collaborative problem solving handout

Collaborative Problem Solving: What It Is and How to Do It

What is collaborative problem solving, how to solve problems as a team, celebrating success as a team.

Problems arise. That's a well-known fact of life and business. When they do, it may seem more straightforward to take individual ownership of the problem and immediately run with trying to solve it. However, the most effective problem-solving solutions often come through collaborative problem solving.

As defined by Webster's Dictionary , the word collaborate is to work jointly with others or together, especially in an intellectual endeavor. Therefore, collaborative problem solving (CPS) is essentially solving problems by working together as a team. While problems can and are solved individually, CPS often brings about the best resolution to a problem while also developing a team atmosphere and encouraging creative thinking.

Because collaborative problem solving involves multiple people and ideas, there are some techniques that can help you stay on track, engage efficiently, and communicate effectively during collaboration.

  • Set Expectations. From the very beginning, expectations for openness and respect must be established for CPS to be effective. Everyone participating should feel that their ideas will be heard and valued.
  • Provide Variety. Another way of providing variety can be by eliciting individuals outside the organization but affected by the problem. This may mean involving various levels of leadership from the ground floor to the top of the organization. It may be that you involve someone from bookkeeping in a marketing problem-solving session. A perspective from someone not involved in the day-to-day of the problem can often provide valuable insight.
  • Communicate Clearly.  If the problem is not well-defined, the solution can't be. By clearly defining the problem, the framework for collaborative problem solving is narrowed and more effective.
  • Expand the Possibilities.  Think beyond what is offered. Take a discarded idea and expand upon it. Turn it upside down and inside out. What is good about it? What needs improvement? Sometimes the best ideas are those that have been discarded rather than reworked.
  • Encourage Creativity.  Out-of-the-box thinking is one of the great benefits of collaborative problem-solving. This may mean that solutions are proposed that have no way of working, but a small nugget makes its way from that creative thought to evolution into the perfect solution.
  • Provide Positive Feedback. There are many reasons participants may hold back in a collaborative problem-solving meeting. Fear of performance evaluation, lack of confidence, lack of clarity, and hierarchy concerns are just a few of the reasons people may not initially participate in a meeting. Positive public feedback early on in the meeting will eliminate some of these concerns and create more participation and more possible solutions.
  • Consider Solutions. Once several possible ideas have been identified, discuss the advantages and drawbacks of each one until a consensus is made.
  • Assign Tasks.  A problem identified and a solution selected is not a problem solved. Once a solution is determined, assign tasks to work towards a resolution. A team that has been invested in the creation of the solution will be invested in its resolution. The best time to act is now.
  • Evaluate the Solution. Reconnect as a team once the solution is implemented and the problem is solved. What went well? What didn't? Why? Collaboration doesn't necessarily end when the problem is solved. The solution to the problem is often the next step towards a new collaboration.

The burden that is lifted when a problem is solved is enough victory for some. However, a team that plays together should celebrate together. It's not only collaboration that brings unity to a team. It's also the combined celebration of a unified victory—the moment you look around and realize the collectiveness of your success.

We can help

Check out MindManager to learn more about how you can ignite teamwork and innovation by providing a clearer perspective on the big picture with a suite of sharing options and collaborative tools.

Need to Download MindManager?

Try the full version of mindmanager free for 30 days.

How to ace collaborative problem solving

April 30, 2023 They say two heads are better than one, but is that true when it comes to solving problems in the workplace? To solve any problem—whether personal (eg, deciding where to live), business-related (eg, raising product prices), or societal (eg, reversing the obesity epidemic)—it’s crucial to first define the problem. In a team setting, that translates to establishing a collective understanding of the problem, awareness of context, and alignment of stakeholders. “Both good strategy and good problem solving involve getting clarity about the problem at hand, being able to disaggregate it in some way, and setting priorities,” Rob McLean, McKinsey director emeritus, told McKinsey senior partner Chris Bradley  in an Inside the Strategy Room podcast episode . Check out these insights to uncover how your team can come up with the best solutions for the most complex challenges by adopting a methodical and collaborative approach. 

Want better strategies? Become a bulletproof problem solver

How to master the seven-step problem-solving process

Countering otherness: Fostering integration within teams

Psychological safety and the critical role of leadership development

If we’re all so busy, why isn’t anything getting done?

To weather a crisis, build a network of teams

Unleash your team’s full potential

Modern marketing: Six capabilities for multidisciplinary teams

Beyond collaboration overload

MORE FROM MCKINSEY

Take a step Forward

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • View all journals
  • My Account Login
  • Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • Review Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 11 January 2023

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

  • Enwei Xu   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6424-8169 1 ,
  • Wei Wang 1 &
  • Qingxia Wang 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  16 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

15k Accesses

15 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

  • Science, technology and society

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education as well as a key competence for learners in the 21st century. However, the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking remains uncertain. This current research presents the major findings of a meta-analysis of 36 pieces of the literature revealed in worldwide educational periodicals during the 21st century to identify the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and to determine, based on evidence, whether and to what extent collaborative problem solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]); (2) in respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem solving can significantly and successfully enhance students’ attitudinal tendencies (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI[0.58, 0.82]); and (3) the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have an impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. On the basis of these results, recommendations are made for further study and instruction to better support students’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Similar content being viewed by others

collaborative problem solving handout

Impact of artificial intelligence on human loss in decision making, laziness and safety in education

collaborative problem solving handout

Sleep quality, duration, and consistency are associated with better academic performance in college students

collaborative problem solving handout

An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success

Introduction.

Although critical thinking has a long history in research, the concept of critical thinking, which is regarded as an essential competence for learners in the 21st century, has recently attracted more attention from researchers and teaching practitioners (National Research Council, 2012 ). Critical thinking should be the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education (Peng and Deng, 2017 ) because students with critical thinking can not only understand the meaning of knowledge but also effectively solve practical problems in real life even after knowledge is forgotten (Kek and Huijser, 2011 ). The definition of critical thinking is not universal (Ennis, 1989 ; Castle, 2009 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). In general, the definition of critical thinking is a self-aware and self-regulated thought process (Facione, 1990 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). It refers to the cognitive skills needed to interpret, analyze, synthesize, reason, and evaluate information as well as the attitudinal tendency to apply these abilities (Halpern, 2001 ). The view that critical thinking can be taught and learned through curriculum teaching has been widely supported by many researchers (e.g., Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), leading to educators’ efforts to foster it among students. In the field of teaching practice, there are three types of courses for teaching critical thinking (Ennis, 1989 ). The first is an independent curriculum in which critical thinking is taught and cultivated without involving the knowledge of specific disciplines; the second is an integrated curriculum in which critical thinking is integrated into the teaching of other disciplines as a clear teaching goal; and the third is a mixed curriculum in which critical thinking is taught in parallel to the teaching of other disciplines for mixed teaching training. Furthermore, numerous measuring tools have been developed by researchers and educators to measure critical thinking in the context of teaching practice. These include standardized measurement tools, such as WGCTA, CCTST, CCTT, and CCTDI, which have been verified by repeated experiments and are considered effective and reliable by international scholars (Facione and Facione, 1992 ). In short, descriptions of critical thinking, including its two dimensions of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, different types of teaching courses, and standardized measurement tools provide a complex normative framework for understanding, teaching, and evaluating critical thinking.

Cultivating critical thinking in curriculum teaching can start with a problem, and one of the most popular critical thinking instructional approaches is problem-based learning (Liu et al., 2020 ). Duch et al. ( 2001 ) noted that problem-based learning in group collaboration is progressive active learning, which can improve students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Collaborative problem-solving is the organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning, which takes learners as the center of the learning process and uses problems with poor structure in real-world situations as the starting point for the learning process (Liang et al., 2017 ). Students learn the knowledge needed to solve problems in a collaborative group, reach a consensus on problems in the field, and form solutions through social cooperation methods, such as dialogue, interpretation, questioning, debate, negotiation, and reflection, thus promoting the development of learners’ domain knowledge and critical thinking (Cindy, 2004 ; Liang et al., 2017 ).

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely used in the teaching practice of critical thinking, and several studies have attempted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature on critical thinking from various perspectives. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking. Therefore, the best approach for developing and enhancing critical thinking throughout collaborative problem-solving is to examine how to implement critical thinking instruction; however, this issue is still unexplored, which means that many teachers are incapable of better instructing critical thinking (Leng and Lu, 2020 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, Huber ( 2016 ) provided the meta-analysis findings of 71 publications on gaining critical thinking over various time frames in college with the aim of determining whether critical thinking was truly teachable. These authors found that learners significantly improve their critical thinking while in college and that critical thinking differs with factors such as teaching strategies, intervention duration, subject area, and teaching type. The usefulness of collaborative problem-solving in fostering students’ critical thinking, however, was not determined by this study, nor did it reveal whether there existed significant variations among the different elements. A meta-analysis of 31 pieces of educational literature was conducted by Liu et al. ( 2020 ) to assess the impact of problem-solving on college students’ critical thinking. These authors found that problem-solving could promote the development of critical thinking among college students and proposed establishing a reasonable group structure for problem-solving in a follow-up study to improve students’ critical thinking. Additionally, previous empirical studies have reached inconclusive and even contradictory conclusions about whether and to what extent collaborative problem-solving increases or decreases critical thinking levels. As an illustration, Yang et al. ( 2008 ) carried out an experiment on the integrated curriculum teaching of college students based on a web bulletin board with the goal of fostering participants’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These authors’ research revealed that through sharing, debating, examining, and reflecting on various experiences and ideas, collaborative problem-solving can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking in real-life problem situations. In contrast, collaborative problem-solving had a positive impact on learners’ interaction and could improve learning interest and motivation but could not significantly improve students’ critical thinking when compared to traditional classroom teaching, according to research by Naber and Wyatt ( 2014 ) and Sendag and Odabasi ( 2009 ) on undergraduate and high school students, respectively.

The above studies show that there is inconsistency regarding the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a thorough and trustworthy review to detect and decide whether and to what degree collaborative problem-solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. Meta-analysis is a quantitative analysis approach that is utilized to examine quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. This approach characterizes the effectiveness of its impact by averaging the effect sizes of numerous qualitative studies in an effort to reduce the uncertainty brought on by independent research and produce more conclusive findings (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ).

This paper used a meta-analytic approach and carried out a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking in order to make a contribution to both research and practice. The following research questions were addressed by this meta-analysis:

What is the overall effect size of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills)?

How are the disparities between the study conclusions impacted by various moderating variables if the impacts of various experimental designs in the included studies are heterogeneous?

This research followed the strict procedures (e.g., database searching, identification, screening, eligibility, merging, duplicate removal, and analysis of included studies) of Cooper’s ( 2010 ) proposed meta-analysis approach for examining quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. The relevant empirical research that appeared in worldwide educational periodicals within the 21st century was subjected to this meta-analysis using Rev-Man 5.4. The consistency of the data extracted separately by two researchers was tested using Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and a publication bias test and a heterogeneity test were run on the sample data to ascertain the quality of this meta-analysis.

Data sources and search strategies

There were three stages to the data collection process for this meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 1 , which shows the number of articles included and eliminated during the selection process based on the statement and study eligibility criteria.

figure 1

This flowchart shows the number of records identified, included and excluded in the article.

First, the databases used to systematically search for relevant articles were the journal papers of the Web of Science Core Collection and the Chinese Core source journal, as well as the Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) source journal papers included in CNKI. These databases were selected because they are credible platforms that are sources of scholarly and peer-reviewed information with advanced search tools and contain literature relevant to the subject of our topic from reliable researchers and experts. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the Web of Science was “TS = (((“critical thinking” or “ct” and “pretest” or “posttest”) or (“critical thinking” or “ct” and “control group” or “quasi experiment” or “experiment”)) and (“collaboration” or “collaborative learning” or “CSCL”) and (“problem solving” or “problem-based learning” or “PBL”))”. The research area was “Education Educational Research”, and the search period was “January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2021”. A total of 412 papers were obtained. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the CNKI was “SU = (‘critical thinking’*‘collaboration’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘collaborative learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘CSCL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem solving’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem-based learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘PBL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem oriented’) AND FT = (‘experiment’ + ‘quasi experiment’ + ‘pretest’ + ‘posttest’ + ‘empirical study’)” (translated into Chinese when searching). A total of 56 studies were found throughout the search period of “January 2000 to December 2021”. From the databases, all duplicates and retractions were eliminated before exporting the references into Endnote, a program for managing bibliographic references. In all, 466 studies were found.

Second, the studies that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were chosen by two researchers after they had reviewed the abstracts and titles of the gathered articles, yielding a total of 126 studies.

Third, two researchers thoroughly reviewed each included article’s whole text in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meanwhile, a snowball search was performed using the references and citations of the included articles to ensure complete coverage of the articles. Ultimately, 36 articles were kept.

Two researchers worked together to carry out this entire process, and a consensus rate of almost 94.7% was reached after discussion and negotiation to clarify any emerging differences.

Eligibility criteria

Since not all the retrieved studies matched the criteria for this meta-analysis, eligibility criteria for both inclusion and exclusion were developed as follows:

The publication language of the included studies was limited to English and Chinese, and the full text could be obtained. Articles that did not meet the publication language and articles not published between 2000 and 2021 were excluded.

The research design of the included studies must be empirical and quantitative studies that can assess the effect of collaborative problem-solving on the development of critical thinking. Articles that could not identify the causal mechanisms by which collaborative problem-solving affects critical thinking, such as review articles and theoretical articles, were excluded.

The research method of the included studies must feature a randomized control experiment or a quasi-experiment, or a natural experiment, which have a higher degree of internal validity with strong experimental designs and can all plausibly provide evidence that critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving are causally related. Articles with non-experimental research methods, such as purely correlational or observational studies, were excluded.

The participants of the included studies were only students in school, including K-12 students and college students. Articles in which the participants were non-school students, such as social workers or adult learners, were excluded.

The research results of the included studies must mention definite signs that may be utilized to gauge critical thinking’s impact (e.g., sample size, mean value, or standard deviation). Articles that lacked specific measurement indicators for critical thinking and could not calculate the effect size were excluded.

Data coding design

In order to perform a meta-analysis, it is necessary to collect the most important information from the articles, codify that information’s properties, and convert descriptive data into quantitative data. Therefore, this study designed a data coding template (see Table 1 ). Ultimately, 16 coding fields were retained.

The designed data-coding template consisted of three pieces of information. Basic information about the papers was included in the descriptive information: the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper.

The variable information for the experimental design had three variables: the independent variable (instruction method), the dependent variable (critical thinking), and the moderating variable (learning stage, teaching type, intervention duration, learning scaffold, group size, measuring tool, and subject area). Depending on the topic of this study, the intervention strategy, as the independent variable, was coded into collaborative and non-collaborative problem-solving. The dependent variable, critical thinking, was coded as a cognitive skill and an attitudinal tendency. And seven moderating variables were created by grouping and combining the experimental design variables discovered within the 36 studies (see Table 1 ), where learning stages were encoded as higher education, high school, middle school, and primary school or lower; teaching types were encoded as mixed courses, integrated courses, and independent courses; intervention durations were encoded as 0–1 weeks, 1–4 weeks, 4–12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks; group sizes were encoded as 2–3 persons, 4–6 persons, 7–10 persons, and more than 10 persons; learning scaffolds were encoded as teacher-supported learning scaffold, technique-supported learning scaffold, and resource-supported learning scaffold; measuring tools were encoded as standardized measurement tools (e.g., WGCTA, CCTT, CCTST, and CCTDI) and self-adapting measurement tools (e.g., modified or made by researchers); and subject areas were encoded according to the specific subjects used in the 36 included studies.

The data information contained three metrics for measuring critical thinking: sample size, average value, and standard deviation. It is vital to remember that studies with various experimental designs frequently adopt various formulas to determine the effect size. And this paper used Morris’ proposed standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation formula ( 2008 , p. 369; see Supplementary Table S3 ).

Procedure for extracting and coding data

According to the data coding template (see Table 1 ), the 36 papers’ information was retrieved by two researchers, who then entered them into Excel (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The results of each study were extracted separately in the data extraction procedure if an article contained numerous studies on critical thinking, or if a study assessed different critical thinking dimensions. For instance, Tiwari et al. ( 2010 ) used four time points, which were viewed as numerous different studies, to examine the outcomes of critical thinking, and Chen ( 2013 ) included the two outcome variables of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, which were regarded as two studies. After discussion and negotiation during data extraction, the two researchers’ consistency test coefficients were roughly 93.27%. Supplementary Table S2 details the key characteristics of the 36 included articles with 79 effect quantities, including descriptive information (e.g., the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper), variable information (e.g., independent variables, dependent variables, and moderating variables), and data information (e.g., mean values, standard deviations, and sample size). Following that, testing for publication bias and heterogeneity was done on the sample data using the Rev-Man 5.4 software, and then the test results were used to conduct a meta-analysis.

Publication bias test

When the sample of studies included in a meta-analysis does not accurately reflect the general status of research on the relevant subject, publication bias is said to be exhibited in this research. The reliability and accuracy of the meta-analysis may be impacted by publication bias. Due to this, the meta-analysis needs to check the sample data for publication bias (Stewart et al., 2006 ). A popular method to check for publication bias is the funnel plot; and it is unlikely that there will be publishing bias when the data are equally dispersed on either side of the average effect size and targeted within the higher region. The data are equally dispersed within the higher portion of the efficient zone, consistent with the funnel plot connected with this analysis (see Fig. 2 ), indicating that publication bias is unlikely in this situation.

figure 2

This funnel plot shows the result of publication bias of 79 effect quantities across 36 studies.

Heterogeneity test

To select the appropriate effect models for the meta-analysis, one might use the results of a heterogeneity test on the data effect sizes. In a meta-analysis, it is common practice to gauge the degree of data heterogeneity using the I 2 value, and I 2  ≥ 50% is typically understood to denote medium-high heterogeneity, which calls for the adoption of a random effect model; if not, a fixed effect model ought to be applied (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ). The findings of the heterogeneity test in this paper (see Table 2 ) revealed that I 2 was 86% and displayed significant heterogeneity ( P  < 0.01). To ensure accuracy and reliability, the overall effect size ought to be calculated utilizing the random effect model.

The analysis of the overall effect size

This meta-analysis utilized a random effect model to examine 79 effect quantities from 36 studies after eliminating heterogeneity. In accordance with Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1992 ), it is abundantly clear from the analysis results, which are shown in the forest plot of the overall effect (see Fig. 3 ), that the cumulative impact size of cooperative problem-solving is 0.82, which is statistically significant ( z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]), and can encourage learners to practice critical thinking.

figure 3

This forest plot shows the analysis result of the overall effect size across 36 studies.

In addition, this study examined two distinct dimensions of critical thinking to better understand the precise contributions that collaborative problem-solving makes to the growth of critical thinking. The findings (see Table 3 ) indicate that collaborative problem-solving improves cognitive skills (ES = 0.70) and attitudinal tendency (ES = 1.17), with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.95, P  < 0.01). Although collaborative problem-solving improves both dimensions of critical thinking, it is essential to point out that the improvements in students’ attitudinal tendency are much more pronounced and have a significant comprehensive effect (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]), whereas gains in learners’ cognitive skill are slightly improved and are just above average. (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

The analysis of moderator effect size

The whole forest plot’s 79 effect quantities underwent a two-tailed test, which revealed significant heterogeneity ( I 2  = 86%, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01), indicating differences between various effect sizes that may have been influenced by moderating factors other than sampling error. Therefore, exploring possible moderating factors that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis, such as the learning stage, learning scaffold, teaching type, group size, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, in order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking. The findings (see Table 4 ) indicate that various moderating factors have advantageous effects on critical thinking. In this situation, the subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01), and teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05) are all significant moderators that can be applied to support the cultivation of critical thinking. However, since the learning stage and the measuring tools did not significantly differ among intergroup (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05, and chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05), we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These are the precise outcomes, as follows:

Various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively, without significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05). High school was first on the list of effect sizes (ES = 1.36, P  < 0.01), then higher education (ES = 0.78, P  < 0.01), and middle school (ES = 0.73, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the learning stage’s beneficial influence on cultivating learners’ critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is essential for cultivating critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Different teaching types had varying degrees of positive impact on critical thinking, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05). The effect size was ranked as follows: mixed courses (ES = 1.34, P  < 0.01), integrated courses (ES = 0.81, P  < 0.01), and independent courses (ES = 0.27, P  < 0.01). These results indicate that the most effective approach to cultivate critical thinking utilizing collaborative problem solving is through the teaching type of mixed courses.

Various intervention durations significantly improved critical thinking, and there were significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01). The effect sizes related to this variable showed a tendency to increase with longer intervention durations. The improvement in critical thinking reached a significant level (ES = 0.85, P  < 0.01) after more than 12 weeks of training. These findings indicate that the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated, with a longer intervention duration having a greater effect.

Different learning scaffolds influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01). The resource-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.69, P  < 0.01) acquired a medium-to-higher level of impact, the technique-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.63, P  < 0.01) also attained a medium-to-higher level of impact, and the teacher-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.92, P  < 0.01) displayed a high level of significant impact. These results show that the learning scaffold with teacher support has the greatest impact on cultivating critical thinking.

Various group sizes influenced critical thinking positively, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05). Critical thinking showed a general declining trend with increasing group size. The overall effect size of 2–3 people in this situation was the biggest (ES = 0.99, P  < 0.01), and when the group size was greater than 7 people, the improvement in critical thinking was at the lower-middle level (ES < 0.5, P  < 0.01). These results show that the impact on critical thinking is positively connected with group size, and as group size grows, so does the overall impact.

Various measuring tools influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05). In this situation, the self-adapting measurement tools obtained an upper-medium level of effect (ES = 0.78), whereas the complete effect size of the standardized measurement tools was the largest, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 0.84, P  < 0.01). These results show that, despite the beneficial influence of the measuring tool on cultivating critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Different subject areas had a greater impact on critical thinking, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05). Mathematics had the greatest overall impact, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 1.68, P  < 0.01), followed by science (ES = 1.25, P  < 0.01) and medical science (ES = 0.87, P  < 0.01), both of which also achieved a significant level of effect. Programming technology was the least effective (ES = 0.39, P  < 0.01), only having a medium-low degree of effect compared to education (ES = 0.72, P  < 0.01) and other fields (such as language, art, and social sciences) (ES = 0.58, P  < 0.01). These results suggest that scientific fields (e.g., mathematics, science) may be the most effective subject areas for cultivating critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

According to this meta-analysis, using collaborative problem-solving as an intervention strategy in critical thinking teaching has a considerable amount of impact on cultivating learners’ critical thinking as a whole and has a favorable promotional effect on the two dimensions of critical thinking. According to certain studies, collaborative problem solving, the most frequently used critical thinking teaching strategy in curriculum instruction can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking (e.g., Liang et al., 2017 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Cindy, 2004 ). This meta-analysis provides convergent data support for the above research views. Thus, the findings of this meta-analysis not only effectively address the first research query regarding the overall effect of cultivating critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills) utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving, but also enhance our confidence in cultivating critical thinking by using collaborative problem-solving intervention approach in the context of classroom teaching.

Furthermore, the associated improvements in attitudinal tendency are much stronger, but the corresponding improvements in cognitive skill are only marginally better. According to certain studies, cognitive skill differs from the attitudinal tendency in classroom instruction; the cultivation and development of the former as a key ability is a process of gradual accumulation, while the latter as an attitude is affected by the context of the teaching situation (e.g., a novel and exciting teaching approach, challenging and rewarding tasks) (Halpern, 2001 ; Wei and Hong, 2022 ). Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting and interesting, as well as rewarding and challenging; because it takes the learners as the focus and examines problems with poor structure in real situations, and it can inspire students to fully realize their potential for problem-solving, which will significantly improve their attitudinal tendency toward solving problems (Liu et al., 2020 ). Similar to how collaborative problem-solving influences attitudinal tendency, attitudinal tendency impacts cognitive skill when attempting to solve a problem (Liu et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ), and stronger attitudinal tendencies are associated with improved learning achievement and cognitive ability in students (Sison, 2008 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). It can be seen that the two specific dimensions of critical thinking as well as critical thinking as a whole are affected by collaborative problem-solving, and this study illuminates the nuanced links between cognitive skills and attitudinal tendencies with regard to these two dimensions of critical thinking. To fully develop students’ capacity for critical thinking, future empirical research should pay closer attention to cognitive skills.

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

In order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking, exploring possible moderating effects that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis. The findings show that the moderating factors, such as the teaching type, learning stage, group size, learning scaffold, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, could all support the cultivation of collaborative problem-solving in critical thinking. Among them, the effect size differences between the learning stage and measuring tool are not significant, which does not explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

In terms of the learning stage, various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively without significant intergroup differences, indicating that we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking.

Although high education accounts for 70.89% of all empirical studies performed by researchers, high school may be the appropriate learning stage to foster students’ critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving since it has the largest overall effect size. This phenomenon may be related to student’s cognitive development, which needs to be further studied in follow-up research.

With regard to teaching type, mixed course teaching may be the best teaching method to cultivate students’ critical thinking. Relevant studies have shown that in the actual teaching process if students are trained in thinking methods alone, the methods they learn are isolated and divorced from subject knowledge, which is not conducive to their transfer of thinking methods; therefore, if students’ thinking is trained only in subject teaching without systematic method training, it is challenging to apply to real-world circumstances (Ruggiero, 2012 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Teaching critical thinking as mixed course teaching in parallel to other subject teachings can achieve the best effect on learners’ critical thinking, and explicit critical thinking instruction is more effective than less explicit critical thinking instruction (Bensley and Spero, 2014 ).

In terms of the intervention duration, with longer intervention times, the overall effect size shows an upward tendency. Thus, the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated. Critical thinking, as a key competency for students in the 21st century, is difficult to get a meaningful improvement in a brief intervention duration. Instead, it could be developed over a lengthy period of time through consistent teaching and the progressive accumulation of knowledge (Halpern, 2001 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Therefore, future empirical studies ought to take these restrictions into account throughout a longer period of critical thinking instruction.

With regard to group size, a group size of 2–3 persons has the highest effect size, and the comprehensive effect size decreases with increasing group size in general. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a group composed of two to four members is most appropriate for collaborative learning (Schellens and Valcke, 2006 ). However, the meta-analysis results also indicate that once the group size exceeds 7 people, small groups cannot produce better interaction and performance than large groups. This may be because the learning scaffolds of technique support, resource support, and teacher support improve the frequency and effectiveness of interaction among group members, and a collaborative group with more members may increase the diversity of views, which is helpful to cultivate critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

With regard to the learning scaffold, the three different kinds of learning scaffolds can all enhance critical thinking. Among them, the teacher-supported learning scaffold has the largest overall effect size, demonstrating the interdependence of effective learning scaffolds and collaborative problem-solving. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a successful strategy is to encourage learners to collaborate, come up with solutions, and develop critical thinking skills by using learning scaffolds (Reiser, 2004 ; Xu et al., 2022 ); learning scaffolds can lower task complexity and unpleasant feelings while also enticing students to engage in learning activities (Wood et al., 2006 ); learning scaffolds are designed to assist students in using learning approaches more successfully to adapt the collaborative problem-solving process, and the teacher-supported learning scaffolds have the greatest influence on critical thinking in this process because they are more targeted, informative, and timely (Xu et al., 2022 ).

With respect to the measuring tool, despite the fact that standardized measurement tools (such as the WGCTA, CCTT, and CCTST) have been acknowledged as trustworthy and effective by worldwide experts, only 54.43% of the research included in this meta-analysis adopted them for assessment, and the results indicated no intergroup differences. These results suggest that not all teaching circumstances are appropriate for measuring critical thinking using standardized measurement tools. “The measuring tools for measuring thinking ability have limits in assessing learners in educational situations and should be adapted appropriately to accurately assess the changes in learners’ critical thinking.”, according to Simpson and Courtney ( 2002 , p. 91). As a result, in order to more fully and precisely gauge how learners’ critical thinking has evolved, we must properly modify standardized measuring tools based on collaborative problem-solving learning contexts.

With regard to the subject area, the comprehensive effect size of science departments (e.g., mathematics, science, medical science) is larger than that of language arts and social sciences. Some recent international education reforms have noted that critical thinking is a basic part of scientific literacy. Students with scientific literacy can prove the rationality of their judgment according to accurate evidence and reasonable standards when they face challenges or poorly structured problems (Kyndt et al., 2013 ), which makes critical thinking crucial for developing scientific understanding and applying this understanding to practical problem solving for problems related to science, technology, and society (Yore et al., 2007 ).

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Other than those stated in the discussion above, the following suggestions are offered for critical thinking instruction utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

First, teachers should put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, to design real problems based on collaborative situations. This meta-analysis provides evidence to support the view that collaborative problem-solving has a strong synergistic effect on promoting students’ critical thinking. Asking questions about real situations and allowing learners to take part in critical discussions on real problems during class instruction are key ways to teach critical thinking rather than simply reading speculative articles without practice (Mulnix, 2012 ). Furthermore, the improvement of students’ critical thinking is realized through cognitive conflict with other learners in the problem situation (Yang et al., 2008 ). Consequently, it is essential for teachers to put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, and design real problems and encourage students to discuss, negotiate, and argue based on collaborative problem-solving situations.

Second, teachers should design and implement mixed courses to cultivate learners’ critical thinking, utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving. Critical thinking can be taught through curriculum instruction (Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), with the goal of cultivating learners’ critical thinking for flexible transfer and application in real problem-solving situations. This meta-analysis shows that mixed course teaching has a highly substantial impact on the cultivation and promotion of learners’ critical thinking. Therefore, teachers should design and implement mixed course teaching with real collaborative problem-solving situations in combination with the knowledge content of specific disciplines in conventional teaching, teach methods and strategies of critical thinking based on poorly structured problems to help students master critical thinking, and provide practical activities in which students can interact with each other to develop knowledge construction and critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Third, teachers should be more trained in critical thinking, particularly preservice teachers, and they also should be conscious of the ways in which teachers’ support for learning scaffolds can promote critical thinking. The learning scaffold supported by teachers had the greatest impact on learners’ critical thinking, in addition to being more directive, targeted, and timely (Wood et al., 2006 ). Critical thinking can only be effectively taught when teachers recognize the significance of critical thinking for students’ growth and use the proper approaches while designing instructional activities (Forawi, 2016 ). Therefore, with the intention of enabling teachers to create learning scaffolds to cultivate learners’ critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem solving, it is essential to concentrate on the teacher-supported learning scaffolds and enhance the instruction for teaching critical thinking to teachers, especially preservice teachers.

Implications and limitations

There are certain limitations in this meta-analysis, but future research can correct them. First, the search languages were restricted to English and Chinese, so it is possible that pertinent studies that were written in other languages were overlooked, resulting in an inadequate number of articles for review. Second, these data provided by the included studies are partially missing, such as whether teachers were trained in the theory and practice of critical thinking, the average age and gender of learners, and the differences in critical thinking among learners of various ages and genders. Third, as is typical for review articles, more studies were released while this meta-analysis was being done; therefore, it had a time limit. With the development of relevant research, future studies focusing on these issues are highly relevant and needed.

Conclusions

The subject of the magnitude of collaborative problem-solving’s impact on fostering students’ critical thinking, which received scant attention from other studies, was successfully addressed by this study. The question of the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking was addressed in this study, which addressed a topic that had gotten little attention in earlier research. The following conclusions can be made:

Regarding the results obtained, collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster learners’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z  = 12.78, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]). With respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving can significantly and effectively improve students’ attitudinal tendency, and the comprehensive effect is significant (ES = 1.17, z  = 7.62, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z  = 11.55, P  < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

As demonstrated by both the results and the discussion, there are varying degrees of beneficial effects on students’ critical thinking from all seven moderating factors, which were found across 36 studies. In this context, the teaching type (chi 2  = 7.20, P  < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2  = 12.18, P  < 0.01), subject area (chi 2  = 13.36, P  < 0.05), group size (chi 2  = 8.77, P  < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2  = 9.03, P  < 0.01) all have a positive impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. Since the learning stage (chi 2  = 3.15, P  = 0.21 > 0.05) and measuring tools (chi 2  = 0.08, P  = 0.78 > 0.05) did not demonstrate any significant intergroup differences, we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included within the article and its supplementary information files, and the supplementary information files are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IPFJO6 .

Bensley DA, Spero RA (2014) Improving critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive monitoring through direct infusion. Think Skills Creat 12:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.001

Article   Google Scholar  

Castle A (2009) Defining and assessing critical thinking skills for student radiographers. Radiography 15(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2007.10.007

Chen XD (2013) An empirical study on the influence of PBL teaching model on critical thinking ability of non-English majors. J PLA Foreign Lang College 36 (04):68–72

Google Scholar  

Cohen A (1992) Antecedents of organizational commitment across occupational groups: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130602

Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: a step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, London, England

Cindy HS (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 51(1):31–39

Duch BJ, Gron SD, Allen DE (2001) The power of problem-based learning: a practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline. Stylus Educ Sci 2:190–198

Ennis RH (1989) Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res 18(3):4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004

Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Eric document reproduction service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed315423

Facione PA, Facione NC (1992) The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the CCTDI test manual. California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Forawi SA (2016) Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Think Skills Creat 20:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005

Halpern DF (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J Gen Educ 50(4):270–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/27797889

Hu WP, Liu J (2015) Cultivation of pupils’ thinking ability: a five-year follow-up study. Psychol Behav Res 13(05):648–654. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2015.05.010

Huber K (2016) Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 86(2):431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Kek MYCA, Huijser H (2011) The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. High Educ Res Dev 30(3):329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074

Kuncel NR (2011) Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). National Research Council, Washington, DC

Kyndt E, Raes E, Lismont B, Timmers F, Cascallar E, Dochy F (2013) A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educ Res Rev 10(2):133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Leng J, Lu XX (2020) Is critical thinking really teachable?—A meta-analysis based on 79 experimental or quasi experimental studies. Open Educ Res 26(06):110–118. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2020.06.011

Liang YZ, Zhu K, Zhao CL (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ Res 38(10):87–92. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2017.10.014

Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical meta-analysis. International Educational and Professional, London, pp. 92–160

Liu Z, Wu W, Jiang Q (2020) A study on the influence of problem based learning on college students’ critical thinking-based on a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Explor High Educ 03:43–49

Morris SB (2008) Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organ Res Methods 11(2):364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Mulnix JW (2012) Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educ Philos Theory 44(5):464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Naber J, Wyatt TH (2014) The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 34(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002

National Research Council (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Niu L, Behar HLS, Garvan CW (2013) Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 9(12):114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Peng ZM, Deng L (2017) Towards the core of education reform: cultivating critical thinking skills as the core of skills in the 21st century. Res Educ Dev 24:57–63. https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2017.24.011

Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13(3):273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2

Ruggiero VR (2012) The art of thinking: a guide to critical and creative thought, 4th edn. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

Schellens T, Valcke M (2006) Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput Educ 46(4):349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.010

Sendag S, Odabasi HF (2009) Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 53(1):132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008

Sison R (2008) Investigating Pair Programming in a Software Engineering Course in an Asian Setting. 2008 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2008.61

Simpson E, Courtney M (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Mary Courtney 8(2):89–98

Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S (2006) Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? Publication bias in meta-analysis. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, pp. 261–286

Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K (2010) A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med Educ 40(6):547–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x

Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G (2006) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2):89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Wei T, Hong S (2022) The meaning and realization of teachable critical thinking. Educ Theory Practice 10:51–57

Xu EW, Wang W, Wang QX (2022) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2

Yang YC, Newby T, Bill R (2008) Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: a quasi-experimental study on promoting learners’ critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 50(4):1572–1585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.006

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007) The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 5(4):559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Zhang T, Zhang S, Gao QQ, Wang JH (2022) Research on the development of learners’ critical thinking in online peer review. Audio Visual Educ Res 6:53–60. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2022.06.08

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the graduate scientific research and innovation project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region named “Research on in-depth learning of high school information technology courses for the cultivation of computing thinking” (No. XJ2022G190) and the independent innovation fund project for doctoral students of the College of Educational Science of Xinjiang Normal University named “Research on project-based teaching of high school information technology courses from the perspective of discipline core literacy” (No. XJNUJKYA2003).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science, Xinjiang Normal University, 830017, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Enwei Xu, Wei Wang & Qingxia Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Enwei Xu or Wei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary tables, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Xu, E., Wang, W. & Wang, Q. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Download citation

Received : 07 August 2022

Accepted : 04 January 2023

Published : 11 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Impacts of online collaborative learning on students’ intercultural communication apprehension and intercultural communicative competence.

  • Hoa Thi Hoang Chau
  • Hung Phu Bui
  • Quynh Thi Huong Dinh

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis

Sustainable electricity generation and farm-grid utilization from photovoltaic aquaculture: a bibliometric analysis.

  • A. A. Amusa
  • M. Alhassan

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2024)

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

collaborative problem solving handout

LIVES IN THE BALANCE

DIFFERENT LENSES, DIFFERENT PRACTICES, AND DIFFERENT OUTCOMES

Help kids solve the problems that are causing their concerning behavior…without shame, blame, or conflict.

WHERE COMPASSION AND SCIENCE INTERSECT

Collaborative & Proactive Solutions (CPS) is the evidence-based, trauma-informed, neurodiversity affirming model of care that helps caregivers focus on identifying the problems that are causing concerning behaviors in kids and solving those problems collaboratively and proactively. The model is a departure from approaches emphasizing the use of consequences to modify concerning behaviors. In families, general and special education schools, inpatient psychiatry units, and residential and juvenile detention facilities, the CPS model has a track record of dramatically improving behavior and dramatically reducing or eliminating discipline referrals, detentions, suspensions, restraints, and seclusions. The CPS model is non-punitive, non-exclusionary, trauma-informed, transdiagnostic, and transcultural.

And this website is the hub of free resources on the CPS model.

Young girl smiling

WHAT YOU NEED TO GIVE KIDS WHAT THEY NEED

Parents & families, educators & schools, pediatricians & family physicians.

facebook

15 Main Street, Suite 200, Freeport, Maine 04032

Lives In the Balance All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy Disclaimer Gift Acceptance Policy

Sign up for our Newsletter CPS Methodology Podcasts about the CPS Model Connect with our Community Research

Why We’re Here Meet the Team Our Board of Directors Higher Ed Advisory Board

Get in Touch Make a Donation

  • PARENTS & FAMILIES
  • EDUCATORS & SCHOOLS
  • PEDIATRICIANS & FAMILY PHYSICIANS
  • CPS WITH YOUNG KIDS
  • WORKSHOPS & TRAININGS
  • CPS PAPERWORK
  • WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?
  • PUBLIC AWARENESS
  • SCHOLARSHIPS
  • BECOME AN ADVOCATOR
  • RESOURCES FOR ADVOCATORS
  • TAKE ACTION

Utah State University

Search Utah State University:

Collaborative learning.

Collaborative learning is a broad strategy that can range from students working in pairs to working in groups of various sizes. The concept is based in sociocultural learning theory and constructivism and focuses on how people learn within social interactions by respecting knowledge held within the group (Ertmer & Newby, 2018; Panitz, 1999; Yang, 2023). Students can use the perspectives of other students and the shared experience of learning together to improve critical thinking skills (Kaddoura, 2013), experience deeper learning (Sembert et al., 2021), and connecting by negotiating boundaries of knowledge with peers (Yang, 2023).

On This Page

Alternative Plans

Collaborative problem solving, think-pair-share, considerations.

The purpose of collaborative learning is to allow students to:

  • build knowledge within social groups through activities, 
  • test out that understanding with the whole class as groups share what they have learned with each other, 
  • then confirm the accuracy of their knowledge against the broader knowledge of the field by getting feedback from the instructor. (Bruffee, 1995)

Collaborative learning is not just for task division or coming to agreement, but enables students to “develop, compare, and understand multiple perspectives on an issue” (Karagiorgi & Symeou, 2011, p. 21). The classroom culture should enable groups to develop theories and refine these theories together.

Individual performance can put a lot of undo pressure on students, which is not helpful to maximize learning potential. By focusing on achieving a common goal, students are able to participate in socialization (McKeachie & Svinicki, 2006, p. 78). Students are more likely to communicate a lack of understanding to a peer than to an instructor (McKeachie & Svinicki, 2006).

In collaborative learning “group rewards (instead of individual rewards) and individual accountability (achieved by task specialization and division of labor) are critical to improving students’ achievement.” (Slavin, 1983 as referenced in Yang, 2023, p. 723)

Students hands placing painters tape on the ground in a geometric shape.

There is distinction made in the literature between the processes of collaborative learning and cooperative learning (Bruffee, 1995; Panitz, 1999; Yang, 2023) that discusses the purpose of the interaction and distinguishes the process of learning from the product created because of working with members of a group. However, the terms have more similarities than differences. For brevity, the two terms are used interchangeably here.

Types of Collaborative Learning Activities

As previously mentioned, Collaborative Learning is a broad strategy that has a broad range of implementation strategies. Below explain some of these strategies.

Good collaborative learning tasks encourage individuals within groups to bring compelling ideas to the group to help other members of the group think about the task differently. For example, the task might be to come up with three alternative plans, pick the best, and describe the reasoning behind why the selection is preferable within the defined context. (Bruffee, 1995)

With this method the instructor provides a loosly structured problem to the student groups and the students decide how they are going to proceed in solving the problem. The following criteria must be present:

  • a novel problem to be solved (i.e., as opposed to completing a routine task)
  • objective accountability(i.e., the quality of the solution is visible to team members),
  • differentiation of roles (i.e., team members complete different tasks), and 
  • interdependency (i.e., a single person cannot solve the problem alone) (Graesser et al., 2018, p. 60)

These requirements can quite easily be met for various disciplines and skill levels.

Another well documented strategy Think-Pair-Share was developed by Dr. Frank Lyman in 1981. The strategy is to have students 1) reflect on a question or idea presented in class, 2) discuss their ideas with someone else in the class, then 3) share their own —more refined— thoughts or their peer’s thoughts with the rest of the class. In Sembert et al. (2021) Dr. Lyman provides insight into how he came up with the idea when observing a student teacher. The student teacher was having problems with the class participation with the model where only one person could talk at a time. Lyman connected the need for students to have a pause to collect their thoughts before sharing with a need for more students to be able to participate. So, he grouped the students together to share with each other before sharing their thoughts with the whole class. The Think-Pair-Share method was born.

Teaching Format Modifications

At Utah State University, courses can be taught in one of five different delivery formats, each having their own unique challenges and benefits. Below expounds on how to modify Collaborative Learning Techniques for some of those teaching formats that might not already be explicitly obvious.

Student raising their hand in a classroom.

Collaborative learning activities are possible in Connect and Online courses, but they require some technological mediation. For the Think-Pair-Share method, that might look something like the following:

Assign students to work with a buddy for the semester. Pairing each student with someone who is different from them can make it possible for the pair to have varying perspectives for discussion. When students work with the same partner for the duration of the course it gives them a chance to get to know each other. Allow them to pick with their partner what format of communication will work best for them (i.e. phone call, text messaging, instant messaging app, etc.). In each class period, provide at least one opportunity for students to stop and think, then connect with their buddy, then share their group perspectives with the class.

Sembert et al. (2021) used the Think-Pair-Share approach in a virtual course with live instruction via online video conferencing. Students were assigned a buddy based on their answers to a pre-course “All About Me” survey to maximize diversity, where possible. Buddies reported sharing insights with each other, asking for clarification, or getting professional support. Two of the students shared their experience in the class by noting feelings of socialization, camaraderie, and safety within the virtual environment. One of the students expressed a desire to have all his instructors use the Think-Pair-Share or buddy system.

Working in collaborative groups introduces the possibilities that students might not manage time efficiently and get off task, some students in the group may choose not participate fully or may not be able to do so for various reasons (a.k.a. “social loafing”), and lack of social skills might result in conflict or disruption to group productivity (Graesser et al., 2018, p. 62). Some structural or task ground rules and instructor coaching can help to alleviate these issues.

Collaborative inhibition is when the group that has collaborated doesn’t do as well on a recall task as a group who hasn’t worked together. Graesser et al. (2018) referenced a couple of studies (Andersson, Hitch, & Meudell, 2006; Weldon & Bellinger, 1997) which have identified this effect.

Ideas for additional collaborative learning activities can be found on the USU Teach website:

  • Think-Pair-Share (Kaddoura, 2013; Sembert et al., 2021)
  • Three-Step Interview (Yang, 2023)
  • Case Study (Cornell University Center for Teaching Innovation, 2024)
  • Team-Based Learning (Cornell University Center for Teaching Innovation, 2024)
  • Jigsaw (strategy first developed by Elliot Aronson (McKeachie & Svinicki, 2006)
  • Fishbowl Debate (Cornell University Center for Teaching Innovation, 2024)

Bruffee, K. A. (1995). Sharing Our Toys: Cooperative Learning Versus Collaborative Learning. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 27(1), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.1995.9937722

Cornell University Center for Teaching Innovation. (2024). Examples of Collaborative Learning or Group Work Activities. https://teaching.cornell.edu/resource/examples-collaborative-learning-or-group-work-activities

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. (2018). Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Constructivism: Comparing Critical Features From an Instructional Design Perspective. In R. E. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology (1st ed.). Available at https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations

Graesser, A. C., Fiore, S. M., Greiff, S., Andrews-Todd, J., Foltz, P. W., & Hesse, F. W. (2018). Advancing the Science of Collaborative Problem Solving. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 19(2), 59–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100618808244

Kaddoura, M. (2013). Think pair share: A teaching learning strategy to enhance students’ critical thinking. Educational Research Quarterly, 36(4), 3–24.

Karagiorgi, Y., & Symeou, L. (2011). Translating Constructivism into Instructional Design: Potential and Limitations.

McKeachie, W. J., & Svinicki, M. (2006). McKeachie’s Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and University Teachers (Twelfth Edition). Houghton Mifflin Company.

Panitz, T. (1999, December). Collaborative versus Cooperative Learning. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED448443

Sembert, P. J., Vermette, P. J., Lyman, F., Bardsley, M. E., & Snell, C. (2021). Think-Pair-Share as a Springboard for Study Buddies in a Virtual Environment. Excelsior: Leadership in Teaching and Learning, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.14305/jn.19440413.2021.14.1.04

Yang, X. (2023). A Historical Review of Collaborative Learning and Cooperative Learning. TechTrends, 67(4), 718–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00823-9

loading

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Article • 0 min read

Team Building Exercises – Problem Solving and Decision Making

Fun ways to turn problems into opportunities.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

collaborative problem solving handout

Whether there's a complex project looming or your team members just want to get better at dealing with day-to-day issues, your people can achieve much more when they solve problems and make decisions together.

By developing their problem-solving skills, you can improve their ability to get to the bottom of complex situations. And by refining their decision-making skills, you can help them work together maturely, use different thinking styles, and commit collectively to decisions.

In this article, we'll look at three team-building exercises that you can use to improve problem solving and decision making in a new or established team.

Exercises to Build Decision-Making and Problem-Solving Skills

Use the following exercises to help your team members solve problems and make decisions together more effectively.

Exercise 1: Lost at Sea*

In this activity, participants must pretend that they've been shipwrecked and are stranded in a lifeboat. Each team has a box of matches, and a number of items that they've salvaged from the sinking ship. Members must agree which items are most important for their survival.

Download and print our team-building exercises worksheet to help you with this exercise.

This activity builds problem-solving skills as team members analyze information, negotiate and cooperate with one another. It also encourages them to listen and to think about the way they make decisions.

What You'll Need

  • Up to five people in each group.
  • A large, private room.
  • A "lost at sea" ranking chart for each team member. This should comprise six columns. The first simply lists each item (see below). The second is empty so that each team member can rank the items. The third is for group rankings. The fourth is for the "correct" rankings, which are revealed at the end of the exercise. And the fifth and sixth are for the team to enter the difference between their individual and correct score, and the team and correct rankings, respectively.
  • The items to be ranked are: a mosquito net, a can of petrol, a water container, a shaving mirror, a sextant, emergency rations, a sea chart, a floating seat or cushion, a rope, some chocolate bars, a waterproof sheet, a fishing rod, shark repellent, a bottle of rum, and a VHF radio. These can be listed in the ranking chart or displayed on a whiteboard, or both.
  • The experience can be made more fun by having some lost-at-sea props in the room.

Flexible, but normally between 25 and 40 minutes.

Instructions

  • Divide participants into their teams, and provide everyone with a ranking sheet.
  • Ask team members to take 10 minutes on their own to rank the items in order of importance. They should do this in the second column of their sheet.
  • Give the teams a further 10 minutes to confer and decide on their group rankings. Once agreed, they should list them in the third column of their sheets.
  • Ask each group to compare their individual rankings with their collective ones, and consider why any scores differ. Did anyone change their mind about their own rankings during the team discussions? How much were people influenced by the group conversation?
  • Now read out the "correct" order, collated by the experts at the US Coast Guard (from most to least important): - Shaving mirror. (One of your most powerful tools, because you can use it to signal your location by reflecting the sun.) - Can of petrol. (Again, potentially vital for signaling as petrol floats on water and can be lit by your matches.) - Water container. (Essential for collecting water to restore your lost fluids.) -Emergency rations. (Valuable for basic food intake.) - Plastic sheet. (Could be used for shelter, or to collect rainwater.) -Chocolate bars. (A handy food supply.) - Fishing rod. (Potentially useful, but there is no guarantee that you're able to catch fish. Could also feasibly double as a tent pole.) - Rope. (Handy for tying equipment together, but not necessarily vital for survival.) - Floating seat or cushion. (Useful as a life preserver.) - Shark repellent. (Potentially important when in the water.) - Bottle of rum. (Could be useful as an antiseptic for treating injuries, but will only dehydrate you if you drink it.) - Radio. (Chances are that you're out of range of any signal, anyway.) - Sea chart. (Worthless without navigational equipment.) - Mosquito net. (Assuming that you've been shipwrecked in the Atlantic, where there are no mosquitoes, this is pretty much useless.) - Sextant. (Impractical without relevant tables or a chronometer.)

Advice for the Facilitator

The ideal scenario is for teams to arrive at a consensus decision where everyone's opinion is heard. However, that doesn't always happen naturally: assertive people tend to get the most attention. Less forthright team members can often feel intimidated and don't always speak up, particularly when their ideas are different from the popular view. Where discussions are one-sided, draw quieter people in so that everyone is involved, but explain why you're doing this, so that people learn from it.

You can use the Stepladder Technique when team discussion is unbalanced. Here, ask each team member to think about the problem individually and, one at a time, introduce new ideas to an appointed group leader – without knowing what ideas have already been discussed. After the first two people present their ideas, they discuss them together. Then the leader adds a third person, who presents his or her ideas before hearing the previous input. This cycle of presentation and discussion continues until the whole team has had a chance to voice their opinions.

After everyone has finished the exercise, invite your teams to evaluate the process to draw out their experiences. For example, ask them what the main differences between individual, team and official rankings were, and why. This will provoke discussion about how teams arrive at decisions, which will make people think about the skills they must use in future team scenarios, such as listening , negotiating and decision-making skills, as well as creativity skills for thinking "outside the box."

A common issue that arises in team decision making is groupthink . This can happen when a group places a desire for mutual harmony above a desire to reach the right decision, which prevents people from fully exploring alternative solutions.

If there are frequent unanimous decisions in any of your exercises, groupthink may be an issue. Suggest that teams investigate new ways to encourage members to discuss their views, or to share them anonymously.

Exercise 2: The Great Egg Drop*

In this classic (though sometimes messy!) game, teams must work together to build a container to protect an egg, which is dropped from a height. Before the egg drop, groups must deliver presentations on their solutions, how they arrived at them, and why they believe they will succeed.

This fun game develops problem-solving and decision-making skills. Team members have to choose the best course of action through negotiation and creative thinking.

  • Ideally at least six people in each team.
  • Raw eggs – one for each group, plus some reserves in case of accidents!
  • Materials for creating the packaging, such as cardboard, tape, elastic bands, plastic bottles, plastic bags, straws, and scissors.
  • Aprons to protect clothes, paper towels for cleaning up, and paper table cloths, if necessary.
  • Somewhere – ideally outside – that you can drop the eggs from. (If there is nowhere appropriate, you could use a step ladder or equivalent.)
  • Around 15 to 30 minutes to create the packages.
  • Approximately 15 minutes to prepare a one-minute presentation.
  • Enough time for the presentations and feedback (this will depend on the number of teams).
  • Time to demonstrate the egg "flight."
  • Put people into teams, and ask each to build a package that can protect an egg dropped from a specified height (say, two-and-a-half meters) with the provided materials.
  • Each team must agree on a nominated speaker, or speakers, for their presentation.
  • Once all teams have presented, they must drop their eggs, assess whether the eggs have survived intact, and discuss what they have learned.

When teams are making their decisions, the more good options they consider, the more effective their final decision is likely to be. Encourage your groups to look at the situation from different angles, so that they make the best decision possible. If people are struggling, get them to brainstorm – this is probably the most popular method of generating ideas within a team.

Ask the teams to explore how they arrived at their decisions, to get them thinking about how to improve this process in the future. You can ask them questions such as:

  • Did the groups take a vote, or were members swayed by one dominant individual?
  • How did the teams decide to divide up responsibilities? Was it based on people's expertise or experience?
  • Did everyone do the job they volunteered for?
  • Was there a person who assumed the role of "leader"?
  • How did team members create and deliver the presentation, and was this an individual or group effort?

Exercise 3: Create Your Own*

In this exercise, teams must create their own, brand new, problem-solving activity.

This game encourages participants to think about the problem-solving process. It builds skills such as creativity, negotiation and decision making, as well as communication and time management. After the activity, teams should be better equipped to work together, and to think on their feet.

  • Ideally four or five people in each team.
  • Paper, pens and flip charts.

Around one hour.

  • As the participants arrive, you announce that, rather than spending an hour on a problem-solving team-building activity, they must design an original one of their own.
  • Divide participants into teams and tell them that they have to create a new problem-solving team-building activity that will work well in their organization. The activity must not be one that they have already participated in or heard of.
  • After an hour, each team must present their new activity to everyone else, and outline its key benefits.

There are four basic steps in problem solving : defining the problem, generating solutions, evaluating and selecting solutions, and implementing solutions. Help your team to think creatively at each stage by getting them to consider a wide range of options. If ideas run dry, introduce an alternative brainstorming technique, such as brainwriting . This allows your people to develop one others' ideas, while everyone has an equal chance to contribute.

After the presentations, encourage teams to discuss the different decision-making processes they followed. You might ask them how they communicated and managed their time . Another question could be about how they kept their discussion focused. And to round up, you might ask them whether they would have changed their approach after hearing the other teams' presentations.

Successful decision making and problem solving are at the heart of all effective teams. While teams are ultimately led by their managers, the most effective ones foster these skills at all levels.

The exercises in this article show how you can encourage teams to develop their creative thinking, leadership , and communication skills , while building group cooperation and consensus.

* Original source unknown. Please let us know if you know the original source.

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

Pdca (plan do check act).

Continually Improving, in a Methodical Way

The Plan-Do-Check-Act Process

How to Minimize Risk

Add comment

Comments (0)

Be the first to comment!

collaborative problem solving handout

Gain essential management and leadership skills

Busy schedule? No problem. Learn anytime, anywhere. 

Subscribe to unlimited access to meticulously researched, evidence-based resources.

Join today and take advantage of our 30% offer, available until May 31st .

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Member Extras

Most Popular

Latest Updates

Article a0pows5

Winning Body Language

Article andjil2

Business Stripped Bare

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

Nine ways to get the best from x (twitter).

Growing Your Business Quickly and Safely on Social Media

Managing Your Emotions at Work

Controlling Your Feelings... Before They Control You

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Pain points podcast - how do you thrive in a vuca world.

When Life Is Volatile, Unstable, Complex, Ambiguous

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Team Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Member Podcast

Logo

  • Collaborative Problem Solving in Schools »

Collaborative Problem Solving in Schools

Collaborative Problem Solving ® (CPS) is an evidence-based, trauma-informed practice that helps students meet expectations, reduces concerning behavior, builds students’ skills, and strengthens their relationships with educators.

Collaborative Problem Solving is designed to meet the needs of all children, including those with social, emotional, and behavioral challenges. It promotes the understanding that students who have trouble meeting expectations or managing their behavior lack the skill—not the will—to do so. These students struggle with skills related to problem-solving, flexibility, and frustration tolerance. Collaborative Problem Solving has been shown to help build these skills.

Collaborative Problem Solving avoids using power, control, and motivational procedures. Instead, it focuses on collaborating with students to solve the problems leading to them not meeting expectations and displaying concerning behavior. This trauma-informed approach provides staff with actionable strategies for trauma-sensitive education and aims to mitigate implicit bias’s impact on school discipline . It integrates with MTSS frameworks, PBIS, restorative practices, and SEL approaches, such as RULER. Collaborative Problem Solving reduces challenging behavior and teacher stress while building future-ready skills and relationships between educators and students.

Transform School Discipline

Traditional school discipline is broken, it doesn’t result in improved behavior or improved relationships between educators and students. In addition, it has been shown to be disproportionately applied to students of color. The Collaborative Problem Solving approach is an equitable and effective form of relational discipline that reduces concerning behavior and teacher stress while building skills and relationships between educators and students. Learn more >>

A Client’s Story

CPS SEL

Collaborative Problem Solving and SEL

Collaborative Problem Solving aligns with CASEL’s five core competencies by building relationships between teachers and students using everyday situations. Students develop the skills they need to prepare for the real world, including problem-solving, collaboration and communication, flexibility, perspective-taking, and empathy. Collaborative Problem Solving makes social-emotional learning actionable.

Collaborative Problem Solving and MTSS

The Collaborative Problem Solving approach integrates with Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) in educational settings. CPS benefits all students and can be implemented across the three tiers of support within an MTSS framework to effectively identify and meet the diverse social emotional and behavioral needs of students in schools. Learn More >>

CPS and MTSS

The Results

Our research has shown that the Collaborative Problem Solving approach helps kids and adults build crucial social-emotional skills and leads to dramatic decreases in behavior problems across various settings. Results in schools include remarkable reductions in time spent out of class, detentions, suspensions, injuries, teacher stress, and alternative placements as well as increases in emotional safety, attendance, academic growth, and family participation.

Academic growth

Educators, join us in this introductory course and develop your behavioral growth mindset!

This 2-hour, self-paced course introduces the principles of Collaborative Problem Solving ®  while outlining how the approach is uniquely suited to the needs of today's educators and students. Tuition: $39 Enroll Now

Bring CPS to Your School

We can help you bring a more accurate, compassionate, and effective approach to working with children to your school or district.

What Our Clients Say

Education insights, corporal punishment ban in new york sparks awareness of practice, to fix students’ bad behavior, stop punishing them, behaviors charts: helpful or harmful, bringing collaborative problem solving to marshalltown, ia community school district, the benefits of changing school discipline, eliminating the school-to-prison pipeline, ending restraint and seclusion in schools: podcast, a skill-building approach to reducing students’ anxiety and challenging behavior, the school discipline fix book club, what can we do about post-pandemic school violence, sos: our schools are in crisis and we need to act now, talking to kids about the tiktok bathroom destruction challenge, north dakota governor’s summit on innovative education 2021, kids of color suffer from both explicit and implicit bias, school discipline is trauma-insensitive and trauma-uninformed, privacy overview.

4 Conflict Resolution Worksheets for Your Practice

Conflict Resolution Worksheets

As a therapist, counselor, or coach, your main job is to help clients identify the situations that are troubling them – the conflicts in their lives – and guide them through to win–win solutions.

Mutually satisfying outcomes can prevent anger, anxiety, and depression, and enable individuals, couples, and families to live together productively and in peace (Christensen & Heavey, 1999; Cummings, Koss, & Davies, 2015).

In this article, we’ll share some powerful conflict resolution worksheets that can teach parties the pathways to win–win outcomes, converting conflict into shared problem solving. Participants feel like they are sitting on the same side of the table, working together against the problem, instead of against each other.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Positive Communication Exercises (PDF) for free . These science-based tools will help you and those you work with build better social skills and better connect with others.

This Article Contains:

2 useful conflict resolution worksheets, 4 tools for resolving conflicts at work, worksheets for student conflicts, 2 best worksheets for couples’ conflicts, teaching conflict resolution: 4 lesson plans, 5 positivepsychology.com toolkit resources, a take-home message.

Conflict – problems, issues, troubles, dilemmas, tough decisions, etc. – generally emerge in one or more of the following three areas (adapted from Kellermann, 1996):

  • Intrapsychic conflicts – pulls and tugs within a person’s array of feelings, desires, thoughts, fears, and actions
  • Interpersonal or intergroup conflicts – situations in which two or more preferred action plans seem to be incompatible
  • Situational conflicts – situations in which adverse circumstances such as illness, financial difficulties, or other factors collide with each other or with what participants want

Differences can quickly spark arguments when parties believe that the outcome will result in either winning or losing. That is why the word “conflict” usually suggests fighting. These worksheets, by contrast, teach pathways to win–win outcomes.

By guiding both conflict resolution and cooperative problem solving in the same process, solution building for any decision, issue, or dilemma becomes a combined effort. The idea of winning versus losing is removed, and a win–win outcome negates previous conflicts.

Win–Win Waltz Worksheet

The process that leads to win–win outcomes is referred to as the win–win waltz because the process involves three essential steps.

The Win–Win Waltz Worksheet explains the key terms, core concepts, and essential ingredients for using the exercise successfully.

1. Knowing when to use the win–win waltz

The win–win waltz guides the way to cooperative solution building in situations when there seems to be conflict with underlying or overt tension and a feeling that two sides feel in opposition.

Also, the win–win waltz guides the process in any situation that calls for problem solving.

In both instances, the tone needs to stay calm and cooperative. There needs to be an awareness of the dilemma that participants need to solve and a willingness on both sides to seek a solution that will be responsive to the concerns of all parties.

2. Core concepts: solutions versus underlying concerns

Solutions are potential plans of action.

Concerns , by contrast, are the factors to which the solution needs to be responsive.

For instance, a problem/conflict is that I am hungry, but at the same time, I don’t want to eat – two alternative and seemingly opposed courses of action.

My underlying concern might include wanting to lose weight, to alleviate my hunger, to minimize my intake of calories, and to find an immediate solution. The solution options may be to eat some yogurt, distract myself by phoning a friend, or to exercise as that too tends to alleviate feelings of hunger.

3. One list for both people’s concerns

A happy couple should have healthy conflict

That assumption differs significantly from the usual two-list way of thinking (e.g., my way versus your way or pros versus cons).

4. What if there are seemingly too many underlying concerns?

Paradoxically, the more concerns that have been identified, the more likely it becomes that the ultimate solution will be excellent, even though a long list of concerns may appear daunting.

The trick is for each participant to step back and reflect: “ Of all of these concerns, what one or two concerns are most deeply felt? ” Start the solution-building process by responding to these concerns first. Add additional elements to the solution set until all the underlying concerns have been answered.

For instance, Gil and Angela want to find a new apartment. Stepping back from their list of 20 concerns concerning what apartment to choose, they realize Angela’s primary concern is location. She wants an apartment close to her mother, while Gil’s primary concern is the price. With just two variables to attend to for starters, Angela and Gil can quickly start apartment hunting.

Once they find apartments that met their initial criteria, they add their other concerns.

5. It is for me to look at what I can do, not to tell you what to do.

Solution generating works best if each participant looks at what they can offer toward a win–win solution, and especially toward a plan of action responsive to the other person. Offering suggestions about what the other could do can undermine solution building.

collaborative problem solving handout

Download 3 Communication Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will equip you or your clients with tools to improve communication skills and enjoy more positive social interactions with others.

Download 3 Free Communication Tools Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

  • Email Address *
  • Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
  • Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

In the workplace, conflict resolution skills enable managers to keep their work environment positive.

They also enable colleagues to work together harmoniously (Johansen, 2012; Korabik, Baril, & Watson, 1993).

Whereas conflict breeds tension that erodes work quality, cooperation maximizes productivity and, at the same time, keeps employees enjoying their work.

Fortunately, the Win–Win Waltz Worksheet works wonderfully in workplace situations too.

The additional tools below also merit attention when conflicts arise in the business world.

Early intervention. It’s best to address potential tensions as soon as you become aware of them.

Participation. It is generally best to bring together all the parties involved in any given dispute and to have them learn to do the win–win waltz together.

Identify those who, even with guidance, cannot think in terms of win–win.

If one or more parties appear to be unable to look for mutually satisfying solutions, a top-down or powering-over decision may be necessary.

Some parties simply cannot get past looking out for themselves only. Others invest more in seeking to hurt the other party rather than to find benefits for both sides. They would rather create a lose–lose outcome than see the other side receive any aspect of what they want.

Keep the problem, the problem.

The vital principle comes from the work of Fisher and Ury (1991). They rightly identify that talking about people and feelings can be inappropriate in work settings.

The problem, for instance, is not that ‘she is an intrusive person.’ The problem is that roles and responsibilities may be unclear. The problem is not that ‘he is lazy.’ The problem is an unclear division of labor. The problem is not that ‘he works too slowly;’ rather, how to speed up the work process so that deadlines can be met.

14 Effective conflict resolution techniques – BRAINY DOSE

Students can benefit from using the Win–Win Waltz Worksheet when they face conflict situations with roommates, friends, and teachers.

Students also are likely to experience conflicts within their own thoughts and preferences.

For instance, these intrapsychic conflicts can arise when they want to go out with friends but also know they need to study for an exam. The win–win waltz recipe works well for any of these situations.

Worksheets to manage couple conflict

From my way , No my way , to OUR way is for practicing win–win conflict resolutions on issues that can arise at home. The worksheet is from Susan Heitler’s (2003) book The Power of Two Workbook . (Available on Amazon .)

The Anger Exit and Re-entry Worksheet offers guidance for stepping back and calming down when anger begins to emerge.

When people become angry, they cease to be able to hear each other’s concerns. They are likely to disregard all their cooperative-talking skills and instead resort to blame, criticism, and attempts to control.

In the face of irritation or anger, it is essential to have a self-calming ability as part of the conflict resolution process.

It generally is best to begin the self-calming process by stepping back or out of the anger-inducing situation. For this reason, couples need to develop mutual exit/re-entry routines.

Win win conflict resolution

In a collaborative marriage, partners respect each other’s ideas; they avoid dismissing or steamrolling over each other’s viewpoints. But what happens when couples have differing opinions regarding a future decision? Both spouses may want the decision to go their way. Fortunately, both can win.

Exercise 1: The Win-Win Waltz

One hallmark of a true partnership is the effectiveness of two people’s shared decision making.

“Effective” means their ability to make decisions that are responsive to the full range of concerns of both partners.

These steps of the win–win waltz can be used in a group to demonstrate how to make decisions about upcoming events (shared decision making) and to change things that are not working (fix-it talk). The only difference is that fix-it talk begins with two initial steps.

  • Learn the signs and costs of unilateral decision making in a partnership.
  • Learn to make shared decisions.
  • Practice division of labor decisions so that they do not keep re-occurring.
  • Identify pitfalls to avoid and keys to success.

Cue cards – Write one step each on three separate pieces of paper:

  • Express initial positions.
  • Explore underlying concerns.
  • Create win–win solutions.

Win–Win Waltz Situation Cards Win–Win Waltz Worksheet : distribute one copy to each participant.

Place the three cue cards so that they are visible to all the group members (e.g., facing the group, propped on chairs in front of the group). Spread the cards/chairs out so there is room for two people to stand next to each.

Explain that a waltz has three steps, as does collaborative problem solving, pointing to the step on each cue card as you explain it.

Walk through the following example to be sure that everyone understands the difference between concerns (fears, values, motivations) and positions and solutions (plans of action). The leader plays both Pete and Mary.

Step 1: Express initial positions.

Peter and Mary want to buy a car. Peter says, “ Let ‘s buy a Ford. ” Mary says, “ No. I want a Toyota. “

Step 2: Explore underlying concerns.

Ask the group what Peter’s concerns might be. Peter might say: “ The prices are reasonable, and the dealership is close by, so it will be easy to take care of maintenance and repairs. “

Stress that both sides need to explore their underlying concerns, and ask then for what Mary’s might be. Mary might say: “ I don’t want to have to keep taking the car back to the shop; I want as much room as we can get for passengers for our kids and their friends. “

Step 3: Create a plan of action responsive to both.

Go with the information generated by the group. Peter and Mary might say: “ Let’s get a Consumer’s Report guide to cars so we have full information on repair rates, roominess, and prices. Let’s also find out which dealers have repair facilities near us. “

Hint: Encourage thinking in terms of solution sets that are multi-piece answers.

Now, invite one couple in front of the group to try the “waltz” sequence. Use the situation of a couple deciding where to go for dinner.

Emphasize the difference between concerns and positions (which are action plans or specific solutions).

Make one list of all of their concerns and a list of three possible solutions: one partner’s idea with modifications, the other partner’s idea with modifications, and at least one new solution (possible final solution).

Invite the group to look at the difference between concerns and solutions.

Have a different couple come to the front and traverse the three steps on their own to the dilemma: “ What should we do for vacation this summer? ”

To be sure they follow the three steps, use the Win–Win Waltz Worksheet where they can write out the three steps.

Pass out additional Situation Cards and invite other couples to try the win–win waltz in front of the group.

  • Most couples have systems for making decisions together, such as taking turns on who gets their way, whoever feels most strongly about the issue gets their way, or they compromise (they both give up some). How do these three options compare to the win–win waltz?
  • What was most satisfying about this style of problem solving?
  • What will be the hardest part of actually using the win–win waltz?

Conclusions

With the win–win waltz, virtually any decision becomes easy and mutual. Both big and little choices – where to live and what to eat for lunch – become simple and shared. The more skilled a couple becomes, the faster the decision making and the more satisfied you both feel with the resulting plan of action.

Exercise 2: Win–Win Worksheet

Applying the win–win waltz successfully, even under challenging dilemmas, requires practice. It often helps to write out your process on particularly tough decisions.

Use the Win–Win Waltz Worksheet as a guide for working through the process of making collaborative decisions.

Two copies of the Win–Win Waltz Worksheet for each participant.

Couples facing each other, with some space between each couple, so that each couple will be able to work semi-privately.

  • Hand out two worksheets to each participant. Explain that one is to use now, and the second is for them to take home.
  • Ask participants to look at the worksheet. What do they notice about the boxes on the page?
  • They start with two different boxes, then merge into one list of concerns for everyone. In other words, each individual’s interests become the concern of the partnership.
  • There are four different suggestions for ways to generate solution sets. Generating multiple solution sets helps in two ways. First, it fosters creative thinking. Second, evaluating between solution set options often gives rise to identifying additional underlying concerns.
  • Have each couple work together to complete the worksheet. Suggest they pick from one of the following topics:
  • Saving for retirement
  • If you should join a new sports club (or some other organization)

How did the worksheet help to structure your decision-making process?

Using the worksheet can help keep track of the details, emphasizing that all underlying concerns are important.

Exercise 3: Traps and Tips

People sometimes say, “ I tried the win–win waltz, and it didn’t work. ” Usually, that means they fell into one of several common traps.

By contrast, if they said, “ The win–win waltz works great! ” odds are they utilized certain techniques that facilitate success.

One copy of the Traps to Avoid and Tips for Success Worksheet One copy of the Win–Win Waltz Situation Cards

1. Recognize at least three potential traps (listed in Procedure, below).

2. Recognize three techniques for success (below).

Briefly explain each Trap to Avoid and Tip for Success.

  • Frozen thinking (saying the same thing over and over, and not taking in new information) versus absorbing information from each other
  • Attachment to a position and pushing for that solution, evident in attempts to debate, persuade, and convince
  • Criticizing the other’s concerns instead of trying to understand them

Tips for success:

  • Be an example to each other and listen to learn!
  • Create one list for concerns, a shared data pool, so both partners’ concerns become of equal import.
  • Emphasize the elephant: Tell the story about the blind men and the elephant. Each blind man felt one part of the animal. The one who touched its side described the elephant as something like a wall. The one who felt the tail described the animal as like a hose. The trunk felt like a tree branch, the leg like a tree trunk. Putting all of their perspectives together was essential for them to be able to appreciate the whole elephant. Similarly, emphasize that both partners have legitimate views; each of them tunes into different aspects of a dilemma.
  • Ask the last question—” Is there any piece of this that still feels unfinished? “
  • Think out of the box and be creative when exploring possible solution sets.
  • Exit now; talk later. When you get too stuck, drop the dialogue and resume later, when everyone is calmer.

Now, pick one situation from the Situation Cards . Ask for one volunteer (A) to try to be a reasonable spouse. In a way that the rest of the group can’t see, point to one of the trap for another participant (B). This participant will use this style of thinking. The group’s role is to be on the alert for recognizing each trap B demonstrates.

As soon as the group identifies a trap, B needs to let go of it and return to productive mode. A’s role is to try to be so effective that A and B reach a consensus despite the traps.

Debrief by noting what A did that was effective even if B was persisting in a trap.

Ask for two new participants to be A and B. Repeat using a different trap.

Ask participants to help you come up with a potentially tricky decision a couple might have to make. Have two participants come to the front and discuss this question with the tips in front of them. Have the rest of the group pay attention to what tips they used and the impact of them.

What would you like to be able to do if you find yourself or your partner in a trap?

With enough skills, couples can avoid slipping into an adversarial stance. If not, take a break from the discussion, and try another time. Using the tips will often make it easier to come to a consensus on complicated dilemmas.

Exercise 4: Costs of Unilateral Rather Than Shared Decision Making

Depression and anger both indicate flaws in shared decision making. Notice the connection in the following story.

  • Understand the relationship between unilateral decision making, anger, and depression.
  • Experience the concept “ Depression is a disorder of power. “

Tell the following story:

Once upon a time, in a kingdom not far away, a lovely lady named Linda married a handsome man named Len. Linda and Len lived in Louiston, where Linda grew up and was a town she loved.

One day Len said to Linda, “ I don’t seem to be able to find employment here that is as good as what I could get if we were to move. ”

Linda felt crushed. “ I love Louiston. I love my job here, my family, my friends. I don’t want to move, as much as I do understand that the job market is better in other areas. ”

Len answered, “ Linda, I’m sorry that you’re so against the idea. But I have already taken a job several states away. We need to move if we’re ever going to get ahead in life. That’s that. The decision has been made. ”

Continue reading the following instructions to the group, pausing after each, but saving the answers until the visualization has been completed:

  • Close your eyes and picture yourself as Linda.
  • Notice what emotions you are experiencing. Notice who seems more prominent, more powerful – yourself or your partner – as you put yourself into the role of the two partners.
  • What did you experience?
  • Now have two participants role-play this scenario using their best win–win waltz skills. What is different?

Discussion and conclusions

What have you learned about the relationship between anger, depression, and unilateral (one-sided) decision making? The powerless person experiences either anger or depression. The more critical the decision, the more potent the anger/depression.

collaborative problem solving handout

17 Exercises To Develop Positive Communication

17 Positive Communication Exercises [PDFs] to help others develop communication skills for successful social interactions and positive, fulfilling relationships.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

Our toolkit contains invaluable tools for practitioners, coaches, and other professionals. In fact, the Positive Psychology Toolkit© contains over 400 tools, many of which are highly applicable to conflict resolution.

Below we will briefly mention some of these tools that are designed to assist with conflict resolution.

1. Giving Negative Feedback Positively

In any relationship, there are the inevitable ‘hard topics’ to breach, and by avoiding these topics, more harm is done to the relationship. To approach these discussions in a healthy way, our Giving Negative Feedback Positively worksheet guides you through eight constructive steps for a positive conversation and successful relationships.

2. How to Apologize

This exercise also focuses on positive communication in relationships , guides clients in how to apologize effectively to build trust and prevent further conflict.

3. Hot buttons

When Hot Buttons Are Pushed is a coping exercise to help clients become aware of their ‘hot buttons’ that cause unhelpful and impulsive actions. This exercise will help them respond more effectively once they know what their hot buttons are.

4. Difficult people

Looking at Difficult People from a Strength Perspective  is an exercise to guide a client’s thinking about a ‘difficult’ person. Once the client can see the strengths of that person and focus on positive aspects, they’ll be less affected by less desirable aspects.

5. Improving Expression and Understanding

This couples therapy exercise is geared toward Improving Expression and Understanding and is a formatted guide with prompts to encourage positive communication.

6. 17 Positive Communication Exercises

If you’re looking for more science-based ways to help others communicate better, this collection contains 17 validated positive communication tools for practitioners. Use them to help others improve their communication skills and form deeper and more positive relationships.

Conflict leads to emotional distress, turmoil, depression, unhappy relationships, and separation.

But it does not have to be that way.

Being able to manage conflict constructively can instead create opportunities to reach many mutually beneficial decisions. The conflict resolution process can bring you and your partner closer together; allow you to learn from each other; and get to know, understand, love, and respect each other even better.

As long as there are differences of opinion, there will always be conflict. But knowing how to manage it productively and turn it into a win–win situation is the key to a healthy relationship , friendship, and family.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Positive Communication Exercises (PDF) for free .

  • Christensen, A., & Heavey, C. L. (1999). Interventions for couples.  Annual Review of Psychology ,  50 (1), 165-190.
  • Cummings, E. M., Koss, K. J., & Davies, P. T. (2015). Prospective relations between family conflict and adolescent maladjustment: Security in the family system as a mediating process.  Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology ,  43 (3), 503-515.
  • Fisher, R., & Ury, W. L. (1991). Getting to yes. Penguin Books.
  • Heitler, S., & Hirsch, A. H. (2003). The power of two workbook: Communication skills for a strong & loving marriage. New Harbinger.
  • Johansen, M. L. (2012). Keeping the peace: Conflict management strategies for nurse managers.  Nursing Management ,  43 (2), 50-54.
  • Kellermann, P. F. (1996). Interpersonal conflict management in group psychotherapy: An integrative perspective.  Group Analysis ,  29 (2), 257-275.
  • Korabik, K., Baril, G. L., & Watson, C. (1993). Managers’ conflict management style and leadership effectiveness: The moderating effects of gender.  Sex Roles ,  29 (5-6), 405-420.

profile picture

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

Misbah Arshad

Hi, I want to use the Conflict Resolution Checklist by Susan Heitler, PhD., 2020. How should I cite this in my research.

Nicole Celestine, Ph.D.

Glad you found this checklist useful. You can reference it in APA 7th as follows:

Heitler, S. (2020). Conflict resolution checklist [Worksheet]. PositivePsychology.com . Retrieved from: https://positivepsychology.com/wp-content/uploads/Conflict-Resolution-Checklist.pdf

Hope this helps!

– Nicole | Community Manager

Luis Aguirre

I’m trying to conduct a process with my parents, as they wouldn’t accept formal help, and it has been highly helpful for us. Thank you 🙂

Sandra Billingslea

Helpful information.

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Conflict Resolution Training

Conflict Resolution Training: 18 Best Courses and Master’s Degrees

All humans have some things in common. We all need air to breathe and water to stay alive. We are all social beings, and if [...]

Positive Communication

How to Foster Positive Communication: 9 Effective Techniques

Can you recall a really good conversation you’ve had? What was memorable about it? Was it the topic, the words, or just a feeling it [...]

Communication in therapy

Communication Skills in Counseling & Therapy: 17 Techniques

Positive outcomes from therapy and counseling rely on the strength of the relationship between the mental health professional and the client. Such connections build on [...]

Read other articles by their category

  • Body & Brain (49)
  • Coaching & Application (58)
  • Compassion (25)
  • Counseling (51)
  • Emotional Intelligence (23)
  • Gratitude (18)
  • Grief & Bereavement (21)
  • Happiness & SWB (40)
  • Meaning & Values (26)
  • Meditation (20)
  • Mindfulness (44)
  • Motivation & Goals (45)
  • Optimism & Mindset (34)
  • Positive CBT (30)
  • Positive Communication (20)
  • Positive Education (47)
  • Positive Emotions (32)
  • Positive Leadership (18)
  • Positive Parenting (15)
  • Positive Psychology (34)
  • Positive Workplace (37)
  • Productivity (17)
  • Relationships (43)
  • Resilience & Coping (37)
  • Self Awareness (21)
  • Self Esteem (38)
  • Strengths & Virtues (32)
  • Stress & Burnout Prevention (34)
  • Theory & Books (46)
  • Therapy Exercises (37)
  • Types of Therapy (64)

collaborative problem solving handout

IMAGES

  1. Collaborative Problem-Solving Steps

    collaborative problem solving handout

  2. Collaborative Problem Solving Made Simpler

    collaborative problem solving handout

  3. Collaborative Management

    collaborative problem solving handout

  4. Problem Solving In The Collaborative Classroom

    collaborative problem solving handout

  5. Developing Problem-Solving Skills for Kids

    collaborative problem solving handout

  6. Problem-Solving Steps

    collaborative problem solving handout

VIDEO

  1. Collaborative problem-solving…#Shorts#LoveFact#Love

  2. Collaborative Problem Solving: Strategies for Success

  3. Collaborative problem-solving, globally

  4. Collaborative Problem Solving

  5. Mastering Collaborative Problem-Solving: Unlock Group Study Success!

  6. Klutts Math Handout 4 Problem Solving with Trend Lines page 1

COMMENTS

  1. Think:Kids : Collaborative Problem Solving®

    Flowing from this simple but powerful philosophy, CPS focuses on building skills like flexibility, frustration tolerance and problem solving, rather than simply motivating kids to behave better. The process begins with identifying triggers to a child's challenging behavior and the specific skills they need help developing.

  2. PDF Steps for Collaborative Problem Solving (Collaborative & Proactive

    Steps for Collaborative Problem Solving (Collaborative & Proactive Solutions) Terry D'Elisa, PsyD, NCSP April 2020. Terry D'Elisa, PsyD, NCSP • (203) 966-9203 140 Elm St, Suite 5 New Canaan, CT 06840 [email protected] | www.DrTerryDElisa.com. Neuropsychological Testing | Psychotherapy | Parent Coaching. Steps for Collaborative ...

  3. PDF Collaborative Problem Solving

    1. Emphasis is on solving problems rather than on extinguishing or replacing behaviors. 2. Problem solving is collaborative rather than unilateral. 3. Understanding comes before helping; understanding is the most important part of helping.

  4. PDF FCBC CAREGIVER HANDOUT

    FCBC CAREGIVER HANDOUT. This handout has been prepared by FCBC to provide an overview of the Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS) Approach for understanding and helping children with social, emotional and behavioral challenges. The approach, first described by Dr. Ross W. Greene in the book: The Explosive Child; and later expanded upon in the ...

  5. PDF Collaborative Problem Solving

    distinction between individual problem solving and collaborative problem solving is the social component in the context of a group task. This is composed of processes such as the need for communication, the exchange of ideas, and shared identification of the problem and its elements. The PISA 2015 framework defines CPS as follows:

  6. Collaborative Problem Solving: The Ultimate Guide

    Because collaborative problem solving involves multiple people and ideas, there are some techniques that can help you stay on track, engage efficiently, and communicate effectively during collaboration. Set Expectations. From the very beginning, expectations for openness and respect must be established for CPS to be effective.

  7. Cps Materials / Paperwork

    The Problem Solving Referral Form was created to help schools shift from discipline referrals to referrals that prompt scheduling time for Plan B. You can tailor it to the needs of your school. ... The Collaborative & Proactive Solutions* model is recognized as an empirically-supported, evidence-based treatment by the ...

  8. How to ace collaborative problem solving

    To solve any problem—whether personal (eg, deciding where to live), business-related (eg, raising product prices), or societal (eg, reversing the obesity epidemic)—it's crucial to first define the problem. In a team setting, that translates to establishing a collective understanding of the problem, awareness of context, and alignment of ...

  9. PDF PLAN B CHEAT SHEET Collaborative & Proactive Solutions

    • Maybe he needs the problem broken down into its component parts ... Collaborative & Proactive Solutions THIS IS HOW PROBLEMS GET SOLVED livesinthebalance.org REV 102020. Created Date: 10/30/2020 10:02:48 AM ...

  10. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting

    The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students' critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z = 12.78, P ...

  11. Problem Solving Packet

    worksheet. Guide your clients and groups through the problem solving process with the help of the Problem Solving Packet. Each page covers one of five problem solving steps with a rationale, tips, and questions. The steps include defining the problem, generating solutions, choosing one solution, implementing the solution, and reviewing the ...

  12. Think:Kids : What Is Collaborative Problem Solving?

    In Collaborative Problem Solving, we think of it much in the way you might think of a learning disability, except instead of areas like reading and math and writing. This is in areas like flexibility, frustration, tolerance, problem-solving. These kids are delayed in the development of those skills. Now, a long time ago, we used to think kids ...

  13. PDF Think Kids Collaborative Problem Solving Resources in Oregon

    Collaborative Problem Solving Resources in Oregon Updated January 2020 Lieberman Consulting Bob Lieberman Website: Email:[email protected] Phone: 541-761-0551 Bowman Consulting Group Rick and Doris Bowman website: www.bowmanconsultgroup.com Email: [email protected] Phone: 657-204-6639 Randi Cooper, Independent Contractor Website:

  14. PDF Collaborative Problem-solving with Parents Exercises ...

    Craft a reframe response that might yield a fresh perspective to foster problem-solving. Share your example with your elbow partner. #6 Motivational Interviewing Activity. •Examine discrepancies •Express appreciation for the dilemma of change •Frame all behaviors as choices & explore pros and cons.

  15. PDF Parenting The Explosive Child

    2. Define the problem 3. Invitation to problem solving • Counselors working with parents on implementation of Collaborative Problem Solving should listen for missing steps Step 1: Empathy • Reasoning - Feeling understood is calming - The child's concern is on the table

  16. Our Solution

    Collaborative & Proactive Solutions (CPS) is the evidence-based, trauma-informed, neurodiversity affirming model of care that helps caregivers focus on identifying the problems that are causing concerning behaviors in kids and solving those problems collaboratively and proactively. The model is a departure from approaches emphasizing the use of ...

  17. Collaborative Learning Techniques

    Collaborative Problem Solving. With this method the instructor provides a loosly structured problem to the student groups and the students decide how they are going to proceed in solving the problem. The following criteria must be present: a novel problem to be solved (i.e., as opposed to completing a routine task) ...

  18. Team Building Exercises

    Download and print our team-building exercises worksheet to help you with this exercise. Uses. This activity builds problem-solving skills as team members analyze information, negotiate and cooperate with one another. ... This fun game develops problem-solving and decision-making skills. Team members have to choose the best course of action ...

  19. Problem Solving

    Consider your own behavior, as well as external factors. Define your problem. Be as clear and comprehensive as possible. If there are many parts to your problem, describe each of them. TIP: If you find it difficult to separate your emotions from the problem, try to complete this step from the perspective of an impartial friend.

  20. Think:Kids : Collaborative Problem Solving in Schools

    The Results. Our research has shown that the Collaborative Problem Solving approach helps kids and adults build crucial social-emotional skills and leads to dramatic decreases in behavior problems across various settings. Results in schools include remarkable reductions in time spent out of class, detentions, suspensions, injuries, teacher ...

  21. 4 Conflict Resolution Worksheets For Your Practice

    These worksheets, by contrast, teach pathways to win-win outcomes. By guiding both conflict resolution and cooperative problem solving in the same process, solution building for any decision, issue, or dilemma becomes a combined effort. The idea of winning versus losing is removed, and a win-win outcome negates previous conflicts.