One of the wicked problems teachers are currently trying to solve is the idea of failure as a learning mode. Students are progressing through school only to end up at Ivy league universities where they experience failure for the first time, leaving them crippled (Ainissa Ramirez, 2013). With this rapid increase of technology integration in the school systems, I was curious to see how many teachers that I work with are beginning to address this problem and if so, how are they doing it?
I surveyed a group of 10 teachers that work in STEM based programs or schools whose focus is on the integration of science, engineering, technology and math. Ainissa Ramirez says that in STEM, failure is a part of life, therefore it should be used to help bridge this fear of failure (2013). I did this in the hopes of learning how STEM directly impacts the acceptance of failure in a learning setting versus those students who aren’t in a STEM based setting (a second survey I am conducting personally).
Before going deeper into the data I would like to mention that I don’t feel that I got enough information to truly analyze these results and provide a thorough rationale. I would have preferred having a minimum of 15 teachers respond to the survey and although I got 10, my graphs will show you that some teachers did not answer all of the questions. This leaves my data to be based on a small percentage of people. Therefore, I do not feel that I can make a generalization about failure as a learning mode in STEM based programs.
The teachers I survey work with students from different socioeconomic backgrounds and cultures and have served their school communities for 4 or more years. The schools are all equipped with Smart Boards, document cameras, clickers, Smart Tables, iPads, listening stations and computer labs. Students are exposed to these forms of technology in a group or individual setting. These teachers are a mix of home room and ancillary staff, demonstrating the cross over or technology in every discipline.
83% of the teachers surveyed said that they use tools and programs that instantaneously display correct and incorrect answers in class. They use a variety of programs, ClassDojo, Clicker and Compass Learning being the most widely used. This shows me that in these schools with a STEM focus, that there has been a push t increase the interaction with failure. It also shows me that teachers are beginning to create lessons that provide instantaneous feedback as a teaching tool.
66% of teacher say that utilizing tools that provide instantaneous feedback is effective to student learning. When I surveyed responses, teachers acknowledged that higher performing students felt much more confident, reassured, and encouraged to continue participating in activities that publicly displayed their ability level based on answer choice. They attributed this to feeling confident, self-assured and knowledgeable about the content matter and therefore comfortable in participating.In fact 66% of teachers said that their advanced students are highly motivated to engage in programs such as these.
My survey results showed that teachers felt emergent learners are 50% likely to be engaged in a lesson that provided instantaneous feedback. They went on to mention that emergent learners are more likely to shy away from this type of activity due to the idea of being publicly shamed when they get an answer incorrect. Two teachers mentioned that it depended on the subject matter as well as the number of times this activity has been performed in class. Their thoughts are supported by research from UC Berkely Professor Martin Covington who says that fear of failure is directly correlated to self-worth (2013). If lower learners are used to getting things wrong and feeling bad about themselves then they are less likely to participate.
Despite using technology everyday and engaging in programs that instantaneously publish the percentage of correct and incorrect answers, teachers identified that utilizing programs that provide instantaneous feedback are only useful in some cases. They stressed the importance of a safe learning environment before introducing programs like this due to the very nature of the program. They discussed making sure that the social-emotional needs of the student took as much precedence as the content.
Although I was fascinated by the responses of the teachers I survey, and I was able to begin to get an idea of just how wicked this “fear of failure” truly is, I would like to try to complete this survey again in the hopes of collecting a larger data sample and recognize some more powerful trends. I would also be interested in known what types of things are being in done in classrooms to help create that safe community that teachers continuously mentioned. I think analyzing data like this can put us in the right direction to help solve this wicked problem.
Reference
Ramirez, Ainissa. (2013, August 26). Making Friends With Failure [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/learning-from-failure-ainissa-ramirez
Zakrewski, Vicky. (2013, December 5). How to Help Kids Overcome Fear of Failure [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/how_to_help_kids_overcome_fear_of_failure
We have grown up in a society that has created the connection between failure and self-worth. This crazy idea that failure means you are no good. This is a big problem! Failure is an important part of life; it is essential in growth and progress! Could you imagine what would have happened if Thomas Edison had given up after he failed the first time at developing the telegraph or creating the light bulb? We wouldn’t be able to communicate overseas, watch movies or see in the dark. Yet, somehow the public school sector has developed this ideology that success=good and failure=bad.
Sushma Lohitsa 
