Caught on Camera: Youth and Educators’ Noticing of and Responding to Failure Within Making Contexts
A lot of attention has been given to the role failure plays in learning and innovation. Yet, we know little about the conditions necessary for the experience to result in positive outcomes. In this study, we sought to answer three research questions: (1) What is the relationship among attend, interpret, and respond when experiencing failures within making-related activities? (2) How does youths’ and educators’ noticing of failure within making-related activities differ by tasks? (3) How does youths’ and educators’ noticing of failures within making-related activities differ by context? To address these questions, we used data collected from youths participating in making experiences in three different contexts: schools, a science museum, and an afterschool program run by science museum educators. Analysis of approximately 90 h of video revealed differences in how youths and educators attended, interpreted and responded to failures that suggest differences in the sophistication of their response. Educational implications from these findings support less direct oversight by educators and increased use of techniques to have the youth demonstrate positive troubleshooting behaviors.
KeywordsFailure Making contexts STEM Video analysis
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1623452. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- Abdi, H. (2007). Bonferroni and Šidák corrections for multiple comparisons. Encyclopedia of measurement and statistics, 3, 103–107.Google Scholar
- Antlová, A., & Chudý, Š. (2017). An error as a positive element in a learning process. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
- Bishop, K. (2017). Framing failure in the legal classroom: Techniques for encouraging growth and resilience. Arkansas Law Review, 70(4), 959–1006.Google Scholar
- Blikstein, P., & Worsley, M. (2017). Children are not hackers: Building a culture of powerful ideas, deep learning, and equity in the maker movement. In K. Peppler, E. R. Halverson, & Y. B. Kafai (Eds.), Makeology: Makerspaces as learning environments (pp. 64–79). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Brahms, L., & Crowley, K. (2016). Learning to make in the museum: The role of maker educators. In Peppler K., Halverson E., & Kafai Y. (Eds.) Makeology in K-12, higher, and informal education: The maker movement and the future of learning. Routledge.Google Scholar
- Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Craighead, E. W., & Weiner, I. B. (Eds.). (2010a). Kappa coefficient. In The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology (Vol. 2). Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0484. Accessed 7 Feb 2019.
- Craighead, E. W., & Weiner, I. B. (Eds.). (2010b). Kruskal-Wallis test. In The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology (Vol. 2). Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0491. Accessed 7 Feb 2019.
- Dougherty, D. (2013). The maker mindset. In M. Honey & D. E. Kanter (Eds.), Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of science innovators (pp. 7–11). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Helsinki: Orienta-konsultit.Google Scholar
- van Es, E. (2011). A framework for learning to notice student thinking. In M. Sherin, V. Jacobs, & R. Philipp (Eds.), Mathematics teacher noticing: Seeing through teachers’ eyes (pp. 134–151). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2000). Learning from museums: Visitor experiences and the making of meaning. Lanham, MD: Alta Mira Press.Google Scholar
- Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1408–1416.Google Scholar
- Grafsgaard, J., Wiggins, J. B., Boyer, K. E., Wiebe, E. N., & Lester, J. (2013). Automatically recognizing facial expression: Predicting engagement and frustration. Memphis, TN: International Conference on Educational Data Mining.Google Scholar
- Jacobs, V. R., Lamb, L. L., & Philipp, R. A. (2010). Professional noticing of children's mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 169–202.Google Scholar
- Kulič, V. (1971). Chyba a učení: Funkce chybného výkonu v učení a v jeho řízení. [Mistake and learning: Malfunction in learning and in control.] Prague, Czech: SPN.Google Scholar
- Lahey, J. (2016). The gift of failure: How the best parents learn to let go so their children can succeed. New York, NY: Harper.Google Scholar
- Lottero-Perdue, P. S., & Parry, E. A. (2014). Perspectives on failure in the classroom by elementary teachers new to teaching engineering. Indianapolis, IN: Paper presented at the 121st ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition.Google Scholar
- Maltese, A., Simpson, A., & Anderson, A. (2018). Failing to learn: The impact of failures during making activities. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 30, 116-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.01.003
- Maltese, A., Simpson, A., & Anderson, A. (2019). Learning while failing during maker activities. Structured poster presentation at the annual research meeting of the American Educational Research Association: Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
- Petrich, M., Wilkinson, K., & Bevan, B. (2013). It looks like fun, but are they learning? In M. Honey & D. E. Kanter (Eds.), Design, make, play: Growing the next generation of STEM innovators (pp. 50–70). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Simpson, A., & Maltese, A. V. (2017). “Failure is a major component of learning anything.”: The role of failure in the career development of STEM professionals. Journal of Science and Technology Education, 26(2), 223-237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9674-9
- Simpson, A., Burris. A., & Maltese, A. V. (2017). Youth’s engagement as scientists and engineers in an after-school tinkering program. Research in Science Education. [Advanced Online Publication.] https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9678-3
- Simpson, A., Maltese, A. V., Anderson, A., & Sang, E. (Forthcoming). Failures, errors and mistakes: A systematic review of the literature. In E. Vanderheiden & C.-H. Mayer (Eds.), Mistakes, Errors and Failures: Their Hidden Potentials in Cultural Contexts. Google Scholar
- University of Minnesota. (2018). VideoAnt. Retrieved at https://ant.umn.edu/documentation
- Wardrip, P. S., & Brahms, L. (2015). Learning practices of making: developing a framework for design. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 375–378). ACM.Google Scholar
- Wardrip, P. S., & Brahms, L. (2017). Taking making to school: A model for integrating making into classrooms. In K. Peppler, E. R. Halverson, & Y. B. Kafai (Eds.), Makeology: Makerspaces as learning environments (pp. 97–106). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar