Multiple people can observe the same situation and perceive different problems associated it, although there is likely to be some commonly agreed upon issue that is given greater priority. Usually well-structured problems cause us to limit ourselves in thinking about what the solution is because there is likely only one or two possible correct answers. Such is the case in mathematics with algebraic questions that may only have one correct answer. However, with ill-structured problems one is forced to think more critically and thoroughly, outlining every aspect of the situation and figuring out all the possible ways to address the issue. This causes debate amongst people who are trying to solve the problem because they likely don't have the same solutions in mind. This is due to each individual's unique experience in life, whether it be with handling a similar situation to the one presented or having no experience at all with dealing with this specific problem. Having no experience may seem to bring nothing to the table, but a fresh perspective on a commonly encountered situation is often beneficial in finding a new and lasting solution to the problem because it will likely acknowledge other problems that the more experienced problem-solvers could not see. Perhaps they could not see the other problems because they weren't expecting it or because they were already hardwired into fixing the situation in a certain manner. In that sense, it's important to have both people with little and lots of experience with a certain situation in order to find an effective solution. Usually this is done through agreeing to prioritize one specific aspect of the situation because it is causing the most damage or seemingly has the biggest influence on the situation.

I remember telling a professor I could not see the "course materials" on their canvas website. What I meant was that I could not see the assigned readings, but other course materials were visible. This frustrated my professor greatly because they thought that none of the course materials were uploaded and accessible on their canvas website, and thus none of the students in their course could utilize them. I could have prevented a great deal of stress from falling on my professor by specifying what course materials were not visible on the site instead of speaking in broad terms and making them think that all of the course materials were not visible.

In a writing class my professor encouraged the use of anthropomorphism in scientific writing to help explain complex scientific subjects to the general public. He assigned a reading excerpted from American Wolf, written by Nate Blakeslee. In the book, Blakeslee constantly designates human emotions and traits to a pack of wolves that reside in Yellowstone National Park. In order to portray the idea of an alpha wolf in a pack, Blakeslee often described the alpha as having leader-like characteristics - such as being brave, smart, and caring - often those that we associate with human leaders. This helped me understand that an alpha stood out amongst its pack and took on important responsibilities. However, these descriptions can be a bit dramatic considering we have no way of knowing what wolves are actually thinking, if they think at all, or what emotions they are or aren't feeling, and therefore we should be careful when comparing animal behavior to that of humans.

Mental models represent a foundation of knowledge to draw inspiration from in order to answer new questions or solve related problems. They can be important for learning because they demonstrate a fundamental understanding of a concept by the individual using mental models, and also help develop inspire new models when new problems present themselves.