Productive failure as an instructional approach to promote future learning
Abstract
Productive failure is an instructional approach that requires learners to struggle as they attempt to generate solutions to problems before, rather than after, receiving direct instruction on a targeted concept. Studies demonstrate that productive failure prepares students for later learning of new, related knowledge. Our study explored the effectiveness of productive failure as an instructional intervention in health professions education with respect to (a) acquisition and application of a novel concept, and (b) learners' preparation for future learning of new, related content. Forty year-one students enrolled in the Doctor of Pharmacy program at the University of Toronto were randomly assigned to a productive failure (i.e. attempt to generate solutions before receiving instruction) or direct instruction only learning condition. After a practice phase, participants completed a series of tests designed to measure knowledge acquisition, knowledge application, and preparation for future learning (new learning is required for successful problem solving). As expected, no difference in performance was seen between participants on the acquisition and application tests. However, participants in the productive failure condition outperformed those in the direct instruction condition on the preparation for future learning test. These results emphasize the role of struggle in learning and support the theory that engaging students in solving problems that are beyond their abilities can be a productive exercise in failure. The results suggest that productive failure assists learners in acquiring the conceptual knowledge needed to facilitate learning in the future.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Productive failure theory predicts that struggling with problems before receiving solutions produces better long-term conceptual understanding than receiving solutions first.
“Productive failure theory predicts that struggling with problems before receiving solutions produces better long-term conceptual understanding than receiving solutions first 28 .”
From AI-induced never-skilling in medical education (2026) · cites this paper as [28]
Cites
Bruner, J. S., & Lufburrow, R. A. (1963) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1969598 · Cited by 6,021 · see citing works
Schmidt, R. A., & Bjork, R. A. (1992) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00029.x · Cited by 1,582 · see citing works
Cognitive biases associated with medical decisions: a systematic review
Saposnik, G., Redelmeier, D., Ruff, C. C., & Tobler, P. N. (2016) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/s12911-016-0377-1 · Cited by 1,001 · see citing works
Designing for Productive Failure
Kapur, M., & Bielaczyc, K. (2012) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1080/10508406.2011.591717 · Cited by 674 · see citing works
Kapur, M. (2016) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1155457 · Cited by 523 · see citing works
Productive Failure in Learning Math
Kapur, M. (2014) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/cogs.12107 · Cited by 453 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
AI-induced never-skilling in medical education
Ke, Y., Jin, L., Ong, J. C. L., Thirunavukarasu, A. J., Car, J., Cheung, C. Y., Tham, Y. C., Ting, D. S. W., Ong, M. E. H., Compton, S., et al. (2026) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-026-04438-y · Cited by 35 · see citing works
From Obstacle to Catalyst: A Narrative Review of Learning from Errors in Science Education
Fabre-Mitjans, N., Jiménez-Valverde, G., Viciana, S., & Crespo i Torres, F. (2026) · Encyclopedia · doi:10.3390/encyclopedia6090192
- Authors
- Steenhof, N., Woods, N. N., Van Gerven, P. W. M., & Mylopoulos, M.
- Affiliations
- University Health Network (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Steenhof, Naomi
- Venue
- Advances in Health Sciences Education
- Published
- 2019-05-14
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 739-749
- ISSN
- 1382-4996 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-1677
- OpenAlex
- W2945422642
- Cited by
- 70
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 8
- FWCI
- 8.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Advances in Health Sciences Education (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion)
- Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- productive failure, direct instruction, knowledge acquisition, knowledge application, problem solving, pharmacy students, health professions education, conceptual knowledge
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Canada, Clinical Competence, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Middle Aged, Students, Pharmacy, Problem-Based Learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review