From the moment someone awakes each day, they are constantly solving problems. To stay in bed or not? What to have for breakfast? What order to do things in? When to leave? How to toast the bread? In some cases, the problem has been solved before, but the problem keeps appearing and the pre-made solution is retrieved (e.g., every morning, the person might be hungry, what is the person going to do about it?). Usually, the common situations a person experiences during the day are not voiced in problem solving terminology, nor consciously thought of as ‘problems’ to solve. The person is hungry and just goes to the fridge and grabs something to eat.

Most of the problem solving a person does during their life is not systematic or structured. It is not consciously done, reflected upon, or is deliberately practiced. It is not formally assessed and the actual problem-solving process used does not change over time. For example, do you still do your morning routine the same way you have for years?

We categorize this type of daily problem solving as being at the amateur level and most people do it well enough to survive day to day, week to week, year to year. They get the groceries, get to work, plan vacations, get the kids to the sitters, etc. Not everyone does this with the same level of quality of course, and there are those who struggle with the simplest of tasks; those who just do not have their proverbial crap together. There are those whose problem solving is quite disastrous. There are oopsies and there are ‘it seemed like a good idea at the time’, ‘I did not think that through’ reflections.

Unfortunately, amateur problem solving is not good enough when you are a professional problem solver; which is what a student is during the academic journey and then upon graduation. Ad hoc and possibly ‘good enuf’ is not good enuf. A professional 'whatever' is supposed to be a better problem solver than someone from the general public. They are expected to create effective and efficient solutions in an effective and efficient way. That is how jobs are done.

Problem solving is a cognitive skill and is pervasive. Everyone is constantly trying to figure out what to do, how to do it, why to do it, when to do it, where it should be done, and who might do it. Some problems and tasks will take minutes, and others may take weeks or months to crack. If a 'trained' individual wants to be better than someone off the street, the individual will need to consciously think about their problem-solving skills and methods. They will need to be taught problem-solving and they will need to deliberately practice problem solving throughout their post-secondary education.

Suggestions…

• Slow it down and take it from the top. Do not assume that the students can even read or comprehend. So, focus on the first challenge: understanding the problem. Comprehension is necessary before you can apply knowledge, analyze the problem, synthesize a solution, and evaluate it. John Dewey once noted that a problem well defined is a problem half solved. Think three times, cut once. This is how we introduce problem-solving to junior students:
• First, try to take it all in: the context, the situation, the various moving parts, people, system and understand at a high level. One trick is to imagine explaining the situation to a three or four-year old. This is like seeing the mountains and water and taking in the scene, wallowing in the majesty of the view. Squint, blur the vision and see the big picture. Caution: do not over-do the analysis to the point of paralysis.

• Second, you try to identify and isolate the various components; what they are, how they relate to each other, what value does each bring, what are the issues with each. You understand what is core to the problem, and what is superficial or irrelevant. This is like looking at the mountains and water, but not seeing it as a whole; you are seeing the trees in the forest, not comprehending it as a forest. You do not see the mountains and water as one. In this phase, you can create simple visual models or sketches of what is ‘happening’ (how are things connected, what does the situation look like from start to end. Try a dull sketch in sand with a blunt stick.
• Third, and this is the part that is hard to explain, if you understand it well, you will get to the point of seeing the mountains and water as one again. This is the aha, eureka, OMG moment of understanding the situation, when it all comes together. Summarize the zen: what makes it what it is and no more.
• Allow for 10-12 problem-solving exercises through the term. Starting simple with many supports and then incrementally increasing the problem-solving challenge. If you want them to learn problem-solving, you have to focus on problem-solving and not distract them with other learning outcomes!
• Explicitly discuss how the students solve problems and include reflection and problem-solving problems on the midterms and final.
• On rubrics, use equal marks for the ‘how’ as well as the ‘what’. Design ways that will expose and illustrate the student’s ability.

Co-dependencies & The Necessary and Hopefully Sufficient

• The instructor needs to make the students aware of possible biases and issues when they think (Kahneman et al. 2021, Kahneman 2011).
• Try to avoid teaching something 100% new at the same time as teaching problem-solving; especially at the junior levels. The ‘how’ will be lost in the ‘what’.
• As the instructor, you will need to close the circle for the students if they are to understand the value of professional problem-solving versus thrashing about. You have to provide experiences that cover the whole process.
• The following is what we often work through with the students in a very systematic fashion with multiple exercises, constructive failure situations, repetition, debriefings and reflections. It is important to break it down for the students and to actually teach them how to break it down and to think. For convenience, we will share some of the notes we use that introduce the teaching cycle:

• Take time to understand the background and the problem context. You need to know the terms, components, underlying requirements, and possibly previous engineering decisions. Do some intel!
• In doing this, you will usually get a better understanding of what the REAL problem is. Not the symptoms someone might be confused by. You will usually get a better understanding of what questions should be asked, and not necessarily what was asked. Know the REAL problem. Root cause analysis: ask WHY five times!
• Solving a problem implies that you eventually get to a solution. In any field, you will learn lots of theories, concepts, methods, and tools. These are what you will use to deal with the specifics after you understand what you have to do. There will likely be multiple solutions as well, each with pros and cons. Know and understand the implications and limitations of using various tools, not just how to use them.
• You need to know the assumptions and conditions that the method relies on. You need to know when to use a tool (method, concept, or theory) and when not to. Someone might ask you to use a method they have heard about, not really understanding the method and you need to deal with this. You need to understand the weaknesses and strengths of the methods, else you can create a bigger problem. Choose the right tool based on the actual context.
• You need to understand enough about the problem to know how well the situation fits the tool and sometimes you can say ‘x is kinda similar to y, and z can work on y, so it is reasonable to try z on x’. If you do this, you have to be careful and let people know you are possibly pushing a tool, possibly creating a risk. State the assumptions and risks.

Further reading

• Gause, D.C. and G.M. Weinberg (1990). Are Your Lights On? Dorset Publishing, NY.
• Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow, Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• Kahneman, D., Sibony, O. and C.R. Sunstein (2021) Noise: A Flaw in Human Judgment, Little, Brown, Spark.