July 31st, 2007 by Frank LaBanca, Ed.D.
The actually coding of the interviews should tease this idea out better, but it is worth discussing these two perspectives at this point.
I have often thought about the problem finding process including the idea of student metacognitive feasibility. In other words, as a student is trying to develop a problem that eventually produces a highly successful project, he or she must consider the feasibility of the project. In other words, does the student have the necessary personal expertise, access to others with expertise, the funds, the materials, the equipment, the resources, and the time. (Are there others that I am missing?)
However, looking at some of the very successful students, I think the scope of the problem is somewhat greater than what is actually presented. Work done by the student is often greater than what is presented as well. So what has happened? It seems to me that the student has compartmentalized the project. He or she presents only one facet (albeit a powerful one) of the project. The student has selected work to exclude for some reason (i.e. it wasn’t finished, it wasn’t flashy enough, it was too tangental, it was too long ago . . .)
So I wonder where the compartmentalization and the feasibility intersect and where they diverge.
