Performance Mode vs Learning Mode - What's your default?

When I first read "Mindset" by Carol Dweck, I was left with the impression that one had either a growth mindset or a fixed mindset and while it was not immutable (i.e. we can develop habits of a growth mindset), we should always be aiming to have a growth mindset. I then came across a brilliant TED talk from Eduardo Briceño (embedded at the end of this article) which really helped me to appreciate the subtleties of the contexts in which a growth mindset is more prevalent and when the characteristics of a fixed mindset are more valued.

In short, Briceño talks about the performance zone and the learning zone as periods of time when we have different goals; in the learning zone, we are aiming to improve, an objective which both promotes and engenders a growth mindset, whilst in the performance zone we aim for flawless execution, a mode which reflects and promotes some characteristics of a fixed mindset.

"The learning zone is when our goal is to improve. Then we do activities designed for improvement, concentrating on what we haven't mastered yet, which means we have to expect to make mistakes, knowing that we will learn from them. That is very different from what we do when we're in our performance zone, which is when our goal is to do something as best as we can, to execute. Then we concentrate on what we have already mastered and we try to minimize mistakes." Eduardo Briceño

Both zones are important in learning. Being allowed to spend as much time as possible in the learning zone allows each learner to get things wrong, seek and value feedback, grow in a culture of experimentation which values improvement over performance and have agency over their learning. I want the learning experiences I design for adults and children to allow them to spend the majority of their time in the learning zone.

Having said that, there are absolutely times when we want our learners in schools to be in the performance zone. Each learner deserves the opportunity to demonstrate what they know and can do to the best of their ability. I want each learner to feel the pride of demonstrating their learning as flawlessly as possible. I want them to feel butterflies in their tummy because they want to do well. The problem is that when this becomes the default mode in our classrooms and schools, it can lead to all of the negative characteristics of a fixed mindset where failure is avoided and invalidating, where feedback is unwanted and stressful, where effort is seen as a waste of time and, as a learner, I measure my success as being relative to others, rather than relative to my previous performance. Those butterflies in my tummy become gnawing cramps of anxiety. In short we destroy the environment where growth is the default.

A big part of this is because high stakes, terminal examinations are the default measure of success at the end of school. In Australia we rank students at the end of school because, frankly, it is the easiest way to measure student success. That is if you define success as a narrow range of academic outcomes measured in high stakes, artificial environments. I am sure that we don't mean to do it, but sometimes the assessment systems we design start to wag the learning dog.

In recent years, it has become common practice to have ongoing assessment and reporting so parents and guardians receive regular feedback on their child's progress. On the surface, this sounds like a good idea, however when we scratch the surface, it is far too easy to fall into the trap of putting learners through summative assessment hoops in order to fulfil the requirements of a learning management system. When the system forces us into the performance zone every few weeks, where is the actual time for learning? As a parent, I am much more interested in the growth of my child as a flourishing member of society, who is developing critical and creative thinking skills, is capable of communicating and has agency over his own development. A box and whisker plot for a piece of summative assessment tells me nothing that will help me help him grow. Moreover, we must start to ask about the purpose of this kind of ongoing assessment. Who is it for? The parents? The school data pot? Or is it for the good of the learners? If the latter, then the focus should surely be on formative assessment which leads to growth in conceptual understanding and application which requires in situ, in time feedback which is often best achieved with hardest of interventions to measure; a learning conversation. If a teacher is spending all of their time writing, giving and marking summative assessments, then when are they given the time to design learning which keeps their students in the learning zone for as much time as possible?

So here is a question for every educator and school. What is the default in your learning culture? Is it the learning zone where growth is paramount or the performance zone where a fixed mindset reigns? Is your system of assessment and reporting genuinely supporting student learning growth (take a breath and think about this carefully before jumping to the defence of a summative reporting construct for parents disguised as ongoing formative assessment for learners)? While a crude adage, we would do well to remember that you don't fatten a pig by constantly weighing it. Learning is a gift and school should be the place where we can flourish and grow as both an individual and a collective. Creating a culture where we spend most of our time in the learning zone is key to this and while we cannot and should not entirely escape from the learning zone, we can choose to keep a healthy balance.

Chris Harte - Director - Unstuck Learning Design