas and considering different approaches to solving the problem.
- Evaluate options : After generating potential solutions, evaluate each option based on its feasibility, effectiveness, and possible outcomes.
- Choose the best solution : Select the most appropriate solution that best meets the defined goals and addresses the root cause of the problem.
- Implement the solution : Once a solution is chosen, it must be implemented. This step involves planning the implementation process and taking necessary actions to execute the solution.
- Monitor progress : After implementing the solution, monitor its progress and evaluate its effectiveness. This step helps ensure that the problem is being resolved as expected.
- Reflect and adjust : Reflect on the problem-solving process, identify any lessons learned, and make adjustments if necessary. This continuous improvement cycle helps refine solutions and develop better problem-solving skills.
How to Become a General Problem Solver
Parents play a crucial role in nurturing their children's problem-solving skills. Here are some ways parents can help their children become effective problem solvers.
- Encourage critical thinking : Encourage children to ask questions, analyse information, and consider different perspectives. Engage them in discussions that challenge their thinking and promote reasoning.
- Support independence : Allow children to tackle challenges on their own. Offer guidance and encouragement without immediately providing solutions. This helps build confidence and resilience.
- Provide opportunities for problem-solving : Create opportunities for children to solve real-life problems, such as planning a family event, organising their room, or resolving conflicts with siblings or friends.
- Foster creativity : Encourage creative thinking and brainstorming. Provide materials and activities that stimulate imagination and innovation.
- Model problem-solving behaviours : Demonstrate problem-solving skills in your own life and involve children in decision-making processes. Show them how to approach challenges calmly and methodically.
How Online Schooling Encourages Problem-Solving
Online schooling encourages problem-solving skills by requiring students to navigate digital platforms, manage their time effectively , and troubleshoot technical issues independently.
Students often engage in interactive assignments and projects that promote critical thinking and creativity. They learn to adapt to different learning environments and collaborate virtually, fostering innovative solutions.
Online schooling also encourages self-directed learning , where students must identify and address their own learning gaps. This enhances problem-solving abilities and prepares them for the complexities of the digital age.
To find out more about online learning, click here .
Download the FREE Exam Study Planner
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Why Teaching Problem-Solving Skills is Essential for Student Success](https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/60e309c8ce945b281d4e46be/667bf456d1c8c2e94e008ac1_Study%20Planner%20Mockup.png)
Download our free study planners to stay organised and manage your next examination period successfully.
Other articles
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/60e309c7ce945b7e2f4e4685/6295ff929f6f1f5d4f85060b_wall-clock.png)
How it works
Transform your enterprise with the scalable mindsets, skills, & behavior change that drive performance.
Explore how BetterUp connects to your core business systems.
We pair AI with the latest in human-centered coaching to drive powerful, lasting learning and behavior change.
Build leaders that accelerate team performance and engagement.
Unlock performance potential at scale with AI-powered curated growth journeys.
Build resilience, well-being and agility to drive performance across your entire enterprise.
Transform your business, starting with your sales leaders.
Unlock business impact from the top with executive coaching.
Foster a culture of inclusion and belonging.
Accelerate the performance and potential of your agencies and employees.
See how innovative organizations use BetterUp to build a thriving workforce.
Discover how BetterUp measurably impacts key business outcomes for organizations like yours.
Daring Leadership Institute: a groundbreaking partnership that amplifies Brené Brown's empirically based, courage-building curriculum with BetterUp’s human transformation platform.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Learn more](https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/9253440/cec385d0-be72-4ad8-a63e-424d801cc95d.png)
- What is coaching?
Learn how 1:1 coaching works, who its for, and if it's right for you.
Accelerate your personal and professional growth with the expert guidance of a BetterUp Coach.
Types of Coaching
Navigate career transitions, accelerate your professional growth, and achieve your career goals with expert coaching.
Enhance your communication skills for better personal and professional relationships, with tailored coaching that focuses on your needs.
Find balance, resilience, and well-being in all areas of your life with holistic coaching designed to empower you.
Discover your perfect match : Take our 5-minute assessment and let us pair you with one of our top Coaches tailored just for you.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Find your Coach](https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/9253440/21fbace0-fd3a-4c41-ba35-a2067143bdea.png)
Research, expert insights, and resources to develop courageous leaders within your organization.
Best practices, research, and tools to fuel individual and business growth.
View on-demand BetterUp events and learn about upcoming live discussions.
The latest insights and ideas for building a high-performing workplace.
- BetterUp Briefing
The online magazine that helps you understand tomorrow's workforce trends, today.
Innovative research featured in peer-reviewed journals, press, and more.
Founded in 2022 to deepen the understanding of the intersection of well-being, purpose, and performance
We're on a mission to help everyone live with clarity, purpose, and passion.
Join us and create impactful change.
Read the buzz about BetterUp.
Meet the leadership that's passionate about empowering your workforce.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Request a demo](https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/9253440/6ac54b8a-cf90-4c95-a7dd-af4a87983811.png)
For Business
For Individuals
10 Problem-solving strategies to turn challenges on their head
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Find my Coach](https://no-cache.hubspot.com/cta/default/9253440/ce9ee3b4-0410-44ff-922e-acc5525e7b29.png)
Jump to section
What is an example of problem-solving?
What are the 5 steps to problem-solving, 10 effective problem-solving strategies, what skills do efficient problem solvers have, how to improve your problem-solving skills.
Problems come in all shapes and sizes — from workplace conflict to budget cuts.
Creative problem-solving is one of the most in-demand skills in all roles and industries. It can boost an organization’s human capital and give it a competitive edge.
Problem-solving strategies are ways of approaching problems that can help you look beyond the obvious answers and find the best solution to your problem .
Let’s take a look at a five-step problem-solving process and how to combine it with proven problem-solving strategies. This will give you the tools and skills to solve even your most complex problems.
Good problem-solving is an essential part of the decision-making process . To see what a problem-solving process might look like in real life, let’s take a common problem for SaaS brands — decreasing customer churn rates.
To solve this problem, the company must first identify it. In this case, the problem is that the churn rate is too high.
Next, they need to identify the root causes of the problem. This could be anything from their customer service experience to their email marketing campaigns. If there are several problems, they will need a separate problem-solving process for each one.
Let’s say the problem is with email marketing — they’re not nurturing existing customers. Now that they’ve identified the problem, they can start using problem-solving strategies to look for solutions.
This might look like coming up with special offers, discounts, or bonuses for existing customers. They need to find ways to remind them to use their products and services while providing added value. This will encourage customers to keep paying their monthly subscriptions.
They might also want to add incentives, such as access to a premium service at no extra cost after 12 months of membership. They could publish blog posts that help their customers solve common problems and share them as an email newsletter.
The company should set targets and a time frame in which to achieve them. This will allow leaders to measure progress and identify which actions yield the best results.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world team-meeting-problem-solving-strategies](https://www.betterup.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Blog%20Images/problem%20solving%20strategies/team-meeting-problem-solving-strategies.jpg?width=883&name=team-meeting-problem-solving-strategies.jpg)
Perhaps you’ve got a problem you need to tackle. Or maybe you want to be prepared the next time one arises. Either way, it’s a good idea to get familiar with the five steps of problem-solving.
Use this step-by-step problem-solving method with the strategies in the following section to find possible solutions to your problem.
1. Identify the problem
The first step is to know which problem you need to solve. Then, you need to find the root cause of the problem.
The best course of action is to gather as much data as possible, speak to the people involved, and separate facts from opinions.
Once this is done, formulate a statement that describes the problem. Use rational persuasion to make sure your team agrees .
2. Break the problem down
Identifying the problem allows you to see which steps need to be taken to solve it.
First, break the problem down into achievable blocks. Then, use strategic planning to set a time frame in which to solve the problem and establish a timeline for the completion of each stage.
3. Generate potential solutions
At this stage, the aim isn’t to evaluate possible solutions but to generate as many ideas as possible.
Encourage your team to use creative thinking and be patient — the best solution may not be the first or most obvious one.
Use one or more of the different strategies in the following section to help come up with solutions — the more creative, the better.
4. Evaluate the possible solutions
Once you’ve generated potential solutions, narrow them down to a shortlist. Then, evaluate the options on your shortlist.
There are usually many factors to consider. So when evaluating a solution, ask yourself the following questions:
- Will my team be on board with the proposition?
- Does the solution align with organizational goals ?
- Is the solution likely to achieve the desired outcomes?
- Is the solution realistic and possible with current resources and constraints?
- Will the solution solve the problem without causing additional unintended problems?
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world woman-helping-her-colleague-problem-solving-strategies](https://www.betterup.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Blog%20Images/problem%20solving%20strategies/woman-helping-her-colleague-problem-solving-strategies.jpg?width=867&name=woman-helping-her-colleague-problem-solving-strategies.jpg)
5. Implement and monitor the solutions
Once you’ve identified your solution and got buy-in from your team, it’s time to implement it.
But the work doesn’t stop there. You need to monitor your solution to see whether it actually solves your problem.
Request regular feedback from the team members involved and have a monitoring and evaluation plan in place to measure progress.
If the solution doesn’t achieve your desired results, start this step-by-step process again.
There are many different ways to approach problem-solving. Each is suitable for different types of problems.
The most appropriate problem-solving techniques will depend on your specific problem. You may need to experiment with several strategies before you find a workable solution.
Here are 10 effective problem-solving strategies for you to try:
- Use a solution that worked before
- Brainstorming
- Work backward
- Use the Kipling method
- Draw the problem
- Use trial and error
- Sleep on it
- Get advice from your peers
- Use the Pareto principle
- Add successful solutions to your toolkit
Let’s break each of these down.
1. Use a solution that worked before
It might seem obvious, but if you’ve faced similar problems in the past, look back to what worked then. See if any of the solutions could apply to your current situation and, if so, replicate them.
2. Brainstorming
The more people you enlist to help solve the problem, the more potential solutions you can come up with.
Use different brainstorming techniques to workshop potential solutions with your team. They’ll likely bring something you haven’t thought of to the table.
3. Work backward
Working backward is a way to reverse engineer your problem. Imagine your problem has been solved, and make that the starting point.
Then, retrace your steps back to where you are now. This can help you see which course of action may be most effective.
4. Use the Kipling method
This is a method that poses six questions based on Rudyard Kipling’s poem, “ I Keep Six Honest Serving Men .”
- What is the problem?
- Why is the problem important?
- When did the problem arise, and when does it need to be solved?
- How did the problem happen?
- Where is the problem occurring?
- Who does the problem affect?
Answering these questions can help you identify possible solutions.
5. Draw the problem
Sometimes it can be difficult to visualize all the components and moving parts of a problem and its solution. Drawing a diagram can help.
This technique is particularly helpful for solving process-related problems. For example, a product development team might want to decrease the time they take to fix bugs and create new iterations. Drawing the processes involved can help you see where improvements can be made.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world woman-drawing-mind-map-problem-solving-strategies](https://www.betterup.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Blog%20Images/problem%20solving%20strategies/woman-drawing-mind-map-problem-solving-strategies.jpg?width=867&name=woman-drawing-mind-map-problem-solving-strategies.jpg)
6. Use trial-and-error
A trial-and-error approach can be useful when you have several possible solutions and want to test them to see which one works best.
7. Sleep on it
Finding the best solution to a problem is a process. Remember to take breaks and get enough rest . Sometimes, a walk around the block can bring inspiration, but you should sleep on it if possible.
A good night’s sleep helps us find creative solutions to problems. This is because when you sleep, your brain sorts through the day’s events and stores them as memories. This enables you to process your ideas at a subconscious level.
If possible, give yourself a few days to develop and analyze possible solutions. You may find you have greater clarity after sleeping on it. Your mind will also be fresh, so you’ll be able to make better decisions.
8. Get advice from your peers
Getting input from a group of people can help you find solutions you may not have thought of on your own.
For solo entrepreneurs or freelancers, this might look like hiring a coach or mentor or joining a mastermind group.
For leaders , it might be consulting other members of the leadership team or working with a business coach .
It’s important to recognize you might not have all the skills, experience, or knowledge necessary to find a solution alone.
9. Use the Pareto principle
The Pareto principle — also known as the 80/20 rule — can help you identify possible root causes and potential solutions for your problems.
Although it’s not a mathematical law, it’s a principle found throughout many aspects of business and life. For example, 20% of the sales reps in a company might close 80% of the sales.
You may be able to narrow down the causes of your problem by applying the Pareto principle. This can also help you identify the most appropriate solutions.
10. Add successful solutions to your toolkit
Every situation is different, and the same solutions might not always work. But by keeping a record of successful problem-solving strategies, you can build up a solutions toolkit.
These solutions may be applicable to future problems. Even if not, they may save you some of the time and work needed to come up with a new solution.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world three-colleagues-looking-at-computer-problem-solving-strategies](https://www.betterup.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Blog%20Images/problem%20solving%20strategies/three-colleagues-looking-at-computer-problem-solving-strategies.jpg?width=867&name=three-colleagues-looking-at-computer-problem-solving-strategies.jpg)
Improving problem-solving skills is essential for professional development — both yours and your team’s. Here are some of the key skills of effective problem solvers:
- Critical thinking and analytical skills
- Communication skills , including active listening
- Decision-making
- Planning and prioritization
- Emotional intelligence , including empathy and emotional regulation
- Time management
- Data analysis
- Research skills
- Project management
And they see problems as opportunities. Everyone is born with problem-solving skills. But accessing these abilities depends on how we view problems. Effective problem-solvers see problems as opportunities to learn and improve.
Ready to work on your problem-solving abilities? Get started with these seven tips.
1. Build your problem-solving skills
One of the best ways to improve your problem-solving skills is to learn from experts. Consider enrolling in organizational training , shadowing a mentor , or working with a coach .
2. Practice
Practice using your new problem-solving skills by applying them to smaller problems you might encounter in your daily life.
Alternatively, imagine problematic scenarios that might arise at work and use problem-solving strategies to find hypothetical solutions.
3. Don’t try to find a solution right away
Often, the first solution you think of to solve a problem isn’t the most appropriate or effective.
Instead of thinking on the spot, give yourself time and use one or more of the problem-solving strategies above to activate your creative thinking.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world two-colleagues-talking-at-corporate-event-problem-solving-strategies](https://www.betterup.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Blog%20Images/problem%20solving%20strategies/two-colleagues-talking-at-corporate-event-problem-solving-strategies.jpg?width=866&name=two-colleagues-talking-at-corporate-event-problem-solving-strategies.jpg)
4. Ask for feedback
Receiving feedback is always important for learning and growth. Your perception of your problem-solving skills may be different from that of your colleagues. They can provide insights that help you improve.
5. Learn new approaches and methodologies
There are entire books written about problem-solving methodologies if you want to take a deep dive into the subject.
We recommend starting with “ Fixed — How to Perfect the Fine Art of Problem Solving ” by Amy E. Herman.
6. Experiment
Tried-and-tested problem-solving techniques can be useful. However, they don’t teach you how to innovate and develop your own problem-solving approaches.
Sometimes, an unconventional approach can lead to the development of a brilliant new idea or strategy. So don’t be afraid to suggest your most “out there” ideas.
7. Analyze the success of your competitors
Do you have competitors who have already solved the problem you’re facing? Look at what they did, and work backward to solve your own problem.
For example, Netflix started in the 1990s as a DVD mail-rental company. Its main competitor at the time was Blockbuster.
But when streaming became the norm in the early 2000s, both companies faced a crisis. Netflix innovated, unveiling its streaming service in 2007.
If Blockbuster had followed Netflix’s example, it might have survived. Instead, it declared bankruptcy in 2010.
Use problem-solving strategies to uplevel your business
When facing a problem, it’s worth taking the time to find the right solution.
Otherwise, we risk either running away from our problems or headlong into solutions. When we do this, we might miss out on other, better options.
Use the problem-solving strategies outlined above to find innovative solutions to your business’ most perplexing problems.
If you’re ready to take problem-solving to the next level, request a demo with BetterUp . Our expert coaches specialize in helping teams develop and implement strategies that work.
Understand Yourself Better:
Big 5 Personality Test
Elizabeth Perry, ACC
Elizabeth Perry is a Coach Community Manager at BetterUp. She uses strategic engagement strategies to cultivate a learning community across a global network of Coaches through in-person and virtual experiences, technology-enabled platforms, and strategic coaching industry partnerships. With over 3 years of coaching experience and a certification in transformative leadership and life coaching from Sofia University, Elizabeth leverages transpersonal psychology expertise to help coaches and clients gain awareness of their behavioral and thought patterns, discover their purpose and passions, and elevate their potential. She is a lifelong student of psychology, personal growth, and human potential as well as an ICF-certified ACC transpersonal life and leadership Coach.
8 creative solutions to your most challenging problems
5 problem-solving questions to prepare you for your next interview, what are metacognitive skills examples in everyday life, what is lateral thinking 7 techniques to encourage creative ideas, 31 examples of problem solving performance review phrases, learn what process mapping is and how to create one (+ examples), leadership activities that encourage employee engagement, how much do distractions cost 8 effects of lack of focus, can dreams help you solve problems 6 ways to try, the pareto principle: how the 80/20 rule can help you do more with less, thinking outside the box: 8 ways to become a creative problem solver, 3 problem statement examples and steps to write your own, 10 examples of principles that can guide your approach to work, contingency planning: 4 steps to prepare for the unexpected, stay connected with betterup, get our newsletter, event invites, plus product insights and research..
3100 E 5th Street, Suite 350 Austin, TX 78702
- Platform Overview
- Integrations
- Powered by AI
- BetterUp Lead™
- BetterUp Manage™
- BetterUp Care®
- Sales Performance
- Diversity & Inclusion
- Case Studies
- Why BetterUp?
- About Coaching
- Find your Coach
- Career Coaching
- Communication Coaching
- Personal Coaching
- News and Press
- Leadership Team
- Become a BetterUp Coach
- BetterUp Labs
- Center for Purpose & Performance
- Leadership Training
- Business Coaching
- Contact Support
- Contact Sales
- Privacy Policy
- Acceptable Use Policy
- Trust & Security
- Cookie Preferences
How to Use Computational Thinking to Solve Problems Like a Pro
- Post author: Janey Davies, B.A. (Hons)
- Post published: August 16, 2020
- Reading time: 6 mins read
- Post category: Brain Power / Self-Improvement
Can thinking like a computer help us solve our most difficult problems? You might wonder ‘ what is the point of computational thinking? ’ After all, we invented computers to help solve our most difficult problems. Why would we now want to think like them?
Well, there are a few reasons. The first reason is practical. It is not realistic to expect computers to solve every problem. After all, they don’t take into account human emotions or local knowledge.
The second reason is a moral one. Perhaps we shouldn’t rely on computers to solve everyday problems. I mean, who hasn’t seen sci-fi films like Terminator or the Matrix? We can’t allow them to have too much power over us.
But this is not the point of my article. My point is how to use computational thinking to help with everyday problems.
What exactly is computational thinking?
You might think that computational thinking is a very longwinded way of solving problems, but actually, we do it every day. Just think about it.
Computational thinking
Computational thinking is exactly what you imagine it to be. It is a way of thinking like a computer . In fact, we already use it in our everyday lives. When we cook a meal or get ready for work. When we budget for the weekly shop or plan a trip to the coast.
Computational thinking just means using a set process in which to break down a complex problem . By using this set process, you follow the set technique and find a solution.
For example, if you were to cook a meal, you wouldn’t just blindly throw lots of ingredients into a pan and hope for the best. You would consult a recipe book, go out and buy the correct ingredients, weigh them and then, following the instructions – cook them in the correct order.
Or say you were planning a holiday abroad. You would research suitable resorts and hotels. If you have children, you may look at child-friendly locations. You will look at the cost of flights and the times of departure and arrival. You’ll budget your expenditure and arrange for pickups to and from the airport. After carrying out all of the above, you’ll make a decision and book your holiday.
These are both examples of computational thinking. There are four steps in computational thinking:
Four steps in computational thinking
Decomposition.
Taking the problem and breaking it down into smaller components.
Pattern recognition
Looking for patterns within these smaller components.
Abstraction
Focusing on the important details and leaving out irrelevant distractions.
Finding steps to solve the smaller problems which will then lead to a solution for the main problem.
You can use computational thinking in many aspects of your life. However, it is particularly helpful when it comes to solving everyday problems . That’s because it breaks down a complex problem into manageable parts.
For example:
You get in your car one morning and the engine doesn’t start. Obviously, you don’t give up, instead, you try and sort out the problem. So where do you start?
By breaking down the components.
Is it cold outside? Do you need to give the engine some gas? Did you remember to put in the anti-freeze? Is the car in gear? If so put the gear in neutral and try again. Have you run out of petrol? Does the car have oil and water?
Now you can see that beforehand we had one main problem – the broken-down car. Now, we are dividing the car into different sections which are easily managed.
We can examine each section without getting overwhelmed at the scale of the problem. By doing this, we can also look for patterns in each section. Have we experienced this before? For instance, did our car fail to start on a previous occasion because we had left it in gear?
When you have one main problem, it is easy to get distracted by all the tiny little irrelevant details. By breaking it down into bitesize manageable portions, you can keep what is important in mind and discard what is not.
So with our car break-down, we won’t be concerned with things like the condition of the tyres or whether the windscreen wash is topped up. We are solely focused on what is causing the car not to work.
Now that we have broken our major problem into more manageable ones, it has become easier to identify what is wrong. We can now address the problem and find a solution.
So with our broken down car, once we have identified what is wrong we can fix the problem.
Why is computational thinking important?
Being able to think in this way is important for a variety of reasons.
We retain control
First of all, solving problems in a logical and measured way allows a person to remain in control of a situation. When we can analyse and predict what is going to happen, we are likely to learn from our experiences.
We become confident
By solving problems we become confident and learn to challenge ourselves. We acquire skills that boost our self-esteem . Every stage of computational thinking is an opportunity for learning, and, as a result, self-improvement.
We are not overwhelmed
By breaking down a complex problem we learn not to be overwhelmed by a seemingly insurmountable task. Then we start to recognise patterns once we have broken the task down. This comes with experience. Experience also teaches us what to discard and what is important in solving this problem.
All of these steps are vital life lessons that are useful in our everyday lives.
Final thoughts
Computational thinking isn’t really about programming people to think like a computer. It is about teaching people the four fundamental steps to solve our everyday problems . Why not try it next time you are faced with a complex problem and let me know how you get on?
References :
- royalsocietypublishing.org
- www.researchgate.net
Like what you are reading? Subscribe to our newsletter to make sure you don’t miss new thought-provoking articles!
Share this story share this content.
- Opens in a new window Facebook
- Opens in a new window X
- Opens in a new window LinkedIn
- Opens in a new window Reddit
- Opens in a new window Tumblr
This Post Has 2 Comments
Janey, Thank you for another great article. I recently came to the realization I can’t just say I’m gonna clear out the back bedroom, currently collecting all kind of stacks of everything. The reason I can not start this much long overdue and very needed project is I have not a clue as to where to start. Now I am entertaining a plan, I’ll need a hand at least to get started. You inspire me. Carol
Thank you Carol, I think we have the same back bedroom! Let me know how you get on! Thank you for your continued reading and support. It is always appreciated. Janey.
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
10 Everyday uses for Problem Solving Skills
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world](https://kepner-tregoe.com/app/uploads/2021/09/4-3.jpg)
- Problem Solving & Decision Making Real world training delivers real world results. Learn More
Many employers are recognizing the value and placing significant investments in developing the problem solving skills of their employees. While we often think about these skills in the work context, problem solving isn’t just helpful in the workplace. Here are 10 everyday uses for problem solving skills that can you may not have thought about
1. Stuck in traffic and late for work, again
With busy schedules and competing demands for your time, getting where you need to be on time can be a real challenge. When traffic backs up, problem solving skills can help you figure out alternatives to avoid congestion, resolve the immediate situation and develop a solution to avoid encountering the situation in the future.
2. What is that stain on the living room carpet?
Parents, pet owners and spouses face this situation all the time. The living room carpet was clean yesterday but somehow a mysterious stain has appeared and nobody is claiming it. In order to clean it effectively, first you need to figure out what it is. Problem solving can help you track down the culprit, diagnose the cause of the stain and develop an action plan to get your home clean and fresh again.
3. What is that smell coming from my garden shed?
Drawing from past experiences, the seasoned problem solver in you suspects that the source of the peculiar odor likely lurks somewhere within the depths of the shed. Your challenge now lies in uncovering the origin of this scent, managing its effects, and formulating a practical plan to prevent such occurrences in the future.
4. I don’t think the car is supposed to make that thumping noise
As with many problems in the workplace, this may be a situation to bring in problem solving experts in the form of your trusted mechanic. If that isn’t an option, problem solving skills can be helpful to diagnose and assess the impact of the situation to ensure you can get where you need to be.
5. Creating a budget
Tap into your problem-solving prowess as you embark on the journey of budgeting. Begin by determining what expenses to include in your budget, and strategize how to account for unexpected financial surprises. The challenge lies in crafting a comprehensive budget that not only covers your known expenses but also prepares you for the uncertainties that may arise.
6. My daughter has a science project – due tomorrow
Sometimes the challenge isn’t impact, its urgency. Problem solving skills can help you quickly assess the situation and develop an action plan to get that science project done and turned in on time.
7. What should I get my spouse for his/her birthday?
As with many problems, this one may not have a “right answer” or apparent solution. Its time to apply those problem solving skills to evaluate the effects of past decisions combined with current environmental signals and available resources to select the perfect gift to put a smile on your significant other’s face.
8. The office printer suddenly stopped working, and there are important documents that need to be printed urgently.
Uh oh, time to think quickly. There is an urgent situation that must be addressed to get things back to normal, a cause to be identified (what’s causing the printer issue), and an action plan to resolve it. Problem solving skills can help you avoid stress and ensure that your documents are printed on time.
9. I’m torn between two cars! Which one should I choose?
In a world brimming with countless choices, employ decision analysis as your trusty tool to navigate the sea of options. Whether you’re selecting a car (or any other product), the challenge is to methodically identify and evaluate the best choices that align with your unique needs and preferences.
10. What’s for dinner?
Whether you are planning to eat alone, with family or entertaining friends and colleagues, meal planning can be a cause of daily stress. Applying problem solving skills can put the dinner dilemma into perspective and help get the food on the table and keep everyone happy.
Problem Solving skills aren’t just for the workplace – they can be applied in your everyday life. Kepner-Tregoe can help you and your team develop your problem solving skills through a combination of training and consulting with our problem solving experts.
![how is it possible for everyday problem solving skills to be useful in the science world Blog Image 1](https://kepner-tregoe.com/app/uploads/2021/09/tips.jpg)
We are experts in:
For inquiries, details, or a proposal!
Subscribe to the KT Newsletter
![](http://serviteca.online/777/templates/cheerup2/res/banner1.gif)
IMAGES
COMMENTS
A Guide to Using the Scientific Method in Everyday Life. The scientific method —the process used by scientists to understand the natural world—has the merit of investigating natural phenomena in a rigorous manner. Working from hypotheses, scientists draw conclusions based on empirical data. These data are validated on large-scale numbers ...
The scientific method can be used to address any situation or problem where a theory can be developed. Although more often associated with natural sciences, it can also be used to develop theories in social sciences (such as psychology, sociology and linguistics), using both. information is information that can be measured, and tends to focus ...
Problem Solving in STEM. Solving problems is a key component of many science, math, and engineering classes. If a goal of a class is for students to emerge with the ability to solve new kinds of problems or to use new problem-solving techniques, then students need numerous opportunities to develop the skills necessary to approach and answer ...
Thinking Like a Scientist. This book describes how one can use The Scientific Method to solve everyday problems including medical ailments, health issues, money management, traveling, shopping, cooking, household chores, etc. It illustrates how to exploit the information collected from our five senses, how to solve problems when no information ...
Solving real world problems in real time given constraints posed by one's environment are crucial for survival. At the core of this skill is our mental capability to get out of "sticky situations" or impasses, i.e., difficulties that appear unexpectedly as impassable roadblocks to solving the problem at hand.
The scientific method, also known as the hypothetico-deductive method, is a series of steps that can help you accurately describe the things you observe or improve your understanding of them ...
Abstract. Engaging learners in the excitement of science, helping them discover the value of evidence-based reasoning and higher-order cognitive skills, and teaching them to become creative problem solvers have long been goals of science education reformers. But the means to achieve these goals, especially methods to promote creative thinking ...
Balancing disciplinary knowledge and practical reasoning in problem solving is needed for meaningful learning. In STEM problem solving, science subject matter with associated practices often appears distant to learners due to its abstract nature. Consequently, learners experience difficulties making meaningful connections between science and their daily experiences. Applying Dewey's idea of ...
The wide range of cognitive processes in problem sol-ving has received extensive attention. Research on the role of analogy and conceptual metaphor enriches this work with an acknowledgement of the ways in which structure mapping sometimes informs efforts to solve everyday problems.
Graham A. J. Worthy is founder and director of the National Center for Integrated Coastal Research at the University of Central Florida (UCF Coastal) and chairs the university's department of ...
The traditional teaching of science problem solving involves a considerable amount of drill and practice. Research suggests that these practices do not lead to the development of expert-like problem-solving strategies and that there is little correlation between the number of problems solved (exceeding 1,000 problems in one specific study) and the development of a conceptual understanding.
Science is an excellent way to teach these skills because it involves experimentation and discovery. Children can learn problem-solving skills by conducting experiments and observing the results. Science also encourages children to think critically and ask questions. There are many fun science experiments that you can do with your children to ...
Other investigators advocate for critical thinking as a model of intelligence specifically designed for addressing real-world problems. Yes, intelligence (i.e., critical thinking) can be enhanced and used for solving a real-world problem such as COVID-19, which we use as an example of contemporary problems that need a new approach.
Unrealistic, outdated ideas that idealize science can set the public up to distrust scientists and the research process. A philosopher of science describes 3 aspects of how science really gets done.
My approach to making algorithms compelling was focusing on comparisons. I take algorithms and put them in a scene from everyday life, such as matching socks from a pile, putting books on a shelf, remembering things, driving from one point to another, or cutting an onion. These activities can be mapped to one or more fundamental algorithms ...
Teaching the art of problem-solving is crucial for preparing students to thrive in an increasingly complex and interconnected world. Beyond the ability to find solutions, problem-solving fosters critical thinking, creativity, and resilience: qualities essential for academic success and lifelong learning. This article explores the importance of ...
One of the primary benefits of puzzle-solving is the improvement of problem-solving skills. Whether it's a jigsaw puzzle or a mind-boggling riddle, puzzles require individuals to analyze, strategize, and come up with a solution. This process stimulates critical thinking and helps develop logical reasoning abilities.
1. Focus on the Solution - Not the Problem. Neuroscientists have shown that it is difficult for your brain to find solutions if you focus on the problem. A more positive approach is to acknowledge the problem and then switch to seeking possible solutions. 2.
Problem-solving involves utilizing critical thinking based on knowledge and information from your collective experiences to identify, analyze, and solve complex problems. Mathematics provides a systematic and logical framework for problem-solving and critical thinking. The study of math helps to develop analytical skills, logical reasoning, and ...
2. Break the problem down. Identifying the problem allows you to see which steps need to be taken to solve it. First, break the problem down into achievable blocks. Then, use strategic planning to set a time frame in which to solve the problem and establish a timeline for the completion of each stage. 3.
Computational thinking. Computational thinking is exactly what you imagine it to be. It is a way of thinking like a computer. In fact, we already use it in our everyday lives. When we cook a meal or get ready for work. When we budget for the weekly shop or plan a trip to the coast. Computational thinking just means using a set process in which ...
Here are four ways to improve your problem-solving skills: 1. Learn how to identify the problem. On tests, a significant amount of time is wasted when a student is unsure what the problem is about. Occasionally, the source of an incorrect answer is rooted not in misinformation, but rather in misunderstanding.
Problem solving therapy is a form of cognitive-behavioral therapy that has been shown to be especially useful in the treatment of such disorders as depression and anxiety (D'Zurilla and Nezu, 1999).The premise of problem solving therapy is that individuals can be instructed in problem solving skills as a method of coping with stress and emotional distress.
Here are 10 everyday uses for problem solving skills that can you may not have thought about. 1. Stuck in traffic and late for work, again. With busy schedules and competing demands for your time, getting where you need to be on time can be a real challenge. When traffic backs up, problem solving skills can help you figure out alternatives to ...