What We Talk About When We Talk About Problems
At Stone, we often ask: How prepared are students to navigate the complexities of the world they live in?
How prepared are they to understand and grapple with the kinds of problems they encounter on a daily basis?
Here, we’re using an intentionally broad definition of a problem – that a problem represents the difference between a current state and a desired state. At Stone, we believe a problem can be something incredibly large and complex and urgent (climate change, for example); a problem can also be something really small (an unanswered text in need of response). A problem can be a research project, a problem can be a decision about lunch. In fact, we are faced with thousands of decisions each day which can easily be categorized as a problem in need some kind of solution:
How to get to school most efficiently;
How to use free time with intention;
How to plan for college;
How to write a single line of code in a programming class.
How to decide which text to respond to and which DM to ignore;
How to change audience behavior in an entrepreneurship project;
How to earn a “High Pass” on the Senior Defense;
How to understand a complicated social dynamic.
Some problems demand immediate attention; others can wait. Some have clear solutions; others are messy and ambiguous. Some represent choices and decisions have extraordinary scale; some are so small as to feel nearly invisible. And for all, regardless of size and consequence, it is our ability to make real-time engagement decisions that defines the rhythm of our days.
Some problems have…louder consequences than other do, like the House Richardson annual Jenga tournament.
James Clear writes, “The hardest part of solving a problem is defining it.” David Allen, the productivity expert, goes further: “If you don't give something the attention it deserves, it starts to take more attention than it deserves.” Somewhere therein lies the core of a problem-based education like ours at Stone – we tend not to see most problems as either “good” or “bad” so much as open loops in need of some form of definition and appropriate engagement. Learning to define problems well is one of the most valuable skills a student can develop, and yet schools often expect students to manage an ever-increasing flood of problems without equipping them with the right frameworks—tools for thinking and decision-making – that will help them do it.
Tame Problems vs. Wicked Problems
The Stanford d.school categorizes problems into two broad types: tame problems and wicked problems. Tame problems are often straightforward. They have clear answers and are usually binary in nature—they are either correct or incorrect. These include:
Introductory math problems (5 x 5 = 25 every single time).
Grammar rules.
Dates and names in history.
Simple to-do list items like responding to an email or submitting an assignment.
Tame problems aren’t defined as more or less easy, but they are solvable with a structured approach. In our leadership cohort, we categorize many tame problems as workflow challenges—tasks that need to be scheduled and managed within a system (we lean heavily on David Allen’s Getting Things Done methodology). For tame problems, the most immediately useful framework is time—when are you going to address this? In fact, if it is the case that you are the right person to tackle a tame problem – assuming you have the appropriate skills to do so – it’s often the case that just deciding when to take action solves the problem itself.
Wicked Problems: Complex, Messy, and Uncertain
Wicked problems, on the other hand, are the ones that keep us up at night, the ones that nag, the ones which do not have a “solved”-state or a “done”-state. They are not completable, they are complex, interdependent, and resistant to simple solutions. They often involve multiple perspectives, unintended consequences, and deep systemic structures. For example:
9th grade student Jack P., either iterating or being iterated.
Climate change isn’t just about emissions—it’s connected to politics, economics, culture, and technology. It can’t be “fixed”, but it can be iterated.
A fender bender isn’t just an isolated event—it’s the result of urban design, road safety policies, human behavior, our relationship to cars, and much more.
Navigating an uncertain career path isn’t just about choosing a major—it’s about skills, adaptability, relationships, and evolving industries;
The Senior Defense isn’t a “research project”, it’s a learning project which demands time, reading-to-learn, reflection, and synthesis.
Wicked problems can’t be solved with a single step or set of steps (and in fact they likely can never be solved so much as “improved-upon”). Instead, they require frameworks that help us navigate complexity, iterate, and think systemically. At Stone, our students are instructed to use four key frameworks which help them engage with wicked problems in a structured way, which help them advance through deep challenges in organized ways:
1. Design Thinking: Prototyping Toward Solutions
Design Thinking is a framework which exists largely to structure our student’s approach to iteration, prototyping, and testing. A typical design cycle follows six steps:
Empathize (understand the problem from different perspectives)
Define (clearly articulate the challenge)
Ideate (generate multiple possible solutions)
Prototype (build a working model)
Test (see how it works in real life)
Repeat (refine and improve)
Design Thinking can help us better understand our “users”; it certainly helps us understand the iterative process. And not coincidentally it interacts neatly with the scientific method as a series of steps which help us get closer and closer to understanding the relationships between what we believe might be true and what we can test to be true.
2. Systems Thinking: Seeing the Bigger Picture
Systems Thinking helps students move beyond seeing problems as isolated events and instead recognize them as part of a larger system. Rather than asking, How do we fix this one issue?, we ask, What underlying structures led to this outcome?
Using the Iceberg Model, students analyze problems beyond surface-level events by engaging with four key layers:
Events – Observable occurrences;
Patterns – Recurring trends over time.
Structures – Systems, policies, or incentives driving those patterns.
Mental Models – Deep beliefs and assumptions shaping the system itself.
All of which enables our students to better contextualize a real world “event”, and better interact with the true scale of the complexity of the event in order to better understand how to make change.
3. Entrepreneurial Mindset: Navigating Uncertainty
Entrepreneurial Mindset is an internal framework we have designed to encourage our students to reframe their approach to challenge itself – one which encourages students to embrace uncertainty, seek opportunities, and think creatively about solutions. In fact, as they approach the work of problem-solving, we ask them to:
Reconsider problems as opportunities
Develop comfort with risk and ambiguity
Leverage creativity to build innovative solutions
Or, as we sometimes say, “You don’t have problems, you have projects.”
4. The Aristotelian Triangle: Communicating Solutions Effectively
And finally, because even the best solution can fail if it isn’t communicated effectively, we ask our students to refer to Aristotle’s rhetorical triangle so that they may balance three key elements in their messaging:
Logos (Logic): Does the argument make sense?
Ethos (Credibility): Is the source trustworthy?
Pathos (Emotion): Does the message connect with the audience?
Whether presenting a startup pitch, writing a persuasive essay, or leading a community initiative, understanding how to communicate ideas persuasively is critical in order to inspire and change their audience.
Why This Matters
There’s a question inherent to school itself: what are we preparing our students for? It can’t just be more school. They live in a world flooded with information, alerts, notifications, and constant decision-making and because they do we owe it to them to do more than just tell them to “stay organized” and send them on. We need to give them frameworks that allow them to think critically, define problems well, and navigate complexity with confidence.
At Stone, we believe problems aren’t roadblocks—they are invitations to engage with the world more thoughtfully. And when students learn to see problems through the right frameworks, they don’t just “get through” life—they actively shape it.