PEDAGOGY FOR LEARNING FROM FAILURE USING CDIO FRAMEWORK: MARINE ENGINEERING PILOT RUN

This paper described how the pedagogy of learning from deliberate failure based on the CDIO Framework was adopted and implemented in a marine engineering course in Singapore Polytechnic. More specifically, the paper shares the results of a study whereby a set of integrated learning experiences were introduced into a 60-hour Year 2 core module entitled “Marine Engine Room Simulator Training” taken by 4 classes with a total of 59 students, over a semester. Two classes served as the experimental groups, where they received instructions from the facilitators about skills in visualization and solved additional “challenge” questions that were inserted in the learning tasks to get them to identify potential failure scenarios and consequences of selected failures. The other 2 classes function as control groups, where students learned the module in the ‘traditional’ way, i.e. without any emphasis on learning from failures. The aim is to firstly “prepare the minds”, that is to change and shape students’ attitudes toward failure in a series of learning tasks based on a marine engine simulator for the first 8 weeks before the semester break. Students learn about the engine systems of a ship, which include the generator, compressor, seawater and freshwater cooling, pump and ballast, etc. This is followed by another 7 weeks after the semester break of simulator-based training. Here the students are required to make use of the first 8 weeks’ prior learning to work through various exercises simulating shipboard operation of preparing the engines for departing port, watch keeping at sea, and arriving port. Learning experiences from the 2 groups of students are compared, firstly via a pre-test post-test survey administered at the beginning and end of the semester. 2 questionnaires are used: the School Failure Tolerance Scale and the Kirton Adaptor-Innovator Inventory. Each student is also required to submit a reflection journal, to enable comparison of attitudes toward failure between the 2 groups. Lastly, a quick comparison of the students’ assessment marks is also shared. The results showed that the failure tolerance of students from experimental group had decreased, contrary to expectations, although statistically the difference is not significant. This outcome, plus the input from reflection journals and assessment scores yield insights other factors that can affect students’ engagement in the learning tasks and suggested that more needs to be done to improve the students learning experience in learning from deliberate failure.