What if it’s not our learners who get stuck, but the expectations we place on them?

I recently came across a post by neuropsychologist Jelle Jolles that centres exactly on this question. He argues that much of what we label as “behaviour” is actually a reflection of our own assumptions. The issue is rarely what a young person is not doing, but what we think they should already be able to do. It is, at its core, a matter of attitude.

His message is simple: adjust your expectations.
The moment we recognise that we often expect something a young learner cannot yet deliver because their knowledge, skills or experience are not there yet, we gain the space to guide them far more effectively.

Jolles calls for a shift from teaching to learning. I often describe it as moving from teaching (which easily slips into preaching) toward facilitating and guiding learning.

This shift is exactly what we focus on within allLearners. When you change the way you look at a learner’s development, your actions naturally change with it. And that is where research becomes practice, grounded in the Self-Determination Theory, the Zone of Proximal Development and Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle.

Effective guidance doesn’t start with explaining. It starts with observing.
Where is this learner today? Does he feel too much or too little autonomy? Does he feel competent enough to take the next step? Is there enough relational safety to take a risk?

Autonomy, competence and relatedness form the foundation for motivation. When one of these is unstable, a learner shuts down. Not because he won’t, but because he can’t yet. That distinction matters!!

Then we look at the Zone of Proximal Development, I like to call it the stretchzone. This is where learning becomes possible, because the learner wants to reach into something just beyond his current ability. That desire doesn’t come from our plans or the system. It comes from the learner himself.

This is where the Golden Circle becomes powerful. When a learner connects to something on the why-level, ownership emerges. Motivation becomes internal. The learner begins to understand why something matters, forms a clearer picture of what he wants to achieve and only then do we step in to support the how.

A small example brings this to life. A child receives his first maths book. A parent sighs: “Terrible subject, I was awful at it.” Before the school year has begun, the tone is set. Contrast this with another approach. A learner says he wants to cook. We respond: “Let’s do that here. Do you need help converting ingredients?” Or a student wants to become an architect. “Tomorrow you’ll have time. Shall we arrange help with perspective drawing?”

The key is not the task. It’s how we interpret the request. Sometimes a task is simply too big. By making it smaller, it becomes doable and enters the stretchzone. Sometimes the need is relational: does the learner feel safe asking a peer for help? Sometimes it’s competence: does he have enough foundation for the next step?

And yes, sometimes the group genuinely needs our explanation. When they understand why they want to learn something, our input lands deeper and is applied rather than memorised.

So of course we can still explain and give lectures. There is nothing wrong with the components of what we offer in education. The challenge lies in the order in which we offer them and in how we facilitate them.

This, in my view, is the shift Jolles describes and the shift we see in the schools we work with. When educators align their expectations with where learners truly are, development follows naturally. Learners don’t need to be policed, because we start from their motivation. They show up and grow because they understand what they are growing toward.

And if this is true for young learners, it is just as true for all learners, including you and your colleagues, who must go through this attitude shift yourselves.

We need to be kind and lead by example, which means treating one another with the same care, patience and attention we hope to offer our students.