The value of failure

[PG]

A series has started today on Radio 4 called The Value of Failure. I was reading the linked article “Is it good for people to fail occasionally?” and wondered whether is is reaction to failure – not always finding all the controls easily – that causes some people to fail to stick with orienteering after a couple of events. It suggests that girls react less well to failure than boys. Is this part of the reason less girls orienteer?

Do we need to emphasise to beginners and improvers that in orienteering you aren't “only as good as your last event”. We all make mistakes*, but at best we learn from them and develop as an orienteer by working at techniques to avoid them.

*I'm a prime example; despite previous medal-winning performances, this week in Portugal O-meeting mistakes mean I'm struggling to get into the top ten in my class, but at least I'm improving my position every day.

[SeanC]

It's an interesting question. Another way to look at this is "what is success?". I find that complete beginners (women and men) are often quite happy to try orienteering at Kent Night Cup events (even though you'd think that a first event at night would be setting people up for failure) if someone helps make expectations realistic before the event. Eg Something like "most people who've never done this before find about 3 controls". If they then find 4 they come back happy because this is a success, there is no failure to cope with.

Mass start score events are great for adult beginners and intermediate orienteers IMHO. In contrast colour coded events are a harder pitch. Miss a control and you get "disqualified" = failure announced publicly, plus beginners courses (white to orange) are often mostly younger juniors which can emphase slow times and therefore feels like failure. Also with mass start score events all the experienced orienteers can be encouraging/offer advice etc and the organiser can re-inforce this at the start briefing, or pick out some for praise at the post event prizegiving.

Women and sport... probably many factors? More men do sport than women, not sure whether orienteering is average. Here's some stuff from SportEngland on the subject: http://www.sportengland.org/research/en ... and-women/

[ba-ba]

I'd definitely agree with both the question posed and some of Sean's solutions. In the past I found it difficult to sell such a 'long term' (in terms of getting quite good at it) sport in a more 'wham bam thankyou mam' instant gratification culture.
Of course there are those irritating people who pick it up ridiculously quickly and to a pretty high standard - Jamie Parkinson at OUOC is a prime example and now a British champion - but these are present in all sports (the current English 10k road race champion Matty Hynes started running 4 years ago)

[King Penguin]

I get extremely irritated by all the namby pamby "children must not play competitive sports because not everyone can win". Life is full of challenges, and competitive sports and getting used to setbacks are a good way of helping to prepare them for what lies ahead. We will lose some; some will rise to the challenge and return determined to do better next time; some will give up.
However, I agree entirely we should not line beginners up for failure and setting reasonable expectations is essential.

[awk]

It suggests that girls react less well to failure than boys. Is this part of the reason less girls orienteer?

I always understood it was, if anything, the opposite.

I suspect that the reason fewer girls orienteer than boys is more wrapped up in the fact that fewer girls take part in competitive sport overall, which is due to social pressures, different attitudes to competition in different contexts, etc.

Girls are generally better readers than boys at early ages, not least because they tend to be more persistent at learning when they can't do it first time - boys tend to give up and move on to something else. Doesn't quite tie up with the idea that girls don't react as well to failure as boys. It would have to be something more specific, e.g. how one reacts to failure in competition.

There is also the whole issue of motivation driven by mastery versus winning, intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation and so on and so on.

In other words, it is, I suggest, way more complicated than a simple 'girls don't react as well to failure as boys.' (which I'm not convinced about anyway!).

[Sunlit Forres]

fewer girls orienteer than boys

Just had a count up from our last event - 33 boys 34 girls but overall you're probably right - there would probably have been more boys had they not been off doing other sports!

There are nearly 4,00 males vs just under 2,000 females on the BOF ranking list.

[Tatty]

Young girls do ot like getting muddy and wet! Push Urban orienteering?

[NFKleanne]

I think I've learnt more when I have had 'bad events', I've become more determined after doing a headless chicken impression and eventually finding a control, than I would have done if I had found them cleanly. Not doing well, also make me more likely to go back to an area - so I can beat it, and find controls better. At one of my early events I managed to go off the map by about 2 miles - I made the map fit what I was seeing, and then had to find my way back to registration via a public footpath and main roads - now they was embarrasing! But I went back and tried again the next time. Concentration, map reading all improved.

[SeanC]

Found this report from SportEngland https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... alysis.pdf

Scrolling down to the bit 'Participation in Sport, by Sex' and skim reading through the blandification this quote seems relevant:

The top three perceived benefits of participating in sport are the same for both men and women: health, exercise and fitness, being with others/socialising and enjoyment/fun.
However, women (8.2% +/-1.3) are more likely than men (4.8% +/-1.0) to consider feeling good afterwards to be a benefit while men (8.5% +/-1.2) are more likely than women (4.3% +/-0.9) to consider winning or doing well to be a benefit.

[EddieH]

I have only read what's here, but thr question “Is it good for people to fail occasionally?” seems odd to me as it self evidently is vital to fail and fail often if you want to be very successful.

Modern culture pressures people against this but almost everyone has some tolerence of failure. People with none whatsoever could never learn any new skill as inevitably they will fail and give up.

Ones ability to excel is in direct poprortion to one's willingness to fail.

[King Penguin]

".....If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two imposters just the same ....."
(Kipling)

[Big Jon]

Failure is just negative name for "learning experiences".
Treat set-backs as learning experiences, learn from them, improve, don't make the same mistake again ..........and make a different mistake at the next event