1: Studies of Problem Solving, Judgment, and Decision Making: Implications for Educational Research

Abstract

Bruner (1971) quotes an aphorism he attributes to the English Platonist Weldon. It is apt as a prolegomenon to this chapter: ". . . there are three kinds of things in the world: there are troubles which we do not know quite how to handle; then there are puzzles with their clear conditions and unique solu tions, marvelously elegant; and then there are problems-and these we invent by finding an appropriate puzzle form to impose upon a trouble" (p. 104). Educational researchers attack problems for which convenient puzzle forms exist. As evidence for this assertion, witness the continuing preoccupation with studies of paired-associate learning, adjunct questions, learning hierarchies, and social-class differences in intelligence and achievement. Research typically slights the problem of how teachers think about their pupils and instructional problems; it concentrates instead on how teachers act or perform in the class room. It is our hope that by providing a number of "puzzle forms" for the study of individual judgment and problem solving, we can make it possible for more of our colleagues to pursue educational research in these areas.In this chapter we shall review representative studies and theoretical proposals on thinking, human judgment, and decision making. Since "judg ment," "decision making," and "problem solving" are used in so many ways, the scope of our treatment will be outlined here. First, the focus will be mostly PAUL SLOVIC, Oregon Research Institute, was the editorial consultant for this chapter.We are indebted to Paul Slovic for many helpful suggestions. Kenneth Hammond's reactions to an earlier draft were also of great value. We would like to thank Judy Carley for typing the many drafts, Donna Edison for assistance in tracking down and checking references, and Nova Green for editorial contributions.

Effect of Management Information System (MIS) on Decision-Making in the Academic Sector

“…After implementing the previous phases, we find the result. If the result is a failure, we must start the procedure again or go to the last step and check for any mistakes (Shulman & Elstein 1975).…”