The best way to learn math is to learn

how to fail productively

Singapore, the land of many math geniuses, may have discovered the secret to learning
mathematics (pdf). It employs a teaching method called productive failure (pdf),
pioneered by Manu Kapur, head of the Learning Sciences Lab at the National Institute
of Education of Singapore.
Students who are presented with unfamiliar concepts, asked to work through them, and
then taught the solution significantly outperform those who are taught through formal
instruction and problem-solving. The approach is both utterly intuitivewe learn from
mistakesand completely counter-intuitive: letting kids flail around with unfamiliar
math concepts seems both inefficient and potentially damaging to their confidence.
Kapur believes that struggle activates parts of the brain that trigger deeper learning.
Students have to figure out three critical things: what they know, the limits of what they
know, and exactly what they do not know. Floundering first elevates the learning from
knowing a formula to understanding it, and applying it in unfamiliar contexts.
The education ministry in Singapore has given Kapur over $1 million to explore
productive failure, including a $460,0000 grant to train teachers for 11th and 12th grade
statistics.
He learned the approach firsthand as a student at the National University in Singapore.
He spent four months trying to solve a non-linear differential equation in fluid
dynamics. His teacher finally let on that the problem was unsolvable with math alone (it
required computation). Frustrated, he asked why he had allowed him to waste so much
time. It wasnt wasted, the teacher explained; Kapur now truly understood the problem
he was trying to solve. As a teacher himself, Kapur wondered whether this method
could be more broadly applied.
He soon designed studies to test it. In one, written up in Cognitive Science, researchers
presented 9th grade students in an Indian private school with the following math
problem. The concept is standard deviation, but the kidswho have never been exposed
to it beforedont know that
One group is asked to figure out how to solve the problem in as many ways as possible.
They are given 30-45 minutes and teachers cannot help. After that, the teacher discusses
3-4 of the most common approaches. The teacher then shows the class the standard
solution.

A control group is taught standard deviation the traditional way and then asked to do
problems. Both groups are then tested.
On procedural knowledge, or applying the formula, there was no difference between
productive failure and direct instruction. But on conceptual understanding
understanding what it means and possessing the ability to adapt the informationthe
productive failure students dramatically outperform their direct instruction peers.
We are taking the science of human cognition and learning and designing failure-based
experiences to help kids learn better, Kapur tells Quartz.
Kapur started to design quasi-experimental and randomized-controlled studies to test his
theories in 2003. The work has been replicated by researchers in the US, Germany, and
Australia.
So far, teachers have mixed reactions. They recognize that the approach is good but they
worry about efficiency and standardized tests: will kids fall on high-stakes national and
international tests?
Kapur uses the research to make his case. Students get more output (deeper learning) for
the same input (hours of instruction), which presents another problem: teachers have to
get out of the way. They [teachers] say its stressful to teach this way, he says. Its
easier to tell them [students] what you know.
Effective teachers prepare students for the experience, he explains. They are told, we
know you dont know this, we want you to generate as many ideas right or wrong and
the more you generate the more you will learn.
In fact, Kapur theorizes in one of his studies that direct instruction might close students
minds. Once a teacher presents a solution, students may no longer see the possibility of
other solutions, or more creative approaches.
We are saying persist, be resilient, struggle a bit, Kapur says.