Recently I’ve become aware of the reality that as math teachers, we often talk about what problems we will be using and even how we will implement them but frequently we miss opportunities to discuss why we’re using them. Consider Graham Fletcher’s amazing sugar cube task on volume of a rectangular prism. I can think of three different reasons why you would do this task, and all three of them greatly impact the decisions you make during the problem and consequently how the students learn.
Reason #1: Use the problem to introduce a new concept
Consider though how this could potentially look to two observers: one who understands the reason why you are using this problem and one who does not.
Observer Perspective
- An observer who understands that you are using this problem to introduce a new concept expects that students will be curious and possibly baffled by the problem. They’ll see how students will be eager to learn more about how to solve the problem. Whether or not you finish the problem is inconsequential because you can come back to it at the end of the unit. Either way, you invested time in developing a marvelous context that will pay dividends throughout the unit.
- An observer who doesn’t understand that you are using this problem to introduce a new concept may wonder:
- What was the purpose of this problem?
- Why didn’t you finish it?
- Why didn’t you let students struggle through it?
- Did the teacher end the problem because he or she was confused and gave up?
Reason #2: Productive struggle
Observer Perspective
- An observer who understands that you are using this problem to let students productively struggle is looking to see that kids are working hard to make connections on their own. The observer realizes that your choice to give minor hints and not tell students what to do is not laziness or being unprepared, but rather trying to give students the least amount of help needed for them to keep going. This is similar to a bench presser and a spotter. A spotter’s job is to give the bench presser the least amount of help needed so that he or she can lift the weight. Too much help and it’s the spotter who gets stronger. Too little help and the bench presser dies. As part of this process, students will inevitably demonstrate many of the Common Core Standards for Mathematical Practice including 1, 3, and 6 as they try to make sense of the problem and convince their partners why they are right or wrong.
- An observer who doesn’t understand that you are using this problem to let students productively struggle may wonder:
- Why did the teacher let the students sit there confused instead of telling them what to do?
- Did the students even learn anything because they never figured out the answer?
- Why didn’t the teacher finish the problem? Did she lose track of time?
Reason #3: Problem completion
Observer Perspective
- An observer who understands that you are using this task to show a completed problem realizes that you had to make some sacrifices to complete it in a single class period. The observer is better prepared to imagine how different parts could be expanded, given more time, and is appreciative of having experienced the problem in Cliff Notes form.
- An observer who doesn’t understand that you are trying to complete the problem in one period may wonder:
- Who really did the work today: the students or the teacher?
- Why did the teacher not see all those great opportunities for students to make their own connections and take advantage of them?
- Why did the teacher give such obvious hints and tell them what to do?
My recommendation is to have conversations with your colleagues about why you are using specific problems. You may find that your “why” is different from theirs. Not having that conversation before the problem usually sounds like this after implementing the problem:
- Teacher 1: “Man, that problem was challenging for students. They spent the whole period working on it and didn’t even finish it.” (Goal is productive struggle)
- Teacher 2: “Yeah, it was challenging but I gave them some hints and we worked our way through it because we are beginning a project tomorrow.” (Goal is problem completion)
- Teacher 3: “We didn’t actually finish the problem. We started it but we’ll come back to it later once they’ve learned more about the concept.” (Goal is introducing a new concept)
What do you think about this? What other reasons for using a problem are you seeing?
Update (4/27/2016)
It made me wonder:
– is using a problem for assessment its own category?
– does this categorization only apply to non-procedural problems?
I really enjoyed reading this, Robert. This year, I feel that I’ve gotten much better at asking myself, “What do I / we want students to learn and be able to do by the end of the lesson?” when lesson planning, which has helped me craft my learning objective or target and how I want the students to engage in the SMPs and content.
But…now that I reflect on it, I’ve only accomplished two or the three parts — the “what” and the “how.” I need to be better at reminding myself about the “why” — why am I using this activity, why am I asking students to do this, why is it important for student learning.
I’ll be honest…I’ve definitely used certain lessons or activities multiple times because I simply enjoy them or students enjoy them. I would like to think that there are many other teachers that are in the same boat. I will say that I’ve gotten better at choosing lessons or activities that are congruent to my learning objective, but I am (and I think other teachers are) still missing that third and critical piece to the puzzle.
I appreciate you reminding me and others that we need to start with the “why” with everything that we do in our classrooms, conducting professional development, and our conversations with students, parents, and administration. The more we communicate our intentions and have these conversations, the better we will all be — teachers and students together.
Thanks Daniel. This whole post is very post-dictable to me in the sense that it is all so obvious to read now that it’s been written, but yet it had never occurred to me until very recently. Definitely worth thinking about personally but also worth communicating to others when we do lessons in their classes.
I completely agree. It makes total sense when I read (and re-read) this post. I appreciate you taking the time to formalize this for us. I’ve been guilty of trying to accomplish all three of the reasons and I know it could have gone better if I just focused on one.
One question…do you think it is possible or appropriate to use a math problem with the purpose of accomplishing more than one or all of the reasons you listed? For example, can a 5th grade teacher use Graham’s sugar cube task to accomplish productive struggle and problem completion?
Great question Daniel. Short version is that I don’t know for sure. Two thoughts though:
– First, I am far from certain that this is a comprehensive list of why people use problems. There are likely others.
– Second, my gut tells me that one reason is should be prioritized above the other. For example, in your scenario, problem completion is likely the priority. So, that would look like, “I’ll let the kids struggle as much as possible, but the problem still needs to get done so I might cut them off if we start to run out of time.”
It seems though that some reasons are more at odds with one another. For example, problem completion and introducing a topic don’t go well together. If you use a problem to introduce a topic, you have time to come back to it, so you don’t necessarily want to give them formulas needed to complete the problem that they will discover soon.
Thanks for pushing my thinking.
This post really resonates with me, both as a teacher and an instructional coach. Additionally, you know I’m a big fan of starting with “why” and the purpose (or learning objective). Your offering of possible uses and conversations can really help support a collaborative math department, or initiate a more collaborative department.
One thing I would advocate (and add to this post) is the need for teachers to solve the task. It might be assumed while reading your post, but assumptions can be detrimental. I think if a teacher understands the importance of solving the task ahead of time (and not the night before), it will be extremely beneficial. In solving the task, the teacher can anticipate as many students solutions and misconceptions as possible, making it easier to determine where they want to use the task: new concept, productive struggle, or problem completion.
Tagged under my “Sticky Math Blog Posts – 2016”
http://padlet.com/mr_stadel/mathblogs2016
Yes, I completely agree with you. I guess I would classify it this way:
What = Choosing the problem
How = Using the 5 practices, which includes doing the problem of course
Why = One of the three reasons above or any of the other reasons I will realize exist over the coming years.
I would like to see PB questions for Algebra 2 for polynomial or rational problems. I’ve been following you and reading your materials and have used some of your videos. But I would like to see some examples for these functions
Hi Michelle,
This is a common question I hear too. I’m curious if you’d be able to share any tasks you’ve created or have come across in a textbook that would represent polynomial or rational functions.
If not, what are some of your favorite problems from the math textbook, curriculum, or resources you are currently using with polynomial and rational functions? I’m curious because sometimes textbooks have decent contexts related to higher level mathematics and we can use them as a starting point in finding PD questions for Algebra 2 like you requested.
Thanks.
I don’t have a problem for you, exactly, but I think James Tanton’s “Personal Polynomial” task might be the start of something good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPlnjLLXe2M
I, of course, would cheat. My full name is PATRICK, which means I’d need to find a function f(x) such that:
f(1) = P
f(2) = A
f(3) = T
f(4) = R
f(5) = I
f(6) = C
f(7) = K
That’s too much. It’s been a while since anyone has shortened my name to the androgynous PAT, but since it’ll make my life simpler, I’d try to find a function f(x) with:
f(1) = P
f(2) = A
f(3) = T
Shouldn’t be too hard; some simple quadratic should do the trick.
I love how you’ve broken this down so more people can understand it! I used to do this a lot when I was in the classroom and some people would think I was crazy until they saw that my students could actually problem solve through some things better than other teachers. Plus I loved engaging them and getting them to the point of begging me to teach them the little piece they were missing. Keep up the great work!
Thanks Sarah. The more we can all get on the same page in terms of goals and expectations, the better. I appreciate the support.
Great post, Robert. I just engaged teachers in a the what and how and why today. The why got cut short due to time. Your post makes me rethink conversations I have with teachers and the order in which we address these questions. I’ll definitely be more deliberate about beginning with the “why” when planning with some 8th grade teachers on Monday.
As you continue wondering about problems used as assessment being in their own category, do you think that may depend on the reason for the assessment? Is it formative or summative? What is the teacher’s reasoning for giving the assessment. Is it just to get a grade or is there a more pedagogical reason?
Lots to think about here. Thanks making me waking my brain up… again!
Thanks Mike. Regarding your questions about using problems for assessments, in short: I don’t know. The lesson was just quizzing kids with no reflection whether kids got the answer right or wrong and obvious purpose. Let’s be clear, I have done the exact same thing when I was in the classroom.
Now with more experience and perspective, I try to have a specific goal for everything I do. Certainly I don’t hit it every time, but now I have something to measure against to see how effective what I did was.
It is interesting that the “hows” of doing the problem should also be nested in the “whys”. Eg.” I used pairs or groups of 3 because I know in their productive struggle there will be a lot of mathematical reasoning and communication happening. They were on vertical surfaces so their work was exposed to others making it more likely that the key conceptual understanding could be mobilized in the class and aid problem completion. We “assessed=discussed” the clarity of each group’s communication so that students would acquire problem solving skills for other problems. I summarized what I saw in the student solutions to draw out the key conceptual understanding. . .” This process is mirrored in the comment discussions after your initial post. You have utilized the blog as our problem to extend our thinking in our (& your) planning of, observing of and reacting to lessons.
Thank you for a rich time.
What a nice comment! Thanks Fred. I didn’t reflect on how this discussion may relate to implementing a problem. Thanks again for chiming in.
I am getting observed today, so this is perfect timing! Truly a bit nervous because I am introducing a problem today that I know students will not be ready to solve. This goes along the Dan Meyer, Jo Boaler, yourself and other philosophies about creating that desire to learn the math. Making the math interesting for right now, today, so there is a want from the students to learn the procedural that compliments the problem solving. My principal is pretty great, I think once I explain this, he will be on board. I thank you for writing this so I can share it with him today.
I noticed your last comment about observing a teacher who reviewed homework and then spent a class preparing for an assessment. We still live in two worlds. The reality of needing grades, and the hope for change to move towards standards based instruction. I struggle living in both worlds and try endlessly to somehow bring the two in sync. No, it is not a perfect situation, but we can’t give up!
One of the new additions to my culture this year comes from Jo Boaler. I am incorporating a Participation Quiz. I have been tweaking day after day as I can’t seem to achieve the right balance quite yet. Today, I will be attempting version 6. This grade will actually come from student working together, having conversations, etc. Perhaps it is one way we can bridge the two schools of thought. It might be one way to get the standards and grades on the same page (until we can get rid of grades!!!). Do you have any other ideas?
Maybe I’m just missing the point here, but I don’t see what’s wrong with practicing for an assessment. Once you’ve done the productive struggle and developed the concepts, you need some practice with them to develop procedural fluency. Then on the assessment you can demonstrate that procedural fluency as you solve smaller problems in context. Also, you can use those skills to solve more complex problems in future lessons.
Hi Kathy. Perhaps some of the misunderstanding comes from what type of assessment you are talking about. If you are doing formative assessment, you want to see where your kids are at so you can adjust accordingly. You would not practice especially for that because you’re just trying to figure out where they are. For a summative assessment, then at the end of some period of time you’d like to measure how well they understood the concepts. So, I guess all that you teach them goes towards practicing for that assessment.
I’d also be careful to separate practice from being exclusively connected to procedural fluency. You can also practice applications and developing conceptual understanding.
Hi Kathy, I think the problem with the test review using Kahoot is that there was no way of knowing why students would get an answer wrong or knowing who did. It mostly benefited those who were already well versed in the procedural and conceptual understanding. Those who weren’t got wrong answers bit no clarification of their understanding. This type of review simply creates a feeling of failure and frustration for the students who are getting wrong answers. I would NOT want my students going into a test with that cloud of negativity hanging over them. Rather, I want them coming into the test feeling confident and eager to do their best. Kahoot is fun and engaging but maybe not the best way to prepare students for a test.
Hi Meryl. I’m glad that this post was useful for you. It sounds like there is a lot of potential with your Participation Quiz. I hope it went well. I don’t have any other ideas for you at the moment, but if I do, I’ll add them to this post. Thanks!
I have been thinking about the role of imaginative education in developing problems solving. We (most) often ask questions that students work on to find a solution path. There is a large focus on ‘what the answer is’ and less on the process. What if we were to reverse this; show sample student solutions and have students imagine how the other students solved the problem? This would create much more emphasis on the process. Students would be looking at what the ‘mathematics’ ‘speaks’ about their process. A simple example is array counting with a picture of dots and students asked to show how they might determine the number of dots. Instead, here is a picture of some dots. One student said it was 4(3) – 2 = 12 – 2 = 10 dots. Show how you think they were seeing the picture. Self-assessments of participation and peer comments will be a big help but ‘learning work’ should be in process and not summatively graded. This comes when the learning has processed.
Just my nickel worth of thoughts as Canadians have done away with the penny and inflation has made my two cents, a nickel.
On the quizzes, I don’t think we truly have the balance until students are assessing on the criteria and not marking on them to arrive a grade in a formative setting. Checkups are key to seeing where each student is at and where their next steps might be. Grades interfere with the analysis of criteria.
Very neat idea Fred. It reminds me of the work I did with teachers this week around picking a selection strategy when implementing the five practices. Instead of going from concrete to abstract, one group picked abstract to concrete and tried to get people to see a formula and be able to explain where it came from. It worked out pretty well.
Thanks for adding to the conversation!
I think this applies to more than just colleagues observing us. Parents too wonder what is going on in math class when they get their child’s version of what happened in class. They don’t know your why at all! I’ve been a math co-op teacher for homeschooled kids and I am really sensitive to the judgement of parents when I try to do things differently from the “old traditional way.” Your post helped me realize why that is! It does look dumb to those who don’t understand your goal. (And especially to those that don’t agree with your goal.) Now I know what I can do about it for myself. I thought I just wasn’t confident in my math teaching skills; but now I think it’s more that it was about knowing in the back of my mind that those “observing me” (and in online classes that are live the parents are literally observing you without any feedback) were passing judgement without the full picture. Thanks for this post!!
Hi Shelly. I hadn’t thought about the perspective of parents’ perspective but I totally see what you mean now. I’d love to hear about how this went if you tried sharing this.
Thank you for the many thought provoking posts! In considering the above update regarding assessment as a reason for working through a problem, I think it’s more than simply assessment prep. Some problems allow us to target the current level of mastery for a specific standard. Whether it’s test prep, classwork, homework, or an actual assessment, sometimes we need to see that a student can recognize a related efficient procedure and apply it effectively in order to independently solve a problem. Have they reached mastery for a specific standard? Complex problem solving is excellent, but it involves a great deal of standard and practices overlap as well as collaboration. That makes it difficult to look for individual weak areas that require further targeted instruction. Besides, not all problems in life are complex. Sometimes the goal is to recognize and use the most efficient method to get something done.
Thanks Linda. Your comment really made me think. I agree that there exist problems used for that type of purpose. In this particular situation, it didn’t seem like the problems were really being used in such a way that complex problem solving was being assessed. Truly it is a challenging thing to measure, but in the situation I was in, it seemed like it was more like a summative assessment being paraded as formative, and with no particular purpose in mind.
Greetings RK,
Let me say you had me at the title for this post. Just before the tyranny of the testing timetable placed an extended pause on our collaborative planning sessions I had started to regularly pose the question during our examinations of student work: “Why did you choose this activity?” (NOTE: We’re only just beginning to crack the ice on dropping worksheets and using performance tasks with any regularity so the term ‘activity’ covers any work Ts put before students.)
A typical response to the question was a good news / not so good news kind of affair as, more often than not, pointing to the notation somewhere on the page, teachers will share “It says it’s for the ____ focus standard.” Good News: Folks are paying attention to standards but, Not So Good News: stopping their evaluation of the suitability of a task once standards ‘alignment” appears to be achieved.
The ideas in your post provide a useful springboard for thinking about task analysis as a part of instructional planning and post lesson reflection. Such analysis can lead to teachers not only giving more attention to actually unpacking standards but for giving deeper thought to the dimensions and depths of learning they’re after as well. Further, it strikes me that having a clear sense of what students will need to know, understand, and do to be successful in mastering a concept or skill seems central to identifying why we would or would not choose any particular task. Determining when we use a task, that is, electing to employ a particular task in the ways you’ve outlined and/or for other reasons, is a decision that necessitates taking into consideration multiple factors not the least of which is teachers’ knowledge of their learners and comfort/experience with varied instructional approaches.
Lastly, I think that finding a way to share the “why this task” with students is worth pondering. (If there are others observing they can hear the why of the task being offered to students and see what fruit the lesson comes to bear.) Speaking of observers, for formal observations, our teachers are expected to prepare a written lesson plan that is shared with the principal at a pre-observation conference. This seems like an opportune time to note/share the “why this task” information right there in the plan document and the conference conversation. As an on-going practice, however, I’m wondering if including a statement of “why this task” is always worth noting whatever the observation status may be.
Hi Carole. I’m glad this resonated with you and I’m intrigued by the pros and cons of sharing the “why” with students. For example, I wonder if telling them that this is to introduce a concept would reduce their anxiety but also reduce their effort (“We’re not going to finish this right now anyway. Why should we try?”)
I’ll have to keep thinking about this.
Thanks for the post. As a team leader for mathematics teachers, my goal this year is to minimize the gap between the classroom problems that should (and hopefully) have the what/how/why in mind with the assessment questions. So, your last paragraph with the comment about assessments resonates a lot with me.
I like the three why’s will think of how to incorporate this in our next math team meeting.
Thanks
No problem Zane. One question I still have is whether there are other whys. I would be shocked if I never found any others.
This was a great read to think about in my role as an instructional coach. I am going to remember to ask “why” when planning to ensure the teaching and learning matches the intent, and for self-reflection and feedback purposes. I also think this could help in our PLC when teachers debrief the lesson together-what was the why, how do we know if students achieved the why, what will we do to come back around if needed, or how can we use the why to extend for those that got it?
Agreed Ashley. I would definitely front load this as much as possible because people will be having their own conceptions about how well the lesson is going based on their “Why?” assumptions.
Robert Kaplinsky, I enjoyed your article and the rich discussion that followed. I am going to share this with my colleagues. I especially appreciate the discussion of how it all ties back to what an observer might see and interpret. Being a classroom teacher for 23 years and counting, I have been observed by many types of principals and not one of them would see a lesson the same way. For example, some might ding you for not finishing the problem or for choosing a problem that was too hard and the students didn’t get it because you obviously don’t know your students versus some seeing the problem as a great hook into the unit. They agree with productive struggle and they understand that sometimes a problem can frame your unit; by referring back to it throughout the unit as they learn more they can view it differently. Solving the problem at the end of the unit is a great way to keep students focused, thinking and engaged because they become more invested as the unit continues. It is also a great way to wrap up a unit and celebrate achievement.
Thanks Cheryl. My hope is that it would help explain what often feels like a never-ending misunderstanding for those being observed.