Analysis: Part V
Learning how to work hard is not a skill that comes naturally. Ironically, learning to work hard is hard work. However, it is usually easier for an individual to develop this skill if they have a clear goal in mind. American psychologists, Edwin Locke and Gary Latham define goals as an “object or aim of an action” such as “to attain a specific standard of proficiency, usually within a specified time limit” (Locke & Latham, 2002). High school students will typically center their goals on grades they hope to earn in a particular classes and their “specified time limit” is until the end of the school year. On the first day of school each student set a goal to aspire to during the year. The majority of individuals aspired to earn a certain grade. Some said they simply wanted “to pass” and others said that they wanted “to get all A’s” (Artifact #1B). Surprisingly, many students did not mention grades whatsoever. These students hoped to “learn new things” and to “get better” at math (Artifact #1B). According to American psychologists, Edwin Locke and Gary Latham, the first set of students set performance goals - a goal that refers to the score one attains on and task, whereas the second set of students set learning goals – a goal that refers to the number of ideas or strategies one acquires or develops to accomplish a task effectively (Locke and Latham, 2002).
Students will typically choose a particular letter grade to aspire to because it is an easy objective to remember. They also have a clear indicator of whether or not they reached their goal. However, earning a particular letter grades is a superficial way of measuring success in the classroom. A student who maintained an A for the duration of the year did not necessarily learn more than someone who jumped from a C to a B. Some might argue that the latter student was actually more successful than the student who received an A because they were clearly improving. While a student who maintained an A for the entire semester could have also improved his or her level of understanding.
A student who maintains an A for the duration of the year might be challenging themselves and improving their understanding of the subject, but is that the case for all student who maintain an A? I have a handful of students who have maintained an A, not because they put in a lot of effort into class, but simply because they are good at math. While these students might be content with their letter grade, what are they really gaining from their minimal efforts? While it is inevitable that some students will have an easier time with math than others, if a student knows that they have an easy time getting an A in a math class, I think it is important for that student to pick a different goal to aspire to, particularly something that will be challenging.
At the beginning of the year, when I was first getting to know my students, it was difficult to assess their goals. I could not tell which students set challenging goals and which students created goals that would be easy to achieve. However, mid-way through the semester when students were given an evaluation of the course (Artifact #5) and were required to create new goals for the upcoming semester I could tell which students thrived off of challenge and which students were content setting easily attainable goals (Artifact #5B). A person’s goals need to be a perfect balance of challenging and attainable. If a person sets a goal that is extremely challenging, but unattainable, they will become frustrated and most likely will give up on themselves. However, what might be even worse than setting too challenging of a goal is setting a goal that is too attainable.
Learning to strike a balance between ambitious and realistic goals will allow students to perform at their highest potential. Psychologist Lev Vygotsky refers to this perfect balance as the zone of proximal development. Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development refers to “the range of tasks that children cannot yet perform independently but can perform with help and guidance of others” (Ormand, 2008, p. 332). While it might feel satisfying in the moment, setting goals that are easily attainable harms the learning process. However, most students set goals that are too attainable because they are afraid that they will not achieve a challenging goal that they set out for themselves. It is difficult for anyone to achieve their long-term goals if they do not have a clear understanding of how they are going to reach them. Also, because long-term goals are far into the future, there is no immediate accountability to reach them. In order to help more students to reach their long-term goals, I spent more time emphasizing the importance of setting short-term goals (Artifact #8).
Not only did students set weekly short-term goals, but also that they reflected on their progress every week as to whether or not they actually achieved their short-term goals and whether or not they found the weekly goals helpful (Artifact #9A). While there were a few exceptions, overall students thought that setting short-term goals was helpful to their learning process. One student noted, “it’s very helpful to have short term goals every week because it trains me up to do longer term ones and it gets me in the habit of following through on what I say I’ll do” (Artifact #9B). In a class discussion, one student said that she thought short-term goals were helpful because they helped her “get closer to our long-term goals” (Artifact #10).
As a teacher you always want to encourage student to do their best. However, research shows that “difficult goals consistently lead to higher performance than urging people to do their best” (Locke & Latham, 2002). While it is important for students to “do their best” most of the time individuals do not even realize that their perceived best does not equate to their actual best. If students continue to set goals revolving around grades and aspiring to achieve goals that are simply attainable rather than challenging, they will not really be improving themselves as learners.
Students will typically choose a particular letter grade to aspire to because it is an easy objective to remember. They also have a clear indicator of whether or not they reached their goal. However, earning a particular letter grades is a superficial way of measuring success in the classroom. A student who maintained an A for the duration of the year did not necessarily learn more than someone who jumped from a C to a B. Some might argue that the latter student was actually more successful than the student who received an A because they were clearly improving. While a student who maintained an A for the entire semester could have also improved his or her level of understanding.
A student who maintains an A for the duration of the year might be challenging themselves and improving their understanding of the subject, but is that the case for all student who maintain an A? I have a handful of students who have maintained an A, not because they put in a lot of effort into class, but simply because they are good at math. While these students might be content with their letter grade, what are they really gaining from their minimal efforts? While it is inevitable that some students will have an easier time with math than others, if a student knows that they have an easy time getting an A in a math class, I think it is important for that student to pick a different goal to aspire to, particularly something that will be challenging.
At the beginning of the year, when I was first getting to know my students, it was difficult to assess their goals. I could not tell which students set challenging goals and which students created goals that would be easy to achieve. However, mid-way through the semester when students were given an evaluation of the course (Artifact #5) and were required to create new goals for the upcoming semester I could tell which students thrived off of challenge and which students were content setting easily attainable goals (Artifact #5B). A person’s goals need to be a perfect balance of challenging and attainable. If a person sets a goal that is extremely challenging, but unattainable, they will become frustrated and most likely will give up on themselves. However, what might be even worse than setting too challenging of a goal is setting a goal that is too attainable.
Learning to strike a balance between ambitious and realistic goals will allow students to perform at their highest potential. Psychologist Lev Vygotsky refers to this perfect balance as the zone of proximal development. Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development refers to “the range of tasks that children cannot yet perform independently but can perform with help and guidance of others” (Ormand, 2008, p. 332). While it might feel satisfying in the moment, setting goals that are easily attainable harms the learning process. However, most students set goals that are too attainable because they are afraid that they will not achieve a challenging goal that they set out for themselves. It is difficult for anyone to achieve their long-term goals if they do not have a clear understanding of how they are going to reach them. Also, because long-term goals are far into the future, there is no immediate accountability to reach them. In order to help more students to reach their long-term goals, I spent more time emphasizing the importance of setting short-term goals (Artifact #8).
Not only did students set weekly short-term goals, but also that they reflected on their progress every week as to whether or not they actually achieved their short-term goals and whether or not they found the weekly goals helpful (Artifact #9A). While there were a few exceptions, overall students thought that setting short-term goals was helpful to their learning process. One student noted, “it’s very helpful to have short term goals every week because it trains me up to do longer term ones and it gets me in the habit of following through on what I say I’ll do” (Artifact #9B). In a class discussion, one student said that she thought short-term goals were helpful because they helped her “get closer to our long-term goals” (Artifact #10).
As a teacher you always want to encourage student to do their best. However, research shows that “difficult goals consistently lead to higher performance than urging people to do their best” (Locke & Latham, 2002). While it is important for students to “do their best” most of the time individuals do not even realize that their perceived best does not equate to their actual best. If students continue to set goals revolving around grades and aspiring to achieve goals that are simply attainable rather than challenging, they will not really be improving themselves as learners.