Interactive method and system for teaching decision making

• US 20020146676A1
• Filed: 05/11/2001
• Published: 10/10/2002
• Est. Priority Date: 05/11/2000
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Thomas J. Reynolds
• Original Assignee: Thomas J. Reynolds
• Inventors: Reynolds, Thomas J.
• Granted Patent: US 6,971,881 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 434/362
• CPC Class Codes: G09B 5/00 Electrically-operated educational appliances working with questions and answers G09B7/00; simulators G09B9/00; advertising or displaying in general G09F
• CPC Class Codes: G09B 7/00 Electrically-operated teaching apparatus or devices working with questions and answers mechanically operated G09B3/00; computing arrangements G06F
• CPC Class Codes: G09B 7/02 of the type wherein the student is expected to construct an answer to the question which is presented or wherein the machine gives an answer to the question presented by a student

Abstract

The present invention is directed to an interactive tool for teaching decision-making skills. The tool requires users to identify choice options and, for each choice option, relevant consequences, outcomes, goals, and/or driving forces. The tool further provides a methodology to evaluate the performance of the user.

Claims

1. An interactive teaching method, comprising:

(a) referencing at least one factual context to a user;

(b) requiring the user to provide a listing of choice options corresponding to the at least one factual context;

(c) requiring the user to provide a listing of results corresponding to each choice option;

(d) requiring the user to provide a listing of goals that are relevant to each choice option;

(e) requiring the user to identify at least one driving force relevant to at least one of the listed choice options; and

(f) evaluating at least one of;

the listing of goals, the listing of results, the listing of goals, and the at least one driving force.

2. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein the evaluating step is performed for each of the listings in steps (b) through (e).

3. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein, when the at least one of the listings is unacceptable, requiring the user to repeat at least one of steps (b) through (g).

4. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein, when the at least one of the listings is unacceptable, repeating steps (a) through (f) for a new factual context.

5. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein steps (a), (b), and (f) are repeated for a plurality of factual contexts.

6. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein step (a) includes the step of initializing a counter and further comprising, if the listing of choice options is unacceptable in step (f):

comparing the counter to a predetermined number of iterations;

when the counter at least one of equals and exceeds the predetermined number, failing the user; and

when the counter is less than the predetermined number, repeating step (b).

7. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein only steps (a), (b), and (f) are repeated for a first time period, only steps (a) through (c) and (f) are repeated for a second time period, and only steps (a) through (d) and (f) are repeated for a third time period and wherein the first time period precedes the second time period and the second time period precedes the third time period.

8. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, further comprising after step (c) and before step (e):

if the listing of results is acceptable in step (f), requesting a list of choice distinctions for each listed choice; and

assessing the list of choice distinctions for each listed choice option.

9. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein steps (d) through (f) are repeated for a plurality of factual contexts.

10. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein step (c) includes the step of initializing a counter and further comprising, if the listing of results is unacceptable:

comparing the counter to a predetermined number of iterations;

when the counter at least one of equals and exceeds the predetermined number, failing the user; and

when the counter is less than the predetermined number, repeating step (c).

11. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein the listing of results includes outcomes and consequences.

12. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein steps (e) and (f) are repeated for a plurality of factual contexts.

13. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein step (d) includes the step of initializing a counter and further comprising, if the listing of goals is unacceptable:

comparing the counter to a predetermined number of iterations;

when the counter at least one of equals and exceeds the predetermined number, failing the user; and

when the counter is less than the predetermined number, repeating step (d).

14. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 13, further comprising:

(g) requiring selection of a choice option; and

(h) requiring a rationale for the selected choice option; and

wherein the evaluating step includes the substep of assessing the rationale.

15. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 14, further comprising:

(1) determining a test score for the user'"'"'s performance in one or more of steps (b), (c), (d), and (e).

16. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein in step (f) the number of choice options is counted and compared to a predetermined ordering of numbers to determine a level of performance.

17. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 1, wherein step (f) considers at least one of the number of choice options in the choice option listing, a level of sophistication of a choice option in the listing, and a number of choice options considered for selecting a most important choice option.

18. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 14, wherein step(f) includes the step of:

forming a decision chain.

19. An interactive teaching method, according to claim 18, wherein the forming step includes the steps of:

comparing the listing of choice options to a predetermined listing of choice options and corresponding code to identify at least one listed choice option on the predetermined listing of choice options and a code corresponding thereto;

assigning the code to the listed choice option;

comparing the rationale with the listings of results, goals, and driving forces to identify which of the listed results, goals and driving forces are in the rationale;

comparing the results, goals and driving forces in the rationale with a predetermined listing of results, goals, and driving forces and corresponding codes to identify the codes corresponding to the results, goals and driving forces in the rationale; and

determining the highest code level and the number of code levels in the rationale to form the decision chain.