Problems that possess these characteristics are known as ill-defined or ill-structured problems

(Jonassen, 1997, 2000). Ill-structured problems are prototypical of tasks or problems that are often
found or encountered in real-world practices requiring the integration of several content domains and
possessing multiple solutions or solution paths (Chen, 2009; Jonassen, 1997; Lesh & Doerr, 2003). They
are problems for “which opposing or contradictory evidence and opinions exist” and whose solutions
“are not readily apparent or specified in the problem statement” and cannot be determined by
employing a specific problem solving process; rather, solving them requires not only identifying the
nature of the problem, “but also an acceptable solution and a process for arriving at it” (Jonassen, 1997,
pp. 67 & 78). In mathematics education, such problems or learning tasks are sometimes referred to as
“thought-revealing” or “model-eliciting” problems (Lesh et al., 2000). In this genre of problems, the onus
is placed on the student to create a model to capture in meaningful ways the complexity presented in
the learning task. This is in contrast to well-structured problems whose solutions are knowable and
probabilistic requiring the prescriptive and organized application of a finite number of concepts and
rules (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996; Jonassen, 2000).

There are several pedagogical models that use ill-structured problems as a stimulus for authentic
activity. These include situated learning (also known as anchored instruction), cognitive apprenticeship,
problem-based learning, learning by design, goal-based scenarios, and cognitive flexibility hypertexts
among others. While each of these pedagogical models possesses specific instructional characteristics
(Dabbagh & Bannan-Ritland, 2005), collectively they are rooted in the epistemological principles of
constructivism and situated cognition, consequently integrating the following overarching learning
principles: learning is embedded in complex, realistic, and relevant contexts; social negotiation is an
integral part of learning; the use of multiple perspectives and multiple modes of representation is
supported; ownership in learning is encouraged; and self-awareness of the knowledge construction
process is nurtured (Dabbagh & Bannan-Ritland, 2005; Driscoll, 2000).