Goal Setting Research – ‘Can we fix it’ is the right question to ask

An interesting article by Daniel Pink referring to research about changing the way we might set our goals from “I will…” to “Will I…?”


In a nifty set of experiments, three social scientists explored the differences between what they call “declarative” self-talk (I will fix it!) and “interrogative” self-talk (Can I fix it?). They began by presenting a group of participants with some anagrams to solve (for example, rearranging the letters in “sauce” to spell “cause”.) But before the participants tackled the problem, the researchers asked one half of them to take a minute to ask themselves whether they would complete the task – and the other half to tell themselves that they would complete the task.

The results?

The self-questioning group solved significantly more anagrams than the self-affirming group.

The researchers – Ibrahim Senay and Dolores Albarracin of the University of Illinois, along with Kenji Noguchi of the University of Southern Mississippi – then enlisted a new group to try a variation with a twist of trickery: “We told participants that we were interested in people’s handwriting practices. With this pretence, participants were given a sheet of paper to write down 20 times one of the following word pairs: Will I, I will, I, or Will. Then they were asked to work on a series of 10 anagrams in the same way participants in Experiment One did.”

The outcome was the same. People “primed” with Will I solved nearly twice as many anagrams as people in the other three groups. In subsequent experiments, the basic pattern held. Those who approached a task with questioning self-talk did better than those who began with affirming self-talk.

“Setting goals and striving to achieve them assumes, by definition, that there is a discrepancy between where you are and want to be. When you doubt, you probably achieve the right mindset,” researcher Albarracin explained in an email to me.

“In addition, asking questions forces you to define if you really want something and probably think about what you want, even in the presence of obstacles.”


Taken from ‘Can we fix it’ is the right question to ask – Telegraph http://tgr.ph/H6zSqt


Some good counterpoints to discussions about the importance of learning outcomes and setting goals. Could this be done in the way we verbalise or talk about our targets or what we are learning in the classroom? How do you think this idea would play out in the classroom?

The “Interesting Ways” Series: A Milestone in Sharing

On Saturday I joined the TEDx community of presenters and gave a talk about knowledge sharing at TEDxNottingham, so it is fitting that the Interesting Ways has passed a milestone of sorts – a milestone in sharing.

Thanks to some great recent contributions the iPad resource passed 100 shared ideas!

To you this may mean very little, as we see a great many lists of this sort “100 Ways to Eat Fruit…”, “100 Different Keyboard Shortcuts…”, “100 Reasons Not to Use Compiled Lists”. But the key characteristic of these is that they have almost certainly been built quickly, sometimes by a few people, but more likely by an individual compiler.

142455033 49ce50a89bYou only have to look at a copy of Wired or other such magazine to see how much we are transfixed with the presentation of numbered sets of information or advice.

The Interesting Ways series is different. Firstly the list always starts at zero and although I have a hunch people will chip in and share, it is not guaranteed. Secondly they are built with classroom practice in mind, the ideas are shared by mostly practicing teachers. Thirdly the resources have many, many editors – you only have to scan through the Twitter names left as signatures on each slide to see that. And finally they are built over time – there is no rush to get a perfect multiple of 10 before they are published, they evolve at different speeds, sometimes quickly, sometimes more slowly as the community learns.

I think the final point refers to the lovely imperfections of them – which is in direct contrast to the sterile multiple-of-10-perfection posts which drive traffic. These are evolving all of the time – the first resource for the IWB has been a publicly editable document for 5 years!

They’re a bit scrappy and some have had things moved around and deleted but that is to be expected for resources that are in the open and publicly editable for so long. I am always grateful to hear from so many of you who have noticed something is amiss, spotted any problems and either fixed it up or let me know – people care for these resources.

It would be interesting to know how you see it all, but I think there are a few reasons why they have proven popular/useful – (1) They are always changing (2) You can easily present them to staff and embed them in a webpage (3) One slide, one idea, one image seems to work (4) They are easy to contribute to, they have a low barrier to entry (5) they are owned by the community that have built them (6) We learn about our community through the ideas we share.

I always thought the idea might catch on, this milestone, of sorts, just reminds me of how far we have come and I am so pleased to help everyone build such great pots of ideas.

I genuinely think we can do more though and hope that we can all continue to share more of our ideas and expertise. 

Image: ‘Sharing

The School Filter Bubble

5538036046 ef4b4f5382

It is good to question what we see, as all too often we adhere to the life script that everyone else is happily playing out – for me Eli Pariser’s book The Filter Bubble helped me to once again question what we take as the truth, in his case the internet that is presented to us.

But what if there is a school filter bubble?

I am going to look at this as a parent and as a teacher.

My son is my favourite subject and there isn’t really any known limit to the amount I want to know about his day and what he is up to. He has been in full time school for just over a year and I still would love to follow him around for a day. But the message from school and what we find out as parents is only such a tiny fraction of what is happening at school.

We digest the presented message of school, of our children’s learning and the finer intricacies of what is taking place. The PR machine of school is crafting a message about the business of learning. And what a tough task that is because (a) learning is one of the most complex processes in the universe because of the number of factors that effect it and (b) the message is aimed at a (more than) captive audience – as parents we always want to know more.

It may come across that I am bashing school-home communications a bit – well the key thing for me – being a professional in the education sector – is that I know only a sliver of what is happening in my son’s learning life at school. Really only a fraction, the fraction that is communicated, shared at parents evening or in the odd newsletter or word at the classroom door. I don’t think that is enough.

Why should I just accept the school filter bubble?

How is it possible with all of the technology tools that build knowledge sharing, participation, crowd-sourcing, communities and overcome physical and social barriers to make connections, tools that side-step language and time differences and allow us instantaneous communication – that we still don’t have the true capacity to experience what is happening at school instantly, more easily, more quickly and more intuitively.

Well we should and one day we can make it happen.

Pic Cost savings in The Netherlands: Now you see it, now you don’t by opensourceway

Set Your Compass: Share Your Direction

5374308475 619de16a0a

All too often we don’t co-construct our curriculum with the children in our class. What occurs is a complete lack of clarity about where, as a group of learners, we are heading. In fact the direction we are going in is all too often very much laid out for the learner – the route is set by the teacher and the outcomes are already known.

Curriculum planning in this vein doesn’t cater for the tangent or the divergent thinker- well it might entertain it briefly but will eventually settle back on the steady path to where we were always going.

Curricular of this ilk are not setup for serendipity. If I knew exactly the music that was going to be played on the radio all of the time, well in advance and had no control over it, I would miss out on those beautiful moments when you hear a wonderful track that hasn’t been played for ages and there you are in that completely unexpected moment savouring every note.

Much of this is to do with teacher control and the lack of willingness to let go of the reins and venture from the path a little. But it is also to do with a lack of ambition about what we plan, many models of curriculum, as well as units of work, are legacy systems:

A legacy system is an old method, technology, computer system, or application program that continues to be used, typically because it still functions for the users’ needs, even though newer technology or more efficient methods of performing a task are now available.

If the direction of a unit is already laid out, involving the learner in the direction is fruitless, for the learner at least, for no alteration can be made anyway.

In his book How Children Fail, John Holt reflected in 1958:

It has become clear over the year that these children see school almost entirely in terms of the day-to-day and hour-to-hour tasks that we impose on them. This is not at all the way the teacher thinks of it. The conscientious teacher thinks of himself as taking his students (at least part way) on a journey to some glorious destination, well worth the pains of the trip.

He continues to explain that he recognises a disconnect with what we as teachers perceive as a learning journey and how children truly see this. How many schools do you think could still be described in these terms?

At one of our partner schools in South London the pupils of Rosendale Primary School negotiate their learning. They have a clear direction and input into the course that is going to be set – not only that they have the ability to define how they get there. The pupil’s prior knowledge, skills, interests and passions are the starting point for much of the project learning that takes place.

With a vested interest the pupils at Rosendale have a much clearer understanding of the learning as a journey – they know what needs to be done and have made choices that help to define this and make it real and meaningful to them. It is not simply a set of tasks imposed on them by a legacy system.

Most of the time with these more open models we have to set our course into the unknown a little, we have to be willing to take the path less trodden.

When the teachers and Year 3 and 4 pupils of Thorney Close Primary School took on the challenge of running their own TEDx we didn’t know if we would be successful, there were a great deal of unknowns. At one point we didn’t have a venue because Take That were playing at the Stadium of Light!

With uncertainty often comes failure and we felt that for real and so did the children, but would they learn from it – absolutely!

Here are some reflections on the process by one of the teachers involved:

I learnt to trust the children and to let them go in the direction they want, trust that they’re going to make the right decisions with a little bit of guidance but not as much structure as we normally would give. So to sit back more and to listen more, and just ask the odd few questions – without waiting for that answer that the teacher wants to hear.

One of my favourite ways to describe this sense of a general direction, unclear and yet thoughtfully open, is the idea of a “fuzzy goal”. Taken from the opening to the wonderful book Gamestorming by Sunni Brown, David Gray and James Macanufo – a fuzzy goal can both describe our philosophical approach to change as well as the direction of a student led unit.

Like Columbus, in order to move toward an uncertain future, you need to set a course. But how do you set a course when the destination is unknown? This is where it becomes necessary to imagine a world; a future world that is diferent from our own. Somehow we need to imagine a world that we can’t really fully conceive yet—a world that we can see only dimly, as if through a fog.

Pic navigation (cc) by marfis75

Is the “page” dead or are we just getting started?

One of the interesting points made by Anthony Salcito, the VP of Education for Microsoft, during his talk at Learning Without Frontiers, was about the persistance of the page in digital formats.

He referred to the bookshelf look of iBooks and the animated page turn in digital books. Salcito asked why do we need this in the digital form? Why does this analogue construct persist in the digital representation of text?

I have recently enjoyed reading some of the the early Sherlock Holmes stories on my iPad and I like the way I can personalise the look and feel of the text. The page turn animation and control is always quite nice too. But are we just being unnecessarily nostalgic about this and in fact limiting what can be done with text in the digital form by sticking to this traditional notion of the “page”? Are we not being ambitious enough?

I think it was either Anthony Salcito himself or Steve Wheeler on Twitter who referred to it as a behavioural artifact:

[blackbirdpie url=”https://twitter.com/timbuckteeth/statuses/162560661866561537″]

And thrown into the mix was of course our love of the ‘desktop’ which was shared by Andy Powell.

The discussion about pages in digital text reminded me of the following video of further development of the user interface of the eBook, a prototype from KAIST (Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology)

Skimming through the pages of a book, a feature that was previously unavailable with e-books, is also possible through 3D rendering of the contents on the pages being flipped. A bookmark function allows users to conveniently go back and forth between pages of interest. In addition, the system has a “multi-touch” function as well as a smart capability of recognising dragging time, finger pressure, and finger gestures.

Professor Howon Lee said,

“I hope that our technology will accelerate the wider use of e-books and contribute to Korea’s endeavours to lead the development of software application technology for mobile devices.”

But is this simply innovation in the wrong direction? Does it just perpetuate a form factor that limits what can be done on digital devices? Or is the 1000 year old idea of a page going to be with us for another millennium and beyond?