How Productive Failure Can Support Learning in Novel Problem-Solving

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyresa Jackson
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Productive Failure

scholarly journals When Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Works: Evidence for Productive Failure

2021 ◽  
pp. 003465432110191
Author(s):  
Tanmay Sinha ◽  
Manu Kapur
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Effect Sizes ◽  
Productive Failure ◽  
Ps I ◽  
Initial Learning ◽  
Younger Age ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
General Skills ◽  
Passionate Debate

When learning a new concept, should students engage in problem solving followed by instruction (PS-I) or instruction followed by problem solving (I-PS)? Noting that there is a passionate debate about the design of initial learning, we report evidence from a meta-analysis of 53 studies with 166 comparisons that compared PS-I with I-PS design. Our results showed a significant, moderate effect in favor of PS-I (Hedge’s g 0.36 [95% confidence interval 0.20; 0.51]). The effects were even stronger (Hedge’s g ranging between 0.37 and 0.58) when PS-I was implemented with high fidelity to the principles of Productive Failure (PF), a subset variant of PS-I design. Students’ grade level, intervention time span, and its (quasi-)experimental nature contributed to the efficacy of PS-I over I-PS designs. Contrasting trends were, however, observed for younger age learners (second to fifth graders) and for the learning of domain-general skills, for which effect sizes favored I-PS. Overall, an estimation of true effect sizes after accounting for publication bias suggested a strong effect size favoring PS-I (Hedge’s g 0.87).

scholarly journals When failure fails to be productive: probing the effectiveness of productive failure for learning beyond STEM domains

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 651-697
Author(s):  
Valentina Nachtigall ◽  
Katja Serova ◽  
Nikol Rummel
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Productive Failure ◽  
Stem Learning ◽  
Beneficial Effects

AbstractThe current work builds on research demonstrating the effectiveness of Productive Failure (PF) for learning. While the effectiveness of PF has been demonstrated for STEM learning, it has not yet been investigated whether PF is also beneficial for learning in non-STEM domains. Given this need to test PF for learning in domains other than mathematics or science, and the assumption that features embodied in a PF design are domain-independent, we investigated the effect of PF on learning social science research methods. We conducted two quasi-experimental studies with 212 and 152 10th graders. Following the paradigm of typical PF studies, we implemented two conditions: PF, in which students try to solve a complex problem prior to instruction, and Direct Instruction (DI), in which students first receive instruction followed by problem solving. In PF, students usually learn from their failure. Failing to solve a complex problem is assumed to prepare students for deeper learning from subsequent instruction. In DI, students usually learn through practice. Practicing and applying a given problem-solving procedure is assumed to help students to learn from previous instruction. In contrast to several studies demonstrating beneficial effects of PF on learning mathematics and science, in the present two studies, PF students did not outperform DI students on learning social science research methods. Thus, the findings did not replicate the PF effect on learning in a non-STEM domain. The results are discussed in light of mechanisms assumed to underlie the benefits of PF.

scholarly journals Productive Failures: From Class Requirement to Fostering a Support Group

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 271-294
Author(s):  
Milos Savic ◽  
Devon Gunter ◽  
Emily Curtis ◽  
Ariana Paz Pirela
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Support Groups ◽  
Support Group ◽  
Research Group ◽  
Productive Failure ◽  
Psychological Benefits ◽  
Human Aspect ◽  
Psychology Literature ◽  
Shed Light

Mistakes occur frequently in mathematics. Reframing mistakes into positive moments can be psychologically important in a student’s educational journey. We investigated two tertiary math classes that explicitly valued mistakes through a pedagogical requirement called “productive failure”. For a percentage of their grade, students demonstrated how they made mistakes in their problem solving and, most importantly, how they overcame those mistakes. Through interviews, video-stimulated recalls, and evaluations of the course all from students, we initially looked for affectual responses to the pedagogical allowance and student-led demonstration. Many of the responses, both benefits and drawbacks of the productive failure, were interpreted by the research group to resemble the psychology literature on peer-led support groups. Descriptions of both productive failure and support groups, as well as quotes from the students, aim to shed light on psychological benefits of valuing mistakes. Finally, we believe that productive failures benefitted many students because it made the human aspect of mathematics more explicit.

scholarly journals Micro productive failure and the acquisition of algebraic procedural knowledge

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Ziegler ◽  
Dragan Trninic ◽  
Manu Kapur
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Procedural Knowledge ◽  
Sixth Graders ◽  
Algebraic Expression ◽  
Productive Failure ◽  
Complex Concept ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Single Complex ◽  
Open Question ◽  
Ps Condition

AbstractProductive failure has shown positive effects on conceptual and transfer measures, but no clear effects on procedural measures. It is therefore an open question whether, and to what extent, productive failure methods may be used to enhance the learning of procedural skills. A typical productive failure study focuses on a single, complex concept; in contrast, procedural knowledge generally consists of a series of less-complex procedural steps. In this study, failure occasions were adapted to specifically fit procedural knowledge by introducing procedural problems prior to the formal instruction of relevant principles. These procedural problems offered brief but multiple occasions for failure, which we call micro productive failure. A total of 85 sixth-graders were introduced to algebraic expression simplification by providing problem-solving prior to instruction (PS-I condition), compared to providing problem-solving after instruction (I-PS condition). Findings reveal a stable effect of offering micro productive failure occasions for procedural learning; however, as anticipated, there were no effects on conceptual or transfer measures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document