The Benefits of Anti-Models for Boosting Learning

Whenever I plan a lesson, I grapple with this question: How can familiar content be reimagined so that students experience it as fresh and perspective-shifting? One answer that works for me is having students generate an anti-model that explores what not to do in various academic and social contexts. Here are some prompts:

• Generate rules to guarantee that a class discussion fails.
• How do you show someone you’re not listening?
• List the top strategies to sabotage a team project.
• What would make a collaborative project super-frustrating for everyone on a team?
• Name sources that would weaken your research essay.
• What are surefire ways to irritate your teacher?
• Design a slide that irritates and confuses viewers.
• How can we get kicked out of a museum field trip?

Through contrast and critical reflection, these playful reversals sharpen students’ awareness of common pitfalls, bring to light invisible errors, and deepen students’ grasp of best practices.

To avoid reinforcing misconceptions, don’t display anti-models on bulletin boards. Additionally, use this kind of activity sparingly, and always conclude by explicitly redirecting students’ attention to high-quality exemplars.

Here are some examples of anti‑model assignments in different subjects, along with tips for implementation. Many of these serve as ideal hooks to launch lessons and trigger curiosity. They may also highlight common errors in a playful way that puts students on the right track. The anti-models are organized by subject and grade, with actionable extensions designed to enhance critical thinking and deepen skill development. These are just examples—I hope they’ll inspire you to come up with your own “what not to do” lessons.

English Language Arts: Dullest Speech Opener

Elementary: Use a simple prompt: “How I’d redesign schools” or “Why pie is superior to cake.” After writing a dull introduction with unexciting language (no vivid adjectives or action verbs), students share them in small groups. Then have student teams use a graphic organizer to rewrite their openings with hooks or fun facts that make the speech more engaging.

Middle: Individually, students draft intentionally boring speech introductions and then swap with a peer, who should identify the dullest sentences and offer concrete suggestions for making them more engaging. 

High school: Direct student teams to create a video depicting the worst introduction to a speech. Next, groups swap videos and analyze their peers’ performances, focusing on rhetorical weaknesses as well as how vocal delivery and body language undermine effectiveness.

Follow-up challenge: Prompt ChatGPT or another AI tool to create intentionally flat introductions—for example, “Create six boring speech openings on the topic of [insert topic] appropriate for a [insert grade] reading level. Use no more than 70 words.” Have student groups remix these dull speech introductions to incorporate dramatic pauses, humorous asides, vivid imagery, rhetorical questions, or a story. Finally, each group performs its revised opener.

English Language Arts: Hot Mess Essay

Elementary: Ask students to brainstorm ways a paragraph can be disorganized (e.g., no main idea, no logical order, tangents, repetition of ideas). Then ask them to write an example. Have them switch papers with a peer, who should identify the problems and rewrite the confusing paragraph. 

Middle: Have students take an essay they previously wrote and scramble the paragraph order, then remove transition words and topic sentences. Finally, students exchange their “hot mess” essay with a partner, who should reorder the paragraphs, add transitions, and supply topic sentences to restore clarity.

High school: Students compose a “confusion manifesto” on a topic they care about. Their writing should include three features: an unclear thesis (for example, “Contemporary educational contexts disinhibit ambiguity”); two sentences unrelated to the topic; and a conclusion that neither summarizes nor reinforces the central idea (for example, “There are many other topics to explore, and that’s just how things are these days”). Once the manifestos are completed, students swap them and identify the confusing elements in their peers’ writing. Finally, students revise their peers’ manifestos, clarifying the thesis, composing supporting sentences, and writing tighter conclusions.

Follow-up challenge: Red Pen Relay is an activity based loosely on Ken Lackman’s Error Correction Games for Writing. Each student in a small group receives a paper copy of a different error-filled essay written by the teacher or AI. Working simultaneously, each learner identifies one confusing element and rewrites it more clearly. Every two minutes, students pass their papers to the team member on their left, who adds another edit. This continues until every member has contributed to every essay.

Math: Math Mayhem

Elementary: Direct learners to individually create a “solved” math problem that looks correct but intentionally includes a common math error: for example, writing digits in reverse, forgetting to borrow in subtraction, or confusing multiplication with addition. Classmates review a peer’s work, explaining the error and correcting it.

Middle: Similar to the elementary version above, direct students to write out a “solved” problem that includes ignoring PEMDAS (order of operations) or other common math errors that occur in middle school. Then have students exchange their problems with a peer, who is charged with detecting the mistake, explaining what went wrong, and rewriting the problem with a correct solution and a brief rationale.

High school: As with the elementary and middle grade versions, have individual learners intentionally create incorrect math solutions, such as dropping negative signs, combining unlike terms, misusing the Pythagorean Theorem on non-right triangles, confusing mean with median or mode, or making other math errors often done by students in high school. Once finished, students exchange their anti-models with a peer, who must identify the error, explain what went wrong, and show how to correct the error. Invite students to apply mathematical vocabulary during the feedback process to build fluency.

Follow-up challenge: Ask students to create an “explainer” poster to display in class. The poster should include the original anti-model, a corrected version with annotated steps, an explanation of the error, and one or more tips for how to avoid making the mistake. 

Science: Sideways Experiments

Elementary: During a whole class discussion, ask students to describe how to kill a plant—never watering it, overwatering it, or keeping it in complete darkness, for example. Record their ideas on the board. To help the class learn cause and effect, point out how each of these harmful care habits might affect the plant.

Middle: Have students work in teams to write about a flawed design for an experiment (for example, unclear hypothesis, uncontrolled variables, or biased procedures) and then write how their design ignores important scientific principles. 

High school: Assign students to analyze famous scientific or research failures or instances of fraud (e.g., cold fusion claims, Andrew Wakefield’s MMR vaccine study, Jan Hendrik Schön’s physics fraud, Stanford Prison Experiment critiques, etc.) and then create brief slide show presentations on how these cases brilliantly “triumphed” at sabotaging scientific progress and ethics.

Follow-up challenge: Ask each student to write a policy memo addressed to a “Fact-Check Fanatics Scientific Review Board” outlining best practices to prevent similar failures.

Social Studies: Weakest Historical Argument

Elementary: In groups, students write a short paragraph on well-known historical figures like George Washington and Rosa Parks. The paragraph should integrate three or more exaggerated claims with other accurate biographical information (for example, “Rosa Parks ended racism”). Once paragraphs are complete, each team trades with another group. Next, students read their partner group’s paragraph carefully and label generalizations as either “Fact-Based” or “Exaggerated Claim,” discussing their reasoning. Finally, the original group reviews the feedback from their classmates and explains why they agree or disagree with the evaluation.

Middle: Groups of students write a sentence about a historical event, making broad statements that lack detail and evidence (for example, “All colonists wanted independence from Britain”). Next, they exchange their sentences with a partner team that identifies what other perspectives or evidence might challenge the generalization. 

High school: Students begin by researching common logical fallacies like overgeneralization, cherry-picking evidence, and the fallacy of omission. Then they write about a historical event and intentionally incorporate one of these fallacies. Pairs exchange essays with another team, identify the fallacy used, and rewrite the argument to include broader evidence and nuance.

Follow-up activity: Use these questions to steer a whole class debrief: What made some arguments especially persuasive despite their flaws? How can you guard against bias in your writing? What resources can you consult to verify the accuracy of a historical claim?

Homework: Self-Sabotage

Elementary: In pairs, students brainstorm common “giving up” behaviors that can occur during math homework, such as saying, “This is too hard,” daydreaming, or turning on the TV. Afterward, they design motivational posters to encourage themselves and their classmates to persevere when math homework gets challenging, incorporating slogans like “Struggling? Take a Breather and Try Again!”

Middle: Student teams develop a satirical “Procrastinator’s Guide to Homework Supremacy.” On poster paper, they list and illustrate ridiculous “tips” that glorify procrastination, like waiting until the last minute to start homework because stress always boosts brain power. Then each team presents its guide.

High school: Ask student teams to dramatize ways to undermine persistence in homework with negative self-talk. Then, as a class, discuss positive self-talk techniques to defeat negative internal monologues, such as reframing (“This is hard, but I can be methodical and patient”), applying a growth mindset (“Mistakes are part of learning”), and remembering past successes. 

Follow-up challenge: Ask students to track their homework sessions for two weeks, noting when distractions happen and how they respond. Then have learners reflect on what distractions are hardest to resist and what strategies helped them stay focused.

By design, the chief beneficiaries of these anti-models are struggling students, who often experience that epiphanic “Oh, I didn’t know that” moment when viewing schoolwork from an unconventional angle. Ultimately, these metacognitive activities do more than highlight mistakes. They demystify common errors—constructively, playfully, and memorably—while deepening academic confidence for every learner, especially those who need it most.