OPPapers.com

Professional Formulation

Thinking Critically Simulation Review

University of Phoenix

In the Thinking Critical Simulation, it appeared that a few different problem solving tools and techniques were used to frame the problem. The simulation used a criteria matrix to rate each problem in terms of urgency and criticality. This method was used along with Importance Weighting. Value analysis was also part of this problem solving simulation, as the rate of urgency and criticality was sorted by priority (University of Phoenix).
Team C, from JC Carlin’s Critical Thinking class at University of Phoenix analyzed this simulation and was asked which evaluation tools and techniques that they would have applied had they created this simulation. All agreed that the Criteria Matrix was an excellent choice of a problem-solving tool. Importance weighting was also a famous choice, as priorities must be chosen so that the problems will be solved in order of significance and in a timely manner. Value analysis would have been used to rate the urgency and criticality and to sort them by priority.
Only one problem solving tool was not used in the simulation that would have been had Team C designed it. In addition to the evaluation tools and techniques that were used in the simulation, they probably would have applied the Cause-and-Effect (Fishbone) Diagram. This diagram, by listing all possible causes of the problem, would help to frame the actual problem, rather than just to “treat” its symptoms. By using the Cause-and-Effect Diagram, framing the problem would result in a clearer picture of exactly what the problem is, rather than focusing only on its symptoms.
The criteria matrix assisted the decision making process by choosing which problems were the most critical versus which problems were the least critical and by listing the items by the importance of urgency. This way of listing the problems allow the problems on hand to be listed in a clear and easy way so the people or person trying to fix...