Safe to Fail Probe

Fail?  That's not something that sits easy with me.  So when I was introduced to the idea of carrying out a 'Safe to Fail Probe',  I felt anxious and apprehensive.

Why plan for something that could quite likely fail?

During an ELT in Term 1, we were given the opportunity to experiment with designing a Safe to Fail Probe.  Within a safe environment, we explored how sharing an idea with other groups encouraged us to question and delve deeper into our 'probe'; making changes and redirecting our thinking.

This practice highlighted the possibilities that sharing can create.   Through our own eyes we felt that we were designing a great plan.  But with the support an independent group, whose role was to question not praise, we were able to see gaps - not only in our plan, but also in the way that we delivered the concept.

Safe to Fail - LH2

In early May, following our discussions on Safe to Fail Probes and how to identify whether it is risky - yet not disastrous if it fails, we constructed our first 'probe'.   Our thinking which lead to this probe was that we felt that many of our Learners were not engaging in an iExplore activity in a meaningful way.   Many of the boys were making guns an swords out of the multilink cubes and running around the habitat.   Many girls were drawing princesses and making cards.

In our minds, iExplore was to be a time for the Learners to explore their curiosities, yet also extending their learning.   Were these activities providing this?   Could we design iExperience opportunities out of their interests which could then lead into a more personalised and challenging iExplore?

One area of difficulty with designing a probe is to make it simple - to keep it granular.   Also, it is challenging to design a probe that would help to solve a problem, rather than to learn something from.   

Chris and Leanne reminded us that it needed to be an inquiry to learn, rather than an inquiry to solve.  They also suggested that we keep our eyes open to notice what would happen if we make small changes - to be alert for anything that is not normal - emergence of the unusual, e.g. the quiet Learner suddenly starts speaking.

Our initial probe was redesigned towards the end of May and although we have started the 30 minute taster experiences, we are not overly pleased with Learner acceptance to choose an extension experience on the Wednesday.     It seemed as if they felt little need to delve deeper or extend their understanding.    

Today, during our EOD, we designed Our 2nd Safe to Fail Probe - 3.6.2016.  This was influenced by a day of discussion in which we identified that we wanted the iExperiences to generate greater independence, yet to also meet their individual Proximal Zones of Development.

I'm sure there will be some tweaking and I'm curious to find out who can manage this and which taster experiences ignite their minds.