Are We Teaching Students to Solve Problems or Solving Problems for Them?
Early in the school year, I introduced an open-ended engineering design challenge to my middle school science students. I was looking forward to seeing what they would come up with. I imagined students discussing ideas, experimenting with materials, and figuring out different ways to solve the problem. That was not quite what happened.
After giving clear instructions and distributing materials such as craft sticks, string, tag board, tape, glue, and rulers, I noticed that many students did not seem to know where to begin. Some stared at their materials. Others looked around the room, seemingly waiting for more instructions. Before making much of an attempt, several began asking for help.
I certainly do not mind students asking questions. That is an important part of learning, especially in science. What concerned me was that some seemed reluctant to take that first step without additional direction or reassurance. I provided more guidance and demonstrated an example, but I also encouraged students to work through the challenge themselves. As we continued, I noticed another problem. Even after I demonstrated an example to help students understand the challenge, some seemed more interested in reproducing what I had shown them than developing their own solutions. I had intended the example to provide guidance, but I began wondering whether it had unintentionally limited their willingness to explore other possibilities.
Here I was asking students to think creatively and develop their own solutions, yet some seemed more comfortable following an example than exploring their own ideas. It made me wonder whether, in our efforts to help students succeed, we sometimes provide so much guidance that we unintentionally limit their willingness to think independently. Are we giving students enough opportunities to develop the confidence and persistence to work through unfamiliar problems on their own?
When Students Struggle to Think Independently
When I think back to my early years of teaching, I remember students who seemed eager to take on unfamiliar challenges. Many could not wait to get into the science lab, work with materials, and see what they could discover. They did not always get things right, but they were often willing to try.
More than 25 years later, I have noticed a difference. I still teach students who are curious, motivated, and eager to learn. However, I also encounter more students who seem hesitant to begin something unfamiliar without someone telling them exactly what to do. I realize these are my own observations, and I would not suggest they represent every student or classroom. Students today are growing up in a different world, with different expectations and distractions. Still, the change is difficult for me to ignore. I do not believe students today are any less capable. I do wonder, however, whether some have become so accustomed to receiving detailed instructions and immediate assistance that they have had fewer opportunities to figure things out for themselves.
When Support Becomes Dependence
Teaching has changed considerably since I entered the profession. Today, we are expected to provide more differentiated instruction, detailed directions, scaffolding, and individualized support. Much of this has been beneficial, particularly in helping us better address students’ different learning needs. But I sometimes wonder whether, in our efforts to help students succeed, we are doing too much of the thinking for them. I find myself spending more time breaking assignments into smaller steps, explaining directions, and providing examples before students begin working. These are often necessary practices. Yet even after receiving this support, some students still hesitate to move forward without additional reassurance.
I am certainly not suggesting that we eliminate scaffolding or accommodations. Students have different needs, and some require more explicit instruction and guidance than others. That support is important. However, scaffolding should help students become more independent over time. At some point, we have to give them opportunities to use what they have learned without walking them through every step. There is a difference between helping students finish an assignment and helping them develop the skills to complete challenging work independently. The first may get them to the correct answer. The second prepares them for the next problem.
Problem-Solving Requires More Than Critical Thinking
Another concern I have is whether we sometimes place so much emphasis on critical thinking and problem-solving that we overlook the foundational knowledge students need to do either one effectively.
The engineering challenge reminded me of this. I wanted students to design solutions, but some were struggling to use a ruler. I have seen similar difficulties when students are asked to analyze data but cannot interpret a graph or design an experiment without understanding variables.
When the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) were introduced, I welcomed the emphasis on inquiry and engineering design. I also explored teachers’ perceptions of NGSS implementation through my doctoral research. One concern I have had is how inquiry has sometimes been interpreted in classrooms. In moving away from memorization and traditional instruction, I believe some essential knowledge and skills have received less attention than they deserve.
The standards themselves recognize the importance of content knowledge alongside scientific practices. The challenge is making sure our instruction reflects that balance.
Get Milton G. Harris, Ed.D.’s stories in your inbox
Join Medium for free to get updates from this writer.
Students need to know things before they can think critically about them. Memorization alone is not enough, but neither is asking students to solve complex problems without the knowledge and skills to get started.
When Answers Are Only a Click Away
Technology has also changed how students approach learning. When I started teaching, students relied heavily on textbooks, libraries, and classroom resources. Today, information is available almost instantly. That access has created tremendous opportunities. Yet I sometimes find myself reminding students to look in their digital textbooks or consult resources already available to them before asking me for an answer.
Artificial intelligence adds another dimension. These tools can help students understand difficult concepts, but they can also provide answers to questions students might otherwise have worked through themselves. I am not opposed to technology. I use it in my classroom and recognize its value. However, I believe we need to help students understand the difference between finding an answer and developing the ability to solve a problem.
Helping Students Become Independent Problem-Solvers
These concerns have led me to become more intentional about how I encourage independence in my classroom.
One approach I use is what I call “mindset moments.” Sometimes I include a brief statement in our Google Classroom agenda alongside the learning objectives. Other times, I take a moment during class to remind students about persistence, resourcefulness, and the importance of thinking for themselves.
One message captures what I want them to understand: “My role as your teacher is not simply to give you answers, but to guide you as you learn to discover them for yourself.”
My colleagues and I have also introduced formative learning checklists. Rather than simply receiving a score and moving on, students review their assessments, identify what they misunderstood, and develop plans to improve. Students who demonstrate mastery work on enrichment activities. I have noticed that this process encourages students to take greater ownership of their learning.
I am also beginning to develop proficiency scales to help students better understand where they are in their learning and what they need to do to move forward.
Perhaps one of the most important changes I am making, however, is allowing more wait time.
When students encounter a difficult question or unfamiliar task, I try not to jump in immediately. Instead, I give them time to think, review directions, consult resources, or talk through ideas with classmates. This can be uncomfortable, and not just for students. As teachers, we often feel the need to step in when students appear confused or uncertain. Sometimes we want to help. Other times, we simply want to keep the lesson moving. But I have found that when I allow students to sit with that uncertainty a little longer, they often begin looking for solutions themselves. They consult their materials, test ideas, or work together to figure out what to do next.
That does not mean I leave students to struggle indefinitely. I am still there to guide them, ask questions, clarify misunderstandings, and redirect them when necessary. I simply try not to make giving them the answer my first response.
I also believe students need more opportunities to make decisions during science investigations rather than always following detailed procedures. Sometimes the learning comes from trying something, discovering it does not work, and deciding what to do differently.
When I think back to that engineering challenge, I recognize that some students needed additional instruction while others needed reassurance or simply more time to work through the problem.
Perhaps we should pay closer attention to what students do when they encounter something unfamiliar. Do they make an attempt? Do they use available resources? Are they willing to try another approach when the first one does not work? These are habits I want my students to develop, not just for science class, but for life beyond the classroom.
Ultimately, my job is not simply to help students find answers to the problems I give them today. It is to help them develop the knowledge, confidence, and persistence to solve problems they will face tomorrow, even when I am no longer there to guide them.
