Running head: PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

Problem of Practice:
A Proposal for Incorporating Goal Setting in Education for K-12
Sarah Shin
University of Houston

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

2
INTRODUCTION

I will argue that goal setting is an essential skill that students must learn. Though it is an area that
has produced much research, it has produced limited information on the types of learning environments
that are conducive to setting goals. Therefore, this paper will navigate through various aspects of my
problem of practice and seek to offer a curricular solution.
The first section will explore various facets of goal setting. I will define goals and goal setting and
identify the types of goals that help students produce outcomes through using goal setting theory. I will
offer a possible rationale as to why goals are taught and refute that rationale. I will then address how
educators can combat this rationale by identifying the specific skills they need to promote to enable
students to view goal setting in other ways.
The second section will pose the problem. I will introduce characteristics of traditional instruction
and cite research as evidence that this instruction is being used today. I will then argue that traditional
instruction is not a conducive environment to teach goal setting as it limits the ways students think about
it. I will turn to Frieres notion of the banking concept to support this argument.
The third section will provide the curricular solution. I will first define project and problem-based
learning and explain the relationship between these two terms. I will then establish how project-based
learning, coupled with problem-based learning, provides a conducive context that promotes specific
skills that enable students to view goal setting in various ways. I will then establish how it is structured
in a way that helps students set goals through implementing a real-life example.
The final section will address the practical aspects in teaching goal setting in the context of
project and problem-based learning. I will establish the scope in which project and problem-based
learning should be implemented. I will then provide strategies that would be useful for educators to

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

teach goal setting. Lastly, I will identify appropriate assessments to measure student progress in setting
goals.
GOAL SETTING
Introducing Goals, Goal Setting, Academic Goal Setting, and Goal-Setting Theory
Dale Schunk (2009) defines a goal as a behavior or outcome that one is consciously trying to
perform or attain (n.p.). He then defines goal setting as the process of establishing that behavior or
outcome to serve as the aim of ones actions (n.p.). Thus, academic goal setting will be defined as the
process of establishing [a] behavior or outcome to serve as the aim of ones action in an academic
context. The act of setting goals is based on the assumption that conscious goals will affect action or
behavior (Locke & Latham, 2002). This statement suggests that if students are aware of the goals they
set, it will influence the ways in which they act or behave.
In Goal Setting, Schunk (2009) unpacks decades-worth of research by exploring different
characteristics of goals. He then explores how different goals link with achievement outcomes (2009,
n.p.). The following briefly describes the characteristics of goals and identifies the types of goals that
help students achieve:
1. Specific goals v. general goals: Specific goals are precise whereas general goals are vague.
According to Schunk, Goals that incorporate specific standards are more likely to enhance
motivation and learning than are general goals because specific goals better describe the amount
of effort needed to succeed (2009, n.p.).
2. Proximal goals v. distant goals: Schunk states that Goals can be distinguished according to
how far they extend into the future (2009, n.p.). He defines proximal goals as goals that are close
at hand and distant goals as goals that are farther away. According to goal setting theory,

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

Proximal goals arebeneficial for children because they have short time frames of reference
and are not fully developmentally capable of representing long-term outcomes in thought
(Schunk, 2009, n.p.).
3. Difficult goals v. easy goals: Taing et al. state, Locke et al. (1981) determined that 90% of both
eld studies and lab experiments on goal setting and task performance found that specic,
challenging goals led to higher performance than no goals, easy goals, or do your best goals
(2013, p. 1668). However, students are not motivated to attempt goals that they believe are
impossible to attain (Schunk, 2009, n.p.).
4. Process goals v. outcome goals: Process goals refer to acquiring certain knowledge,
behavior[s], skill[s] or strateg[ies] (Schunk, 2009, n.p.) and outcome goals refer to the finished
product. Schunk states that both can motivate behavior; however, he also states outcome goals
can lead learners to compare their work with that of others, which can lower motivation among
students who are not making adequate progress (2009, n.p.).
In summary, Schunk states how goal setting research has highlighted the importance of setting specific,
proximal, and moderately challenging goals (2009, n.p.).
Possible Rationale: Viewing Goal Setting though Neoliberalism
In A Remarkable Leadership workshop, given to university students, Kevin Eikenberry explores
the importance of goal setting, stating how it creates alignment, creates engagement, creates meaning,
and creates better results (p. 5). The purpose of this illustration is not to examine its content but to
question the context in which the presentation is given. It begs the question as to why university
students, who are relatively competent adults, attend workshops about the importance of goal setting.
In fact, this question extends beyond university students and applies to many working professionals who

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

are often required to attend this same type of workshop. It demonstrates a widespread need for goal
setting that is not only limited within the educational spheres but also pervades professional spheres.
One possible reason why goal setting is so pervasive perhaps lies in the way Tyler describes values
and its impact on shaping educational objectives. Tyler states, When a school accepts [values] as basic
the implication is that these are values to be aimed at in the educational program of the school (2013,
p. 34). He then explores the implications of schools adopting certain values such as material values and
success, stating the following:
Suggestions that are made implying that this or that...will contribute to material rewards or will
make for this kind of success are likely to be eliminated, whereas objectives that lead toward
spiritual values will be given higher rank. (p. 35)
However, in opposition to Tylers assertion that schools are unlikely to adopt materialistic values,
in The Neoliberal Arts, Deresiewicz states that inherent in many educational institutions today, the
purpose of education in a neoliberal age is to produce producers (2015, p. 2). He states, neoliberalism
is everywhere [at] public high schools, at grade schools we see it in the relentless focus on basic
skills in K-12, as if knowledge were simply an assemblage of methods and facts (Deresiewicz, 2015, p.
5). In Deresiewiczs statement about producing producers, he argues that educational institutions
present a narrow view of what producers should produce. He contends that educational institutions
delimit producers in the economic sense.
This notion of value and its impact on educational objectives is problematic when seen through
the lens of teaching goal setting. As goal setting is the process of establishing an outcome to serve as the
aim of ones action, viewing goal setting in the neoliberal sense implies that people merely set goals in
order reap the benefits of the economy. However, goal setting can extend beyond mere materialism; it

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

can encompass a variety of things, such as producing art or music and attaining an improved health or
educational outcome. This, in turn, broadens the sense in which we, as educators, can view goal setting.
Though one can argue that producing producers in the neoliberal sense offers a logical and adequate
rationale for why we need to teach goal setting, as educators, it is essential to provide opportunities for
students to view goal setting in other ways. Thus, a curricular solution that aims to do so must promote
the following: independence, creativity, collaboration, active participation, and critical thinking.
PROBLEM IN K-12: TRADITIONAL INSTRUCTION
The Origin of Traditional Instruction
Traditional instruction is often characterized as being teacher-centered and one way (e.g. via
lecture) (Allen & Dickson, 2015, p. 2). This type of instruction grows out of the Industrial Revolution, a
period marked by mass production. During this time, Joseph Lancaster developed the Lancasterian
method (Hall et al., 2014). The Lancasterian method was an innovative and efficient means to teach
studentsas many as 100 students sat in long rows while the teacher taught his students and the
mentors facilitated recitations and drills. It was considered to be the panacea for efficient schooling of
the masses (Hall et al., 2014, p. 165).
Tyler (2013) states, because contemporary life is so complex and because life is continually
changing [emphasis added], it is very necessary to focus educational efforts [on] aspects that are of
importance today (p. 17). However, it is evident that the instructional approaches used during the
Industrial Revolution continue to thrive today. Hmelo-Silver & Barrows (2006) cite a study conducted by
Schoenfeld (1998) who did a detailed analyses of expert and novice teachers (p. 22), revealing how
novice teachersas opposed to expert teachersused a teacher-centered instruction (Hmelo-Silver &
Barrows, 2006). Considering the number of pre-service teachers who enter the teaching profession every

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

year gives reason to believe novice teachers are using instructional approaches that may not be
conducive, or relevant, to students today. Furthermore, as opposed to other types of instruction, the
nature of traditional instruction, which is simple and efficient, gives further reason to believe that many
schools and educators are currently using this instructional approach for its sheer accessibility.
Viewing Traditional Instruction through Frieres Banking Concept
When considering a curriculum for goal setting that promotes independence, creativity,
collaboration, active participation, and critical thinking, traditional instruction may not be the best
approach. As traditional instructional design is overtly focused on the teacher posing a known-answer
question (Hmelo-Silver & Barrows, 2006), it may not instill within students the necessary skills for goal
setting. Friere (2005, p. 73) states the following characteristics of the banking concept:
(a) the teacher teaches and the students are taught;
(b) the teacher knows everything and the students know nothing;
(c) the teacher thinks and the students are thought about;
(d) the teacher talks and the students listenmeekly.
In describing the banking conceptwhich closely mirrors the characteristics of traditional instruction
Friere states, Projecting an absolute ignorance onto othersnegates education and knowledge as
processes of inquiry (2005, p. 72). In this assertion, Friere argues that when teachers impose their voice,
or authority, they oppose education and knowledge as processes of inquiry. In opposing processes of
inquiry, educators diminish opportunities for students to participate. This lack of participation reduces
students chances in learning about goal setting in a way that promotes certain skills (as mentioned
above), elucidating the reasons why traditional instruction is not an adequate approach to teaching
students about goal setting.

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

CURRICULAR SOLUTION: PROJECT-BASED LEARNING AND PROBLEM-BASED LEARNING

In distinguishing project and problem-based learning, Larmer call[s] problem-based learning a
subset of project-based learningthat is, one of the ways a teacher could frame a project is to solve a
problem (2014, n.p.). He asserts that, conceptually, project and problem-based learning are the same
as both project and problem-based learning focus on an open-ended question or task; provide
authentic applications of content analysis; emphasize student independence and inquiry; and are
more multifaceted than traditional lessons or assignment. He distinguishes project and problem-based
learning in terms of style and scope in the following ways:
Project-Based Learning

Problem-Based Learning

Often multi-subject

More often single-subject, but can be multi-subject

May be lengthy (weeks or months)

Tend to be shorter, but can be lengthy

Follows general steps

Classically follows specific, traditionally prescribed

steps

Includes creation of a product or

performance

The product may be tangible OR a proposed

solution, expressed in writing or in a presentation

May use scenarios but often involves realworld, fully authentic tasks and settings

Often uses case studies or fictitious scenarios as illstructure problems

Given that many students are not realistic about the steps involved in completing a project or about
how much time is required to complete those steps (Schunk, 2009, n.p.), problem-based learning in the
context of project-based learning provides the means in which to help students do so. As mentioned in
this paper, another component that must be addressed in this curricular solution is whether or not it
promotes independence, creativity, collaboration, active participation, and critical thinking. According
to Hmelo-Silver (2004), problem-based learning [helps] students become active learners because it
situates learning in real-world problems and makes students responsible for their learning (p. 236). At

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

King Middle School in Portland, Maine, students were asked to create a model of an original kinetic
sculpture through an interdisciplinary approach. They researched and photographed public art sites,
produced a Google Maps walking tour, created a model of an original kinetic sculpture, and proposed to
install it (Ellis et al., 2010). In commenting on the project, David Ruff, the Executive Director at Great
Schools Partnership, states the following:
And sometimes, I think we get too concerned about the standards. And theres an assumption
behind a lotta that that we actually know what our kids are gonna face in the future. And Im not
very convinced of that. And so the pieces about creativity, cooperation, problem solving, those
are gonna be there, and so the kids getting those here is crucial and key. (Ellis et al., 2010, n.p.)
As seen in this example of project-based learning, educators utilized a problem-based learning approach
to organize the project. Through dividing the project into mini-assignments, educators were able to
naturally guide students through the steps of goal setting and facilitate students independence,
creativity, collaboration, active participation, and critical thinking. These steps which enable students to
produce some a product or performance is the very foundation that makes project-based learning
coupled with problem-based learning conducive to teaching students how to set goals.
GOAL SETTING IN PRACTICE
According to Tyler (2013), No single learning experience has a very profound influence upon the
learnerIn order for educational experiences to produce a cumulative effect, they must be so organized
as to reinforce each other (p. 83). Thus, incorporating goal setting in a project and problem-based
learning context would ideally be incorporated school-wide. Given that a project or problem can
encompass a range of topics, including theoretical, practical, social, technicalscientific [etc.] (Barge,
2010, p. 7), it is highly probable that project and problem-based learning would be interdisciplinary.

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

10

Teaching Strategies
Goal-setting theory states that specific, proximal, and moderately challenging goals help students
achieve their goals. Rather than using this as a prescribed method, it would be useful for educators to
view it as a guide to organize the curriculum. The following are ways in which educators can do so:
Step 1. Collaboration
Educators will have weekly meetings to discuss the ways in which they can incorporate goal
setting. Using goal-setting theory as a guide, they will create an open-ended questionnaire that
students will be given at different times throughout the semester. The questionnaire will pose
questions that help students think about the final product or performance. Examples of such
questions include the following:

What is your final outcome?

When must you produce this final outcome? What is the deadline?

What specific goals can you set to achieve that outcome?

What dates must these specific goals be met in order to meet the deadline?

Are these specific goals attainable considering the time period you have to complete it?

Do you have the necessary resources to achieve these goals?

Step 2. Incorporate Student Voice

According to Friere, Banking education resists dialogue; problem-posing education [emphasis
added] regards dialogue as indispensable to the act of cognition which unveils reality (2005, p.
83). This implies that educators must participate in dialogue with their students. Educators can
do this in the following ways:

Provide opportunities for students to express their issues or concerns

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

11

Allow students to provide input when creating the rubric for the final product or performance
by posing questions that help students think about their final product (e.g. What types of
characteristics do you think your final project should have? What steps do you think we need
to take to incorporate those characteristics in our final project?)

Be a facilitator rather than a teacher by giving students the appropriate amount of space to
promote student autonomy

Pose questions rather than provide answers (e.g. rather than telling students their goal is not
feasible, ask students whether or not they believe their goal is feasible)

Emphasize the importance of collaboration by not only emphasizing team work but also
involving members of the school and community

Step 3. Use Reflection

Educators can aim to facilitate goal setting by allotting time in the classroom for meaningful
reflection (i.e. using reflection journals or implementing classroom discourse). When discussing
aspects of goal setting, Schunk explores components of Banduras social cognitive theory,
specifically self-efficacy. He states self-efficacy refers to personal beliefs about ones capabilities
to learn or perform actions at designated levels (2009, n.p.). Bandura contends that learners
set goals that they feel self-efficacious about attaining and believe that when attained will result
in positive outcomes (as cited in Schunk, 2009, n.p.). In addition, Bandura believes if [students]
feel self-efficacious for succeeding but believe that their present strategy is not working well
enough, they may alter their strategy by working harder, persisting long, deciding to use a
different method, or seeking help from others (as cited in Schunk, 2009, n.p.). This selfregulatory process in which students are reflective and alters their strategy promote[s] learning,

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

12

motivation, and self-efficacy (Schunk, 2009, n.p.). Thus, in setting goals, educators should use
strategies that capitalize on reflection, such as using reflection journals, classroom discourse, and
emphasizing process goals rather than outcome goals.
Assessment
According to Tyler (2013), evaluation must appraise the behavior of students since it is change
in these behaviors which is sought in education (p. 106). Therefore, in assessing students progress in
setting goals, educators should implement portfolios as the primary means to archive any goal setting
questionnaires and assignments. In doing so, educators can assess the ways in which students are
thinking about goal setting and how students are adjusting the ways in which they approach the final
project. Furthermore, in incorporating student input on rubrics, educators should gather and organize
this feedback and create a rubricthat has been revised by both students and other educatorsto
assess the final project and/or performance.
CONCLUSION
In this paper, I have argued that project-based learning, coupled with problem-based learning, is
a viable curricular solution in teaching goal setting. I have offered specific strategies educators can
implement to incorporate goal setting in the curriculum. However, one criticism may be that schools
may not have the necessary resources to implement a school-wide approach. Thus, when bearing in
mind any sort of curriculum and/or instruction, it is important to consider the resources available and
educational philosophies practiced in the school as an educational program should develop a model
that works for their program goals and suits the needs of their students and faculty (Hyde, 2015, p. 5).

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

13
REFERENCES

Allen, S., & Dickson, T. (2015). Attributes of a Traditional Classroom and a Differentiated Classroom.
Retrieved December 13, 2015, from
http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/di/cresource/q1/p01/di_01_link_tvsdi/
Barge, S. (2010, September). Principles of Problem and Project Based Learning. Retrieved December
11, 2015, from http://www.aau.dk/digitalAssets/62/62747_pbl_aalborg_modellen.pdf
Deresiewicz, W. (2015, September). The Neoliberal Arts. Retrieved December 10, 2015, from
http://harpers.org/archive/2015/09/the-neoliberal-arts/2/
Eikenberry, K. (2010). Remarkable Leaders Set Goals and Support Goal Setting. Retrieved December 12,
2015, from
http://www.alumni.cmu.edu/s/1410/images/editor_documents/goal_setting_101.pdf
Ellis, K., Borovoy, A., Nobrega, G., Kalunian, K., Keely, D., Bidleman, C., & Bogas, E. (2010, March 31).
Anatomy of a Project: "Kinetic Conundrum" (K. Sutherland, Ed.). Retrieved December 14, 2015,
from http://www.edutopia.org/stw-maine-project-based-learning-kinetic-art-video
Friere, P. (2005). Chapter 2. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed (30th anniversary ed., pp. 7186). New York, NY: The Continuum International Publishing Group.
Hall, G., Quinn, L., & Gollnick, D. (2014). History of Schools in the United States. In Introduction to
Teaching: Making a Difference in Student Learning (p. 165). Thousand Oaks, California.
Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn? Educational
Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.

PROBLEM OF PRACTICE

14

Hmelo-Silver, C.E., & Barrows, H.S. (2006). Goals and Strategies of a Problem-based Learning
Facilitator: Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1). Retrieved December 12,
2015, from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=ijpbl
Hyde, A. (2015, September 28). Mind-Body Tools for Teachers: A Proposal for Incorporating
Mindfulness Techniques into Teacher Education. Retrieved December 18, 2015, from
http://www.tcrecord.org
Larmer, J. (2014, January 6). Project-Based Learning vs. Problem-Based Learning vs. X-BL. Retrieved
December 7, 2015, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/pbl-vs-pbl-vs-xbl-john-larmer
Locke, E.A., & Latham, G.P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task
motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.
Schunk, D. (2009, December 23). Goal Setting. Retrieved December 16, 2015, from
http://www.education.com/reference/article/goal-setting/
Tyler, Ralph, W. Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,
2013. Print.
Taing, M., Smith, T., Singla, N., Johnson, R., & Chang, C. (2013). The relationship between learning goal
orientation, goal setting, and performance: A longitudinal study.Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 43(8), 1668-1675.