Find Another Way — One Goal, Many Tries

A hands-on challenge with a clear goal and a built-in snag, where the obvious first method fails and your child has to drop it and test a different approach until one works.

  1. Set a concrete goal — and a catch: “Get this pom-pom into that cup across the room, but your feet stay behind this line.” Put a few “tools” nearby — a cardboard tube, a wooden spoon, a paper plate, some string, a few blocks.
  2. Let them try their first idea (usually throwing) — and let it really fail; the pom-pom flutters short.
  3. Resist fixing it. Don’t name a tool or demonstrate. Stay warm and curious: “Hmm — that didn’t reach. So throwing won’t do it. What’s another way?”
  4. Narrate the feedback, not the solution: “It rolled off the tube — what could stop it rolling off?” Let them test, watch what happens, and adjust.
  5. Cheer the switch itself, not just success: “You tried throwing, then blowing, then the tube — you kept finding new ways!” Count the strategies tried.
  6. When it works, ask why this way worked and the first didn’t — turning trial-and-error into a noticed rule.
  7. Play again with one tool removed, so a path that just worked is now blocked and they have to shift again.

Variation: rescue a soft toy from just out of reach using only the offered tools (pushing may beat grabbing). Build a block-or-cardboard bridge across a gap between two books that holds a toy car without sagging. Move water from a bowl to a jar with “wrong” tools — a sponge, a spoon, a turkey baster — and find which carries the most.

Requirements

  • Space: A clear corner of a room or a table; about 2 m of run for the throw-across version
  • Surface: Floor or a sturdy table; for the water version, a wipeable or outdoor surface, or a towel underneath
  • Materials: Household odds and ends — pom-poms or a light ball, cups and bowls, a cardboard tube, a wooden spoon, a paper plate, string, a few blocks or books, masking tape for a floor line
  • Participants: One adult plus one child; scales to two or three children taking turns or racing the same challenge
  • Supervision: Continuous — an adult scaffolds the prompts, steadies the frustration, and keeps reaching and tools safe

Rationale & Objective

The heart of cognitive flexibility is the perseveration-to-shift move: noticing that the current strategy isn’t working and switching to a different one instead of repeating what fails. This is exactly the change the Dimensional Change Card Sort captures — three-year-olds tend to persist with the old rule, while most four- and five-year-olds can switch (Zelazo, 2006; Doebel & Zelazo, 2015) — and Diamond (2013) frames flexibility partly as “if one way of solving a problem isn’t working, can we think of a new way.” A real goal with an obstacle gives honest feedback from the world: the failing approach is rejected by reality, not by a grown-up, so the child practises generating and testing alternatives rather than guessing what the adult wants. Generating multiple attempts is itself the active ingredient — in “productive failure” research, the number of distinct solutions a learner produces predicts later understanding and transfer (Kapur, 2014). The same predict–try–observe–revise loop underpins early science and maths and the engineering-design process used in preschools (Blank & Lynch, 2018). It also builds resilience: staying regulated and re-engaging after a setback. Honest framing — some trial-and-error and even brief perseveration is normal and healthy at five; the parent’s job is to scaffold (narrate the feedback, ask “what else?”), not to rescue, because children need to succeed a fair share of the time to keep trying, and any gains are likely modest and near-transfer rather than a general leap.

Progress Indicators

  • Early: repeats the same failing move over and over, or stops at the first failure and asks the adult to do it or give the answer
  • Developing: tries a second approach when prompted (“what’s another way?”), but needs the adult to flag that the first one failed and to nudge each switch
  • Proficient: notices on their own that an approach isn’t working and switches, trying two or three genuinely different strategies before succeeding
  • Advanced: spontaneously generates and tests several different strategies, predicts which might work and why, stays regulated through repeated failure, and re-shifts when a working path is blocked

Safety Notes

  • For out-of-reach challenges, set the target no higher than a standing reach — never let a child stack chairs on tables or climb furniture; the tool, not climbing, is the intended solution
  • Keep small parts (marbles, small pom-poms, beads) away from under-3s; if a younger sibling is about, use larger items only
  • Check the “tools”: no sharp or splintered edges, no string long enough to loop around a neck (keep cord short and supervised), and supervise long-handled tools near faces
  • Water and sand versions are slip and spill hazards — wipe drips at once, use a towel, or take it outside
  • Keep frustration productive, not crushing — watch for rising distress and scaffold before a meltdown by dropping a hint, shrinking the gap, or taking a break

Hints

  • Playfulness: give failed attempts a silly sound effect (“boing — nope!”), keep a tally of “ways we tried,” and treat each dead end as a clue you found together, not a mistake
  • Sustain interest: rotate the challenge and the tool set, let your child pick the target or the prize, and turn it into “beat your record” — solve it in fewer tries or with a new tool
  • Common mistake: jumping in with the answer the moment they struggle. That skips the whole skill — bite your tongue, count to ten, and ask “that didn’t work — what else could we try?” instead of showing them
  • Limited materials: you need almost nothing — a sock-ball and a laundry basket set too far to reach, plus whatever’s on the counter (a spoon, a kitchen-roll tube, a shoelace); fewer tools actually forces more inventive switching
  • Cross-domain: links to scientific thinking (predict–test–observe), early maths (comparing distances and amounts), fine and gross motor (aiming, rolling, pouring), and especially resilience and emotional regulation (staying calm and re-engaging after a plan flops)
  • Progression: one obvious-but-blocked path → set it up so two different tools could each work → remove the easy tools so they must invent the path → add a constraint mid-game (feet behind the line; one hand only) so a working strategy gets blocked → child designs a challenge for you and judges your attempts

Sources

  • Diamond, A. (2013). “Executive Functions.” Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168
  • Zelazo, P. D. (2006). “The Dimensional Change Card Sort (DCCS): a method of assessing executive function in children.” Nature Protocols, 1(1), 297–301
  • Doebel, S. & Zelazo, P. D. (2015). “A meta-analysis of the Dimensional Change Card Sort.” Developmental Review, 38, 241–268
  • Zelazo, P. D. (2015). “Executive function: Reflection, iterative reprocessing, complexity, and the developing brain.” Developmental Review, 38, 55–68
  • Kapur, M. (2014). “Productive Failure in Learning Math.” Cognitive Science, 38(5), 1008–1022 (evidence base is mainly older learners; a supporting analogy, not direct preschool data)
  • Blank, J. & Lynch, S. (2018). “Growing in STEM — The Design Process: Engineering Practices in Preschool.” Young Children, 73(4), 89–93 (NAEYC)
  • Diamond, A. & Lee, K. (2011). “Interventions Shown to Aid Executive Function Development in Children 4 to 12 Years Old.” Science, 333(6045), 959–964
  • Nicholson, S. (1971). “How NOT to Cheat Children: The Theory of Loose Parts.” Landscape Architecture, 62(1), 30–34
  • Head Start ELOF — Approaches to Learning (P-ATL 9: flexibility in thinking and behavior; P-ATL 7: persistence) and Cognition (Reasoning and Problem-Solving: trying and revising solutions)