DEVELOPING PROBLEM-

SOLVING SKILLS
Ruth E. Cook
Brent D. Slife

Practical suggestions for possible remediation

strategies for problem-solving skills

Many educators intuitively feel that "problem solving is prob-

ably the single most important basic skill" (Cowan and Clary
1978). Yet, little has been written to assist teachers or parents in
their attempts to help those who are poor problem solvers.
Why are some children poor problem solvers? Where do their
difficulties occur in the problem-solving process? How can
these difficulties be overcome? Our purpose is to address these
issues by first identifying obstructions to problem solving, then
providing suggestions for skills that need to be "facilitated" by
the teacher and "discovered" by the student.

Why Poor Problem Solvers?

Most research about problem solving suggests that the
following five steps are practically a universally endorsed pro-
cess: (1) recognition of the problem, (2) analysis of contributing
factors, (3) consideration of possible solutions, (4) choice of op-
timal solutions, and (5) evaluation of feedback to determine
results (Maker 1981). We will contend that the universal en-
dorsement of these steps indicate a natural problem-solving
l o g i c - a logic that virtually everyone goes through when effec-
tively solving most any problem. Not only is problem solving a

SEPT. 1985 5

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015

natural logic, but the motivation to overcome obstacles ap-
pears to be natural as well. To have a problem is to be tense
and anxious since goal attainment is thwarted (the textbook
definition of frustration).
If steps to solving problems and the motivation to solve
them is natural, why is it that some children are good problem
solvers, while others are poor problem solvers? We suggest that
environments obstruct their tendency toward problem solving.
The following "obstructions" are but a few of the major ones
that may impede the development of natural thinking skills.
Obstruction #7: Problems are often prevented from occurring.
Handicapped children who are protected from real and
imagined dangers lose natural opportunities for problem solv-
ing. This results not only in a lack of experience with problem
solving, but more importantly a lack of experience in recogniz-
ing problems (the first, all-important step to problem solving).
Research has indicated this to be a major weakness of learning
disabled c h i l d r e n - t h e failure to recognize a problem when it
exists (Slife, Weiss, and Bell, in press).
Obstruction #2: Emphasis placed on right and wrong
When right vs. wrong is emphasized in learning, children
suffer from a fear of failure or an attitude described as learned
helplessness (Dweck 1977). The experimentation and explora-
tion necessary for problem solving is quashed by beliefs that
the outcome of an action is beyond their control (Cook 1983).
Some element of risk is crucial to any process of problem solv-
ing. It is not unusual in some families for children to be ridi-
culed for a novel solution to a problem. If a child spills his milk
and suggests that it can be cleaned up by having the cat lick it
up, his innovative thinking often is discouraged as the "wrong"
solution. The child first learns not to offer ideas, and later learns
to stop thinking.

Obstruction #3: Emphasis on learning "facts"

With so much attention to memory activities, one either
has the facts correctly or one does not. This "obstruction" is
related to the "fear of failure," in that the emphasis upon
memory activities can lead to fear of being wrong. It is worth
noting that the general approach of many parents and
educators is to tell children what they should know, or what is

6 ACADEMIC THERAPY/21:1

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015

right to be remembered. In this context, remembering is
synonymous with learning. If this is true, there is no need for
thinking, let alone thinking skills.
Obstruction #4: Lack of time
Teachers and parents do not feel that they have the time
necessary to facilitate problem solving. A typical response of
some parents to a child's query of "I don't understand" is, "Here
is how you do this." An important problem-solving opportunity
is lost, and the natural tendency to attempt a solution is cut off.
Or, many teachers have students for a limited time period and
feel they must cover a certain number of chapters in the text-
book. With increasing pressure for higher test scores and more
parents working, time is becoming a scarce resource. Neither
parents nor teachers feel they have the time and patience to
allow children to work out problems themselves. Yet, time is
precisely what is needed to facilitate thinking and problem
solving skills.

Overcoming the Obstacles

Obstacles may arise at any phase of the problem-solving
process, from problem recognition to the evaluation of results.
Therefore, we will review each step, indicate problems typical-
ly encountered, and suggest possible remediation strategies.
Recognizing that a problem exists
A recent study (Slife, Weiss, and Bell, in press) compared
learning disabled and "normal" students on their ability to
recognize when they were having difficulties in math. The "nor-
mal" students knew almost without exception when they were
experiencing difficulties. The LD students, on the other hand,
rarely knew they were even having problems. The LD students
lacked what Brown and Palincsar (1982) call "metacognitive
abilities," knowing that one does not know. Obviously, prob-
lem solving cannot begin unless a problem is recognized. What
can be done to facilitate this recognition?
First, it is important that the learner have a desired goal. A
problem is an obstacle that prevents a person from reaching a
goal. The feeling that one has a "problem" comes from the
sense that a goal is not being realized. When the LD students
were interviewed in the study above, it was evident that they

SEPT. 1985/PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS 7

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015

did not have goals in doing the math problems. The teachers
were the ones with goals.
The key to remediating this difficulty is to make the task
relevant or important to the child. We count too often on the
desire of good grades to inject goals into an "irrelevant" learn-
ing atmosphere. Grades are not effective motivators for hand-
icapped children who may be at a competitive disadvantage.
If classwork is difficult to make relevant, look for problems
to be solved in other areas. Students can be encouraged to
recognize problems as they occur outside of the class, such as
on the playground or with friends. Reward the mere recogni-
tion of these problems. Have the children bring big and small
problems into class for general discussion, and then attempt to
extend this recognition to academic work. Often, just knowing
that it's all right to have problems (or make mistakes) will aid in
problem recognition.
Understanding the Problem
This phase consists of two sub-elements: clarifying goals
and clarifying obstacles. Goal identification has been noted.
However, it is not unusual for a student to sense that he has a
problem, but not know what the problem is. Feeling the anxie-
ty that accompanies a problem, the student may go off "half-
cocked" in an attempt to remove an obstacle that is irrelevant
to the real goal. Problem solving obviously requires con-
siderable analysis and thinking. The student needs to attend to
the critical features of the problem, gather the information
needed, and understand the causes and effects involved. Poor
problem solvers, unfortunately, are unwilling or unable to do
this analysis. They are notoriously impulsive and distractible
(Havertape and Kass 1978). Herein lies the major difference
between good and poor problem solvers in our v i e w - t h e lack
of patient thinking.
7. Patient thinking. How does the teacher or parent
facilitate "patient thinking?" We have three suggestions: (1)
allowing adequate time; (2) the "three R's"- rechecking, review-
ing, and rereading; and (3) "thinking aloud/' The central issue in
this phase is the slow and careful understanding of the prob-
lem. Too often we are looking for learning efficiency, which
translates into a quick, "Here's the answer." Many literary and
scholarly luminaries have admitted to reading "painfully slow."

8 ACADEMIC THERAPY/21:1

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015

Newton was once quoted as saying, "If I have succeeded . . . I
owe it less to any superior strength of mind, than to a habit of
patient thinking" (Whimbey 1980). Clearly, for such "patient
thinking" to occur, educators may have to adjust the pace of in-
struction.
2. Mnemonics. The use of mnemonics, such as the "three
R's" can be the basis of patient thinking. Mnemonics help to
make thinking and problem solving objects of study. For writ-
ten tasks, the "three R's"-rechecking, reviewing, and rereading
can become a part of the student's repertoire of "thinking tools."
However, having a child memorize mnemonics rarely ensures
that he will spontaneously use them when a problem arises
(Torgeson and Goldman 1977). Part of the difficulty in teaching
problem solving is that skills cannot be modeled and corrected
as readily as in other areas of performance. Tennis instructors,
for instance, have the luxury of being able to model the swing
as well as guide a student through practice motions.
3. Thinking aloud. Methods of thinking aloud offer ex-
cellent opportunities to develop "patient thinking" (Whimbey
1980). One should first model "patient thinking" by thinking
aloud about a problem in front of the students. It is essential to
include all of the steps one goes through in attempting to
understand and solve the problem. It is easy for skilled thinkers
to consider certain steps automatic, while less skilled thinkers
see them as inexplicable "conceptual leaps." Students are en-
couraged when they witness the normal confusion and anxiety
which may accompany a problem. They are comforted to
realize that even the teacher needs the "three R's."
Analyzing the Problem
Next, begin a discussion of problem analysis in a group of
students. Have them take turns thinking aloud or suggesting
critical elements of the problem at hand. By modeling hesita-
tion and "false starts" through self-talk, students will feel freer to
begin the problem-solving process. Specially designed "tricky"
problems help to illustrate the importance of patient analysis.
Soon novice problem solvers will see that it is all right, indeed a
vital part of problem solving, to be slow and unsure.
Considering Alternative Solutions
The crucial need in this phase of the problem-solving se-

SEPT. 1985/PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS 9

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015

quence is the willingness to consider many solutions, even
those that may seem silly or unfeasible. A "brainstorming" at-
mosphere is most beneficial. Judgment must be reserved until
several possibilities are "on the table/' A mistake of many poor
problem solvers is the premature limiting of their field of
options.
Unfortunately, this mistake not only rules out innovative
problem solving, but it may also halt the learning process in
problem solving altogether. Learning cannot take place unless
one "fails" occasionally, or, in another sense, obtains
" d i s a f f i r m i n g evidence." That is, it is as important in this type
of learning to know what something is not as it is to know what
something is. Recall Edison's famous comment that he had
learned a great deal from his "failures" to find a filament for the
light bulb. If this is true, then one is learning as much when one
is "failing" as when one is "succeeding." This means that the no-
tions of "failure" and "success" lose their traditional meanings in
problem solving. If students could understand this simple fact,
many difficulties stemming from a fear of failure would be
gone, and half the battle of overcoming the "obstacles" would
have been won.
Choosing the Best Solution
This phase of problem solving entails the evaluation of
possible solutions, the weighing of the advantages and disad-
vantages of each. One of the prominent difficulties of poor prob-
lem solvers in this phase is what could be called "thinking in a
rut." This is a state in which many of the possible solutions
generated in the prior phase are rejected out of hand because
"that's not the way things are done." Viable alternatives are not
given thoughtful evaluation. The work done in the previous
phase to get all solutions "on the table" can go for naught.
One way to combat this is the "PMI" (de Bono 1983). This is
a simple mnemonic device that merely reminds a student to
look in the "plus" direction when evaluating a possibility, and
then in the "minus" direction, and, finally, in the direction of
their own "interests." The first two categories essentially direct
the problem solver to look at advantages and disadvantages.
This helps to short circuit out-of-hand rejection of an alter-
native. The last category is actually a catchall category for any
characteristics of the proposed solution that do not seem to fit
easily into the "p" or "m" categories.

10 ACADEMIC THERAPY/21:1

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015

Evaluating the results
This final step reminds us that once a solution has been
tried, it is imperative that it be evaluated. Here the difficulties
observed in poor problem solvers are two-fold: (1) an unwill-
ingness to monitor the results of their attempted solution and (2)
an unwillingness to learn from a "failed" attempt. A study cited
earlier (Slife, Weiss, and Bell, in press) illustrates and supports
the former difficulty. "Normal" students were observed to
check routinely their solutions to math problems, both during
their solving and after a solution had been decided. LD
students, on the other hand, worked the solutions with very lit-
tle attention to their appropriateness. The LD students did not
follow up and hence did not monitor their efforts.
One possible reason for this involves the second difficulty
observed in this phase. Poor problem solvers do not really want
to know the results of their efforts. As discussed above, they are
fearful of failure and have never been encouraged to view
failure as a learning opportunity. A solution that does not work
is taken to mean that the problem solver is "wrong." Hence, to
avoid the real or imagined consequences of being "wrong," one
declines to monitor the solution at all. Unfortunately, the fear
of error can be compounded in this last phase by the invest-
ment a student may have in reaching a solution. The student
has spent considerable time analyzing the problem as well as
brainstorming and evaluating possible solutions. To learn that
the carefully selected solution did not "work" can be painful.
The key to treatment is the fostering of the attitude de-
scribed previously: one is not right or wrong in problem solv-
ing, because both outcomes present us with learning oppor-
tunities. Unfortunately, this type of attitude is difficult to instill
unless the problem solvers have the feeling that they are now
removed from "fact gathering" and "input activities" and thus
"rights" and "wrongs."
We recommend that a portion of each day be set aside for
nothing but "problem solving." This demarcates the period as
separate from activities involving rights and wrongs. Initially, it
may also be helpful to move to another location so that the
cues are different from the regular classroom activities. Praise,
of course, would be doled out not only for "success," but for the
willingness to try a solution and learn from it. The general ob-
jective would be to facilitate an atmosphere in which ex-

SEPT. 1985/PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS 11

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015

perimentation is welcomed and risk-taking is the rule rather
than the exception.

Putting it All Together

Several mnemonics have been suggested thus far as good
ways of intervening in various aspects of problem solving and
as "thinking" tools to be used. We would like to add one more
that serves to sum up the problem solving process for a child.
This is the "Hey Wait-Think-See-So" mnemonic (Brown 1983)
which translates into: Hey, wait! (recognize and understand the
problem); Think! (consider possible solutions and pick the
best); See! (see how well the solution works); So! (decide what
to do next, e.g,. try another solution). Brown (1983) tells of a
teacher who went to settle a dispute that four girls were having
over the rules of a game. When the teacher arrived, the girls an-
nounced that they were already on "See" in solving their
problem.
The ideal approach to "putting together" the problem-
solving process for the student, from our view, would be to
deal with widely differing problems at each problem-solving
session. One day the equipment in the middle of the floor
could be considered; the next, the noise during study time;
then, a problem on the playground or a current event. Once
you get started, problems can be solicited from the class. Such
varied problems will aid greatly in the student's conceptualiz-
ing the entire process of problem solving and will combat the
tendency to rely on formulas.
There is another motive for dealing with problem-solving
skills through different types of practice. A central issue in
education today is that of learning transfer. What is being
taught is not being transfered to other subjects, to real-life, et
cetera. One of the great values of problem solving skills is that
they can bridge the gaps and allow greater transfer of the
regular classroom curricula. The knowledge of the student, of
course, is constantly being used and tested in problem solving.
If the structure of problem solving can be seen to be similar
across these diverse subjects, then learning transfer will be
facilitated.
Despite the demands of our educational curricula, we feel
problem solving deserves to be a topic of study in its own right.

72 ACADEMIC THERAPY/21:1

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015

It c o u l d be v i e w e d as the o n e subject d u r i n g the day that links
the other subjects together. Its other benefits are n u m e r o u s and
i n c l u d e not o n l y real life issues, but also academic skills, pa-
tient t h i n k i n g , the m o n i t o r i n g of the learning process, and the
fostering of creativity, to name just a f e w . W e also believe that
there s h o u l d be a t i m e in t h e educational process w h e n t h e
pressure of being right is r e m o v e d , and t h i n k i n g can go o n .

References
Brown, A.L. 1983. On teaching thinking skills in the elementary and
middle school. Phi Delta Kappan 64: pp. 709-714.
Brown, A.L. and Palincsar, A.S. 1982. Inducing strategic learning
from texts by means of informed, self-control training. Topics in
Learning and Learning Disabilities, 2, pp. 1-17.
Cowan, R.E. and Clary, R.C. 1978. Identifying and teaching essential
mathematical skills-terms. Mathematics Teacher 71: pp. 130-134.
Cook, R.E. 1983. Why Jimmy doesn't try. Academic Therapy, 19:
pp. 155-163.
deBono, E. 1983. The direct teaching of thinking as a skill, Phi Delta
Kappan 64: pp. 703-708.
Dweck, C.S. 1977. Learned helplessness and negative evaluation.
Educator 19: pp. 44-49
Havertape, J.F. and Kass, C.W. 1978. Examination of problem solving
in learning disabled adolescents through verbalized self-
instructions. Learning Disability Quarterly 1: pp. 94-100.
Maker, C.J. 1981. Problem solving: A general approach to remedia-
tion. In D.D. Smith (Ed.), Teaching the Learning Disabled. Engle-
wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Slife, B.D., Weiss, J. and Bell, T. (In press). The separability of mega-
cognition and cognition: Problem solving in learning disabled
and regular students, journal of Educational Psychology.
Torgeson, J.K. and Goldman, R. 1977. Verbal rehearsal and short-
term memory in reading-disabled children. Child Development
48: pp. 56-60.
Whimbey, A. 1980. Students can learn to be better problem solvers
Educational Leadership 37: pp. 560-565.

Ruth E. Cook, PhD, is an associate professor in the Division of Counseling

Psychology and Education, The University of Santa Clara, 226 Bannan, Santa
Clara, CA 95053. Brent D. Slife is an assistant professor of psychology at
Baylor University in Waco, Texas.

AFP

SEPT. 1985/PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS 13

Downloaded from isc.sagepub.com at Karolinska Institutets Universitetsbibliotek on May 26, 2015