FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING LEARNING THINKING COMMUNICATING INTERSCHOLASTIC

FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING LEARNING THINKING COMMUNICATING

INTERSCHOLASTIC ACADEMIC COMPETITION

GOALS OF THE FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING PROGRAM DEVELOP CREATIVE THINKING INCREASE AWARENESS OF AND INTEREST IN THE FUTURE IMPROVE COMMUNICATION SKILLS (BOTH VERBAL AND WRITTEN)

GOALS OF THE FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING PROGRAM (CONT’D) LEARN AND UTILIZE PROBLEM SOLVING STRATEGIES DEVELOP TEAMWORK SKILLS DEVELOP AND IMPROVE RESEARCH TECHNIQUES EXERCISE CRITICAL AND ANALYTICAL THOUGHT

PROCESS SKILLS ANALYZING COMPOSING APPLYING COMPREHENDING ASSUMING CONDENSING BUDGETING TIME CONCLUDING CLARIFYING COOPERATING CLASSIFYING CREATING COMPARING DECIDING

PROCESS SKILLS (CONT’D) DISCOVERING EXTRAPOLATING DISCUSSING IDENTIFYING DIVERGING INTERPRETING ELABORATING LISTENING EVALUATING OBSERVING EXPERIMENTING ORGANIZING

PROCESS SKILLS (CONT’D) PERFORMING SELECTING READING SOLVING RECALLING SPEAKING RESEARCHING SYNTHESIZING RESTRUCTURING UNIFYING SCHEDULING WRITING

U. S. PARTICIPATION IN FPS

WORLD PARTICIPATION IN FPS COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN FPS: AFRICA AUSTRALIA NIGERIA NEW SOUTH WALES ASIA SOUTH AUSTRALIA HONG KONG NEW ZEALAND INDIA EUROPE PHILIPPINES BELGIUM SAUDI ARABIA ENGLAND PAKISTAN HOLLAND

WORLD PARTICIPATION IN FPS (CONT’D) COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN FPS: EUROPE NORTH AMERICA NORWAY PUERTO RICO SPAIN UNITED STATES SWITZERLAND SOUTH AMERICA WEST GERMANY BOLIVIA NORTH AMERICA CHILE CANADA PERU MEXICO

THE PROCESS: AN OVERVIEW FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING TEAM = COACH + 4 STUDENTS

BLOOM’S TAXONOMY APPRAISE, CONCLUDE CREATE, COMBINE SEPARATE, CONTRAST ORGANIZE EXPLAIN DEFINE, LIST EVALUATION SYNTHESIS ANALYSIS APPLICATION COMPREHENSION KNOWLEDGE CRITICIZE, SUPPORT ORGANIZE, HYPOTHESIZE SUMMARIZE, COMPUTE CLASSIFY EXTEND, SHOW DESCRIBE, LABEL

BLOOM’S TAXONOMY DESCRIBE BEST SOLUTION, BRAINSTORM SOLUTIONS, BRAINSTORM PROBLEMS, IDENTIFY UL PROBLEM DISCUSS/BRAINSTORM RESEARCH EVALUATION SYNTHESIS ANALYSIS APPLICATION COMPREHENSION KNOWLEDGE SELECT CRITERIA DESCRIBE BEST SOLUTION BRAINSTORM SOLUTIONS

FPS TOPICS 1996 -97 1. HOMES OF THE FUTURE: COLUMBUS (11/9/97) 2. EXTRATERRESTRIAL LIFE: HOME (1/1 -1/15/97) 3. CASHLESS SOCIETY: COLUMBUS (3/8 & 3/9/97) 4. ** COMPETITION: SOLON (4/12/97) -----------------------------INTERNATIONAL: INCREASING LIFE SPAN

TOPICS FOR FPS SHRINKING TROPICAL FORESTS THE ARMS RACE POVERTY MEDICAL ADVANCES SPACE TRAVEL ACID RAIN IMMIGRATION THE ELDERLY GARBAGE CHANGING FAMILY STRUCTURES WATER ILLITERACY DRUNK DRIVING NUCLEAR WAR EDUCATION GREENHOUSE EFFECT ELECTRONIC GAMES PRISONS LASERS NUCLEAR WASTE

PRACTICE PROBLEM A. RESEARCH TOPIC AREA (LEARNING) B. TEACH STUDENTS FPS PROCESS (THINKING) C. COMPLETE A PRACTICE PROBLEM BOOKLET (COMMUNICATING) D. BOOKLET RETURNED WITH FEEDBACK FROM EVALUATOR

RESEARCH A. RESOURCE MANUAL (AVAILABLE FROM FPSP NATIONAL OFFICE B. NEWSWEEKLIES (TIME, NEWSWEEK, U. S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, ETC. ) C. FUTURISTIC PERIODICALS (OMNI, THE FUTURIST, DISCOVER, ETC. ) D. READER’S GUIDE E. LOCAL EXPERTS F. FIELD TRIPS G. ? ? ?

CREATIVE THINKING FLUENCY: GENERATE A LARGE NUMBER OF RELEVANT IDEAS FLEXIBILITY: THINK OF A VARIETY OF IDEAS ORIGINALITY: PRODUCE NOVEL OR UNIQUE IDEAS ELABORATION: EXPAND OR ADD DETAIL

FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT, AGE 9

FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING: THE 6 STEP PROCESS RESEARCH TOPIC (FUZZY SITUATION -- FUTURISTIC SCENARIO DESCRIBING TOPIC) I. BRAINSTORM PROBLEMS II. IDENTIFY AN UNDERLYING PROBLEM III. BRAINSTORM SOLUTIONS IV. SELECT CRITERIA TO EVALUATE SOLUTIONS VI. DESCRIBE BEST SOLUTION

STEP I: BRAINSTORMING SUBPROBLEMS BRAINSTORM WRITE 20 SUBPROBLEMS USE COMPLETE SENTENCES USE TERMS OF POSSIBILITY (MAY, MIGHT) DESCRIBE WHAT THE PROBLEM IS AND WHY IT IS A PROBLEM

HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUT PROBLEMS DEFENSE: BECAUSE THE U. S. ARMED FORCES NEED A HIGHLY TRAINED WORKFORCE, H. S. DROPOUTS MAY NOT BE DESIRABLE RECRUITS. LAW & JUSTICE: RESEARCH INDICATES THAT 25% OF H. S. STUDENTS MAY DROP OUT. SOME OF THESE STUDENTS MAY TURN TO DRUG USE. THIS MAY RESULT IN INCREASED CRIME. SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS: ACCORDING TO THE C. B. S. SPECIAL, “AMERICA’S TOUGHEST ASSIGNMENT, " SOME HIGH SCHOOLS ARE LARGE AND IMPERSONAL. THIS IMPERSONAL HIGH SCHOOL MAY CONTRIBUTE TO ALIENATION WHICH MAY RESULT IN DROPPING OUT.

STEP II. IDENTIFY AN UNDERLYING PROBLEM A. CATEGORIZE STEP 1 PROBLEMS B. SELECT ONE PROBLEM CATEGORY C. WRITE UNDERLYING PROBLEM USING 4 ELEMENTS LISTED ON THE NEXT SLIDE. . .

STEP II. IDENTIFY AN UNDERLYING PROBLEM (CONT’D) STEM(S): – “HOW MIGHT WE” OR – “IN WHAT WAYS MIGHT WE” KEY VERB PHRASE (KVP): ONE KEY VERB IN A PHRASE THAT MANDATES WHAT YOU MUST DO IN STEP 3 TO SOLVE YOUR PROBLEM PURPOSE (P): THE PURPOSE DESCRIBES THE GOAL TOWARD WHICH YOU WILL CARRY OUT THE MANDATE OF THE KEY VERB PHRASE FUZZY SITUATION PARAMETERS (FSP): CONDITIONS THAT PLACE YOUR UNDERLYING PROBLEM WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE FUZZY SITUATION -TIME, PLACE, AND TOPIC

STEM: I W W M W KVP: ASSIST THE SARINO TASK FORCE IN PROVIDING A BETTER TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATION FOR YOUNGER STUDENTS PUR: SO THAT THESE STUDENTS WILL CONTINUE THEIR EDUCATION TO RECEIVE A TECHNO-CERTIFICATE FSP: IN SARINO IN 2020

STEP III. BRAINSTORM ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS A. BRAINSTORM B. WRITE YOUR 20 BEST SOLUTIONS IN COMPLETE SENTENCES. DESCRIBE: WHO WILL DO THE SOLUTION WHAT WILL BE DONE HOW IT WILL WORK WHY IT IS BEING DONE

SOLUTIONS: IN ORDER TO ASSIST THE SARINO TASK FORCE IN PROVIDING A BETTER TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATION FOR YOUNGER CHILDREN, SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS: THE SARINO SCHOOL BOARD WILL RESTRUCTURE ALL SCHOOLS INTO SMALLER UNITS. TEACHERS AND STUDENTS WILL FORM A COMMUNITY. POSITIVE PEER GROUP WORK WILL BE ENCOURAGED. BUSINESS: THE SARINO BRANCH OF I. B. M. WILL SUPPLY PERSONNEL TO ASSIST ELEMENTARY STUDENTS INTO COMPUTER INSTRUCTION FOR A 9 WEEK PERIOD. THIS WILL RESULT IN BETTER SELF-CONFIDENCE AND WILL REDUCE THE DROPOUT RATE. DEFENSE: THE U. S. ARMY WILL PROVIDE A 2 WEEK UNIT ON TECHNOLOGICAL NEEDS AT THE FOURTH GRADE LEVEL. STUDENTS WILL REALIZE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WORK IN THE ARMED FORCES AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR. THESE UNITS WILL REDUCE THE D. O. RATE.

STEP IV. SELECT CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING SOLUTIONS 1. WHICH SOLUTION WILL BE THE EASIEST TO IMPLEMENT? 2. WHICH SOLUTION WILL BEST DEVELOP STUDENTS INTO WELL-ADJUSTED CITIZENS? 3. WHICH SOLUTION WILL HAVE THE FEWEST ADVERSE SIDE EFFECTS FOR CHILDREN? 4. WHICH SOLUTION WILL CREATE THE GREATEST AMOUNT OF SOCIALIZATION FROM PEERS? 5. WHICH SOLUTION WILL OFFER THE MOST SOCIALIZATION FROM ADULTS?

STEP IV. SELECT CRITERIA TO EVALUATE SOLUTIONS A. BRAINSTORM 5 CRITERIA TO EVALUATE YOUR SOLUTIONS 1. STOCK CRITERIA: COST, PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE, IMPLEMENTATION TIME, ETC. 2. TARGET CRITERIA: KEY VERB PHRASE AND/OR PURPOSE

STEP IV. SELECT CRITERIA TO EVALUATE SOLUTIONS (CONT’D) B. WRITE CRITERIA 1. SINGLE DIMENSION: (E. G. , WHICH SOLUTION WILL BE THE MOST EFFECTIVE? ) 2. RANKABLE: (E. G. , WHICH SOLUTION WILL BE THE LEAST COSTLY TO IMPLEMENT? ) 3. DESIRED DIRECTION: (E. G. , WHICH SOLUTION WILL BE THE MOST ACCEPTABLE TO THE PUBLIC? )

STEP V. EVALUATING SOLUTIONS 10 SOLUTIONS INTO GRID RANK EACH CRITERION 1 -10 ADD ROWS ACROSS HIGHEST TOTAL IS BEST SOLUTION

STEP VI. DESCRIBE THE BEST SOLUTION A. SELECT YOUR BEST SOLUTION BASED ON THE HIGHEST SCORING SOLUTION IN THE GRID B. WRITE YOUR BEST SOLUTION AS A PROPOSAL FOR SOLVING YOUR UNDERLYING PROBLEM. DESCRIBE: WHO WHAT WHEN WHERE WHY HOW, AND HOW

CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT GOES BEYOND THE CLASSROOM PROVIDES OPEN ENVIRONMENT ACCEPTS UNUSUAL IDEAS REQUIRES ORIGINAL THINKING PROVIDES OPPORTUNITY TO FORM HYPOTHESES ACCEPTS A VARIETY OF RESPONSES PROVIDES OPPORTUNITY FOR DISCOVERY, EXPERIMENTING, QUESTIONING, EXPLORING, AND RISK-TAKING

SCENARIO WRITING INDIVIDUAL STUDENTS DEVELOP SCENARIOS OF LIFE AS THEY SEE IT 20 YEARS INTO THE FUTURE (GRADES 4 THROUGH 12) THE YEAR WAS 2019. . .

FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING TOPICS (1990 -1991) #1: HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS #2: OZONE DEPLETION #3: TRANSPORTATION (QUALIFYING PROBLEM) STATE: CENSORSHIP INTERNATIONAL: CORRUPTION IN GOVERNMENT

FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING TOPICS (1991 -1992) NOVEMBER 6, 1991: SPACE DECEMBER 18, 1991: LEGAL EPIDEMIC FEBRUARY 1, 1992: SCENARIO MARCH 4, 1992: SPORTS ETHICS *** STATE BOWL (BOWLING GREEN, OH) MAY 2, 1992: LAND USE INTERNATIONAL BOWL (MADISON, WI) JUNE 12 -15, 1992: ADVERTISING

FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING TOPICS (1993 -1994) #1: ROBOTICS #2: ANTARCTICA #3: EXTINCTION OF ANIMALS (QUALIFYING PROBLEM) STATE BOWL: SPACE LAW INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE: CONTROL OF DISEASE

FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING TOPICS (1994 -1995) #1: CITIES #2: HOMELESSNESS #3: KIDS AND VIOLENCE (QUALIFYING PROBLEM) STATE BOWL: PREJUDICE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE: PRIVACY

FUTURE PROBLEM SOLVING TOPICS (1995 -1996) #1: WEAPONS CONTROL #2: MENTAL HEALTH #3: 21 ST CENTURY MARKETS (QUALIFYING PROBLEM) STATE BOWL: CYBERNETICS INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE: UNITED NATIONS

RULES FOR BRAINSTORMING 1. CRITICISM. . . IS RULED OUT. CRITICISM 2. FREE-WHEELING IS WELCOMED. THE WILDER THE IDEAS, THE BETTER. OFFBEAT AND SILLY IDEAS MAY TRIGGER PRACTICAL BREAKTHROUGHS THAT MIGHT NOT OTHERWISE OCCUR.

RULES FOR BRAINSTORMING (CONT’D) 3. COMBINATION AND IMPROVEMENT ARE SOUGHT. GROUP MEMBERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO COMBINE AND “HITCHHIKE” IDEAS. 4. QUANTITY IS WANTED. THE LARGE THE NUMBER OF IDEAS, THE GREATER THE CHANCE OF REACHING THE BEST SOLUTIONS.

MATHEMATICAL FORMULA FOR FPS EVALUATION SUBJECTIVE MATERIAL (BOOKLET) + SUBJECTIVE EVALUATION STANDARDS (FPS CRITERIA) + SUBJECTIVE EVALUATORS (HUMANS) SUBJECTIVE EVALUATION

CRITICISM SANDWICH GOOD FLEXIBILITY! TRY TO RELATE YOUR PROBLEMS BACK TO THE FUZZY EXCELLENT RESEARCH ON THIS PROBLEM!

FORMULA FOR FEEDBACK SOMETHING YOU DID REALLY WELL: SOMETHING YOU COULD IMPROVE UPON: A WAY TO IMPROVE IT: SOMETHING YOU DID REALLY WELL: