Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes

  • Development
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although problem solving is regarded by most educators as among the most important learning outcomes, few instructional design prescriptions are available for designing problem-solving instruction and engaging learners. This paper distinguishes between well-structured problems and ill-structured problems. Well-structured problems are constrained problems with convergent solutions that engage the application of a limited number of rules and principles within well-defined parameters. Ill-structured problems possess multiple solutions, solution paths, fewer parameters which are less manipulable, and contain uncertainty about which concepts, rules, and principles are necessary for the solution or how they are organized and which solution is best. For both types of problems, this paper presents models for how learners solve them and models for designing instruction to support problem-solving skill development. The model for solving well-structured problems is based on information processing theories of learning, while the model for solving ill-structured problems relies on an emerging theory of ill-structured problem solving and on constructivist and situated cognition approaches to learning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Anderson, J.R., Farrell, R. & Sauers, R. (1984). Learning to program in LISP.Cognitive Science, 8, 87–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arlin, P.K. (1989). The problem of the problem. In J.D. Sinnott (Ed.),Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 229–237). New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B.S., Englehart, M.D., Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H., & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956).Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Handbook 1; The cognitive domain. New York: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodker, S. (1991). Activity theory as a challenge to systems design. In H.E. Nissen, H.K. Klein, & R. Hirschheim (Eds.),Information systems research: Contemporary approaches and emergent traditions. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. (1994). Who ya gonna call? Thoughts about teaching problem solving. In P. Hallinger, K. Lithwood, & J. Murphy (Eds.),Cognitive perspectives on educational leadership. New York: Teacher's College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J., & Stein, B.S. (1984).The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity.New York:W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charney, D., Reder, L., & Kusbit, G.W. (1990). Goal setting and procedure selection in acquiring computer skills: A comparison of tutorials, problem solving, and learner exploration.Cognition & Instruction, 7(4) 323–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M.T.H., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices.Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M.T.H. & Glaser, R. (1985). Problem solving ability. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.),Human abilities: An information processing approach. New York: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M.T.H. & Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.),Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp. 7–77). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Churchman, C.W. (1971).The design of inquiring systems: Basic concepts of systems and organizations. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cognition Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.),Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 77–89). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, G., & Sweller, J. (1987). The effects of schema acquisition and rule automation of mathematical problem-solving transfer.Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 347–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covington, M.C., Crutchfield, R.S., Daves, L.B., & Olton, R.M. (1974).The productive thinking program: A course in learning to think. Columbus, Ohio: Charles Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M.G.M. (1986). Cognitive structures of good an poor novice problem solvers in physics.Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 279–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • deBono, E. (1974).CoRT thinking materials. London: Direct Educational Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunkle, M.E., Schraw, G., & Bendixen, L.D. (1995, April).Cognitive processes in well-defined and ill-defined problem solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

  • Ernst, G.W., & Newell, A. (1969).GPS: A case study in generality and problem solving. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R.M. (1966).The conditions of learning (1st ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R.M. (1977).The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R.M. (1985).The conditions of learning (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gagné, R.M., Briggs, L.J., & Wager, W.W. (1992).Principles of instructional design (4th ed.). New York: Harcourt, Brace, & Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gick, M.L. (1986). Problem-solving strategies.Educational Psychologist, 21, 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gick, M.L., & Holyoak, K.J. (1980). Analogical problem solving.Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, S.E., & Gill, R.T.. (1989). The formation and use of knowledge structures in problem solving domains. Tech. Report AFOSR-88-0063. Washington, DC: Bolling AFB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. (1978). Natures of problem-solving abilities. In W. Estes (Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive processes (pp. 239–270). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, J.R. (1981)The compleat problem solver. Philadelphia: Franklin Institute Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, M.J. (1990).Knowledge acquisition, cognitive flexibility, and the instructional applications of hypertext: A comparison of contrasting designs for computer-enhanced learning environments. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois).

  • Jonassen, D.H. (1996). Scaffolding diagnostic reasoning in case-based learning environments.Journal of Computing in Higher Education.

  • Jonassen, D.H., Ambruso, D.R., & Olesen, J. (1992). Designing a hypertext on transfusion medicine using cognitive flexibility theory.Journal of Educational Hypermedia and Multimedia, 1(3), 309–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M.A. (1993).Structural knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H., Doricott, D., & Engels, R. (1995).Comparing the effectiveness of worked examples and trial-and-error learning methods in an engineering microworld. American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H., Mann, E., & Ambruso, D.J. (1996). Causal modeling for structuring case-based learning environments.Intelligent Tutoring Media, 6(3/4), 103–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D.H., & Tessmer, M. (1996). An outcomes-based taxonomy for the design, evaluation, and research of instructional systems.Training Research Journal.

  • Kosonen, P., & Winne, P.H. (1995). Effects of teaching statistical laws on reasoning about everyday problems.Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 33–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchner, K.S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing.Human Development, 26, 222–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitchner, K.S., & King, P.M. (1981). Reflective judgment: Concepts of justification and their relationship to age and education.Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2, 89–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kluwe, R.H., & Friedrichsen, G. (1985), Mechanisms of control and regulation and problem solving. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.),Action control (pp. 203–217). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B.A Nardi (Ed.),Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J. (1988).Cognition in practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeBlanc, S.E., & Fogler, H.S. (1995).Strategies for creative problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leont'ev, A.N. (1978).Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R.E. (1989). Models for understanding.Review of Educational Research, 59(1), 43–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCombs, B.L. (1986). The instructional systems development model: A review of those factors critical to its implementation.Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 34, 67–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meacham, J.A., & Emont, N.C. (1989). The interpersonal basis of everyday problem solving. In J.D. Sinnott (Ed.),Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 7–23). New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merrill, M.D. (1983). Component display theory. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nardi, B.A. (1996).Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A. (1980). Reasoning, problem solving and decision processes: The problem space as a fundamental category. In R.S. Nickerson (Ed.),Attention and performance: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Attention and Performance, VIII. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newell, A. & Simon, H. (1972).Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polson. P., & Jeffries, R. (1985). Instruction in problem solving skills: An analysis of four approaches. In J.W. Segal, S. F. Chipman, & R. Glaser (Eds.),Thinking and learning skills (Vol. 1, pp. 417–455). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polya, M. (1957).How to solve it (2nd Ed.). New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed, S. K. (1992).Cognition: Theory and applications. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reitman, W. (1965).Cognition and thought. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson, W.C. (1990). Detection of cognitive structure with protocol data: Predicting performance on physics transfer problems.Cognitive Science, 14, 253–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein, M. (1975).Patterns of problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scandura, J.M. (1964). An analysis of exposition and discovery modes of problem solving instruction.Journal of Experimental Education, 33(2), 149–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R., & Cleary, C. (1995).Engines for education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D.A. (1990). The design process. In V.A. Howard (Ed.),Varieties of thinking: Essays from Harvard's philosophy of education center (pp. 110–141). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. (1976). Identifying basic abilities underlying intelligent performance on complex tasks. In L.B. Resnick (Ed.),The nature of intelligence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, D.P. (1978). Information processing theory of human problem solving. In D. Estes (Ed.),Handbook of learning and cognitive process. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, D.P., & Simon, H.A. (1978). Individual differences in solving physics problems. In R. Siegler (Ed.),Children's thinking: What develops. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinnott, J.D. (1989). A model for solution of ill-structured problems: Implications for everyday and abstract problem solving. In J.D. Sinnott (Ed.),Everyday problem solving: Theory and applications (pp. 72–99). New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, P.L., & Ragan, T.J. (1993).Instructional design. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, R.J., Feltovich, P.J., Jacobson, M.J., & Coulson, R.L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In T.M. Duffy & D.H. Jonassen (Eds.),Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 57–76). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, R.J., Vispoel, W., Schmitz, J., Samarapungavan, A., & Boerger, A. (1987). Knowledge acquisition for application: Cognitive flexibility and transfer in complex content domains. In B.C. Britton (Ed.),Executive control processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiro, R.J., Coulson, R.L., Feltovich, P.J., & Anderson, D.K. (1988).Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Tech Report No. 441. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois, Center for the Study of Reading.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning.Cognitive Science, 12, 257–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. (1985) The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra.Cognition and Instruction, 2, 59–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarmizi, R., & Sweller, J. (1988). Guidance during mathematical problem solving.Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 424–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J.F. (1988). Learning and transfer in subject-matter learning: A problem solving model.International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 607–622.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J.F., & Post, T.A. (1989). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M.T.H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M.J. Farr (Eds.),The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, J.F., Wolfe, C.R., Lawrence, J.A., & Engle, R.A. (1991). From representation to decision: An analysis of problem solving in international relations. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.),Complex problem solving. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ward, M., & Sweller, J. (1990). Structuring effective worked examples.Cognition and Instruction, 7(1), 1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickelgren, W.A., (1973).How to solve problems: Elements of a theory of problems and problem solving. San Francisco, CA: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, P.K. (1983). Inquiring systems and problem structures: Implications for cognitive development.Human Development, 26, 249–265.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. the Pennsylvania State University, USA

    David H. Jonassen (Professor and head of the Instructional Systems program)

Authors
  1. David H. Jonassen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

His publications include the recently completedHandbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, reviewed in this issue.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jonassen, D.H. Instructional design models for well-structured and III-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. ETR&D 45, 65–94 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299613

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299613

Keywords