Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginger Power
I have been thinking to myself (and debating with others) the value of failure vs. the value of success. I don't think that anybody will question that both hold great value in the learning process for students and mentors alike. What I've been asking is how do we as mentors balance these methods of learning? Mentors generally have the power to intervene in students' struggles and take away the lessons that can be learned from failure, but at the same time, save the student from frustration and give them a new skill with which they can create bigger and more exciting problems to be solved. Obviously there is no "correct", one-size-fits-all answer, but there are surely more successful, and less successful methods.
Here is my take on the issue:
My parents tell me that I am supposed to go to the boy's bathroom and guide me through the process. I successfully do it over and over and never have an issue. I have succeeded in learning which bathroom to use: value in success.
But maybe one day I'm tired, or knowing me, not paying full attention and I mistakenly walk into the girls bathroom  (something I'd be willing to bet most of us have done). The embarrassment and humiliation will cause me never to forget to check the sign before walking into the bathroom: value in failure.
Long story short, value that comes from success is generally easy to come by when it's handed to you, but the value that comes from failure has a more permanent and lasting effect.
On the other hand:
The strategy team is debating what direction the team should go for the year and has hit a major road block. They can't figure out what to do and the argument is getting heated. Mentor William Beatty has this great game-breaking idea that he proposes to the students. They can all now move on and begin implementing the idea: value in success.
Meanwhile many other teams who resent mentor-built-robots allow the students to debate until their voices are hoarse. After a week or two they finally agree and have a student crafted strategy. They end the year as an average team and all agree the students need to be quicker in deciding the strategy next year: value in failure.
Long story short, value that comes from failure takes more time and often leads to fewer new discoveries and experiences (less build time and prototyping time in the above example). Value from success often allows for more and greater success and failure opportunities since it can be done in a quick way.
So basically I typed all that to say I have no idea how to balance out success and failure. I think this is a question that every mentor and team should answer for themselves. I also think it is a question that drives a lot of the mentor-built vs. student-built debate (please don't let it turn into one of those). As a mentor going into my second year, and trying to be the most effective mentor that I can, I'd be really interested to hear how others have answered this question for themselves in the past. |
Interesting topic.
I'll add a personal example:
In 2012, we went to the Granite State Regional in New Hamshire during Week 1. We couldn't shoot accurately or even lower a bridge correctly. We ended up not getting picked at a regional. We realized through this experience that the robot needed some major retooling to succeed-
Value in Failure.
A few weeks later, we attended the Connecticut Regional. Our shot accuracy wasn't much better the first day, but our bridge lowering and balancing was much better, and that night we decided to switch strategies and become a feeder robot. We ended up getting selected by 195 and 181 and winning the Connecticut Regional. Through this, we learned that a role player could be valuable.
Value in Success.
We then attended the Championship event in the Archimedes division. I got a chance to watch the amazing 2012 Archimedes final matches, some of the best matches ever in FRC history. I got to look at 67's robot up close and I said "Wow, that robot is so much simpler than ours." Through looking at their robot (as well as a few others), I learned the value of simplicity and elegance in robot design. This is value from neither success nor failure- I'd call it
Value in Inspiration.
I think teams can use all of these, and they're all effective means of gaining value from the FIRST Program.