center for collaborative problem solving

It is Autism Awareness Day - Recognizing those on the autism spectrum who need our support and understanding, and  helping  them achieve their goals and what is meaningful to them.

View our featured blog posts and get 10% off products on special., center for collaborative problem solving.

Under the direction of Drs. Ross Greene and Stuart Ablon, the Center provides clinical services, training, and consultation to assist education, mental health, and medical professionals and parents in understanding and implementing the Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS) approach.

• Counseling & Therapy Services
• Residential Center for Healing & Resilience
• Birth Parents
• Adoptive Parents
• Suicide Prevention
• YOUTHWORKS!
• Planned Giving
• Appreciated Assets
• Events & Galas
• Careers & Volunteering
• Leading Edge for Youth
• For Employees

Collaborative Problem Solving: A Resource Guide for Counselors Addressing Family Issues

Idaho Youth Ranch

Subscribe to our blog

Collaborative Problem Solving (CPS) is an evidence-based approach that focuses on understanding and addressing the root causes of challenging behavior in children and adolescents. Developed by Dr. Ross Greene, CPS aims to foster empathy, communication, and collaboration between parents, children, and professionals, ultimately leading to more effective and lasting solutions for family issues. This resource guide provides an overview of the CPS model, outlines the key principles and steps involved, and offers practical tips and strategies for counselors working with families.  

The Collaborative Problem Solving Model 

1. Understanding the CPS Philosophy

CPS is grounded in the belief that children do well if they can. The approach posits that challenging behavior is not due to a lack of motivation, attention-seeking, or manipulation but rather a result of lagging skills and unsolved problems. By understanding and addressing these underlying factors, counselors can help families develop more effective, compassionate, and sustainable solutions.  

2. Key Principles of CPS 

Empathy: The foundation of the CPS model is empathic understanding, which involves recognizing and validating the feelings and perspectives of all family members.  

Collaboration: CPS emphasizes the importance of working together rather than relying on unilateral decision-making or power-based approaches.  

Skill-building: The approach focuses on identifying and addressing lagging skills, such as emotion regulation, problem-solving, and communication, to promote lasting change.  

Implementing the Collaborative Problem Solving Process 

The first step in the CPS process is to identify the specific skills that a child may be struggling with. This can be done through a combination of observation, interviews, and assessments. Some common lagging skills include:  

Emotional regulation  

Flexibility  

Impulse control  

Problem-solving  

Communication  

Once lagging skills have been identified, the next step is to determine the specific situations or problems that are causing difficulties for the child and family. Unsolved problems are often characterized by predictability and can be uncovered through discussions with family members and the child.  

3. The Three Steps of Collaborative Problem Solving

The CPS process involves three primary steps, which can be adapted and tailored to the unique needs and circumstances of each family.  

• Step 1: Empathy

Begin by gathering information and understanding the child’s perspective on the problem. This step involves active listening, validating emotions, and demonstrating genuine curiosity.  

• Step 2: Define Adult Concerns

Clearly articulate the parent or caregiver’s concerns and needs regarding the situation. This step promotes mutual understanding and acknowledges the importance of addressing both the child’s and the adult’s concerns.  

• Step 3: Invitation to Collaborate 

Invite the child and parent to brainstorm possible solutions together. Encourage them to consider a range of ideas and evaluate each option based on its feasibility and effectiveness in addressing both the child’s and the adult’s concerns.  

Tips and Strategies for Counselors 

1. Build Rapport and Establish Trust 

Establishing a strong therapeutic alliance with both the child and the parent is essential for the success of CPS. Be patient, empathetic, and transparent in your approach in order to foster trust and cooperation.  

2. Use Reflective Listening and Validation 

Active listening and validation are crucial tools in the CPS process. Reflect back the emotions and concerns of family members to ensure they feel heard and understood.  

3. Encourage Open Communication 

Create a safe and non-judgmental environment that encourages open communication and allows family members to express their thoughts, feelings, and concerns without fear of criticism or rejection.  

4. Be Flexible and Adaptable 

Each family is unique, and the CPS process may need to be adapted to suit their specific needs and circumstances. Be prepared to modify your approach, pacing, and techniques as needed to best support the family.  

5. Provide Support and Guidance  

As a counselor, your role is to facilitate the CPS process and provide guidance and support to the family throughout. Offer suggestions, ask probing questions, and share relevant resources to help family members develop their problem-solving skills.  

6. Monitor Progress and Adjust 

Regularly assess the family’s progress and the effectiveness of the solutions they’ve implemented. Be prepared to revisit and adjust the problem-solving process as needed, based on the family’s evolving needs and circumstances.  

7. Encourage Skill-Building 

As part of the CPS process, help family members develop and practice the skills necessary to address their unsolved problems effectively. This may include offering resources, psychoeducation, or skill-building exercises to support growth in areas such as emotion regulation, communication, and flexibility.  

Collaborative Problem Solving offers a compassionate and effective approach to addressing challenging behaviors and family issues. By understanding the underlying causes of these difficulties and engaging in a collaborative, empathic problem-solving process, counselors can help families develop lasting solutions and strengthen their relationships. By following the principles and steps outlined in this resource guide and adapting your approach to meet the unique needs of each family, you can support families in achieving positive, sustainable change.  

Share this article

Leave a Comment

Read more blogs.

Creating Holiday Memories that Build Resilience in Adolescents: A Guide for Parents from Idaho Youth Ranch

The holiday season is a special time for families to create lasting...

Teen Suicide Prevention: Warning Signs to Watch Out For

If you’re worried your teen is suicidal, reach out to the following 24/7...

Unlocking Resilience: How Understanding Your Brain Can Help You Navigate Your Child’s Mental Health Journey

Parenting is a journey filled with joys, challenges, and unexpected turns....

• skip to Cookie Notice
• skip to Main Navigation
• skip to Main Content
• skip to Footer
• Find a Doctor
• Find a Location
• Appointments & Referrals
• Patient Gateway
• Español
• Leadership Team
• Quality & Safety
• Equity & Inclusion
• Community Health
• Education & Training
• Centers & Departments
• Browse Treatments
• Browse Conditions A-Z
• View All Centers & Departments
• Clinical Trials
• Cancer Clinical Trials
• Cancer Center
• Digestive Healthcare Center
• Heart Center
• Mass General for Children
• Neuroscience
• Orthopaedic Surgery
• Information for Visitors
• Maps & Directions
• Parking & Shuttles
• Services & Amenities
• Accessibility
• Visiting Boston
• International Patients
• Medical Records
• Billing, Insurance & Financial Assistance
• Privacy & Security
• Patient Experience
• Explore Our Laboratories
• Industry Collaborations
• Research & Innovation News
• About the Research Institute
• Innovation Programs
• Education & Community Outreach
• Support Our Research
• Find a Researcher
• News & Events
• Ways to Give
• Patient Rights & Advocacy
• Website Terms of Use
• Apollo (Intranet)
• Like us on Facebook
• Follow us on Twitter
• See us on LinkedIn
• Print this page
• View our full website

Contact Information

One Bowdoin Square, 7th Floor Boston , MA   02114

Phone: 617-643-6030 Fax: 617-643-2502

Email: [email protected]

Full website:  www.thinkkids.org

Explore This Treatment Program

Think:Kids aims to dramatically improve society’s understanding and treatment of challenging kids. Think:Kids achieves these goals by disseminating and implementing an innovative, proven approach described in the book, Treating Explosive Kids: The Collaborative Problem Solving Approach. The CPS model conceptualizes challenging behavior as the result of difficulty with crucial thinking skills; thus, unlike traditional models of discipline, the model eschews power, control, and motivational procedures and focuses instead on identifying and teaching challenging kids the skills they lack.

About the Program

At Think:Kids we have a unique view of challenging kids: we don’t think they are attention-seeking, manipulative or unmotivated. Rather we understand that they lack crucial skills for solving problems, handling frustration and being flexible. And we understand that these skills can be taught. Our approach represents a novel, contemporary, practical, compassionate, and (as documented by published research) highly effective approach for understanding and helping these children and their caretakers. Think:Kids staff currently train thousands of parents, educators, and mental health professionals throughout the world each year in applying this model.

For more information, please visit our full website.

Go to ThinkKids.org

Pediatric Psychiatry

The Division of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry at Mass General for Children provides comprehensive psychiatric services for children and teens.

Pioneering Psychiatry Research

The integration of patient care and clinical research has been a hallmark of the Department of Psychiatry for more than 30 years. Today, the department has the largest clinical research program in the hospital, with studies at the forefront of neuroscience, molecular biology and genetics.

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

13 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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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: 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.

PROVIDER MENU

“Kids do well if they can.”

—Ross Greene, Ph.D.

Say goodbye to conflict, screaming, spankings, detentions, suspensions, de-escalating, restraint, and seclusion. Say hello to solving problems collaboratively and proactively.

What is collaborative & proactive solutions.

Collaborative & Proactive Solutions (CPS) is an evidence-based model of psychosocial treatment originated and developed by Dr. Ross Greene , and described in his books The Explosive Child , Lost at School , Raising Human Beings , and Lost & Found .

What does CPS do?

Rather than focusing on kids’ concerning behaviors (and modifying them), CPS helps kids and caregivers solve the problems that are causing those behaviors. The problem solving is collaborative (not unilateral) and proactive (not reactive). Research has shown that the model is effective not only at solving problems and improving behavior but also at enhancing skills.

Where has CPS been implemented?

In countless families, general and special education schools, group homes, inpatient psychiatry units, and residential and juvenile detention facilities, the CPS model has been shown to dramatically reduce concerning behavior and dramatically reduce or eliminate discipline referrals, detentions, suspensions, and the use of restraint and seclusion .

How do you get the ball rolling?

This website connects you to vast array of resources, including a variety of learning and training options and over 200 providers in 16 different countries. And you’ll find lots of additional resources—including the research supporting the effectiveness of the model—on the website of the non-profit,  Lives in the Balance .

We are also happy to discuss your specific needs… CONTACT US

Collaborative and Proactive Solutions™

Next Parent Course Starts 6/11/2024

Signed in as:

[email protected]

• What is CPS in A Nutshell
• Board of Directors
• Mental Health Giving Day
• Testimonials
• Calendar of Events
• All Classes
• Morning Parent Class
• Evening Parent Class
• Saturday Parent Class
• Chino Hills Parent Class
• Spanish Parenting Class
• Parent Support Club
• Parent Behavior Coaching
• Group Behavior Coaching
• Educational Advocacy
• HBCC Book Club
• All Trainings
• CPS Essential Training
• 2-hour CPS Overview
• Your FBA is a Fantasy!
• Revolutionary Resilience
• I'm a Teacher Not Ther...
• Truly Trauma-Informed
• Newsletter / Photos

Helping the Behaviorally Challenging Child

Compliance is about Skill, Not Will

(714) 695-1057

There's much to see and learn here. Please, take your time, look around, and learn all there is to know about HBCC. We hope you enjoy our site and take a moment to drop us a line, take a training, attend a support group or champion rethinking challenging behaviors with us.

Ask for a FREE Consultation

Join email list, parent classes, parent support club monthly.

1st Weds Women & 2nd Weds Men

Educator Clinician Trainings

Frequently asked questions.

Reach out to us at [email protected] or leave a message @ 714-695-1057

HBCC teaches a revolutionary, social, skill-building , evidence-based approach that promotes the understanding that challenging kids lack the skill, not the will, to behave well. Through coaching, training, therapy, parent support and referrals to services that support connection, collaboration and inclusion. HBCC champions rethinking challenging behaviors beyond the medical model, into the social model, and amazing results are happening. 

Social Model Thinking        

• Child is valued
• Strengths and needs defined by self & others
• Identify barriers and develop solutions
• Outcome based programs designed  
• Resources are made readily available to ordinary services
• Training includes parents
• Relationships nurtured
• Society evolves
• Child included
• Diversity welcomed   
• Professionals re-trained

Medical Model Thinking

• Child is faulty, needs fixing
• Diagnosis focused
• Impairment becomes focus of attention
• Monitoring and behavior modification therapy imposed
• Segregated and alternative services
• Ordinary needs put on hold
• Society remains unchanged 
• Re-entry conditional 
• Permanent exclusion if non-compliant
• Conventional training utilized

Classes Alternate from  

• Weekday Evenings 7pm - 9pm
• Weekday Mornings 10am - Noon
• Saturday Mornings 10am - Noon
• 6-weeks in length
• 2 hours each session (w/5 min break)
• Each class builds on the previous weeks class
• Tustin continuously and on-going
• Chino Hills frequently
• South Orange County occasionally
• Pasadena (soon) 

No. The ideal is that both parents take the class. It may not always be possible to take the class together due to childcare, etc. Each parent can attend their own class series, depending on schedules. Discounts apply whenever taking the course for the same child.

Single parents taking the course are encouraged to build a community of supporters. It is highly beneficial to hear the approach firsthand, so grandparents, caregivers, stepparents and significant others are all encouraged to take the course when it works for their schedules.

Yes, HBCC also hosts trainings for educators and professionals.  HBCCs primarily provides support, coaching and trainings for parents, guardians and caregivers. To bring Educators & Parents Together as Allies we have an Educator/Clinician Committee that is peer-to-peer and provides trainings and support. Please go to the Educators Clinicians Trainings section of this website.   

The parenting class at HBCC is in-person and limited to 10 families per class. Parents, caregivers and guardians appreciate the company of being with others going through a similar situation in-person. They find out they are not alone! There are options for online trainings, please call or email us regarding those options if online is what you want.

The course includes:

• a weekly digital PowerPoint
• parent handouts
• weekly worksheets
• step-by-step guidance
• weekly email summaries
• parent coaching during class
• optional: follow-up coaching at the end of the course

Yes, HBCC provides parent behavior coaching during the course and/or after the course. Someone can work with you individually or group coaching. 

A Road Map for Parents

Parents, Do You...

• Have a child with concerning behaviors, such as aggression, tantrums or defiance?
• Attempt to discipline your child, only to end up arguing or engaged in a power struggle?
• Feel overwhelmed or exhausted by the demands of parenting a neurodivergent child?
• Feel like you've tried "everything," wondering why rewards & consequences haven't worked?
• Notice your child becoming academically or socially disengaged, not wanting to go to school?
• Get calls from school about your child's behavior?
• Experience guilt, shame, or doubt about your parenting?
• Struggle to manage your own emotional response to your child's challenging behavior?

Children with concerning and challenging behaviors are often misunderstood.

Myth: Children with challenging behavior are unmotivated, attention-seeking, lazy, out-of-control, poorly parented or defiant.

Fact: Children with challenging behaviors often have diagnosed or undiagnosed neurological, developmental, or learning differences. Many have behavioral health challenges or Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs). Sometimes just the way the world responds to challenging behaviors is an ACE. Children of the families we serve often have a diagnosis that may include ADHD, ASD, Dyslexia, Anxiety, Depression, DMDD, ODD, Attachment Disorder, etc. Some have no diagnosis at all. The good news? The approach we teach is appropriate for EVERY child, youth and young adult.

Compliance is about skill, not will.

HBCC programs are grounded in the Collaborative Problem Solving ® (CPS) approach.  CPS is owned and developed by Think:kids, a program in the Department of Psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

CPS leads to significant positive outcomes including:

• Reductions in challenging behavior
• Reductions in adult-child stress
• Improved adult-child relationships
• Improved problem-solving skills

The Road Map for parenting, teaching and treating children, teens, and young adults with concerning, difficult-to-manage behaviors, developmental challenges and/or mental health concerns can be overwhelming for parents.

Simply speaking, you know something's wrong, but you don't know why or what to do about it. You feel stressed, angry, confused, even scared. You reach out to professionals and find that their language is filled with long unfamiliar terms, and you get advice on approaches that haven't worked or make matters worse. Even professionals and educators don't always know what to do beyond a Token Economy based on behavior charts filled with rewards, consequences and ignoring based on a Behavior Management approach. 

The Token Economy based approach works for a large majority of kids -- kids who have the ability to be thoughtful, flexible, and intentional with their behaviors -- but this Behavior Management approach doesn't work for kids who struggle with emotional regulation, flexibility and problem solving. No matter no matter how consistently you implement a reward system, set boundaries, and impose consequences, temperatures continue to rise with this population.

You may find that the standard conventional approach is like pouring gas on a fire when you remind your child of consequences, or equally stressful, like pouring salt on a wound when they don't get the reward - yet again.

Emotional dysregulation is increasingly recognized as a challenge for many children and teens. No longer considered just "bad behavior", it's clear that staying in control can be a struggle for some youth despite their best intentions.  But what is a parent to do?  Expectations still have to be met, right?

The answer is 100% right !  When kids are dysregulated, parents can become dysregulated, and families are often thrown into chaos.  Parents describe "walking on eggshells" or "feeling held hostage" in their efforts to manage challenging behaviors and find moments of calm.

CPS can't make impossible possible however it can make the possible more possible.

Some of you have spent years frustrated, chasing down services, being told you are doing the intervention wrong – instead of being told you are using the WRONG intervention .

You don't want to use a shovel, when you need a wheel.

The decade of the brain and the new neuroscience confirms an evidence-based, skill-building, truly trauma-informed, social-emotional, inclusive approach like CPS is what is needed.  

Give your child and yourself the equity you deserve! 

It helps to know a bit about what factors contribute to the development of good regulation -- that's why Helping the Behaviorally Challenging Child (HBCC) was founded.

As Parent Coaches we take you on a journey to understand what is going on, what has typically been done about it, why that isn't working and how to help your child keep their behavior within an acceptable range, communicate and express their feelings, develop executive function, cognitive flexibility, and social skills.

Wanting answers to resolve the challenging situation in your life is not too much to ask and it shouldn't be so difficult to find options other than a behavior modification system using a token economy of rewards, consequences and ignoring "bad" behavior. 

If the "behavior modification" approach is NOT working, it is often blamed on the parent's implementation as the reason why the approach is not working.

Parents hear over and over...

• "be consistent"
• "follow through with consequences"
• "set boundaries"
• "let your child know they may not get away with bad behaviors"
• "tell them to make good choices" 
•  "tell your child NO firmly and stick to it" 
•  "use a sticker chart to motivate your child" 

These are simplified statements to a complicated issue because rewards, consequences and ignoring were never meant to teach complex thinking skills -- a token economy is an extrinsic motivator for a child who has access to skills that allow them to think about what sets them off and consider expectations, rules and personal goals. That is why conventional parenting advice works for so many ... but not a child with chronic challenging behaviors .... your child is that left-handed child in a right-handed world.  While the majority of kids are right-handed your left-handed child deserves to be taught skills about flexibility, working memory and the ability to monitor their own feelings and behavior so they can develop good reasoning, planning and organizational skills.

Discipline without relationship leads to rebellion. 

HBCC helps parents, caregivers and family members with a Road Map that makes a tough job easier!  

HBCC has grown over the years and is now composed of multiple CPS Certified individuals who are committed to helping transform children's lives by deepening their world's understanding of their behaviors and promoting effective interventions that focus on connection, collaboration, and inclusion.

As Certified Collaborative Problem Solving(CPS)® parent coaches and mentors, we are here to help you become your child’s Case Manager to confidently understand the road you are traveling and what your choices are to maximize the potential of your child and the entire family.  

CPS is based on the premise that challenging behaviors occur when demands and expectations exceed one's capacity to respond appropriately.  

HBCCs founder has presented this course on Helping the Behaviorally Challenging Child since 2007, reaching thousands of parents. She was that challenging kid herself!  She and her husband have two boys, 21 months apart. One is neurodivergent and the other is neurotypical.  

HBCC has learned from each and every family that has participated in the course over the many years and one thing that is predictable across all families: their challenging child’s behaviors are being misunderstood and it’s time to STOP blaming parenting as the reason for non-compliance and START applying what neuroscience knows about lagging skills that leads to challenging behaviors.   

Challenging behaviors such as swearing, blurting out, yelling, avoiding, eloping, not sitting still, refusal, etc., not only frustrate adults, but challenging children are also punished chronically for their developmental delays and lagging skills with an intense program of rewards, consequences and ignoring which is exhaustingly for everyone. 

If a child could do well, they would do well! 

Let HBCC help you on a journey to understanding your challenging child through a compassionate, collaborative, social emotional learning lens! 

HBCC’s curriculum has been fine-tuned across the years in response to parent input to help YOU get results. 

HBCC follows up Parenting Classes with Parent Coaching to help you navigate the Sea of Options with Coaching, Training & Therapy.

HBCC offers a monthly Support Club for Women & Men to grow together in this grassroots movement. 

HBCC is located in the heart of Old Town Tustin, in the Heart 4 Kids Coaching, Training & Therapy Building .

There are mental health educators, school support advocates, therapists, psychiatrists, clinical psychologists and more in HBCC's educator/clinician trained community. More and more parents are asking for trained CPS professionals everyday so more and more services providers are being trained in this approach that understands, follows and incorporates the Collaborative Problem Solving(CPS)® approach.

HBCC helps you find and build your team.

If you have made it this far, this information is most likely speaking to YOU!

Parents have little time to take a parenting class. Especially when so many parenting classes have failed them, taking another one can seem like a waste of precious time. Don't quit before the miracle! 

HBCC IS YOUR ANSWER -- glad you found us!

The journey to a healthier happier life begins with YOU taking the first step and signing up for a parenting course!   

(Week 1) What is getting in the way?  Why do challenging children sometimes struggle to meet day-to-day expectations.  What has typically been done about what is getting in the way? 

(Week 2) What are the Five Thinking Skills needed to meet expectations? What is Collaborative Problem Solving®(CPS) ?

(Week 3) What are the unsolved problems behind the behaviors?  Dives into Collaborative Problem Solving and the 3 options for responding to unmet expectations. 

(Week 4) Looks through a truly trauma-informed lens to cover how to practice addressing problems proactively - before things become escalated between you and your child.  How CPS reduces challenging behaviors, improves relationships and teaches critical skills.

(Week 5) Practice what you've learned through watching roll playing moderated in the class setting. 

(Week 6) Wraps up the course with an in-depth Q&A, videos, role playing and more videos.

Are you looking to:

• Reduce meltdowns & defiance?
• Stop the power struggles?
• Teach lagging thinking skills, durably?
• End the chronic noncompliance?
• Solve unsolved problems?
• Improve communication?
• Build connection?

HBCC offers:

• 6-week in-person Parenting Classes
• Monthly Parent Support Club for Women & Men
• On-going Parent Coaching & Mentoring
• 2-Hour Overview
• On-going workshops
• CPS Advocacy to Bring Parents & Educators Together as Allies 

Educator/Clinician Trainings

• Parents ask "who is going to train the educators/clinicians?
• Educators/Clinicians ask "who is going to train the parent? 
• See the Educator/Clinician Training Tab on the menu bar above

HBCC can help you climb what may seem like an impossible mountain!

If this describes YOUR situation, please take the time to watch the videos provided below and explore this website some more.

What is Collaborative Problem Solving®?

Collaborative Problem Solving®(CPS) is an evidence-based approach developed by Think:Kids, a program based in the Department of Psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, MA.

CPS is a big shift when it comes to understanding your child's challenging behaviors and what to do about it.

CPS is proven to reduce challenging behavior, increase compliance, improve family relationships and help your child build the skills they lack. 

www.thinkkids.org 

HBCCs Story

Take a moment and listen to the story from the Founder and CEO of HBCC, Debra Ann Afarian -- be sure to watch to the end, past the credits.

New Possibilities In Parenting

What if behavioral challenges are about something completely different than what you think they are? Mara James of Extraordinary Lives Foundation (ELF) interviews HBCC founder, Debra Ann Afarian on her "Let's Talk Wellness" podcast.  Debra Ann shares her powerful story and how it inspired her to help other parents understand and empower their children. 

Inspirational Interview

Jill Stowell of Stowell Learning Center speaks with HBCC Founder, Debra Ann Afarian, who has a message of experience, strength and hope!

Key Points:

✔️ A child's challenging behaviors are NOT the parents' fault.

✔️ Practical guidance for meeting your child exactly where they are. 

✔️ Compassionately move your child to a place of self-control & success. 

✔️ Learn how to stop the adult/child power struggles & implement Collaborative Problem Solving®. 

Trainings in Collaborative Problem Solving®

Cps certified coaches & mentors.

HBCC provides an effective, evidence-based, parent/caregiver classes where you will learn how to partner with your child to identify the triggers for their challenging behavior and work together to produce a game plan for how to handle problems BEFORE they happen.  Take the first step to reduce adult/child power struggles and conflict today by signing up for a parenting/caregiver class or join our FREE monthly support club or call for a FREE consultation with an HBCC Think:Kids Certified CPS® Parent Coach or Mentor to learn more or do all of these!  

CPS strengthens relationships and teaches skills! 

#HBCC #CuriousNotFurious #PraiseApproximationToTheGoal #IncrementsEveryoneCanHandle #CPSapproach #SkillNotWill #2e #KidsDoWellifTheyCan #ChildBehavior #BehaviorManagement #MentalHealthAwareness #ADHDawareness #ADHDsupport #neurodiversity #SmartAndQuirky #ADHDparenting #DisciplineWithoutRelationshipLeadsToRebellion

#ASDparenting #ASDsupport #ASDawareness #ChallengingBehaviors 

Help Champion Our Cause

Your support, donations and contributions enable us to meet our overall goals. Your generous donations fund our mission and provide outreach, tuition assistance, and trainings for families, as well as educators & service providers.

Information

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

145 W. Main Street, Suite 260, Tustin, California 92780

 Helping the Behaviorally Challenging Child (HBCC) is a California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation whose mission is to enable children experiencing behavioral health challenges to lead more productive and inclusive lives.  We work to transform these children's lives by deepening adults’ understanding of their behaviors, and promoting effective interventions that focus on connectedness, collaboration, and inclusion. 

© 2024 Helping the Behaviorally Challenging Child 501(c)(3)

Non-Profit I.D. #46-3240447 - All Rights Reserved.

Contact Us @ (714) 695-1057 or [email protected]

Collaborative Problem Solving®

6-week parent class.

Help for caregivers raising kids with challenging behaviors

6-WEEK PARENT CLASS

Help for Caregivers Raising Kids with Challenging Behaviors

Having a child with behavior challenges can feel lonely and leave parents and caregivers feeling lost. Traditional rewards and consequences have been ineffective, despite everyone's best efforts.

But there is HOPE!

The Collaborative Problem Solving® approach is an evidence-based method to managing challenging behavior that promotes the understanding that challenging kids lack the skill - not the will - to behave; specifically, skills related to problem-solving, flexibility and frustration tolerance.

Register for this in-person 6 week class for parents to:

• Learn the Collaborative Problem Solving® approach & effective ways to reduce conflict
• Build your child's skills
• Gain confidence in using the CPS approach
• Network and share information about community resources
• Develop new understanding of challenging behavior and learn new ways to help your child
• Rethink conventional approaches to behavioral difficulties and strengthen relationships
• Gain support from other parents

WHEN: 6 Tuesday evenings starting May 7th, 2024:

➡️  May 7, 2024

➡️  May 14, 2024

➡️  May 21, 2024

➡️  May 28, 2024

➡️  June 4, 2024

➡️  June 11, 2024

TIME: 6:30 - 8:30 PM

LOCATION: In-Person at SLC Chino

15192 Central Ave., Chino, CA 91710

(909) 598-2482

COST*: $250 per person / $400 per couple

Register now - LIMIT 10 spots available

*All current SLC clients will receive a refund of the class fee as a credit towards tuition upon completion of the course

*Scholarships available

Hosted By: Lauren Ma

Director of growth and operations for stowell learning centers and mom of 2.

Lauren is a Collaborative Problem Solving® Certified parent educator.

She has worked with neurodiverse students for over 18 years at Stowell Learning Center and has a real passion for building their skills to help them thrive in both school and life.

Lauren began her career in education as an elementary public school teacher, but left the classroom after becoming frustrated with the limited solutions for students with learning challenges.

She now oversees all four centers in the Southern California area (Chino, Irvine, Pasadena Thousand Oaks).

She is also a mom to two highly-sensitive and creative girls who keep her constantly learning (and on her toes!)

“When parents and teachers learn to look at behavior as a skills problem

and embrace the CPS approach, it truly changes everything.”

- Jill Stowell

In the video below, Jill Stowell and Lauren Ma discuss Collaborative Problem Solving® (CPS) and the upcoming 6-Week Parent Class:

• What is Collaborative Problem Solving® (CPS)?
• How CPS can help you and your child with challenging behaviors 
• What changes other families have experienced 
• Why you should make the CPS parent class a priority

What is Collaborative Problem Solving®?

Collaborative Problem Solving® (CPS) is an evidence-based approach developed by Think:Kids, a program based in the Department of Psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, MA. CPS is a big shift when it comes to understanding your child's challenging behaviors and what to do about it.

CPS is proven to:

• Reduce challenging behavior
• Increase compliance
• Improve family relationships
• Help your child build the skills they lack

▶️ Watch our LD Expert Live episode video below featuring Dr. Stuart Ablon, Director of Think:Kids, on the Collaborative Problem Solving® Approach

Collaborative Problem Solving: Considerations for the National Assessment of Educational Progress NAEP CPS NCES PISA

• https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/researchcenter/collaborative_problem_solving.pdf

Collaborative Problem Solving ®

Parent education classes, sign up on this page for classes offered through riverview center for growth for oregon parents, grandparents, foster parents, and caregivers.

  Classes are 8-Weeks long and offered at no charge to 

parents and caregivers who reside in Oregon. 

  Register for a parenting class in 2 easy steps!

Each participant must complete the 2 -step process using their personal email address. 

After you complete your registration: Log in information will be sent via email 1-2 weeks before class. 

Find A Class!

Finish Your Registration!

New Class Alerts

Riverview Center for Growth

Class Flyer

Classes are generously funded by the Oregon Health Authority to help bring services to underserved areas of Oregon, to promote positive mental health, and to prevent future mental health difficulties. Our program is also supported by the Early Childhood Learning Hub of Lane County .

The goal of this project is to help Oregon families, especially those in rural and underserved areas, strengthen positive relationships and build the skills needed for success at home, at school, in the community, and in life.

Areas served.

We are focused on providing services to seven regions in Oregon in areas that have limited Mental Health Provider resources. This is defined as fewer than 1.25 providers per 1000 residents by the Oregon Office of Rural Health. As shown by the shaded areas on the map, most of the State is underserved. Click to view ORH's full 2021 report documenting Oregon's Unmet Health Care Needs .

• Learn and Do
• STEM Classes and Camps
• Burrell Observatory Lecture Series
• Collaborative Problem Solving
• Professional Development for Educators
• School Outreach
• About Community STEM Initiatives
• Faculty & Staff

Center for Collaborative Problem Solving

Baldwin Wallace University's commitment to collaborative problem-solving extends beyond the classroom, thanks to the visionary efforts of Dr. Ed Meyer and Professor Meridith Witt. Through both college courses and specialized evening and summer programs offered at BW, their pioneering work has made problem-solving skills accessible to all ages.

Meyer, a distinguished physics professor and a global advocate for problem-solving education, emphasizes for students that employers seek individuals who do not just solve equations but can innovate and navigate challenges. He also highlights that problem-solving is a skill that stimulates brain growth and enhances neural connections.

His co-teacher Witt, also a Physics Professor, underscores the importance of problem solving group activities to assist in developing communication, patience, and empathy. Participants are encouraged to embrace the process of discovery, emphasizing the value of perseverance and creative thinking. Dr. Meyer and Professor Witt's problem-solving courses and programs beyond the classroom, build mental fortitude, teamwork, consensus-building, adaptability, and resourcefulness — all essential life skills.

Explore the DCL

All we offer.

• Community Arts School
• Community Athletics & Recreation
• Community STEM Initiatives
• Executive & Professional Development
• Institute for Learning in Retirement
• More from the Division of Community Learning

Center for Cooperative Problem Solving

Developing leaders and teams.

Individuals associated with the Center for Cooperative Problem Solving are working to advance the teaching, research, and outreach of Adaption-Innovation (A-I) theory and the corresponding measure, Kirton’s Adaption-Innovation Inventory (KAI).

Upcoming Events

Apply for the next KAI Accreditation Course, online, April 15-26. 

Apply for the Switzerland KAI Accreditation Course, July 8-11.

For More Information email us at  [email protected]  

• Learn Collaborative Problem Solving »
• Introduction to Collaborative Problem Solving »

Introduction to Collaborative Problem Solving

These self-paced online courses introduce the basic principles of Collaborative Problem Solving , an innovative, trauma-informed, and evidence-based approach to understanding and helping kids and adults with behavioral challenges. Participants learn a more empathic and accurate understanding of what causes unmet expectations and challenging behavior and are exposed to an overview of the three key components of the approach. These courses lay the foundation for attending Essential Foundation in Collaborative Problem Solving (Level 1) .

Join us to:

• Understand what really causes challenging behavior or unmet expectations in others.
• Discover the limitations of motivational approaches as a solution to unwanted behavior.
• Learn three ways to respond to unwanted behavior and the best times to use them.
• See how the approach can positively change interactions and outcomes with youth and adults.

Host a Private Training

If your organization or school is interested in hosting a private in-person or live-online training, please contact us to learn about our customized training options!

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

Therapeutic & Residential staff r evolutionize your professional and personal approach to addressing challenging behavior !

This 1.5-hour, self-paced course introduces the principles of Collaborative Problem Solving ® while outlining how the approach can create a more compassionate, effective care environment. Tuition: $39 Enroll Now

Parents & Caregivers, learn how you can help your kids meet expectations and improve your relationship!

This 1.5-hour, self-paced course introduces the principles of Collaborative Problem Solving ® while outlining how the approach can meet your family's needs. Tuition: $39 Enroll Now

Introduction to Collaborative Problem Solving - CE-credited

The MGH Department of Psychiatry hosts our online, 3-hour, pre-recorded Introduction to Collaborative Problem Solving as a CE-credited course. This course is ideal for clinicians seeking CE credit. Tuition: $99 Register

What our participants say

Additional information.

Financial assistance:  If you require financial assistance, please  apply for assistance by completing this form . Funds are limited, and the application does not guarantee an award.

Privacy Overview