Failure is the death of enthusiasm. It is probably the one consistent emotional response, for children through adults, to an event that doesn’t turn out as planned. Unlike most parts of a lesson, failure is never planned. It can start with humans, nature, timing, components, or technology. As STEM is heavily reliant on technology anything can cause a good plan to go awry. STEM disciplines are also about problem-based learning so even failure can be productive. Dickson et al. consider failures productive when they inspire more learning and perseverance contrary to how the lesson was originally designed (2020). This is different than ill-structured problems as found in problem-based learning. Ill-structured problems have unknown problems, elements, and multiple solutions that shape inquiry. Productive failure re-directs the exploration after reflection on initial attempts.

According to Fernandes and Simoes, in failure, students can guide their learning process in ways that are critical, collaborative, and transformative (2019). As the engineering process involves a prototype/test/redesign phase, so does unplanned error. In 3D printing the variables of printing material, temperature, and settings require documentation for when printing error occur. This may appear as layers of printed material separating, not sticking to the build platform, or melting upon itself. Students need to reflect on the potential cause of problems, research and make a suitable hypothesis about a what factor they can change to improve the result. Collaboration is an essential component of the STEM classroom and is especially effective in problem identification. Student experience, diversity, and multiple intelligences offers access to information that can maintain enthusiasm for moving forward through shared resolutions. This is transformative in how problems are seen, not as setbacks, but as motivation to persevere. These competencies are transferable in problem-solving processes reflect the real-world skills needed for the 21st-century work environment.

Research by Hansen et al. shows that when students encounter failure in class the result is meaningful learning experiences (2019). Challenging aspects of projects lead to cognitively higher learning. Hansen et al. continue to describe the affordances of the risks of using technology in the classroom. Affordances, or positive benefits, of 3D printers, include an emerging and cutting-edge technology that prepares students for schools and jobs. Learners can personalize products that are realistic, practical and they can relate to. Finally, 3D printing material is relatively inexpensive and enable revisions using the engineering design process to allow for experiments, variations, and do-overs.

Productive failure challenges all stakeholders to think critically about steps and procedures when using technology in the classroom. While it can initially be frustrating, unique problems engage higher cognitive learning and more meaningful experiences. Accessing intellectual intelligences through collaborations between teachers, students, and peers energizes the process as one more step to consider when designing learning experiences.

Dickson, B., Weber, J., Kotsopoulos, D., Boyd, T., Jiwani, S., & Roach, B. (2020). The role of productive failure in 3D printing in a middle school setting. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31(3), 489–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09568-z

Fernandes, S. C. F., & Simoes, R. (2019). Using 3D printing as a strategy for including different student learning styles in the classroom. In Advances in educational technologies and instructional design book series. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7018-9.ch009

Hansen, A. K., McBeath, J. K., & Harlow, D. B. (2019). No Bones About It: How Digital Fabrication Changes Student Perceptions of their Role in the Classroom. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1155