problem solving approach to education

Center for Teaching Innovation

Resource library.

Establishing Community Agreements and Classroom Norms
Sample group work rubric
Problem-Based Learning Clearinghouse of Activities, University of Delaware

Problem-Based Learning

Problem-based learning  (PBL) is a student-centered approach in which students learn about a subject by working in groups to solve an open-ended problem. This problem is what drives the motivation and the learning. 

Why Use Problem-Based Learning?

Nilson (2010) lists the following learning outcomes that are associated with PBL. A well-designed PBL project provides students with the opportunity to develop skills related to:

Working in teams.
Managing projects and holding leadership roles.
Oral and written communication.
Self-awareness and evaluation of group processes.
Working independently.
Critical thinking and analysis.
Explaining concepts.
Self-directed learning.
Applying course content to real-world examples.
Researching and information literacy.
Problem solving across disciplines.

Considerations for Using Problem-Based Learning

Rather than teaching relevant material and subsequently having students apply the knowledge to solve problems, the problem is presented first. PBL assignments can be short, or they can be more involved and take a whole semester. PBL is often group-oriented, so it is beneficial to set aside classroom time to prepare students to  work in groups  and to allow them to engage in their PBL project.

Students generally must:

Examine and define the problem.
Explore what they already know about underlying issues related to it.
Determine what they need to learn and where they can acquire the information and tools necessary to solve the problem.
Evaluate possible ways to solve the problem.
Solve the problem.
Report on their findings.

Getting Started with Problem-Based Learning

Articulate the learning outcomes of the project. What do you want students to know or be able to do as a result of participating in the assignment?
Create the problem. Ideally, this will be a real-world situation that resembles something students may encounter in their future careers or lives. Cases are often the basis of PBL activities. Previously developed PBL activities can be found online through the University of Delaware’s PBL Clearinghouse of Activities .
Establish ground rules at the beginning to prepare students to work effectively in groups.
Introduce students to group processes and do some warm up exercises to allow them to practice assessing both their own work and that of their peers.
Consider having students take on different roles or divide up the work up amongst themselves. Alternatively, the project might require students to assume various perspectives, such as those of government officials, local business owners, etc.
Establish how you will evaluate and assess the assignment. Consider making the self and peer assessments a part of the assignment grade.

Nilson, L. B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors (2nd ed.).  San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 

Why Every Educator Needs to Teach Problem-Solving Skills

Strong problem-solving skills will help students be more resilient and will increase their academic and career success .

Want to learn more about how to measure and teach students’ higher-order skills, including problem solving, critical thinking, and written communication?

Problem-solving skills are essential in school, careers, and life.

Problem-solving skills are important for every student to master. They help individuals navigate everyday life and find solutions to complex issues and challenges. These skills are especially valuable in the workplace, where employees are often required to solve problems and make decisions quickly and effectively.

Problem-solving skills are also needed for students’ personal growth and development because they help individuals overcome obstacles and achieve their goals. By developing strong problem-solving skills, students can improve their overall quality of life and become more successful in their personal and professional endeavors.

Problem-Solving Skills Help Students…

develop resilience.

Problem-solving skills are an integral part of resilience and the ability to persevere through challenges and adversity. To effectively work through and solve a problem, students must be able to think critically and creatively. Critical and creative thinking help students approach a problem objectively, analyze its components, and determine different ways to go about finding a solution.

This process in turn helps students build self-efficacy . When students are able to analyze and solve a problem, this increases their confidence, and they begin to realize the power they have to advocate for themselves and make meaningful change.

When students gain confidence in their ability to work through problems and attain their goals, they also begin to build a growth mindset . According to leading resilience researcher, Carol Dweck, “in a growth mindset, people believe that their most basic abilities can be developed through dedication and hard work—brains and talent are just the starting point. This view creates a love of learning and a resilience that is essential for great accomplishment.”

Set and Achieve Goals

Students who possess strong problem-solving skills are better equipped to set and achieve their goals. By learning how to identify problems, think critically, and develop solutions, students can become more self-sufficient and confident in their ability to achieve their goals. Additionally, problem-solving skills are used in virtually all fields, disciplines, and career paths, which makes them important for everyone. Building strong problem-solving skills will help students enhance their academic and career performance and become more competitive as they begin to seek full-time employment after graduation or pursue additional education and training.

Resolve Conflicts

In addition to increased social and emotional skills like self-efficacy and goal-setting, problem-solving skills teach students how to cooperate with others and work through disagreements and conflicts. Problem-solving promotes “thinking outside the box” and approaching a conflict by searching for different solutions. This is a very different (and more effective!) method than a more stagnant approach that focuses on placing blame or getting stuck on elements of a situation that can’t be changed.

While it’s natural to get frustrated or feel stuck when working through a conflict, students with strong problem-solving skills will be able to work through these obstacles, think more rationally, and address the situation with a more solution-oriented approach. These skills will be valuable for students in school, their careers, and throughout their lives.

Achieve Success

We are all faced with problems every day. Problems arise in our personal lives, in school and in our jobs, and in our interactions with others. Employers especially are looking for candidates with strong problem-solving skills. In today’s job market, most jobs require the ability to analyze and effectively resolve complex issues. Students with strong problem-solving skills will stand out from other applicants and will have a more desirable skill set.

In a recent opinion piece published by The Hechinger Report , Virgel Hammonds, Chief Learning Officer at KnowledgeWorks, stated “Our world presents increasingly complex challenges. Education must adapt so that it nurtures problem solvers and critical thinkers.” Yet, the “traditional K–12 education system leaves little room for students to engage in real-world problem-solving scenarios.” This is the reason that a growing number of K–12 school districts and higher education institutions are transforming their instructional approach to personalized and competency-based learning, which encourage students to make decisions, problem solve and think critically as they take ownership of and direct their educational journey.

Problem-Solving Skills Can Be Measured and Taught

Research shows that problem-solving skills can be measured and taught. One effective method is through performance-based assessments which require students to demonstrate or apply their knowledge and higher-order skills to create a response or product or do a task.

What Are Performance-Based Assessments?

With the No Child Left Behind Act (2002), the use of standardized testing became the primary way to measure student learning in the U.S. The legislative requirements of this act shifted the emphasis to standardized testing, and this led to a decline in nontraditional testing methods .

But many educators, policy makers, and parents have concerns with standardized tests. Some of the top issues include that they don’t provide feedback on how students can perform better, they don’t value creativity, they are not representative of diverse populations, and they can be disadvantageous to lower-income students.

While standardized tests are still the norm, U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona is encouraging states and districts to move away from traditional multiple choice and short response tests and instead use performance-based assessment, competency-based assessments, and other more authentic methods of measuring students abilities and skills rather than rote learning.

Performance-based assessments measure whether students can apply the skills and knowledge learned from a unit of study. Typically, a performance task challenges students to use their higher-order skills to complete a project or process. Tasks can range from an essay to a complex proposal or design.

Preview a Performance-Based Assessment

Want a closer look at how performance-based assessments work? Preview CAE’s K–12 and Higher Education assessments and see how CAE’s tools help students develop critical thinking, problem-solving, and written communication skills.

Performance-Based Assessments Help Students Build and Practice Problem-Solving Skills

In addition to effectively measuring students’ higher-order skills, including their problem-solving skills, performance-based assessments can help students practice and build these skills. Through the assessment process, students are given opportunities to practically apply their knowledge in real-world situations. By demonstrating their understanding of a topic, students are required to put what they’ve learned into practice through activities such as presentations, experiments, and simulations.

This type of problem-solving assessment tool requires students to analyze information and choose how to approach the presented problems. This process enhances their critical thinking skills and creativity, as well as their problem-solving skills. Unlike traditional assessments based on memorization or reciting facts, performance-based assessments focus on the students’ decisions and solutions, and through these tasks students learn to bridge the gap between theory and practice.

Performance-based assessments like CAE’s College and Career Readiness Assessment (CRA+) and Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+) provide students with in-depth reports that show them which higher-order skills they are strongest in and which they should continue to develop. This feedback helps students and their teachers plan instruction and supports to deepen their learning and improve their mastery of critical skills.

Explore CAE’s Problem-Solving Assessments

CAE offers performance-based assessments that measure student proficiency in higher-order skills including problem solving, critical thinking, and written communication.

College and Career Readiness Assessment (CCRA+) for secondary education and
Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA+) for higher education.

Our solution also includes instructional materials, practice models, and professional development.

We can help you create a program to build students’ problem-solving skills that includes:

Measuring students’ problem-solving skills through a performance-based assessment
Using the problem-solving assessment data to inform instruction and tailor interventions
Teaching students problem-solving skills and providing practice opportunities in real-life scenarios
Supporting educators with quality professional development

Get started with our problem-solving assessment tools to measure and build students’ problem-solving skills today! These skills will be invaluable to students now and in the future.

Ready to Get Started?

Learn more about cae’s suite of products and let’s get started measuring and teaching students important higher-order skills like problem solving..

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
My Account Login
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Review Article
Open access
Published: 11 January 2023

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

Enwei Xu ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6424-8169 1 ,
Wei Wang 1 &
Qingxia Wang 1

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 10 , Article number: 16 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

15k Accesses

13 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

Science, technology and society

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education as well as a key competence for learners in the 21st century. However, the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking remains uncertain. This current research presents the major findings of a meta-analysis of 36 pieces of the literature revealed in worldwide educational periodicals during the 21st century to identify the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and to determine, based on evidence, whether and to what extent collaborative problem solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]); (2) in respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem solving can significantly and successfully enhance students’ attitudinal tendencies (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI[0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI[0.58, 0.82]); and (3) the teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01) all have an impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. On the basis of these results, recommendations are made for further study and instruction to better support students’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Impact of artificial intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness and safety in education

The development of human causal learning and reasoning

Sleep quality, duration, and consistency are associated with better academic performance in college students

Introduction.

Although critical thinking has a long history in research, the concept of critical thinking, which is regarded as an essential competence for learners in the 21st century, has recently attracted more attention from researchers and teaching practitioners (National Research Council, 2012 ). Critical thinking should be the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education (Peng and Deng, 2017 ) because students with critical thinking can not only understand the meaning of knowledge but also effectively solve practical problems in real life even after knowledge is forgotten (Kek and Huijser, 2011 ). The definition of critical thinking is not universal (Ennis, 1989 ; Castle, 2009 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). In general, the definition of critical thinking is a self-aware and self-regulated thought process (Facione, 1990 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). It refers to the cognitive skills needed to interpret, analyze, synthesize, reason, and evaluate information as well as the attitudinal tendency to apply these abilities (Halpern, 2001 ). The view that critical thinking can be taught and learned through curriculum teaching has been widely supported by many researchers (e.g., Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), leading to educators’ efforts to foster it among students. In the field of teaching practice, there are three types of courses for teaching critical thinking (Ennis, 1989 ). The first is an independent curriculum in which critical thinking is taught and cultivated without involving the knowledge of specific disciplines; the second is an integrated curriculum in which critical thinking is integrated into the teaching of other disciplines as a clear teaching goal; and the third is a mixed curriculum in which critical thinking is taught in parallel to the teaching of other disciplines for mixed teaching training. Furthermore, numerous measuring tools have been developed by researchers and educators to measure critical thinking in the context of teaching practice. These include standardized measurement tools, such as WGCTA, CCTST, CCTT, and CCTDI, which have been verified by repeated experiments and are considered effective and reliable by international scholars (Facione and Facione, 1992 ). In short, descriptions of critical thinking, including its two dimensions of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, different types of teaching courses, and standardized measurement tools provide a complex normative framework for understanding, teaching, and evaluating critical thinking.

Cultivating critical thinking in curriculum teaching can start with a problem, and one of the most popular critical thinking instructional approaches is problem-based learning (Liu et al., 2020 ). Duch et al. ( 2001 ) noted that problem-based learning in group collaboration is progressive active learning, which can improve students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Collaborative problem-solving is the organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning, which takes learners as the center of the learning process and uses problems with poor structure in real-world situations as the starting point for the learning process (Liang et al., 2017 ). Students learn the knowledge needed to solve problems in a collaborative group, reach a consensus on problems in the field, and form solutions through social cooperation methods, such as dialogue, interpretation, questioning, debate, negotiation, and reflection, thus promoting the development of learners’ domain knowledge and critical thinking (Cindy, 2004 ; Liang et al., 2017 ).

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely used in the teaching practice of critical thinking, and several studies have attempted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature on critical thinking from various perspectives. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking. Therefore, the best approach for developing and enhancing critical thinking throughout collaborative problem-solving is to examine how to implement critical thinking instruction; however, this issue is still unexplored, which means that many teachers are incapable of better instructing critical thinking (Leng and Lu, 2020 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, Huber ( 2016 ) provided the meta-analysis findings of 71 publications on gaining critical thinking over various time frames in college with the aim of determining whether critical thinking was truly teachable. These authors found that learners significantly improve their critical thinking while in college and that critical thinking differs with factors such as teaching strategies, intervention duration, subject area, and teaching type. The usefulness of collaborative problem-solving in fostering students’ critical thinking, however, was not determined by this study, nor did it reveal whether there existed significant variations among the different elements. A meta-analysis of 31 pieces of educational literature was conducted by Liu et al. ( 2020 ) to assess the impact of problem-solving on college students’ critical thinking. These authors found that problem-solving could promote the development of critical thinking among college students and proposed establishing a reasonable group structure for problem-solving in a follow-up study to improve students’ critical thinking. Additionally, previous empirical studies have reached inconclusive and even contradictory conclusions about whether and to what extent collaborative problem-solving increases or decreases critical thinking levels. As an illustration, Yang et al. ( 2008 ) carried out an experiment on the integrated curriculum teaching of college students based on a web bulletin board with the goal of fostering participants’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These authors’ research revealed that through sharing, debating, examining, and reflecting on various experiences and ideas, collaborative problem-solving can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking in real-life problem situations. In contrast, collaborative problem-solving had a positive impact on learners’ interaction and could improve learning interest and motivation but could not significantly improve students’ critical thinking when compared to traditional classroom teaching, according to research by Naber and Wyatt ( 2014 ) and Sendag and Odabasi ( 2009 ) on undergraduate and high school students, respectively.

The above studies show that there is inconsistency regarding the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a thorough and trustworthy review to detect and decide whether and to what degree collaborative problem-solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. Meta-analysis is a quantitative analysis approach that is utilized to examine quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. This approach characterizes the effectiveness of its impact by averaging the effect sizes of numerous qualitative studies in an effort to reduce the uncertainty brought on by independent research and produce more conclusive findings (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ).

This paper used a meta-analytic approach and carried out a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking in order to make a contribution to both research and practice. The following research questions were addressed by this meta-analysis:

What is the overall effect size of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills)?

How are the disparities between the study conclusions impacted by various moderating variables if the impacts of various experimental designs in the included studies are heterogeneous?

This research followed the strict procedures (e.g., database searching, identification, screening, eligibility, merging, duplicate removal, and analysis of included studies) of Cooper’s ( 2010 ) proposed meta-analysis approach for examining quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. The relevant empirical research that appeared in worldwide educational periodicals within the 21st century was subjected to this meta-analysis using Rev-Man 5.4. The consistency of the data extracted separately by two researchers was tested using Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and a publication bias test and a heterogeneity test were run on the sample data to ascertain the quality of this meta-analysis.

Data sources and search strategies

There were three stages to the data collection process for this meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 1 , which shows the number of articles included and eliminated during the selection process based on the statement and study eligibility criteria.

This flowchart shows the number of records identified, included and excluded in the article.

First, the databases used to systematically search for relevant articles were the journal papers of the Web of Science Core Collection and the Chinese Core source journal, as well as the Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) source journal papers included in CNKI. These databases were selected because they are credible platforms that are sources of scholarly and peer-reviewed information with advanced search tools and contain literature relevant to the subject of our topic from reliable researchers and experts. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the Web of Science was “TS = (((“critical thinking” or “ct” and “pretest” or “posttest”) or (“critical thinking” or “ct” and “control group” or “quasi experiment” or “experiment”)) and (“collaboration” or “collaborative learning” or “CSCL”) and (“problem solving” or “problem-based learning” or “PBL”))”. The research area was “Education Educational Research”, and the search period was “January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2021”. A total of 412 papers were obtained. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the CNKI was “SU = (‘critical thinking’*‘collaboration’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘collaborative learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘CSCL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem solving’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem-based learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘PBL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem oriented’) AND FT = (‘experiment’ + ‘quasi experiment’ + ‘pretest’ + ‘posttest’ + ‘empirical study’)” (translated into Chinese when searching). A total of 56 studies were found throughout the search period of “January 2000 to December 2021”. From the databases, all duplicates and retractions were eliminated before exporting the references into Endnote, a program for managing bibliographic references. In all, 466 studies were found.

Second, the studies that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were chosen by two researchers after they had reviewed the abstracts and titles of the gathered articles, yielding a total of 126 studies.

Third, two researchers thoroughly reviewed each included article’s whole text in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meanwhile, a snowball search was performed using the references and citations of the included articles to ensure complete coverage of the articles. Ultimately, 36 articles were kept.

Two researchers worked together to carry out this entire process, and a consensus rate of almost 94.7% was reached after discussion and negotiation to clarify any emerging differences.

Eligibility criteria

Since not all the retrieved studies matched the criteria for this meta-analysis, eligibility criteria for both inclusion and exclusion were developed as follows:

The publication language of the included studies was limited to English and Chinese, and the full text could be obtained. Articles that did not meet the publication language and articles not published between 2000 and 2021 were excluded.

The research design of the included studies must be empirical and quantitative studies that can assess the effect of collaborative problem-solving on the development of critical thinking. Articles that could not identify the causal mechanisms by which collaborative problem-solving affects critical thinking, such as review articles and theoretical articles, were excluded.

The research method of the included studies must feature a randomized control experiment or a quasi-experiment, or a natural experiment, which have a higher degree of internal validity with strong experimental designs and can all plausibly provide evidence that critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving are causally related. Articles with non-experimental research methods, such as purely correlational or observational studies, were excluded.

The participants of the included studies were only students in school, including K-12 students and college students. Articles in which the participants were non-school students, such as social workers or adult learners, were excluded.

The research results of the included studies must mention definite signs that may be utilized to gauge critical thinking’s impact (e.g., sample size, mean value, or standard deviation). Articles that lacked specific measurement indicators for critical thinking and could not calculate the effect size were excluded.

Data coding design

In order to perform a meta-analysis, it is necessary to collect the most important information from the articles, codify that information’s properties, and convert descriptive data into quantitative data. Therefore, this study designed a data coding template (see Table 1 ). Ultimately, 16 coding fields were retained.

The designed data-coding template consisted of three pieces of information. Basic information about the papers was included in the descriptive information: the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper.

The variable information for the experimental design had three variables: the independent variable (instruction method), the dependent variable (critical thinking), and the moderating variable (learning stage, teaching type, intervention duration, learning scaffold, group size, measuring tool, and subject area). Depending on the topic of this study, the intervention strategy, as the independent variable, was coded into collaborative and non-collaborative problem-solving. The dependent variable, critical thinking, was coded as a cognitive skill and an attitudinal tendency. And seven moderating variables were created by grouping and combining the experimental design variables discovered within the 36 studies (see Table 1 ), where learning stages were encoded as higher education, high school, middle school, and primary school or lower; teaching types were encoded as mixed courses, integrated courses, and independent courses; intervention durations were encoded as 0–1 weeks, 1–4 weeks, 4–12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks; group sizes were encoded as 2–3 persons, 4–6 persons, 7–10 persons, and more than 10 persons; learning scaffolds were encoded as teacher-supported learning scaffold, technique-supported learning scaffold, and resource-supported learning scaffold; measuring tools were encoded as standardized measurement tools (e.g., WGCTA, CCTT, CCTST, and CCTDI) and self-adapting measurement tools (e.g., modified or made by researchers); and subject areas were encoded according to the specific subjects used in the 36 included studies.

The data information contained three metrics for measuring critical thinking: sample size, average value, and standard deviation. It is vital to remember that studies with various experimental designs frequently adopt various formulas to determine the effect size. And this paper used Morris’ proposed standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation formula ( 2008 , p. 369; see Supplementary Table S3 ).

Procedure for extracting and coding data

According to the data coding template (see Table 1 ), the 36 papers’ information was retrieved by two researchers, who then entered them into Excel (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The results of each study were extracted separately in the data extraction procedure if an article contained numerous studies on critical thinking, or if a study assessed different critical thinking dimensions. For instance, Tiwari et al. ( 2010 ) used four time points, which were viewed as numerous different studies, to examine the outcomes of critical thinking, and Chen ( 2013 ) included the two outcome variables of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, which were regarded as two studies. After discussion and negotiation during data extraction, the two researchers’ consistency test coefficients were roughly 93.27%. Supplementary Table S2 details the key characteristics of the 36 included articles with 79 effect quantities, including descriptive information (e.g., the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper), variable information (e.g., independent variables, dependent variables, and moderating variables), and data information (e.g., mean values, standard deviations, and sample size). Following that, testing for publication bias and heterogeneity was done on the sample data using the Rev-Man 5.4 software, and then the test results were used to conduct a meta-analysis.

Publication bias test

When the sample of studies included in a meta-analysis does not accurately reflect the general status of research on the relevant subject, publication bias is said to be exhibited in this research. The reliability and accuracy of the meta-analysis may be impacted by publication bias. Due to this, the meta-analysis needs to check the sample data for publication bias (Stewart et al., 2006 ). A popular method to check for publication bias is the funnel plot; and it is unlikely that there will be publishing bias when the data are equally dispersed on either side of the average effect size and targeted within the higher region. The data are equally dispersed within the higher portion of the efficient zone, consistent with the funnel plot connected with this analysis (see Fig. 2 ), indicating that publication bias is unlikely in this situation.

This funnel plot shows the result of publication bias of 79 effect quantities across 36 studies.

Heterogeneity test

To select the appropriate effect models for the meta-analysis, one might use the results of a heterogeneity test on the data effect sizes. In a meta-analysis, it is common practice to gauge the degree of data heterogeneity using the I 2 value, and I 2 ≥ 50% is typically understood to denote medium-high heterogeneity, which calls for the adoption of a random effect model; if not, a fixed effect model ought to be applied (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ). The findings of the heterogeneity test in this paper (see Table 2 ) revealed that I 2 was 86% and displayed significant heterogeneity ( P < 0.01). To ensure accuracy and reliability, the overall effect size ought to be calculated utilizing the random effect model.

The analysis of the overall effect size

This meta-analysis utilized a random effect model to examine 79 effect quantities from 36 studies after eliminating heterogeneity. In accordance with Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1992 ), it is abundantly clear from the analysis results, which are shown in the forest plot of the overall effect (see Fig. 3 ), that the cumulative impact size of cooperative problem-solving is 0.82, which is statistically significant ( z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]), and can encourage learners to practice critical thinking.

This forest plot shows the analysis result of the overall effect size across 36 studies.

In addition, this study examined two distinct dimensions of critical thinking to better understand the precise contributions that collaborative problem-solving makes to the growth of critical thinking. The findings (see Table 3 ) indicate that collaborative problem-solving improves cognitive skills (ES = 0.70) and attitudinal tendency (ES = 1.17), with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 7.95, P < 0.01). Although collaborative problem-solving improves both dimensions of critical thinking, it is essential to point out that the improvements in students’ attitudinal tendency are much more pronounced and have a significant comprehensive effect (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]), whereas gains in learners’ cognitive skill are slightly improved and are just above average. (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

The analysis of moderator effect size

The whole forest plot’s 79 effect quantities underwent a two-tailed test, which revealed significant heterogeneity ( I 2 = 86%, z = 12.78, P < 0.01), indicating differences between various effect sizes that may have been influenced by moderating factors other than sampling error. Therefore, exploring possible moderating factors that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis, such as the learning stage, learning scaffold, teaching type, group size, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, in order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking. The findings (see Table 4 ) indicate that various moderating factors have advantageous effects on critical thinking. In this situation, the subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01), and teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05) are all significant moderators that can be applied to support the cultivation of critical thinking. However, since the learning stage and the measuring tools did not significantly differ among intergroup (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05, and chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05), we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These are the precise outcomes, as follows:

Various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively, without significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05). High school was first on the list of effect sizes (ES = 1.36, P < 0.01), then higher education (ES = 0.78, P < 0.01), and middle school (ES = 0.73, P < 0.01). These results show that, despite the learning stage’s beneficial influence on cultivating learners’ critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is essential for cultivating critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Different teaching types had varying degrees of positive impact on critical thinking, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05). The effect size was ranked as follows: mixed courses (ES = 1.34, P < 0.01), integrated courses (ES = 0.81, P < 0.01), and independent courses (ES = 0.27, P < 0.01). These results indicate that the most effective approach to cultivate critical thinking utilizing collaborative problem solving is through the teaching type of mixed courses.

Various intervention durations significantly improved critical thinking, and there were significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01). The effect sizes related to this variable showed a tendency to increase with longer intervention durations. The improvement in critical thinking reached a significant level (ES = 0.85, P < 0.01) after more than 12 weeks of training. These findings indicate that the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated, with a longer intervention duration having a greater effect.

Different learning scaffolds influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01). The resource-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.69, P < 0.01) acquired a medium-to-higher level of impact, the technique-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.63, P < 0.01) also attained a medium-to-higher level of impact, and the teacher-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.92, P < 0.01) displayed a high level of significant impact. These results show that the learning scaffold with teacher support has the greatest impact on cultivating critical thinking.

Various group sizes influenced critical thinking positively, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05). Critical thinking showed a general declining trend with increasing group size. The overall effect size of 2–3 people in this situation was the biggest (ES = 0.99, P < 0.01), and when the group size was greater than 7 people, the improvement in critical thinking was at the lower-middle level (ES < 0.5, P < 0.01). These results show that the impact on critical thinking is positively connected with group size, and as group size grows, so does the overall impact.

Various measuring tools influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05). In this situation, the self-adapting measurement tools obtained an upper-medium level of effect (ES = 0.78), whereas the complete effect size of the standardized measurement tools was the largest, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 0.84, P < 0.01). These results show that, despite the beneficial influence of the measuring tool on cultivating critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Different subject areas had a greater impact on critical thinking, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05). Mathematics had the greatest overall impact, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 1.68, P < 0.01), followed by science (ES = 1.25, P < 0.01) and medical science (ES = 0.87, P < 0.01), both of which also achieved a significant level of effect. Programming technology was the least effective (ES = 0.39, P < 0.01), only having a medium-low degree of effect compared to education (ES = 0.72, P < 0.01) and other fields (such as language, art, and social sciences) (ES = 0.58, P < 0.01). These results suggest that scientific fields (e.g., mathematics, science) may be the most effective subject areas for cultivating critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

According to this meta-analysis, using collaborative problem-solving as an intervention strategy in critical thinking teaching has a considerable amount of impact on cultivating learners’ critical thinking as a whole and has a favorable promotional effect on the two dimensions of critical thinking. According to certain studies, collaborative problem solving, the most frequently used critical thinking teaching strategy in curriculum instruction can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking (e.g., Liang et al., 2017 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Cindy, 2004 ). This meta-analysis provides convergent data support for the above research views. Thus, the findings of this meta-analysis not only effectively address the first research query regarding the overall effect of cultivating critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills) utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving, but also enhance our confidence in cultivating critical thinking by using collaborative problem-solving intervention approach in the context of classroom teaching.

Furthermore, the associated improvements in attitudinal tendency are much stronger, but the corresponding improvements in cognitive skill are only marginally better. According to certain studies, cognitive skill differs from the attitudinal tendency in classroom instruction; the cultivation and development of the former as a key ability is a process of gradual accumulation, while the latter as an attitude is affected by the context of the teaching situation (e.g., a novel and exciting teaching approach, challenging and rewarding tasks) (Halpern, 2001 ; Wei and Hong, 2022 ). Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting and interesting, as well as rewarding and challenging; because it takes the learners as the focus and examines problems with poor structure in real situations, and it can inspire students to fully realize their potential for problem-solving, which will significantly improve their attitudinal tendency toward solving problems (Liu et al., 2020 ). Similar to how collaborative problem-solving influences attitudinal tendency, attitudinal tendency impacts cognitive skill when attempting to solve a problem (Liu et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ), and stronger attitudinal tendencies are associated with improved learning achievement and cognitive ability in students (Sison, 2008 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). It can be seen that the two specific dimensions of critical thinking as well as critical thinking as a whole are affected by collaborative problem-solving, and this study illuminates the nuanced links between cognitive skills and attitudinal tendencies with regard to these two dimensions of critical thinking. To fully develop students’ capacity for critical thinking, future empirical research should pay closer attention to cognitive skills.

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

In order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking, exploring possible moderating effects that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis. The findings show that the moderating factors, such as the teaching type, learning stage, group size, learning scaffold, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, could all support the cultivation of collaborative problem-solving in critical thinking. Among them, the effect size differences between the learning stage and measuring tool are not significant, which does not explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

In terms of the learning stage, various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively without significant intergroup differences, indicating that we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking.

Although high education accounts for 70.89% of all empirical studies performed by researchers, high school may be the appropriate learning stage to foster students’ critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving since it has the largest overall effect size. This phenomenon may be related to student’s cognitive development, which needs to be further studied in follow-up research.

With regard to teaching type, mixed course teaching may be the best teaching method to cultivate students’ critical thinking. Relevant studies have shown that in the actual teaching process if students are trained in thinking methods alone, the methods they learn are isolated and divorced from subject knowledge, which is not conducive to their transfer of thinking methods; therefore, if students’ thinking is trained only in subject teaching without systematic method training, it is challenging to apply to real-world circumstances (Ruggiero, 2012 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Teaching critical thinking as mixed course teaching in parallel to other subject teachings can achieve the best effect on learners’ critical thinking, and explicit critical thinking instruction is more effective than less explicit critical thinking instruction (Bensley and Spero, 2014 ).

In terms of the intervention duration, with longer intervention times, the overall effect size shows an upward tendency. Thus, the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated. Critical thinking, as a key competency for students in the 21st century, is difficult to get a meaningful improvement in a brief intervention duration. Instead, it could be developed over a lengthy period of time through consistent teaching and the progressive accumulation of knowledge (Halpern, 2001 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Therefore, future empirical studies ought to take these restrictions into account throughout a longer period of critical thinking instruction.

With regard to group size, a group size of 2–3 persons has the highest effect size, and the comprehensive effect size decreases with increasing group size in general. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a group composed of two to four members is most appropriate for collaborative learning (Schellens and Valcke, 2006 ). However, the meta-analysis results also indicate that once the group size exceeds 7 people, small groups cannot produce better interaction and performance than large groups. This may be because the learning scaffolds of technique support, resource support, and teacher support improve the frequency and effectiveness of interaction among group members, and a collaborative group with more members may increase the diversity of views, which is helpful to cultivate critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

With regard to the learning scaffold, the three different kinds of learning scaffolds can all enhance critical thinking. Among them, the teacher-supported learning scaffold has the largest overall effect size, demonstrating the interdependence of effective learning scaffolds and collaborative problem-solving. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a successful strategy is to encourage learners to collaborate, come up with solutions, and develop critical thinking skills by using learning scaffolds (Reiser, 2004 ; Xu et al., 2022 ); learning scaffolds can lower task complexity and unpleasant feelings while also enticing students to engage in learning activities (Wood et al., 2006 ); learning scaffolds are designed to assist students in using learning approaches more successfully to adapt the collaborative problem-solving process, and the teacher-supported learning scaffolds have the greatest influence on critical thinking in this process because they are more targeted, informative, and timely (Xu et al., 2022 ).

With respect to the measuring tool, despite the fact that standardized measurement tools (such as the WGCTA, CCTT, and CCTST) have been acknowledged as trustworthy and effective by worldwide experts, only 54.43% of the research included in this meta-analysis adopted them for assessment, and the results indicated no intergroup differences. These results suggest that not all teaching circumstances are appropriate for measuring critical thinking using standardized measurement tools. “The measuring tools for measuring thinking ability have limits in assessing learners in educational situations and should be adapted appropriately to accurately assess the changes in learners’ critical thinking.”, according to Simpson and Courtney ( 2002 , p. 91). As a result, in order to more fully and precisely gauge how learners’ critical thinking has evolved, we must properly modify standardized measuring tools based on collaborative problem-solving learning contexts.

With regard to the subject area, the comprehensive effect size of science departments (e.g., mathematics, science, medical science) is larger than that of language arts and social sciences. Some recent international education reforms have noted that critical thinking is a basic part of scientific literacy. Students with scientific literacy can prove the rationality of their judgment according to accurate evidence and reasonable standards when they face challenges or poorly structured problems (Kyndt et al., 2013 ), which makes critical thinking crucial for developing scientific understanding and applying this understanding to practical problem solving for problems related to science, technology, and society (Yore et al., 2007 ).

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Other than those stated in the discussion above, the following suggestions are offered for critical thinking instruction utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

First, teachers should put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, to design real problems based on collaborative situations. This meta-analysis provides evidence to support the view that collaborative problem-solving has a strong synergistic effect on promoting students’ critical thinking. Asking questions about real situations and allowing learners to take part in critical discussions on real problems during class instruction are key ways to teach critical thinking rather than simply reading speculative articles without practice (Mulnix, 2012 ). Furthermore, the improvement of students’ critical thinking is realized through cognitive conflict with other learners in the problem situation (Yang et al., 2008 ). Consequently, it is essential for teachers to put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, and design real problems and encourage students to discuss, negotiate, and argue based on collaborative problem-solving situations.

Second, teachers should design and implement mixed courses to cultivate learners’ critical thinking, utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving. Critical thinking can be taught through curriculum instruction (Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), with the goal of cultivating learners’ critical thinking for flexible transfer and application in real problem-solving situations. This meta-analysis shows that mixed course teaching has a highly substantial impact on the cultivation and promotion of learners’ critical thinking. Therefore, teachers should design and implement mixed course teaching with real collaborative problem-solving situations in combination with the knowledge content of specific disciplines in conventional teaching, teach methods and strategies of critical thinking based on poorly structured problems to help students master critical thinking, and provide practical activities in which students can interact with each other to develop knowledge construction and critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Third, teachers should be more trained in critical thinking, particularly preservice teachers, and they also should be conscious of the ways in which teachers’ support for learning scaffolds can promote critical thinking. The learning scaffold supported by teachers had the greatest impact on learners’ critical thinking, in addition to being more directive, targeted, and timely (Wood et al., 2006 ). Critical thinking can only be effectively taught when teachers recognize the significance of critical thinking for students’ growth and use the proper approaches while designing instructional activities (Forawi, 2016 ). Therefore, with the intention of enabling teachers to create learning scaffolds to cultivate learners’ critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem solving, it is essential to concentrate on the teacher-supported learning scaffolds and enhance the instruction for teaching critical thinking to teachers, especially preservice teachers.

Implications and limitations

There are certain limitations in this meta-analysis, but future research can correct them. First, the search languages were restricted to English and Chinese, so it is possible that pertinent studies that were written in other languages were overlooked, resulting in an inadequate number of articles for review. Second, these data provided by the included studies are partially missing, such as whether teachers were trained in the theory and practice of critical thinking, the average age and gender of learners, and the differences in critical thinking among learners of various ages and genders. Third, as is typical for review articles, more studies were released while this meta-analysis was being done; therefore, it had a time limit. With the development of relevant research, future studies focusing on these issues are highly relevant and needed.

Conclusions

The subject of the magnitude of collaborative problem-solving’s impact on fostering students’ critical thinking, which received scant attention from other studies, was successfully addressed by this study. The question of the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking was addressed in this study, which addressed a topic that had gotten little attention in earlier research. The following conclusions can be made:

Regarding the results obtained, collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster learners’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]). With respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving can significantly and effectively improve students’ attitudinal tendency, and the comprehensive effect is significant (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

As demonstrated by both the results and the discussion, there are varying degrees of beneficial effects on students’ critical thinking from all seven moderating factors, which were found across 36 studies. In this context, the teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01) all have a positive impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. Since the learning stage (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05) and measuring tools (chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05) did not demonstrate any significant intergroup differences, we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included within the article and its supplementary information files, and the supplementary information files are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IPFJO6 .

Bensley DA, Spero RA (2014) Improving critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive monitoring through direct infusion. Think Skills Creat 12:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.001

Article Google Scholar

Castle A (2009) Defining and assessing critical thinking skills for student radiographers. Radiography 15(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2007.10.007

Chen XD (2013) An empirical study on the influence of PBL teaching model on critical thinking ability of non-English majors. J PLA Foreign Lang College 36 (04):68–72

Google Scholar

Cohen A (1992) Antecedents of organizational commitment across occupational groups: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130602

Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: a step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, London, England

Cindy HS (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 51(1):31–39

Duch BJ, Gron SD, Allen DE (2001) The power of problem-based learning: a practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline. Stylus Educ Sci 2:190–198

Ennis RH (1989) Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res 18(3):4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004

Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Eric document reproduction service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed315423

Facione PA, Facione NC (1992) The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the CCTDI test manual. California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Forawi SA (2016) Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Think Skills Creat 20:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005

Halpern DF (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J Gen Educ 50(4):270–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/27797889

Hu WP, Liu J (2015) Cultivation of pupils’ thinking ability: a five-year follow-up study. Psychol Behav Res 13(05):648–654. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2015.05.010

Huber K (2016) Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 86(2):431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Kek MYCA, Huijser H (2011) The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. High Educ Res Dev 30(3):329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074

Kuncel NR (2011) Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). National Research Council, Washington, DC

Kyndt E, Raes E, Lismont B, Timmers F, Cascallar E, Dochy F (2013) A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educ Res Rev 10(2):133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Leng J, Lu XX (2020) Is critical thinking really teachable?—A meta-analysis based on 79 experimental or quasi experimental studies. Open Educ Res 26(06):110–118. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2020.06.011

Liang YZ, Zhu K, Zhao CL (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ Res 38(10):87–92. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2017.10.014

Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical meta-analysis. International Educational and Professional, London, pp. 92–160

Liu Z, Wu W, Jiang Q (2020) A study on the influence of problem based learning on college students’ critical thinking-based on a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Explor High Educ 03:43–49

Morris SB (2008) Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organ Res Methods 11(2):364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059

Article ADS Google Scholar

Mulnix JW (2012) Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educ Philos Theory 44(5):464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Naber J, Wyatt TH (2014) The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 34(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002

National Research Council (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Niu L, Behar HLS, Garvan CW (2013) Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 9(12):114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Peng ZM, Deng L (2017) Towards the core of education reform: cultivating critical thinking skills as the core of skills in the 21st century. Res Educ Dev 24:57–63. https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2017.24.011

Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13(3):273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2

Ruggiero VR (2012) The art of thinking: a guide to critical and creative thought, 4th edn. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

Schellens T, Valcke M (2006) Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput Educ 46(4):349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.010

Sendag S, Odabasi HF (2009) Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 53(1):132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008

Sison R (2008) Investigating Pair Programming in a Software Engineering Course in an Asian Setting. 2008 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2008.61

Simpson E, Courtney M (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Mary Courtney 8(2):89–98

Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S (2006) Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? Publication bias in meta-analysis. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, pp. 261–286

Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K (2010) A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med Educ 40(6):547–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x

Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G (2006) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2):89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Wei T, Hong S (2022) The meaning and realization of teachable critical thinking. Educ Theory Practice 10:51–57

Xu EW, Wang W, Wang QX (2022) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2

Yang YC, Newby T, Bill R (2008) Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: a quasi-experimental study on promoting learners’ critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 50(4):1572–1585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.006

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007) The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 5(4):559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Zhang T, Zhang S, Gao QQ, Wang JH (2022) Research on the development of learners’ critical thinking in online peer review. Audio Visual Educ Res 6:53–60. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2022.06.08

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the graduate scientific research and innovation project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region named “Research on in-depth learning of high school information technology courses for the cultivation of computing thinking” (No. XJ2022G190) and the independent innovation fund project for doctoral students of the College of Educational Science of Xinjiang Normal University named “Research on project-based teaching of high school information technology courses from the perspective of discipline core literacy” (No. XJNUJKYA2003).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science, Xinjiang Normal University, 830017, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Enwei Xu, Wei Wang & Qingxia Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Enwei Xu or Wei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary tables, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Xu, E., Wang, W. & Wang, Q. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Download citation

Received : 07 August 2022

Accepted : 04 January 2023

Published : 11 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Share this article

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

This article is cited by

Impacts of online collaborative learning on students’ intercultural communication apprehension and intercultural communicative competence.

Hoa Thi Hoang Chau
Hung Phu Bui
Quynh Thi Huong Dinh

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis

Sustainable electricity generation and farm-grid utilization from photovoltaic aquaculture: a bibliometric analysis.

A. A. Amusa
M. Alhassan

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2024)

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

What is Problem-Based Learning (PBL)? PBL is a student-centered approach to learning that involves groups of students working to solve a real-world problem, quite different from the direct teaching method of a teacher presenting facts and concepts about a specific subject to a classroom of students. Through PBL, students not only strengthen their teamwork, communication, and research skills, but they also sharpen their critical thinking and problem-solving abilities essential for life-long learning.

By working with PBL, students will:

Become engaged with open-ended situations that assimilate the world of work
Participate in groups to pinpoint what is known/ not known and the methods of finding information to help solve the given problem.
Investigate a problem; through critical thinking and problem solving, brainstorm a list of unique solutions.
Analyze the situation to see if the real problem is framed or if there are other problems that need to be solved.

How to Begin PBL

Establish the learning outcomes (i.e., what is it that you want your students to really learn and to be able to do after completing the learning project).
Find a real-world problem that is relevant to the students; often the problems are ones that students may encounter in their own life or future career.
Discuss pertinent rules for working in groups to maximize learning success.
Practice group processes: listening, involving others, assessing their work/peers.
Explore different roles for students to accomplish the work that needs to be done and/or to see the problem from various perspectives depending on the problem (e.g., for a problem about pollution, different roles may be a mayor, business owner, parent, child, neighboring city government officials, etc.).
Determine how the project will be evaluated and assessed. Most likely, both self-assessment and peer-assessment will factor into the assignment grade.

Designing Classroom Instruction

How to Orchestrate a PBL Activity

Explain Problem-Based Learning to students: its rationale, daily instruction, class expectations, grading.
Serve as a model and resource to the PBL process; work in-tandem through the first problem
Help students secure various resources when needed.
Supply ample class time for collaborative group work.
Give feedback to each group after they share via the established format; critique the solution in quality and thoroughness. Reinforce to the students that the prior thinking and reasoning process in addition to the solution are important as well.

Teacher’s Role in PBL

The Role of the Students

Robert Gagné’s Taxonomy of Learning

Gagne classified learning outcomes into five major categories: verbal information, intellectual skills, cognitive strategies, motor skills and attitudes. What is learning to Gagné? As outlined in his 9-events of instruction, Gagne believed that learning was…

Open Source Learning Management Systems (LMS)

Learning Management Systems (LMSs) are becoming a vital part of classrooms in the 21th Century. This is a list of open source learning management systems. By open source we mean that source code of…

Adaptive Learning: What is It, What are its Benefits and How Does it Work?

People learn in many different ways. Adaptive learning has sought to address differences in ability by targeting teaching practices. The use of adaptive models, ranging from technological programs to intelligent systems, can be…

Instructional Design

What is Instructional Design The Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) defines instructional design as “the theory and practice of design, development, utilization, management, and evaluation of processes and resources for learning”…

Concept Maps and How To Use Them

Concept maps help our brains take in information, mostly when there is visual information. The maps help us to see the big picture along with the connected and related data. They also help…

Center for Teaching

Teaching problem solving.

Print Version

Tips and Techniques

Expert vs. novice problem solvers, communicate.

Have students identify specific problems, difficulties, or confusions . Don’t waste time working through problems that students already understand.
If students are unable to articulate their concerns, determine where they are having trouble by asking them to identify the specific concepts or principles associated with the problem.
In a one-on-one tutoring session, ask the student to work his/her problem out loud . This slows down the thinking process, making it more accurate and allowing you to access understanding.
When working with larger groups you can ask students to provide a written “two-column solution.” Have students write up their solution to a problem by putting all their calculations in one column and all of their reasoning (in complete sentences) in the other column. This helps them to think critically about their own problem solving and helps you to more easily identify where they may be having problems. Two-Column Solution (Math) Two-Column Solution (Physics)

Encourage Independence

Model the problem solving process rather than just giving students the answer. As you work through the problem, consider how a novice might struggle with the concepts and make your thinking clear
Have students work through problems on their own. Ask directing questions or give helpful suggestions, but provide only minimal assistance and only when needed to overcome obstacles.
Don’t fear group work ! Students can frequently help each other, and talking about a problem helps them think more critically about the steps needed to solve the problem. Additionally, group work helps students realize that problems often have multiple solution strategies, some that might be more effective than others

Be sensitive

Frequently, when working problems, students are unsure of themselves. This lack of confidence may hamper their learning. It is important to recognize this when students come to us for help, and to give each student some feeling of mastery. Do this by providing positive reinforcement to let students know when they have mastered a new concept or skill.

Encourage Thoroughness and Patience

Try to communicate that the process is more important than the answer so that the student learns that it is OK to not have an instant solution. This is learned through your acceptance of his/her pace of doing things, through your refusal to let anxiety pressure you into giving the right answer, and through your example of problem solving through a step-by step process.

Experts (teachers) in a particular field are often so fluent in solving problems from that field that they can find it difficult to articulate the problem solving principles and strategies they use to novices (students) in their field because these principles and strategies are second nature to the expert. To teach students problem solving skills, a teacher should be aware of principles and strategies of good problem solving in his or her discipline .

The mathematician George Polya captured the problem solving principles and strategies he used in his discipline in the book How to Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method (Princeton University Press, 1957). The book includes a summary of Polya’s problem solving heuristic as well as advice on the teaching of problem solving.

Teaching Guides

Online Course Development Resources
Principles & Frameworks
Pedagogies & Strategies
Reflecting & Assessing
Challenges & Opportunities
Populations & Contexts

Quick Links

Services for Departments and Schools
Examples of Online Instructional Modules

Teaching problem solving: Let students get ‘stuck’ and ‘unstuck’

Subscribe to the center for universal education bulletin, kate mills and km kate mills literacy interventionist - red bank primary school helyn kim helyn kim former brookings expert @helyn_kim.

October 31, 2017

This is the second in a six-part blog series on teaching 21st century skills , including problem solving , metacognition , critical thinking , and collaboration , in classrooms.

In the real world, students encounter problems that are complex, not well defined, and lack a clear solution and approach. They need to be able to identify and apply different strategies to solve these problems. However, problem solving skills do not necessarily develop naturally; they need to be explicitly taught in a way that can be transferred across multiple settings and contexts.

Here’s what Kate Mills, who taught 4 th grade for 10 years at Knollwood School in New Jersey and is now a Literacy Interventionist at Red Bank Primary School, has to say about creating a classroom culture of problem solvers:

Helping my students grow to be people who will be successful outside of the classroom is equally as important as teaching the curriculum. From the first day of school, I intentionally choose language and activities that help to create a classroom culture of problem solvers. I want to produce students who are able to think about achieving a particular goal and manage their mental processes . This is known as metacognition , and research shows that metacognitive skills help students become better problem solvers.

I begin by “normalizing trouble” in the classroom. Peter H. Johnston teaches the importance of normalizing struggle , of naming it, acknowledging it, and calling it what it is: a sign that we’re growing. The goal is for the students to accept challenge and failure as a chance to grow and do better.

I look for every chance to share problems and highlight how the students— not the teachers— worked through those problems. There is, of course, coaching along the way. For example, a science class that is arguing over whose turn it is to build a vehicle will most likely need a teacher to help them find a way to the balance the work in an equitable way. Afterwards, I make it a point to turn it back to the class and say, “Do you see how you …” By naming what it is they did to solve the problem , students can be more independent and productive as they apply and adapt their thinking when engaging in future complex tasks.

After a few weeks, most of the class understands that the teachers aren’t there to solve problems for the students, but to support them in solving the problems themselves. With that important part of our classroom culture established, we can move to focusing on the strategies that students might need.

Here’s one way I do this in the classroom:

I show the broken escalator video to the class. Since my students are fourth graders, they think it’s hilarious and immediately start exclaiming, “Just get off! Walk!”

When the video is over, I say, “Many of us, probably all of us, are like the man in the video yelling for help when we get stuck. When we get stuck, we stop and immediately say ‘Help!’ instead of embracing the challenge and trying new ways to work through it.” I often introduce this lesson during math class, but it can apply to any area of our lives, and I can refer to the experience and conversation we had during any part of our day.

Research shows that just because students know the strategies does not mean they will engage in the appropriate strategies. Therefore, I try to provide opportunities where students can explicitly practice learning how, when, and why to use which strategies effectively so that they can become self-directed learners.

For example, I give students a math problem that will make many of them feel “stuck”. I will say, “Your job is to get yourselves stuck—or to allow yourselves to get stuck on this problem—and then work through it, being mindful of how you’re getting yourselves unstuck.” As students work, I check-in to help them name their process: “How did you get yourself unstuck?” or “What was your first step? What are you doing now? What might you try next?” As students talk about their process, I’ll add to a list of strategies that students are using and, if they are struggling, help students name a specific process. For instance, if a student says he wrote the information from the math problem down and points to a chart, I will say: “Oh that’s interesting. You pulled the important information from the problem out and organized it into a chart.” In this way, I am giving him the language to match what he did, so that he now has a strategy he could use in other times of struggle.

The charts grow with us over time and are something that we refer to when students are stuck or struggling. They become a resource for students and a way for them to talk about their process when they are reflecting on and monitoring what did or did not work.

For me, as a teacher, it is important that I create a classroom environment in which students are problem solvers. This helps tie struggles to strategies so that the students will not only see value in working harder but in working smarter by trying new and different strategies and revising their process. In doing so, they will more successful the next time around.

Problem-Solving Method in Teaching

The problem-solving method is a highly effective teaching strategy that is designed to help students develop critical thinking skills and problem-solving abilities . It involves providing students with real-world problems and challenges that require them to apply their knowledge, skills, and creativity to find solutions. This method encourages active learning, promotes collaboration, and allows students to take ownership of their learning.

Definition of problem-solving method.

Problem-solving is a process of identifying, analyzing, and resolving problems. The problem-solving method in teaching involves providing students with real-world problems that they must solve through collaboration and critical thinking. This method encourages students to apply their knowledge and creativity to develop solutions that are effective and practical.

Meaning of Problem-Solving Method

The meaning and Definition of problem-solving are given by different Scholars. These are-

Woodworth and Marquis(1948) : Problem-solving behavior occurs in novel or difficult situations in which a solution is not obtainable by the habitual methods of applying concepts and principles derived from past experience in very similar situations.

Skinner (1968): Problem-solving is a process of overcoming difficulties that appear to interfere with the attainment of a goal. It is the procedure of making adjustments in spite of interference

Benefits of Problem-Solving Method

The problem-solving method has several benefits for both students and teachers. These benefits include:

Encourages active learning: The problem-solving method encourages students to actively participate in their own learning by engaging them in real-world problems that require critical thinking and collaboration
Promotes collaboration: Problem-solving requires students to work together to find solutions. This promotes teamwork, communication, and cooperation.
Builds critical thinking skills: The problem-solving method helps students develop critical thinking skills by providing them with opportunities to analyze and evaluate problems
Increases motivation: When students are engaged in solving real-world problems, they are more motivated to learn and apply their knowledge.
Enhances creativity: The problem-solving method encourages students to be creative in finding solutions to problems.

Steps in Problem-Solving Method

The problem-solving method involves several steps that teachers can use to guide their students. These steps include

Identifying the problem: The first step in problem-solving is identifying the problem that needs to be solved. Teachers can present students with a real-world problem or challenge that requires critical thinking and collaboration.
Analyzing the problem: Once the problem is identified, students should analyze it to determine its scope and underlying causes.
Generating solutions: After analyzing the problem, students should generate possible solutions. This step requires creativity and critical thinking.
Evaluating solutions: The next step is to evaluate each solution based on its effectiveness and practicality
Selecting the best solution: The final step is to select the best solution and implement it.

Verification of the concluded solution or Hypothesis

The solution arrived at or the conclusion drawn must be further verified by utilizing it in solving various other likewise problems. In case, the derived solution helps in solving these problems, then and only then if one is free to agree with his finding regarding the solution. The verified solution may then become a useful product of his problem-solving behavior that can be utilized in solving further problems. The above steps can be utilized in solving various problems thereby fostering creative thinking ability in an individual.

The problem-solving method is an effective teaching strategy that promotes critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. It provides students with real-world problems that require them to apply their knowledge and skills to find solutions. By using the problem-solving method, teachers can help their students develop the skills they need to succeed in school and in life.

Jonassen, D. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. Routledge.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.
Mergendoller, J. R., Maxwell, N. L., & Bellisimo, Y. (2006). The effectiveness of problem-based instruction: A comparative study of instructional methods and student characteristics. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1(2), 49-69.
Richey, R. C., Klein, J. D., & Tracey, M. W. (2011). The instructional design knowledge base: Theory, research, and practice. Routledge.
Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (2001). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. CRLT Technical Report No. 16-01, University of Michigan. Wojcikowski, J. (2013). Solving real-world problems through problem-based learning. College Teaching, 61(4), 153-156

Bipolar Disorder
Therapy Center
When To See a Therapist
Types of Therapy
Best Online Therapy
Best Couples Therapy
Best Family Therapy
Managing Stress
Sleep and Dreaming
Understanding Emotions
Self-Improvement
Healthy Relationships
Student Resources
Personality Types
Guided Meditations
Verywell Mind Insights
2024 Verywell Mind 25
Mental Health in the Classroom
Editorial Process
Meet Our Review Board
Crisis Support

Overview of the Problem-Solving Mental Process

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Rachel Goldman, PhD FTOS, is a licensed psychologist, clinical assistant professor, speaker, wellness expert specializing in eating behaviors, stress management, and health behavior change.

Identify the Problem
Define the Problem
Form a Strategy
Organize Information
Allocate Resources
Monitor Progress
Evaluate the Results

Frequently Asked Questions

Problem-solving is a mental process that involves discovering, analyzing, and solving problems. The ultimate goal of problem-solving is to overcome obstacles and find a solution that best resolves the issue.

The best strategy for solving a problem depends largely on the unique situation. In some cases, people are better off learning everything they can about the issue and then using factual knowledge to come up with a solution. In other instances, creativity and insight are the best options.

It is not necessary to follow problem-solving steps sequentially, It is common to skip steps or even go back through steps multiple times until the desired solution is reached.

In order to correctly solve a problem, it is often important to follow a series of steps. Researchers sometimes refer to this as the problem-solving cycle. While this cycle is portrayed sequentially, people rarely follow a rigid series of steps to find a solution.

The following steps include developing strategies and organizing knowledge.

1. Identifying the Problem

While it may seem like an obvious step, identifying the problem is not always as simple as it sounds. In some cases, people might mistakenly identify the wrong source of a problem, which will make attempts to solve it inefficient or even useless.

Some strategies that you might use to figure out the source of a problem include :

Asking questions about the problem
Breaking the problem down into smaller pieces
Looking at the problem from different perspectives
Conducting research to figure out what relationships exist between different variables

2. Defining the Problem

After the problem has been identified, it is important to fully define the problem so that it can be solved. You can define a problem by operationally defining each aspect of the problem and setting goals for what aspects of the problem you will address

At this point, you should focus on figuring out which aspects of the problems are facts and which are opinions. State the problem clearly and identify the scope of the solution.

3. Forming a Strategy

After the problem has been identified, it is time to start brainstorming potential solutions. This step usually involves generating as many ideas as possible without judging their quality. Once several possibilities have been generated, they can be evaluated and narrowed down.

The next step is to develop a strategy to solve the problem. The approach used will vary depending upon the situation and the individual's unique preferences. Common problem-solving strategies include heuristics and algorithms.

Heuristics are mental shortcuts that are often based on solutions that have worked in the past. They can work well if the problem is similar to something you have encountered before and are often the best choice if you need a fast solution.
Algorithms are step-by-step strategies that are guaranteed to produce a correct result. While this approach is great for accuracy, it can also consume time and resources.

Heuristics are often best used when time is of the essence, while algorithms are a better choice when a decision needs to be as accurate as possible.

4. Organizing Information

Before coming up with a solution, you need to first organize the available information. What do you know about the problem? What do you not know? The more information that is available the better prepared you will be to come up with an accurate solution.

When approaching a problem, it is important to make sure that you have all the data you need. Making a decision without adequate information can lead to biased or inaccurate results.

5. Allocating Resources

Of course, we don't always have unlimited money, time, and other resources to solve a problem. Before you begin to solve a problem, you need to determine how high priority it is.

If it is an important problem, it is probably worth allocating more resources to solving it. If, however, it is a fairly unimportant problem, then you do not want to spend too much of your available resources on coming up with a solution.

At this stage, it is important to consider all of the factors that might affect the problem at hand. This includes looking at the available resources, deadlines that need to be met, and any possible risks involved in each solution. After careful evaluation, a decision can be made about which solution to pursue.

6. Monitoring Progress

After selecting a problem-solving strategy, it is time to put the plan into action and see if it works. This step might involve trying out different solutions to see which one is the most effective.

It is also important to monitor the situation after implementing a solution to ensure that the problem has been solved and that no new problems have arisen as a result of the proposed solution.

Effective problem-solvers tend to monitor their progress as they work towards a solution. If they are not making good progress toward reaching their goal, they will reevaluate their approach or look for new strategies .

7. Evaluating the Results

After a solution has been reached, it is important to evaluate the results to determine if it is the best possible solution to the problem. This evaluation might be immediate, such as checking the results of a math problem to ensure the answer is correct, or it can be delayed, such as evaluating the success of a therapy program after several months of treatment.

Once a problem has been solved, it is important to take some time to reflect on the process that was used and evaluate the results. This will help you to improve your problem-solving skills and become more efficient at solving future problems.

A Word From Verywell

It is important to remember that there are many different problem-solving processes with different steps, and this is just one example. Problem-solving in real-world situations requires a great deal of resourcefulness, flexibility, resilience, and continuous interaction with the environment.

Get Advice From The Verywell Mind Podcast

Hosted by therapist Amy Morin, LCSW, this episode of The Verywell Mind Podcast shares how you can stop dwelling in a negative mindset.

Follow Now : Apple Podcasts / Spotify / Google Podcasts

You can become a better problem solving by:

Practicing brainstorming and coming up with multiple potential solutions to problems
Being open-minded and considering all possible options before making a decision
Breaking down problems into smaller, more manageable pieces
Asking for help when needed
Researching different problem-solving techniques and trying out new ones
Learning from mistakes and using them as opportunities to grow

It's important to communicate openly and honestly with your partner about what's going on. Try to see things from their perspective as well as your own. Work together to find a resolution that works for both of you. Be willing to compromise and accept that there may not be a perfect solution.

Take breaks if things are getting too heated, and come back to the problem when you feel calm and collected. Don't try to fix every problem on your own—consider asking a therapist or counselor for help and insight.

If you've tried everything and there doesn't seem to be a way to fix the problem, you may have to learn to accept it. This can be difficult, but try to focus on the positive aspects of your life and remember that every situation is temporary. Don't dwell on what's going wrong—instead, think about what's going right. Find support by talking to friends or family. Seek professional help if you're having trouble coping.

Davidson JE, Sternberg RJ, editors. The Psychology of Problem Solving . Cambridge University Press; 2003. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511615771

Sarathy V. Real world problem-solving . Front Hum Neurosci . 2018;12:261. Published 2018 Jun 26. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00261

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Spanish – español

Approaches to Learning: Problem Solving

Birth to 9 months

7 months to 18 months, 16 months to 24 months, 21 months to 36 months.

Children attempt a variety of strategies to accomplish tasks, overcome obstacles, and find solutions to tasks, questions, and challenges.

Children build the foundation for problem-solving skills through nurturing relationships, active exploration, and social interactions. In infancy, children learn that their actions and behaviors have an effect on others. For example, children cry to signal hunger to their caregivers; in turn, their caregivers feed them. Caregivers’ consistent responses to children’s communication attempts teach children the earliest forms of problem solving. Children learn that they have the ability to solve a problem by completing certain actions. Children build this knowledge and translate it into how they interact and problem-solve in future situations.

Children discover that their actions and behaviors also have an impact on objects. They learn that certain actions produce certain results. For example, children may bang a toy over and over as they notice the sound that it makes. This behavior is intentional and purposeful; children learn that they have the ability to make something happen. As they get older, children will experiment with different ways to solve problems, such as moving puzzle pieces in different ways to place them correctly. They will use trial and error to find solutions to the tasks they are working on, and use communication skills to ask or gesture for help from caregivers.

By 36 months, children are able to decrease the amount of trial and error they use when solving problems. Their cognitive skills are maturing and they are able to use logic and reasoning when working through challenges. Increased attention allows children to focus for longer periods of time when working through challenges. Children still depend on their caregivers for help, but are likely to attempt problem solving on their own before asking someone for help.

Children are building the foundation for problem solving through active exploration and social interaction.

Indicators for children include:

Focuses on getting a caregiver’s attention through the use of sounds, cries, gestures, and facial expressions
Enjoys repeating actions, e.g., continues to drop toy from highchair after it is picked up by a caregiver or sibling
Communicates the need for assistance through verbal and/or nonverbal cues, e.g., pointing, reaching, vocalizing

Strategies for interaction

Respond thoughtfully and promptly to the child’s attempts for attention
Provide interesting and age-appropriate toys and objects for exploration
Engage and interact with the child frequently during the day

Children begin to discover that certain actions and behaviors can be solutions to challenges and obstacles they encounter. Children also recognize how to engage their caregiver(s) to assist in managing these challenges.

Repeats actions over and over again to figure out how an object works
Begins to recognize that certain actions will draw out certain responses, e.g., laughing and smiling will often result in an adult responding in the same manner
Attempts a variety of physical strategies to reach simple goals, e.g., pulls the string of a toy train to move it closer or crawls to get a ball that has rolled away
Demonstrate how to try things in different ways and encourage the child to do the same, e.g., using a plastic bucket as a drum
Gently guide the child in discovering and exploring, while allowing him or her enough independence to try new things
Respond thoughtfully and promptly to the child’s communication attempts

Children have an enhanced capacity to solve challenges they encounter through the use of objects and imitation. Children may take on a more autonomous role during this stage, yet, reach out to caregiver(s) in most instances.

Imitates a caregiver’s behavior to accomplish a task, e.g., attempts to turn a doorknob
Increases ability to recognize and solve problems through active exploration, play, and trial and error, e.g., tries inserting a shape at different angles to make it fit in a sorter
Uses objects in the environment to solve problems, e.g., uses a pail to move numerous books to the other side of the room
Uses communication to solve problems, e.g., runs out of glue during an art project and gestures to a caregiver for more
Validate and praise the child’s attempts to find solutions to challenges
Narrate while assisting the child in figuring out a solution, e.g., “Let’s try to turn the puzzle piece this way”
Provide the child with opportunities to solve problems with and without your help; minimize the possibility for the child to become frustrated
Respond to the child’s communication efforts

Children begin to discriminate which solutions work, with fewer trials. Children increasingly become more autonomous and will attempt to first overcome obstacles on their own or with limited support from caregiver(s).

Asks for help from a caregiver when needed
Begins to solve problems with less trial and error
Refuses assistance, e.g., calls for help but then pushes a hand away
Shows pride when accomplishing a task
Uses increasingly refined skills while solving problems, e.g., uses own napkin to clean up a spill without asking an adult for help
Follow the child’s lead and pay attention to his or her cues when assisting in a task
Share in the child’s joy and accomplishments
Model and narrate problem-solving skills through play
Provide the child with blocks of uninterrupted time to work on activities
Be available for the child and recognize when he or she needs guidance

Real World Story

Sebastian, who is 25 months old, is engaged in a fine-motor activity provided by his caregiver. He is holding large, plastic tweezers and is attempting to use them to pick up big, fuzzy balls off a plastic plate and move them into a plastic cup. He is holding the plastic tweezers in one hand, and holds the plate steady on the table. He repeatedly tries to use one hand, but cannot pinch the tweezers tightly enough to pick up one of the balls. Sebastian pauses, looks around, and picks up the balls with his thumb and forefinger.

Holding the plastic tweezers in one hand and the ball in the other, Sebastian places the ball in the tweezers and then pinches it closed. He moves it over to the plastic cup and drops it inside. He then grabs another fuzzy ball and places it in the tweezers. Again, he pinches it tightly and transfers it to the cup. Sebastian engages in the same method until all the fuzzy balls on his plate are now inside his cup. Once he is done, he empties out the cup onto the plate and starts all over. After successfully completing the process again, he holds out his full cup toward his caregiver, Maria. She sees him, smiles, and gives two thumbs up. Sebastian grabs his cup and walks over to her. He hands Maria the cup and walks away from the table.

Discover how this Real World Story is related to:

Self-Regulation: Foundation of Development Attention Regulation
Developmental Domain 1: Social & Emotional Development Self-Concept
Developmental Domain 2: Physical Development & Health Fine Motor
Developmental Domain 2: Physical Development & Health Perceptual
Developmental Domain 4: Cognitive Development Logic & Reasoning

THIS EXAMPLE HIGHLIGHTS how children use physical trial and error to solve problems. Sebastian is not successful in his initial attempts to pick up the small objects with his tweezers. However, he pauses to think about possible ways to work on this problem, and then changes his process. Instead of pinching the tweezers to grab the ball, he places the ball in between the tweezers and then pinches it closed. This is easier for him, as he is still developing the fine motor skills necessary to be able to complete this task. Once he realizes he is successful in accomplishing his goal, he engages in this task until he has finished placing every ball on his plate into the cup. He then repeats the activity all over again. Sebastian’s ability to successfully problem solve builds his self-confidence. Maria’s positive acknowledgment of his accomplishment further supports his social and emotional development. A positive self-concept and increasing self-confidence is very important for Sebastian’s future learning and overall healthy development.

Discover how Problem Solving is related to:

Self-Regulation: Foundation of Development Emotional Regulation
Developmental Domain 1: Social & Emotional Development Relationship with Adults
Developmental Domain 4: Cognitive Development Memory

Related Resources

Process Evaluation of a Problem-Solving Approach for Analyzing Literacy Practices within a Multi-Tiered System of Supports Framework

Original Paper
Open access
Published: 06 May 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

Amy Murdoch ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4138-9166 1 ,
Julie Q. Morrison 2 &
Wendy Strickler 1

18 Accesses

Explore all metrics

A Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) framework features a structured problem-solving process and the use of assessment data to develop, identify, and evaluate the impact of instruction and intervention to meet the needs of all students proactively. The purpose of this process evaluation was to examine the implementation of a novel problem-solving approach for analyzing literacy practices across the tiers of an MTSS framework (i.e., core instruction, strategic intervention). The aim of the initiative was to build the capacity of teachers to provide effective instruction based on the science of reading in two elementary schools. The findings from this process evaluation study provide evidence that a problem-solving approach for analyzing literacy practices resulted in improvements in the core curriculum, instruction, and intervention supports. Implications for improvement efforts at the school district and state department of education levels are discussed.

Constructing Successful School Models for Inclusive Literacy: Supporting Student Success Through Strategic Instruction in Diverse Settings

Problem Analysis at Tier 2: Using Data to Find the Category of the Problem

Data-based decision-making, the problem-solving model, and response to intervention in the minneapolis public schools.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Research on how children learn to read and why some young learners have difficulty developing as proficient readers has informed the development of evidence-based instructional approaches and interventions to promote reading proficiency. This vast, interdisciplinary body of knowledge is known as the science of reading (The Reading League, 2022 ). The science of reading emphasizes the importance of explicit, systematic, and sequential instruction targeting the five essential components of reading: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension (National Reading Panel, 2000 ; Spear-Swerling, 2018 ).

Effective instruction based on the science of reading is beneficial for the approximately 40% of students for whom learning to read with general instruction develops fairly easily, but essential for approximately 60% of students for whom learning to read is more difficult (Foorman et al., 2016 ; National Reading Panel, 2000 ). The majority of these emergent readers do not have a learning disability, but simply require explicit, systematic, and sequential instruction to become proficient readers. The term “instructional casualties” has been used to refer to struggling readers who did not receive adequate, scientifically based reading instruction and consequently risked being misidentified as a student with a learning disability (Lyon et al., 2001 ). The impact on the lives of these young students is devastating. Students who do not develop reading proficiency are more likely to be retained a grade in school, drop out of high school, and enter the juvenile justice system (Fien et al., 2021 ; Reynolds et al., 2002 ).

Decades of dismal reading outcomes indicate that the national educational landscape is strewn with instructional casualties. Only 33% of fourth-grade students performed at or above the proficient level in reading in 2022 (National Assessment of Educational Progress [NAEP], 2022 ). This reading crisis is particularly dire among students who are educationally marginalized - in particular, students from diverse racial and ethnic groups, economically disadvantaged students, English Language Learners, and students with disabilities. Only 19% of fourth-grade students eligible for the National School Lunch Program scored at or above the proficient level in reading in 2022 (NAEP, 2022 ). Likewise, only 17% of Black fourth-grade students and 21% of Hispanic students performed at or above the proficient level in reading (NAEP, 2022 ).

Evidence-Based Interventions within a Multi-Tiered System of Supports Framework

An MTSS framework is a systems-level approach to ensuring supports for all students proactively based on academic or behavioral skill need. The core features of an MTSS framework are: (1) universal screening; (2) data-based decision making and problem solving; (3) continuous progress monitoring; (4) a continuum of evidence-based practices across tiers (core instruction with universal support, targeted intervention, and intensive intervention); and (5) a focus on fidelity of implementation (McIntosh & Goodman, 2016 ).

An MTSS framework aims to meet the needs of all students by considering the influence of ecological variables such as instruction, curriculum, and classroom environment on student outcomes. Through the prevention-focused early intervention approach, with an emphasis on effective core instruction and instructional supports through data-based decision making, MTSS facilitates meeting the needs of marginalized students (Albritton et al., 2016 ). Research indicates that an MTSS framework, when implemented with fidelity, holds promise for addressing several key outcomes including (1) increasing student achievement (VanDerHeyden et al., 2007 ); (2) detecting and intervening early with students at risk for academic problems (Al Otaiba & Torgeson, 2007 ); (3) improving the means by which students are determined to be eligible for special education services (Barrett, 2023 ); (4) reducing disproportional representation of minoritized students receiving special education (VanDerHeyden & Witt, 2005 ); and (5) meeting the needs of struggling readers cost-effectively (Morrison et al., 2020 ).

MTSS Reading Implementation Fidelity Challenges

The core components of MTSS need to be implemented fully in an integrated and consistent manner for the positive outcomes to be attained (Keller-Margulis, 2012 ; Noell & Gansle, 2006 , Sanetti & Luh, 2019 ). Yet implementation fidelity can be difficult to achieve because it requires educators to fundamentally change how they support learners not only by advancing their knowledge and skills in scientifically-based reading approaches (Kilpatrick, 2015 ), but also developing their competencies in the timely use of data to inform instructional decision making (Daly et al., 2007 ; Kratochwill et al., 2007 ), and adopting an ecological view of learning by seeking to, “eliminate contextual variables as a viable explanation for academic failure” (Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003 , p. 142).

Many challenges to MTSS implementation have been identified in the research literature (see Table 1 ). The failure to implement evidence-based reading interventions with fidelity is the most frequently recognized limitation (Sanetti & Luh, 2019 ). Reading intervention researchers contend that the evidence-based interventions that produce significant word-reading outcomes (Torgesen et al., 2001 ; Vellutino et al., 1996 ) risk being diluted or dropped within an MTSS framework (Vellutino et al., 2008 ). Furthermore, when MTSS implementation efforts fail to address weaknesses in the core instruction, a high proportion of students may meet the criteria for more intensive intervention resulting in more school resources dedicated to intensive intervention, when the resources may have been more effectively used to improve core instruction (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2017 ).

Increasing MTSS Implementation Fidelity with Training and Coaching

Building teachers’ capacity to provide effective instruction and intervention based on the science of reading within an MTSS framework involves a fundamental shift in how teachers provide reading instruction (Spear-Swerling, 2018 ) and gather, monitor, and respond to reading assessment data (Kratochwill et al., 2007 ). Training alone is insufficient. Research on teacher professional learning has shown that newly learned practices are crude compared to the performance by a master practitioner, fragile in the face of reactions from others, and incomplete when translated to the school setting (Joyce & Showers, 2002 ). As a result, training coupled with ongoing and embedded coaching is essential for promoting competent usage of evidence-based instructional practices (Joyce & Showers, 2002 ). Training and coaching function as critical drivers of implementation (Blase et al., 2013 ; Fixsen et al., 2013 ), but more research is needed on models for training and coaching to promote sustained use of evidence-based reading instruction and intervention within an MTSS framework.

Purpose of the Study

Evidence-based instruction and interventions emerging from the science of reading are key to addressing the needs of struggling readers and closing the opportunity gap for educationally marginalized learners (Fletcher et al., 2004 ). Yet, weak reading intervention fidelity and inconsistent fidelity of implementation of the core components of MTSS have resulted in the proliferation of initiatives that feature only the surface manifestations of an MTSS framework (e.g., sorting students into tiers based on universal screening data) grafted on top of traditional practices and routines not aligned with the science of reading (Hall, 2018 ; Kilpatrick, 2015 ; Sabnis et al., 2020 ). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of an MTSS initiative designed to build the capacity of teachers to provide effective instruction and intervention based on the science of reading. In particular, process evaluation examined the implementation of a novel problem-solving approach for analyzing literacy practices across an MTSS framework (i.e., core instruction and strategic intervention). The Promoting Achievement in Reading Through Needs-driven Evidence-based Reading Structures (PARTNERS) Project aimed to provide comprehensive professional learning (i.e., training and coaching) in a problem-solving approach to examining the tiers of literacy instruction to improve early literacy outcomes for students in kindergarten through second grade. This process evaluation examined teacher team outcomes during the project’s third year of implementation, which focused on strengthening the core reading curriculum and instruction (Tier 1) and strategic intervention (Tier 2). The study addressed the following process evaluation question: To what extent did the PARTNERS Project increase teacher teams’ capacity to analyze and improve the core curriculum and instruction and intervention supports?

The methods used to evaluate the effectiveness of the PARTNERS Project were reviewed by the Institutional Review Board. Data from the LAP-G presented in Figures 1 , 2 and 3 are not publicly available in order to protect teacher participants’ privacy. The data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The PARTNERS Project and its evaluation were funded as a Model Demonstration Project by the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs.

Results of the Annual Administration of the LAP-G Tier 1 and Tier 2 at Loweland School: K – 2 Teacher Team

Results of the Annual Administration of the LAP-G Tier 1 and Tier 2 at St. Mark School: K – 1 Teacher Team

Results of the Annual Administration of the LAP-G Tier 1 and Tier 2 at St. Mark School: Grade 2 – 3 Teacher Team

Participants and Setting

Loweland School (a pseudonym) is an elementary school in a public school district classified as Urban-High Student Poverty and Average Student Population according to the state department of education. Loweland School had an enrollment of 278 students in kindergarten through Grade 6, of which 100% were classified economically disadvantaged. In the year prior to the PARTNERS Project, only 21.2% of the third-grade students scored at or above the proficient level on the state-mandated achievement test.

St. Mark School (a pseudonym) is a non-public, Catholic School serving an urban, predominately Hispanic community. St. Mark School had an enrollment of 215 students in preschool through Grade 8, of which 94% were economically disadvantaged. State-mandated achievement test data were not available for non-public schools. However, Acadience screening data collected at the onset of the study indicated that only 25% of the third-grade students were at benchmark for reading at the middle of the year checkpoint. Demographic information for each school’s student population is provided in Table 2 .

Loweland School formed a K – 2 teacher team that consisted of four teachers, an intervention teacher, and the principal. St. Mark School formed two teams, a K – 1 teacher team with eight members, and a grades 2 – 3 teacher team with six members. At St. Mark School, the principal, English Language Learner (ELL) teacher, reading intervention teacher, and the Title I teacher all served on both the K – 1 team and the grades 2 – 3 team. Table 3 provides information regarding the gender, race/ethnicity, years of teaching experience at the start of the PARTNERS Project, and any relevant training each participant had received prior to the start of the PARTNERS Project. Given the opportunity to participate in the PARTNERS Project, all of the participants expressed a willingness to be involved. The teachers were encouraged, but not required, to participate in the project Table 3 .

The PARTNERS Project

The PARTNERS Project provided comprehensive professional learning (i.e., training and coaching) to teams of teachers in a problem-solving, data-driven process whereby they evaluated their own instructional program and identified areas of needed improvement to align with the science of reading. The problem-solving approach was operationalized in the Literacy Analysis and Planning Guide (LAP-G). A description of the LAP-G and the professional learning supports are provided in this section.

Literacy Analysis and Planning Guide Tool

The Literacy Analysis and Planning Guide (LAP-G) provided for an analysis of evidence-based literacy practices across each tier of an MTSS framework (i.e., core instruction, strategic intervention, and intensive intervention). The core components of evidence-based literacy instruction analyzed by the LAP-G process at Tier 1 were (1) Screening; (2) Instructional Materials by Essential Component—Core and Supplemental; (3) Implementation of Tier 1 Instruction; and (4) Differentiated Instruction. The reliability, validity, and comprehensiveness of the school’s screening system was operationalized by 11 items on the LAP-G (see Table 4 ). The second core component pertained to the instructional materials (the core curriculum and supplemental materials) used to address each of the essential components of reading: Phonological awareness, phonics, reading fluency, vocabulary, comprehension, and writing (see Table 5 ). Implementation of Tier 1 instruction was the third core component. Six items on the LAP-G operationalize how implementation is assessed through multiple measures (e.g., permanent product review, direct observation) and multiple data sources (see Table 6 ). The fourth core component was differentiated instruction. Seven items on the LAP-G operationalize differentiated instruction (see Table 7 ).

The core components of evidence-based literacy intervention analyzed by the LAP-G process at Tier 2 were (1) Assessments—Intervention-based Diagnostics and Progress monitoring; (2) Instructional Materials for Each Intervention Program; and (3) General Considerations: Effective Intervention Design, Professional Development, Implementation Checks. The core components of evidence-based literacy intervention at Tier 3 were (1) Assessment; (2) Designing Tier 3 Supports—Collaborative Problem Solving, Intervention Components; (3) Effective Implementation of Tier 3 Interventions—Effective Implementation, Appropriate Placement in Tier 3, Professional Learning for Tier 3. A copy of the LAP-G with the core components of evidence-based literacy interventions at Tier 2 and 3 is available upon request to the corresponding author.

The LAP-G engaged a team of educators in a problem-solving process whereby the effectiveness of each tier of instruction/intervention was evaluated. The tool utilizes a five-step collaborative problem-solving process: (1) Define and Analyze Needs: Collect Initial Information; (2) Define and Analyze Needs: Summarize, Analyze, and Prioritize; (3) Plan Support; (4) Implement Plan; and (5) Evaluate. Teams began by documenting and reviewing student data to identify areas of concern with the support of their PARTNERS Project consultant who served as a facilitator. Priority areas of opportunity were then identified and action plans were developed to improve upon current practices (plan development and implementation). The LAP-G process was completed annually in April/May to evaluate progress and determine next steps.

Professional Learning: Training and Coaching

An overview of the scope of the professional learning provided through the PARTNERS Project is presented in Table 8 . At Loweland Elementary, the need for changes in the core curriculum and instructional practices was identified in the first year of PARTNERS Project implementation with its focus on Tier 1 instruction. Teachers participated in training in Language Essentials for Teachers of Reading and Spelling (LETRS) to build foundational understanding of the science of reading. LETRS has been shown by research to be an effective professional development program for reading teachers (Garet et al., 2008 ). Kindergarten and first-grade teachers at Loweland identified a need to focus on supplemental phonics instruction in Tier 1. A review of curriculum aligned with the science of reading and matched to the instructional need resulted in the selection of Superkids. The Superkids Reading Program meets the criteria for which programs can be called evidence-based established by the federal Every Student Succeeds Act ( https://media.zaner-bloser.com/reading/superkids-reading-program/pdfs/R1727_SK_EvidenceforESSA.pdf ). Teachers at Loweland were trained in effective literacy instruction and high-fidelity curriculum implementation in the use of Superkids at the kindergarten, first and second grade levels. Training also included a two-day Summer Institute focused on Superkids and data-based decision making prior to implementation. Due to teacher requests during a monthly teacher team PARTNERS meeting, the Superkids consultant was brought back for a day of modeling lessons and program-specific coaching the following spring.

At St. Mark School, the need to strengthen the core instructional program and use of differentiation in instruction were identified as priorities at the kindergarten and first-grade levels. Teachers participated in training in Language Essentials for Teaching Reading and Spelling (LETRS) to build foundational understanding of the science of reading. Teachers at St. Mark School identified a need to focus on supplemental phonics instruction in Tier 1. Superkids was adopted as the curriculum prior to the start of the PARTNERS Project, but there was a recognized need for additional professional learning. St. Mark School teachers participated alongside Lowland Elementary teachers for the 2-day Summer Institute focused on Superkids and data-based decision making. Kindergarten and first-grade teachers at St. Mark School also participated in ongoing training in the valid and reliable use of Acadience measures beginning in their first year of engagement with the PARTNERS Project. In Year 2, the LAP-G process showed gaps in the phonics instruction with Superkids. The teacher teams reviewed alternative curriculums and selected the 95% Group Phonics Lesson Library. In addition to training in this new curriculum, the teams at St. Mark School focused on writing skills in Years 2-3 and reading comprehension in Year 3. Given that the student population was predominately Hispanic, the PARTNERS Project professional learning included a year-long book study on supporting the early literacy skills of English Language Learners.

At both schools, PARTNERS Project consultants observed teacher instruction and assessed implementation fidelity using a fidelity checklist co-designed with the teachers. Observations were conducted weekly in Years 2 and 3, such that each teacher was observed at least once a month. The collaborative coaching model included individualized performance feedback shared in person or via email following each observation.

Measure and Analysis

The LAP-G tool was developed for use in the PARTNERS Project based on a prototype developed by the first author and colleagues. The development of the LAP-G was informed by an extensive review of the science of reading research and the literature on MTSS. Preliminary content validation was established through expert review. A panel of nine individuals with expertise in the science of reading were asked to review the LAP-G overall and by tier on three dimensions: quality, relevance, and usefulness (QRU). Definitions for QRU were based on the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Special Education Program’s Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) measures (Moore & Lammert, 2019 ). Quality was defined as the degree to which the tool is grounded with current research or policy. On a 10-point scale where 10 represented the highest level of quality, the mean ratings were high for the LAP-G overall ( M = 8.8, SD = 1.28), Tier 1 ( M = 9.0, SD = 1.41), Tier 2 ( M = 9.2, SD = 1.30), and Tier 3 ( M = 9.1, SD = 1.1). Relevance was defined as the degree to which the tool addresses current educational problems or issues. On a 10-point scale where 10 represented the highest level of relevance, the mean ratings were high for the LAP-G overall ( M = 9.1, SD = 1.36), Tier 1 ( M = 9.3, SD = 1.66), Tier 2 ( M = 9.2, SD = 1.64), and Tier 3 ( M = 9.7, SD = 0.7). Usefulness was defined as the degree to which the tool could be readily and successfully used by practitioners (i.e., ease of use, suitability). On a 10-point scale where 10 represented the highest level of usefulness, the mean ratings were high for the LAP-G overall ( M = 9.1, SD = 1.36), Tier 1 ( M = 8.9, SD = 1.62), Tier 2 ( M = 8.9, SD = 1.62), and Tier 3 ( M = 9.1, SD = 1.1). Teacher team members were also asked to complete a survey to assess their perceptions of the Quality, Relevance, and Usefulness of the LAP-G and solicit qualitative data regarding their acceptability of the tool.

In using the LAP-G, teacher teams complete a problem-solving process led by their PARTNERS Project consultant who had a primary role in the development of the tool and served as a coach in this project. The problem-solving process involved an examination of many sources of information including Acadience screening data, assessment schedules, and decision rules for the screening section; sample lesson plans for the Tier 1 section; weekly schedules to examine time allotted for instruction and classroom observation data for the classroom environment section; and sample intervention programs for the Tier 2 section. After reviewing these student screening data and permanent products, each of the core components was scored on a 3-point scale, where 3 represented “Strong evidence/No need to problem solve,” 2 “Mixed or inconsistent evidence/Possible area for problem solving,” and 1 represented “No evidence/An area in need of problem solving.” Many of the LAP-G items included a checklist of essential elements that were required to be evident for a score of a 3 for that core component. The number of possible points for each component was based on the number of items and not the number of essential elements. In the Tier 1 section, the number of possible points for the core components was: Screening (33 points), Instructional Materials by Essential Component – Core and Supplemental (18 points), Implementation of Tier 1 Instruction (18 points), and Differentiated Instruction (21 points). The number of possible points for the Tier 2 section by core component was as follows: Assessments—Intervention-based Diagnostics and Progress Monitoring (30 points), Instructional Materials for Each Intervention Program (12 points), and General Considerations: Effective Intervention Design, Professional Development, Implementation Checks (64 points). Only the Tier 1 and Tier 2 sections had been completed by the teacher teams during the period of time reported on in this study.

Design and Procedures

The evaluation of the PARTNERS Project used descriptive research methods. The LAP-G was completed annually in April/May during the first three years of the project. The results were calculated as the percentage of possible points earned for each of the core components in the Tier 1 section and the Tier 2 sections.

The results of this process evaluation indicate that the PARTNERS Project increased teachers’ capacity to implement key MTSS practices pertaining to reading. Over the course of the first three years of the PARTNERS Project, implementation gains were made at Tier 1 and Tier 2, as measured by the LAP-G.

At Loweland School, Tier 1: Screening remained stable from Year 1 to Year 2 at 81.8% and increased to 87.9% in Year 3. Instructional Materials by Essential Component increased from 63.9% in Year 1 to 83.3% in Years 2 and 3. Implementation of Tier 1 Instruction was more variable with a decrease from 94.4% in Year 1 to 77.8% in Year 2 before a slight increase to 88.9% in Year 3. This dip is attributed to greater teacher understanding of the components of the science of reading leading to more accurate rating of practices in Year 2 relative to Year 1, as well as a possible implementation dip while learning the newly adopted phonics program. Differentiated Instruction saw a steady increase from 42.9% in Year 1 to 61.9% in Year 2 and 69.0% in Year 3.

The Tier 2 section was completed in Years 2 and 3 of the PARTNERS Project at Loweland. Tier 2 Assessments increased from 70.4% in Year 2 to 92.6% in Year 3. Instructional Materials for Each Intervention Program remained stable at 83.3% both years. General Considerations/Implementation increased from 59.5% to 72.6%. Loweland School’s results on the annual administration of the LAP-G are presented graphically in Figure 1 .

The K-1 teacher team at St. Mark School demonstrated marked gains in Tier 1. Tier 1 Screening increased sharply from 39.4% in Year 1 to 100% in Years 2 and 3. Instructional Materials by Essential Component increased from 33.3% in Year 1 to 86.1% in Year 2 to 100% in Year 3. Implementation of Tier 1 Instruction increased sharply from 44.4% in Year 1 to 100% in Years 2 and 3. Differentiated Instruction increased from 61.9% in Year 1 to 100% in Years 2 and 3.

The K – 1 teacher team at St. Mark School also demonstrated marked gains in Tier 2 evidence-based literacy practices. Tier 2 Assessments increased sharply from 33.3% in Year 1 to 100% in Years 2 and 3. Instructional Materials for Each Intervention Program increased from 33.3% in Year 1 to 91.7% in Year 2 to 100% in Year 3. General Considerations/Implementation increased sharply from 21.9% in Year 1 to 96.9% in Year 2 to 100% in Year 3. Through this process, the K – 1 team focused on increasing the coordination of the interventionists delivering a seamless continuum of supports. St. Mark School’s K – 1 teacher team results are presented graphically in Figure 2 .

The Grade 2 – 3 teacher team at St. Mark School demonstrated similarly positive gains on the annual administration of the LAP-G at Tier 1. Tier 1 Screening increased sharply from 39.4% in Year 1 to 100% in Years 2 and 3. Instructional Materials by Essential Component increased from 33.3% in Year 1 to 72.2% in Years 2 and 3. Implementation of Tier 1 Instruction increased from 50.0% in Year 1 to 72.2% in Year 2 to 83.3% in Year 3. Differentiated Instruction increased sharply from 52.4% in Year 1 to 100% in Years 2 and 3.

The Grade 2 – 3 teacher team at St. Mark School also demonstrated marked gains in Tier 2 evidence-based literacy practices. Tier 2 Assessments increased sharply from 33.3% in Year 1 to 100% in Years 2 and 3. Instructional Materials for Each Intervention Program increased from 33.3% in Year 1 to 91.7% in Years 2 to 100% in Year 3. General Considerations/Implementation increased sharply from 21.9% in Year 1 to 96.9% in Year 2 to 100% in Year 3. St. Mark School’s Grade 2 – 3 teacher team results are presented graphically in Figure 3 .

Through this process at St. Mark School, a screening system was installed, the core instruction program at K – 1 was determined to be focused on skills that were too advanced given the students’ actual instructional levels, LETRS training was initiated to increase their knowledge and skills in the science of reading, and both teams focused on small-group differentiated instruction. Mid-year changes in Year 1 were made to the supplemental instructional program at K – 1 when the Acadience benchmark data indicated a stronger focus on phonics was needed.

Qualitative data regarding teachers’ perceptions of the acceptability of the PARTNERS Project and the LAP-G process were gathered from 100% of the teachers on St. Mark’s K – 1 and Grades 2 – 3 teams at the end of their first year of implementation. Teachers’ comments provide additional evidence to support the contribution of the PARTNERS Project on increasing teachers’ capacity to implement key MTSS practices pertaining to reading:

I have high hopes that the LAP-G will do everything that is listed above. I am excited about the progress that has been made this year with the Superkids curriculum and am looking forward to more progress next year!

It provided a systematic way to look at strengths and needs.

Still learning about the LAP-G, but I think it's a wonderful system and learning tool to help promote early literacy inside the classroom and provide the teachers with extra support to see areas of needs.

The teachers’ comments provided at the end of the first year of implementation also highlight the teachers’ recognition that they are still developing their skill fluency and require the scaffolded support of their PARTNERS Project consultant and the sustained investment of their school’s administration.

I believe the LAP-G does a great job at pin-pointing areas of need, which makes it easier to plan ahead and supplement those areas for improvement. However, without the guidance of [PARTNERS Project consultant], I'm not sure how successful I'd be filling it out on my own.

I hope the administration will be able to work with the PARTNERS work to provide instructional materials & training needed to continue the positive direction PARTNERS & our teachers have taken this year!

One only needs to consider the decades of substandard reading outcomes to recognize that we have a national reading crisis. Given that research shows upwards of 95% of all students are capable of becoming proficient readers (Foorman et al., 2003 ; Simos et al., 2002 ; Torgesen, 2007 ), low rates of reading proficiency are indicative of an inadequate core curriculum, instruction, and tiered supports to target student needs. The travesty of instructional casualties is particularly devastating among educationally marginalized students. Whereas children from affluent families can pursue private tutoring to compensate for weaknesses in early literacy instruction, families with fewer financial resources often find their children falling farther behind due to unmet instructional needs.

Advances in the science of reading have produced a robust evidence base for effective curriculum and instruction. MTSS provides a framework within which literacy instruction aligned with the science of reading can be provided to address the needs of students proactively. Fidelity of implementation is essential to realizing the potential of evidence-based instruction delivered within an MTSS framework. However, schools often lack the capacity to implement research-based practices with fidelity. The PARTNERS Project was designed to build the capacity of teachers to strengthen the core reading curriculum, instruction, and tiered intervention supports for students in kindergarten through second grade.

As presented in Table 8 , the PARTNERS Project’s training and coaching supports varied from school to school to meet the unique needs, opportunities, and challenges at each school. A highly engaged and effective principal at St. Mark School committed time and energy to drive PARTNERS Project implementation. As a result, the K – 1 teacher team was able to strengthen phonics instruction at Tier 1 and Tier 2 in the first year of implementation, which enabled them to focus on writing instruction, comprehension, and Tier 3 intervention in the second year of implementation. The lack of continuity of effective, invested leadership at Loweland Elementary created challenges in fostering engagement among the teachers in the PARTNERS Project. These varied experiences of the PARTNERS Project highlight the importance of leadership as a driver of meaningful systems change.

The results of this study provide evidence that a problem-solving process focused on evaluating the core curriculum and instruction and intervention supports based on the science of reading and delivered within an MTSS framework can increase the capacity of teacher teams to implement evidence-based literacy practices. Evidence of the effectiveness of the LAP-G problem-solving process was demonstrated at two elementary schools serving educationally marginalized students. Anecdotal evidence based on the observations of the PARTNERS consultants indicates that teachers gained the knowledge and skills to analyze and improve their reading instruction. Classroom observations showed teachers using the targeted instructional practices, for example replacing word walls with sound walls, directing students to sound out known words instead of guessing, prompting students to retrieve previously learned skills and knowledge such as why a given word (e.g., white) has a long i sound (recalling the “silent e” or “magic e” rule—e makes the vowel say its name). Teachers demonstrated increased knowledge and intention in the questions they would ask, such as why a certain word appeared in the curriculum before the sounds had been taught. Finally, the principal of St. Mark School commented that the teachers are now quick to provide the needed instructional support to help students when the learner first shows signs of struggling, whereas before the PARTNERS Project, special education referral and retention seemed like the only ways of dealing with students who were falling behind.

The findings from this process evaluation are consistent with advances in implementation science, which emphasizes training and coaching as crucial for supporting high-fidelity practices, in sharp contrast to the flawed “train and hope” (Stokes & Baer, 1977 ) approach to professional learning. This study extends the research literature by describing the problem-solving process (focused on evaluating weaknesses in the core curriculum and instruction) and professional learning supports needed to build the capacity for teachers to improve Tier 1 instruction to improve outcomes and prevent instructional casualties.

Limitations of the Study

Several limitations need to be considered when interpreting the results of this study. First, this evaluation employed descriptive research methods to show changes in teachers’ capacity to provide scientifically based reading instruction and intervention based on only one measure, the LAP-G, used with teachers at two schools. Additional research is needed to triangulate these findings and validate the impact of the PARTNERS Project on teachers’ literacy instructional practices and the impact on student reading outcomes across a larger sample of schools.

A second limitation of the evaluative study was the lack of a research-validated instrument for conducting classroom observations of teachers’ instructional practices. As part of the PARTNERS Project, PARTNERS Project consultants observed teacher instruction and assessed implementation fidelity using a fidelity checklist that was developed collaboratively with the teachers based on the targeted instructional practices identified through the LAP-G problem-solving process and focused on in the coaching cycle. In addition, interobserver agreement should have been measured to determine the reliability of the observation data collection. The lack of evidence regarding the reliability and validity of the classroom observation is a limitation of this study.

As a third limitation, in the 3rd year of implementation the PARTNERS Project focused only on strengthening the core reading curriculum and instruction (Tier 1) and targeted intervention (Tier 2). In the 4th year of the project, the focus will extend to intensive intervention (Tier 3). Thus, the outcomes reported represent changes that focused on Tiers 1 and 2 only, an incomplete application of the PARTNERS Project.

A final limitation of the study was the historical threat to validity of the COVID-19 pandemic. The first 2 full years of PARTNERS Project implementation (2020 – 2021 and 2021 – 2022) coincided with significant disruptions to teaching and learning, created by the public health crisis. The demands of physical distancing, health insecurity, financial hardship, and dramatically reduced access for families to school-based instruction, specialized instruction and behavioral health services, and social supports (i.e., school lunch, after-school care) created unprecedented challenges for school communities (Schaffer et al., 2021 ). The positive outcomes attained in 2021 – 2022 through the implementation of the PARTNERS Project focused on Tier 1 instruction are all the more noteworthy for having been achieved during the latter part of the pandemic. Future research should examine the effectiveness of the PARTNERS Project, or a similar initiative, to improve reading instruction in postpandemic conditions.

Implications of the Study

The PARTNERS Project does not assert a single curriculum or instructional program, if selected, will meet the needs of all learners. Just as a functional assessment is needed to develop a hypothesis regarding how and why an individual student is struggling to read (Daly et al., 2005 , 2006 ), an analysis of the instructional environment and resulting learning outcomes is needed to determine specific evidence-based literacy practices to be targeted for improvement. In essence, the LAP-G problem-solving process serves as an autopsy examining the fatal flaws in the core curriculum and instruction and tiered system of interventions resulting in mass instructional casualties.

The PARTNERS Project engages teams of teachers in a problem-solving, data-driven process whereby they evaluate their own instructional program and identify areas of needed improvement to align with the science of reading. With considerable training and coaching, teacher teams can be equipped to shift their efforts to correcting deficits in instruction (rather than exclusively focusing on remediating academic skill deficits in students). The results of this study have significant implications for school districts and state departments of education urgently seeking to align the core curriculum and instruction with the science of reading and prevent instructional casualties among our most educationally marginalized students.

Al Otaiba, S., & Torgeson, J. (2007). Effects from intensive standardized kindergarten and first-grade interventions for the prevention of reading difficulties. In S. E. Jimerson, M. K. Burns, & A. M. VanDerHeyden (Eds.), Handbook of response to intervention (pp. 212–222). Springer.

Chapter Google Scholar

Albritton, K., Anhalt, K., & Terry, N. P. (2016). Promoting equity for our nation’s youngest students: School psychologists as agents of social justice in early childhood settings. School Psychology Forum, 10 (3), 237–250.

Google Scholar

Barrett, C. A. (2023). Best practices in applying multiple models to assessment and identification of learning disabilities. In P. L. Harrison, S. L. Proctor, & A. Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology: Data-based and collaborative decision making (7 th ed., pp. 227–239). National Association of School Psychologists.

Blase, K. A., Fixsen, D. L., Van Dyke, M., & Duda, M. A. (2013). Implementation drivers: Best practices for coaching . National Implementation Research Network. http://nirn.fpg.unc.edu

Codding, R. S., & Lane, K. L. (2015). A spotlight on treatment intensity: An important and often overlooked component of intervention inquiry. Journal of Behavioral Education, 24 , 1–10.

Article Google Scholar

Daly, E. J., III, Bonfiglio, C. M., Mattson, T., Persampieri, M., & Foreman-Yates, K. (2005). Refining the experimental analysis of academic skills deficits: Part I. An investigation of variables that affect generalized oral reading performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 38 (4), 485–497.

Daly, E. J., III, Bonfiglio, C. M., Mattson, T., Persampieri, M., & Foreman-Yates, K. (2006). Refining the experimental analysis of academic skills deficits: Part II. Use of brief experimental analysis to evaluate reading fluency treatments. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 39 (3), 323–331.

Daly, E. J., III., Martens, B. K., Barnett, D., Witt, J. C., & Olson, S. C. (2007). Varying intervention delivery in response-to-intervention: Confronting and resolving challenges with measurement, instruction, and intensity. School Psychology Review, 36 , 562–581.

Fien, H., Chard, D. J., & Baker, S. K. (2021). Can the evidence revolution and multi-tiered systems of support improve education equity and reading achievement? Reading Research Quarterly, 56 (1), S105–S118. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.391

Fixsen, D., Blase, K., Metz, A., & Van Dyke, M. (2013). Statewide implementation of evidence-based programs. Exceptional Children, 79 , 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900206

Fletcher, J. M., Coulter, W. A., Reschly, D. J., & Vaugh, S. (2004). Alternative approaches to the definition and identification of learning disabilities: Some questions and answers. Annals of Dyslexia, 54 , 304–331.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Foorman, B., Beyler, N., Borradaile, K., Coyne, M., Denton, C. A., Dimino, J., Furgeson, J., Hayes, L., Henke, J., Justice, L., Keating, B., Lewis, W., Sattar, S., Streke, A., Wagner, R., & Wissel, S. (2016). Foundational skills to support reading for understanding in kindergarten through 3rd grade (NCEE 2016-4008). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. http://whatworks.ed.gov .

Foorman, B. R., Breier, J. I., & Fletcher, J. M. (2003). Interventions aimed at improving reading success: An evidence-based approach. Developmental Neuropsychology, 24 (3), 613–639. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565641.2003.9651913

Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2017). Critique of the national evaluation of response to intervention: A case for simpler frameworks. Exceptional Children, 83 , 255–268. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402917693580

Garet, M. S., Cronen, S., Eaton, M., Kurki, A., Ludwig, M., Jones, W., Uekawa, K., Falk, A., Bloom, H., Doolittle, F., Zhu, P., & Sztenjnberg, L. (2008). The impact of two professional development interventions on early reading instruction and achievement (NCEE 2008-4030). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Hall, S. (2018). 10 success factors for literacy intervention: Getting results with MTSS in elementary school . Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.). Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.

Keller-Margulis, M. A. (2012). Fidelity of implementation framework: A critical need for response to intervention models. Psychology in the Schools, 49 , 342–352. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21602

Kilpatrick, D. A. (2015). Essentials of assessing, preventing, and overcoming reading difficulties . John Wiley & Sons.

Kratochwill, T. R., Volpiansky, P., Clements, M., & Ball, C. (2007). Professional development in implementing and sustaining multitier prevention models: Implications for response to intervention. School Psychology Review, 36 , 618–631.

Long, A. C. J., Hagermoser, Sanetti, & L. M., Collier-Meek, M. A., Gallucci, J, Altschaefl, M., & Kratochwill, T. R. (2016). An exploratory investigation of teachers’ intervention planning and perceived implementation barriers. Journal of School Psychology, 55 , 1–26.

Lyon, G. R., Fletcher, J. M., Shaywitz, S. E., Shaywitz, B. A., Torgesen, J. K., Wood, F. B., Schulte, A., & Olson, R. (2001). Rethinking learning disabilities. In C. E. Finn, R. A. J. Rotherham, & C. R. Hokanson (Eds.), Rethinking special education for a new century (pp. 259–287). Thomas B. Fordham Foundation & Progressive Policy Institute.

Maras, M. A., Splett, J. W., Reinke, W. M., Stormont, M., & Herman, K. C. (2014). School practitioners’ perspectives on planning, implementing, and evaluating evidence-based practices. Child & Youth Services Review, 47 , 314–322.

McIntosh, K., & Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending RTI and PBIS. Guilford Press.

Moore, H., & Lammert, J. (2019). Making project measures meaningful: Quality, relevance, usefulness, and beyond! Westat Center to Improve Program & Project Performance.

Morrison, J. Q., Hawkins, R. O., & Collins, T. A. (2020). Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the Dyslexia Pilot Project: A multi-tiered system of support for early literacy. Psychology in the Schools, 57 (4), 522–539. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22343

National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2022). https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction . National Institutes of Health.

Noell, G. H., & Gansle, K. A. (2006). Assuring the form has substance: Treatment plan implementation as the foundation of assessing response to intervention. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 32 , 32–39.

The Reading League. (2022). The science of reading: A defining guide .

Reynolds, A. J., Temple, J. A., Robertson, D. L., & Mann, E. A. (2002). Age 21 cost-benefit analysis of the Title I Chicago Child-Parent Centers. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis , 24 (4), 267–303. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3594119

Sabnis, S., Castillo, J. M., & Wolgemuth, J. R. (2020). RTI, equity, and the return to the status quo: Implications for Consultants. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 30 (3), 285–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2019.1674152

Sanetti, L. M. H., & Luh, H.-J. (2019). Fidelity of implementation in the field of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 42 (4), 204–216.

Schaffer, G. E., Power, E. M., Fisk, A. K., & Trolian, T. L. (2021). Beyond the four walls: The evolution of school psychological services during the COVID-19 outbreak. Psychology in the Schools, 58 (7), 1246–1265. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22543

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Simos, P. G., Fletcher, J. M., Bergman, E., Breier, J. I., Foorman, B. R., Castillo, E. M., Davis, R. N., Fitzgerald, M., & Papanicolaou, A. C. (2002). Dyslexia-specific brain activation profile becomes normal following successful remedial training. Neurology, 58 , 1203–1213.

Spear-Swerling, L. (2018). Structured literacy and typical literacy practices: Understanding differences to create instructional opportunities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 51 (3), 201–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059917750160

Stokes, T. F., & Baer, D. M. (1977). An implicit technology of generalization. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10 (2), 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1977.10-349

Torgesen, J. K. (2007). Recent discoveries on remedial interventions for children with dyslexia. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hume (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 521–537). Blackwell.

Torgesen, J. K., Alexander, A. W., Wagner, R. K., Rashotte, C. A., Voeller, K. K. S. & Conway, T. (2001). Intensive remedial instruction for children with severe reading disabilities: Immediate and long-term outcomes from two instructional approaches. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34 (1), 33–58, 78.

VanDerHeyden, A. M. (2013). Universal screening may not be for everyone: Using a threshold model as a smarter way to determine risk. School Psychology Review, 42 , 402–414.

VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Witt, J. C. (2005). Quantifying context in assessment: Capturing the effect of base rates on teacher referral and a problem-solving model of identification. School Psychology Review, 34 , 161–183.

VanDerHeyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Gilbertson, D. (2007). A multi-year evaluation of the effects of a response to intervention (RTI) model on identification of children for special education. Journal of School Psychology, 45 (2), 225–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.11.004

Vaughn, S., & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18 , 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00070

Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Sipay, E. R., Small, S. G., Pratt, A., Chen, R., & Denkla, M. B. (1996). Cognitive profiles of difficult-to-remediate and readily remediated poor readers: Early intervention as a vehicle for distinguishing between cognitive and experiential deficits as basic causes of specific reading disability. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88 , 601–638.

Vellutino, F. R., Scanlon, D. M., Zhang, H., & Schatschneider, C. (2008). Using response to kindergarten and first grade intervention to identify children at-risk for long-term reading difficulties. Reading & Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 21 , 437–480.

Download references

This research project was funded by a U.S. Department of Education, Office for Special Education Program (OSEP) Model Demonstration Grant for the Early Identification of Students with Dyslexia in Elementary Schools.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Reading Science Program, Mount Saint Joseph University, Cincinnati, OH, USA

Amy Murdoch & Wendy Strickler

School Psychology Program, University of Cincinnati, CECH-School of Human Services, P.O. Box 210068, Cincinnati, OH, 45221-0068, USA

Julie Q. Morrison

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie Q. Morrison .

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest to disclose.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Murdoch, A., Morrison, J.Q. & Strickler, W. Process Evaluation of a Problem-Solving Approach for Analyzing Literacy Practices within a Multi-Tiered System of Supports Framework. Behav. Soc. Iss. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-024-00166-5

Download citation

Accepted : 12 March 2024

Published : 06 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s42822-024-00166-5

Share this article

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

Science of reading
Program evaluation
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

A problem solving approach to nutrition education and counseling

Affiliation.

1 Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
PMID: 16785096
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneb.2006.01.005

This report applies problem-solving principles to the design and implementation of nutrition education and counseling programs. A framework is proposed that builds on an extensive body of research in mental health and health education that has demonstrated the efficacy of a problem-solving approach to helping people cope with stressful life events. Our framework uses problem-solving principles in helping participants in nutrition education or counseling programs to overcome obstacles they experience in changing their nutrition behaviors. Both research and clinical experience suggest that incorporating problem-solving techniques in nutrition education and counseling will increase long term change in nutrition behaviors.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Attitude to Health
Counseling*
Health Education / methods*
Nutritional Sciences / education*
Problem Solving*
United States

AWW Media [US]

16 Problems Stemming From a Poor Education

Posted: May 8, 2024 | Last updated: May 8, 2024

<p>Education is a lifelong journey that equips us with the tools to navigate the world effectively. It fosters critical thinking, communication skills, and a thirst for knowledge. But what happens when someone hasn’t had the opportunity to develop these skills? What if their schooling didn’t teach these skills? Here are 16 signs that might indicate someone hasn’t had access to a strong educational foundation. </p>

Education is a lifelong journey that equips us with the tools to navigate the world effectively. It fosters critical thinking, communication skills, and a thirst for knowledge. But what happens when someone hasn’t had the opportunity to develop these skills? What if their schooling didn’t teach these skills? Here are 16 signs that might indicate someone hasn’t had access to a strong educational foundation.

<p><span>The first hard truth reminds us of our mortality. Baby Boomers understand that, eventually, we all reach the end of our journey. While our impact may linger in the hearts of loved ones, the reality is that one day, our name will no longer be spoken. </span></p><p><span>This realization prompts reflection on the legacy we wish to leave behind.</span></p>

16. Poor Problem-Solving Skills:

Education trains us to break down complex situations, analyze information, and develop creative solutions. Someone with limited education might struggle when faced with challenges. They might jump to the first answer they come up with, or get easily discouraged if the solution isn’t immediately apparent.

<p>Unlike the rich who may have the resources to pay off debts quickly and the poor who may qualify for debt forgiveness programs, the middle class often struggles to manage various debts, such as student loans, credit card debt, and car loans. This can be a significant burden, limiting their financial mobility.</p><p>However, the middle class also has advantages. Their income often allows them to create a workable debt repayment plan. With careful budgeting, prioritizing high-interest debts, and exploring options like debt consolidation, they can chip away at their debt and achieve financial freedom.</p>

15. Struggle with Technology and Digital Literacy:

Technology is an ever-present part of our lives, and education plays a crucial role in teaching us how to use it effectively. Someone who hasn’t had exposure to technology might struggle with basic tasks like using a computer, navigating the internet, or utilizing digital tools. This can limit their ability to access information and participate fully in the modern world.

<p>Americans’ general lack of knowledge about world geography, cultures, and international affairs can be a source of frustration for people from other countries. Stereotypes and misconceptions can arise, hindering meaningful cross-cultural interactions.</p><p>An American who assumes everyone follows American customs or uses American measurements can cause offense and create unnecessary barriers in communication.</p><p>Understanding and appreciating diverse perspectives can lead to smoother interactions and foster a more inclusive global community. So, let’s embrace cultural awareness and navigate the nuances that come with the fascinating tapestry of our interconnected world.</p>

14. Difficulty in Understanding Abstract Concepts:

Education helps us develop our critical thinking skills and the ability to grasp complex ideas. Someone with limited education might struggle with abstract concepts like philosophy, scientific theories, or economic principles. These concepts often require a strong foundation in logic and reasoning, which can be challenging with or without a strong educational background.

<p>Boomers take pride in their work and prioritize quality over quantity. They believe in doing things right the first time and paying attention to detail in everything they do. Boomers value craftsmanship and excellence, striving for perfection in their endeavors.</p><p>Whether it’s a professional project or a personal hobby, Boomers invest time and effort into producing high-quality results that stand the test of time. Their commitment to quality is evident in their work ethic, integrity, and dedication to excellence, setting a standard of excellence for future generations to emulate.</p>

13. Inability to Differentiate Between Fact and Opinion:

Discerning fact from opinion is a vital skill in today’s information age. Someone who hasn’t had a strong education in critical thinking might struggle to evaluate the information they encounter. They might readily accept unverified information or take personal opinions as established facts. This can lead to difficulty forming informed decisions and make you more susceptible to manipulation.

<p>Education exposes us to a wide range of words and teaches us the proper way to use them. Someone with limited education might have a restricted vocabulary, making it difficult for them to express themselves clearly and concisely. Additionally, they might struggle with grammar rules, making their communication less effective.</p>

12. Limited Vocabulary and Poor Grammar:

Education exposes us to a wide range of words and teaches us the proper way to use them. Someone with limited education might have a restricted vocabulary, making it difficult for them to express themselves clearly and concisely. Additionally, they might struggle with grammar rules, making their communication less effective.

<p>Education broadens our understanding of the world around us. Without education might have significant gaps in their general knowledge base. They might struggle with basic historical facts, scientific concepts, or current events. This can make it difficult to participate in conversations and engage with the world around them on a deeper level.</p>

11. Lack of General Knowledge:

Education broadens our understanding of the world around us. Without education might have significant gaps in their general knowledge base. They might struggle with basic historical facts, scientific concepts, or current events. This can make it difficult to participate in conversations and engage with the world around them on a deeper level.

<p>Change is inevitable, and mentally fit individuals approach it with adaptability and resilience rather than fear or resistance. They understand that change can bring growth, learning opportunities, and new possibilities for personal development. Instead of clinging to comfort zones or routines, they embrace change as a natural part of life’s journey, remaining open-minded and flexible in the face of uncertainty.</p><p>By embracing change with courage and curiosity, they navigate transitions with greater ease and thrive in evolving circumstances.</p>

10. Closed-Mindedness and Resistance to New Ideas:

Education encourages intellectual curiosity and open-mindedness. Without education, one might be resistant to new ideas or perspectives that challenge their existing beliefs. They might be unwilling to consider evidence or arguments that contradict their current understanding.

<p>Language is a dynamic and ever-evolving entity, reflecting societal changes and progress. In recent times, there has been a conscious effort to promote inclusivity and sensitivity in our communication. This shift has led to the reconsideration and replacement of certain expressions that may be perceived as outdated or insensitive.</p> <p>These are 15 classic expressions that are making way for more inclusive and mindful alternatives, as we bid adieu to linguistic relics in the era of awareness.</p>

9. Difficulty with Critical Thinking and Analysis:

Education teaches us to analyze information, identify biases, and form well-reasoned arguments. Some might struggle to dissect complex issues or identify logical fallacies. They might rely on emotions or personal experiences to form their opinions rather than objective reasoning.

<p>Any form of abuse—physical, emotional, or psychological—is a strong and valid reason for leaving a relationship, regardless of love. Safety and respect are fundamental.</p>

8. Poor Communication Skills:

Effective communication goes beyond simply conveying information. It involves listening actively, expressing oneself clearly, and tailoring language for the audience. With limited education one might struggle with these aspects of communication. They might have difficulty formulating clear arguments, expressing themselves concisely, or understanding nonverbal cues.

<p>Education trains us to concentrate on tasks for extended periods and absorb information from various sources. Without that training, some people might find it difficult to read lengthy texts or participate in in-depth discussions that require sustained attention.</p>

7. Short Attention Span and Difficulty with Focused Learning:

Education trains us to concentrate on tasks for extended periods and absorb information from various sources. Without that training, some people might find it difficult to read lengthy texts or participate in in-depth discussions that require sustained attention.

<p>Expand your social circle and expose yourself to diverse perspectives by engaging with people from different backgrounds, cultures, and ages. Interacting with a variety of individuals enhances empathy, communication skills, and cognitive flexibility, enriching your overall social and intellectual experiences. Embracing diversity in your social interactions fosters a more inclusive and compassionate community where everyone feels valued and respected.</p>

6. Limited Exposure to Different Cultures and Perspectives:

Education broadens our horizons and exposes us to diverse cultures and ways of thinking. Someone with limited education might have a narrow worldview and limited understanding of different customs, beliefs, and perspectives. This can lead to misunderstandings and difficulty interacting with people from different backgrounds.

<p>Emotional disconnect can be more damaging than physical distance. Women often leave because they feel emotionally neglected or misunderstood by their partners.</p>

5. Lack of Confidence in Learning and Skill Development:

Education fosters a growth mindset and the belief that we can always learn and improve. Without education, one might struggle with a fixed mindset and believe their intelligence or skills are predetermined. This can make them hesitant to take on new challenges or pursue opportunities for learning and growth.

<p>Relationships require ongoing effort and nurturing. If a woman feels she is the only one making an effort to sustain the relationship, she might decide to leave to seek balance and reciprocity.</p>

4. Difficulty with Self-Awareness and Self-Reflection:

Education should help us develop self-awareness and the ability to reflect on our thoughts, behaviors, and emotions. Without which one might struggle with introspection and understanding their own strengths and weaknesses. This can make it difficult for them to learn from their mistakes and grow as individuals.

<p>Continuous arguing without resolution can wear anyone down. If conflicts grow frequent and solutions seem out of reach, leaving might appear as the only option for peace.</p>

3. Overreliance on Others for Information and Decision-Making:

Education empowers us to think critically and make informed decisions. Without this you might be overly reliant on others for information and decision-making. Struggling to research topics independently, evaluate options, or trust their own judgment.

<p>A curious mind is a hallmark of a well-educated person. Someone with limited education might display a lack of curiosity or enthusiasm for learning new things. They might see learning as a chore rather than a source of personal growth and enjoyment.</p>

2. No Interest in Learning New Things:

A curious mind is a hallmark of a well-educated person. Someone with limited education might display a lack of curiosity or enthusiasm for learning new things. They might see learning as a chore rather than a source of personal growth and enjoyment.

<p>Wise people understand that true happiness doesn’t come from material possessions. Cultivating a simple and intentional life allows for a greater focus on what truly matters – relationships, experiences, and personal growth.</p><p>Living simply doesn’t mean depriving yourself. It’s about making conscious choices about what you truly value and letting go of the excess.</p>

1. Difficulty Adapting to Change:

The world is constantly evolving, and education equips us with the tools to adapt to new situations. Someone with limited education might struggle with change and have difficulty adjusting to new technologies, work environments, or social dynamics.

Remember, this list is not meant to be judgmental. Education comes in many forms, and there are always opportunities to learn and grow. If you recognize these signs in yourself or someone you know, there are many resources available to help bridge the knowledge gap.

<p>In the intricate dance of relationships, certain habits can act as warning signs, signaling potential issues that may drive others away. Recognizing these <a href="https://tipsaholic.com/habits-that-keep-people-away/">red flags</a> is crucial for fostering healthy and fulfilling connections.</p>

Relationship Red Flags: 12 Habits That Push People Away

In the intricate dance of relationships, certain habits can act as warning signs, signaling potential issues that may drive others away. Recognizing these red flags is crucial for fostering healthy and fulfilling connections.

<p>Building a thriving community goes beyond property lines; it’s about fostering an environment where everyone feels appreciated and respected. So, let’s delve into self-reflection and discover the <a href="https://tipsaholic.com/reasons-you-are-a-bad-neighbor/">ten reasons you might be considered a bad neighbor</a>.</p>

Neighborly Nightmare: 10 Distasteful Habits Revealed

Building a thriving community goes beyond property lines; it’s about fostering an environment where everyone feels appreciated and respected. So, let’s delve into self-reflection and discover the ten reasons you might be considered a bad neighbor .

More for You

Brittney Griner (L) and Caitlin Clark were the top picks in their respective drafts.

Caitlin Clark receives harsh warning from Brittney Griner

The health condition many women are getting diagnosed with after COVID

The health condition many women are developing after COVID

Churches and Skyline of New Haven, Connecticut

This is the salary it takes to be considered rich in every state

7 CDs You Probably Owned, Threw Out and Now Are Worth Bank

Renewed and Canceled TV Shows 2024 Guide

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds: This is unconscionable

NEWS: [Subcat: US] Map shows the best place to buy a house in US to survive nuclear war (SEO) METRO GRAPHICS Credit FEMA / Getty / metro.co.uk

Map reveals best places to live in the US if nuclear war breaks out

‘I’ve sacrificed my career’: My husband and I may divorce soon, but he will inherit $1 million. How do I make sure I get half?

Amid Tesla’s bloodletting, top exec sends Musk a message: The company has ‘taken its pound of flesh’

A Lawn Leveling Rake Is The Yard Tool You'll Wish You Had Sooner

The 16 worst-paying college majors, five years after graduation

Ways to Identify When Someone is Richer Than You Think

13 Remote Jobs That Pay Over $200,000 a Year

10 Reasons Hybrids Are Worse Than All-Electric Cars

Net Worth for Retirees: How To Tell If You’re Poor, Middle Class, Upper Middle Class or Rich

Video Shows Massive Tornado Roaring Through Tennessee: 'Extremely Violent'

Our Gardening Expert Warns To Avoid This Major Mistake When Growing Hostas

Trump lashes out at Paul Ryan after ex-House speaker declares he ‘lacks character’ for being president

17 Jobs That Pay $25 an Hour to Work From Home

‘We’ve had our ups and downs’: My late in-laws left their estate to me, my husband and our son. Do we need to hire an attorney?

Meats were shown to have a bigger impact on risk of death than many other kinds of ultraprocessed foods, according to the new study. - Adam Höglund/iStockphoto/Getty Images

Here are the ultraprocessed foods you most need to avoid, according to a 30-year study

COMMENTS

Problem-Based Learning
Problem-based learning (PBL) is a student-centered approach in which students learn about a subject by working in groups to solve an open-ended problem. This problem is what drives the motivation and the learning. ... Problem solving across disciplines. Considerations for Using Problem-Based Learning.
Why Every Educator Needs to Teach Problem-Solving Skills
Students need strong problem-solving skills for academic and career success. Educators can begin teaching these skills with a quality problem solving assessment. ... Critical and creative thinking help students approach a problem objectively, analyze its components, and determine different ways to go about finding a solution. ... Education must ...
Teaching Problem Solving
Problem solving is a necessary skill in all disciplines and one that the Sheridan Center is focusing on as part of the Brown Learning Collaborative, which provides students the opportunity to achieve new levels of excellence in six key skills traditionally honed in a liberal arts education - critical reading, writing, research, data ...
The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting
Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting ... (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ ...
Problem-Based Learning (PBL)
PBL is a student-centered approach to learning that involves groups of students working to solve a real-world problem, quite different from the direct teaching method of a teacher presenting facts and concepts about a specific subject to a classroom of students. Through PBL, students not only strengthen their teamwork, communication, and ...
Teaching Problem Solving
Make students articulate their problem solving process . In a one-on-one tutoring session, ask the student to work his/her problem out loud. This slows down the thinking process, making it more accurate and allowing you to access understanding. When working with larger groups you can ask students to provide a written "two-column solution.".
Teaching problem solving: Let students get 'stuck' and 'unstuck'
By naming what it is they did to solve the problem, students can be more independent and productive as they apply and adapt their thinking when engaging in future complex tasks. After a few weeks ...
Full article: Understanding and explaining pedagogical problem solving
In this approach problem solving involves diagnosing the issue and identifying alternative potential solutions, whereas decision making is concerned with evaluating and choosing among these options then committing and implementing this choice. ... "Problem‐Based Learning: A Framework for Prospective Teachers' Pedagogical Problem Solving ...
PDF Problem Based Learning: A Student-Centered Approach
Keywords: problem based learning, curriculum, collaborative learning, team work, approach, method 1. Introduction Problem based learning is a student-centered educational method which aims to develop problem - solving skills through a self- directed learning as a life time habit and team work skills. Untidy, messy, ill structured situations
Educational leaders' problem-solving for educational improvement
Educational leaders' effectiveness in solving problems is vital to school and system-level efforts to address macrosystem problems of educational inequity and social injustice. Leaders' problem-solving conversation attempts are typically influenced by three types of beliefs—beliefs about the nature of the problem, about what causes it, and about how to solve it. Effective problem solving ...
Problem-Solving as a Theory of Learning and Teaching
Above all, the problem-solving approach contributes to an effective theory of teaching because it is replete with implications for the classroom. Problem-solving fares well, accordingly, as a guide to the teaching- learning process. It is also consistent with the aims of American education.
Educational Strategies Problem-Solving Concepts and Theories
of learning and problem solving. An early cognitive approach to problem solving was to identify the mental stages through which problem solving proceeded. Two noted cognitive psychologists, Wallas and Polya, developed a four-stage model of problem solving. The four stages of problem solving identified by Wallas were (1) prepara-
PDF Pedagogical Approaches to Problem Solving in Higher Education
The article includes analysis of pedagogical approaches like project-based, problem-based learning and enquiry-based learning, as well as describes the use of design thinking as one of the problem solving approaches in higher education. As mathematics studies at universities play an important role in developing problem solving skills, an ...
Problem-Solving Method In Teaching
The problem-solving method is an effective teaching strategy that promotes critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. It provides students with real-world problems that require them to apply their knowledge and skills to find solutions. By using the problem-solving method, teachers can help their students develop the skills they need to ...
Brian Holmes (1920-1993)
Holmes regarded the best method for comparative education to be the problem-solving method. By confounding individual norms with national norms, Holmes created a difficulty in his method, a difficulty that repeated reference to mental states was needed to overcome. Holmes emphasised the separation of individual norms and societal institutions ...
The Problem-Solving Process
Problem-solving is a mental process that involves discovering, analyzing, and solving problems. The ultimate goal of problem-solving is to overcome obstacles and find a solution that best resolves the issue. The best strategy for solving a problem depends largely on the unique situation. In some cases, people are better off learning everything ...
Approaches to Learning: Problem Solving
Birth to 9 months. Children are building the foundation for problem solving through active exploration and social interaction. Indicators for children include: Focuses on getting a caregiver's attention through the use of sounds, cries, gestures, and facial expressions. Enjoys repeating actions, e.g., continues to drop toy from highchair ...
Problem Solving Approach to Mathematics for Elementary School ...
A Problem Solving Approach to Mathematics for Elementary School Teachers offers a concept-rich, skill-based presentation that helps prepare you to become an outstanding elementary math teacher. It not only helps future teachers learn the math, but creates an invaluable reference by including professional development features and discussion of ...
Process Evaluation of a Problem-Solving Approach for ...
A Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) framework features a structured problem-solving process and the use of assessment data to develop, identify, and evaluate the impact of instruction and intervention to meet the needs of all students proactively. The purpose of this process evaluation was to examine the implementation of a novel problem-solving approach for analyzing literacy practices ...
How to utilize problem-solving models in education
The MTSS problem-solving model is a data-driven decision-making process that helps educators utilize and analyze interventions based on students' needs on a continual basis. Traditionally, the MTSS problem-solving model only involves four steps: Identifying the student's strengths and needs, based on data.
Applying Problem Solving Approach in Teaching Addition and Subtraction
This study examined the effectiveness of using a word problem solving approach to improve Grade 3 learners' performance when learning addition and subtraction. The study employed this hypothesis to test the difference between the experimental and control groups and between the pre-test and post-test with learners in diverse classrooms solving ...
PDF A Problem Solving Approach to Designing and Implementing a Strategy to
Problem-Solving Approach to Strategy Design and Implementation. The problem-solving approach to designing and implementing a strategy includes eight steps (see. Figure A): 1. Identify the Problem. 2. Analyze the Problem and Diagnose Its Causes. 3. Develop a Theory of Action.
A problem solving approach to nutrition education and counseling
This report applies problem-solving principles to the design and implementation of nutrition education and counseling programs. A framework is proposed that builds on an extensive body of research in mental health and health education that has demonstrated the efficacy of a problem-solving approach to helping people cope with stressful life events.
12 Approaches To Problem-Solving for Every Situation
Here are the seven steps of the rational approach: Define the problem. Identify possible causes. Brainstorm options to solve the problem. Select an option. Create an implementation plan. Execute the plan and monitor the results. Evaluate the solution. Read more: Effective Problem Solving Steps in the Workplace.
16 Problems Stemming From a Poor Education
Poor Problem-Solving Skills: Education trains us to break down complex situations, analyze information, and develop creative solutions. Someone with limited education might struggle when faced ...
Which philosophy of education encourages a problemsolving
Which philosophy of education encourages a problem-solving approach to education? a. scientific rationalism. b. systems theory. c. empiricism. d. ... Education must include a common-sense approach to life. Children must work towards a correct solution of a problem. (more) 0 1. Answers.
An Investigation into the Utility of Large Language Models in ...
The study reveals that GPT-4 achieved an overall problem-solving accuracy of 67% with custom instructional prompting, significantly higher than the 28.9% with zero-shot learning and 34% with CoT. However, the study underscores the importance of human oversight in interpreting and verifying GPT-4's outputs, especially in complex, higher-order ...

Center for Teaching Innovation

Problem-Based Learning

Why Use Problem-Based Learning?

Considerations for Using Problem-Based Learning

Getting Started with Problem-Based Learning

Why Every Educator Needs to Teach Problem-Solving Skills

Want to learn more about how to measure and teach students’ higher-order skills, including problem solving, critical thinking, and written communication?

Problem-Solving Skills Help Students…

Set and Achieve Goals

Resolve Conflicts

Achieve Success

Problem-Solving Skills Can Be Measured and Taught

What Are Performance-Based Assessments?

Preview a Performance-Based Assessment

Performance-Based Assessments Help Students Build and Practice Problem-Solving Skills

Explore CAE’s Problem-Solving Assessments

Ready to Get Started?

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

Similar content being viewed by others

Impact of artificial intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness and safety in education

The development of human causal learning and reasoning

Sleep quality, duration, and consistency are associated with better academic performance in college students

Data sources and search strategies

Eligibility criteria

Data coding design

Procedure for extracting and coding data

Publication bias test

Heterogeneity test

The analysis of the overall effect size

The analysis of moderator effect size

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Implications and limitations

Conclusions

Data availability

Acknowledgements

Author information

Corresponding authors

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

Informed consent

Supplementary information

About this article

Share this article

This article is cited by

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis

Quick links

Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

By working with PBL, students will:

How to Begin PBL

Designing Classroom Instruction

How to Orchestrate a PBL Activity

Teacher’s Role in PBL

The Role of the Students

Similar Posts

Robert Gagné’s Taxonomy of Learning

Open Source Learning Management Systems (LMS)

Adaptive Learning: What is It, What are its Benefits and How Does it Work?

Instructional Design

Concept Maps and How To Use Them

Center for Teaching

Tips and Techniques

Encourage Independence

Be sensitive

Encourage Thoroughness and Patience

Teaching Guides

Quick Links

Teaching problem solving: Let students get ‘stuck’ and ‘unstuck’

Problem-Solving Method in Teaching

Table of Contents

Meaning of Problem-Solving Method

Benefits of Problem-Solving Method

Steps in Problem-Solving Method

Verification of the concluded solution or Hypothesis

Overview of the Problem-Solving Mental Process

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Identifying the Problem

2. Defining the Problem

3. Forming a Strategy

A Word From Verywell