Throughout much of human history, learning was an individual affair. An expert would take on a small number of apprentices who would learn the expert's skills under direct supervision while receiving immediate feedback. Apprentices learning to be a blacksmith wouldn't sit in a six-week course on introductory smithing before picking up the hammer; rather, they would immediately begin real work in the smithy. The students would learn by doing. More importantly, they would learn by failing. In modern terminology, that concept is called productive failure, a problem-solving-first style of instruction that focuses on learning from mistakes while tackling novel concepts.

Productive failure can make online or self-paced courses similar to invaluable one-on-one training programs by giving learners the opportunity to try a task before a trainer explains exactly how to do it. Such a try-first structure helps learners create stronger neural pathways around the task's completion, engages learners' critical thinking abilities, and encourages learners to consider how the task should work.

If an instructor correctly sets up the task, participants will remember what they were inclined to do while practicing the task and why the behavior or process was or was not correct. Even when direct instruction follows the task, individuals will be more likely to focus if the training course begins with an opportunity for productive failure because they will have a scaffold to which they attach the instruction and will understand the context in which they will use the information.

Although failing may feel frustrating to learners, the payoff is worth it. In a study detailed in the Journal of the Learning Sciences article "Designing for Productive Failure," researchers found that among seventh-grade students who learned a new mathematical concept, the students who learned through failure before instruction scored an average of 18 percent better on complex problems than students who received direct instruction and traditional homework.

By allowing learners to engage with hands-on tasks and make mistakes before receiving direct instruction, you are tapping into a more effective and natural learning process and better preparing them for real-world application.

Simulate real life

Productive failure can take many forms—for example, a pre-training test, a small project, or a writing prompt—but it works especially well in the context of a simulation. A well-designed simulation provides opportunity for failure at key points, focuses on problems that training can solve (in other words, problems caused by a lack of knowledge rather than by a lack of resources or by environments that make it easy to fail), and reflect the learner's real-life working environment.

A learning environment that reflects the workplace as closely as possible enables employees to more easily transfer the theoretical concepts they learn in a training program into practical, actionable skills. Simulation-based training should focus on what the participants will need to do in the real world, replicate key decision points, and simplify areas where workers already are proficient.

Setting the scene

At the International Academies of Emergency Dispatch (IAED), we primarily focus on training emergency dispatchers to take calls according to a set of protocols designed to gather the most critical information in volatile, emergent situations. Emergency dispatchers must act and think quickly while assessing a veritable onslaught of information. No amount of instruction on theory and background, however invaluable, can replace practice.

In developing our training approach, we faced two main challenges: the elevated turnover rate of those high-stress positions and the criticality of almost any failure. We developed a productive failure model so that if a student failed, they would do so in a safe, offline environment where instructors could help them learn from their mistake, not an actual emergency.

To that end, we created a simulation environment that closely mimics the real-world, call-taking setting in which emergency dispatchers work, including the software they use, the types of calls they face, as well as caller and dispatcher audio. The simulations test participants on choosing the correct protocol, the specifics of certain protocol usage, and additional software tools and soft skills necessary to keep callers and the public safe.

Simulation types

When choosing how to simulate your content, there are more options than you may initially think. A traditional simulation is an in-lesson re-creation of software, where the learner can build skills free of real-world consequences. While that is an excellent application of simulation-based learning, it doesn't have to end there.

Technology enables designers to create simulations of situations outside of software, ranging from flight simulators operated at a computer desk to 3D simulations of laparoscopic surgery using a virtual reality headset. Such solutions will never imitate the one-to-one tactile experience of performing the task, but the visual immersion and safe space to learn from potentially deadly mistakes can vastly increase transference.

Role playing is another way to simulate the situations and skills an employee needs to master. Role-play simulation is an excellent method for soft skills instruction. Participants can hone their customer service, bedside manner, or leadership skills against an instructor or another participant, who can give them immediate feedback and workshop phrasing with them.

When designing role-play simulations, remember that putting one or a few students on the spot can have adverse outcomes. A key component of productive failure is safety. Learners must be free to fail and make mistakes in a safe environment. In some cases, or for some individuals, that may mean that they should not participate in role-play scenarios in front of large groups. However, L&D professionals cannot make a blanket proscription against role plays in front of the class. Some people learn well from seeing others fail and evaluating their performance, while others learn better from trying and failing themselves and discussing that failure with their peers. As such, consider specific classroom dynamics when designing in-person role-play scenarios based on productive failure.

Historically, role-play learning has occurred only in classroom and in-person environments, but companies such as Tactile VR are pushing that boundary with VR nursing training that features responsive, artificial-intelligence-powered "patients."

Other exercises that frequently show up in traditional training make effective simulations when you begin with the goal of inducing productive failure. For instance, project-based learning is one of the closest callbacks to the expert-apprentice relationship, where a student must complete a challenging project while receiving occasional guidance and, eventually, feedback on the final product. Teaching through failure as the student overcomes challenges is valuable, but it has limited applications such as in writing, computer programming, or other creative work.

The simplest way to induce productive failure is to ask learners open-ended questions and let them come up with their own answers before discussing the correct ones. Participants may come up with the correct answer on their own, but those who do not will increase their understanding by being able to compare their responses with the correct ones. A trainer can apply that technique in classroom settings or design it for other applications, such as web-based courses, by having a student submit a written response before the program reveals the correct answer.

Ensure the failure is productive

It's easy to induce failure in learners, but, when using a productive failure approach, it's important to follow up failures with corrective feedback and guidance so participants can correctly complete the task. Otherwise, a potential pitfall is the possibility that training participants will remember their incorrect steps.

Feedback should redirect the learner toward the correct action, not simply point out that the student was incorrect. Further, good feedback should feel motivating and clarifying rather than punitive and demoralizing. For instance, instead of only saying, "That's not right," instructors should say something such as "Not quite. Remember that …" to explain why that pathway was incorrect and why the correct choice is better. That way, learners will be more likely to remember the correct action sequence and cement the desired behavior into their muscle memory.

Simulations will already focus on addressing pain points, so the facilitator's feedback should anticipate where the learners will fail and redirect them while calling back key points from the training content as a reminder. Good feedback is the difference between failing productively and just failing. After offering feedback, the trainer should ask the individuals to try again until they take the correct action. Enable learners to come to the right answer on their own rather than providing it to them.

Take, for example, one of IAED's simulations that covers protocol choice. In it, we present a student with a caller who describes that their friend, who has diabetes, fell to the ground and began to seize. The student then must decide whether to use protocol 13: diabetic problems or protocol 12: convulsions/seizures. If the student chooses to use the wrong protocol (protocol 13), we remind them of the important facts of the situation and the protocol-selection rules.

Plot the course

Creating a training program based on productive failure is more effort for both the instructional designer and the subject matter experts, but it pays off in the end. Help reluctant SMEs get onboard by collaborating with them to create an action map of the course (see sidebar). Action mapping encourages SMEs to move beyond describing what they know and into explaining what they do. The latter can guide you in creating a plan to help learners practice those specific actions. Useful action maps answer two key questions:

• How would an outside observer notice who has and hasn't taken the training course?

• What will a trained employee do that an untrained one wouldn't?

A successful action mapping session will result in both you and the SME outlining specific, actionable, measurable goals for the training program. Most SMEs genuinely want to help designers create a training course that results in learners doing the right things; with a designer's guidance, SMEs tend to become excited about listing potential activities to help learners practice.

Productive failure helps the facilitator make sure the participants understood the material. Traditional assessments, such as multiple-choice tests, are a poor predictor of whether trainees will be able to apply the material they have learned in a real-world context. Simulations and productive failure enable participants to practice in a context without theoretical abstractions, and their behaviors during the simulation enable them to build skills that will transfer more easily than traditional instruction. Design the simulation to disallow a learner to complete the training program until they have correctly completed the simulation. Therefore, the simulation will function as a built-in evaluation that ensures learners accurately perform the most important tasks.

Give failure a try

We have found that when one of our training programs includes opportunities for productive failure, learners are more likely to report that they understand the material well and feel better prepared to apply it in their jobs. For every lesson that includes simulations, learners have shared that the simulations were the best and most useful parts of the courses. Student surveys indicate that our productive-failure-based approach has helped participants understand the material far more than any other teaching approach we have tried.

If you're ready to give productive failure a try, look for places in training programs where you can transform direct instruction or information-dumping into engaging simulations for learners. Simulations can take many forms, so choose a simulation type that works best with the training topic. Role plays and open-ended questions work well for teaching soft skills; projects can help participants who will mostly have independent, self-directed goals; and software simulations can teach complicated processes and protocols while familiarizing learners with (sometimes unfortunately obtuse) user interfaces.

Failure may not feel great at first, but failing is only unproductive if participants don't learn anything.

What Is Action Mapping?

While subject matter experts may initially be skeptical of the action mapping process, we've found that it quickly draws them in and gets them excited about the course while cementing the instructional designer as a training expert in their minds. Action mapping begins by focusing on the actions that a fully trained employee will take. Rather than an aggregation of all the things you wish a learner to know, make a list of all the things you want them to do.

For example, if you are designing a course on how to change a tire, you may ask the SME, "If someone had taken this course, what actions would they take to demonstrate that they are fully trained?" Asking such a question enables the SME to imagine the result rather than worrying about the course content and structure. The SME may answer that a trained employee should be able to:

1. Find the spare tire and jack in their car. Use the jack to lift the car. Remove the flat tire. Install the spare. Visit a tire shop as soon as possible to avoid driving on the spare for too long.

With those five actions in mind, you can then work with the SME to imagine how trainees may practice those actions. Use that information to build the content and exercises for the course. For instance, if you want learners to know how to find their spare tire, you may have them practice accessing the operator's manual of a vehicle and using it to find the location of the spare tire, simulate locating and accessing it on a specific fleet vehicle, or practice identifying common locations on consumer vehicles.

Although you can complete action mapping by hand on a whiteboard or typed up in Microsoft Word, a mind-mapping software will help track your thoughts in an aesthetically pleasing flow chart.