Nuts and Bolts: Leading a Horse to Water

The horse, apparently seeing the river for the first time, hesitates.

The rider dismounts and leads the horse to the water’s edge. Thehorse approaches, curious, then turns and repeats. Nearly a minute into thevideo the rider puts a foot in the water and splashes it in the river. Thehorse almost almost takes a drink,even appearing to lick the water. The rider wades out into the river. Finally,knee deep with his rider, the horse … splashes the water with his hoof. Againand again—and again. And some more. And still more. And then with both hooves. Atleast the drenched rider had a sense of humor about it all. I posted this videoon Facebook with a heading about “learning” and someone commented, “But the horsedidn’t drink the water.” 

To which I said: “The rider may have intended to teach the horseto drink. But she was really effective at teaching him to splash.”

This took me back to maybe the best lesson I ever learned about performanceobjectives, and the need to be very, very clear about what it is you’re tryingto teach.

One summer afternoon my friend Jo left her son, five-year-oldMax, in the care of his grandmother. While Max was napping Grandma found adead rattlesnake in the yard and thought to herself, “This is a good time toteach Max about snakes.”

Her objective: “Max will understand about snakes.”

So when Max awoke from his nap Grandma took him outside andsaid: “See, Max, this is a rattlesnake. Some snakes are very dangerous so youmust be careful if you are ever near one. They can be hard to see.” Grandmaused a hoe to move the snake into some weeds and led a discussion about placessnakes can hide. She then moved the snake onto a bed of pine straw, to show Maxhow the snake’s colors tended to blend with the setting. There ensued aconversation about how many animals have natural camouflage. Grandma talkedabout being careful when running around outside barefoot. She told Max about notbothering or teasing snakes, and she walked him around the yard discussing theneed to take care when playing near places snakes might be found, like under fallenlogs or on warm rocks.

At the end of Grandma’s lesson she said: “So, Max, do youunderstand about snakes?”

And Max looked up at her and said, “Oh, yes, Grandma. I love snakes.”

This wasn’t the outcome Grandma had in mind, but it is exactlywhat she taught Max: Snakes are interesting and snakes are mysterious andsnakes spend their days sunning on warm rocks and snakes are excellent athiding. What could be more appealing to a five-year-old boy? And Max? He’s anadult now—and he still loves snakes.

So: It seems so obvious and easy to avoid, but it’s a mistakethat happens all the time. We lose sight of the objective and add ininteresting bits, extraneous fun, nice-to-know. Or we spend time teaching thewrong skill. Or we get caught up in our own needs and interests and forgetabout the learner. Or sometimes, when a learner exhibits an unexpected skill orinterest, we are dismayed because it’s not the thing we intended them to beskilled in or interested about.

Moral? Don’t be surprised when people (or horses) do what youteach them to do. “Understand,” as Max’s grandma learned, is not a very preciseterm. Adding interesting but extraneous information can take learners down apath you never intended. When you’re talking about designing performancesolutions, be sure to ask yourself: When you lead the horse to water, do youwant it to drink—or splash? 

Note: The “Max and the Snake” anecdote—which Ipromise is true—was first published in my book From Analysis to Evaluation (Wiley, 2008).