Fantastic take, Tim. “The struggles worth protecting, then, are the open ones, the questions with no answer in the back of the book that a student leaves the room still holding.” Completely agree here. I’ve designed over 25 years of instructional practice around this concept. For me, true friction (productive struggle) results in traction — durable skills that strengthen over time. I really resonate with your reminder about incubation. Personally, it’s one of my most treasured way of solving a problem. But it has to mean something to the student. It has to have purpose, authenticity, challenge, intrinsic motivation…which is precisely why it is difficult to accomplish in a traditional setting. The question is this: How do we design the conditions for this open and alluring type of learning? I know I have my take and hope to write about it before the end of the summer, and I trust you do as well. Would love to focus on this with you and your readers.
I struggle :) to differentiate the benefits of productive struggle (I like your use of "productive failure") vs. the spacing effect, which your text also implicates. One technique that might make things easier ("easier" in a good way, not a counterproductive way) is to use AI to optimize and balance struggle and spacing -- as Matt Strand writes, to "design the conditions for this open and alluring type of learning." Then again, there must also be a strong human role in making struggle and spacing (not to mention learning goals themselves) effective for all learners. Looking forward to part 2.
I can see why. They are both at play I think. The main benefit I think of both spacing and incubation would a memory consolidation, which is about far more than remembering a fact when complex concepts are involved. Hard to separate because to see what they have learned after incubation immediately introduces spacing, so the measurement is muddled. My interpretation of the neuroscience is that spacing doesn’t have to happen through an external trigger. The unconscious or conscious cogitating in the downtime is its own spaced trigger (assuming more recent things are more common triggers).
And spacing, as with productive failure, has only been researched for factual recall and other tasks for which there is no prior skill in the learners.
Fantastic take, Tim. “The struggles worth protecting, then, are the open ones, the questions with no answer in the back of the book that a student leaves the room still holding.” Completely agree here. I’ve designed over 25 years of instructional practice around this concept. For me, true friction (productive struggle) results in traction — durable skills that strengthen over time. I really resonate with your reminder about incubation. Personally, it’s one of my most treasured way of solving a problem. But it has to mean something to the student. It has to have purpose, authenticity, challenge, intrinsic motivation…which is precisely why it is difficult to accomplish in a traditional setting. The question is this: How do we design the conditions for this open and alluring type of learning? I know I have my take and hope to write about it before the end of the summer, and I trust you do as well. Would love to focus on this with you and your readers.
I struggle :) to differentiate the benefits of productive struggle (I like your use of "productive failure") vs. the spacing effect, which your text also implicates. One technique that might make things easier ("easier" in a good way, not a counterproductive way) is to use AI to optimize and balance struggle and spacing -- as Matt Strand writes, to "design the conditions for this open and alluring type of learning." Then again, there must also be a strong human role in making struggle and spacing (not to mention learning goals themselves) effective for all learners. Looking forward to part 2.
I can see why. They are both at play I think. The main benefit I think of both spacing and incubation would a memory consolidation, which is about far more than remembering a fact when complex concepts are involved. Hard to separate because to see what they have learned after incubation immediately introduces spacing, so the measurement is muddled. My interpretation of the neuroscience is that spacing doesn’t have to happen through an external trigger. The unconscious or conscious cogitating in the downtime is its own spaced trigger (assuming more recent things are more common triggers).
And spacing, as with productive failure, has only been researched for factual recall and other tasks for which there is no prior skill in the learners.
Great point. And "incubation" is a helpful term.