Present at our first gathering in December: Wendy Carter (now sadly lost to the Robotics Team), Nate Mattson, Kelly Momsen, Paul Pearson, Karen Snyder, Lon Weaver, and Cheryl Wulff.

After reflecting on the first meeting and the participants additional comments thereafter, I think the discoveries of members of the group can be generally divided into three areas: (1) barriers to problem-solving, (2) processes for problem-solving, and (3) pedagogical responsibilities and institutional implications for the teaching of problem-solving.

Barriers to problem-solving were noted by Cheryl and Kelly. Cheryl has noted that students tend not to have problem solving skills and require greater opportunities for independent, non-teacher-dependent problem solving. Kelly attributes the absence of—or hesitance to cultivate—problem-solving skills to fear of failure and obsession with having to have the right answer.

Wendy, Paul, Nate, and Lon addressed the process of problem-solving. Wendy and Lon addressed the difference between the types and/or stages of problem-solving. Wendy noted that in science there is both a creative, generative step for developing solutions as well as an exploratory, evaluative step in which critical thinking is core to scientific studies. Lon saw a similar distinction between creative problem-solving in which brainstorming generated ideas and reflective problem-solving which honed in on solutions, both of them key to ethical practice. Nate reflected on the need for the inclusion of problem-solving opportunities in the study of English, especially related to the interpretation of materials in nonfiction. Paul pointed to the work of George Polya, specifically his four-step framework of “(1) understanding a problem, (2) devising a plan, (3) carrying out the plan,” and (4) reviewing the process. He noted that teachers and students, alike, are tempted to jumping to step three without due care in completing steps 1 and 2.

Finally, Karen addressed the pedagogical and institutional significance of problem-solving. First, she pointed to the importance of both modeling problem-solving and tenaciously coaching students in the practice. Second, she noted the importance of doing foundational work in problem-solving in the middle school to provide the basis for honing the skill in the upper school.