Underlying theory or pedagogy

Little classroom teaching is devoted to solving problems for which there are no definite answers. More typical of instruction is the 2+2 = 4 philosophy which encourages 'rote memorisation' rather than critical thinking. Most problems of the real world, however, have any number of possible solutions that are dependent upon available information and the individuals taking part. This activity involves trainees in the experiences of solving problems that have a real-world significance beyond the school or training situation. It affords a connection with the theory that underlies the approach adopted by KeyNet (i.e. constructivist pedagogy), in that it contains academic challenges that provide a focus for knowledge development and real leaf scenarios that cast trainees in roles they may actually assume or have assumed in real life.

 

Training Strategy

Using badly-structured problems, problems that have not one correct solution, is a teaching strategy used to promote critical thinking and problem solving within the context of real world applications. By thinking through ill-structured problems, trainees are able to expand and refine their knowledge through self-directed searches for information, active discussion with others, analysis of conflicting ideas and appeals, and decision making.

 

Evaluation criteria

The 'performance checklist' included at the end of this activity will be used for trainee assessment. Post a copy of this checklist in the classroom for trainees to use as a guide to your expectations.

 

Learning Activity Scenario

The local education committee is interested in offering school courses over the internet. Students would be able to take these courses without attending school, accessing the information from their home computers and communicating with their teachers and other classmates through e-mail;. Due to the fact that not all students have access to home computers (although they are available in the library), and because students would not need to be physically present in class, the suggestion is an issue. The parties affected by this decision would be students, parents, school faculty or tutors, and the business community. Your company has been asked to investigate the issue and come up with a recommendation to present to the local education committee.

 

Operational Steps

STEP 1

Have trainees identify a hypothesis for problem solution.

Brainstorming can be used as a strategy for compiling a list of issues relative to the problem.

 

STEP 2

Identify the roles of problem solving groups. Explain that there will be four teams of investigations to prove or disprove the hypothesis, with each group representing one of the four types of 'stake-holders-people' from business and industry, school faculty, school students and parents. One member of each team should be chosen by the team members as the panellist who will represent them at the public forum to be held in 2 weeks at the education committee meeting.

Encourage trainee self-selection of internet user roles based on the focus of their interest.

 

STEP 3

Describe each team's responsibility, which is to gather information in support or rejection of the hypothesis. Each panellist's responsibility is to present her/his team's rationale for or against censorship of internet usage in the school or training area.

Engage in 'scaffolding' by helping trainees to connect their responsibilities to various methods of application. For example, use questioning to help them clarify their roles and ways to perform them, letting their responses direct the way to offer leadership.

 

STEP 4

Initiate the research part of the investigation by guiding the four groups to appropriate resources, including the internet. Additionally, provide the teams with background information on censorship and the student's right to know.

Provide primary sources, along with manipulative, interactive and physical materials to encourage enquiry.

 

STEP 5

Brainstorm with trainees other methods for obtaining information, such as interviewing community members, conducting surveys and personally soliciting opinions of parents and students.

Guide trainees in ways to structure questions to use in interviews. Circulate among and coach trainees at they attempt to follow your model.

 

STEP 6

Engage trainees in critical thinking and reasoning. Have team members work together to identify the facts and values that surround the problem and develop criteria to evaluate the appropriateness of information available on the internet.

Explain that because social issues are often the basis for ill-structured problems, trainees should give special attention to values-ethical, economic, moral, legal, environmental, health and safety-related values when devising problem solutions. Ask open-ended questions such as 'What is important to the students, parents, schools and community?' 'What ethical issues are involved in the decisions?'

 

STEP 7

Help problem solution by having team members work together to identify possible solutions to the problem and prepare a rationale supporting or rejecting the censorship of internet usage. Prompt trainees to relate the value principles they used to guide their decisions and offer facts to support those principles.

Ask leading questions such as 'What information is reliable?' 'What are some possible options to the issue of internet courses?' 'What will happen if . . . (pros and cons)?'

 

STEP 8

Direct trainees to make a decision based on the consensus of the four groups.

Monitor the exchange of information and discussions among trainees and guide trainees toward conflict resolution if necessary.

 

Reflective Practices

Have trainees discuss the importance of various perspectives on internet courses obtained through their research. Ask them to identify how the omission of one of those perspectives might alter the decision they made.

Have trainees identify how values (medical, academic, family) influence decisions about which solutions to ill-structured problems are the "best" ones. Ask them to offer examples of how bias is reflected in the way data are interpreted.

Engage trainees in discussion of how each type of information is important to consider in solving an ill-structure problem.

 

Evaluation

Involve trainees in debriefings about the team activity:

"What was most difficult for you in the team activity?"
"What was one of the most positive things to come from your team interactions?"

Have teams assess their own process of problem solving by responding to the following questions:

 

Performance Checklist

Part 1: To what extent were these guidelines for team interactions followed?

Item	Always	Sometimes	Rarely	Never
The specifics of the problem were clearly identified by the team
Sufficient information was gathered for review
Several perspectives to the problem were considered by the team
The pros and cons of each recommendation were presented
The solution was unanimously selected

 

Part 2: Identify the extend to which the following practices were evident in your team interactions:

Item	Always	Sometimes	Rarely	Never
Demonstration of good listening skills
Free submission of ideas for group consideration
Demonstration of respect for the opinions of others
Active consideration given to all suggestions
Negotiation with others to reach team agreement

 

 

back | top | next