Research School Network: No Question, More Thinking: Reframing Word Problems for Deeper Maths Helping Pupils Think Before They Calculate
—
Blog
No Question, More Thinking: Reframing Word Problems for Deeper Maths
Helping Pupils Think Before They Calculate
Share on:
by Staffordshire Research School
on the
Sarah Foster
JTMAT Primary Maths Subject Secondee
Sarah Foster is a Year 6 teacher at Whittington Primary and Nursery School. Sarah has worked in education for 16 years. Alongside her classroom role, she works as a JTMAT Primary Maths Subject Secondee and a Teaching for Mastery Specialist with the NCETM, with a particular focus on supporting high-quality maths teaching and improving outcomes for all pupils.
We have all seen it. A pupil scans a word problem, spots two numbers, and immediately writes down an operation — any operation — just to get started. Others sit frozen, overwhelmed before they have even begun. For many children, particularly those with less confidence or limited prior exposure to mathematical language, traditional word problems can reinforce surface-level strategies rather than encourage ‘deep thinking’.
In my classroom, I began to wonder: what if the question itself is getting in the way?
Removing Questions
Towards the end of a teaching sequence — when pupils have the knowledge needed to solve a problem — I now present a word problem without the question. At first, this can feel unusual. However, it quickly shifts the focus from answer-getting to sense-making.
We begin simply:
- What do we know? - What don’t we know?
This opening discussion is powerful. Every child can contribute, regardless of attainment. There is no immediate pressure to calculate, only to understand.
We then move on to a richer stage:
- What could the question be?
Pupils suggest possibilities, justify their reasoning and build on one another’s ideas. Only after this exploration, do I reveal the actual question. By this stage, many pupils feel more prepared and increasingly confident since they have already engaged deeply with the structure of the problem.
The result? More accurate solutions, stronger reasoning and importantly, more pupils participating. Here are some examples of what you could do with SATs questions in Year 6.
You could remove the blue lozenge. What do we know? The ratio, how many blue beads. What don’t we know? The number of red beads, the number of beads altogether on the necklace. What could the question be?
Again, remove the blue lozenge. What do we know? How much the fruit costs altogether, there are 3 oranges and 2 pineapples, how much oranges cost. What don’t we know? How much 3 oranges cost, how much 1 and 2 pineapples cost. What could the question be?
Deeper Strategies
This approach aligns closely with the EEF’s Improving Mathematics in Key Stages 2 and 3, particularly Recommendation 3: Teach strategies for solving problems. The EEF emphasises that pupils need to “interrogate and use their existing mathematical knowledge to solve problems” (EEF, 2017).
By removing the question initially, pupils are nudged to pause and reflect:
- Have I seen a problem like this before?
- What are the strategies that might apply?
This mirrors the findings of Givvin and Stigler (2019), who note that:
“Expert problem solvers typically spend more time thinking about problems and trying to understand them than do novices, who tend to immediately execute a solution.”
In my classroom, this shift has been particularly beneficial for pupils who previously rushed or froze. Without a question to latch onto, the habitual rush to calculate is interrupted, therefore creating space for genuine understanding.
This aligns with Recommendation 3, which encourages teachers to verbalise metacognitive thinking, and Recommendation 4, which highlights the value of pupil talk in developing understanding.
As pupils collaborate and discuss possible questions, they are not just solving a problem — they are learning how to approach problems more generally.
Designing Thinking Tasks
Several key influences have shaped this approach. Clare Sealy’s discussion of goal-free problems highlights how removing the end-point can reduce cognitive overload and focus attention on the structure of the mathematics (Sealy, 2020). Similarly, Gareth Metcalfe’s “slow reveal” technique encourages prediction and curiosity, prompting pupils to engage more thoughtfully with the information presented.
Borthwick (2021) also emphasizes that effective task design should promote thinking and working mathematically, rather than simply executing procedures. By withholding the question, we naturally create a task that prioritises reasoning, discussion and exploration.
Supporting All Learners
This approach is particularly supportive for pupils who may face barriers to learning, including those experiencing disadvantage. By slowing the process down and opening multiple entry points:
- Pupils are less likely to feel overwhelmed
- Participation increases
- Confidence builds through shared thinking
Rather than narrowing access, we widen it — ensuring that all pupils can contribute meaningfully to mathematical discussions.
Removing the question might seem like a simple tweak, but its impact has been significant. Pupils are no longer rushing to calculate or freezing in uncertainty. Instead, they have demonstrated the art of talking, thinking and engaging deeply with mathematics.
Perhaps the question we should be asking ourselves as teachers is not “What is the answer?” but “How are pupils thinking?”
Reflection Questions
How often do my pupils engage with the structure of a problem before calculating?
Do all pupils have an entry point into my word problems?
How explicitly do I model my thinking when approaching problems?
Actions to try
Trial presenting a word problem without the question at the end.
Model metacognitive thinking aloud during problem-solving.
Build in structured discussion time before revealing the question.
