how to solve problem in education

– with a better introduction to describe its "big picture" context in education and in life;  and fixing the links. 

  In my page about a paragraph for — which is useful because "when you're co-designing as part of a group, you'll want to develop empathy for the other solution-designers in your team, to make your more enjoyable and productive" — leads into a section about that begins with educational goals:  "our most important (our ) usually involve people, so is a worthy goal.  When we're designing whole-person education to help students improve personally useful in their whole lives as whole people, our goals should include the important life-skill of building better relationships, with empathy & kindness and in other ways. 

An effective general strategy — for educating students (and teachers & everyone else) in all of the including (empathy & self-empathy, and much more) — is to a " by thinking (re: an ability they want to improve) “not yet” instead of “not ever.”   /    developing-and-using a growth mindset is useful for "everyone" because education (as broadly defined in the for my website about ) is the lifelong “learning from experience” that everyone does.}

{more - If you want to learn more about these ideas (that are not discussed later in this page) you can read my page about .}

[[ A very useful personal skill is developing-and-using a... growth mindset.....]]

- the remainder of this brown box is idea-scraps about one strategy for societal problem solving more generally (not just in relationships) so it probably will be moved out of this section.

often the weighting of outcomes, deciding what is most important (based on their values & priorities) how to weigh the importance of each outcome, and will depend on their life-experiences & life-situation.

worldview-based values & priorities

{e.g. try to if you didn't know “who you are” regarding your intelligence, looks, race, health, wealth, status, location,... so, due to your imagining, your actual current knowledge of “who you are” has less influence on your evaluative weighting of different outcome-factors.}    /    But many people aren't skilled in “coping with complexity” and they don't enjoy trying to cope with it, especially when the actual complexity challenges the oversimplistic reasoning they have been using to defend their own views, so it decreases their over-confidence in their views, and the policies they advocate.

[[ obviously we cannot do this "veil of ignorance" now, instead the best we can do is use empathy-and-kindness so we'll want (with kindness) to make things better for more people, and (with empathy) we'll understand what life is like for others, to help us problem-solve ways to make things better for them.

SHOULD WE USE MODELS ?

During , students can by using a model and/or semi-model and/or no model. website#dpomnsm??/wsepp?

link to sections above, with models for , and , plus my

simple -- e.g. for all problem-solving activities (+ when focus is on Science)

Also, for different kinds of models -- Robert Marzano's has three systems and a that includes Information, Mental Procedures, Physical Procedures; 

and (from educational researchers at CRESST) provide a framework for thinking about an [[ == that uses Design Process to improve the mutually supportive interactions between ideas and skills. 

what are some benefits of combining two (or more) Models-for-Process ?

Structure + Function -- for instruction, for thinking

-- -- link to home.htm%234a4b / dp-om.htm#seq/ws.htm#dpmo4aseq ?

  )

  (of instruction)

One useful strategy f is .

Other educators also have developed strategies for goal-directed designing.  For example, can help guide our selection-and-sequencing of activities that include to achieve specific learning outcomes for students.  With more detail,

There is a wide variety of views, and thus controversy, when educators ask important questions:

     { As discussed , if there are “competitions” — of — how much of our limited resources (our time, people, money,...) should we invest in improving problem-solving skills? }

   This question leads to many sub-questions, including these:

  {e.g.,   and   }   and 

[[ i.o.u. -- this section is an "overlap" between #1 (Goals) and #2 (Methods) so... maybe i'll put it in-between them? -- i'll decide soon, maybe during mid-June 2021 ]]

Two Kinds of Inquiry Activities  (for Science and Design )

To more effectively help students improve their problem-solving skills, teachers can provide opportunities for students to be actively involved in solving problems, with inquiry activities .  What happens during inquiry?  Opportunities for inquiry occur whenever a gap in knowledge — in conceptual knowledge (so students don't understand) or procedural knowledge (so they don't know what to do, or how) — stimulates action (mental and/or physical) and students are allowed to think-do-learn.

Students can be challenged to solve two kinds of problems during two kinds of inquiry activity:

    during Science-Inquiry they try to improve their understanding, by asking problem-questions and seeking answers.  During their process of solving problems, they are using Science-Design , aka Science , to design a better explanatory theory.

    during Design-Inquiry they try to improve some other aspect(s) of life, by defining problem-projects and seeking solutions.   During their process of solving problems, they are using General Design (which includes Engineering and more) to design a better product, activity, or strategy.

    But... whether the main objective is for Science-Design or General Design, a skilled designer will be flexible, will do whatever will help them solve the problem(s).  Therefore a “scientist” sometimes does engineering, and an “engineer” sometimes does science.  A teacher can help students recognize how-and-why they also do these “ crossover actions ” during an activity for Science Inquiry or Design Inquiry.  Due to these connections, we can build transfer-bridges between the two kinds of inquiry ,  and combine both to develop “hybrid activities” for Science-and-Design Inquiry.

Goal-Priorities:  There are two kinds of inquiry, so (re: Goals for What to Learn) what emphasis do we want to place on activities for Science -Inquiry and Design -Inquiry?  (in the limited amount of classroom time that teachers can use for Inquiry Activities)

Two Kinds of Improving  (for Performing and Learning )

Goal-Priorities:  There are two kinds of improving, so (re: Goals for What to Learn) what emphasis do we want to place on better Performing (now) and Learning (for later)?

When defining goals for education, we ask “How important is improving the quality of performing now, and (by learning now ) of performing later   ?”   For example, a basketball team (coach & players) will have a different emphasis in an early-season practice (when their main goal is learning well) and end-of-season championship game (when their main goal is performing well).     {we can try to optimize the “total value” of performing/learning/enjoying for short-term fun plus long-term satisfactions }

SCIENCE   (to use-learn-teach Skills for Problem Solving )

Problem-solving skills used for science.

This section supplements models for Scientific Method that "begin with simplicity, before moving on to models that are more complex so they can describe the process more completely-and-accurately. "  On the spectrum of simplicity → complexity , one of the simplest models is...

POE (Predict, Observe, Learn) to give students practice with the basic scientific logic we use to evaluate an explanatory theory about “what happens, how, and why.”  POE is often used for classroom instruction — with interactive lectures [iou - their website is temporarily being "restored"] & in other ways — and research has shown it to be effective.  A common goal of instruction-with-POE is to improve the conceptual knowledge of students, especially to promote conceptual change their alternative concepts to scientific concepts.  But students also improve their procedural knowledge for what the process of science is, and how to do the process.     { more – What's missing from POE ( experimental skills ) w hen students use it for evidence-based argumentation    and   Ecologies - Educational & Conceptual  }

Dany Adams (at Smith College) explicitly teaches critical thinking skills – and thus experiment-using skills – in the context of scientific method.

Science Buddies has models for Scientific Method (and for Engineering Design Process ) and offers Detailed Help that is useful for “thinking skills” education. ==[DetH]

Next Generation Science Standards ( NGSS ) emphasizes the importance of designing curriculum & instruction for Three Dimensional Learning with productive interactions between problem-solving Practices (for Science & Engineering ) and Crosscutting Concepts and Disciplinary Core Ideas.

Science: A Process Approach ( SAPA ) was a curriculum program earlier, beginning in the 1960s.  Michael Padilla explains how SAPA defined The Science Process Skills as "a set of broadly transferable abilities, appropriate to many science disciplines and reflective of the behavior of scientists.  SAPA categorized process skills into two types, basic and integrated.  The basic (simpler) process skills provide a foundation for learning the integrated (more complex) skills."   Also, What the Research Says About Science Process Skills by Karen Ostlund;  and Students' Understanding of the Procedures of Scientific Enquiry by Robin Millar, who examines several approaches and concludes (re: SAPA) that "The process approach is not, therefore, a sound basis for curriculum planning, nor does the analysis on which it is based provide a productive framework for research."  But I think parts of it can be used creatively for effective instruction.     { more about SAPA }

ENGINEERING   (to use-learn-teach Skills for Problem Solving )

Problem-solving skills used for engineering.

Engineering is Elementary ( E i E ) develops activities for students in grades K-8.  To get a feeling for the excitement they want to share with teachers & students, watch an "about EiE" video and explore their website .  To develop its curriculum products, EiE uses research-based Design Principles and works closely with teachers to get field-testing feedback, in a rigorous process of educational design .  During instruction, teachers use a simple 5-phase flexible model of engineering design process "to guide students through our engineering design challenges... using terms [ Ask, Imagine, Plan, Create, Improve ] children can understand."   {plus other websites about EiE }

Project Lead the Way ( PLTW ), another major developer of k-12 curriculum & instruction for engineering and other areas, has a website you can explore to learn about their educational philosophy & programs (at many schools ) & resources and more.  And you can web-search for other websites about PLTW.

Science Buddies , at level of k-12, has tips for science & engineering .

EPICS ( home - about ), at college level, is an engineering program using EPICS Design Process with a framework supplemented by sophisticated strategies from real-world engineering.  EPICS began at Purdue University and is now used at ( 29 schools) (and more with IUCCE ) including Purdue, Princeton, Notre Dame, Texas A&M, Arizona State, UC San Diego, Drexel, and Butler.

DESIGN THINKING   (to use-learn-teach Skills for Problem Solving )

Design Thinking emphasizes the importance of using empathy to solve human-centered problems.

Stanford Institute of Design ( d.school ) is an innovative pioneer in teaching a process of human-centered design thinking that is creative-and-critical with empathy .  In their Design Thinking Bootleg – that's an updated version of their Bootcamp Bootleg – they share a wide variety of attitudes & techniques — about brainstorming and much more — to stimulate productive design thinking with the objective of solving real-world problems.   {their first pioneer was David Kelley }

The d.school wants to "help prepare a generation of students to rise with the challenges of our times."  This goal is shared by many other educators, in k-12 and colleges, who are excited about design thinking.  Although d.school operates at college level, they (d.school + IDEO ) are active in K-12 education as in their website about Design Thinking in Schools ( FAQ - resources ) that "is a directory [with brief descriptions] of schools and programs that use design thinking in the curriculum for K12 students...  design thinking is a powerful way for today’s students to learn, and it’s being implemented by educators all around the world."     { more about Education for Design Thinking in California & Atlanta & Pittsburgh & elsewhere} [[a note to myself: @ ws and maybe my broad-definition page]]

On twitter, # DTk12 chat is an online community of enthusiastic educators who are excited about Design Thinking ( DT ) for K-12 Education, so they host a weekly twitter chat (W 9-10 ET) and are twitter-active informally 24/7.

PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING   (to use-learn-teach Skills for Problem Solving )

Problem-Based Learning ( PBL ? ) is a way to improve motivation, thinking, and learning.  You can learn more from:

overviews of PBL from U of WA & Learning-Theories.com ;

and (in ERIC Digests) using PBL for science & math plus a longer introduction - challenges for students & teachers (we never said it would be easy!) ;

a deeper examination by John Savery (in PDF & [without abstract] web-page );

Most Popular Papers from The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning ( about IJPBL ).

videos about PBL by Edutopia (9:26) and others ;

a search in ACSD for [problem-based learning] → a comprehensive links-page for Problem-Based Learning and an ACSD-book about...

Problems as Possibilities by Linda Torp and Sara Sage:  Table of Contents - Introduction (for 2nd Edition) - samples from the first & last chapters - PBL Resources (including WeSites in Part IV) .

PBL in Schools:

Samford University uses PBL (and other activities) for Transformational Learning that "emphasizes the whole person, ... helps students grow physically, mentally, and spiritually, and encourages them to value public service as well as personal gain."

In high school education, Problem-Based Learning Design Institute from Illinois Math & Science Academy ( about );  they used to have an impressive PBL Network ( sitemap & web-resources from 2013, and 9-23-2013 story about Kent, WA ) that has mysteriously disappeared. https://www.imsa.edu/academics/inquiry/resources/ research_ethics

Vanderbilt U has Service Learning thru Community Engagement with Challenges and Opportunities and tips for Teaching Step by Step & Best Practices and Resource-Links for many programs, organizations, articles, and more.

What is PBL?   The answer is " Problem-Based Learning and/or Project-Based Learning " because both meanings are commonly used.  Here are 3 pages (+ Wikipedia) that compare PBL with PBL, examine similarities & differences, consider definitions:

    John Larmer says "we [at Buck Institute for Education which uses Project Based Learning ] decided to call problem-based learning a subset of project-based learning [with these definitions, ProblemBL is a narrower category, so all ProblemBL is ProjectBL, but not vice versa] – that is, one of the ways a teacher could frame a project is to solve a problem, " and concludes that "the semantics aren't worth worrying about, at least not for very long.  The two PBLs are really two sides of the same coin. ...  The bottom line is the same:  both PBLs can powerfully engage and effectively teach your students!"     Chris Campbell concludes, "it is probably the importance of conducting active learning with students that is worthy and not the actual name of the task.  Both problem-based and project-based learning have their place in today’s classroom and can promote 21st Century learning."     Jan Schwartz says "there is admittedly a blurring of lines between these two approaches to education, but there are differences."     Wikipedia has Problem-Based Learning (with "both" in P5BL ) and Project-Based Learning .

i.o.u. - If you're wondering "What can I do in my classroom today ?", eventually (maybe in June 2021) there will be a section for "thinking skills activities" in this page, and in the area for TEACHING ACTIVITIES .

Advertisement

Educational leaders’ problem-solving for educational improvement: Belief validity testing in conversations

• Open access
• Published: 01 October 2021
• Volume 24 , pages 133–181, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Claire Sinnema   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6707-6726 1 ,
• Frauke Meyer 1 ,
• Deidre Le Fevre 1 ,
• Hamish Chalmers 1 &
• Viviane Robinson 1  

14k Accesses

9 Citations

21 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

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 demands testing the validity of these beliefs—the focus of our investigation. We analyzed 43 conversations between leaders and staff about equity related problems including teaching effectiveness. We first determined the types of beliefs held and the validity testing behaviors employed drawing on fine-grained coding frameworks. The quantification of these allowed us to use cross tabs and chi-square tests of independence to explore the relationship between leaders’ use of validity testing behaviors (those identified as more routine or more robust, and those relating to both advocacy and inquiry) and belief type. Leaders tended to avoid discussion of problem causes, advocate more than inquire, bypass disagreements, and rarely explore logic between solutions and problem causes. There was a significant relationship between belief type and the likelihood that leaders will test the validity of those beliefs—beliefs about problem causes were the least likely to be tested. The patterns found here are likely to impact whether micro and mesosystem problems, and ultimately exo and macrosystem problems, are solved. Capability building in belief validity testing is vital for leadership professional learning to ensure curriculum, social justice and equity policy aspirations are realized in practice.

Similar content being viewed by others

Teachers’ Beliefs Shift Across Year-Long Professional Development: ENA Graphs Transformation of Privately Held Beliefs Over Time

Addressing inequity and underachievement: Intervening to improve middle leaders’problem-solving conversations

Teaching Testable Explanations and Putting Them into Practice

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

This study examines the extent to which leaders, in their conversations with others, test rather than assume the validity of their own and others’ beliefs about the nature, causes of, and solutions to problems of teaching and learning that arise in their sphere of responsibility. We define a problem as a gap between the current and desired state, plus the demand that the gap be reduced (Robinson, 1993 ). We position this focus within the broader context of educational change, and educational improvement in particular, since effective discussion of such problems is central to improvement and vital for addressing issues of educational equity and social justice.

Educational improvement and leaders’ role in problem solving

Educational leaders work in a discretionary problem-solving space. Ball ( 2018 ) describes discretionary spaces as the micro level practices of the teacher. It is imperative to attend to what happens in these spaces because the specific talk and actions that occur in particular moments (for example, what the teacher says or does when one student responds in a particular way to his or her question) impact all participants in the classroom and shape macro level educational issues including legacies of racism, oppression, and marginalization of particular groups of students. A parallel exists, we argue, for leaders’ problem solving—how capable leaders are at dealing with micro-level problems in the conversational moment impacts whether a school or network achieves its improvement goals. For example, how a leader deals with problems with a particular teacher or with a particular student or group of students is subtly but strongly related to the solving of equity problems at the exo and macro levels. Problem solving effectiveness is also related to challenges in the realization of curriculum reform aspirations, including curriculum reform depth, spread, reach, and pace (Sinnema & Stoll, 2020b ).

The conversations leaders have with others in their schools in their efforts to solve educational problems are situated in a broader environment which they both influence and are influenced by. We draw here on Bronfonbrenner’s ( 1992 ) ecological systems theory to construct a nested model of educational problem solving (see Fig.  1 ). Bronfenbrenner focused on the environment around children, and set out five interrelated systems that he professed influence a child’s development. We propose that these systems can also be used to understand another type of learner—educators, including leaders and teachers—in the context of educational problem solving.

Nested model of educational problem solving

Bronfenbrenner’s ( 1977 ) microsystem sets out the immediate environment, parents, siblings, teachers, and peers as influencers of and influenced by children. We propose the micro system for educators to include those they have direct contact with including their students, other teachers in their classroom and school, the school board, and the parent community. Bronfenbrenner’s meso system referred to the interactions between a child’s microsystems. In the same way, when foregrounding the ecological system around educators, we suggest attention to the problems that occur in the interactions between students, teachers, school leaders, their boards, and communities. In the exo system, Bronfenbrenner directs attention to other social structures (formal and informal), which do not themselves contain the child, but indirectly influence them as they affect one of the microsystems. In the same way, we suggest educational ministries, departments and agencies function to influence educators. The macro system as theorized by Bronfenbrenner focuses on how child development is influenced by cultural elements established in society, including prevalent beliefs, attitudes, and perceptions. In our model, we recognise how such cultural elements of Bronfenbrenner’s macro system also relate to educators in that dominant and pervasive beliefs, attitudes and perceptions create and perpetuate educational problems, including those relating to educational inequity, bias, racism, social injustice, and underachievement. The chronosystem, as Bronfenbrenner describes, shows the role of environmental changes across a lifetime, which influences development. In a similar way, educators′ professional transitions and professional milestones influence and are influenced by other system levels, and in the context of our work, their problem solving approaches.

Leaders’ effectiveness in discussions about problems related to the micro and mesosystem contributes greatly to the success of exosystem reform efforts, and those efforts, in turn, influence the beliefs, attitudes, and ideologies of the macrosystem. As Fig.  1 shows, improvement goals (indicated by the arrows moving from the current to a desired state) in the exo or macrosystem are unlikely to be achieved without associated improvement in the micro and mesosystem involving students, teachers, and groups of teachers, schools and their boards and parent communities. Similarly, the level of improvement in the macro and exosystems is limited by the extent to which more improvement goals at the micro and mesosystem are achieved through solving problems relating to students’ experience and school and classroom practices including curriculum, teaching, and assessment. As well as drawing on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, our nested model of problem solving draws on problem solving theory to draw attention to how gaps between current and desired states at each of the system levels also influence each other (Newell & Simon, 1972 ). Efforts to solve problems in any one system (to move from current state toward a more desired state) are supported by similar moves at other interrelated systems. For example, the success of a teacher seeking to solve a curriculum problem (demand from parents to focus on core knowledge in traditional learning domains, for example)—a problem related to the microsystem and mesosystem—will be influenced by how similar problems are recognised, attended to, and solved by those in the ministries, departments and agencies in the exosystem.

In considering the role of educational leaders in this nested model of problem solving, we take a capability perspective (Mumford et al., 2000 ) rather than a leadership style perspective (Bedell-Avers et al., 2008 ). School leaders (including those with formal and informal leadership positions) require particular capabilities if they are to enact ambitious policies and solve complex problems related to enhancing equity for marginalized and disadvantaged groups of students (Mavrogordato & White, 2020 ). Too often, micro and mesosystem problems remain unsolved which is problematic not only for those directly involved, but also for the resolution of the related exo and macrosystem problems. The ill-structured nature of the problems school leaders face, and the social nature of the problem-solving process, contribute to the ineffectiveness of leaders’ problem-solving efforts and the persistence of important microsystem and mesosystem problems in schools.

Ill-structured problems

The problems that leaders need to solve are typically ill-structured rather than clearly defined, complex rather that than straight-forward, and adaptive rather than routine challenges (Bedell-Avers et al., 2008 ; Heifetz et al., 2009 ; Leithwood & Stager, 1989 ; Leithwood & Steinbach, 1992 , 1995 ; Mumford & Connelly, 1991 ; Mumford et al., 2000 ; Zaccaro et al., 2000 ). As Mumford and Connelly explain, “even if their problems are not totally unprecedented, leaders are, […] likely to be grappling with unique problems for which there is no clear-cut predefined solution” (Mumford & Connelly, 1991 , p. 294). Most such problems are difficult to solve because they can be construed in various ways and lack clear criteria for what counts as a good solution. Mumford et al. ( 2000 ) highlight the particular difficulties in solving ill-structured problems with regard to accessing, evaluating and using relevant information:

Not only is it difficult in many organizational settings for leaders to say exactly what the problem is, it may not be clear exactly what information should be brought to bear on the problem. There is a plethora of available information in complex organizational systems, only some of which is relevant to the problem. Further, it may be difficult to obtain accurate, timely information and identify key diagnostic information. As a result, leaders must actively seek and carefully evaluate information bearing on potential problems and goal attainment. (p. 14)

Problems in schools are complex. Each single problem can comprise multiple educational dimensions (learners, learning, curriculum, teaching, assessment) as well as relational, organizational, psychological, social, cultural, and political dimensions. In response to a teaching problem, for example, a single right or wrong answer is almost never at play; there are typically countless possible ‘responses’ to the problem of how to teach effectively in any given situation.

Problem solving as socially situated

Educational leaders’ problem solving is typically social because multiple people are usually involved in defining, explaining, and solving any given problem (Mumford et al., 2000 ). When there are multiple parties invested in addressing a problem, they typically hold diverse perspectives on how to describe (frame, perceive, and communicate about problems), explain (identify causes which lead to the problem), and solve the problem. Argyris and Schön ( 1974 ) argue that effective leaders must manage the complexity of integrating multiple and diverse perspectives, not only because all parties need to be internally committed to solutions, but also because quality solutions rely on a wide range of perspectives and evidence. Somewhat paradoxically, while the multiple perspectives involved in social problem solving add to their inherent complexity, these perspectives are a resource for educational change, and for the development of more effective solutions (Argyris & Schön, 1974 ). The social nature of problem solving requires high trust so participants can provide relevant, accurate, and timely information (rather than distort or withhold it), recognize their interdependence, and avoid controlling others. In high trust relationships, as Zand’s early work in this field established, “there is less socially generated uncertainty and problems are solved more effectively” (Zand, 1972 , p. 238).

Leaders’ capabilities in problem solving

Leadership research has established the centrality of capability in problem solving to leadership effectiveness generally (Marcy & Mumford, 2010 ; Mumford et al., 2000 , 2007 ) and to educational leadership in particular. Leithwood and Stager ( 1989 ), for example, consider “administrator’s problem-solving processes as crucial to an understanding of why principals act as they do and why some principals are more effective than others” (p. 127). Similarly, Robinson ( 1995 , 2001 , 2010 ) positions the ability to solve complex problems as central to all other dimensions of effective educational leadership. Unsurprisingly, problem solving is often prominent in standards for school leaders/leadership and is included in tools for the assessment of school leadership (Goldring et al., 2009 ). Furthermore, its importance is heightened given the increasing demand and complexity in standards for teaching (Sinnema, Meyer & Aitken, 2016) and the trend toward leadership across networks of schools (Sinnema, Daly, Liou, & Rodway, 2020a ) and the added complexity of such problem solving where a system perspective is necessary.

Empirical research on leaders’ practice has revealed that there is a need for capability building in problem solving (Le Fevre et al., 2015 ; Robinson et al., 2020 ; Sinnema et al., 2013 ; Sinnema et al., 2016 ; Smith, 1997 ; Spillane et al., 2009 ; Timperley & Robinson, 1998 ; Zaccaro et al., 2000 ). Some studies have compared the capability of leaders with varying experience. For example, Leithwood and Stager ( 1989 ) noted differences in problem solving approaches between novice and expert principals when responding to problem scenarios, particularly when the scenarios described ill-structured problems. Principals classified as ‘experts’ were more likely to collect information rather than make assumptions, and perceived unstructured problems to be manageable, whereas typical principals found these problems stressful. Expert principals also consulted extensively to get relevant information and find ways to deal with constraints. In contrast, novice principals consulted less frequently and tended to see constraints as obstacles (Leithwood & Stager, 1989 ). Allison and Allison ( 1993 ) reported that while experienced principals were better than novices at developing abstract problem-solving goals, they were less interested in the detail of how they would pursue these goals. Similar differences were found in Spillane et al.’s ( 2009 ) work that found expert principals to be better at interpreting problems and reflecting on their own actions compared with aspiring principals. More recent work (Sinnema et al., 2021 ) highlights that educators perceptions of discussion quality is positively associated with both new learning for the educator (learning that influences their practice) and improved practice (practices that reach students)—the more robust and helpful educators report their professional discussion to be, the more likely they are to report improvement in their practice. This supports the demand for quality conversation in educational teams.

Solving problems related to teaching and learning that occur in the micro or mesosystem usually requires conversations that demand high levels of interpersonal skill. Skill development is important because leaders tend to have difficulty inquiring deeply into the viewpoints of others (Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015 ; Le Fevre et al., 2015 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ). In a close analysis of 43 conversation transcripts, Le Fevre et al. ( 2015 ) showed that when leaders anticipated or encountered diverse views, they tended to ask leading or loaded rather than genuine questions. This pattern was explained by their judgmental thinking, and their desire to avoid negative emotion and stay in control of the conversation. In a related study of leaders’ conversations, a considerable difference was found between the way educational leaders described their problem before and during the conversation with those involved (Sinnema et al., 2013 ). Prior to the conversation, privately, they tended to describe their problem as more serious and more urgent than they did in the conversation they held later with the person concerned.

One of the reasons for the mismatch between their private descriptions and public disclosures was the judgmental framing of their beliefs about the other party’s intentions, attitudes, and/or motivations (Peeters & Robinson, 2015 ). If leaders are not willing or able to reframe such privately-held beliefs in a more respectful manner, they will avoid addressing problems through fear of provoking negative emotion, and neither party will be able to critique the reasoning that leads to the belief in question (Robinson et al., 2020 ). When that happens, beliefs based on faulty reasoning may prevail, problem solutions may be based only on that which is discussable, and the problem may persist.

A model of effective problem-solving conversations

We present below a normative model of effective problem-solving conversations (Fig.  2 ) in which testing the validity of relevant beliefs plays a central role. Leaders test their beliefs about a problem when they draw on a set of validity testing behaviors and enact those behaviors, through their inquiry and advocacy, in ways that are consistent with the three interpersonal values included in the model. The model proposes that these processes increase the effectiveness of social problem solving, with effectiveness understood as progressing the task of solving the problem while maintaining or improving the leader’s relationship with those involved. In formulating this model, we drew on the previously discussed research on problem solving and theories of interpersonal and organisational effectiveness.

Model of effective problem-solving conversations

The role of beliefs in problem solving

Beliefs are important in the context of problem solving because they shape decisions about what constitutes a problem and how it can be explained and resolved. Beliefs link the object of the belief (e.g., a teacher’s planning) to some attribute (e.g., copied from the internet). In the context of school problems these attributes are usually tightly linked to a negative evaluation of the object of the belief (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975 ). Problem solving, therefore, requires explicit attention by leaders to the validity of the information on which their own and others’ beliefs are based. The model draws on the work of Mumford et al. ( 2000 ) by highlighting three types of beliefs that are central to how people solve problems—beliefs about whether and why a situation is problematic (we refer to these as problem description beliefs); beliefs about the precursors of the problem situation (we refer to these as problem explanation beliefs); and beliefs about strategies which could, would, or should improve the situation (we refer to these as problem solution beliefs). With regard to problem explanation beliefs, it is important that attention is not limited to surface level factors, but also encompasses consideration of deeper related issues in the broader social context and how they contribute to any given problem.

The role of values in problem-solving conversations

Figure  2 proposes that problem solving effectiveness is increased when leaders’ validity testing behaviors are consistent with three values—respecting the views of others, seeking to maximize validity of their own and others’ beliefs, and building internal commitment to decisions reached. The inclusion of these three values in the model means that our validity testing behaviors must be conceptualized and measured in ways that capture their interpersonal (respect and internal commitment) and epistemic (valid information) underpinnings. Without this conceptual underpinning, it is likely to be difficult to identify the validity testing behaviors that are associated with effectiveness. For example, the act of seeking agreement can be done in a coercive or a respectful manner, so it is important to define and measure this behavior in ways that distinguish between the two. How this and similar distinctions were accomplished is described in the subsequent section on the five validity testing behaviors.

The three values in Fig.  2 are based on the theories and practice of interpersonal and organizational effectiveness developed by Argyris and Schön ( 1974 , 1978 , 1996 ) and applied more recently in a range of educational leadership research contexts (Hannah et al., 2018 ; Patuawa et al., 2021 ; Sinnema et al., 2021a ). We have drawn on the work of Argyris and Schön because their theories explain the dilemma many leaders experience between the two components of problem solving effectiveness and indicate how that dilemma can be avoided or resolved.

Seeking to maximize the validity of information is important because leaders’ beliefs have powerful consequences for the lives and learning of teachers and students and can limit or support educational change efforts. Leaders who behave consistently with the validity of information value are truth seekers rather than truth claimers in that they are open-minded and thus more attentive to the information that disconfirms rather than confirms their beliefs. Rather than assuming the validity of their beliefs and trying to impose them on others, their stance is one of seeking to detect and correct errors in their own and others′ thinking (Robinson, 2017 ).

The value of respect is closely linked to the value of maximizing the validity of information. Leaders increase validity by listening carefully to the views of others, especially if those views differ from their own. Listening carefully requires the accordance of worth and respect, rather than private or public dismissal of views that diverge from or challenge one’s own. If leaders’ conversations are guided by the two values of valid information and respect, then the third value of fostering internal commitment is also likely to be present. Teachers become internally committed to courses of action when their concerns have been listened to and directly addressed as part of the problem-solving process.

The role of validity testing behaviors in problem solving

Figure  2 includes five behaviors designed to test the validity of the three types of belief involved in problem solving. They are: 1) disclosing beliefs; 2) providing grounds; 3) exploring difference; 4) examining logic; and 5) seeking agreement. These behaviors enable leaders to check the validity of their beliefs by engaging in open minded disclosure and discussion of their thinking. While these behaviors are most closely linked to the value of maximizing valid information, the values of respect and internal commitment are also involved in these behaviors. For example, it is respectful to honestly and clearly disclose one’s beliefs about a problem to the other person concerned (advocacy), and to do so in ways that make the grounds for the belief testable and open to revision. It is also respectful to combine advocacy of one’s own beliefs with inquiry into others’ reactions to those beliefs and with inquiry into their own beliefs. When leaders encounter doubts and disagreements, they build internal rather than external commitment by being open minded and genuinely interested in understanding the grounds for them (Spiegel, 2012 ). By listening to and responding directly to others’ concerns, they build internal commitment to the process and outcomes of the problem solving.

Advocacy and inquiry dimensions

Each of the five validity testing behaviors can take the form of a statement (advocacy) or a question (inquiry). A leader’s advocacy contributes to problem solving effectiveness when it communicates his or her beliefs and the grounds for them, in a manner that is consistent with the three values. Such disclosure enables others to understand and critically evaluate the leader’s thinking (Tompkins, 2013 ). Respectful inquiry is equally important, as it invites the other person into the conversation, builds the trust they need for frank disclosure of their views, and signals that diverse views are welcomed. Explicit inquiry for others’ views is particularly important when there is a power imbalance between the parties, and when silence suggests that some are reluctant to disclose their views. Across their careers, leaders tend to rely more heavily on advocating their own views than on genuinely inquiring into the views of others (Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ). It is the combination of advocacy and inquiry behaviors, that enables all parties to collaborate in formulating a more valid understanding of the nature of the problem and of how it may be solved.

The five validity testing behaviors

Disclosing beliefs is the first and most essential validity testing behavior because beliefs cannot be publicly tested, using the subsequent four behaviors, if they are not disclosed. This behavior includes leaders’ advocacy of their own beliefs and their inquiry into others’ beliefs, including reactions to their own beliefs (Peeters & Robinson, 2015 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ).

Honest and respectful disclosure ensures that all the information that is believed to be relevant to the problem, including that which might trigger an emotional reaction, is shared and available for validity testing (Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ; Robinson et al., 2020 ; Tjosvold et al., 2005 ). Respectful disclosure has been linked with follower trust. The empirical work of Norman et al. ( 2010 ), for example, showed that leaders who disclose more, and are more transparent in their communication, instill higher levels of trust in those they work with.

Providing grounds , the second validity testing behavior, is concerned with leaders expressing their beliefs in a way that makes the reasoning that led to them testable (advocacy) and invites others to do the same (inquiry). When leaders clearly explain the grounds for their beliefs and invite the other party to critique their relevance or accuracy, the validity or otherwise of the belief becomes more apparent. Both advocacy and inquiry about the grounds for beliefs can lead to a strengthening, revision, or abandonment of the beliefs for either or both parties (Myran & Sutherland, 2016 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ; Robinson et al., 2020 ).

Exploring difference is the third validity testing behavior. It is essential because two parties simply disclosing beliefs and the grounds for them is insufficient for arriving at a joint solution, particularly when such disclosure reveals that there are differences in beliefs about the accuracy and implications of the evidence or differences about the soundness of arguments. Exploring difference through advocacy is seen in such behaviors as identifying and signaling differing beliefs and evaluating contrary evidence that underpins those differing beliefs. An inquiry approach to exploring difference (Timperley & Parr, 2005 ) occurs when a leader inquires into the other party’s beliefs about difference, or their response to the leaders’ beliefs about difference.

Exploring differences in beliefs is key to increasing validity in problem solving efforts (Mumford et al., 2007 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ; Tjosvold et al., 2005 ) because it can lead to more integrative solutions and enhance the commitment from both parties to work with each other in the future (Tjosvold et al., 2005 ). Leaders who are able to engage with diverse beliefs are more likely to detect and challenge any faulty reasoning and consequently improve solution development (Le Fevre & Robinson, 2015 ). In contrast, when leaders do not engage with different beliefs, either by not recognizing or by intentionally ignoring them, validity testing is more limited. Such disengagement may be the result of negative attributions about the other person, such as that they are resistant, stubborn, or lazy. Such attributions reduce opportunities for the rigorous public testing that is afforded by the exchange and critical examination of competing views.

Examining logic , the fourth validity testing behavior, highlights the importance of devising a solution that adequately addresses the nature of the problem at hand and its causes. To develop an effective solution both parties must be able to evaluate the logic that links problems to their assumed causes and solutions. This behavior is present when the leader suggests or critiques the relationship between possible causes of and solutions to the identified problem. In its inquiry form, the leader seeks such information from the other party. As Zaccaro et al. ( 2000 ) explain, good problem solvers have skills and expertise in selecting the information to attend to in their effort to “understand the parameters of problems and therefore the dimensions and characteristics of a likely solution” (p. 44–45). These characteristics may include solution timeframes, resource capacities, an emphasis on organizational versus personal goals, and navigation of the degree of risk allowed by the problem approach. Explicitly exploring beliefs is key to ensuring the logic linking problem causes and any proposed solution. Taking account of a potentially complex set of contributing factors when crafting logical solutions, and testing the validity of beliefs about them, is likely to support effective problem solving. This requires what Copland ( 2010 ) describes as a creative process with similarities to clinical reasoning in medicine, in which “the initial framing of the problem is fundamental to the development of a useful solution” (p. 587).

Seeking agreement , the fifth validity testing behavior, signals the importance of warranted agreement about problem beliefs. We use the term ‘warranted’ to make clear that the goal is not merely getting the other party to agree (either that something is a problem, that a particular cause is involved, or that particular actions should be carried out to solve it)—mere agreement is insufficient. Rather, the goal is for warranted agreement whereby both parties have explored and critiqued the beliefs (and their grounds) of the other party in ways that provide a strong basis for the agreement. Both parties must come to some form of agreement on beliefs because successful solution implementation occurs in a social context, in that it relies on the commitment of all parties to carry it out (Mumford et al., 2000 ; Robinson & Le Fevre, 2011 ; Tjosvold et al., 2005 ). Where full agreement does not occur, the parties must at least be clear about where agreement/disagreement lies and why.

Testing the validity of beliefs using these five behaviors, and underpinned by the values described earlier is, we argue, necessary if conversations are to lead to two types of improvement—progress on the task (i.e., solving the problem) and improving the relationship between those involved in the conversation (i.e., ensuring those relationship between the problem-solvers is intact and enhanced through the process). We draw attention here to those improvement purposes as distinct from those underpinning work in the educational leadership field that takes a neo-managerialist perspective. The rise of neo-managerialism is argued to redefine school management and leadership along managerial lines and hence contribute to schools that are inequitable, reductionist, and inauthentic (Thrupp & Willmott, 2003 ). School leaders, when impacted by neo-managerialism, need to be (and are seen as) “self-interested, opportunistic innovators and risk-takers who exploit information and situations to produce radical change.” In contrast, the model we propose rejects self-interest. Our model emphasizes on deep respect for the views of others and the relentless pursuit of genuine shared commitment to understanding and solving problems that impact on children and young people through collaborative engagement in joint problem solving. Rather than permitting leaders to exploit others, our model requires leaders to be adept at using both inquiry and advocacy together with listening to both progress the task (solving problems) and simultaneously enhance the relationship between those involved. We position this model of social problem solving effectiveness as a tool for addressing social justice concerns—it intentionally dismisses problem solving approaches that privilege organizational efficiency indicators and ignore the wellbeing of learners and issues of inequity, racism, bias, and social injustice within and beyond educational contexts.

Methodology

The following section outlines the purpose of the study, the participants, and the mixed methods approach to data collection and analysis.

Research purpose

Our prior qualitative research (Robinson et al., 2020 ) involving in-depth case studies of three educational leaders revealed problematic patterns in leaders’ approach to problem-solving conversations: little disclosure of causal beliefs, little public testing of beliefs that might trigger negative emotions, and agreement on solutions that were misaligned with causal beliefs. The present investigation sought to understand if a quantitative methodological approach would reveal similar patterns and examine the relationship between belief types and leaders’ use of validity testing behaviors. Thus, our overarching research question was: to what extent do leaders test the validity of their beliefs in conversations with those directly involved in the analysis and resolution of the problem? Our argument is that while new experiences might motivate change in beliefs (Bonner et al., 2020 ), new insights gained through testing the validity of beliefs is also imperative to change. The sub-questions were:

What is the relative frequency in the types of beliefs leaders hold about problems involving others?

To what extent do leaders employ validity testing behaviors in conversations about those problems?

Are there differential patterns in leaders’ validity testing of the different belief types?

Participants

The participants were 43 students in a graduate course on educational leadership in New Zealand who identified an important on the job problem that they intended to discuss with the person directly involved.

The mixed methods approach

The study took a mixed methods approach using a partially mixed sequential equal status design; (QUAL → QUAN) (Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2009 ). The five stages of sourcing and analyzing data and making interpretations are summarised in Fig.  3 below and outlined in more detail in the following sections (with reference in brackets to the numbered phases in the figure). We describe the study as partially mixed because, as Leech & Onwuegbuzie, 2009 explain, in partially mixed methods “both the quantitative and qualitative elements are conducted either concurrently or sequentially in their entirety before being mixed at the data interpretation stage” (p. 267).

Overview of mixed methods approach

Stage 1: Qualitative data collection

Three data sources were used to reveal participants’ beliefs about the problem they were seeking to address. The first source was their response to nine open ended items in a questionnaire focused on a real problem the participant had attempted to address but that still required attention (1a). The items were about: the nature and history of the problem; its importance; their own and others’ contribution to it; the causes of the problem; and the approach to and effectiveness of prior attempts to resolve it.

The second source (1b) was the transcript of a real conversation (typically between 5 and 10 minutes duration) the leaders held with the other person involved in the problem, and the third was the leaders’ own annotations of their unspoken thoughts and feelings during the course of the conversation (1c). The transcription was placed in the right-hand column (RHC) of a split page with the annotations recorded at the appropriate place in the left-hand column (LHC). The LHC method was originally developed by Argyris and Schön ( 1974 ) as a way of examining discrepancies between people’s espoused and enacted interpersonal values. Referring to data about each leader’s behavior (as recorded in the transcript of the conversation) and their thoughts (as indicated in the LHC) was important since the model specifies validity testing behaviors that are motivated by the values of respect, valid information, and internal commitment. Since motives cannot be revealed by speech alone, we also needed access to the thoughts that drove their behavior, hence our use of the LHC data collection technique. This approach allowed us to respond to Leithwood and Stager’s ( 1989 ) criticism that much research on effective problem solving gives results that “reveal little or nothing about how actions were selected or created and treat the administrator’s mind as a ‘black box’” (p. 127).

Stage 2: Qualitative analysis

The three stages of qualitative analysis focused on identifying discrete beliefs in the three qualitative data sources, distilling those discrete beliefs into key beliefs, and identifying leaders’ use of validity testing behaviors.

Stage 2a: Analyzing types of beliefs about problems

For this stage, we developed and applied coding rules (see Table 1 ) for the identification of the three types of beliefs in the three sources described earlier—leaders’ questionnaire responses, conversation transcript (RHC), and unexpressed thoughts (LHC). We identified 903 discrete beliefs (utterances or thoughts) from the 43 transcripts, annotations, and questionnaires and recorded these on a spreadsheet (2a). While our model proposes that leaders’ inquiry will surface and test the beliefs of others, we quantify in this study only the leaders’ beliefs.

Stage 2b: Distilling discrete beliefs into key beliefs

Next, we distilled the 903 discrete beliefs into key beliefs (KBs) (2b). This was a complex process and involved multiple iterations across the research team to determine, check, and test the coding rules. The final set of rules for distilling key beliefs were:

Beliefs should be made more succinct in the key belief statement, and key words should be retained as much as possible

Judgment quality (i.e., negative or positive) of the belief needs to be retained in the key belief

Key beliefs should use overarching terms where possible

The meaning and the object of the belief need to stay constant in the key belief

When reducing overlap, the key idea of both beliefs need to be captured in the key beliefs

Distinctive beliefs need to be summarized on their own and not combined with other beliefs

The subject of the belief must be retained in the key belief—own belief versus restated belief of other

All belief statements must be accounted for in key beliefs

These rules were applied to the process of distilling multiple related beliefs into statements of key beliefs as illustrated by the example in the table below (Table 2 ).

Further examples of how the rules were applied are outlined in ' Appendix A '. The number of discrete beliefs for each leader ranged from 7 to 35, with an average of 21, and the number of key beliefs for each leader ranged between 4 and 14, with an average of eight key beliefs. Frequency counts were used to identify any patterns in the types of key beliefs which were held privately (not revealed in the conversation but signalled in the left hand column or questionnaire) or conveyed publicly (in conversation with the other party).

Stage 2c: Analyzing leaders’ use of validity testing behaviors

We then developed and applied coding rules for the five validity testing behaviors (VTB) outlined in our model (disclosing beliefs, providing grounds, exploring difference, examining logic, and seeking agreement). Separate rules were established for the inquiry and advocacy aspects of each VTB, generating ten coding rules in all (Table 3 ).

These rules, summarised in the table below, and outlined more fully in ' Appendix A ', encompassed inclusion and exclusion criteria for the advocacy and inquiry dimensions of each validity testing behavior. For example, the inclusion rule for the VTB of ‘Disclosing Beliefs’ required leaders to disclose their beliefs about the nature, and/or causes, and/or possible solutions to the problem, in ways that were consistent with the three values included in the model. The associated exclusion rule signalled that this criterion was not met if, for example, the leader asked a question in order to steer the other person toward their own views without having ever disclosed their own views, or if they distorted the urgency or seriousness of the problem related to what they had expressed privately. The exclusion rules also noted how thoughts expressed in the left hand column would exclude the verbal utterance from being treated as disclosure—for example if there were contradictions between the right hand (spoken) and left hand column (thoughts), or if the thoughts indicated that the disclosure had been distorted in order to minimise negative emotion.

The coding rules reflected the values of respect and internal commitment in addition to the valid information value that was foregrounded in the analysis. The emphasis on inquiry, for example (into others’ beliefs and/or responses to the beliefs already expressed by the leader), recognised that internal commitment would be impossible if the other party held contrary views that had not been disclosed and discussed. Similarly, the focus on leaders advocating their beliefs, grounds for those beliefs and views about the logic linking solutions to problem causes recognise that it is respectful to make those transparent to another party rather than impose a solution in the absence of such disclosure.

The coding rules were applied to all 43 transcripts and the qualitative analysis was carried out using NVivo 10. A random sample of 10% of the utterances coded to a VTB category was checked independently by two members of the research team following the initial analysis by a third member. Any discrepancies in the coding were resolved, and data were recoded if needed. Descriptive analyses then enabled us to compare the frequency of leaders’ use of the five validity testing behaviors.

Stage 3: Data transformation: From qualitative to quantitative data

We carried out transformation of our data set (Burke et al., 2004 ), from qualitative to quantitative, to allow us to carry out statistical analysis to answer our research questions. The databases that resulted from our data transformation, with text from the qualitative coding along with numeric codes, are detailed next. In database 1, key beliefs were all entered as cases with indications in adjacent columns as to the belief type category they related to, and the source/s of the belief (questionnaire, transcript or unspoken thoughts/feelings). A unique identifier was created for each key belief.

In database 2, each utterance identified as meeting the VTB coding rules were entered in column 1. The broader context of the utterance from the original transcript was then examined to establish the type of belief (description, explanation, or solution) the VTB was being applied to, with this recorded numerically alongside the VTB utterance itself. For example, the following utterance had been coded to indicate that it met the ‘providing grounds’ coding rule, and in this phase it was also coded to indicate that it was in relation to a ‘problem description’ belief type:

“I noticed on the feedback form that a number of students, if I’ve got the numbers right here, um, seven out of ten students in your class said that you don’t normally start the lesson with a ‘Do Now’ or a starter activity.” (case 21)

A third database listed all of the unique identifiers for each leader’s key beliefs (KB) in the first column. Subsequent columns were set up for each of the 10 validity testing codes (the five validity testing behaviors for both inquiry and advocacy). The NVivo coding for the VTBs was then examined, one piece of coding at a time, to identify which key belief the utterance was associated with. Each cell that intersected the appropriate key belief and VTB was increased by one as a VTB utterance was associated with a key belief. Our database included variables for both the frequency of each VTB (the number of instances the behavior was used) and a parallel version with just a dichotomous variable indicating the presence or absence or each VTB. The dichotomous variable was used for our subsequent analysis because multiple utterances indicating a certain validity testing behavior were not deemed to necessarily constitute better quality belief validity testing than one utterance.

Stage 4: Quantitative analysis

The first phase of quantitative analysis involved the calculation of frequency counts for the three belief types (4a). Next, frequencies were calculated for the five validity testing behaviors, and for those behaviors in relation to each belief type (4b).

The final and most complex stage of the quantitative analysis, stages 4c through 4f, involved looking for patterns across the two sets of data created through the prior analyses (belief type and validity testing behaviors) to investigate whether leaders might be more inclined to use certain validity testing behaviors in conjunction with a particular belief type.

Stage 4a: Analyzing for relationships between belief type and VTB

We investigated the relationship between belief type and VTB, first, for all key beliefs. Given initial findings about variability in the frequency of the VTBs, we chose not to use all five VTBs separately in our analysis, but rather the three categories of: 1) None (key beliefs that had no VTB applied to them); 2) VTB—Routine (the sum of VTBs 1 and 2; given those were much more prevalent than others in the case of both advocacy and inquiry); and 3) VTB—Robust (the sum of the VTBs 3, 4 and 5 given these were all much less prevalent than VTBs 1 and 2, again including both advocacy and/or inquiry). Cross tabs were prepared and a chi-square test of independence was performed on the data from all 331 key beliefs.

Stage 4b: Analyzing for relationships between belief type and VTB

Next, because more than half (54.7%, 181) of the 331 key beliefs were not tested by leaders using any one of the VTBs, we analyzed a sub-set of the database, selecting only those key beliefs where leaders had disclosed the belief (using advocacy and/or inquiry). The reason for this was to ensure that any relationships established statistically were not unduly influenced by the data collection procedure which limited the time for the conversation to 10 minutes, during which it would not be feasible to fully disclose and address all key beliefs held by the leader. For this subset we prepared cross tabs and carried out chi-square tests of independence for the 145 key beliefs that leaders had disclosed. We again investigated the relationship between key belief type and VTBs, this time using a VTB variable with two categories: 1) More routine only and 2) More routine and robust.

Stage 4c: Analyzing for relationships between belief type and advocacy/inquiry dimensions of validity testing

Next, we investigated the relationship between key belief type and the advocacy and inquiry dimensions of validity testing. This analysis was to provide insight into whether leaders might be more or less inclined to use certain VTBs for certain types of belief. Specifically, we compared the frequency of utterances about beliefs of all three types for the categories of 1) No advocacy or inquiry, 2) Advocacy only, 3) Inquiry only, and 4) Advocacy and inquiry (4e). Cross tabs were prepared, and a chi-square test of independence was performed on the data from all 331 key beliefs. Finally, we again worked with the subset of 145 key beliefs that had been disclosed, comparing the frequency of utterances coded to 1) Advocacy or inquiry only, or 2) Both advocacy and inquiry (4f).

Below, we highlight findings in relation to the research questions guiding our analysis about: the relative frequency in the types of beliefs leaders hold about problems involving others; the extent to which leaders employ validity testing behaviors in conversations about those problems; and differential patterns in leaders’ validity testing of the different belief types. We make our interpretations based on the statistical analysis and draw on insights from the qualitative analysis to illustrate those results.

Belief types

Leaders’ key beliefs about the problem were evenly distributed between the three belief types, suggesting that when they think about a problem, leaders think, though not necessarily in a systematic way, about the nature of, explanation for, and solutions to their problem (see Table 4 ). These numbers include beliefs that were communicated and also those recorded privately in the questionnaire or in writing on the conversation transcripts.

Patterns in validity testing

The majority of the 331 key beliefs (54.7%, 181) were not tested by leaders using any one of the VTBs, not even the behavior of disclosing the belief. Our analysis of the VTBs that leaders did use (see Table 5 ) shows the wide variation in frequency of use with some, arguably the more robust ones, hardly used at all.

The first pattern was more frequent disclosure of key beliefs than provision of the grounds for them. The lower levels of providing grounds is concerning because it has implications for the likelihood of those in the conversation subsequently reaching agreement and being able to develop solutions logically aligned to the problem (VTB4). The logical solution if it is the time that guided reading takes that is preventing a teacher doing ‘shared book reading’ (as Leader 20 believed to be the case) is quite different to the solution that is logical if in fact the reason is something different, for example uncertainty about how to go about ‘shared book reading’, lack of shared book resources, or a misunderstanding that school policy requires greater time on shared reading.

The second pattern was a tendency for leaders to advocate much more than they inquire— there was more than double the proportion of advocacy than inquiry overall and for some behaviors the difference between advocacy and inquiry was up to seven times greater. This suggests that leaders were more comfortable disclosing their own beliefs, providing the grounds for their own beliefs and expressing their own assumptions about agreement, and less comfortable in inquiring in ways that created space and invited the other person in the conversation to reveal their beliefs.

A third pattern revealed in this analysis was the difference in the ratio of inquiry to advocacy between VTB1 (disclosing beliefs)—a ratio of close to 1:2 and VTB2 (providing grounds)—a ratio of close to 1:7. Leaders are more likely to seek others’ reactions when they disclose their beliefs than when they give their grounds for those beliefs. This might suggest that leaders assume the validity of their own beliefs (and therefore do not see the need to inquire into grounds) or that they do not have the skills to share the grounds associated with the beliefs they hold.

Fourthly, there was an absence of attention to three of the VTBs outlined in our model—in only very few of the 329 validity testing utterances the 43 leaders used were they exploring difference (11 instances), examining logic (4 instances) or seeking agreement (22 instances). In Case 22, for example, the leader claimed that learning intentions should be displayed and understood by children and expressed concern that the teacher was not displaying them, and that her students thus did not understand the purpose of the activities they were doing. While the teacher signaled her disagreement with both of those claims—“I do learning intentions, it’s all in my modelling books I can show them to you if you want” and “I think the children know why they are learning what they are learning”—the fact that there were differences in their beliefs was not explicitly signaled, and the differences were not explored. The conversation went on, with each continuing to assume the accuracy of their own beliefs. They were unable to reach agreement on a solution to the problem because they had not established and explored the lack of agreement about the nature of the problem itself. We presume from these findings, and from our prior qualitative work in this field, that those VTBs are much more difficult, and therefore much less likely to be used than the behaviors of disclosing beliefs and providing grounds.

The relationship between belief type and validity testing behaviors

The relationship between belief type and category of validity testing behavior was significant ( Χ 2 (4) = 61.96,  p  < 0.001). It was notable that problem explanation beliefs were far less likely than problem description or problem solution beliefs to be subject to any validity testing (the validity of more than 80% of PEBs was not tested) and, when they were tested, it was typically with the more routine rather than robust VTBs (see Table 6 ).

Problem explanation beliefs were also most likely to not be tested at all; more than 80% of the problem explanation beliefs were not the focus of any validity testing. Further, problem description beliefs were less likely than problem solution beliefs to be the target of both routine and robust validity testing behaviors—12% of PDBs and 18% of PSBs were tested using both routine and robust VTBs.

Two important assumptions underpin the study reported here. The first is that problems of equity must be solved, not only in the macrosystem and exosystem, but also as they occur in the day to day practices of leaders and teachers in micro and mesosystems. The second is that conversations are the key practice in which problem solving occurs in the micro and mesosystems, and that is why we focused on conversation quality. We focused on validity testing as an indicator of quality by closely analyzing transcripts of conversations between 43 individual leaders and a teacher they were discussing problems with.

Our findings suggest a considerable gap between our normative model of effective problem solving conversations and the practices of our sample of leaders. While beliefs about what problems are, and proposed solutions to them are shared relatively often, rarely is attention given to beliefs about the causes of problems. Further, while leaders do seem to be able to disclose and provide grounds for their beliefs about problems, they do so less often for beliefs about problem cause than other belief types. In addition, the critical validity testing behaviors of exploring difference, examining logic, and seeking agreement are very rare. Learning how to test the validity of beliefs is, therefore, a relevant focus for educational leaders’ goals (Bendikson et al., 2020 ; Meyer et al., 2019 ; Sinnema & Robinson, 2012 ) as well as a means for achieving other goals.

The patterns we found are problematic from the point of view of problem solving in schools generally but are particularly problematic from the point of view of macrosystem problems relating to equity. In New Zealand, for example, the underachievement and attendance issues of Pasifika students is a macrosystem problem that has been the target of many attempts to address through a range of policies and initiatives. Those efforts include a Pasifika Education Plan (Ministry of Education, 2013 ) and a cultural competencies framework for teachers of Pasifika learners—‘Tapasa’ (Ministry of Education, 2018 ) At the level of the mesosystem, many schools have strategic plans and school-wide programmes for interactions seeking to address those issues.

Resolving such equity issues demands that macro and exosystem initiatives are also reflected in the interactions of educators—hence our investigation of leaders’ problem-solving conversations and attention to whether leaders have the skills required to solve problems in conversations that contribute to aspirations in the exo and macrosystem, include of excellence and equity in new and demanding national curricula (Sinnema et al., 2020a ; Sinnema, Stoll, 2020a ). An example of an exosystem framework—the competencies framework for teachers of Pacific students in New Zealand—is useful here. It requires that teachers “establish and maintain collaborative and respectful relationships and professional behaviors that enhance learning and wellbeing for Pasifika learners” (Ministry of Education, 2018 , p. 12). The success of this national framework is influenced by and also influences the success that leaders in school settings have at solving problems in the conversations they have about related micro and mesosystem problems.

To illustrate this point, we draw here on the example of one case from our sample that showed how problem-solving conversation capability is related to the success or otherwise of system level aspirations of this type. In the case of Leader 36, under-developed skill in problem solving talk likely stymied the success of the equity-focused system initiatives. Leader 36 had been alerted by the parents of a Pasifika student that their daughter “feels that she is being unfairly treated, picked on and being made to feel very uncomfortable in the teacher’s class.” In the conversation with Leader 36, the teacher described having established a good relationship with the student, but also having had a range of issues with her including that she was too talkative, that led the teacher to treat her in ways the teacher acknowledged could have made her feel picked on and consequently reluctant to come to school.

The teacher also told the leader that there were issues with uniform irregularities (which the teacher picked on) and general non conformity—“No, she doesn’t [conform]. She often comes with improper footwear, incorrect jacket, comes late to school, she puts make up on, there are quite a few things that aren’t going on correctly….”. The teacher suggested that the student was “drawing the wrong type of attention from me as a teacher, which has had a negative effect on her.” The teacher described to the leader a recent incident:

[The student] had come to class with her hair looking quite shabby so I quietly asked [the student] “Did you wake up late this morning?” and then she but I can’t remember, I made a comment like “it looks like you didn’t take too much interest in yourself.” To me, I thought there was nothing wrong with the comment as it did not happen publicly; it happened in class and I had walked up to her. Following that, [her] Mum sends another email about girls and image and [says] that I am picking on her again. I’m quite baffled as to what is happening here. (case 36)

This troubling example represented a critical discretionary moment. The pattern of belief validity testing identified through our analysis of this case (see Table 7 ), however, mirrors some of the patterns evident in the wider sample.

The leader, like the student’s parents, believed that the teacher had been offensive in her communication with the student and also that the relationship between the teacher and student would be negatively impacted as a result. These two problem description beliefs were disclosed by the leader during her conversation with the teacher. However, while her disclosure of her belief about the problem description involved both advocating the belief, and inquiring into the other’s perception of it, the provision of grounds for the belief involved advocacy only. She reported the basis of the concern (the email from the student’s parents about their daughter feeling unfairly treated, picked on, and uncomfortable in class) but did not explicitly inquire into the grounds. This may be explained in this case through the teacher offering her own account of the situation that matched the parent’s report. Leader 36 also disclosed in her conversation with the teacher, her problem solution key belief that they should hold a restorative meeting between the teacher, the student, and herself.

What Leader 36 did not disclose was her belief about the explanation for the problem—that the teacher did not adequately understand the student personally, or their culture. The problem explanation belief (KB4) that she did inquire into was one the teacher raised—suggesting that the student has “compliance issues” that led the teacher to respond negatively to the student’s communication style—and that the teacher agreed with. The leader did not use any of the more robust but important validity testing behaviors for any of the key beliefs they held, either about problem description, explanation or solutions. And most importantly, this conversation highlights how policies and initiatives developed by those in the macrosystem, aimed at addressing equity issues, can be thwarted through well-intentioned but ultimately unsuccessful efforts of educators as they operate in the micro and mesosystem in what we referred to earlier as a discretionary problem solving space. The teacher’s treatment of the Pasifika student in our example was in stark contrast to the respectful and strong relationships demanded by the exosystem policy, the framework for teachers of Pasifika students. Furthermore, while the leader recognized the problem, issues of culture were avoided—they were not skilled enough in disclosing and testing their beliefs in the course of the conversation to contribute to broader equity concerns. The skill gap resonates with the findings of much prior work in this field (Le Fevre et al., 2015 ; Robinson et al., 2020 ; Sinnema et al., 2013 ; Smith, 1997 ; Spillane et al., 2009 ; Timperley & Robinson, 1998 ; Zaccaro et al., 2000 ), and highlights the importance of leaders, and those working with them in leadership development efforts, to recognize the interactions between the eco-systems outlined in the nested model of problem solving detailed in Fig.  1 .

The reluctance of Leader 36 to disclose and discuss her belief that the teacher misunderstands the student and her culture is important given the wider research evidence about the nature of the beliefs teachers may hold about indigenous and minority learners. The expectations teachers hold for these groups are typically lower and more negative than for white students (Gay, 2005 ; Meissel et al., 2017 ). In evidence from the New Zealand context, Turner et al. ( 2015 ), for example, found expectations to differ according to ethnicity with higher expectations for Asian and European students than for Māori and Pasifika students, even when controlling for achievement, due to troubling teacher beliefs about students’ home backgrounds, motivations, and aspirations. These are just the kind of beliefs that leaders must be able to confront in conversations with their teachers.

We use this example to illustrate both the interrelatedness of problems across the ecosystem, and the urgency of leadership development intervention in this area. Our normative model of effective problem solving conversations (Fig.  2 ), we suggest, provides a useful framework for the design of educational leadership intervention in this area. It shows how validity testing behaviors should embody both advocacy and inquiry and be used to explore not only perceptions of problem descriptions and solutions, but also problem causes. In this way, we hope to offer insights into how the dilemma between trust and accountability (Ehren et al., 2020 ) might be solved through increased interpersonal effectiveness. The combination of inquiry with advocacy also marks this approach out from neo-liberal approaches that emphasize leaders staying in control and predominantly advocating authoritarian perspectives of educational leadership. The interpersonal effectiveness theory that we draw on (Argyris & Schön, 1974 ) positions such unilateral control as ineffective, arguing for a mutual learning alternative. The work of problem solving is, we argue, joint work, requiring shared commitment and control.

Our findings also call for more research explicitly designed to investigate linkages between the systems. Case studies are needed, of macro and exosystem inequity problems backward mapped to initiatives and interactions that occur in schools related to those problems and initiatives. Such research could capture the complex ways in which power plays out “in relation to structural inequalities (of class, disability, ethnicity, gender, nationality, race, sexuality, and so forth)” and in relation to “more shifting and fluid inequalities that play out at the symbolic and cultural levels (for example, in ways that construct who “has” potential)” (Burke & Whitty, 2018 , p. 274).

Leadership development in problem solving should be approached in ways that surface and test the validity of leaders’ beliefs, so that they similarly learn to surface and test others’ beliefs in their leadership work. That is important not only from a workforce development point of view, but also from a social justice point of view since leaders’ capabilities in this area are inextricably linked to the success of educational systems in tackling urgent equity concerns.

Allison, D., & Allison, P. (1993). Both ends of a telescope: Experience and expertise in principal problem solving. Educational Administration Quarterly, 29 (3), 302–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x93029003005

Article   Google Scholar  

Argyris, C., Schön, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness . Jossey-Bass.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective Addison-Wesley.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice . Addison-Wesley.

Google Scholar  

Ball, D. L. (2018). Just dreams and imperatives: the power of teaching in the struggle for public education . New York, NYC: Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.

Bedell-Avers, E., Hunter, S., & Mumford, M. (2008). Conditions of problem-solving and the performance of charismatic, ideological, and pragmatic leaders: A comparative experimental study. The Leadership Quarterly, 19 , 89–106.

Bendikson, L., Broadwith, M., Zhu, T., & Meyer, F. (2020). Goal pursuit practices in high schools: hitting the target?. Journal of Educational Administration , 56 (6), 713–728. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-01-2020-0020

Bonner, S. M., Diehl, K., & Trachtman, R. (2020). Teacher belief and agency development in bringing change to scale. Journal of Educational Change, 21 (2), 363–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09360-4

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta, Six theories of child development: Revised formulations and current issues. Jessica Kingsley Publishers

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32 (7), 513–531.

Burke Johnson, R., & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2004). Mixed methods research; a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14–26.

Burke, P. J., & Whitty, G. (2018). Equity issues in teaching and teacher education. Peabody Journal of Education, 93 (3), 272–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2018.1449800

Copland, F. (2010). Causes of tension in post-observation feedback in pre-service teacher training: An alternative view. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26 (3), 466–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.06.001

Ehren, M., Paterson, A., & Baxter, J. (2020). Accountability and Trust: Two sides of the same coin? Journal of Educational Change, 21 (1), 183–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-019-09352-4

Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief An Introduction to Theory and Research. Attitude, Intention and Behavior . Addison-Wesley.

Gay, G. (2005). Politics of multicultural teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 56 (3), 221–228.

Goldring, E., Cravens, X., Murphy, J., Porter, A., Elliott, S., & Carson, B. (2009). The evaluation of principals: What and how do states and urban disrticts assess leadership? The Elementary School Journal, 110 (1), 19–36.

Hannah, D., Sinnema, C., & Robinson. V. (2018). Theory of action accounts of problem-solving: How a Japanese school communicates student incidents to parents. Management in Education, 33 (2), 62–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0892020618783809 .

Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership: Tools and tactics for changing your organization and the world . Harvard Business Press.

Le Fevre, D., & Robinson, V. M. J. (2015). The interpersonal challenges of instructional leadership: Principals’ effectiveness in conversations about performance issues. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51 (1), 58–95.

Le Fevre, D., Robinson, V. M. J., & Sinnema, C. (2015). Genuine inquiry: Widely espoused yet rarely enacted. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 43 (6), 883–899.

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & Quantity, 43 (2), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-007-9105-3

Leithwood, K., & Steinbach, R. (1995). Expert problem solving: Evidence from school and district leaders . State University of New York Press.

Leithwood, K., & Stager, M. (1989). Expertise in Principals’ Problem Solving. Educational Administration Quarterly, 25 (2), 126–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161x89025002003

Leithwood, K., & Steinbach, R. (1992). Improving the problem solving expertise of school administrators. Education and Urban Society, 24 (3), 317–345.

Marcy, R., & Mumford, M. (2010). Leader cognition: Improving leader performance through causal analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 21 (1), 1–19.

Mavrogordato, M., & White, R. (2020). Leveraging policy implementation for social justice: How school leaders shape educational opportunity when implementing policy for English learners. Educational Administration Quarterly, 56 (1), 3–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X18821364

Meissel, K., Meyer, F., Yao, E. S., & Rubie-Davies, C. (2017). Subjectivity of Teacher Judgments: Exploring student characteristics that influence teacher judgments of student ability. Teaching and Teacher Education, 65 , 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.02.021

Meyer, F., Sinnema, C., & Patuawa, J. (2019). Novice principals setting goals for school improvement in New Zealand. School Leadership & Management , 39 (2), 198−221. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2018.1473358

Ministry of Education. (2013). Pasifika education plan 2013–2017 Retrieved 9 July from https://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Ministry/Strategies-and-policies/PEPImplementationPlan20132017V2.pdf

Ministry of Education. (2018). Tapasā cultural competencies framework for teachers of Pacific learners . Ministry of Education.

Mumford, M., & Connelly, M. (1991). Leaders as creators: Leaders performance and problem solving in ill-defined domains. Leadership Quarterly, 2 (4), 289–315.

Mumford, M., Friedrich, T., Caughron, J., & Byrne, C. (2007). Leader cognition in real-world settings: How do leaders think about crises? The Leadership Quarterly, 18 , 515–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2007.09.002

Mumford, M., Zaccaro, S., Harding, F., Jacobs, T., & Fleishman, E. (2000). Leadership skills for a changing world: Solving complex social problems. Leadership Quarterly, 11 (1), 11–35.

Myran, S., & Sutherland, I. (2016). Problem posing in leadership education: using case study to foster more effective problem solving. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 19 (4), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555458916664763

Newell, A., & Simon. (1972). Human problem solving . Prentice-Hall.

Norman, S., Avolio, B., & Luthans, B. (2010). The impact of positivity and transparency on trust in leaders and their perceived effectiveness. The Leadership Quarterly, 21 , 350–364.

Patuawa, J., Robinson, V., Sinnema, C., & Zhu, T. (2021). Addressing inequity and underachievement: Middle leaders’ effectiveness in problem solving. Leading and Managing , 27 (1), 51–78. https://doi.org/10.3316/informit.925220205986712

Peeters, A., & Robinson, V. M. J. (2015). A teacher educator learns how to learn from mistakes: Single and double-loop learning for facilitators of in-service teacher education. Studying Teacher Education, 11 (3), 213–227.

Robinson, V. M. J., Meyer, F., Le Fevre, D., & Sinnema, C. (2020). The Quality of Leaders’ Problem-Solving Conversations: truth-seeking or truth-claiming? Leadership and Policy in Schools , 1–22.

Robinson, V. M. J. (1993). Problem-based methodology: Research for the improvement of practice . Pergamon Press.

Robinson, V. M. J. (1995). Organisational learning as organisational problem-solving. Leading & Managing, 1 (1), 63–78.

Robinson, V. M. J. (2001). Organizational learning, organizational problem solving and models of mind. In K. Leithwood & P. Hallinger (Eds.), Second international handbook of educational leadership and administration. Kluwer Academic.

Robinson, V. M. J. (2010). From instructional leadership to leadership capabilities: Empirical findings and methodological challenges. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 9 (1), 1–26.

Robinson, V. M. J. (2017). Reduce change to increase improvement . Corwin Press.

Robinson, V. M. J., & Le Fevre, D. (2011). Principals’ capability in challenging conversations: The case of parental complaints. Journal of Educational Administration, 49 (3), 227–255. https://doi.org/10.1108/09578231111129046

Sinnema, C., Robinson, V. (2012). Goal setting in principal evaluation: Goal quality and predictors of achievement. Leadership and Policy in schools . 11 (2), 135–167, https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2011.629767

Sinnema, C., Le Fevre, D., Robinson, V. M. J., & Pope, D. (2013). When others’ performance just isn’t good enough: Educational leaders’ framing of concerns in private and public. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 12 (4), 301–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/15700763.2013.857419

Sinnema, C., Ludlow, L. H., & Robinson, V. M. J. (2016a). Educational leadership effectiveness: A rasch analysis. Journal of Educational Administration , 54 (3), 305–339. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-12-2014-0140

Sinnema, C., Meyer, F., & Aitken, G. (2016b). Capturing the complex, situated, and sctive nature of teaching through inquiry-oriented standards for teaching. Journal of Teacher Education , 68 (1), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487116668017

Sinnema, C., Daly, A. J., Liou, Y.-h Sinnema, C., Daly, A. J., Liou, Y.-H., & Rodway, J. (2020a). Exploring the communities of learning policy in New Zealand using social network analysis: A case study of leadership, expertise, and networks. International Journal of Educational Research , 99 , 101492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.10.002

Sinnema, C., & Stoll, L. (2020b). Learning for and realising curriculum aspirations through schools as learning organisations. European Journal of Education, 55 , 9–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12381

Sinnema, C., Nieveen, N., & Priestley, M. (2020c). Successful futures, successful curriculum: What can Wales learn from international curriculum reforms? The Curriculum Journal . https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.17

Sinnema, C., Hannah, D., Finnerty, A., & Daly, A. J. (2021a). A theory of action account of within and across school collaboration: The role of relational trust in collaboration actions and impacts. Journal of Educational Change .

Sinnema, C., Hannah, D., Finnerty, A. et al. (2021b). A theory of action account of an across-school collaboration policy in practice. Journal of Educational Change . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-020-09408-w

Sinnema, C., Liou, Y.-H., Daly, A., Cann, R., & Rodway, J. (2021c). When seekers reap rewards and providers pay a price: The role of relationships and discussion in improving practice in a community of learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 107 , 103474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103474

Smith, G. (1997). Managerial problem solving: A problem-centered approach. In C. E. Zsambok & G. Klein (Eds.), Naturalistic Decision Making (pp. 371–380). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Spiegel, J. (2012). Open-mindedness and intellectual humility. School Field, 10 (1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878512437472

Spillane, J., Weitz White, K., & Stephan, J. (2009). School principal expertise: Putting expert aspiring principal differences in problem solving to the test. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 8 , 128–151.

Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2006). A general typology of research designs featuring mixed methods. Research in the Schools, 13 , 12–28.

Thrupp, M., & Willmott, R. (2003). Education management in managerialist times: Beyond the textual apologists . Open University Press.

Timperley, H., & Parr, J. M. (2005). Theory competition and the process of change. Journal of Educational Change, 6 (3), 227–251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-005-5065-3

Timperley, H. S., & Robinson, V. M. J. (1998). Collegiality in schools: Its nature and implications for problem solving. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34 (1), 608–629. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X980341003

Tjosvold, D., Sun, H., & Wan, P. (2005). Effects of openness, problem solving, and blaming on learning: An experiment in China. The Journal of Social Psychology, 145 (6), 629–644. https://doi.org/10.3200/SOCP.145.6.629-644

Tompkins, T. (2013). Groupthink and the Ladder of Inference : Increasing Effective Decision Making. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning , 8 (2), 84–90.

Turner, H., Rubie-Davies, C. M., & Webber, M. (2015). Teacher expectations, ethnicity and the achievement gap. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 50 (1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40841-015-0004-1

Zaccaro, S., Mumford, M., Connelly, M., Marks, M., & Gilbert, J. (2000). Assessment of leader problem-solving capabilities. Leadership Quarterly, 11 (1), 37–64.

Zand, D. (1972). Trust and managerial problem solving. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17 , 229–239.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

The Faculty of Education and Social Work, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand

Claire Sinnema, Frauke Meyer, Deidre Le Fevre, Hamish Chalmers & Viviane Robinson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claire Sinnema .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

See Table 8 .

See Table 9 .

See Table 10 .

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

Sinnema, C., Meyer, F., Le Fevre, D. et al. Educational leaders’ problem-solving for educational improvement: Belief validity testing in conversations. J Educ Change 24 , 133–181 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09437-z

Download citation

Accepted : 29 August 2021

Published : 01 October 2021

Issue Date : June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-021-09437-z

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

• Educational Change
• Educational improvement
• Problem solving
• Problem-solving conversations
• Educational leadership
• Validity testing
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

current events conversation

What Students Are Saying About How to Improve American Education

An international exam shows that American 15-year-olds are stagnant in reading and math. Teenagers told us what’s working and what’s not in the American education system.

By The Learning Network

Earlier this month, the Program for International Student Assessment announced that the performance of American teenagers in reading and math has been stagnant since 2000 . Other recent studies revealed that two-thirds of American children were not proficient readers , and that the achievement gap in reading between high and low performers is widening.

We asked students to weigh in on these findings and to tell us their suggestions for how they would improve the American education system.

Our prompt received nearly 300 comments. This was clearly a subject that many teenagers were passionate about. They offered a variety of suggestions on how they felt schools could be improved to better teach and prepare students for life after graduation.

While we usually highlight three of our most popular writing prompts in our Current Events Conversation , this week we are only rounding up comments for this one prompt so we can honor the many students who wrote in.

Please note: Student comments have been lightly edited for length, but otherwise appear as they were originally submitted.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings .

Login Alert

• > The Cambridge Handbook of Cognition and Education
• > Learning How to Solve Problems by Studying Examples

Book contents

• The Cambridge Handbook of Cognition and Education
• Copyright page
• Contributors
• How Cognitive Psychology Can Inform Evidence-Based Education Reform
• Part I Foundations
• Part II Science and Math
• 3 Teaching Critical Thinking as if Our Future Depends on It, Because It Does
• 4 Improving Students’ Scientific Thinking
• 5 Spatial Skills, Reasoning, and Mathematics
• 6 Iterative Development of Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Mathematics Learning and Instruction
• 7 Development of Fraction Understanding
• 8 Learning How to Solve Problems by Studying Examples
• 9 Harnessing Our Hands to Teach Mathematics
• Part III Reading and Writing
• Part IV General Learning Strategies
• Part V Metacognition

8 - Learning How to Solve Problems by Studying Examples

from Part II - Science and Math

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2019

Access options

Save book to kindle.

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle .

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service .

• Learning How to Solve Problems by Studying Examples
• By Tamara van Gog , Nikol Rummel , Alexander Renkl
• Edited by John Dunlosky , Kent State University, Ohio , Katherine A. Rawson , Kent State University, Ohio
• Book: The Cambridge Handbook of Cognition and Education
• Online publication: 08 February 2019
• Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108235631.009

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox .

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive .

9 Simple Solutions for Common Teaching Problems

November 27, 2016

Can't find what you are looking for? Contact Us

Listen to my interview with Mark Barnes ( transcript ):

This post contains Amazon Affiliate links; if you make a purchase from Amazon after going there through these links, Cult of Pedagogy receives a small commission at no extra cost to you. Thanks.

It’s pretty easy to avoid solving problems.  It happens to everyone: A good chunk of the year has passed, you’ve got a routine going, and whatever problems you might have, you’ve basically accepted them for now. Fixing them would take too much time. The solution would probably be too complicated.

Not necessarily.

My buddy Mark Barnes, a veteran teacher and author of six education books, thinks the solutions to many of our education challenges are things we could start doing tomorrow. This philosophy was the guiding principle behind the 2015 book we wrote together, Hacking Education: 10 Quick Fixes for Every School.  Since then, Barnes has published eight other Hack Learning books. He knows you don’t have time to read stacks of research-heavy, theoretical books. You want answers you can use right away. With this series, he aims to give educators “hacks”—solutions that can be implemented right now.

To give you a sampling of the kinds of solutions you’ll find in this series, we’re going to look at one idea from each book: Nine simple ideas that can have a big impact on student learning at your school. Although each hack has a blueprint for full implementation in the book it comes from, we’ll look at how you can get started right away. By the time you’re done reading, you should have found one you can try at your school. Let’s go.

1. Student Tech Gurus

From Hacking Education: 10 Quick Fixes for Every School

The Problem: Not enough tech support in your school. You have the tech, but when teachers or students need help, or something goes wrong, everything comes to a standstill because your current tech support staff doesn’t have the manpower to handle it all.

The Solution: Some schools are training teams of students to provide basic-level tech support for the school, even at the elementary level. These students attend staff trainings on new technology, act as teaching assistants when a class is working with a new or challenging technology, and even conduct their own training sessions for students and teachers. If students are trained to handle and prevent the lower-level problems, this frees up the paid tech support staff to focus on the more complex issues.

What You Can Do Tomorrow:  Establishing a true tech team takes some time, but right away, you can make a list of students you know to be pretty tech-savvy. Beside their names, list the tools each student is proficient in. Put this list in a public location in your classroom. Then, the next time students are working with a piece of technology, have them go to the students who know that tool for help.

2. Inspiration Boards

From Make Writing: 5 Teaching Strategies that Turn Writer’s Workshop into a Maker Space

The Problem:  In writing classes, students are sometimes slow to come up with ideas for what to write about.

The Solution: Dedicate a wall in your classroom as an Inspiration Board, a place where students can place images, quotes, rough ideas, the opening lines of a story they’re thinking of writing, anything that inspires them or shows fragments of inspiration. This gets the ideas out of students’ heads and into a public space, where they can generate fresh new ideas. “Students put an idea up, and then someone else maybe will see that idea and go, ‘Oh, I like that, and that makes me think of this,'” Barnes explains. “They’re getting thoughts out onto a board, and then starting to discuss those ideas, and ultimately those turn into those stories and projects and pieces of writing.”

What You Can Do Tomorrow: Clear everything off one of your bulletin boards and ask students to bring in something to hang on the board that inspires them—this can be a quote, an image, a poem, anything that can be affixed to a board. You may need to model this at first to get things going. If you teach more than one class period of writers, you could create separate boards for every class or just mix it all together.

3. Tracking Progress Transparently

From Hacking Assessment: 10 Ways to Go Gradeless in a Traditional Grades School

The Problem: Traditional grade books provide a very limited picture of a student’s progress, and students have no ownership of tracking their growth.

The Solution:  Have students keep a record of their own progress in a “transparent” space—a Google doc, for example—where the student, teacher, and parents can view it any time. The information they record will vary depending on student age and subject area, but the document will become more valuable if you require students to go beyond numbers: Record each assignment, the feedback they got on it, the standard(s) being measured, and what goals they set in response to the feedback.

What You Can Do Tomorrow:  Choose the record-keeping system you’re going to use—ideally, it will be something in the cloud, such as a Google Doc, but it can even be a chart on paper. Have students record the results of their most recent assignment, including the feedback they got and a goal for future growth, based on that feedback. Tell students you’re still just trying this out and get their feedback on how the system should evolve over time.

4. “Morecabulary”

From Hacking the Common Core: 10 Strategies for Amazing Learning in a Standardized World

The Problem: Students need to grow their vocabulary in all subject areas, but our most common methods of vocabulary instruction are dry and don’t lead to long-term retention.

The Solution: Instead of doing traditional dictionary and sentence-writing work, have students construct the meaning of vocabulary words in a variety of ways. One way of doing this is with a tool like Padlet , which is like an online corkboard. By creating a Padlet board for each word, students can all contribute their own definitions, sentences, even links to videos or articles that use the word in context. This kind of varied work will give students a more well-rounded, memorable experience with each word, and they’ll have more fun doing it, too.

What You Can Do Tomorrow:  Get started with one word: Choose a term students typically get wrong in your subject area and create a Padlet for it. (If your school is light on tech, you can use a sheet of paper or part of a bulletin board instead.) Then take 15 minutes and have students contribute definitions, sentences, images, videos, or other resources to flesh out the meaning of that word. Stay involved in the process, so you can correct any misconceptions. Once kids are used to the process, it can be repeated for other words.

5. Broadcast Student Voices

From Hacking Leadership: 10 Ways Great Leaders Inspire Learning that Teachers, Students, and Parents Love

The Problem: Most educators say they want to “give students a voice,” but they don’t always know how to make that happen.

The Solution: Using podcasting and live streaming, we can literally broadcast student voices right out into our schools and communities. Students can talk about topics or events that matter to them, or they can even share their own writing pieces or class projects. Links to these podcasts and broadcasts can be shared through the school website, newsletter, or social media account.

What You Can Do Tomorrow:  You can literally have students record and publish a podcast tomorrow using a free tool like Spreaker , which allows users to record podcasts right from a mobile device. For the sake of time, you might want to provide students with a starter topic or question, but once students get used to having a platform, let them take the reins.

6. OPB (Other People’s Books)

From Hacking Literacy: 5 Ways to Turn Any Classroom into a Culture of Readers

The Problem: Students need to be reading for pleasure, but your classroom doesn’t have enough books, and you can’t afford to buy any more.

The Solution: Build a massive classroom library with Other People’s Books—used books donated by parents, community members, and local businesses. Most people have a few books around the house that they’d be happy to donate; they just need to be asked. Then contact your public library—most libraries regularly purge their shelves of books to make room for new ones, and many would be happy to donate these to a classroom. Keep in mind that these books don’t have to be fiction: Student reading proficiency will grow if they read cookbooks, DIY home project books, old copies of the Guinness Book of World Records, really anything that isn’t inappropriate for school.

What You Can Do Tomorrow: Send an email out to staff and parents, explaining what you’re attempting to do and asking them to send in used books. Then start clearing some shelves!

7. Celebrity Couple Nickname Game

From Hacking Engagement: 50 Tips & Tools to Engage Teachers and Learners Daily

The Problem: Learning student names is essential for relationship-building, but it’s hard to learn lots of names quickly.

The Solution:  In the same way that the media creates mashups of celebrity couples’ names (think Brangelina), you can construct similar mashups to create unique nicknames for students using their first and last name: Jason Matthews becomes JMat. Rhianna Johnson becomes RJo. Have students offer their own suggestions until you find one that’s just right. Although you will eventually need to learn students’ real names, these nicknames can help jar your memory more quickly than a standard list of names will.

What You Can Do Tomorrow:  Obviously, if you’re reading this close to the beginning of a school year, you can plan to play this game with your students soon. But even if you’re way into the year and you already know everyone’s name, the game would make a fun bonding activity when you have a few spare minutes.

8. Boomerang Model

From Hacking Homework: 10 Strategies that Inspire Learning Outside the Classroom

The Problem: Students lack independent problem-solving skills when it comes to homework, relying too often on parents to “tell them how to do it.”

The Solution: Teach parents how to use the Boomerang Model, which empowers students to find solutions to their own homework problems. Barnes explains: “So they come to me, and they say, ‘Dad, I need help with this. I don’t get it.’ I’m going to respond with, ‘How can you help yourself? What strategy can you use that maybe you haven’t tried yet? Where should you start, because maybe you missed the real starting point? What evidence do you have to support this?’ If they say, ‘Is this right? Should I do this this way?’ I can say, ‘Well, what evidence do you have?’ We don’t want their automatic response to a struggle to be, ‘I need help from a teacher,’ or ‘I need help from a parent.’ We want them to help themselves.”

What You Can Do Tomorrow: Create a list of questions parents can “boomerang back” to their kids, then practice using them yourself, so students get used to hearing and responding to them. Introduce this concept to parents in a newsletter or better yet, a video demonstrating how it’s done.

9. Question Carousel

From Hacking Project-Based Learning: 10 Easy Steps to PBL and Inquiry in the Classroom

The Problem: When students work on a group project, they sometimes need fresh ideas to see the project or problem from all sides.

The Solution: The Question Carousel starts with students working in groups to generate something unique: A draft of an idea, a solution to a problem, the beginnings of a presentation of some kind. Then students rotate with their groups to study other groups’ products. At each stop, they leave questions for the original group; these questions help to clarify the product, clear up misunderstandings, point out problems, and fine-tune the final outcome.

What You Can Do Tomorrow:  The next time you put students in groups to generate some kind of unique idea or solution, have students rotate in a Question Carousel to prompt deeper thinking.

Browse the Complete Hack Learning Series Library

The ideas presented here are just a small fraction of the solutions you’ll find in each of the Hack Learning books. More books are being added all the time (and the three below are just a few), so click here to see what’s new .

What to Read Next

Categories: Book Recommendations , Podcast

12 Comments

Hey Jen, Among many personal aspects to my life I am also thankful for your blog/posts/thoughts. It’s always a nice break to hear your voice pulling my thoughts not just to best teaching practices but to my student’s needs. Quick Question: Where’s the best place to purchase an entire set of your Hacking series books. i’m thinking of Christmas gifts for my PLC. –jeff Renton HS, Renton, WA

Hi Jeff! Can you tell me how many people this would include?

Jen, Discovery of your podcasts and website has enriched my own pedagogy and now that of my teaching candidates. As an art educator working with undergraduates in the field, it has been a mission of mine to broaden their understanding of becoming an art teacher beyond area specific content knowledge. As you inspire me, I hope to inspire them! Thank you for quenching a thirst. Have you already given away the books you mentioned??

Hi Jen & Marc It is interesting that I discovered all this great Hacks Books last week. I was in my bed reading about Hyperdocs and suddenly the great Amazon suggested me Hacking the Homework. I read the first sample and then the other titles appeared. I read all the samples including Hacking the Assessment, which was one of my favorites. I was unsure which one to buy that night, I picked 50 Hacks to Engagement. Just love it! My favorite part is the one Things that I Could do Tomorrow. Great work, I’ll buy more books in this series. Awesome tools to Hacks my teaching practice.

Hi Jen, I was really interested in your problem #8 where students have trouble problem solving on homework and rely too heavily on their parents for help. I’m a preservice math teacher, so we really aim to help students become good problem solvers. I thought your proposed idea of teaching parents how to use the Boomerang Model of responding to their children’s questions with targeted questions that empower students to find their own solutions was a really great idea because it reinforces what they’re being asked to do in the classroom. I also really liked your next steps of compiling a list of example questions for parents or making an example video. My only thought is that some parents might not see the benefit in this approach and might see it as being more work for them. How would you justify the boomerang method to a parent that isn’t convinced it’s useful?

I love all the topics …in this websites hope i have all … Im a teacher who wants more knowledge…

Thanks for an interesting set of solutions for common teaching problems. I was disappointed by only one: #6, OPB. No mention of a library or librarian in this one? School librarians are eager to partner with teachers to promote outside reading and they are experts in the best, most appealing books for the kids they work with. Town librarians are also great sources of support and information. A teacher doesn’t have to go it alone when it comes to promoting outside reading.

Hi Suzanne,

Thank you for the reminder. I absolutely did not mean to ignore the value of librarians here! The focus of the post was to give teachers actions they could take all on their own, without needing to depend on a school budget. In schools that have an abundance of books in the library, a lack of books may not really be an issue. But for underfunded schools, teachers may need to be more resourceful. I’m glad you pointed out the knowledge of librarians in terms of knowing what books would be the most appealing; regardless of a school’s budget, that kind of knowledge will always be incredibly useful.

Great point, Suzanne. I recently paired with the awesome librarian at my school for a thematic book walk. Our librarian, Amy, set up around the library dozens of books that related to our current unit of study. They were categorized by genre. Students spent time browsing the selections and choosing a book. It was a great way to expand the classroom library and integrate the school library into our class.

Thanks for sharing this, Jenn.

Unfortunately, in a district like mine, the librarians and media specialists have all been removed in the high schools due to budget constraints. The “media specialist” now is just a temp duty person or a school aide. The media center has become somewhere to store textbooks and checkout Chromebooks, but it is no longer the place to get real books or learn from the specialist working there. It is very, very sad.

Loved this episode! It got me excited to read and reread the Hacking books. So practical and inspiring! Thanks!!

Great work!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Don’t Just Tell Students to Solve Problems. Teach Them How.

The positive impact of an innovative UC San Diego problem-solving educational curriculum continues to grow

• Daniel Kane - [email protected]

Published Date

Share this:, article content.

Problem solving is a critical skill for technical education and technical careers of all types. But what are best practices for teaching problem solving to high school and college students? 

The University of California San Diego Jacobs School of Engineering is on the forefront of efforts to improve how problem solving is taught. This UC San Diego approach puts hands-on problem-identification and problem-solving techniques front and center. Over 1,500 students across the San Diego region have already benefited over the last three years from this program. In the 2023-2024 academic year, approximately 1,000 upper-level high school students will be taking the problem solving course in four different school districts in the San Diego region. Based on the positive results with college students, as well as high school juniors and seniors in the San Diego region, the project is getting attention from educators across the state of California, and around the nation and the world.

{/exp:typographee}

In Summer 2023, th e 27 community college students who took the unique problem-solving course developed at the UC San Diego Jacobs School of Engineering thrived, according to Alex Phan PhD, the Executive Director of Student Success at the UC San Diego Jacobs School of Engineering. Phan oversees the project. 

Over the course of three weeks, these students from Southwestern College and San Diego City College poured their enthusiasm into problem solving through hands-on team engineering challenges. The students brimmed with positive energy as they worked together. 

What was noticeably absent from this laboratory classroom: frustration.

“In school, we often tell students to brainstorm, but they don’t often know where to start. This curriculum gives students direct strategies for brainstorming, for identifying problems, for solving problems,” sai d Jennifer Ogo, a teacher from Kearny High School who taught the problem-solving course in summer 2023 at UC San Diego. Ogo was part of group of educators who took the course themselves last summer.

The curriculum has been created, refined and administered over the last three years through a collaboration between the UC San Diego Jacobs School of Engineering and the UC San Diego Division of Extended Studies. The project kicked off in 2020 with a generous gift from a local philanthropist.

Not getting stuck

One of the overarching goals of this project is to teach both problem-identification and problem-solving skills that help students avoid getting stuck during the learning process. Stuck feelings lead to frustration – and when it’s a Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) project, that frustration can lead students to feel they don’t belong in a STEM major or a STEM career. Instead, the UC San Diego curriculum is designed to give students the tools that lead to reactions like “this class is hard, but I know I can do this!” –  as Ogo, a celebrated high school biomedical sciences and technology teacher, put it. 

Three years into the curriculum development effort, the light-hearted energy of the students combined with their intense focus points to success. On the last day of the class, Mourad Mjahed PhD, Director of the MESA Program at Southwestern College’s School of Mathematics, Science and Engineering came to UC San Diego to see the final project presentations made by his 22 MESA students.

“Industry is looking for students who have learned from their failures and who have worked outside of their comfort zones,” said Mjahed. The UC San Diego problem-solving curriculum, Mjahed noted, is an opportunity for students to build the skills and the confidence to learn from their failures and to work outside their comfort zone. “And from there, they see pathways to real careers,” he said. 

What does it mean to explicitly teach problem solving? 

This approach to teaching problem solving includes a significant focus on learning to identify the problem that actually needs to be solved, in order to avoid solving the wrong problem. The curriculum is organized so that each day is a complete experience. It begins with the teacher introducing the problem-identification or problem-solving strategy of the day. The teacher then presents case studies of that particular strategy in action. Next, the students get introduced to the day’s challenge project. Working in teams, the students compete to win the challenge while integrating the day’s technique. Finally, the class reconvenes to reflect. They discuss what worked and didn't work with their designs as well as how they could have used the day’s problem-identification or problem-solving technique more effectively. 

The challenges are designed to be engaging – and over three years, they have been refined to be even more engaging. But the student engagement is about much more than being entertained. Many of the students recognize early on that the problem-identification and problem-solving skills they are learning can be applied not just in the classroom, but in other classes and in life in general. 

Gabriel from Southwestern College is one of the students who saw benefits outside the classroom almost immediately. In addition to taking the UC San Diego problem-solving course, Gabriel was concurrently enrolled in an online computer science programming class. He said he immediately started applying the UC San Diego problem-identification and troubleshooting strategies to his coding assignments. 

Gabriel noted that he was given a coding-specific troubleshooting strategy in the computer science course, but the more general problem-identification strategies from the UC San Diego class had been extremely helpful. It’s critical to “find the right problem so you can get the right solution. The strategies here,” he said, “they work everywhere.”

Phan echoed this sentiment. “We believe this curriculum can prepare students for the technical workforce. It can prepare students to be impactful for any career path.”

The goal is to be able to offer the course in community colleges for course credit that transfers to the UC, and to possibly offer a version of the course to incoming students at UC San Diego. 

As the team continues to work towards integrating the curriculum in both standardized high school courses such as physics, and incorporating the content as a part of the general education curriculum at UC San Diego, the project is expected to impact thousands more students across San Diego annually. 

Portrait of the Problem-Solving Curriculum

On a sunny Wednesday in July 2023, an experiential-learning classroom was full of San Diego community college students. They were about half-way through the three-week problem-solving course at UC San Diego, held in the campus’ EnVision Arts and Engineering Maker Studio. On this day, the students were challenged to build a contraption that would propel at least six ping pong balls along a kite string spanning the laboratory. The only propulsive force they could rely on was the air shooting out of a party balloon.

A team of three students from Southwestern College – Valeria, Melissa and Alondra – took an early lead in the classroom competition. They were the first to use a plastic bag instead of disposable cups to hold the ping pong balls. Using a bag, their design got more than half-way to the finish line – better than any other team at the time – but there was more work to do. 

As the trio considered what design changes to make next, they returned to the problem-solving theme of the day: unintended consequences. Earlier in the day, all the students had been challenged to consider unintended consequences and ask questions like: When you design to reduce friction, what happens? Do new problems emerge? Did other things improve that you hadn’t anticipated? 

Other groups soon followed Valeria, Melissa and Alondra’s lead and began iterating on their own plastic-bag solutions to the day’s challenge. New unintended consequences popped up everywhere. Switching from cups to a bag, for example, reduced friction but sometimes increased wind drag. 

Over the course of several iterations, Valeria, Melissa and Alondra made their bag smaller, blew their balloon up bigger, and switched to a different kind of tape to get a better connection with the plastic straw that slid along the kite string, carrying the ping pong balls. 

One of the groups on the other side of the room watched the emergence of the plastic-bag solution with great interest. 

“We tried everything, then we saw a team using a bag,” said Alexander, a student from City College. His team adopted the plastic-bag strategy as well, and iterated on it like everyone else. They also chose to blow up their balloon with a hand pump after the balloon was already attached to the bag filled with ping pong balls – which was unique. 

“I don’t want to be trying to put the balloon in place when it's about to explode,” Alexander explained. 

Asked about whether the structured problem solving approaches were useful, Alexander’s teammate Brianna, who is a Southwestern College student, talked about how the problem-solving tools have helped her get over mental blocks. “Sometimes we make the most ridiculous things work,” she said. “It’s a pretty fun class for sure.” 

Yoshadara, a City College student who is the third member of this team, described some of the problem solving techniques this way: “It’s about letting yourself be a little absurd.”

Alexander jumped back into the conversation. “The value is in the abstraction. As students, we learn to look at the problem solving that worked and then abstract out the problem solving strategy that can then be applied to other challenges. That’s what mathematicians do all the time,” he said, adding that he is already thinking about how he can apply the process of looking at unintended consequences to improve both how he plays chess and how he goes about solving math problems.

Looking ahead, the goal is to empower as many students as possible in the San Diego area and  beyond to learn to problem solve more enjoyably. It’s a concrete way to give students tools that could encourage them to thrive in the growing number of technical careers that require sharp problem-solving skills, whether or not they require a four-year degree. 

You May Also Like

Precision oncology via artificial intelligence on cancer biopsies, unraveling a key junction underlying muscle contraction, new report shows greater interest in labor unions, especially among young workers, illicit fentanyl use linked to increased risk of hepatitis c among people who use drugs, stay in the know.

Keep up with all the latest from UC San Diego. Subscribe to the newsletter today.

You have been successfully subscribed to the UC San Diego Today Newsletter.

Campus & Community

Arts & culture, visual storytelling.

• Media Resources & Contacts

Signup to get the latest UC San Diego newsletters delivered to your inbox.

Award-winning publication highlighting the distinction, prestige and global impact of UC San Diego.

Popular Searches: Covid-19   Ukraine   Campus & Community   Arts & Culture   Voices

World leading higher education information and services Home News Blogs Courses Jobs function vqTrackId(){return'0a14b8cb-e32a-4bc4-ab7d-ff2b3cfe7090';}(function(d,e){var el=d.createElement(e);el.sa=function(an,av){this.setAttribute(an,av);return this;};el.sa('id','vq_tracking').sa('src','//t.visitorqueue.com/p/tracking.min.js?id='+vqTrackId()).sa('async',1).sa('data-id',vqTrackId());d.getElementsByTagName(e)[0].parentNode.appendChild(el);})(document,'script'); function vqTrackPc(){return 1;} (function(d,e){var el=d.createElement(e);el.sa=function(an,av){this.setAttribute(an,av);return this;};el.sa('id','vq_personalisation').sa('src','//personalisation.visitorqueue.com/p/personalisation.min.js?id='+vqTrackId()).sa('async',1).sa('data-id',vqTrackId());d.getElementsByTagName(e)[0].parentNode.appendChild(el);})(document,'script');

Top 8 modern education problems and ways to solve them.

| September 15, 2017 | 0 responses

In many ways, today’s system is better than the traditional one. Technology is the biggest change and the greatest advantage at the same time. Various devices, such as computers, projectors, tablets and smartphones, make the process of learning simpler and more fun. The Internet gives both students and teachers access to limitless knowledge.

However, this is not the perfect educational system. It has several problems, so we have to try to improve it.

•  Problem: The Individual Needs of Low-Achievers Are Not Being Addressed

Personalized learning is the most popular trend in education. The educators are doing their best to identify the learning style of each student and provide training that corresponds to their needs.

However, many students are at risk of falling behind, especially children who are learning mathematics and reading. In the USA, in particular, there are large gaps in science achievements by middle school.

Solution: Address the Needs of Low-Achievers

The educators must try harder to reduce the number of students who are getting low results on long-term trajectories. If we identify these students at an early age, we can provide additional training to help them improve the results.

• Problem: Overcrowded Classrooms

In 2016, there were over 17,000 state secondary school children in the UK being taught in classes of 36+ pupils.

Solution: Reduce the Number of Students in the Classroom

Only a smaller class can enable an active role for the student and improve the level of individual attention they get from the teacher.

• Problem: The Teachers Are Expected to Entertain

Today’s generations of students love technology, so the teachers started using technology just to keep them engaged. That imposes a serious issue: education is becoming an entertainment rather than a learning process.

Solution: Set Some Limits

We don’t have to see education as opposed to entertainment. However, we have to make the students aware of the purpose of technology and games in the classroom. It’s all about learning.

• Problem: Not Having Enough Time for Volunteering in University

The students are overwhelmed with projects and assignments. There is absolutely no space for internships and volunteering in college .

Solution: Make Internships and Volunteering Part of Education

When students graduate, a volunteering activity can make a great difference during the hiring process. In addition, these experiences help them develop into complete persons. If the students start getting credits for volunteering and internships, they will be willing to make the effort.

• Problem: The Parents Are Too Involved

Due to the fact that technology became part of the early educational process, it’s necessary for the parents to observe the way their children use the Internet at home. They have to help the students to complete assignments involving technology.

What about those parents who don’t have enough time for that? What if they have time, but want to use it in a different way?

Solution: Stop Expecting Parents to Act Like Teachers at Home

The parent should definitely support their child throughout the schooling process. However, we mustn’t turn this into a mandatory role. The teachers should stop assigning homework that demands parental assistance.

• Problem: Outdated Curriculum

Although we transformed the educational system, many features of the curriculum remained unchanged.

Solution: Eliminate Standardised Exams

This is a radical suggestion. However, standardised exams are a big problem. We want the students to learn at their own pace. We are personalizing the process of education. Then why do we expect them to compete with each other and meet the same standards as everyone else? The teacher should be the one responsible of grading.

• Problem: Not All Teachers Can Meet the Standards of the New Educational System

Can we really expect all teachers to use technology? Some of them are near the end of their teaching careers and they have never used tablets in the lecturing process before.

Solution: Provide Better Training for the Teachers

If we want all students to receive high-quality education based on the standards of the system, we have to prepare the teachers first. They need more training, preparation, and even tests that prove they can teach today’s generations of students.

• Problem: Graduates Are Not Ready for What Follows

A third of the employers in the UK are not happy with the performance of recent graduates. That means the system is not preparing them well for the challenges that follow.

Solution: More Internships, More Realistic Education

Practical education – that’s a challenge we still haven’t met. We have to get more practical.

The evolution of the educational system is an important process. Currently, we have a system that’s more suitable to the needs of generations when compared to the traditional system. However, it’s still not perfect. The evolution never stops.

Author Bio:   Chris Richardson is a journalist, editor, and a blogger. He loves to write, learn new things, and meet new outgoing people. Chris is also fond of traveling, sports, and playing the guitar. Follow him on Facebook and Google+ .

Tags: solutions

The global education challenge: Scaling up to tackle the learning crisis

• Download the policy brief

Subscribe to Global Connection

Alice albright alice albright chief executive officer - global partnership for education.

July 25, 2019

The following is one of eight briefs commissioned for the 16th annual Brookings Blum Roundtable, “2020 and beyond: Maintaining the bipartisan narrative on US global development.”

Addressing today’s massive global education crisis requires some disruption and the development of a new 21st-century aid delivery model built on a strong operational public-private partnership and results-based financing model that rewards political leadership and progress on overcoming priority obstacles to equitable access and learning in least developed countries (LDCs) and lower-middle-income countries (LMICs). Success will also require a more efficient and unified global education architecture. More money alone will not fix the problem. Addressing this global challenge requires new champions at the highest level and new approaches.

Key data points

In an era when youth are the fastest-growing segment of the population in many parts of the world, new data from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) reveals that an estimated 263 million children and young people are out of school, overwhelmingly in LDCs and LMICs. 1 On current trends, the International Commission on Financing Education Opportunity reported in 2016 that, a far larger number—825 million young people—will not have the basic literacy, numeracy, and digital skills to compete for the jobs of 2030. 2 Absent a significant political and financial investment in their education, beginning with basic education, there is a serious risk that this youth “bulge” will drive instability and constrain economic growth.

Despite progress in gender parity, it will take about 100 years to reach true gender equality at secondary school level in LDCs and LMICs. Lack of education and related employment opportunities in these countries presents national, regional, and global security risks.

Related Books

Amar Bhattacharya, Homi Kharas, John W. McArthur

November 15, 2023

Geoffrey Gertz, Homi Kharas, Johannes F. Linn

September 12, 2017

Esther Care, Patrick Griffin

April 11, 2017

Among global education’s most urgent challenges is a severe lack of trained teachers, particularly female teachers. An additional 9 million trained teachers are needed in sub-Saharan Africa by 2030.

Refugees and internally displaced people, now numbering over 70 million, constitute a global crisis. Two-thirds of the people in this group are women and children; host countries, many fragile themselves, struggle to provide access to education to such people.

Highlighted below are actions and reforms that could lead the way toward solving the crisis:

• Leadership to jump-start transformation. The next U.S. administration should convene a high-level White House conference of sovereign donors, developing country leaders, key multilateral organizations, private sector and major philanthropists/foundations, and civil society to jump-start and energize a new, 10-year global response to this challenge. A key goal of this decadelong effort should be to transform education systems in the world’s poorest countries, particularly for girls and women, within a generation. That implies advancing much faster than the 100-plus years required if current programs and commitments remain as is.
• A whole-of-government leadership response. Such transformation of currently weak education systems in scores of countries over a generation will require sustained top-level political leadership, accompanied by substantial new donor and developing country investments. To ensure sustained attention for this initiative over multiple years, the U.S. administration will need to designate senior officials in the State Department, USAID, the National Security Council, the Office of Management and Budget, and elsewhere to form a whole-of-government leadership response that can energize other governments and actors.
• Teacher training and deployment at scale. A key component of a new global highest-level effort, based on securing progress against the Sustainable Development Goals and the Addis 2030 Framework, should be the training and deployment of 9 million new qualified teachers, particularly female teachers, in sub-Saharan Africa where they are most needed. Over 90 percent of the Global Partnership for Education’s education sector implementation grants have included investments in teacher development and training and 76 percent in the provision of learning materials.
• Foster positive disruption by engaging community level non-state actors who are providing education services in marginal areas where national systems do not reach the population. Related to this, increased financial and technical support to national governments are required to strengthen their non-state actor regulatory frameworks. Such frameworks must ensure that any non-state actors operate without discrimination and prioritize access for the most marginalized. The ideological divide on this issue—featuring a strong resistance by defenders of public education to tap into the capacities and networks of non-state actors—must be resolved if we are to achieve a rapid breakthrough.
• Confirm the appropriate roles for technology in equitably advancing access and quality of education, including in the initial and ongoing training of teachers and administrators, delivery of distance education to marginalized communities and assessment of learning, strengthening of basic systems, and increased efficiency of systems. This is not primarily about how various gadgets can help advance education goals.
• Commodity component. Availability of appropriate learning materials for every child sitting in a classroom—right level, right language, and right subject matter. Lack of books and other learning materials is a persistent problem throughout education systems—from early grades through to teaching colleges. Teachers need books and other materials to do their jobs. Consider how the USAID-hosted Global Book Alliance, working to address costs and supply chain issues, distribution challenges, and more can be strengthened and supported to produce the model(s) that can overcome these challenges.

Annual high-level stock take at the G-7. The next U.S. administration can work with G-7 partners to secure agreement on an annual stocktaking of progress against this new global education agenda at the upcoming G-7 summits. This also will help ensure sustained focus and pressure to deliver especially on equity and inclusion. Global Partnership for Education’s participation at the G-7 Gender Equality Advisory Council is helping ensure that momentum is maintained to mobilize the necessary political leadership and expertise at country level to rapidly step up progress in gender equality, in and through education. 3 Also consider a role for the G-20, given participation by some developing country partners.

Related Content

Jenny Perlman Robinson, Molly Curtiss Wyss

July 3, 2018

Michelle Kaffenberger

May 17, 2019

Ramya Vivekanandan

February 14, 2019

• “263 Million Children and Youth Are Out of School.” UNESCO UIS. July 15, 2016. http://uis.unesco.org/en/news/263-million-children-and-youth-are-out-school.
• “The Learning Generation: Investing in education for a changing world.” The International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity. 2016. https://report.educationcommission.org/downloads/.
• “Influencing the most powerful nations to invest in the power of girls.” Global Partnership for Education. March 12, 2019. https://www.globalpartnership.org/blog/influencing-most-powerful-nations-invest-power-girls.

Global Education

Global Economy and Development

June 20, 2024

Elyse Painter, Emily Gustafsson-Wright

January 5, 2024

Online only

9:00 am - 10:00 am EST

How do you solve the biggest problem in education?

Education in our country is in a mess! I say this as one that calls myself an educator and has now for almost 20 years. Unfortunately, I fear, that it is actually worse than most people recognize.

So, today, I wanted to give a nice and neat, one step (or at least the first step) in solving the biggest problem in education.

One step! What could be easier!

Our biggest cultural problem in education is our approach to education. We, as a society, keep trying to fix educational problems. Things like No Child Left Behind and The Common Core are these sorts of attempted fixes. When we do this, however, we invariably end up causing more problems. In the end, we keep heaping disaster on catastrophe.

Let's take a step back. What are all of our fixes? They are increasingly desperate (and often well-meaning) attempts to control things so that we can improve them from the top down. In our attempt to control, we legislate, test, provide procedures, test again, rethink, add more laws and forms, and test again.

We do this because we view education as a societal issue instead of a familial or religious issue. No doubt a society rises and falls based on the education it provides its children. Interestingly, however, the times when schools seem to perform the best is when teachers are given the most freedom to teach and when parents are given the most freedom to choose schools. Think about ancient Greece, Renaissance Florence, Victorian England, and early America. The educational accomplishments of those times are staggering. Interestingly, the level societal control over education was minuscule during those times if you compare those times to ours.

So how about this for a one step fix: free education! (I do not mean free as in costing nothing.) Free education from its tether to the government and especially to tax dollars. Give teachers freedom to run classes; give parents freedom to choose schools. Money, students, and support will flow away from bad schools and teachers who are ineffective and toward excellent schools. It will because the decisions will then be made by people with a vested interest to make the best choices (because they will be choosing education for their children) and with the freedom to make those choices a reality. Making our schools and good teachers more free and providing an environment where funds and students follow quality is a pre-requisite to fixing all other problems. Thus, it is the first step toward solving the biggest educational problem that we have.

About our Guests

Tyler fischer.

Head of School

Subscribe to Our Blog

Sign up here to receive the Veritas blog directly to your inbox each time we publish a new post.

More Articles

Faith to Face the Abyss: Equipping Your Child With A Shield For Life's Battles

Encouraging Broad & Excellent Music Listening Habits in Your Family

Communion Beyond Communication: The Importance of Communal Meals

Embracing the New and Clinging to What's True

Christianizing Time: The Hegemony of Christ Over Our Calendars

Meet Mrs. Thompson, Our New First Grade Teacher

KB5042421: CrowdStrike issue impacting Windows endpoints causing an 0x50 or 0x7E error message on a blue screen

Microsoft has identified an issue impacting Windows endpoints that are running the CrowdStrike Falcon agent. These endpoints might encounter error messages 0x50 or 0x7E on a blue screen and experience a continual restarting state.

We have received reports of successful recovery from some customers attempting multiple restart operations on affected Windows endpoints.

We are working with CrowdStrike to provide the most up-to-date information available on this issue. Please check back for updates on this ongoing issue. 

Important:  We have released a USB tool to help automate this manual repair process. For more information, see  New recovery tool to help with CrowdStrike issue impacting Windows devices .

To resolve this issue, follow these instructions for your version of Windows.

Hold the power button for 10 seconds to turn off your device and then press the power button again to turn on your device.

On the Windows sign-in screen, press and hold the  Shift key while you select  Power >  Restart .

Restart your device. Note  You may be asked to enter your  BitLocker recovery key . When the device restarts, continue pressing F4 and then it will log you in to safe mode. Please note, for some devices, you need to press F11 to log in through safe mode.

Once in safe mode, right-click Start , click  Run , type  cmd  in the Open box, and then click OK .

If your system drive is different than C:\, type C: and then press Enter . This will switch you to the C:\ drive.

Type the following command and then press Enter:

CD C:\Windows\System32\drivers\CrowdStrike

Note In this example, C is your system drive. This will change to the CrowdStrike directory.

Once in the CrowdStrike directory, locate the file matching “C-00000291*.sys”. To do this, type the following command and then press Enter :

dir C-00000291*.sys

Permanently delete the file(s) found. To do this, type the following command and then press Enter .

del C-00000291*.sys

Manually search for any files that match “C-00000291*.sys” and delete them.

Restart your device.

On the Windows sign-in screen, press and hold the  Shift  key while you select  Power   >  Restart .

Restart your device. Note  You may be asked to enter your  BitLocker recovery key .

When the device restarts, continue pressing F4 and then it will log you in to safe mode.

Once in safe mode, right-click Start , click  Run , type  cmd  in the Open box, and then click  OK .

Type in the following command and then press Enter :

Note  In this example C is your system drive. This will change to the CrowdStrike directory.

Recovery methods

If you receive the Windows Recovery screen, use one of the following methods to recover your device.

Method 1: Use Enable safe mode

Hold the power button for 10 seconds to turn off your device and thenpress the power button again to turn on your device.

On the Windows sign-in screen, press and hold the  Shift  key while you select  Power >   Restart .

After your device restarts to the  Choose an option  screen, select  Troubleshoot  >  Advanced options  >  Startup Settings  >  Enable safe mode . Then, restart your device. Note  You might be asked to enter your  BitLocker recovery key . When the device restarts, continue pressing F4 and then it will log you in to safe mode. Please note, for some devices, you need to press F11 to log in through safe mode.

If the screen asks for a BitLocker recovery key, use your phone and log on to  https://aka.ms/aadrecoverykey . Log on with your Email ID and domain account password to find the BitLocker recovery key associated with your device. To locate your BitLocker recovery key, click Manage Devices > View Bitlocker Keys > Show recovery key .

If your system drive is different than C:\, type C: and then press  Enter . This will switch you to the C:\ drive.

Type the following command and then press Enter :

Tip:  CD C:\Windows\System32\drivers\CrowdStrike

Note  In this example, C is your system drive. This will change to the CrowdStrike directory.

After your device restarts to the  Choose an option  screen, select  Troubleshoot  >  Advanced options  >  Startup Settings  >  Enable safe mode .  Then restart your device again. Note  You might be asked to enter your  BitLocker recovery key . When the device restarts, continue pressing F4 and then it will log you into safe mode. Please note, for some devices, you need to press F11 to log in through safe mode.

If the screen asks for a BitLocker recovery key, then use your phone and log on to  https://aka.ms/aadrecoverykey . Log on with your Email ID and domain account password to find the bit locker recovery key associated with your device. To locate your BitLocker recovery key, click Manage Devices > View Bitlocker Keys > Show recovery key .

Select the name of the device where you see the BitLocker prompt. In the expanded window, select View BitLocker Keys . Go back to your device and input the BitLocker key that you see on your phone or secondary device.

Note  In this example, C is your system drive. This will change to the CrowdStrike directory.

Method 2: Use System Restore

After your device restarts to the  Choose an option  screen, select  Troubleshoot  >  Advanced options  >  System Restore .

If the screen asks for a BitLocker recovery key, use your phone and log on to  https://aka.ms/aadrecoverykey . Login with your email id and domain account password to find the bit locker recovery key associated with your device. To locate your BitLocker recovery key, click Manage Devices > View Bitlocker Keys > Show recovery key .

Click Next  on System Restore.

Select the Restore option in the list, click  Next , and then click  Finish .

Click Yes  to confirm the restore. Note  This will perform just the Windows system restore and personal data should not be impacted. This process might take up to 15 minutes to complete.

If the screen asks for a BitLocker recovery key, use your phone and log on to  https://aka.ms/aadrecoverykey . Log in with your Email ID and domain account password to find the bit locker recovery key associated with your device. To locate your BitLocker recovery key, click Manage Devices > View Bitlocker Keys > Show recovery key .

Select the Restore option in the list, click Next , and then click  Finish .​​​​​​​

Contact CrowdStrike

If after following the above steps, if you still experience issues logging into your device, please reach out to CrowdStrike for additional assistance.

Start your PC in safe mode in Windows

Third-party information disclaimer

The third-party products that this article discusses are manufactured by companies that are independent of Microsoft. We make no warranty, implied or otherwise, about the performance or reliability of these products.

We provide third-party contact information to help you find technical support. This contact information may change without notice. We do not guarantee the accuracy of this third-party contact information.

Need more help?

Want more options.

Explore subscription benefits, browse training courses, learn how to secure your device, and more.

Microsoft 365 subscription benefits

Microsoft 365 training

Microsoft security

Accessibility center

Communities help you ask and answer questions, give feedback, and hear from experts with rich knowledge.

Ask the Microsoft Community

Microsoft Tech Community

Windows Insiders

Microsoft 365 Insiders

Was this information helpful?

Thank you for your feedback.

No, Kamala Harris Didn't Say 'the Problem of Solving a Problem Is Not a Problem'

The purported quote continued, "but when a problem solves a problem without any problem, then the problem is not at all a problem.", jordan liles, published july 24, 2024.

About this rating

According to memes and social media posts, U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris is rumored to have once opined about dealing with problems, problems and more problems. The purported quote reads, "The problem of solving a problem is not a problem, but when a problem solves a problem without any problem, then the problem is not at all a problem."

For example, a reverse-image search found numerous postings of the quote in meme and text form from 2023 and 2024 on America's Best Pics and Videos , Facebook , iFunny , Imgflip and X . Some users also shared the quote after President Joe Biden dropped out of the 2024 election and endorsed Harris.

In a more prominent example, two-time, Oscar-nominated actor James Woods posted one of the most engaged-with shares of the quote meme with Harris' name. Woods captioned his June 15, 2024, post ( archived ) with the words "DEI VP" — a reference to some right-wing disagreements with efforts toward promoting initiatives regarding diversity, equity and inclusion.

However, we uncovered no video, audio or other type of documentary evidence suggesting Harris ever spoke or wrote the words in the quote.

In our research of the quote, we examined a Reddit thread on the r/Conservative subreddit featuring a meme of Harris with the quote. One user replying to the Jan. 20, 2024, thread commented , "The fact that I can't tell if this is something she actually said because it sounds like something she would say is funny."

However, all that user – or any user in the thread – needed to do to research the quote was quickly and simply search online.

For example, we performed a Google search for the first few words of the quote: "the problem of solving a problem is not." Surrounding the words with quotation marks instructed Google to only display results for an exact match of our search.

As of July 2024, Google only displayed 14 links on two pages of search results. None of the results brought forth any information suggesting video, audio or other evidence existed of Harris saying or writing the quote.

If the quote truly originated from Harris, political websites — primarily right-wing blogs — would likely have widely covered the quote. However, we located no such coverage.

We will update this report if further details come to light.

Evon, Dan. "Snopes Tips: A Guide To Performing Reverse Image Searches." Snopes , 22 Mar. 2022, https://www.snopes.com//articles/400681/how-to-perform-reverse-image-searches/.

Google . https://www.google.com/.

"James Woods." IMDb.com , https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000249/awards/.

Snopes Staff. "Biden Dropped Out of Presidential Race, Endorsed Kamala Harris?" Snopes , 21 July 2024, https://www.snopes.com//fact-check/biden-resigns-election/.

By Jordan Liles

Jordan Liles is a Senior Reporter who has been with Snopes since 2016.

Article Tags

Eight fail-safe ways to build business students’ problem-solving skills

The volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) nature of business environments prompt employers to look for creative and agile graduates

Manju Meenakshy

• More on this topic

Created in partnership with

You may also like

Popular resources

.css-1txxx8u{overflow:hidden;max-height:81px;text-indent:0px;} How AI and immersive technology will personalise learning

How to become an administrator – and why you should, school visits are a triple-win for academics, schools and society, why visible senior leadership in sustainability matters, why the search for research funding is like romance.

As academics, we most often focus on imparting discipline-based knowledge and achieving learning outcomes. While dissemination of knowledge fulfils higher education’s inherent purpose, we have a responsibility to support businesses and economies by preparing job-ready graduates. 

With the ubiquitous demand for work-ready talent, at the macro level colleges should include mandatory internships and research projects in the curriculum to align the programme learning outcomes with industry requirements. However, at the micro level, each facilitator needs to do their best to embed appropriate mechanisms within their courses to foster skills that enhance employability . This will ensure that the course learning outcomes address the needs of the recruiters. The following are a few approaches that educators can use to enhance problem-solving skill sets in students. 

Teaching through case studies

Integrating case studies into your teaching helps students develop problem-identification and problem-solving skills. You can source cases by subscribing to case publishing sites such as Harvard Business Publishing, the Case Centre, WARC and others. These sites allow you to use multiple filters based on subject matter, popularity, availability of supplementary material and other criteria, which can make the selection easier. You can also create your own cases by modifying contemporary news stories to bring in dilemmas that the students need to solve. For example, you can amend a story on store closures of a clothing brand into a case situation where students need to suggest ways to turn the business around.

Incorporating live projects into classes

A live project is a real-world business challenge that corporate houses set students to enable them to get first-hand experience of the kinds of projects they might be asked to take part in in the workplace. For example, a company wanting to check consumer perceptions and attitudes towards its newly launched fruit drink might recruit college students to find this out. Based on students’ insights and research, the company might devise a pricing or packaging strategy for the new drink. 

Fast-moving consumer goods (fmcg) companies are always in need of market research for their brands, so reaching out and partnering with one of these would be a good strategy if you wanted to incorporate live projects into your teaching. 

• Resource collection: Getting students workplace-ready
• Show off students’ employability with e-portfolios
• Sharpen your students’ interview skills

Encouraging students to take microcredentials

Microcredentials are short-duration courses that can aid students in handling critical situations in the workplace. Coursera, Edx and Udemy are among many providers of these. Encouraging students to enrol on courses about creative problem solving and critical thinking, data analysis and data visualisation will help them enhance vital employability skills. Offering them additional marks for completing these courses provides an incentive.

Organising guest lectures 

Inviting industry practitioners to guest lecture at your university will give students valuable insights into real-world business challenges and possible solutions. Reach out to your alumni network to find people who might be interested in imparting their knowledge and experience to current students. 

Running simulations 

Incorporating simulation games into your classes is an engaging way to encourage students to problem solve in real-time. A game scenario might involve students making decisions on the price they will charge for a product, the amount of commission they will give their traders and expenses allocated for promotions, among others, with each combination chosen resulting in an increase or decrease in profit or market share. By playing several rounds students get to understand the consequences of their decisions and get better at choosing the best way forward. 

If you’re looking for inspiration, Harvard Business Publishing offers several simulation packages that you can subscribe to and MIT Sloan offers a free simulation experience with its Platform Wars game.

Setting research tasks

Working on research articles and cases in collaboration with faculty helps students identify problems and possible solutions. For example, a faculty member and a student can jointly study the corporate social responsibility programme of a particular firm and, based on data collection from beneficiaries of the programme, they can suggest modifications to the investment to increase the value for the beneficiaries.

Offering international exposure and networking opportunities

Faculty could encourage students to join international organisations such as AIESEC or the International Association for the Exchange of Students for Technical Experience (IAESTE) so that they can access global quality internships and projects that can expose them to global perspectives and work practices.

Ensuring you have an effective evaluation process

An important aspect of building these skills in your students is ensuring you have a watertight evaluation process in place. An example of grading rubrics could be: 

• Inadequate: cannot find practical solutions
• Satisfactory: can identify possible solutions with help
• Proficient: can independently identify and evaluate workable solutions 
• Excellent: can teach peers to identify and evaluate workable solutions. 

Incorporating these strategies will help you mirror workplace environments and empower students to strive for successful futures. 

Manju Meenakshy is an assistant professor (marketing) and co-chairperson (MBA – marketing) at T A Pai Management Institute, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, India.

If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the Campus newsletter .

How AI and immersive technology will personalise learning

A practical guide to navigating the language of diversity, can we really decolonise the university, emotions and learning: what role do emotions play in how and why students learn, a diy guide to starting your own journal, when it comes to digital upskilling, sharing is caring.

Register for free

and unlock a host of features on the THE site

Coding camp helps middle schoolers in Montgomery Co. recover from pandemic setbacks

by Kellye Lynn

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Md. (7News) — Navika Duvey is a rising seventh grader who is expanding her understanding of coding at summer camp.

"Problem-solving, those skills you learn in math is also in coding," she told 7News.

It's an important connection as Montgomery County Public Schools students and those around the country make slow progress in recovering from pandemic-related academic losses.

READ| Delta struggles with baggage, delays after global IT outage leaves travelers stranded

The national decline in math scores has created what education experts call a data literacy crisis.

"A lot of our students are coming in at different levels, and basically the levels that they’re coming in at they might not have the skills to show their level of performance," explained educator and camp on-site coordinator Yvette Edwards.

For three weeks this summer, more than 800 Montgomery County Public Schools students are strengthening essential critical thinking and problem-solving skills through the Montgomery Can Code camp.

"To have an introduction to Apple Swift coding and learning app design," said Kimberly Bloch-Rincan, Director of ignITe Hub which runs Montgomery Can Code.

The free camp offered at three Montgomery College campuses is also inspiring these middle school students to pursue tech careers.

READ| Target stops taking checks; business expert thinks fighting fraud is the reason

11-year-old Veer Amin hopes to someday work as a robotics engineer.

"I love coding and I think coding’s really important to what you can do ahead in life," he said.

"A lot of computer and AI things are going to be very important in the future so I just want to get ahead of the game," student Wilson Dilone told 7News.