Reframing the Obstacles to Problem-Based Math Instruction

When problem-based math instruction is discussed among school leaders and others interested in reforming our education system, I sometimes hear the challenges described in terms like these:

• "Teachers revert to teaching the way they learned."

• "Teachers don't even read the lessons."

• "Teachers are afraid to give up the control associated with direct instruction."

• "Teachers don't know how to truly facilitate discourse."

I think there is sometimes truth to these. However, I've been reflecting lately on the way that these characterizations not only reflect a deficit view of teachers, but also don't fully capture the systems in which teachers operate. Reframing these challenges more thoughtfully can help us develop meaningful solutions.

Reframe 1: Teachers feel pressure for their students to quickly demonstrate new learning. How does this impact problem-based instruction? Let's consider the details of what problem-based instruction looks like, using this excellent summary from Illustrative Mathematics. A key aspect is described in IM's summary this way: "Students should take an active role, both individually and in groups, to see what they can figure out before having things explained to them or being told what to do." The word before is, for me, what's most important.

Now put yourself in the shoes of a teacher. (If you are a full-time classroom teacher, this will be easy!) Every conversation you've have with your boss since August has centered on data about student learning and how your students are not learning enough. Every piece you read in the local and national media is about post-pandemic learning loss. Every curriculum company and non-profit organization is filling your inbox with ways to accelerate student learning. And now, in this lesson on a Tuesday morning, your problem-based curriculum provides an activity in which you are to pose a problem and let the kids try to figure it out on their own before you explain things or telling them what to do.

I posit that the pressure for results now causes teachers to minimize productive struggle. If you only have 45 or 60 or even 90 minutes with a group of students, how long can you tolerate a mode of instruction where students are trying to solve a problem, but many of them may not yet be totally successful? Using a mode of instruction in which you show and tell first, quickly, and often, I think, feels like it matches the urgency that teachers perceive.

Reframe 2: Teachers bear many additional costs when a lesson doesn't go well. Because problem-based learning is derived from teaching and learning practices that aren't common in the United States, teaching in this way for the first time can feel quite different. Most of us didn't grow up learning via problem-based methods. Moreover, most of our current students haven't spent much time learning this way either! Teachers often get used to leaning on their ability to tell, explain, demonstrate, and show; meanwhile, their students aren't used to attempting problems without seeing them modeled first, and probably aren't used to making sense of an idea in a way that relies heavily on examining their peers' work, conjectures, and ideas. So when a teacher tries teaching in this new way that they aren't used to, and their students aren't used to, as you might expect, it doesn't go perfectly right away.

This obviously ties closely to the first reframe about student learning, but consider also the knock-on effects: a lesson doesn't go well, so the objective may need to be retaught the next day. Now, we've fallen behind a day on our pacing calendar, which may invite negative attention from a supervisor. Further, the curriculum doesn't usually provide a second lesson on the same topic, so time must be spent developing a lesson from scratch or finding one on-line. Consider also that when a lesson bombs, it can erode hard-earned trust between teachers, students, and families.

Reframe 3: Teachers are not granted the necessary resources to do problem-based math well, especially in terms of time. Preparing to teach lessons from a problem-based curriculum takes time. Just reading and making sense of the lesson plan can easily take an entire prep period, never mind doing the examples, anticipating student responses, adapting the lesson to offer multiple entry points, choosing questions to focus discussion on, and others, letting alone reviewing student work from the day before to make sense of student learning. This is time that teachers often aren't granted.

So, what do we do? Reframing challenges to problem-based math instruction in this way yields some useful ideas. How can we better support teachers that are at the beginning of their journey with this type of instruction?

1. Start small. Rather than expecting teachers to change their instruction overnight, consider carefully, collaboratively planning a single problem-based lesson or activity once a week or once a month. This is fundamental to the idea of lesson study.

2. Hold curriculum trainings with teachers and leaders together. It's critical that supervisors of math instruction are on board with a problem-based approach, so training on a problem-based approach should involve teachers and leaders. This also builds empathy and trust.

3. Let students know when a lesson will feel different. When teaching a problem-based lesson for the first time, talk to students beforehand about how it will look and feel different. When starting a new school year with a new problem-based curriculum, invest multiple days with students understanding and practicing key aspects of a problem-based lesson (grappling with a task, sharing solutions with each other, synthesizing key takeaways).

4. Create safety for teachers to try, struggle, and learn. Deploy instructional coaches as coaches, not evaluators. School leaders should let teachers know that it is OK to struggle at first and model their own vulnerability. In the same way that we expect students to learn through productive struggle, space should be made for teachers to try, grapple, and learn.

5. Provide more time for teachers. Starting a problem-based curriculum will require a lot of teachers' time to respond to student work and plan new lessons. Adding more prep time, perhaps by removing existing commitments, will be necessary.

What do you think? What did I miss? Would love to hear from you in the comments!