Originally this Home Page had two parts, but now the parts are in separate pages.
Originally this Home Page had two parts, but now the parts are in separate pages.
what? Part 1 is about my model for Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process) that can help us achieve the worthy educational goals in Part 2. / How? In this page a brief Part 1 will guide your discovery learning to help you construct a “big picture” overview of Design Process. Then to develop deeper understandings you can use a Models Page (if it isn't in the right frame, put it there) that adds important details to the overview of my model-for-process and helps you explore its educational interactions with other models-for-process.
so what? Part 2 describes educational goals that are generally accepted, that you (as an experienced educator) already know and probably accept, so while reading you'll be thinking “yes”. But I also explain how using Design Process can help us achieve our goals, and for these claims you might think “yes” or “yes and” or “yes but” or “maybe” or “no because”, and all of these responses can be useful when we're working to co-create better education.
about me: I'm an enthusiastic educator who wants to find co-enthusiasts. During life on a road less traveled my PhD project at U of Wisconsin was constructing a model for “scientific method” — to describe what it IS & ISN'T, and how science uses logical Reality Checks plus other factors — and using this model to help us analyze instruction (by finding Opportunities to Learn) and improve our education. Since then I've generalized this model (for Scientific Method, i.e. for Science Process) to construct a model for a broader Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process).
my philosophy of writing: As you know, education is complex; in order to understand it more thoroughly-and-accurately, we must combine many ideas. Therefore, in my website I don't want to “keep things simple” if this makes it oversimplistic by ignoring useful ideas. Instead I'm trying to help you learn more time-efficiently (so you learn a lot in a little time, with a high ratio of “your learning / your time”) because your time is valuable,* and I want to help you use your time more effectively. { * In the wise words of Benjamin Franklin, "Do not squander time, for it's the stuff life is made of." } / In this HomePage the ideas are simplified so they are intentionally incomplete because I want to make each section shorter, to help you get a “big-picture overview” more quickly & easily. Therefore you often will find links for “more” when you want to learn more.
three kinds of improvising: During a process of improvised problem solving — when students are making action-decisions about “what to do next” — they are improving the valuable thinking skill of coordinating their problem-solving process. We also can help students improve the important social skill of improvising conversation (in ways that promote understanding & respect) and the enjoyable artistic skill of improvising music (by playing a keyboard with chord-notes that are colorized – with red, blue, green – to guide their creative inventing of semi-harmonious melodies). / All of these improvising experiences beneficially stimulate the brain in ways that are valuable for developing (in young people) and maintaining (in older people) healthy brains.
My goals for Parts 1 & 2 are different yet related, with overlaps. I want to work with other educators, and I'm hoping you will see our “common ground” in Part 2, so you will be thinking “Craig understands education, is with us and for us, wants what we want, is similar to us.” And in Part 1 “he is a little different, with an innovative model — to describe (verbally & visually) human problem-solving actions, to help students understand these actions and improve their own actions — that will contribute useful ‘added value’ to education, so working with him will help us improve education.”
co-creating better education: I'm an enthusiastic educator who enjoys talking with other educators informally, just to share ideas and learn from each other. Maybe we also will want to collaborate on projects of mutual interest – and doing this unofficially as a free volunteer would be fine with me – with us working cooperatively to develop our ideas for helping students improve their creative-and-critical thinking skills and their effective use of problem-solving process in all areas of life. Why? Because we think strategies for improving our problem-solving education are worth developing and (by converting our ideas into actions) actualizing. Hopefully we can design curriculum & instruction that is a better match for how students like to learn (and are able to learn), and how teachers like to teach. I want to see my ideas actualized in practical ways, by combining them with your ideas, working together to achieve your goals. While doing this developing and actualizing, I think it will be productive (and fun) to creatively combine your understandings-and-skills with mine. I need help from educators who more accurately-and-thoroughly understand the thinking & feeling of students (their motivations & confidences, attitudes & behaviors) and the perspectives of classroom teachers; who know the educational culture created by people (students, teachers, administrators, parents, community) who feel & think & do, individually and together, to produce the systems ecology and learning atmosphere in their schools; who are skilled activity developers, and have other kinds of useful experience & expertise; who are in positions where they can decide to actualize ideas and make things happen. Therefore I'm looking forward to learning from teachers & administrators who – in a variety of important ways – know more than me. Their knowledge is important, and my experience is limited, so I have reasons for appropriate humility with appropriate confidence that is not too little and not too much.* So if in this web-page you read “what I think” and you don't agree, I'll want to learn from you, to improve my knowledge. If my theories about “how the world works and what will happen” fail in Reality Checks because my Predictions don't match your Observations, I can revise my personal theories, or my level of confidence in the theories. Then, in a paraphrasing of Maya Angelou, “when I know better, I'll do better” by adjusting my claims to make them more realistic, more likely to be achievable because they're based on a better understanding of realities in K-12. * Despite my limitations with K-12, I have plenty of experience with teaching concepts in math and chemistry & physics to college students (mostly freshmen) but not much K-12 experience, just a few "Fun with Chemistry" day camps (with a week of fun lab activities) for middle schoolers. I also have experience with teaching mental-and-physical skills for tennis (mostly middle-school age) and juggling (mostly adults, plus a few middle schoolers). Also, I've gained knowledge about K-12 education with second-hand experience by learning from web-pages & videos, and by observing an expert high school teacher as a key part of my PhD work. But my overall understandings are at a lower level than those of experienced K-12 teachers & administrators. education for all ages: While writing this page (and the rest of my website) I'm thinking mostly about K-12 schools. But the ideas – about our goals & my model, in Parts 1 & 2 – also can be useful for younger children in pre-school, and older students in college, and all ages in everyday life, because everyone can do lifelong learning. |
put this section into left-side framePart 1 Understanding My Model for Problem-Solving Process What? This section will help you use Discovery Learning (and use Recognition Learning) to understand my model for Problem-Solving Process. How? Your learning will be more effective if you first study this section to learn from Your Discoveries, and then study another section to learn from My Explanations, and to be confident (with Recognition Learning) that Design Process is Your Process). How? You will discover three kinds of Essential Actions in my model for creative-and-critical Design Process ( i.e. for Problem-Solving Process) when you...
|
iou – The rest of Section A “needs work” (as show by putting it into this "gray box") and I'll continue revising it – with lots of condensing – this afternoon, March 17. Educational Benefits of Design Process Design Process is Educationally Useful-Beneficial -- topics: claims(learning/performing), @Transfers(Area+Time), @Transfer-Bridges(skills-mo-conf) #trorg-chunking-internalizing-ERP so what? [ a wide scope for describing PS-Process in a way that is educationally useful in two ways, to improve Learning of PS-Skills by students, and to improve Performing of PS-Skills by students. The two wide scopes (for PS-Activities & PS-Process) are educationally useful because they can help us increase Transfers of Learning and build “Transfer Bridges” between School and Life, to motivate students when they believe that improving their School-Learning will improve their Life-Living. for helping students improve their Problem-Solving Abilities (in being able to Solve Problems, being able to make things better) and Problem-Solving Motivations (in wanting to Solve Problems, wanting to make things better) and Problem-Solving Confidences (in expecting to make things better, skillfully solve problems). this General Process is described by Design Process in ways that are accurate, and are useful for helping students improve their Problem-Solving Abilities (in being able to Solve Problems) and Problem-Solving Motivations (in wanting to Solve Problems, wanting to make things better). Why do I think these claims are justified? This is explained later in the section.
This will happen for you (and for others, including your students) due Design Process accurately describes Our Process: A model for problem solving should accurately describe the basic process that people actually do use (intuitively & naturally, and also with conscious intention) while we are solving problems, and this Goal is achieved by Design Process. But there are... When students get Problem-Solving Experiences and then Reflect on their Experiences, they will observe themselves doing the Actions of Design Process, and this recognition helps them use a Process-of-Inquiry to discover Principles-of-Inquiry, with Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles. ///ok here? This is one way to help students learn more from their problem-solving experiences by developing-and-using metacognitive Strategies for Thinking. so what? The two wide scopes (for PS-Activities & PS-Process) are educationally useful because they can help us increase Transfers of Learning and build “Transfer Bridges” between School and Life, to motivate students when they believe that improving their School-Learning will improve their Life-Living. some educational benefits of descriptive accuracy: They will gain many kinds of benefits, because Design Process can be used for cognition-and-metacognition that will improve the problem solving & self-regulating they use in school and in other areas of life. some educational benefits of descriptive accuracy: When students get Problem-Solving Experiences and then Reflect on their Experiences, they will observe themselves doing the Actions of Design Process, and this recognition helps them use a Process-of-Inquiry to discover Principles-of-Inquiry, with Experiences + Reflections ➞ Principles. This is one way to help students learn more from their problem-solving experiences by developing-and-using Strategies for Thinking. They will gain many kinds of benefits, because Design Process can be used for cognition-and-metacognition that will improve the problem solving & self-regulating they use in school and in other areas of life.
some educational benefits of the two wide scopes: The two wide scopes (for PS-Activities & PS-Process) are educationally useful because these — along with the logical organization of Design Process (including its logical integrating of General Design with Science-Design) — let us show students how Design Process promotes transfers-of-learning (across areas & through time), and this can motivate students so they will want to pursue their own personal education when they build bridges from school into life so they get direct benefits by improving their abilities (to learn & perform) plus indirect benefits by improving important attitudes, in their motivations (for wanting to learn) and their confidence (in being able to learn, with a growth mindset). The wide scope of PS-Activities gives teachers the option of choosing to use Design Process (or not use it) for most of what they do in the classroom, with options ranging from improving basic skills-for-learning to creatively designing a wide variety of fun-and-useful activities.
The apparent “initial complexity” of Design Process becomes actual “eventual simplicity” when students understand how the actions combine to form a logically organized problem-solving process. And when they recognize their own problem-solving process in Design Process. Both of these factors – organization and familiarity – help their model-understanding and their model-using become psychologically intuitive for them.
FAMILY -- maybe these ideas will be condensed for using in this section. -- [ my model for Design Process is a family of sub-models: each sub-model selects different Actions to include (and exclude) in its Action-Diagram,* so each sub-model is accurate/COMPLETE in different ways, and is educationally useful (to improve PS-Learning and/or PS-Performing) in different ways, and the existence of different sub-models offers benefits for creatively Designing Instruction;* all sub-models are similar because each describes the same overall Design Process, but each is different (so they are ≈ similar, are semi-similar, are not identical) because each model includes (and thus encourages a student to think about) different aspects of the overall process. / accurate-and-complete differences * e.g. in Diagram 1 the major PS-Strategy is using Design Cycles of Generate-and-Evaluate; Diagram 2 adds important details about "how we Evaluate" in a second major PS-Strategy, when you Evaluate an Option by using 3 Elements (Predictions & Observations, Goals) in 3 Comparisons (in two Quality Checks and one Reality Check); Diagram 3 adds the major PS-Strategy of using Guided Generation when you use Evaluation (done by Comparing two Elements) to motivate-and-guide your Generation, when you creatively Revise an Old Option so you Generate an Option that is Semi-New, instead of Inventing an Option so you Gnerate an Option that is More-New, or even (although maybe impossible?) is Totally-New. [ * because DP has many "levels" with sub-models that range from simple to more-complex, teachers can design instruction-progressions that moves from simple (using only Diagram 1 with its Cycles of Generate-and-Evaluate) to medium-simple (using Diagram 1+2 with Diagram 2 that adds its Evaluation by using 3 Comparisons) to more complex (using Diagram 3 that adds Guided Generating with Evaluation motivating-and-guiding Generation. [ also: skaters, tool belts, etc -- connect to lego/Atoms
my TERMS -- goal-criterion is to be educationally beneficial -- e.g. not for use in a consulting that's offering problem-solving services for businesses -- e.g. theory vs model, I have rational reasons for choosing theory, and NGSS has rational reasons for choosing model. Call attention to the difference, explain the rational reasons (for me & for NGSS) and use this as an opportunity to discuss the tradeoffs and ----. / other choices of terms: Activities & Projects, GOALS (vs Goal-Criteria vs Objectives) for a relationship. iou – for tradeoffs between |
Below, related sections — 1 and 2 with parallels, 1A-1B-1C and 2A-2B-2C — explain why we should expect that using my model for creative-and-critical Design Process (for Problem-Solving Process) will increase Transfers of Learning (Between Areas & Through Time) due to the logical evidence-based connections between...
two Wide Scopes (of Design Process) in 1 (in 1A & 1B) and
Scientific Knowledge (about Transfers) in 2 (2A & 2B);
the model also (1C & 2C) promotes deep understanding
by logically organizing its Problem-Solving Actions
in the verbal-and-visual framework of its diagrams.
1 – Two Wide Scopes and The Logical Framework
The previous section explains why I confidently claim that "most people use a similar General Process of Problem Solving for most things we do in life, for our Problem-Solving Activities, AND this General Process is described accurately-and-usefully in my model for Design Process (i.e. for Problem-Solving Process), so this model has a Wide Scope for Activities-and-Process." Although technically there is One Wide Scope (for Activities-and-Process) it's often pragmatically useful for teaching – when we are designing & implementing instruction – to view this as being Two Wide Scopes, for Activities and for Process. Design Process has...
so a teacher can use Design Process for most things that students do,* to provide a wide variety of Problem-Solving Experiences during a wide range of Problem-Solving Activities, so students are able to use similar Problem-Solving Skills in multiple contexts. { students will learn more when they get more experiences and they learn more from their experiences } / * A teacher can choose to use Design Process (or not use it) for most of the activities they want to do in their classroom.
so students are able to use a similar Process of Problem Solving for most things they do, in multiple contexts. They will learn from their many experiences, especially when we encourage them to metacognitively reflect on how their Process is similar in many different situations, but is not identical because they (and others) can modify their process – so it's "variations on a theme" – to make it more effective for solving different kinds of problems. And how they can supplement Design Process with other models, to customize it for different problems.
When students examine Design Process by observing (and thinking about) the words & colors and spatial relationships – Discovery Learning, guided by the questions in Part 1. If not, you can do it now with this diagram.
Cycles -- parallels --> 3-in-3 to logically integrate General Design (qc's) and Science-Design (rc) -- guided Generation
https://www.google.com/search?q=what+are+the+effects+of+logically+organizing+procedural+knowledge%3F
is a guide for Discovery Learning, to help you explore Design Process so you'll understand the logical structure of its verbal-and-visual framework.
, so you'll understand the logical structure of Design Process. Researchers have discovered th logically organized: Learning is better because, reinforcing our intuitive common sense, scientific research shows the benefits of organizing knowledge.
2 – Scientific Knowledge about Increasing Transfer
Why should we expect transfers-of-skills to increase when we use Design Process? Some logical science-based reasons come from How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (a highly respected book, commissioned by the National Research Council, about using educational research to improve educational practice) when — after saying "the ultimate goal of learning" is transfer, so it's "a major goal of schooling" — the authors recommend that to increase transfer, we use teaching methods that include these three Strategies:
2A) teach knowledge in multiple contexts, and... 1-A) this 2-A Strategy is allowed by the wide scope of Problem-Solving Activities (when using Design Process) that includes most things that students do, in multiple contexts in many areas of life;
2B) teach knowledge in an easily-generalizable form, and... 1-B) this 2-B Strategy can be done by using Design Process to show students the wide scope of Problem-Solving Process that is similar for most things they do (i.e. it's already generalized), for their Problem-Solving Activities in all areas of their Whole-Life, inside & outside their School-Life.
2C) teach knowledge in ways that promote deep understanding, and... 1-C) this 2-C Strategy is fulfilled by using Design Process how another main recommendation by HPL — to teach for the "deep understanding" that improves transfers — is promoted by the logically organized structure of Design Process that includes a combining of visual-and-verbal meanings, with productive interactions between these two representations of procedural knowledge.
iou – This section “needs a little work” and I'll do this tonight, March 17.
My model for our Process of Problem Solving (PS) has two Wide Scopes (for PS-Activities & PS-Process) and it shows the logical organization of our creative-and-critical thinking so – based on what we know about How People Learn, as explained above in 1 & 2 — we should expect Design Process to help increase transfers Across Areas (between subjects in School and areas in Life) and Through Time (from Past to Present into Future). Because this is happening, ...
A student will get direct benefits when these transfers improve their problem-solving abilities (and other abilities) in a wide variety of situations, in their School-Life and NonSchool-Life, with School-Life + NonSchool-Life = Whole-Life. These direct benefits produce changes in their external results, in their abilities to Learn and Perform.
A student also gets indirect benefits when they improve their internal attitudes, their motivations (for wanting to learn) and their confidences (in being able to learn).
Confidences in Abilities to Learn: These will improve when students recognize that their external results are improving — when they see reasons for confidence with better problem-solving abilities (and other abilities) in a wider variety of situations, in their School-Life and NonSchool-Life — and this helps them develop a growth mindset. { An optimistic growth mindset is part of the foundational Habit 1 – Be Proactive – in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People.} / Design Process can help students improve their confidences, because the Wide Scopes of Design Process produce two-way transfers. Although I've been emphasizing the present-to-future transfers from school into life that increase motivation, students also get past-to-present transfers from life into school to increase confidence when they think “I already have done this before (during design-in-life) so I can do it again (for design-in-school).”
Motivations for Personal Education: These will increase IF you help students persuade themselves – by using Design Process and in other ways – to believe that their Problem-Solving Activities in School will be personally useful in Life. Students will be motivating themselves because they are thinking “when I improve in School NOW, this will help me improve in Life LATER.” { timings: In their Now-and-Later, the "Later" can happen after school today, and next year, and when they're an adult, a little later and a lot later, spanning a wide range of time. } During this process of attitude change, we are helping students develop personal motivations to pursue their personal goals by using personal education that is problem solving (because it makes things better) when they decide “I want to make my education better because this will make my life better, will help me achieve my goals for life.”
iou – This weekend, March 21-22, I'll revise these ideas and will integrate them into this section:
teaching for motivation: we want to show students how School Activities will help them get what they personally want in their Whole Life as a Whole Person. / motivations come from a complex blend of multiple factors that include intrinsic fun (enjoying activities), intrinsic satisfactions (of many kinds), extrinsic (getting extra rewards), intrapersonal (for self-actualization) + interpersonal (for relationships). -- all "intrinsic" because are part of a person. / Educational Teamwork with Matching Goals occurs when teachers' goals match students' goals; a teacher can achieve better matching by adjusting to students, and persuading students; / in effective Motivational Persuasion we consider all aspects of total motivation – intrinsic, personal, interpersonal, and extrinsic, all hopefully based on good values & priorities – that contribute to how a student thinks about their strategies-and-actions aimed at “getting what they want” in their whole life as a whole person; then we use words and actions to persuade students that we have good intentions (we care for them and are trying to help them improve their lives) and we are competent (in defining worthy educational goals, and helping students achieve these goals), and with words-and-actions we share our enthusiasm for the joys of thinking & learning. / and these ideas probably will be moved to elsewhere in the page: wide scopes: integrated system of whole-brain thinking -- fast-unconscious + slow-conscious fast-unconscious / old Observations (personal memories) – "thinking fast and slow" (book, Kanneman)
IF a student believes that their learning will transfer Between Areas (from School into Their Life) and Through Time (from School into Their Future) so their learning will be personally useful. When this happens they are thinking “ if I improve my School-Learning, it will improve my Life-Living, it will help me achieve my goals for Life,” and these beliefs give them personal motivations to learn in school. When they think “making my education better will make my life better,” they are motivated to improve their own personal education, to design their life. / How can we actualize this IF so it becomes a reality? By creating a productive environment with “attitudes and activities” that make School Experiences more fun-and-useful for more students. This includes showing students how – by using Design Process and in other ways – they can Build Bridges between School and Their Life & Their Future. { more: Motivations for Personal Education by Building Bridges from School into Life, and using motivational metaphors that encourage students to skillfully “drive your brain” and “be CEO of your brain” so “you will optimize your wonderful Whole-Brain System of Conscious Thinking and Subconscious Processing.” } When we help students build bridges so they expect school-to-life transfers, this produces the indirect benefits of improving motivation & confidence. / { * Design Process isn't necessary for motivating students, but it can be very useful due to its two wide scopes (for Problem-Solving Activities & Problem-Solving Process) and the Transfers (Across Areas & Thru Time) this facilitates. }
iou – during late March, I'll describe a generalization of Personal Education when a student does a very important kind of problem-solving Design Project, when they decide to proactively-and-wisely design their life to make it better now and in their future.
Our strategies for motivating students can include these three ways to get students more excited about thinking:
motivating with bridges: We can logically explain (as outlined in the previous section) why students should expect transfers-of-learning (Across Areas & Thru Time) that do produce direct benefits (with better results in their learning & performing) and can produce indirect benefits (with better attitudes in their motivations & confidences) IF – with a growth mindset – students confidently expect increases in their problem-solving abilities (and other abilities) in a wide range of situations, in school and in life. Their intrinsic motivations will increase when they expect thinking to be a valuable part of their life, and they think their efforts in school will be rewarded in ways they want, when they expect their skills-in-school to “transfer” and become skills-in-life that will make their life better in ways they want. / Of course, teachers can motivate by “building bridges” whether or not they use Design Process and its distinctive benefits. / We can help this " IF " happen for students when we build bridges — in their expectations for what will occur, and the realities of what does occur — that show them the two-way Transfer Bridges Across Areas (from School into Life, and from Life into School)* and Transfers Thru Time (from their Present into their Future). These bridges can improve their Transfers of Learning (Across Areas & Thru Time) and also their Transitions of Attitudes (by improving their motivations for wanting to learn, and their confidence in being able to learn). {more about building bridges and encouraging transitions of attitudes}
motivating with metaphors: We can enhance the natural motivations of students with motivational metaphors° by encouraging them to “drive your brain” — and “use your growth mindset to imagine how exciting it will be when you see increases in your brain-driving skills and your brain's performance” — and “be CEO of Your Thinking” by using executive control with metacognitive Thinking Strategies; and “be CEO of Your Life” by Designing your Life. Most students are excited by these metaphors and they will be fascinated when you ask them “in what ways can you drive your brain? and how can you improve its performance (as with a car's horsepower & torque, and handling characteristics)? and in what ways can you use executive control?” and “when you improve your driving & CEOing,* what will be the benefits for learning (to increase your capabilities) and (to use your capabilities) for performing?”
motivating with invitations to explore: We can give students exciting “adventures with thinking” in many ways, by inviting them to explore the fascinating world of thinking. They have opportunities to explore in this website and beyond it. For example, [ iou – the following paragraph will be revised soon, probably March 21-22, and the developing will include fixing the "Table of Contents" section that has been removed (because it needed to be fixed) until it's improved. ]
In one kind of exploration adventure, I think many students will be fascinated when they study the logic-and-art in diagrams for Design Process, especially when they already have been motivated by bridges & metaphors.* To make their exploring easier, I've made a Discovery Page with four diagrams – my favorite and two others – that promote Discovery Learning when they "observe the words & colors, and spatial relationships." While they're doing this, if they ask “are these Problem-Solving Actions the same Actions that I use while I'm solving problems?” most will say Yes (why?) and their Discovery Learning will become Recognition Learning. They also can enjoy in-depth explorations of many topics. / * gifted students and homeschool students are more likely to be among “the many who will be fascinated” but this also will happen with some other students.
put this section into left-side frame[ iou – Soon, during March 19-22, I'll revise this introduction because it was written before I changed the three sections above into the current structure of A➞B➞C. ] Above the focus is WHY, with Reasons for Using Design Process because this can Increase Transfers (due to Two Wide Scopes) and Build Bridges that improve Confidences & Motivations). Below the focus shifts to WHAT-and-HOW, beginning with four related ways to use metacognitive Thinking Strategies: by using a Growth Mindset and with Learning that Improves Performing and Learning More From Experiences and using Design Process. One useful Strategy for Learning & Thinking is the productive attitude of... developing-and-using a Growth Mindset: An excellent way to learn more effectively is by developing-and-using a better growth mindset so — when a student asks themself “how well am I doing in this area of life?”* and honestly answers “not well enough” — they are thinking “not yet” (instead of “not ever”) because they are confident that in this area they can “grow” by improving their skills, when they invest intelligent effort. With this attitude they're supplementing current self-perception (based on what they've done in the past) with optimism (about what they can do now & in their future) to build a more useful self-perception. This optimistic view-of-self will help students develop a justifiable confidence in their ability to improve now so they can “do things better” in their future, because they are improving their functional intelligence. With two kinds of Objectives – connecting their present and future – they will try to improve their present-time Learning so they can improve their future-time Performing. This long-term perspective will motivate them because they have a confident belief – with a growth mindset – that their efforts to self-improve (as in personal education for life) will be rewarded. / We also can develop-and-use strategies to motivate students with bridges (between school & life, present & future) and metaphors (to “drive your brain” and “be CEO of your thinking”) plus “adventures in thinking” with Design Process and invitations to explore. * A reason to ask “how well am I doing?” is to learn from experience, for self-education. When I make a mistake, I want to learn from the experience so I can “do it better” the next time. Therefore I ask myself “why?” and often the answer is “my process wasn't effective,” so (in an effort to do better) I've found it beneficial to develop-and-use a Checklist for Problem-Solving Process. [[ iou – during October, maybe I'll briefly describe the physical changing of neuronal connectivities that is allowed by neuroplasticity, and how this relates to having confidence in our possibilities for growth, and thus for confidently using a growth mindset. ]] Are there two kinds transfer? Although present-to-future learning typically isn't considered to be transfer, there are connections between “two kinds of transfer” because Transfers Through Time are necessary to produce Transfers Across Areas, and for inspiring self-motivated Personal Education. Instead of trying to “challenge the definition” I'll just explain how it can be educationally useful to think about transfers-thru-time as being transfers-of-learning, e.g. when you are... put section into left frametrying to improve in your Present and/or Future with Personal Goals to improve Performing and/or Learning: When you want your best possible performing now, you have a Performance Goal. When you want your best possible learning now, so you can improve your best possible performance later, you have a Learning Goal. For example, compare the main objectives for a basketball team's early-season practice (with a Learning Goal, wanting to learn NOW so they can perform better LATER) and late-season tournament game (with a Performance Goal, wanting to play their best NOW). / The title is "and/or" because your highest priority can be to maximize your learning now, or your performing now, or some optimal combination of both, by placing different values on the present (wanting to perform better now) and future (wanting to perform better later, by learning better now). And by adding an important aspect of life, it's Performing and/or Learning, plus Enjoying. In your future, your better performing can happen in two ways. First, you will know better because you have learned from experience, so your potential performing has improved, and you can do better. Second, this potential must be actualized by converting “can do better” into “are doing better” with high-quality actual performing. / a summary: After your past learning has improved your present potential performing, this potential (in principle, as a possibility) to “do it better” will be actualized (in reality) when you do present actual performing with high quality, so you're combining past learning (wanted in previous Learning Goals) with present performing (wanted in your current Performance Goal). { more about performing better now in these two ways – by using your past-to-present Learning, and present Performing – as in the “know better, do better” of Angela Mayou. } { Mahatma Gandhi, "Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever." } { how a friend became – by learning in his present times – a better-performing welder in his future times } [ iou – in late-March, I'll add the concept of using past learning to improve present learning of procedural knowledge-skills, and also – as when connecting current learning to previous learning – for learning conceptual knowledge. And some ideas from the "performing better now" section will be integrated into this section. ]
regulating your metacognition to make it more effective: How? An essential Thinking Strategy is deciding when & how to use metacognition of various kinds for various purposes.* Sometimes you will decide to stimulate higher-quality Performing and/or Learning by using metacognition of a particular type, in a particular way (re: its amount, timing,...). But at other times you will “go with the flow” by just thinking-and-doing (instead of thinking about thinking) to allow higher-quality Performing and/or Learning by avoiding metacognition. We can view this as “stop-and-go metacognition” because in different situations your metacognition will stop (it's “turned off” so you just do thinking) or go (when you “turn it on” and think about thinking), by using Executive Control to regulate your using or not-using of metacognition. {* and how to optimize your system of conscious thinking & subconscious processing for whole-brain problem solving } What? This is a regulation OF metacognition. By contrast, regulation BY metacognition occurs during metacognitive regulation when you use metacognition to observe-and-regulate your cognition. Why? The ability to regulate your metacognition is useful because in some situations – especially when you have a Performance Objective – your quality will improve if you avoid “thinking about thinking,” if instead you just “let yourself do it” with fully focused attention. / One perspective is The Inner Game of Tennis and its concept of Performance = Potential – Interference. How? To decrease Interference (and thus increase Performance) a useful Thinking Strategy is to self-define your metacognition as simply “observing” or “being aware,” and when you sense that you're fully focused (with a “flow” of high current quality) you just continue what you're doing, without conscious metacognition. How? A valuable long-term Learning Objective is to improve your Metacognitive Knowledge so you can make better regulation decisions – about when & how to use metacognition, about the timings & types/amounts of cognition-plus-metacognition you want – by increasing your general Metacognitive Knowledge — about persons (how we think, learn, perform) and tasks (situations, requirements, outcomes) and strategies (for performing more effectively) — plus personal Metacognitive Knowledge by “knowing yourself” based on observations of yourself (as the person) in the context of various tasks using different strategies. By combining these two kinds of Metacognitive Knowledge (general & personal) you can improve your developing-and-using of individually customized personal Conditional Knowledge about each Thinking Strategy by knowing its functional capabilities (WHAT it lets you do, and thus WHY it can be useful) and its conditions-of-application (for WHEN it will be useful for you). also: a Strategy for Teaching that is important – because it's useful – is deciding when & how you do (or don't) want to ask metacognitive reflection questions. [[ iou – in late March I will continue this section (about Regulation of Metacognition) by writing a highly-condensed version of ideas from a section in the Long-HomePage) about strategies for optimizing your effective using of your wonderful whole-brain system that combines conscious cognition with subconscious processing. Design Process is a useful foundation for doing this because whether a person's “thinking” is conscious and/or subconscious in a particular situation, we use a similar general process, whether we view this as "Observe-and-Learn (to understand a Situation) and then Generate Ideas & Evaluate Ideas" or "Observe & Learn, Generate Ideas, Predict-and-Evaluate, Decide & Do" or in other ways. With a cognitive-and-metacognitive strategy, "you can use executive control to optimize your thinking system (so your conscious & subconscious each can do what it does best) if you develop-and-use a [thinking strategy] for effectively regulating your subconscious processing by deciding when-and-how to reduce it or increase it." -- with cognitive-and-metacognitive plus subconscious. } The following "comments for myself" will be heavily edited later: {even though "turning metacognition on and off" oversimplifies the complex blending of cognition-and-metacognition (plus sub-conscious processing & feedback) you want, these binary concepts (“on and off”, “use it or avoid it”) can be useful if they're not interpreted literally. } { for this section, I will link to pages - short & long - that I'll make with Perplexity.AI } ---- EG's for subconsc use of DP, sports QB/PGuard, even running back making simple decision to go L or R, speed up or slow down, etc ]] [[ iou – in late March, somewhere in this section I'll describe how a Knowledge-and-Skills Curriculum includes the essential goal to improve learning and/or performing with productive thinking that combines relevant knowledge with creative-and-critical thinking. / and Whole-Person Education improves academic abilities AND social-emotional abilities -- so the monitoring in SRL includes observing-and-regulating thoughts and also emotions ---- maybe I'll summarize-and-cite The Metacognitive Student by Cohen et al. ]] |
Goal-Directed Designing
of Curriculum & Instruction:
In this common strategy for designing, we...
• DEFINE GOALS for desired outcomes of our CURRICULUM, for ideas-and-skills we want students to learn,
• DESIGN INSTRUCTION with learning activities (and associated teaching activities) that will provide opportunities for experience with these ideas & skills, and will help students learn more from their experiences.
Below, I describe some principles & strategies for designing a Problem-Solving CURRICULUM and Problem-Solving INSTRUCTION,
and then for designing C & I that will improve problem-solving abilities in ways that are optimally beneficial for Whole-Person Education.
CURRICULUM — skillfully design a
Coordinated Wide Spiral that has a
Wide Scope with Spiral Repetitions:
Later I describe reasons to “say yes” but also to “say no” when deciding whether to adopt Whole-Person Education for Knowledge-and-Skills (for knowledge and skills & skills-with-knowledge) that places a high priority on improving problem-solving skills and motivations. I'm hoping your school decides “yes” for this Problem-Solving Curriculum. If you do, one way to pursue your objective with enthusiasm – with a Big YES – 
is by designing a Wide Spiral Curriculum that spans many grades in K-12, that has Wide Scope (so related learning experiences are coordinated across different areas) and uses Spiral Repetitions (so learning experiences are coordinated over time, using instruction spirals that are short-term narrow, short-term wide, long-term wide) to help all students (of all ages) improve their problem-solving skills and their skills & knowledge.
When we're designing C & I that is “wide” the wide scope of problem solving (it includes almost everything students do) is useful because this lets teachers use problem-solving activities in all subject areas, in sciences & engineering, business, humanities, and arts, in STEAM & STREAM and beyond. This wide scope will promote transfers of learning. My model for Design Process also lets students see (in my favorite diagram) how they use a similar problem-solving process in every area, and the logical structure of Design Process helps them logically integrate their thinking when they are doing General Design and/or Science-Design (that have similarities & differences) so they can flexibly adapt their thinking for a wide variety of problem-solving Objectives. These two wide scopes will promote transfers (between areas & through time) and help us build bridges (from school into life) that motivate students to pursue their own Personal Education. These are some of the many reasons for thinking that using Design Process might be very useful in a Wide Spiral Curriculum, that (despite reasons for humility) it's “a good way to bet” for improving students' problem-solving education and their overall education.
INSTRUCTION — skillfully design
Problem-Solving Activities that
are Fun and Personally Useful:
A holistically integrated strategy for designing effective Instruction – by trying to do everything that will help achieve the goals for effective Curriculum – will include Problem-Solving Activities that motivate students because what they're doing is FUN for them, and is personally USEFUL for them, is...
FUN intrinsically when a student enjoys the experience because they think the problem-topic is interesting, and their own actions are interesting. This will stimulate their curiosity, can inspire a love of learning.
FUN due to personal satisfaction when a student anticipates success, and does succeed. We want to help them develop confidence with a growth mindset. One way is to design activities with a “just right” level of optimal challenge as in a good mystery story, so students won't be bored (if it's too easy) or discouraged (if too difficult), so they will be challenged but will succeed and will enjoy the satisfactions of success.
USEFUL as perceived by a student who thinks it will be personally useful, will help them achieve their personal goals, short-term and long-term, including intrinsic fun and satisfaction. We can try to understand students (with empathy), and then consider their goals when defining our goals, to guide our goal-directed designing of their activities. We want them to think “this school-activity will be a useful part of my personal education, will help me achieve my personal goals for life.”
put this section into left-side frameWhat kind of Knowledge-and-Skills Curriculum will produce optimal Whole-Person Education? multiple goals and limited resources: Above I describe a common strategy for Goal-Directed Designing of Curriculum & Instruction, as in designing a Coordinated Wide-Spiral Curriculum using Instruction with Activities that are Fun and Personally Useful. When educators are doing their goal-directed designing, they want their overall Whole-Person Education to achieve multiple goals – by helping students improve in a variety of ways, in many areas of life – but they have limited educational resources (of time, people, money,...) so they must make tough choices about goals by asking “what resources should be invested in each kind of goal?” knowledge and skills: It can be useful to view education as a Knowledge-and-Skills Curriculum with the goal of helping students improve their knowledge and their skills that include skills-with-knowledge. mutual support: The beginning of my verbal-and-visual model for Design Process (i.e. for Problem-Solving Process) is to "Learn so you understand more accurately-and-thoroughly" because productive problem solving occurs when we effectively combine creative-and-critical thinking with relevant knowledge in the problem-solving area. Thus, one benefit of better subject-area knowledge is better problem-solving skills. We also see the reverse, with research showing that using metacognitive problem-solving skills – in metacognitive Self-Regulated Learning – does solve problems (i.e. it does make things better) by improving students' learning of knowledge and skills. supplementing, not replacing: Due to this mutual support, our instruction for skills-with-knowledge (including higher-level thinking skills) should supplement – not replace – basic skills (for reading, math, science,...)* and knowledge (in sciences, social studies, history, literature,...). { * but “basic skills” can involve “higher-level skills” } trying to optimize: Educators generally agree that we should try to help students improve their skills (basic & higher-level) and knowledge; and that we should aim for an optimal combination of knowledge and skills & skills-with-knowledge. But when we ask “what is optimal?” there are disagreements. Some educators, including me, think the balance should shift toward more emphasis on skills and skills-with-knowledge, by using a Curriculum for Problem Solving that improves the problem-solving skills of students and also their motivations to “make things better” – for themselves & for others – with problem solving. { It can be useful to view this kind of curriculum as Whole-Person Education for Problem Solving; or as Education for Whole-Person Problem Solving with the objective of Making Things Better for Whole Persons. } But doing this effectively will depend on actualizing two IF-factors: Instruction with stronger emphasis on problem-solving skills will produce large-scale improvements only IF the instruction is educationally effective and IF it is widely adopted by teachers and their schools & districts. When making a decision (Yes or No) whether to use more resources for instruction in skills-with-knowledge, educators consider many factors, and these provide reasons to say Yes and to say No. The reasons-for-No can make it difficult to convert potentially-beneficial instruction (that IF DONE would help students get more experiences & learn more from experiences) into actually-beneficial instruction (that IS DONE and is experienced by students, so it can improve the problem-solving abilities that include their skills and motivations). perceptions and realities: One “reason for No” is a belief that if more instruction time is invested to improve cognitive-and-metacognitive thinking skills, the change will cause a decrease in scores on standardized exams. But this concern is not justified by the evidence, as described in a research report° – generated by Perplexity AI – about the effects of teaching metacognitive Self-Regulated Learning. It begins with an... Executive Summary: When K-12 schools implement classroom instruction focused on metacognition through Cycles of Self-Regulated Learning (SRL), research demonstrates consistently positive effects on standardized test performance across all academic areas. Meta-analyses reveal moderate to large effect sizes, with students showing improved academic achievement, enhanced learning strategies, and better self-regulation skills that translate to measurable gains on standardized assessments. And when I asked “since metacognitive SRL is beneficial for improving exam scores (and in other ways), why isn't it used by all schools?” the response° begins, Despite compelling research demonstrating that metacognitive Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) cycles significantly improve standardized test scores, many K-12 schools struggle to implement these practices effectively. This comprehensive analysis examines the multifaceted barriers that prevent widespread SRL adoption, and explores the underlying motives behind institutional and teacher resistance. two strategies for implementation: This research report describes a mystery, due to a surprising combination, because research shows that SRL is educationally effective (for improving scores on standardized exams & improving other outcomes), but SRL has a low amount of adoption. If “effectiveness” was the only factor being considered (but it isn't), and if all educators knew about the research (but some don't), then their decisions to avoid SRL would be illogical. But instead they do have rational reasons to say No. We should “ask why” and understand the reasons-for-No when we're designing strategies to increase the adoption of SRL. This understanding will help us design effective ways to combine two strategies, by A) explaining the value of SRL in producing instruction that will be educationally effective and B) explaining why it will be easy to implement. When doing this we can think about how to effectively use each strategy, and then how to combine them, beginning with... Strategy A – by saying “let's go for it” and making a bold claim: Many educators, including me, think one of our goals — helping students improve their Problem-Solving Skills (so they are able to solve problems more effectively) and Problem-Solving Motivations (so they want to solve problems, to make things better) — is currently under-emphasized in most schools, and we will increase the quality of our overall Whole-Person Education if we increase our emphasis on Problem-Solving Education in which metacognitive Self-Regulation (by using SRL) is one of the foundations. I claim that this shift-of-emphasis “would make things better” by producing better Overall Education — because what we gain (in the shift) will be more valuable than what we lose, with the overall result bringing us closer to an optimal balance — so improving our Education for Problem Solving is a worthy Educational Goal. Doing this would increase the instruction that will be educationally effective. / But making progress toward achieving this goal will be faster if we also explain why it will be easy to implement with... Strategy B – by saying “it will be easier than you think”: why? I'll describe how a school might be able to overcome (at least partially) some of "the multifaceted barriers that prevent widespread SRL adoption" by using Design Process (maybe) and (probably) by starting with gifted students.
Strategy B (continued from above) – Maybe implementation barriers could be reduced by... using Design Process: When we view a problem as “any opportunity to make things better,” we solve problems whenever we “make something better” in any area of life. Students can use my model for problem-solving Design Process (DP) to help them improve almost everything they do in the classroom, and in life. They want to learn more effectively, and metacognitive Self-Regulated Learning can help them develop-and-use Strategies for Learning that work better, and the Cycle of DP is an effective way to deeply understand and effectively use the Cycle of SRL. In this way the benefits of SRL (to improve learning and performing) become benefits of DP. Basically, Design Process is “SRL Plus” – it's SRL plus “added value” – because DP can be used for “doing SRL” (it's SRL-with-DP) and also for doing a much wider range of “making things better” in school-life and whole-life. DP Activities include Design Inquiry (these have wide variety° and you can design others° by using DesignThinking-with-DP) and Science Inquiry (using POE - Predict, Observe, Explain), Argumentation (in all subject areas), and Strategizing (as with Strategies for Learning). And in its other wide scope, DP accurately describes the process-of-thinking that people use for all problem solving, in General Design and Science-Design during all problem solving (in the wide variety of ways they make things better) when they're mainly using cognition and also for metacognition. { transfers of learning Across Areas & Through Time are increased by using the two wide scopes of Design Process } Design Process has two wide scopes – for Problem-Solving Activities and Problem-Solving Process – so teachers can use DP for almost everything that happens in their classroom. Or to often not use it. Teachers have options. They can blend DP into the typical activities that would happen anyway (e.g. by using SRL-with-DP to develop-and-use Strategies for Learning) and there won't be major changes. But most of the time they can just ignore DP and let its ongoing beneficial effects operate “in the background” without conscious attention. And they can sometimes get “added value” by consciously using DP for special activities, for Design-Inquiry & Science-Inquiry, for Argumentation and a wide range of applications for Strategizing. starting with gifted students: Although teachers (and their school & district) have reasons to USE activities that are especially valuable for promoting a knowledge-and-skills curriculum (to teach knowledge & skills, and skills-with-knowledge), they also have reasons to NOT USE these activities. But some reasons to not-use will be weaker in programs for gifted students. why & how? Some reasons & strategies are outlined in AI-reports about implementation barriers despite research results° and in gifted programs°. One finding is that "gifted education often emphasizes thinking processes alongside content knowledge, supporting integration of metacognitive strategies" and "explicitly aims to develop self-directed learning capabilities, creating natural alignment with SRL objectives." Therefore, in this section I'm not assuming... that your gifted program is “starting from zero” because "gifted education often emphasizes thinking processes," and probably you already are promoting metacognition in some ways. Instead I'm proposing that adding another way – by using Design Process – might be useful for promoting effective metacognition. or that the ideas are “new knowledge” for you, because here (as in other parts of the page) you will be thinking “yes” or “yes and” or “yes but” or “maybe” or “no because”. Also, despite my enthusiastic optimism about Design Process throughout the page, I realize that “claims for effectiveness” should be made cautiously due to my reasons for humility. Although I'll focus on the benefits of "starting with gifted students," many principles are relevant for all students. And eventually (maybe quickly) we should try to optimize our knowledge-and-skills instruction for all students. / Here is a personal context : I want to co-create better education with others, and this seems more likely to happen with educators in gifted programs and homeschools. Therefore these will be my focus during 2025. So even though I want to improve education for all students, currently I'm more excited about gifted programs. Another factor is my submission of a talk-proposal (in April) and its acceptance (in May) for the Annual Conference of OAGC (Ohio Association for Gifted Children) in October; preparing for this talk is part of my recent motivations for enthusiastic learning-thinking-writing-networking.
Below I'll comment on only a few facets in "the multifaceted barriers that prevent widespread SRL adoption." a perceived competition: In K-12 education a common goal – for students & teachers, districts & schools, parents & community & politicians – is wanting to do well on standardized exams that emphasize “exam abilities” in subject-area knowledge plus basic skills (that usually are not higher-level thinking skills) in reading, math, and science. Often there is a perception of “competition” with exam abilities decreasing when teachers increase their instruction to promote higher-level abilities, as in using SRL to improve metacognition. Although a perception of competition isn't supported by research evidence — which instead shows cooperation because when metacognitive self-regulation increases, exam scores also increase — by itself the perception provides a reason to not increase instruction for metacognition. These concerns are especially important when, as often occurs, the perceived “quality of teaching” for a teacher (and their school & district) is heavily influenced by students’ performance on standardized exams. a reluctance to gamble: A school may not want to “gamble” with instructional change that seems risky, because teachers & administrators are thinking that “although it might be beneficial (for Exam Scores and in other ways), it might be detrimental.” It seems safer to continue using a direct approach (by “teaching to the exam”), instead of changing to a hybrid approach that combines their familiar direct approach and an unfamiliar indirect approach (with some instruction time invested in metacognitive self-regulation) that they don't fully believe or trust. They are worried about the risk of a large-scale loss if they make a major change for the entire school or district. But they might be more willing to gamble on a small scale with changes only in their program for gifted students.* Then if this small-scale experiment works well with good results, they may be more willing to try it on a larger scale, with more students or all students. { * In another reason to say Yes, they may think “the gifted students will do well anyway.” } put this section into left-side frame
using time in the classroom: In the classroom of a gifted program, teachers can offer a variety of fun-and-useful “enrichment” activities* – that can include studying Design Process – as a reward for mastering “the basic lesson” early, as bonus-options for extra learning so they don't become bored with school. Similarly, in a regular classroom – with or without a cluster of gifted students – early finishers can do enrichment activities, including Design Process and metacognitive thinking strategies. {* a variety of activities that include problem-solving activities – broadly defined, so they can be small or large – can be used as “extras” for students; students could learn Design Process independently by just using the Discovery Page with the teacher saying “you observe-and think, and you'll figure it out.” } two contexts for enrichment: If a teacher (or school) has decided that all students will learn Design Process, at the time when everyone begins learning it those who previously learned it during a "bonus activity" can function as tutors to help other students learn it. And if they enjoyed learning it and think using it's personally productive, they can “tell the class what they think, and why” so others will be encouraged to believe they can learn Design Process, and will be motivated so they want to learn it and use it. But... If a teacher has not made this decision, things could get complicated when some students know Design Process and some don't know it, because..... [to be continued] [[ iou – I'm still thinking about the complex ideas in this section, and soon (during August 9-12) I'll revise all of it, especially this currently-incomplete ending. ]]
iou – during September 26-30 the topic in this "brown box" will be developed & revised, and then moved upward out of the box.
improving education for all students: We want to design C & I that will help more students succeed, so more will experience the benefits (in school and life) of success. student diversity: All students are similar in the most important ways, but each has a personal history that makes them unique. Each has their own complex blend of abilities they inherit, plus attitudes (like motivations & confidences - with a growth mindset) and skills (using multiple “intelligences” in many areas of life) they develop, with personal growth (mental, emotional, social, physical) affected by characteristics (gender, race,...) and situations (produced by family, friends, community, school) in their whole-life experiences (in school and outside). activity diversity: There are logical reasons to conclude that "we should try to design eclectic instruction by creatively combining the best features of different approaches into a synergistic blend that produces an optimal overall result (a greater good for a greater number) in helping students achieve worthy educational goals." One reason is that, due to many kinds of diversity, some students will experience more success in problem-solving activities than in other activities, and they will enjoy the emotional & motivational rewards of success.* But some won't. We want to minimize those who "won't" so we should be trying to... try to design eclectic instruction that is optimally effective: We can use our observations — that students differ, and whole-person education has many kinds of goals, and different goals are better taught with different teaching approaches, and each approach has (as in 80-20) diminishing “marginal returns” — plus logic, to conclude that "we should try to design eclectic instruction by creatively combining the best features of different approaches into a synergistic blend that produces an optimal overall result (with greater good for a greater number) in helping students achieve worthy educational goals." / * Enjoying "more success" often co-occurs with “more intrinsic enjoying” when students have two kinds of fun.
learning by young students: iou – in mid-September, I'll revise these three paragraphs, beginning with my "all ages" claim for a Wide Spiral Curriculum, agreeing with the famous claim of Jerome Bruner (contradicting Jean Piaget) that "any subject can be taught effectively in some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development," plus his ideas – for spiral repetitions, scaffolding, social supports,... – about how to "teach effectively" for students of all ages, but especially those who are young. And I'll briefly summarize ideas from two reports made by Perplexity AI (including the pro-Bruner views of Next Generation Science Standards), and will link to a longer section in the Long-HomePage. benefits for older and younger: Because we want to “keep options open” for all students, we should try to improve education for older students (now in high school & college) so – before they leave school – they can improve valuable cognitive-and-metacognitive skills and then use these skills for lifelong learning-and-performing after the end of their formal schooling. And we want to help younger students develop personally-useful skills (for problem solving & in other areas) and attitudes (motivations & confidence) at an early age, so they can continue improving their skills during more of their schooling – during an important stage-of-life when their neurological development is especially fast & effective – so they will be able to more fully develop their whole-person potentials.two options for timings: To grow fruit, “the best time to plant a fruit tree is 20 years ago, the second best time is now.” To grow whole-person abilities in students, the “now” can begin ASAP so each student is the youngest they ever will be. When asking if we should focus our now-responses on secondary & college (to get benefits for more students) or on elementary & middle school (so these students will get benefits for a longer time, during a crucial developmental period of their lives)? Each option has reasons (logical & ethical) to prefer it, with differing payoffs and time scales, so “do both” is the best response. to “see what is available” use the Table of Contents |
Part 2 is based on generally accepted principles, so you probably will be thinking “yes”. But I also make bold claims for 
how? Compared with the simplicity of basic self-questioning, it's more difficult to teach Cycles of Self-Regulated Learning (SRL), but... it will be easier-and-better (for teachers & students) when we use Design Process, because a Cycle of SRL is very similar to a Cycle of DP, as you see in this version of 
designing instruction for diversity, equity, and inclusion: We want to design activities that provide opportunities for all students to succeed, and help more students succeed, so more will experience the benefits (in school & life) of success. We want to design curriculum-and-instruction (including activities) that actually does help more students, with wider diversity, more fully actualize