As I wrap up my latest course, I’m beginning the first steps of an action research project to see if I can make changes in course design that increase the number of students that pass a series of human anatomy and physiology courses at a university. The more I study the process of action research, the more I wish this was the standard way of working. Perhaps it simply caters to the scientist in me, but I think all professions would benefit if everyone approached their work in this way. Thankfully, some do. But I think we can do better.
What is Action Research?
If you aren’t familiar with action research, it begins with identifying a real problem you see in your work or life. Then it progresses through a series of steps to learn more about the problem, develop a solution, implement the solution, and check the results to see if it helped, hurt, or had no impact on the problem. The process repeats as many times as needed until a satisfactory solution is found.
What I like most about this process is that failure is built into the steps.
What I like most about this process is that failure is built into the steps. It’s entirely acceptable when the solution doesn’t work, and the process must start over. As I study innovation, one of the requirements for innovation to occur is the permission to try something new and have it fail. But many people have an aversion to fail, or they exist in an organization that punishes failure.
The Importance of Failure
Failure is not only important for innovation, though. It’s also important for learning, itself. Our current education systems don’t have much tolerance for failing. In fact, failure is set up as the goal to avoid at all costs. What does this really teach our students, though? It’s no wonder most people grow up with an aversion of failing. Failing is often associated with ignorance, lack of focus, or even laziness. In such systems, the innovative student is frequently punished.
Any student with an alternative perspective of the problems facing society may struggle to complete assignments that attempt to reinforce the status quo.
Any student with an alternative perspective of the problems facing society may struggle to complete assignments that attempt to reinforce the status quo. Educators may inaccurately label them as bored or disengaged when these students don’t want to participate in assignments geared towards indoctrination to an existing paradigm. But the truth may be that they are deeply motivated by the problems and interested in testing out their theories for solutions rather than demonstrating they understand something they perceive as contributing to the problem.
Teaching Purposeful Failure
I wonder what an inquiry-based education system built on the action research model might look like and how it might encourage more failing and, as a result, more innovation. Imagine with me for a moment how it might look at the earliest pre-K step.
A class of students sit in a circle with their teacher, who guides them in a discussion. First, they share an example of something they like about their classroom. One student mentions the paints and easels in the corner are his favorite thing. Another mentions they like story time the best. Another says chicken nuggets at lunch on Tuesdays.
After all the students have a chance to share a favorite thing, the teacher asks them to share something they don’t like or something they’d change. As each student mentions something, the teacher asks how many of the other students would change it, too. Again, the answers pour in. One mentions he doesn’t like that the paint colors get mixed up. Several others agree. Another says they’d like to pick the stories at story time. Almost all the students agree. Another says they don’t like the pictures near the door. Several others say they really like the pictures.
After the students respond, the teacher reveals that getting to pick the stories for story time got the most agreement. The teacher spends the next week encouraging the children to brainstorm other ways they could do story time so they could all get a chance to pick stories. Each day, the teacher presents new things for the students to consider and brainstorm about. At the end of the week, they all vote on the option they think is best and they try it for the next story time.
With this kind of teaching, the teacher acts as a guide, but lets the students develop the skills to begin directing their own learning process. Even at this earliest level, action research is a natural progression to problem solving. Identify a problem, research or look for solutions, pick a solution to try, and see what worked or didn’t. If it doesn’t work, that’s as valuable a lesson as when it does. And the students get to learn how to fail with purpose.
Imagine if students continued this process throughout their entire formal education journey. How much more motivated might they be? How much better prepared would they be when they enter the professional world?
Imagine if students continued this process throughout their entire formal education journey. How much more motivated might they be? How much better prepared would they be when they enter the professional world? If they participate collaboratively with others to solve real problems, it provides great skills in team dynamics and communication. If they address societal problems, it provides experience with social responsibility and politics. The benefits from this kind of personalized, authentic activities would likely be far-reaching and extensive.
The Limitations are Lessons, Too
I’m trying to think of drawbacks to this approach and I’m coming up empty-handed. I’m sure some students would want to remove math from school, for example. But a trained educator could guide them to study the implications of that option as they consider possible solutions, which could lead to increased motivation from the students that discover its importance in their areas of interest, or at least increased appreciation for its benefits. And if they are adamant about it, perhaps they can propose a solution that removes the more unpleasant parts of learning math they encounter.
If they press on beyond that, they could learn of the policy makers and the processes to get policies changed. They may fail completely in removing math from school, but they will learn a great deal through the failing. And who knows? Perhaps the student that tries and fails will go on to make a huge impact on the ways we educate future generations through some innovative approach that began with their attempt to remove math.
What do you think? Would this kind of approach have worked for you, your children, or others in your life? Do you see problems with it that I’m missing?
Comments