There are 2 types of failure

Last Saturday, I planned some awesome learning activities to kick off our first unit about great organizations or so I thought. In order to scaffold learning, I had tried to hash out appealing, hands-on activities that would guide students in the identification of patterns between different types of organizations. After a long mental workout, I had created what I believed was a solid plan. And then…came Corey.

As I bounced my ideas off Corey, it quickly became clear that the plan was not that solid after all; as he pointed out, rather than scaffolding activities to prepare students for the final project -a professional magazine featuring great Peruvian organizations- I should let the project drive the learning. Ultimately, that is the ethos of project-based learning. So on Sunday, I went back to the drawing board and started from scratch.

My relationship with failure has come a long way; as a kid, I was taught to regard it as the antonym of success. Growing up, I slowly came to the realization that one does not necessarily have to preclude the other. That said, one has to make a distinction between 2 types of failure.

Unnecessary failures stem from lack of foresight and carelessness. While they can still help us learn from our mistakes, they eventually jeopardize the outcomes of our hard work. So going back to my planning woes, if I pursued my initial plan, it would have shifted the focus away from the project. At some point, I would have realized it, but it could have been too late. Calling it careless might be too harsh; however, had it not been for Corey’s feedback, I would have unwittingly made a counterintuitive call.  Too often we make silly mistakes that can easily be prevented; we can certainly take away important life lessons from such debacles, but there’s much more to lose from unnecessary failures.

On the other hand, calculated failures can drive learning because the person iterating is fully cognizant of its implications. She is fully aware that the outcomes of those iterations, no matter how unfortunate they might be, will allow her to gain invaluable validated learning.

Lean Startup by Eric Ries exemplifies this paradigm. Out of the many anecdotes in this book, Path’s origin story stands out. When the startup was founded there was a lot of hype surrounding it because of the founders’ successful accomplishments with other established startups. However, soon enough, people started to question its slow start and problems encumbered along the way.   Yet the founders knew better; they diligently looked for answers by testing their product:  

“We humbly test our theories and our approach to see what the market thinks. Listen to feedback honestly. And continue to innovate in the directions we think will create meaning in the world” (David Morin, co-founder of Path)  

It is clear that when people seek to unlock the riddle they are open to failure, because they understand that it will bring them one step closer to the answer.

If there’s one thing I learned during my first two weeks teaching in the IA is that students must learn as quickly as possible how to minimize unnecessary failures and capitalize from purposeful ones. Awareness is key.

Photo by Allegra Camaiora

In the meantime, the students have started unpacking the skills needed to create a professional magazine and planning roles and deadlines. Unlike the initial plans, this second iteration allows students to delve straight into their final project and learn by doing.

In hindsight, I believe that in my initial plan, I was trying to protect students from failing by creating guided, teacher-led activities. But, if we want students to make a distinction between these 2 types of failures, we must first give them exposure. What better way than exposing them through project-based learning?