Antifragile learning during COVID-19: lessons for professors and students

A decision from the Faculty where I work has sparked controversy among my colleagues at the University of Ottawa. It has been decided that due to these unique and special circumstances derived from the COVID-19 pandemic, undergraduate students will be able to choose whether or not to take the final exam, and that they are not required to notify their professors of their decision. Students who decide not to take the final exam will receive as a final grade the one they have accumulated in the semester (calculated on the basis of 100%). They will also be able to choose between "satisfactory" or "not satisfactory,” when they receive their numerical grade. This option will not affect their average.

Some colleagues agree with the decision of the Faculty, since they consider that students should have options that free them from the stress that they are living through the abrupt change that COVID-19 has meant in their lives. Many have had to return to their homes and even to their countries of origin. Others have lost their precarious jobs. Still others have families to support in uncertain times.

Other colleagues, among whom I am, think that we should be flexible and understanding with students, but that this does not imply sacrificing academic quality or even the commitment that professors and students should have with knowledge.

Looking to case-by-case, with the necessary reasoning and empathy, we could have found a middle ground that would have meant a richer formative experience for our students. Dropping the final exam as an option is more than a mere formality. That is to say to the students that the first option is to surrender. And this is not right. I will explain why.

Antifragility and learning

My students at the Risk and Crisis Communication seminar know the concept of “antifragility” introduced by Nassim Nicholas Taleb (the same author of the book The Black Swan). To summarize it, antifragile is the equivalent to the Venezuelan saying:  "what does not kill you, strengthens you.” The basic idea of ​​this notion is that there are systems, objects and living beings that gain strength as they are subjected to unexpected shocks.

I prefer to quote Taleb, although it is a bit long, but it is worth for understanding the implications of this concept:

“Crucially, if antifragility is the property of all those natural (and complex) systems that have survived, depriving these systems of volatility, randomness, and stressors will harm them. They will weaken, die, or blow up. We have been fragilizing the economy, our health, political life, education, almost everything ... by suppressing randomness and volatility. Just as spending a month in bed (preferably with an unabridged version of War and Peace and access to The Sopranos ’entire eighty-six episodes) leads to muscle atrophy, complex systems are weakened, even killed, when deprived of stressors. Much of our modern, structured, world has been harming us with top-down policies and contraptions (dubbed “Soviet-Harvard delusions” in the book) which do precisely this: an insult to the antifragility of systems.

This is the tragedy of modernity: as with neurotically overprotective parents, those trying to help are often hurting us the most.

If about everything top-down fragilizes and blocks antifragility and growth, everything bottom-up thrives under the right amount of stress and disorder. The process of discovery (or innovation, or technological progress) itself depends on antifragile tinkering, aggressive risk bearing rather than formal education.”

With the Faculty decision to exempt students from their final exam and to give them the option of not even discussing it with their professor, the institution is sending a "fragile" message to young people. As Taleb says, the Faculty is following the behaviour of "overprotective" parents who end up harming more than educating their children.

Experiencing antifragility

When the University of Ottawa decided to cancel face-to-face courses and switch to virtual learning mode, the vast majority of professors and students managed to adapt quite well to the new situation. They went on to give their courses virtually (using Zoom, Adobe Connect, among other platforms). Students attended their online classes. They did their homework, exercises, and readings. Of course, there have been exceptions, and professors have sought ways to accommodate those students who have had difficulties adjusting to last-minute changes.

The quick adaptability of most professors and students was an exercise in antifragility in full swing, with some confusion, but with great enthusiasm. It was worth continuing this exercise until the end of the semester, and not stop it as the institution has done.

Taleb says that he wrote his books The Black Swan and Antifragile based on his own experiences as a broker in Wall Street. He put what he calls "skin in the game.” We, professors and students, wanted to put “skin in the game” in this disruptive but enriching learning experience. I hope that students get this message, and not fall into the overprotective fragilization.