How to Incorporate Risk-Based Learning as a 9-12 ELA Educator: Encouraging Students to Embrace Failure in Education by Aubrie A. Grass A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION with an emphasis in CURRICULUM DESIGN WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY Ogden, Utah June 10, 2024 Approved, Penée W. Stewart, Ph.D. Sheryl J. Rushton, Ph.D. Marjorie Jo Ralph Marjorie Jo Ralph (Jun 28, 2024 09:24 MDT) Marjie Ralph, M.A. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 2 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 3 Abstract Risk-taking is essential in education. Taking risks and problem-solving are necessary in the learning process and are vital skills for post-graduation success. The current education system does not allow students to take risks and explore learning. Instead, it reinforces a fear of failure, directly impacting students' ability and willingness to take risks. This proposal focuses on the need for risk-based learning and the impact a fear of failure can have on students. It also discusses modern professional development methods for educators and how risk-based learning can be presented in a training format that is accessible and applicable to all. The research led to the creation of an online training course for instructors focused on teaching them how to incorporate risk-based learning in the classroom. The training included three content modules: risk-based learning, students’ fear of failure, and creative-based learning. Keywords: Risk-based learning, creative-based learning, failure, self-efficacy, training TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 4 Acknowledgments I would like to thank my committee chair, Dr. Penée Stewart, for her endless patience and expertise throughout this entire process. She understood the vision and potential of this project, even when I struggled with explaining it myself. I would like to thank my committee member Marjie Ralph, for consistently showing me how to be an incredible educator and an even better human. I would also like to thank Dr. Sheryl Rushton for her quick support and vast knowledge of curricula and professional development. I would like to thank all of my professors at Weber State for their effort, feedback, and support. Their passion for education and wanting to make the world better could be felt in everything they do, and seeing this showed me what education can become. Finally, I want to thank all the educators I have had the great privilege of working with at Payson High School, Jordan High School, and UHCL. Your love for education and your students reminds me every day why I chose this career path. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 5 Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………2 Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………..3 Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………….4 List of Figures……………………………..………………………………………………………6 Nature of the Problem……………………………………………………………………………..7 Literature Review………………………………………………………………………………….8 A Lack of Risk-taking in Learning…………………………..……………………………9 Importance of Embracing Risk and Failure.………………………...…………………...10 Strategies and Preparation for Risk-Based Learning.……………………………………12 Professional Development Focused on Risk-Based Learning………………………...…15 Relevant……………………………………………………………………….…16 Collaborative……………………………………………………………………..16 Supportive………………………………………………………………………..17 Summary….…….……………………….……………………………………………………….18 Purpose…….……..………………………………………………………………………………19 Procedures.……………………………………………………………………………………….20 Curriculum Design……………………………………………………………………….20 Evaluators..………………………………………………………………………………21 Evaluation Rubric.……………………………………………….………………………21 Results……………………………………………………………………………………………22 Canvas Course…………………………………………………………………………...22 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 6 Content and Materials.…………………………………………………...………………24 Evaluator Feedback………………………………………………………………………28 Discussion………………………………………………………………………………………..31 Reflection on Feedback…………………………………..………………………………31 Recommendations…….………………………………………………………………….31 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….32 References………………………………………………………………………………………..34 Appendix…………………………………………………………………………………………38 Appendix A: Course Evaluation Form.…….……………………………………………38 Appendix B: IRB Approval Form…………………….………………………………….41 Appendix C: Access to Course Content………………………………………………….42 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 7 List of Figures Figure 1: Content page for Risk-based Learning Training………………………………………23 Figure 2: A Check-in from the Creative-based Learning Content Page…………………………25 Figure 3: An Interactive Option for Content Presentation……………………………………….26 Figure 4: “Module Introduction: Six-Week Implementation and Mentoring” Canvas Page…….27 Figure 5: “Making Risk-taking Visible” Section in the Risk-based Learning Content Page……28 Figure 6: “My Favorite No” from Making Failure Visible Section Before Edits………………..29 Figure 7: The Example Added to “My Favorite No” During Edits…………. ………………….30 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 8 Nature of the Problem Risk-taking is a skill that is essential for learning but is often avoided by students, as a significant component of risk-taking is the possible consequence of failure (Choi et al., 2018; Creely et al., 2021; Henriksen et al., 2021; Sharma, 2015). Risk-based learning requires students to make choices, take action, embrace challenges, use creative thinking, practice problem-solving, and implement experiments (Beghetto, 2021; Sharma, 2015; Thorley, 2020). In education, the chance of failure for students can have lasting consequences, causing fear and reluctance to take any type of risk, which is further deterred regularly in the academic environment (Beghetto, 2021; Caraway et al., 2003). Many assignments and assessments in the academic system focus on items that can be easily measured, such as mass standardized curricula, productivity, and following rules, rather than exploration, experimentation, and creative thinking (Choi et al., 2018; Creely et al., 2021; Thorley, 2020; Sharma, 2015). However, because of the current academic focus on standardization and results, the fear of failure for many students gets in the way of their learning, as the learning process presented to them is limited to these cautious systems (Burleson, 2005; Creely et al., 2021). Based on the research, educators can still reach said benchmarks while encouraging risk within the classroom. This fear of failure prevents students from taking the necessary risks to further their learning and can impact their views of themselves, their capabilities, and their mental health (Bandura, 1977; Creely et al., 2021; Sowden, 2022). Taking risks and welcoming failure as an experience to grow and change can benefit students in the learning environment (Burleson, 2005). Learning from an academic failure takes resiliency and can be practiced through the support of educators who understand the challenges of dealing with failure and are trained in developing curricula around risk-taking (Creely et al., TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 9 2021). Teaching such skills can help students use failure productively, lead to more productive risk-taking, build confidence in their academic abilities, and even increase self-efficacy (Anderson, 2006; Beghetto, 2008). Furthermore, incorporating risk-based exploration into curricula has been shown to improve students' mental health and well-being, and encourage students to develop skills such as innovation and problem-solving (Sowden, 2022; Creely et al., 2021). Despite the benefits to students, teaching risk-taking in the classroom also includes its own set of challenges. It requires teachers who understand the nonconforming behaviors that come with risk-taking, a challenge in the classroom as it goes against behaviors often praised in education and society, such as obedience and attentiveness (Stojanovska & Popovski, 2021). Telling kids to “take risks” or “be creative” is also not enough, as most students do not know what that looks like, and just having these expectations as an educator does not automatically create the desired results (Bandura, 1977; Stojanovska & Popovski, 2021). Implementing such skills in the classroom can take time and feel frustrating for teachers trying to hit state and district-required testing benchmarks (Choi et al., 2018; Simonton, 2012). Further, teachers may have to adjust the mindset they have been taught about education, going as far as shifting control of learning to students, which has its own set of challenges (Creely et al., 2021). When approaching risk-based learning for students, there also needs to be an embrace of risk-taking in educator practice. Literature Review Current research emphasizes the benefits of incorporating risk-based learning in the classroom. Unfortunately, taking risks in the classroom for students has real consequences that may outweigh any benefits. Many educators also are not trained in risk-based learning and may TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 10 feel unprepared or unsure of where to begin. The following research will explore evidence of a lack of risk-taking in education, why risk-taking is essential to incorporate in education, data on strategies and preparation on what current studies and educators are doing to incorporate risk in the classroom, and finally, research on effective professional development (PD) for educators. A Lack of Risk-Taking in Learning Authentic learning is an inherently risky process. Risk is a part of our everyday lives and can elicit positive and negative emotions (Sharma, 2015). Kogan and Wallach defined risk as “a decision situation involving choice among alternatives and characterized by ‘a lack of certainty and the prospect of loss or failure’” (Clifford, 1991, p. 264). Taking risks comes from analyzing and comparing different benefits and hazards, making a decision, and then taking action based on that analysis (Beghetto, 2021). In the academic sphere, risk-taking can be anything from working on a challenging product to voicing a thought that risks judgment from peers, the teacher, or both (Clifford, 1991). Many students associate risk in education with failure (Beghetto, 2008; Sharma, 2015). Part of this comes from an academic system that rewards error-free success and performance (Clifford, 1991). For some students, asking questions is risky (Sharma, 2015); this suggests that a fear of failure goes beyond academics but is also tied to a student’s view of themselves (Caraway et al., 2003). Students can begin associating risk with failure from a seemingly small situation, such as being dismissed or ignored by the teacher when sharing an unexpected idea (Beghetto, 2008). According to Caraway et al. (2003), “fear of failure refers to the motivation to avoid failure because of the possibility of experiencing shame or embarrassment” (p. 419). Further, not only are educators facing risk-averse students who may respond negatively to an activity, but the fear of failure from risk can manifest in negative TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 11 behaviors such as procrastination, lack of effort, or even cheating (Caraway, 2003; Sharma, 2015). In the current education system, there is an adversity to risk because of the fear of failure (Henriksen et al., 2021). Students view taking academic risks as chancing a poor grade– a belief not beyond what is emphasized in many assessments and the academic culture (Choi et al., 2018). Therefore, many students will choose not to take risks to maintain their grades or, even worse, will choose not to do anything to avoid making an effort and still failing (Sharma, 2015). For students on both sides of the academic spectrum, this fear of failure “haunts the hallways, grounds, and classrooms; it insinuates itself into the lives of the school’s inhabitants” (Creely et al., 2021, p. 3). Failure alone is not negative and can be used as a step toward innovation (Thorley, 2020). When failure is associated with these negative consequences and is part of an academic environment focused on high-stakes testing rather than learning through risk-taking, fearing failure is a practical response to manage and survive such an environment. If students feel like they have very little control over the learning process and the outcomes, not only will they have very little motivation to complete the task at hand, but they may hesitate even to begin, as they are stuck in a belief of ‘why try if I am just going to fail’ (Bandura, 1977). Importance of Embracing Risk and Failure Avoiding risk-taking because of a fear of failure can prevent students from learning adaptive behaviors necessary to best deal with risk and failure in the future (Beghetto, 2021; Clifford, 1991). When studying risk-taking in elementary science, Beghetto found direct correlations between self-efficacy and risk-taking (2008). Beghetto completed a survey of 585 elementary school students, asking them several questions about how they viewed their own interest, intellect, creativity, and support from the teacher in their science classroom (Beghetto, TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 12 2008, p. 214-215). He found that students were more engaged in their learning if they viewed themselves as “imaginative and confident in their ability to generate novel and adaptive ideas, develop their own scientific experiments, and come up with new ways to approach scientific problems” (Beghetto, 2008, p. 218). He further explains that successfully engaging in these academically risky activities and being challenged can increase the likelihood that students will look for similar challenges later on (Beghetto, 2008). Failure is a necessary part of risk-taking, and if risk-taking is necessary for learning, this means that failure is also necessary for students to truly learn. Creative thinking can be both a positive result of risk-based learning and an option for teaching risk in education. Risk-based learning and creativity can help alleviate fears of failure and help teach those adaptive behaviors necessary for dealing with failure, as creativity and failure are very similar in nature and process (Sowden, 2022; Thorley, 2020). Thorley argues that increasing creativity and innovation can help develop a better understanding of how to approach and manage failure in education (Thorley, 2020, p. 73). Students need to feel safe in a classroom before taking risks. Feeling safe means creating social and academic situations within the classroom that encourage students to share ideas and make mistakes without the fear of punishment. The current education system creates social pressures by seeking easy successes rather than rewarding struggling efforts, leaving little room for failure and creative thinking (Sharma, 2015). This pressure can challenge even the most grounded and confident students. Because of these fears of failure, teachers may face pushback and hesitation from the severe consequences students face from taking said risks (Sharma, 2015). As educators look to prepare students for post-high school success, understanding risk and creativity are valuable skills universities and the job market are seeking. In one study, TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 13 Anderson (2006) found that adult learners hesitated to take risks in their education by being creative, even when enrolled in a “creative” degree such as marketing. He found that while the students cognitively understood creativity, they did not internalize it, similar to what we see in k-12 when educators ask students to ‘just be creative’ (Anderson, 2006). More jobs are also seeking individuals who are both creative and problem solvers, and universities thrive off of new and creative ideas (Thorely, 2020). Coming up with fresh and innovative ideas through problem-solving and risk-based learning are skills valuable in the job market and are looked for in new hires to help them stand out (Anderson, 2006). Further, there is an increase in competition and rejection at both the university and job-seeking levels as more individuals enter both fields each year (Thorley, 2020). Risk-based learning can be a method to encourage students to be creative, learn how to deal with rejection and failure, and be problem solvers, therefore better preparing them for the world after graduation. Strategies and Preparation for Risk-Based Learning Teaching strategies around building confidence can be a great place to begin incorporating risk-based learning in the classroom. In High Expectations Teaching: How We Persuade Students to Believe and Act on “Smart Is Something You Can Get” Saphier (2017), provides various strategies to raise and get students to meet high expectations. In one particular strategy, he explains the importance of failure and focuses on the value of what we can learn from our failures in learning. He explains, “Failure is an opportunity for learning and not to be avoided or considered a disgrace. Failure to do something correctly is an invitation to find out why, fill the knowledge gap, identify the misconception, learn the missing step in the process, fix the faulty logic” (Saphier, 2017, p. 57). Saphier explains a strategy observed in a classroom called “My Favorite No,” where the teacher looks for her favorite mistake on a particular TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 14 question and uses it as a teaching moment for the whole class (2017, p. 57). This strategy was originally created by Leah Alcala to help teach math to her eighth-grade students (Maryland Formative Assessment, 2015). The teacher from Saphier’s example models Alcala’s ideas by focusing on not shaming but praising the students for their thought process and allowing everyone to learn from a mistake they made. Not only is her language more positive, but it also allows students to see the value in analyzing their mistakes and taking risks in learning, all within a framework where the assignment is low-stakes, and the classroom is conditioned to be a safe learning environment. Learning strategies around risk, failure, and creativity can seamlessly blend with the content while still having the many positive outcomes of building self-efficacy and a safe classroom. Primi (2014) shows a practical use of creativity through metaphoric writing. Through his research, Primi ran a test that analyzed students' creative ability through the complexity of submitted metaphors (Primi, 2014). Students were given fill-in-the-blank phrases such as “The camel is the _________ of the desert,” which students completed to create a metaphor, and then submissions were assessed through the test (Primi, 2014, p. 465). Primi argued that writing metaphors involved high thinking and analysis, calling them a “creative response in miniature” (Primi, 2014, p. 462). Examples like this emphasize that while the creative process can be a large project, it can also be concise activities that allow students to make creative choices and encourage positive risk-taking in the classroom without significant consequences, such as failure. Choosing to be creative in itself has risks, as students do not know what the outcome will be, and there is a process of trial and error in choosing ideas until they find the one that ends up working (Simonton, 2012). L. Anderson (2006) argues, “Creativity is the root of innovation. It is a process and a skill which can be developed and managed” (p. 91). When we start with an TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 15 environment that supports students, makes them feel safe and nurtured, and explicitly rewards them for being creative and not punishing new ideas, we are more likely to get more innovative products and cultivate feelings of confidence and self-actualization (Beghetto, 2021; Burleson, 2005; Stojanovska & Petrova-Popvski, 2021). In an academic setting, time and effort are required for risk-based learning, which can feel what Simonton calls “inherently risky and wasteful” (2012, p. 219). While on the surface, being risky and wasteful may appear negative to educators, it is through this “wasteful” process that learning develops. The product itself is merely evidence of the learning process. In an academic culture so focused on the success of a final product, it does initially feel wasteful to focus so much on the process. Nevertheless, this is where students can learn how to deal with failure, take risks, build resilience, and take control of their learning (Beghetto, 2021; Creely et al., 2021). When applying risk-based learning to ELA in the 6-12 classroom, we must also consider how teaching these strategies may challenge some current academic structures. When students feel like they are being judged, they focus more on the final score rather than the actual learning process (Mehta et al., 2020). If students are more focused on the external validation of their teacher’s affirmation rather than actual understanding, their choices are more likely to inhibit their learning (Sharma, 2015). When the process or the skill developed is rewarded, and improving performance and ability is the focus, academic risk-taking can also increase (Clifford, 1991). Focusing on the process can include full-unit strategies such as rewarding students through each step of the writing process rather than the final essay. Assessing the process can be a very effective way to encourage students to take risks, as it allows multiple opportunities for failure and reflection (Choi et al., 2018). The process can be assessed by providing feedback on steps like brainstorming, research, and revisions rather than waiting for the final product. Further, TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 16 fostering learning goals and developing student skills around asking questions, listening, discussing, group work, reflecting, and a safe environment all allow opportunities for students to take risks (Sharma, 2015). When these skills were developed and encouraged on a classroom level, students felt safer and more comfortable overall to begin to take risks in the classroom, as seen by Sharma (2015) in his analysis of risk-taking in a mathematics classroom. Strategies like encouraging and providing positive feedback when students set goals or take notes can be the first steps to encouraging students to have confidence and take risks (Saphier, 2017). Doing so can provide students with study tools to fall back on when presented with a particularly challenging or risky learning situation; these study skills and more can be the first step in providing all students with the necessary tools to begin practicing risk-based learning (Saphier, 2017). The key is to explain the value of such skills, provide positive feedback when such skills are done, and continuously encourage such skills to be used in the classroom often (Saphier, 2017). Professional Development Focused on Risk-Based Learning Professional development is most effective when it is relevant, collaborative, and supportive (Bates & Morgan, 2018; Hill & Papay, 2022; Wlodarsky & Carr-Chellman, 2020). These three items must be the highest priority in educator training if the goal is to create training that improves practice and teacher potential (Hill & Papay, 2022). Relevance needs to value content and materials based on the most up-to-date research and to be readily available and editable for educators. Collaboration should include opportunities for educators to share and discuss ideas and options to mentor and be mentored through the training process. Last, support addresses a training environment that is both welcoming and cultivating for learning and growth. Through relevance, collaboration, and support, professional development can focus on how to TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 17 implement risk-based learning in the classroom best, better improve student outcomes and their relationship with learning, and continue to meet the requirements that the system asks of educators (Hill & Papay, 2022; Saphier, 2017). Relevant Professional development that is relevant prioritizes providing educators with strategies and information that can be translated into the classroom and are up-to-date and relatable to modern students and teachers (Bates & Morgan, 2018; Hill & Papay, 2022). In order to provide this information, professional development needs to consider what is relevant in an ever-changing environment. Developing professional development focused on relevant instructional content and strategies rather than broad theories must be one of the first places to begin (Bates & Morgan, 2018; Hill & Papay, 2022). Incorporating active and digital learning options also allows for relevant strategies. For adult and youth learners, active and engaged learning can be much more effective than traditional lectures. In professional development, using modern strategies like active learning can allow educators to consider questions and reflect on struggles with their practice (Bates & Morgan, 2018). Modern strategies also go hand-in-hand with modeling relevant practices through professional development. Modeling can allow educators to see a strategy in action and show how it can be relevant by providing the opportunity to give examples of how it can translate to the classroom (Bates & Morgan, 2018). Collaborative Collaborative training is essential if the hope is that what is learned in the sessions translates to the classroom (King & Heuer, 2009). It is unreasonable to expect an educator to change their entire practice, and rarely is that necessary. Instead, it is vital to provide adaptable content and allow multiple moments during the training for educators to reflect and collaborate TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 18 about how the content can be applied to their different classrooms (Hill & Papay, 2022). Mentorship and group reflection are vital to professional development (Bates & Morgan, 2018; Hill & Papay, 2022; Wlodarsky & Carr-Chellman, 2020). Wlodarsky and Carr-Chellman (2020) address the importance of reflection and mentoring by discussing how successful reflection needs to begin with a relevant “event” or question that a collective wants to address (p. 23). This first step focuses on finding the event that drives the process of reflection, which continues to steps of processing, asking questions about the event, doing research, and finally making a choice—all steps that are necessary when approaching professional development (Wlodarsky & Chellman, 2020). Completing these steps of working collaboratively in either a professional group, with a mentor, or ideally, both can make applying the professional training materials more practical and effective (Hill & Papay, 2022). Wlodarsky and Carr-Chellman (2022) also point out that mentoring through reflection can enhance the learners’ professional experience and open up their ability to consider current professional and personal struggles–considerations that can lead to improved teacher practice overall. Ultimately, it is not enough just to provide information in an adult learning environment and call it learning; there need to be connections that can be made by the learner through the support of a group or mentor in order to make the rich and relevant content most likely translate to the classroom (Bates & Morgan, 2018). Supportive Supportive professional development should include materials for the content, and the professional development setting should be a welcoming and supportive learning environment. In the article “Transformative Learning in Adult Basic Education,” authors King and Heuer (2009) discuss their strategies for adult learners through observing a year-long professional development for educators. They discussed adult learning instructional approaches focused on TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 19 “learner centeredness, safety and trust, and facilitating and modeling” (King & Heuer, 2009, p. 174). The trainers had to create a physical environment (i.e., a welcoming classroom) that allowed the adult learners to feel comfortable and valued before they began sharing and collaborating. When collaboration began, trainers allowed the learners to express negative and positive emotions about the training and their hopes and fears of what would result. They allowed learners to struggle and collaborate without judgment or shame. Finally, the instructors modeled adaptability and worked alongside the learners to facilitate and model (King & Heuer, 2009). King and Heuer (2009) reported profound results in the learners at the end of the year, having individuals who began pessimistic about the training, change their mindset entirely by the end. Further, many individuals were excited and proactive about incorporating the training materials into the classroom. While teachers are professionals, they are also learners, and both need to be considered when creating a supportive environment for professional development. Summary Learning how to deal with failure and embrace risk are vital parts of learning and are essential for entering the adult world. Training educators on how to incorporate risk-based learning can be an option that will address both of these essential skills in the ELA classroom. Students do not understand what is being asked when told to take risks, ignore failure, or be creative, as they have very few examples of what any of that looks like in the current academic system (Stojanovska & Popovski, 2021). Having training that explicitly shows educators how to incorporate risk-based learning and creativity in the classroom can give students a chance to both develop risk-taking and creative skills and improve beyond academics, such as their mental health and self-efficacy (Caraway et al., 2003; Clifford, 1991; Sowden, 2022). By incorporating these skills into curricula, educators can also start to address behaviors often seen in students, TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 20 such as procrastination, lack of self-efficacy, cheating, and decreased motivation (Caraway et al., 2003). If academics want to best prepare students for after-graduation success, incorporating explicit practices of these skills is necessary as we move into the future (Clifford, 1991). Professional Development that addresses relevance, collaboration, and support can make the training more meaningful and impactful for those involved. Purpose This project focused on risk-based content and training for 9-12 ELA educators. Risk-taking in the classroom is necessary to elicit learning, but there is significant fear around risks from both the students and teachers, as evidenced in the literature review. Fear of failure can be one reason some students may react negatively to new or challenging subjects, as there is an amount of risk to both (Sharma, 2015). This fear can appear as apathy, frustration, disruption, or outright refusal (Sharma, 2015). More so, if a teacher has low confidence in their teaching ability, they are less likely to try new teaching practices (Yang, 2020). The students' and teachers’ fear of failure and risk must be addressed when discussing risk-based learning. Strategies for risk-based learning needs to include options for daily use and larger projects. Content and materials focused on students' fear of failure, creative and risk-based decisions, and risk-taking and feedback. Content included instruction and strategies for teachers, while materials included examples and editable documents that can be used in the classroom. Currently, literature on assessing risk-based and creative-based learning strategies has not been easily accessible. This project developed training for educators that addresses the fear of failure and risk-taking in the classroom through creative and risk-based learning strategies. This training included research-based examples of learning strategies that connect creativity, failure, and TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 21 self-efficacy for students and are also practical and applicable to the modern-day 9-12 ELA classroom. Procedures Curriculum Design The curricula's main focus and primary organization followed a basic structure of relevance, collaboration, and support. The curricula were created and presented online using Canvas as the primary LMS. Curricula were broken up into modules– these being small units focused on a selection of objectives related to the content and overall training goals. The curricula fulfilled the course objectives outlined in the rubric found in Appendix A and were organized based on these objectives. Each module incorporated opportunities for relevance, collaboration, and support as required by the module objectives and necessary for the module’s content. The curricula were assessed by analyzing the training materials and content using the same objectives outlined for relevance, collaboration, and support from the rubric in Appendix A. These organizational structures are supported with strategies from “Transformative Learning in Adult Basic Education” by King and Heuer (2009), which are used based on their observations of adult learning. Additional strategies such as modeling, mentoring, and reflection are outlined by Bates & Morgan (2018) and Hill and Paypay (2022). Templates and guidelines provided in High Expectations Teaching: How We Persuade Students to Believe and Act on “Smart Is Something You Can Get” by Saphier (2017) are also used to assess the effectiveness of the learning and the strategies used throughout the curriculum. Content for the curricula also came from various sources and research, including Saphier (2017), Bandura (1977), Beghetto (2008; 2021), Choi et al. (2018), and Primi (2014), as outlined in the literature review. Evaluators TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 22 Three educational professionals were asked to review the professional development course. The first was an eight-year secondary-ELA educator with a bachelor's in education, the second was a 33-year veteran with a master's in education and instructional technology, and the third was a four-year educator professional currently working as an Instructional Designer with a master's in education. These evaluators were chosen for their experience with evaluating various types of curricula, their experience with online education and training, and their combined variety of experience and perspective. All evaluators have yet to learn of the training content or materials beyond that it is content for professional development. The evaluators volunteered to provide their feedback on the course, were not paid for their participation, and will remain anonymous. Evaluation Rubric In order to receive adequate feedback on the curriculum, a rubric was created to assess the structure of the course as professional development and provide opportunities for feedback from the participants on the materials and the content of the course. The rubric was divided into three sections: Relevant, Collaborative, and Supportive. Within each section, the evaluators reviewed the course materials and the training content in relation to each section. Learning objectives were provided for the evaluators to reference, and areas for where the evaluators gave feedback on what was done well, what could be improved, and additional thoughts. Each evaluator was given the same 3-week period to review the course and complete the rubric. Once the evaluations had been completed, the feedback was used to make positive changes to the curricula. For a copy of the rubric, Course Evaluation Rubric, see Appendix A. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 23 Results Canvas Course The course was constructed of six modules- with four being content-based. The link to the Canvas course can be found here: https://canvas.instructure.com/courses/9574184/modules. Please note that the content can only be viewed in sequential order. Initially, three content modules focused on students' fear of failure, creative and risk-based decisions, and risk-taking and feedback. However, adjustments were made during the building process so that modules 2-5 were titled: “Risk-based Learning,” “Fear of Failure,” “Creative-based Learning,” and “Six-Week Implementation and Mentoring.” This allowed the course content to be better organized and the mentoring and application part of the course to be more accessible. Canvas was used as the main location for the course. Articulate Design, an LMS specifically designed around training and instructional design in the adult learning sphere, was used to organize the course content and then embedded into Canvas pages for easy access (Articulate Global Inc., 2024). See Figure 1 for an example of the course content embedded into Canvas. Assignments, discussion boards, peer reviews, and files could also all be accessed within Canvas. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 24 Figure 1 Content page for Risk-based Learning Training The course was designed to be completed in a certain time, with each module being given a 1-week time frame, except for module 5, which had a 6-week time frame. In module one, participants were introduced to the course, syllabus, objectives, resources, and a course navigation video. The course navigation video included a brief tour of where and how to access information and suggestions for the best ways to navigate the course. In module two, participants learned about risk-based learning, participated in a peer classroom observation, and discussed building self-efficacy. In module three, the focus was on student’s fear of failure. Participants submitted a lesson they considered a “failure,” worked in small groups to discuss risk and failure, and implemented one of the learning strategies: “My Favorite Failure,” for the module TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 25 discussion. Module four consisted of content focused on creative-based learning. Participants also gave and received feedback on their “failure” assignment; they worked in small groups to analyze an ELA state standard for risk and creative-based learning, and in the module discussion, they focused on feedback. Module five was designed to last six weeks. During these 6 weeks, participants would put their learning into practice and apply the course content to their own classrooms. They also become mentors for the training group after them. As a mentor, they are assigned someone who is just starting the course. Mentoring required them to provide this person feedback on their “failed” assignment, complete a classroom observation, and be additional support for that person as they make their way through the content. During this time, participants submitted their mentoring observation, mentoring feedback, their own “failed” assignment revisions, an implementation lesson plan, and a creative reflection discussion post. The final module consisted of a conclusion and certificate. An additional adjustment that was made during the creation of the course was to the course evaluation rubric. Originally, the expectation was at least two mentoring interactions per module, but that was adjusted to two interactions overall. Requiring mentorship for every module became excessive, especially in modules like the introductory and conclusion. With the addition of instructor support and peer collaboration, two required mentorship assignments felt to be sufficient. Content and Materials The training content was designed and organized to be relevant, collaborative, and supportive. In order to be relevant, course content came from a variety of sources cited in this proposal. Additional resources included Making Thinking Visible by Ritchhart, Church, and Morrison (2011). The content was organized into smaller sections within a Canvas page. Each TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 26 section provided information on the specific topic and teacher examples, strategies, and article summaries, all in interactive and organized ways. “Check-ins” were included as a single question about the content to assess understanding. See Figure 2 and Figure 3 for an example of a check-in and an interactive way the content was presented. Figure 2 A Check-in From the Creative-based Learning Content Page TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 27 Figure 3 An Interactive Option for Content Presentation The main focus of most of the assignments and discussion boards in the Canvas course was to make the learning collaborative. Participants were expected to collaborate with others for multiple assignments, including “Classroom Peer Observation,” “Assignment Feedback Peer Review,” and all of the mentoring assignments and expectations. See Figure 4 for a picture of the introduction to module 5, including the mentoring explanation. Finally, all the discussion boards included the expectation that a participant submitted their own post and responded to at least two other peers. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 28 Figure 4 “Module Introduction: Six-Week Implementation and Mentoring” Canvas Page Finally, to make the course supportive, as the instructor, I included a “Meet Your Instructor” page and my email and office number in the syllabus so I could be reached for support and to schedule office hours. I also included a Course Q&A that was accessible anytime during the course and was open for anyone to ask and answer questions. As explained above, the course also had mentoring to help with collaboration and support. Finally, concerning anything that required a submission, rubrics were created to explain the expectations of that assignment best. The content-based modules included a section called “Making _____ Visible” (i.e., Making Risk-based Learning Visible). These Making Visible pages included multiple classroom strategies, explanations, and examples related to that section's content subject. In addition, each module had a “Making Visible Files” page. This included editable files for almost all of the TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 29 strategies presented in that module. See Figure 5 below for an example of a Making Visible section. Figure 5 “Making Risk-taking Visible” Section In the Risk-based Learning Content Page Evaluator Feedback Once the proposal received IRB approval (see Appendix B), evaluators were given access to the course and evaluation rubrics. While evaluators were given 3 weeks to complete the feedback forms, the forms were returned within 2 weeks. Once the evaluation rubrics were returned, positives and ways of improvement were assessed regarding the curricula. All evaluators mentioned that the course was organized and explicit in the information provided. They also mentioned that the content was easily accessible and that there were multiple options for collaboration. Suggestions for improvement included adding more visuals to the content TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 30 pages, as they were very word heavy, adding a collaboration activity to module 3, as there was only one, adding variety to some of the assignments for the participants, and adjusting the course and module learning objectives to separate them and make them more specific. Additional visuals were added to the course content, including more examples. The visuals included images of examples, which created more support for those going through the training, and the images also helped break up some of the reading. Figures 6 and 7 show a before and after of one content page that had visuals added to it. Figure 6 “My Favorite No” From Making Failure Visible Section Before Edits TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 31 Figure 7 The Example Added to “My Favorite No” During Edits To add a collaboration activity to module three and to add more assignment variety to the course activities, the assignment “Risk and Failure Group Collage” was created. The final reflection was also changed from a written post to having participants post a creative piece reflecting their experience with the training. This added variety and was an example of how to apply the course content. Finally, the overall course modules were created for the participants and added to the course syllabus and the introduction module. The individual module objectives were also TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 32 changed so they better reflected expectations. For example, a module objective from module 3: Fear of Failure, was changed from “Participants will be able to understand the impact of a student’s fear of failure in the classroom” to “Throughout the module Fear of Failure, participants will show an understanding of the impact of a student’s fear of failure in the classroom by participating in the Risk and Failure Collage.” These changes were made to make the objectives more specific and measurable. Discussion Reflection of Feedback Based on the evaluator’s feedback, using Articulate Design within Canvas was an effective choice for organizing each module’s content page. Evaluators commented on how it made the information easy to access and how they liked the interactive aspects of these pages. Canvas was also an effective tool for making the overall training course accessible. It allowed for various assignment activities and was vital in making the collaborative aspects of the training possible. Evaluators also further commented on how the collaborative aspects of the training made the content more applicable to participants and allowed training participants to review the content and materials together. In the future, as participants begin to interact with the training, changes can be made to best fit their needs. While this course was specifically designed for ELA 9-12 teachers, it could be easily modified to fit a different subject or even apply to higher education. Recommendations The training could be used to gather quantitative data on teachers and students by analyzing responses from both parties before and after the training is completed. Information about a student’s fear of failure could be assessed before and after an instructor completes this TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 33 training. Further, instructors could provide reflections and data regarding student engagement and overall classroom atmosphere before and after using the strategies presented in the training. The research from this training could also be used to advocate for changes in the educational system. Examples could include advocating for more focus on the arts, less on standardized testing, and more on student academic efficacy and overall mental well-being. This researcher hopes that this data and research can be used to make positive changes in k-12 and higher education. Conclusion Risk-taking is an essential part of learning. Analyzing, choosing to take a risk, and knowing how to problem solve and respond to the outcomes are all skills that are necessary for academics and post-graduation success. Unfortunately, students are afraid to take academic risks for fear of failure. Opportunities to practice risk-taking through creative-based learning can be an option where the risks are both low-stakes and approachable. Asking students to take risks with an assignment or just be creative is not enough. A training course for instructors was created to explicitly support educators in teaching students to take risks and practice creativity. This training focused on research on academic risk-taking, fear of failure in academics, creative-based learning, and self-efficacy. To best support educators taking the training, a heavy focus was placed on making the course relevant, collaborative, and supportive. Adult learning methods, effective PD strategies, and building teacher efficacy and confidence in a new curriculum were considered and implemented through requirements for observations, collaboration, mentorship, and having the training entirely online and available through Canvas. In the future, further research will need to explore the relationship between developing assessments for risk-based learning, creative-based learning, and approaching failure in the classroom. The hope is that this TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 34 curriculum will not only be something that can be incorporated in most ELA 6-12 classrooms but it can also show that there are better options for teaching and learning than what our current system allows. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 35 References Anderson, L. (2006). Building confidence in creativity: MBA Students. Marketing Education Review, 16(1), 91–96. https://doi.org/hxvs Articulate Global Inc. (2024, May 14). The world’s best creator platform for online workplace learning | Articulate. Articulate. https://www.articulate.com/ Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 Bates, C. C., & Morgan, D. N. (2018). Seven elements of effective professional development. The Reading Teacher, 71(5), 623–626. https://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1674 Beghetto, R. A. (2008). Correlates of intellectual risk taking in elementary school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 210–223. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20270 Beghetto, R. A. (2021). My favorite failure: Using digital technology to facilitate creative learning and reconceptualize failure. TechTrends, 65, 606-614. https://doi.org/gmm7zs Burleson, W. (2005). Developing creativity, motivation, and self-actualization with learning systems. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63(4–5), 436–451. https://doi.org/fcwwrs Caraway, K., Tucker, C. M., Reinke, W. M., & Hall, C. (2003). Self-efficacy, goal orientation, and fear of failure as predictors of school engagement in high school students. Psychology in the Schools, 40(4), 417–427. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.10092 Choi, J. H. J., Payne, A., Hart, P., & Brown, A. (2018). Creative risk-taking: Developing strategies for first year university students in the creative industries. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 38(1), 73–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/jade.12169 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 36 Clifford, M. M. (1991). Risk Taking: Theoretical, empirical, and educational considerations. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 263–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653135 Creely, E., Henderson, M., Henriksen, D., & Crawford, R. (2021). Leading change for creativity in schools: Mobilizing creative risk-taking and productive failure. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1–24. https://doi.org/hxvv Henriksen, D., Mishra, P., Creely, E., & Henderson, M. (2021). The role of creative risk taking and productive failure in education and technology futures. TechTrends, 65(4), 602–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-021-00622-8 Hill, H. C., & Papay, J. P. (2022). Building Better PL: How to Strengthen Teacher Learning | Annenberg Institute at Brown. Research Partnership for Professional Learning. https://annenberg.brown.edu/rppl/what-works King, K.P., Heur, B.P. (2009). Transformative Learning in Adult Basic Education. Mezirow, J., & Taylor, E. W. (2009). Transformative learning in practice: Insights from Community, Workplace, and Higher Education. John Wiley & Sons. Maryland Formative Assessment. (2015, January 22). Jan 21 Webinar video 1 (My Favorite No Video Slide 19) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuDjke-p4Co Mehta, R., Henriksen, D., & Mishra, P. (2020). “Let Children Play!”: Connecting evolutionary psychology and creativity with Peter Gray. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 64(5), 684–689. https://doi-org.hal.weber.edu/10.1007/s11528-020-00535-y TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 37 Owusu-Agyeman, Y. (2019). An analysis of theoretical perspectives that define adult learners for effective and inclusive adult education policies. International Review of Education, 65(6), 929–953. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-019-09811-3 Primi, R. (2014). Divergent productions of metaphors: Combining many-facet Rasch measurement and cognitive psychology in the assessment of creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity & the Arts, 8(4), 461–474. https://doi-org.hal.weber.edu/10.1037/a0038055 Ritchhart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding, and Independence for All Learners. John Wiley & Sons. Saphier, J. (2017). High expectations teaching: How we persuade students to believe and act on “smart is something you can get.” Corwin. Sharma, S. (2015). Promoting risk taking in mathematics classrooms: The importance of creating a safe learning environment. Mathematics Enthusiast, 12(1–3), 290–306. https://doi.org/hxvw Simonton, D. K. (2012). Teaching creativity: Current findings, trends, and controversies in the psychology of creativity. Teaching of Psychology, 39(3), 217–222. `https://doi-org.hal.weber.edu/10.1177/0098628312450444 Sowden, P. (2022). Rethinking assessment: Putting psychology to work to build learners’ creativity. Psychology of Education Review, 46(1), 21–24. Stojanovska, V., & Petrova - Popovski, N. (2021). What teachers think of developing student’s creativity. Horizons Series A, 28, 29–40. https://doi-org.hal.weber.edu/10.20544/HORIZONS.A.28.1.21.P03 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 38 Thorley, M. (2020). Failing to learn and learning to fail – exemplars of practice from the creative industries. International Journal for Academic Development, 25(1), 71–82. https://doi.org/gkztqc Wlodarsky, R., & Carr‐Chellman, D. (2020). Cultivating leadership in adult and continuing education: Developing adults using reflection within mentoring experiences. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2020(167–168), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.20395 Yang, H. (2019). The effects of professional development experience on teacher self-efficacy: Analysis of an international dataset using Bayesian multilevel models. Professional Development in Education, 46(5), 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1643393 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 39 Appendix Appendix A: Course Evaluation Rubric Key Words Training Content: Instructional items specifically for educators that teach them how to use the materials, provide them with information or research, create spaces for collaboration, and provide them with instruction about the training course. Content can include, but is not limited to, instructional content pages, videos, PowerPoint presentations, discussion boards, and academic technology tools. Materials: Items that can be applied and used within a 9-12 ELA classroom. Materials can include, but are not limited to, documents, rubrics, videos, and academic online technology tools. Course Evaluation Rubric Relevant: Materials Objective The materials are easily accessible. They directly support the training content. Materials are explicit and effective extensions of the training and allow for effective transition to the classroom. Training materials use relevant and effective instructional strategies. What was done well, felt relevant, and/or fulfilled the objective? What could be changed, improved, and/or felt out of place? Additional questions, feedback, or thoughts. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 40 Relevant: Training Content Objective Training content uses relevant and effective instructional strategies. Training includes multiple examples of active learning, up-to-date data, and modeling. What was done well, felt relevant, and/or fulfilled the objective? What could be changed, improved, and/or felt out of place? Additional questions, feedback, or thoughts. Collaborative: Materials Objective Materials allow for adaptation and are editable. Materials allow for at least one option for professional collaboration. Materials provide opportunities for review and follow-up at least once for each module. What was done well, felt collaborative, and/or fulfilled the objective? What could be changed, improved, and/or felt out of place? Additional questions, feedback, or thoughts. Collaborative: Training Content Objective Training content allows for at least two options of professional collaboration for each module. Training content provides at least two options for mentorship. Training content provides at least one option for feedback for each module. What was done well, felt collaborative, and/or fulfilled the objective? What could be changed, improved, and/or felt out of place? Additional questions, feedback, or thoughts. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 41 Supportive: Materials Objective All materials are professional, explicit, and organized. Material goals and uses are explicit in learning objectives in every module. Materials explicitly support professional endeavors related to the training. What was done well, felt supportive, and/or fulfilled the objective? What could be changed, improved, and/or felt out of place? Additional questions, feedback, or thoughts. Supportive: Training Content Objective Training content is professional, explicit, and organized. Training provides an environment for supportive PD, including clear collaborative spaces, locations to get help and questions, and supports professional endeavors related to the training topic. What was done well, felt supportive, and/or fulfilled the objective? What could be changed, improved, and/or felt out of place? Additional questions, feedback, or thoughts. TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 42 Appendix B: IRB Approval May 7, 2024 Pene'e Stewart Students, Teacher Education Initial - IRB-AY23-24-293 How to Incorporate Risk-Based Learning as a 9-12 ELA Educator: Encouraging Students to Embrace Failure in Education Dear Pene'e Stewart: Weber State University Institutional Review Board confirms it has received the documents for How to Incorporate Risk-Based Learning as a 9-12 ELA Educator: Encouraging Students to Embrace Failure in Education. Once you have appoval from your school site, you may proceed. If you have any questions please contact your review committee chair or irb@weber.edu. Sincerely, Dr. Natalie A. Williams, Chair, College of Education Subcommittee Weber State University Institutional Review Board TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 43 Appendix C: Access to Course Content The course link, contact information, and screenshots have been provided below for those interested in viewing the content in more detail. Please note that the course must be viewed in sequential order. For those who would like to participate in the course, please use the contact information below to discuss participation further. Link to Canvas Course: https://canvas.instructure.com/courses/9574184 Contact Information: Aubrie Grass grass.aubrie@gmail.com Course Screenshots: TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 44 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 45 TRAINING FOR RISK-BASED LEARNING 46 Aubrie Grass Final Project.docx Final Audit Report Created: 2024-06-13 By: Ellynn Raynor (ellynnraynor@weber.edu) Status: Signed Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAyDvVj9oboA2g8GUIAI8fVqz4-kc2U1at 2024-06-28 "Aubrie Grass Final Project.docx" History Document created by Ellynn Raynor (ellynnraynor@weber.edu) 2024-06-13 - 4:19:27 PM GMT- IP address: 137.190.70.233 Document emailed to marjie.ralph@hotmail.com for signature 2024-06-13 - 4:20:22 PM GMT Email viewed by marjie.ralph@hotmail.com 2024-06-18 - 10:04:04 PM GMT- IP address: 104.243.58.243 Email viewed by marjie.ralph@hotmail.com 2024-06-28 - 3:22:35 PM GMT- IP address: 104.243.58.243 Signer marjie.ralph@hotmail.com entered name at signing as Marjorie Jo Ralph 2024-06-28 - 3:24:16 PM GMT- IP address: 104.243.58.243 Document e-signed by Marjorie Jo Ralph (marjie.ralph@hotmail.com) Signature Date: 2024-06-28 - 3:24:18 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 104.243.58.243 Document emailed to Sheryl Rushton (sherylrushton@weber.edu) for signature 2024-06-28 - 3:24:22 PM GMT Email viewed by Sheryl Rushton (sherylrushton@weber.edu) 2024-06-28 - 4:02:25 PM GMT- IP address: 66.102.6.45 Document e-signed by Sheryl Rushton (sherylrushton@weber.edu) Signature Date: 2024-06-28 - 4:02:43 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 24.2.94.113 Document emailed to Penee Stewart (pstewart@weber.edu) for signature 2024-06-28 - 4:02:47 PM GMT Email viewed by Penee Stewart (pstewart@weber.edu) 2024-06-28 - 6:21:21 PM GMT- IP address: 74.125.215.163 Document e-signed by Penee Stewart (pstewart@weber.edu) Signature Date: 2024-06-28 - 6:21:43 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 73.3.89.40 Agreement completed. 2024-06-28 - 6:21:43 PM GMT