What if all teachers were outstanding …

Most adults who have been successful in life can point to, on average, two teachers who made a significant impact on their life’s course. Most adults will have had between 30 and 50 teachers during their school careers so this implies that only 4 – 6% of teachers had this type of impact. Our own research supports this low figure and we call these teachers “outstanding teachers”. A closer look at such teachers indicates that they deliver superior academic results and they have few, if any, behavioural issues with their students.

When I started looking at the education system back in 2001 this was one of the things that really jumped out at me. I was interviewing teachers at a school and one of them clearly fell into the outstanding category – when you saw her around the school she was always surrounded by a gaggle of students who clearly loved to be with her, the principal confirmed that she delivered above average results – and she clearly loved to teach. One thing she said to me really struck a chord: “In my thirty years of teaching I have never had a discipline problem yet in this school there are two or three teachers whose sole objective on entering the class room is to survive to the end of the lesson”. I thought, how can we have practitioners of a defined body of knowledge performing at such extremes and, worse, no-one could tell me why!

The interesting thing is that it is often a single event or instance where these teachers had a major impact on us. The latest neuroscience research indicates why this might be the case. Say we are at a critical juncture in our lives, for example, we feel that we want to do something – break away from the norm – but we are not sure. An outstanding teacher provides us the confidence to make the choice and this confidence is powerfully impressed into our memories. Subsequently, when we have a similar decision to make – or we need to persist in the original decision against resistance – then that powerful emotion is recalled and it gives us the confidence to move ahead.

A key to being successful, then, is to get close to such teachers. We can see this happening when students choose subject options in years 9 or 10, they will often choose the subject based on the teacher giving it rather than on the subject itself. Schools often try to prevent this!
An obvious corollary to this is that the key to a successful school is to have a higher proportion of outstanding teachers than the average. Imagine a school where 50% of teachers were outstanding, rather than 5%.

Common characteristics of these teachers tend to be: “they listened to me”, “they believed I could succeed”, “they accepted me – they didn’t judge me, even when I made a mistake or did something wrong”, “they were passionate about their subject”.

Our own research, the basis of all our work, in fact, is that it is just these attitudes and behaviours that make the difference and, we now know, they can be learned. So teachers can learn to be outstanding.

What if our schools were set up for teachers to learn to be outstanding at the same time that they are teaching our children?

Tweeting in the Blue Zone …


Imagine we are meeting for the first time. We shake hands, leaning in slightly towards each other and smiling as we do so. We scan our faces for social connection, see all the right signals, and feel good about the connection.

Then, as you withdraw your hand, you see my business card in your palm, “free product, visit my site…”
How would you feel? Do you still feel as good about the connection?
My guess is that you might feel disappointment, some sense that the engagement was disingenuous. My money is on you not feeling more positive about me. I’d also bet that most folk would never consider this as a successful social strategy.
So how is this different on Twitter? Twitter seems to respond in parallel to many of the face-to-face social cues: those who are successful on Twitter seem to listen, to engage, to ask questions and show affiliation and generosity. All hallmarks of socially successful and influential people. Blue Zone folk. Yet the business card in the hand on introduction abounds. How often do you get an auto direct message on follow that offers you something, or directs you to a url?
I understand the strategy and the urge, yet I also see and hear some contempt for such practices. I have my own preferences, but more than professing these, I am interested in the answers to a few questions:
1. How do you feel when you receive such direct messages?
2. As the recipient, do these messages work in driving your clicks to urls and offers?
3. As the sender, how effective is this in bringing new clicks into your sites ?
What do you think then?
Creative Commons Image attributed to http://www.flickr.com/photos/ooohoooh/1350774613/ with thanks

The Three Types of Change


I was musing yesterday on the changes I have made, and how long they last. This stemmed from passing yet another ‘hidden’ camera, and thinking that the fear or anxiety of not knowing where these cameras are have exerted a coercive and external change on me. Not knowing where these cameras might be have caused me to pay more attention to my speed, indeed my legal speed.
So what happens when this anxiety (as low level as it might be) is removed? Every time I travel across the border from Victoria (hidden cameras) to New South Wales (no hidden cameras) I increase my speed immediately. For me then, the causal agent to change is external and coercive. In its presence I change behaviour, in its absence I revert. Coercive change is short term.
This led me to ponder the longer term changes I have made. In almost every case, these changes have been more persistent often because of the influence of another person. Rarely from anything else. This change may be remote (a book or film for example) or direct – a coach, a leader, a teacher or a parent come to mind most quickly. Indeed the most influential people (in terms of effecting long term change for me) have been those who have listened to me, believed in me and respected me. Their influence, an aggregate of their listening to, believing in and respecting me, has been such that they have assisted me to change my brain. From their influence has arisen reflection, clarity and insight. Learning.
The remaining agent of change, indeed long term change, is trauma. Clearly not an agent of choice, an accident, the detection of cancer, the loss of a loved one can all create almost instant change. Many, after years of attempts to abandon smoking, will do so the moment they are told they have lung cancer.
Which subsystem of the brain, then, is engaged in each of these change mechanism?
Coercive change addresses elements of the limbic brain or Red Zone. This part of the brain works on the time frame of now. It is concerned with minimising loss (our brains detest loss) and maximising reward. The Red Zones engages impulses, particularly when the risk of loss is lowered. Keep the change agent in play (hidden cameras) then the ‘red’ brain will act to avert loss by complying. Remove the change agent and the impulse emerges as the best option in the simple risk/reward economy of the Red Zone. Coercive change addresses either the risk (increase the size of the stick) or the reward (increase the size of the carrot).
Equally, traumatic change is nearly always associated with loss, and it is the degree of this loss that causes changes to the brain almost immediately. The changes that occur may, themselves, be positive or negative but the change process is often as painful as it is rapid. Not an ideal way to create something new.
Influential change address both the Blue Zone and the Red. When someone listens to us, believes in and respects us, they engage our prefrontal cortex, the Blue Zone. This provides resources in the part of the brain that reflects, creates and monitors goals, monitors errors, and measures behaviours against internal and external values or morals. It is the part of the brain that manages down short term impulses for the sake of the longer term goal. The future and the now. Such change equips us with the moral skill to know what the right thing to do actually is, and the moral will to actually do it.
In this case, remove the change agent (the influential person) and the change does not diminish quickly, if at all.
Sustained change then, comes from our great leaders, great teachers and great parents. From listening to, believing in and respecting. From influence.
How influential are you?
Postscript: For further insight into influential and coercive change, watch this Barry Schwartz video from TED 2009: