The Jackdaw Journal
A Publication of M2 Communications

jack-daw [JAK-dah], n. 1. a glossy, black, European bird, corvus monedula, of the crow family, that nests in towers, ruins, etc.; has a proclivity to collect bright objects that attract its attention; can include bits of ice, things round or square, twigs, filaments of light bulbs; specialist on the lookout of what fits the construction of its nest.

jackdaw journal [JAK-dah JERN-al], n. 1. a repository of bright objects — wit, wisdom and whimsey — collected and/or created by Michael McKinney.   2. a web log or blog





reviewboard

March 2007 Archives
* * *

 

Praise Kids For Effort Not Ability

March 25, 2007

First-rate journalist Po Bronson concluded in a New York Magazine article, that "Giving kids the label of smart does not prevent them from underperforming. It might actually be causing it." Who doesn't like to call their child smart; if at least just as an insurance policy. "According to a survey conducted by Columbia University, 85 percent of American parents think it's important to tell their kids that they're smart.
NYMag
In and around the New York area, according to my own (admittedly nonscientific) poll, the number is more like 100 percent. Everyone does it, habitually. The constant praise is meant to be an angel on the shoulder, ensuring that children do not sell their talents short."

Mr. Bronson highlights a study of 400 fifth-graders conducted by psychologist Carol Dweck and a team at Columbia University in which the children took three tests.
Dweck sent four female research assistants into New York fifth-grade classrooms. The researchers would take a single child out of the classroom for a nonverbal IQ test consisting of a series of puzzles—puzzles easy enough that all the children would do fairly well. Once the child finished the test, the researchers told each student his score, then gave him a single line of praise. Randomly divided into groups, some were praised for their intelligence. They were told, "You must be smart at this." Other students were praised for their effort: "You must have worked really hard."

Why just a single line of praise? "We wanted to see how sensitive children were," Dweck explained. "We had a hunch that one line might be enough to see an effect."

Then the students were given a choice of test for the second round. One choice was a test that would be more difficult than the first, but the researchers told the kids that they'd learn a lot from attempting the puzzles. The other choice, Dweck's team explained, was an easy test, just like the first. Of those praised for their effort, 90 percent chose the harder set of puzzles. Of those praised for their intelligence, a majority chose the easy test. The "smart" kids took the cop-out. The second test purposely was made difficult enough that every child failed. What the scientists found was that kids who had been praised for their effort recovered from that failure by the third test to achieve scores 30% higher than on their first test. Meanwhile, the students who were praised for their intelligence had scores that were 20% lower.

Why did this happen? "When we praise children for their intelligence," Dweck wrote in her study summary, "we tell them that this is the name of the game: Look smart, don’t risk making mistakes." And that's what the fifth-graders had done: They'd chosen to look smart and avoid the risk of being embarrassed.

Ms. Dweck's conclusion: "Emphasizing effort gives a child a variable that they can control," she explains. "They come to see themselves as in control of their success. Emphasizing natural intelligence takes it out of the child's control, and it provides no good recipe for responding to a failure."
[I]t turns out that the ability to repeatedly respond to failure by exerting more effort—instead of simply giving up—is a trait well studied in psychology. People with this trait, persistence, rebound well and can sustain their motivation through long periods of delayed gratification. Delving into this research, I learned that persistence turns out to be more than a conscious act of will; it's also an unconscious response, governed by a circuit in the brain. Dr. Robert Cloninger at Washington University in St. Louis located the circuit in a part of the brain called the orbital and medial prefrontal cortex. It monitors the reward center of the brain, and like a switch, it intervenes when there’s a lack of immediate reward. When it switches on, it’s telling the rest of the brain, "Don't stop trying. There's dopa [the brain’s chemical reward for success] on the horizon." While putting people through MRI scans, Cloninger could see this switch lighting up regularly in some. In others, barely at all.

What makes some people wired to have an active circuit?

Cloninger has trained rats and mice in mazes to have persistence by carefully not rewarding them when they get to the finish. "The key is intermittent reinforcement," says Cloninger. The brain has to learn that frustrating spells can be worked through. "A person who grows up getting too frequent rewards will not have persistence, because they'll quit when the rewards disappear."

It would seem constant praise is not helping your kid at all. And when you do be sure you are praising the process and not the ability!

* * *

Don't let the door hit you on the way out!

March 28, 2007

Charles Chapin, the notorious (he also went to Sing Sing for murdering his wife of 39 years) city editor of Joseph Pulitzer's New York Evening World, stocked the Evening World's rewrite desk with such talents as
Cobb
Irvin S. Cobb, a man not known for excessive solicitude. One day word reached the newsroom that Chapin was ill. "Dear me," Cobb famously remarked, "let us hope it's nothing trivial."

The fearsome and despotic Chapin achieved some of his renown for the sheer number of reporters he fired - 108 - usually for showing up slightly late and with a flimsy excuse. A good, fast-paced and captivating biography of Charles E. Chapin (1858-1930) is The Rose Man of Sing Sing: A True Tale of Life, Murder, and Redemption in the Age of Yellow Journalism by James McGrath Morris.

* * *

Spirtualism: An Empty Shell

March 30, 2007

Illinois Senator Barack Obama said, "My mother saw religion as an impediment to boader values...but she was a deeply spiritual person." R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville Kentucky, takes issue with this in the Winter 2006 Wilson Quarterly. Mohler writes: "Where did Obama's mother discover her 'broader values'? What is their specific content? Without reference to some specific truth claim or structured thought, all this is little more than nonsensical wordplay, similar to pragmatist William James' definition of spirituality: 'Susceptibility to ideals, but with a certain freedom to indulge in imagination about them. A certain amount of "otherworldly" fancy.'

"Personally," Mohler says, "I have more respect for a clearheaded secularist than for someone who espouses this kind of mind-numbing relativism. If spirituality simply means a 'susceptibility to ideals,' does it even matter what those ideals are?"

* * *


Powered by
Movable Type 3.34


top

Copyright © M2 Communications 2012 • All Rights Reserved