Succeeding through your Failures: Learning to fail productively. This workshop was given at the AISES (American Indian Science and Engineering Society) Leadership Summit in March 2014.

1. Succeeding through your
F ailures
Learning to fail productively
Steve Lee, PhD
Graduate Diversity Officer
for STEM Disciplines
AISES Leadership Summit
March 21, 2014

2. What can we learn about failure from:
psychologist
Carol Dweck?
a sociological
study?
an artist’s TED
talk?
Your response to failure
reveals your mindset
Scientists often hide our
failures
Embrace your limitations
to succeed
2

3. One day, you go to class that is really
important to you and that you like a lot. The
professor returns midterm tests, and you got
a C+. You’re very disappointed.
On your way home, you get a parking ticket.
Being really frustrated, you call your best
friend to share your day, but are sort of
brushed off.
3
How would you respond?

4. How do you respond to challenges?
4
Dweck proposes 2 different responses:
I’d look at what was
wrong and resolve to do
better.
I’d start thinking about
studying in a different
way.
stay in bed
get drunk
I’m a total failure
I wouldn’t bother trying
hard next time
Fixed mindset Growth mindset

5. Different responses to failure
5
Losing equals death You get better when
you lose

6. Carol Dweck’s Mindset
Fixed vs Growth
ability is static
avoids challenges
gives up easily
sees effort as fruitless
ignores useful criticism
threatened by others
ability is developed
embraces challenges
persists in obstacles
sees effort as necessary
learns from criticism
inspired by others’ success
6

7. What are the consequences of
the different mindsets?
7

8. What are the consequences of
the different mindsets?
Those who were
praised for their:
intelligence
effort
to reinforce a:
fixed mindset
growth mindset
chose to work on:
easier problems.
more challenging
problems.
8

9. What are the benefits of
a growth mindset?
Those with a growth mindset:
achieved higher grades in a General
Chemistry course
had a more accurate sense of their
strengths and weaknesses
had lower levels of depression
9

10. “Doctoring Uncertainty” Delamont and Atkinson
Social Studies of Science, 2001, 87.
as undergrads, they were accustomed to
smaller projects with a high chance of success
many new grad students face greater
difficulties with bigger projects
when scientists present or publish research,
we marginalize our failures
10
What can sociologists tell us
about scientists?

11. How do scientists approach
mistakes and failures?
“The importance of stupidity in
scientific research”
Martin Schwartz, J. Cell Science, 2008, 1771.
Let’s read and discuss
11

12. What can an artist teach us about
our limitations?
12
Phil Hansen’s TED talk

13. 13
Hansen proposes:
embracing your limitations can
drive greater creativity
don’t be driven by a single
approach
What can an artist teach us about
our limitations?

14. What can we learn from failures?
psychologist
Carol Dweck
Professor
Martin Schwartz
artist
Phil Hansen
Growth requires putting
in effort
Accept that research
makes us feel stupid
Embrace your limitations
to succeed
14

15. Self-reflection Questions
What’s been a recent failure for you? Describe the
events, possible causes, people involved, etc.
How did you respond? Was your response more
consistent with a fixed mindset or a growth mindset?
Consider similar experiences of failures, obstacles, and
limitations. Was your behavior more consistent with a
fixed or growth mindset?
Do you believe you need to adjust your response to
failures? If so, what aspects of your behavior do you
believe you need to adjust?
15

16. Further Reading
16
This workshop’s materials are in Slideshare.net

17. 17
Are you paying attention to your failures,
limitations, challenges?
What are they trying to teach you?

18. 1
Succeeding through your F ailures
Learning to Fail Productively
Steve Lee, PhD; stnlee@ucdavis.edu
Graduate Diversity Officer for the STEM Disciplines
Office of Graduate Studies, UC Davis
AISES Leadership Summit
March 21, 2014
Excerpt from “The importance of stupidity in scientific research” Martin Schwartz, J. Cell Science,
2008, 1771.
I recently saw an old friend for the first time in
many years. We had been Ph.D. students at the same
time, both studying science, although in different areas.
She later dropped out of graduate school, went to
Harvard Law School and is now a senior lawyer for a
major environmental organization. At some point, the
conversation turned to why she had left graduate
school. To my utter astonishment, she said it was
because it made her feel stupid. After a couple of
years of feeling stupid every day, she was ready to do
something else.
I had thought of her as one of the brightest people
I knew and her subsequent career supports that view.
What she said bothered me. I kept thinking about it;
sometime the next day, it hit me. Science makes me
feel stupid too. It’s just that I’ve gotten used to it. So
used to it, in fact, that I actively seek out new
opportunities to feel stupid. I wouldn’t know what to
do without that feeling. I even think it’s supposed to
be this way. Let me explain.
For almost all of us, one of the reasons that we
liked science in high school and college is that we were
good at it. That can’t be the only reason – fascination
with understanding the physical world and an
emotional need to discover new things has to enter
into it too. But high-school and college science means
taking courses, and doing well in courses means
getting the right answers on tests. If you know those
answers, you do well and get to feel smart.
A PhD, in which you have to do a research project,
is a whole different thing. For me, it was a daunting
task. How could I possibly frame the questions that
would lead to significant discoveries; design and
interpret an experiment so that the conclusions were
absolutely convincing; foresee difficulties and see ways
around them, or, failing that, solve them when they
occurred? My PhD project was somewhat
interdisciplinary and, for a while, whenever I ran into a
problem, I pestered the faculty in my department who
were experts in the various disciplines that I needed. I
remember the day when Henry Taube (who won the
Nobel Prize two years later) told me he didn’t know
how to solve the problem I was having in his area. I was
a third-year graduate student and I figured that Taube
knew about 1000 times more than I did (conservative
estimate). If he didn’t have the answer, nobody did.
That’s when it hit me: nobody did. That’s why it
was a research problem. And being my research
problem, it was up to me to solve. Once I faced that
fact, I solved the problem in a couple of days. (It wasn’t
really very hard; I just had to try a few things.) The
crucial lesson was that the scope of things I didn’t
know wasn’t merely vast; it was, for all practical
purposes, infinite. That realization, instead of being
discouraging, was liberating. If our ignorance is infinite,
the only possible course of action is to muddle
through as best we can.
Questions:
What are your initial reactions to Professor Martin Schwartz’s perspective?
As Schwartz approaches his research, do you think he has a fixed or growth mindset? Explain your reasoning.

19. 2
Carol Dweck’s Mindset
Fixed Mindset Growth Mindset
ability is static ability is developed
avoids challenges embraces challenges
gives up easily persists in obstacles
sees effort as fruitless sees effort as necessary
ignores useful criticism learns from criticism
threatened by others inspired by others’ success
Self-reflection questions:
What has been a recent experience of failure for you? Describe the events, possible causes,
people involved, etc.
How did you respond to the failure? Was your response more consistent with a fixed mindset or
a growth mindset?
Consider similar events where you experienced failures, obstacles, and limitations. Were your
patterns of behavior more consistent with a fixed or growth mindset?
Do you believe you need to adjust your response to failures? If so, what aspects of your behavior
do you believe you need to adjust?
Further Reading:
“Mindset” by Carol Dweck
“Doctoring Uncertainty” Delamont and Atkinson, Social Studies of Science, 2001, 87.
“The importance of stupidity in scientific research” Martin Schwartz, J. Cell Science, 2008, 1771.
Phil Hansen’s TED talk: www.ted.com/talks/phil_hansen_embrace_the_shake.html
“Switch: How to change things when change is hard” Chip and Dan Heath
• Thanks for coming to the workshop! I hope that it was helpful.
• My presentation and handout are available in my account at < www.slideshare.net >.