Integrating vicarious failure into learning from cases: a conceptual framework for the development of failure cases and scaffolds

Abstract

Failure has proved to be conducive to learning, regardless of whether it is first-hand or vicarious(Darabi et al., 2018; Tawfik et al., 2015). Researchers have explored various methods for utilizing failure as a productive experience in learning, including the productive failure (PF) approach (Kapur, 2012), failure-based case library learning (Tawfik & Jonassen, 2013), studying erroneous examples (Große & Renkl, 2007), and observing vicarious failures prior to lectures (Hartmann et al., 2020). This study examines the integration of vicarious failures into learning from examples and cases and does not consider first-hand failures. It may be both illogical and impractical to encompass both types of failure within a single theoretical lens (as highlighted in the differences between example-based learning and problem-based learning), though both types of failure have significant implications for learning. Although the aforementioned studies apparently share a common belief in the beneficial effects of vicarious failures on students’ future performances, some inconsistencies still remain regarding the timing of the failure experience (i.e.., when to embed failure in instruction; Große & Renkl, 2007; Huang, 2017), scaffolding strategies (i.e., the extent to which teachers need to help students benefit from failure; see Hartmann et al., 2020), and the relative effectiveness of vicarious failure in comparison to first-hand failure (Kapur, 2014). These inconsistencies may largely result from differences in learning domains (e.g., math, science, business management) and instructional methods (e.g., example-based learning, problem-based learning, observational learning). Despite the inherent differences, however, it is still noteworthy that research on learning from failure indicates that instructional design strategies are necessary in order to ensure the optimal use of cases of failure as learning resources (Tawfik et al., 2015; Rong & Choi, 2019). Therefore, it is important to develop practical guidelines for developing and implementing combined failure- and case-based instruction in education. For example, the type and degree of failure (e.g., represented in worked examples, narratives, or videos; well-designed didactically or with authenticity; Hartmann et al., 2020) may largely determine the effectiveness of each instructional approach using failure as a learning resource. Similarly, the extent to which learners are encouraged to reflect upon process-oriented aspects of failure, such as initial expectations, intentions, expectation failures, and subsequent explanations (Schank, 1999), may account primarily for the productive drive produced by failure. In addition, exploring design strategies in terms of failure representation and learner engagement in the failure process also has significant implications for developing and providing scaffolding in learning from vicarious failure. Unlike experienced practitioners, novice learners often fail to elaborate errors in erroneous examples (Große & Renkl, 2007) and cases presented in narrative form (Park et al., 2020), prioritize extracted issues (Tawfik et al., 2019), and reuse the lessons learned from case studies when solving relevant problems (Bennett, 2010; Park et al., 2020). These expert-novice differences in making use of failure indicate that appropriate scaffolding strategies are necessary in learning from failure cases. Furthermore, as the need for scaffolding derives from learners’ lack of experience, learning from vicarious failure may realize its full potential when the true extent to which practitioners experience failure is well represented. In brief, the representations of vicarious failure in cases offer significant implications as to the scaffolding strategies needed to promote learners’ meaningful engagement. Thus, the goal of this study is twofold. First, the authors will examine theoretical design strategiesfor failure case development: what elements of the ...