The team found that students remembered the pairs much better when they first tried to retrieve the answer before it was shown to them. In a way this pretesting effect is counterintuitive: Studying a pair for 13 seconds produces worse recall than studying the pair for 5 seconds, if students in the latter condition spent the previous 8 seconds trying to retrieve or guess the answer. But the effect averaged about 10 percent better recall, and occurred both immediately after study and after a delay averaging 38 hours.
Some readers may look askance at the use of word pairs, even though it is a favorite tactic of psychologists. In another article, in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Lindsey Richland, Nate Kornell and Liche Kao asked the same question, but they used more educationally relevant text material (an essay on vision). Students were asked to read the essay and prepare for a test on it. However, in the pretest condition they were asked questions about the passage before reading it such as “What is total color blindness caused by brain damage called?” Asking these kinds of question before reading the passage obviously focuses students’ attention on the critical concepts. To control this “direction of attention” issue, in the control condition students were either given additional time to study, or the researchers focused their attention on the critical passages in one of several ways: by italicizing the critical section, by bolding the key term that would be tested, or by a combination of strategies. However, in all the experiments they found an advantage in having students first guess the answers. The effect was about the same magnitude, around 10 percent, as in the previous set of experiments.
This work has implications beyond the classroom. By challenging ourselves to retrieve or generate answers we can improve our recall. Keep that in mind next time you turn to Google for an answer, and give yourself a little more time to come up with the answer on your own.
Students might consider taking the questions in the back of the textbook chapter and try to answer them before reading the chapter. (If there are no questions, convert the section headings to questions. If the heading is Pavlovian Conditioning, ask yourself What is Pavlovian conditioning?). Then read the chapter and answer the questions while reading it. When the chapter is finished, go back to the questions and try answering them again. For any you miss, restudy that section of the chapter. Then wait a few days and try to answer the questions again (restudying when you need to). Keep this practice up on all the chapters you read before the exam and you will be have learned the material in a durable manner and be able to retrieve it long after you have left the course.
Of course, these are general-purpose strategies and work for any type of material, not just textbooks. And remember, even if you get the questions wrong as you self-test yourself during study the process is still useful, indeed much more useful than just studying. Getting the answer wrong is a great way to learn.
Are you a scientist? Have you recently read a peer-reviewed paper that you want to write about? Then contact Mind Matters co-editor Gareth Cook, a Pulitzer prize-winning journalist at the Boston Globe, where he edits the Sunday Ideas section.
See what we're tweeting about
79 Comments
Add CommentOddly similar to the consistency one sees most often in life, when you fall you must learn how to get back up.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisImagine that kids respond to being challenged. Now if only we could apply it to journalism........
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisisn't the research kind of old as i have seen the similar ones before
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDid this study take into account people have different learning styles? The conclusion in this study may be true for some people, but likely is not true of all peoples. For example, many Caucasian people learn by trial and error while many indigenous peoples learn from modeling and observation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTabarsi, are those learning differences more cultural and environmental than fundamental structural issues? In other words, if you took an "indigenous" person at birth and raised them in "Caucasian" household (to use your terms) would they still learn by modeling and observation or by trial and error?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere they are learning by association. The stars are bright at night. The factory is noisy (if noisy had been selected) but plants are not.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThey should have gone with multiplication.
It seems to prove the joke, "contrary to popular belief, experience is the worst teacher, she gives you the test first and lesson after."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisChallenge the students - now there's a novel idea! :-)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRight. Because we all know that during the study period no one ever makes a mistake and tries to get it right next time.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSheesh. And it was probably a taxpayer-funded study to boot.
how would this apply subjects whose foundation is mathematics ie. quantum physics, theoretical chemistry?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishow would this apply to subjects of a mathematical nature like quantum physics or theoretical chemistry
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn my experience as an Instructor for several years I came to believe that some people learn in a certain way and others in a different manner. But I have not tested the idea to the fullest. There is little or not any doubt with the idea that there are different minds; like people with synesthesia for example. Remember Nickola Tesla. Otherwise is pretty obvious that making mistakes makes you learn and never ever forget; like in life-threatening situations, or even in interpersonal situations. You learn for life what you ought to do and what not to do in certain dangerous situations. I do not think there are differences between races.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt applies the same everywhere. It may be a little more difficult to see how it applies in sciences like Chemistry, etc. It applies in research and problem solving.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou should always try not to make mistakes and not to induce making mistakes even as a drill.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's a common practice in testing to read the questions before doing the study. That's how I was taught to pass tests regarding reading comprehension. It primes your brain for those answers. Not only do you try to form the story by just the questions but it also keeps your mind alert for those subjects. When your model of the story is proven incorrect and is subsequently re-modeled, you seem to remember more of it. This is likely due to the reinforcing qualities of memory. If you come upon something once, it will likely be forgotten. However, with each subsequent exposure to something, it becomes more concrete in your memory.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI've long believed that we do not challenge our students here in the US enough. I have far more confidence in the ability than most. It almost seems as if we are intentionally keeping the kids from thinking by preferring that that memorize information for tests. As such, I know many people who cannot think or problem-solve for themselves effectively but have great memory. On the other hand, there are very few people I've met who are excellent problem solvers and are quite capable of thinking for themselves.
Roediger and Finn, the authors of this SI article, write that researchers Kornell, Hays, and Bjork have found that "learning becomes better if conditions are arranged so that students make errors." While Roediger and Finn use the word "better," the "what" in "better than what?" is fuzzy. They seem to report that Kornell et al. have found that learning under conditions arranged so that students make errors is better than learning under conditions where students do not make errors. In other words, the reported finding was that errorful learning is better than errorless learning. At least it's easy to infer that finding from this article.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHowever, Kornell et al. mention errorless learning in their paper but don't study it. The abstract notes that they examine the question of "what happens when one cannot answer a test question--does an unsuccessful retrieval attempt impede future learning or enhance it?"
Kornell et al. didn't exactly examine this question either, because they didn't (and possibly couldn't) isolate what part of the learning in their scenario was "future" learning. In addition, they only studied learning after wrong answers, so one must be careful not to assume their research sheds light on getting test questions wrong vs. getting them right. (Suppose a researcher reported that "Student learning among African-Americans is enhanced when they are given test questions they cannot answer." If the researcher only studied African-Americans and made no comparison to other populations, the reported finding might easily be misinterpreted.)
What Kornell et al. did was compare two scenarios for learning previously unknown information. One scenario was unsuccessful retrieval attempts (the students were asked to answer test questions they couldn't answer correctly). In this scenario, the retrieval attempt was followed by feedback that included a brief presentation of the new information (i.e., the correct test question answer). The second scenario was a longer-lasting presentation of the new information with no retrieval attempt (the students were not asked to answer a question).
Not surprisingly, unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhanced learning, when compared to presentation of new information with no retrieval attempts.
Despite the SI article tagline, this research makes no case for "hard tests" as opposed to non-hard tests. It does support the value of tests, hard or not, so long as there's feedback with the right answer. Testing with feedback is well-known to be a useful learning tool.
That would all be fine if the grades weren't used to determine so much, and didn't have such a huge effect on your ability to earn a living, and by extension not be poverty stricken and homeless.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGrades are not innocent things living in a vacuum; they help determine what sort of future you'll lead. Make it so that these "tests" exist ONLY for learning and are never released to other teachers, learning institutions, future employers, and have no bearing your passing of the current class then we'll talk.
Most educational software I have seen simply comprises of lessons followed by multiple-choice questionnaires. Good programs guide learners to the correct solutions by allowing a second or third attempt, when the person thinks harder to try to get the right answer. These latter programs are accepted by children, because they encourage instead of scolding them. And learners do make important and rapid progress.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis pretest/posttest situation where the students first attempt to either guess the answer or retrieve it from prior knowledge bears little resemblance to the situation in the lead-in paragraphs. Attempting to guess answers may be a good study technique, but these experiments say nothing about whether error-free learning is a useful method.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisyep
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe essence here is the stimulation of independent thought and has far reaching consequences beyond this simple memory experiment. Some 40 years ago, in a Swiss university laboratory one of the researchers was looking very depressed. When I asked her what the trouble was she said that her experiment had failed. "Well", I said, "Now things get interesting." She was shocked and looked at me askance. Years of submission to top down lecturing in an authoritarian environment had set her mind into rigid thought patterns from which she was unable to break free.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPerhaps a copy of this article could accompany high school reports.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI liked how you started off by saying that people have different learning styles, but then you make the assumption that all Caucasian's learn by trial and error. This is far from the truth. So if your going to make an example please make sure that it is true.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisi believe it is a good idea and a sandrad to improve our studies.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's too obvious that you learn more from mistakes than from success. Students also must be challenged for them to learn rather than just use rote memory for tests.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn science courses, students should be asked to do science experiments for which they don't know the answer ahead of time. It doesn't matter if they don't figure out the correct result because they're learning to think.
Interesting article in light of the fact that WolframAlpha is doing a Homework Day today. The premise is to get students to provide them with the questions that they have and the WA team will help them with their homework using the knowledge engine. Tough to get the answer wrong first when you have something like this for free.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis has been a part of my philosophy and coaching from the outset. I learned through the school of hard knocks my lessons, and those that leave the greatest and longest lasting impression of great merit have been those trials that remain because of their depth and difficulty.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis study applies only to simple recall. I wonder if the same results would hold if the test were of critical thinking skills?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhere'd that come from?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSchool is a controlled environment that little represents the real world. Students should learn from real world scenarios even stepping into it at a more mature time (high school) to experience it first-hand where real learning occurs. Students should also be taught the 80% that is missing beyond fact, theory, and formula.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisfrgough, It sounds like you missed the main premise that the student does better if they guess rather than simple follow a model. Making mistakes is corollary to the thesis.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisfrgough, it seems you missed the main premise; that guessing results in better overall performance than simply following a model. Making mistakes is corollary to the thesis.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI was educated in South Africa. I took a class at university on computer organization. I was known to be a very tough class, with few students passing it every year (they do not practice grading to a curve in SA). I took the class and worked long and hard on the subject matter during the year. I passed - the pass mark was 50%, which is exactly what I got! The following year we got a survey from the department asking how we studied during the year, how we went about doing our assignments, and how we prepared for the exam. The year after that, every student signing up for the class got a booklet on how to study for the class, based on the results of the survey analysis. Not only did the number of people who passed the class increase dramatically, but so did their average marks. I re-did the class and got 85%. That was 7 years ago, and I still remember the material - and still use their recommendations when studying difficult materials.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne thing to note - they never changed the course content or the standards for the exams. They looked at the problem as one of not using the right study methodology for the class.
I think people learn in a variety of ways and ethnicity has very little to do with learning styles. I myself an "indigenous" person would rather "do" than see...Does that mean I have a little more Causcasion in me??? Hmmm.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting article in light of the things happening today with WolframAlpha and the Homework Day...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisStudents are not learning from errors, what they are learning or doing is first think of possibilities to the questions and that is what we want the students to do. To think first based upon their past experiences and move beyond. It is the teacher who labels the student as making an error, instead of rewarding the student for thinking. This provides the opportunity to explore where the student is in their thinking and provide an excellent learning situation.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUnfortunately, the experimenters and the author of the article have confused getting right answers with learning. Remembering a piece of information does not mean that it is worth knowing in the first place or that you will ever use it again.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would like to add one more thought. In creative thinking there are more than just one possible answer. Isn't what we are supposed to do, to have the students think and to think of alternative. And what about feelings? That was not mentioned in the article. We make a great number of decisions based upon our feelings.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe age and gender of the students may also figure in the results - however the tests highlight the importance of prediction as a before reading strategy. The results may also indicate the need to really utilize the brain more efficiently by learners. For example - the need to retain already known and memorized information is reduced when the subject gets a correct answer before reading. But if they get a wrong answer before reading then the brain activates and becomes increasingly targeted towards the new reading and learning at hand. I expect studies in memory and recall are important in this before testing debate too.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUnfortunately, both the researchers and the authors of the article have confused memorization of information with learning. Worse, they have confused being stumped by hard questions with the process of solving real problems. But that's life in the current world of test-driven schooling.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm a special education teacher. This is an excellent article. I am going to share this with my colleagues. I see this as being a helpful tool to add to my teacher resources "tool box"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm a special education teacher. This is an excellent article. I am going to share this with my colleagues. I see this as being a helpful tool to add to my teacher resources "tool box"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI'm a special education teacher. This is an excellent article. I am going to share this with my colleagues. I see this as being a helpful tool to add to my teacher resources "tool box"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe problem I see is teachers making tests harder the wrong way. These teachers feel that the "hard test" method gives them a license to be lazy as teachers. Instead of pushing the envelope of what the student can learn they just limit the communication channel, i.e. cease to be teachers. This teaches frustration and lowers self esteem of the students.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEither the data are inconclusive or the title of this article is misleading: the point seems to be not that it's good to get the wrong answer but that it's good to struggle with difficult material, even if you make mistakes along the way. It would be unfortunate if readers took the title at face value: there is plenty of evidence to show that errors are difficult to unlearn.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGee, if you're practicing a musical instrument and trying to learn a piece, if you make a mistake and keep making it, it just reinforces it, and it's hard to unlearn. I know, I've played the piano for years, and I'm now learning the cello. I play in a very good community orchestra, and often practice works that are really too hard for me. A mistake is hard to eradicate!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYes, but the mistakes have to come before perfection. My grade one son came home worried about the fact that he was not getting all his arithmatic questions right the first time. (a little perfectionaist). His teacher told him not to worry, because he was not in grade two, so he should not be expected to get them all right immediately.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have also heard that a craftsman does not consider he or she has mastered a particular art or craft until they have been at it for fifteen or twenty years. That gives lots of time for learning opportunities and helpful mistakes. Takes some of the pressure off anyway.
"His teacher told him not to worry, because he was not in grade two, so he should not be expected to get them all right immediately."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe unfortunate side effect is that a teacher now has a license to be a sloppy teacher. They could say,.. It's OK if my kids get the answers wrong, that's the way the new method works.
actually I get used to keep the nightlinght on when I am sleeeping.And I am still in a good codintion .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI believe I read a similar article several years ago.Though I still keep the nightlight on when I am sleeping.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNon-competitive games are good for teaching cooperation, but even there it is possible to make mistakes. Learning is not about making mistakes. Learning is about overcoming mistakes.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is also clear that children do not learn from criticism, but rather from encouragement. The combination of challenge and encouragement can help children reach their potential. Challenge and criticism produces nothing but heartache.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI personally dislike failure and will do most anything not to fail I also think failure causes confidence issues.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLots of useful comments!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJoney makes an interesting point:
"Unfortunately, the experimenters and the author of the article have confused getting right answers with learning. Remembering a piece of information does not mean that it is worth knowing in the first place or that you will ever use it again." I'm not sure they do, though. Not in the content-focused article test, even if the content of the article might not be very stimulating. Remember there are control groups in all the experiments, so the futility factor would be the same for both groups.
Getting things wrong/Failing to solve a problem can be useful a) if you want to get them right/solve it, b) if you know it can be done, and c) if you've got a sporting chance.
Most people know more than they know ;-) The thing is to show them they do, and show them that they can mobilize this knowledge over the board to tackle any problem that comes their way.
If you can get the pre-emptive questions to stimulate learner curiosity, you're home and dry. If you use them to bust their teeth out, you're not.
Frinstance, I once used a Latin poem by Catullus (with lots of love and kissing and ignoring wagging fingers) in a class of 14-year-olds at a school in Sweden in a Swedish lesson. Literature. Most of the class were non-Swedes, including several Latinos. With the help of the Latinos (Spanish being so closely related to Latin) we worked out key words, like life and love and kiss. Then we chorus-read it, to get the swing of things. Etc. It worked like a charm. They knew more than they knew. A Latin poem for 14-year-olds in an immigrant-rich school (second poorest district in Sweden, too, as it happens)!
I'd have generalized the piece a bit more though.
People hate being taught, but they love learning.
That's exactly right. We learn from our mistakes. This is why 10 years ago my husband and I launched a program for teens called BIFF (Building Inspiration From Failure). For more visit www.bostonlearningcenter.org
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI worked until I retired in 1996 as a teacher in higher education, and always told my students that the way to learn was NOT to read the course notes but to try to answer problems based on it. Set questions are usually in increasing order of difficulty, so try the first one you cannot answer easily and use the given material as a resource, applying this principle regressively to go deeper into earlier stuff; so it is good to see my old idea given research backing -- thanks.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI haven't read all the other comments, so if this point has already been made I apologise.
"The factory is noisy (if noisy had been selected) but plants are not."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPower plants are noisy.
I'm a 7th grade student, and I tried this out with my tutor and I think it's a great way to test a student on a reading passage. I think If I could do this on different kinds of test's it would really help me get a better grade. I think it's neat how you tend to get most of the answers right. I know I got the first one wrong on the passage questions that I took. I noticed that you can understand more about the passage if you read the questions applying to it before reading it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhile I like that this article helps chip away at the sophocating stigma of being wrong in school, it does so in a very naive and sensationalized way.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe research does not support people giving harder tests, if harder tests mean high-level thinking and making sense of things rather than pure recall. The results do not speak to this underemphasized and arguably more important kind of thinking.
This article gives psychology a bad name by taking highly contextualized findings and wildly overgeneralizing them to make them seem relevant. It diminishes science to go from correlation to recommendation in one blind leap.
R. Schmidt;
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisActually, experience gives you the test, then the lesson, then the test again. And again. That's why it's the best teacher.
This reminds me of the practice of answering Koans in Buddhisms. The focus is not the answer, but how one come about the answer. The question provokes the act of thinking about the answer, when you reach one the answer doesn't matter anymore. :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thiswhat is this supposed to be, some kind of entanglement?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have been saying this works for years. I recently had some other educators imply to me that I must not be a good teacher because I teach using this method!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow on earth do you expect a teacher to verify whether a student has learned the material without some sort of test of knowledge? Homework results aren't enough, and grading based on a teacher's memory of class performance wouldn't be reliable. Tests are a quantifiable way to measure learning. What's your alternative? Don't just complain about a problem, come up with a solution.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow on earth do you suggest a teacher verifies that a student has learned the material, if not by a test of knowledge? Homework results aren't enough, because they could easily be getting too much help from others. If you ask a student to answer any question at all, whether it's written down or spoken out loud, that is a "test." If tests can't be used to determine grades, which are a way to show how well the student learned the material, what else do you suggest? If someone can come up with a proven, alternative measure of student learning, I'm all for it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis explains an interesting observation I made as an undergraduate taking organic chemistry. Such study requries a lot of rote memorization that is not my strength. My performance improved when instead of doing the homework in the normal way and waiting until the assistant checked homework, I merely read the questions and thought about how to answer them before checking the answers in an answer key. This was much faster, since I didn't actually write down an answer, and I had time to do all of the study questions in the book instead of the limited number assigned. After changing my study methods for a month, my test scores improved from C to A. I have recommended this method to other students for years.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMy observation suggests another factor to explain the author's observations, that is that the prompt exposure to the right answer immediately after making an attempt might be a key ingredient in improved memory.
I wonder if this might account for some of the differences traditionally attributed to gender? Males are more inclined to try before they know the answer - a characteristic that manifests in their reluctance to ask for directions, whereas females prefer to have all the facts from the outset, then work through methodically. Perhaps learning style is at least one factor that predisposes males to say, mathematics, rather than having an inherently "better brain for counting".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is ample neuroscientific evidence that clearly supports this approach to learning. The Society for Neuroscience is a good starting point.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe human brain is a very complex neurobiopsychosocial organ and for the huge amount of study that has been done, there is a fantastic amount of much needed knowledge yet to discover. We have just touched the surface and yet, much of what we do know now is being put to practical application.
Just as in the learning (and retaining) process, there are literally thousands of factors involved, many that we have yet to effectively understand and put to practical use. To learn anything well there must be significant strength in neural pathways and balances in neurochemistry. The human brain, especially for those with a high IQ, must be constantly challenged and active. Having the genetic luck of a high IQ is worthless until effectively challenged on a regular basis.
This from the "As I See It" papers by Dan R. Gray
All business grows on errors
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI never use instruction manuals until I try and fail to achieve the desired result, after all there are always intuitive parts that you don't need to wast time on. You never forget what you struggle to understand on your own before you search for the answer.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI have empirically verified the veracity of this while training and teaching some students with learning disabilities like attention deficit or memory lapse in tests.The very act of checking for errors and correcting them by learning the lessons or referring the texts will improve attention and working memory.This coupled with association enhancing imagining techniques improves learning abilities ,as observed selectively,though not applicable in all cases.Improvements can however be effected in understanding of concepts while learning the lessons,by this error correction methods,though it as such is not found to improve working memory unless association techniques are also coupled to this by imroving imagination
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"The factory is noisy (if noisy had been selected) but plants are not."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFactory=Manufacturing plant, not green, leafy plant.
I think it is not necesary that the educator move the student to make errors. It is natural for human being to make mistakes, to fail, to make errors...so it is true that one universal way of learning is by doing some things in a wrong way; not only academic knowledge, but algo behavior and feelings. To make errors is to be human and to recognize that there is always a chance to be better, if not, why does education exists?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thissamandeepg,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe process might be that a physics problem is presented to students and they attempt to solve it based on the physical laws and methods that they understand. After they fail (although some might succeed - who knows?) they are then taught the information nessecary to solve the problem.
samandeepg,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe process might be that a physics problem is presented to students and they attempt to solve it based on the physical laws and methods that they understand. After they fail (although some might succeed - who knows?) they are then taught the information nessecary to solve the problem.
The prequestioning technique is not new. We call it Anticipation; having the students generate questions based on the cover of a book, the chapter titles, the paragraph headings, etc. The the students come up with answers and decide if they agree or disagree with each anser. Then they answer the questions as the story, article or informational chapter is covered. In the situation where the reading is a novel, the student decides if they agree with the answer - which is often an opinion. (Reaction). This technique generates interactive reading with even reluctant readers and education/learning/thinking occurs.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWho'd a thunk.
It's not failure that causes confidence issues, it's one's response to failure. If one has confidence issues due to failure, it's time to look inside rather than out for one's confidence. This goes for any age; however, for a child, the adults in the child's life have a great responsibility to help the child learn to face failure and learn to use its lessons. This will instill the confidence to regard failures as learning opportunities rather than barriers or personal affronts.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis result is very well known in Physics Education Research (PER). A variety of PER curricula use this idea and achieve normalized gain in range of 30% to 70%, while standard physics courses only achieve gain in the range 0% to 25%. There are some important questions left out of the study.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat effect is there when there is a time delay between the initial question and finding the answer? Is there a correlation between the initial answer and the learning? PER has found that a time delay can wipe out the effect.
For my, these tips are right. I often learn better from my incorrect answers because I spend more time to try to explain why I was wrong.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this