Practices in Action
How to Use This Resource
Driving questions work across disciplines, though they take different forms depending on the field and learning goals. The examples below show how instructors in different contexts can use driving questions to organize student inquiry.
Examples by Discipline
HISTORY
Comparing Historical Moments
An instructor teaching a course on social movements posed this question at the start of a unit: “Why did the Civil Rights Movement achieve legislative success in the 1960s when similar efforts in the 1870s and 1920s did not?”
Over three weeks, students examined primary sources from each era, analyzed the political and social contexts, and considered the role of leadership, media, and economic conditions. The question required them to move beyond describing each movement to actually explaining patterns of change over time. Students presented their arguments in a structured debate, with pairs defending different explanatory frameworks—economic factors, leadership differences, media technology, or coalition-building strategies. The debate revealed that most students initially relied on single-cause explanations but gradually recognized the interplay of multiple factors.
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE
Solving Real-World Problems
In an environmental science course, students spent the semester investigating: “What combination of policy interventions would most effectively reduce plastic waste in coastal communities?”
The instructor divided the class into research teams, each focusing on a different coastal region. Students analyzed waste management data, interviewed local officials, researched existing policies in comparable communities, and calculated cost-benefit ratios for various interventions. Early in the semester, class sessions focused on building shared knowledge about plastic waste sources, municipal budgeting, and policy implementation. By mid-semester, teams were proposing specific interventions, ranging from bottle deposit programs to commercial fishing regulations, and defending their choices using evidence from their research.
Each team produced a policy brief written for a specific audience (city council, state environmental agency, or community advocacy group), which forced them to consider how different stakeholders evaluate proposals. The final products varied widely in their recommendations, reflecting the genuine complexity of the problem and the different priorities of the communities students studied.
BUSINESS
Making Strategic Decisions
A marketing professor framed an entire course around this question: “How would you reposition this struggling retail brand to appeal to Generation Z consumers without alienating its core Baby Boomer customer base?”
At the start of the semester, the instructor selected a real company facing this exact challenge. Students worked in consulting teams throughout the term, conducting market research, analyzing competitor strategies, and developing positioning recommendations. The question required them to apply concepts from market segmentation, consumer behavior, brand identity, and integrated marketing communications—all while grappling with the inherent tensions in the scenario.
Weekly class sessions included mini-cases that built specific skills (interpreting focus group data, calculating customer lifetime value, designing social media campaigns), but everything connected back to the central question. Teams presented their final recommendations in a formal pitch, complete with creative executions and implementation timelines. The instructor noted that the driving question helped students see marketing as strategic problem-solving rather than a collection of unrelated tactics.
LITERATURE
Exploring Interpretation
In a course on contemporary fiction, an instructor opened a unit on narrative perspective with this question: “How does an author’s choice of narrator shape what readers believe about truth and reliability in storytelling?”
Students read three novels, each with a different narrative approach—first person, multiple perspectives, and unreliable narration. Rather than asking students to identify narrative techniques (which they could easily look up), the question pushed them to analyze the relationship between form and meaning. Class discussions focused on moments where students noticed their own trust in the narrator shifting, and what textual evidence triggered those shifts.
For their final project, students chose one of the novels and wrote an analytical essay arguing how the narrative perspective created specific effects on readers. Students presented their arguments in class and responded to questions from the class. The instructor found that the driving question helped students move beyond plot summary toward genuine literary analysis because they had to make claims about how the technical choices mattered for interpretation.
ENGINEERING
Designing with Constraints
A civil engineering professor organized a structures course around this semester-long question: “How would you design a pedestrian bridge for this specific site that meets safety requirements, stays within budget, and minimizes environmental impact?”
The instructor provided students with actual site specifications, budget constraints, and environmental regulations from a city planning project. Students worked in design teams, applying principles from statics, materials science, and structural analysis to develop their proposals. The question was carefully constructed to create genuine trade-offs—the most structurally sound design might exceed the budget, while the most environmentally sensitive approach might compromise accessibility.
Throughout the semester, the instructor introduced new constraints based on “stakeholder feedback,” forcing teams to revise their designs. This mimicked the iterative nature of real engineering work. Teams submitted progress reports at multiple points, documenting their design decisions and the engineering principles that informed them. The final deliverable included technical drawings, calculations, and a presentation to a mock city council. Students had to defend not just the technical soundness of their design but also their decision-making process when facing competing priorities.