13.6 Structured And Ill-Structured Problem Solving

Problem solving is a cognitive skill and needs to be built up, starting with a solid foundation and then through deliberate practice.

There are not just two types of problems to deal with; the structured and the ill-structured. There is a huge grey zone between the two. Something can be 100% structured, 90% structured, 80%, 70%, and so forth. Cognitive learning theory suggests that someone should start with 100% structured, develop sufficient skill and expertise at that level and then progressively push their comfort zone with increasing uncertainty and ambiguity. It is not wise to start on an expert, Olympic grade, downhill ski run the first time you strap on the skis. Same logic applies to any skill, and especially to cognitive skills.

Think of children's rides at an amusement park. They might have some influence in how their own ride or activity is proceeding and decisions to make, but it is on a controlled and supervised ride. It is not like doing the same activity out in the neighborhood or on the street by themselves. You need to build the safe and managed amusement park ride for them. If you are not doing this, you are guessing and relying to ad hoc processes for the problem solving and this is not the professional way to address the learning. And, yes. We understand how much time and effort it takes to learn how to teach problem solving and then to execute it like an amusement park ride. Been there. Done that. But, it is worth it. You have to design the rides that proceed from the young child to the more mature individual; in the context of decision making!

It is also wrong to assume or expect everyone to be able to handle the extreme cases of ill-structure and uncertainty. Not everyone has to; in any field. Not everyone can. It is possible to teach and learn recipe style creativity, innovation, and problem solving. There is no evidence that you can teach or actually learn how to think at the extreme level of inventors and disruptive creativity. Expecting individuals to develop ill-structured problem solving skills beyond recipe and controlled scope situations is both unfair to the students and unwise. It puts unnecessary pressure and expectations on the students if they they that they are lesser or 'not as good' in an activity that cannot actually be learned.

There is a note on general problem solving concepts. The note you are reading is about how to progress and transtion from structured to ill-structured problem solving.

General thoughts...

• When a student is first entering a higher-education setting, making assumptions about what the students can and cannot do is ill-advised. Simple exercises at the start of term can help you understand what each student can do, their starting point, as well as the class profile. These are important things to know if you are going to attempt ill-structured, open-ended problems.
• The first simple exercise should be structured and a second exercise can have a controlled zone of 'freedom of choice' in the problem solving. You need the two exercises to establish a suitable baseline. From these, you can tune the remaining of the term; plotting out a series of activities suitable for the students' starting point. Not what you want them, or wish them to be, but what they are.
• It is important to have multiple, scaffolding exercises where the uncertainty and freedom of choice increases. Remember, students should struggle with what you want them to struggle with and not with anything else. If the struggling is not related to a course learning outcome, fix it. The scaffolding implies that the students are not learning two or more things at the same time; you give the chance to learn one thing, develop some experience and confidence with it, and then use this base for the next activity.
• Sufficient timing and resources are necessary to run any problem solving activity if attempted live; and the helpers, assistants should have attempted the activity themselves before the event. This is extremely important for open-ended activities. The helpers also need to be taught how to help students deal with uncertainty and how to move forward; do not assume that TAs and other instructors know how to do this.
• If the activity is an assignment or project, timely feedback is of utmost importance. We try to scan submissions overnight and have a first debrief the next class session; while the students still have memory of what they did and how they did it. A fuller debrief comes with the detailed rubrics or marking that address both the process and deliverable. This practice also assumes that the TAs and/or instructor have the time and skill to do this quick feedback. It should not be 'next week' or in a few weeks. The feedback session also needs an explicit discussion about what to do next time. They need to be taught how to think it through!
• Initially, the focus should be on the process, starting with understanding the problem or issues as presented. Too often, the students will just jump ahead with solutions and dumbass assumptions before understanding what the problem is, what the assignment or activity is about.

• Throughout any problem solving assessment or activity, it is important to provide feedback on how the problem could have been parsed, understood, and the process taken to arrive at a solution demonstrating reasonable judgment.
• There should be a submitted reflection on each problem solving activity; asking what the students 'learned' from the activity, what they did well, what they could have done better, and what they would do in a future situation. This is part of the deliberate practice strategy and is 100% necessary for cognitive skill development.
• Except at the most senior terms, it is important to have problems that you can speak to the whole class about. If everyone has 100% freedom, it is not possible to do general debriefings about process, have a comparative baseline, or probably provide high quality feedback on each assessment. You would also not know what the class is actually capable of, as an 'average'. You can have controlled uncertainty and degrees of freedom as noted above, but 'chose anything you want' is not well thought through from a learning, feedback, and assessment perspective. Not at all.
• Assessments and grading should be weighted on the how and the problem solving process and not on the outcome. We are repeating ourselves. We know that. It is an important point. The grading should also look for lessons learned and improvements at each step along the way. Marks are given for listening to advice and using it. Marks are given for not making the same mistake twice.
• Do not assume that students know how to pick a topic or an option. They do not understand that they should be picking a topic or making a decision that best demonstrates their mastery in the subject material. They think it is about the actual topic they chose, not the lessons that you have given them about how to approach such topics or issues. They need to be told how to make decisions.

Further reading

• Basadur, M., Ellspermann, S.J., and G.W. Evans (1994). A New Methodology for Formulating Ill-structured Problems, Omega. In/. J. Mgmt S6. 22. 6, pp. 627-645.