<p>Interesting NYT’s OP-Ed article from a well known [in the SF Bay area] Educator- </p>
<p>"the children who are not told theyre smart are more motivated to tackle increasingly difficult puzzles. They also exhibit higher levels of confidence and show greater overall progress in puzzle-solving. "</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/opinion/sunday/raising-successful-children.html?hp[/url]”>http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/opinion/sunday/raising-successful-children.html?hp</a></p>
<p>On the one hand, I think this is old news. I’d guess that most CC parents tend to praise the effort, or specific elements of an accomplishment, and not the child’s personal characteristics.</p>
<p>On the other hand, I have to admit that I am very skeptical of Dweck’s work. Why is it that a single comment or intervention by the psychologist running the test overrides the child’s past experiences, and causes this sudden turn-around in orientation? Since Dweck is telling children that they are smart when she doesn’t believe it, why isn’t it possible that some of the children are detecting her phoniness and losing interest in the puzzles because of that? QMP certainly would have been sufficiently perceptive and sufficiently balky to act just that way.</p>
<p>I disagree with that article… at the very least, it was different for me.</p>
<p>I was always motivated because I knew that I was… not smart, but not dumb. We had to take an IQ test in second grade and it put me in a special program from 3rd grade to middle school, and it was a huge confidence boost… I was told that I did have the ability to succeed and so I actually tried when it came to displaying it!</p>
<p>Where we live now doesn’t have that program, and because my parents always compare my old benchmarks to my little sister, she doesn’t have that reassurance… she doesn’t try. :\ she IS smart… she just won’t believe us because we’ve been saying it only recently since we realized the problem.</p>
<p>I don’t think I personally would have tried very hard if I wasn’t constantly told how smart I was (I skipped kindergarten…) at least, I wouldn’t have aimed as high. I know now that I’m not that smart, but that belief still keeps me goin’!</p>
<p>I don’t really agree with this. Kids KNOW they are different if they are very bright – but they can just think they are wierd, not smart. A girl who has a deep interest in entomology (like my D2), for instance, can endure some pretty heavy teasing from other kids. She isn’t going to feel too good about them or herself without some encouragement that may include letting her know that she is smart, that it is okay to be smart, and encouraging her to stick with her interests even if they are very much at odds with the interest of other kids her age. That doesn’t let her off the hook at all for trying hard at things (both things she is good at and not good at), being kind to other people, etc. But it makes her feel a little less alone and strange, I think, to know that she is (per testing) very, very bright. At least then she has a clue regarding why she has such different, intense interests from the kids around her.</p>
<p>The article is confusing. I totally agree with: the optimal parent is one who is involved and responsive, who sets high expectations but respects her child’s autonomy…hit(s) the sweet spot of parental involvement and generally raise(s) children who do better academically, psychologically and socially…"</p>
<p>How does Dweck’s work bear this out? That kids not told they are capable show more motivation? Or that praising children’s talents and abilities seems to rattle their confidence?</p>
<p>Gotta wonder what tone she used.</p>
<p>"How does Dweck’s work bear this out? "</p>
<p>[New</a> study yields instructive results on how mindset affects learning](<a href=“You've requested a page that no longer exists | Stanford News”>You've requested a page that no longer exists | Stanford News)</p>
<p>[Human</a> Intelligence: Carol S. Dweck](<a href=“Indiana University Bloomington”>Indiana University Bloomington)</p>
<p>[MindSet:</a> A Book written by Carol Dweck. Teaching a growth mindset creates motivation and productivity in the worlds of business, education, and sports.](<a href=“http://mindsetonline.com/]MindSet:”>http://mindsetonline.com/)</p>
<p>" For example, children given praise such as “good job, you’re very smart” are much more likely to develop a fixed mindset, whereas if given compliments like “good job, you worked very hard” they are likely to develop a growth mindset. In other words, it is possible to encourage students, for example, to persist despite failure by encouraging them to think about learning in a certain way"</p>
<p>The above quote from Wikipedia, describes the “gist” of her findings’</p>
<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carol_Dweck[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carol_Dweck</a></p>
<p>Can you provide links or citations to Dweck’s other scholarly work, meloparkmom? I have read one of her books–MindSet, I believe, although I don’t have it at hand at the moment. It was written for a popular audience. I was unimpressed by the book, but it is possible that her journal articles are better.</p>
<p>I think significant ethical questions are raised by her experiments. Much education-related work at universities does not require the normal human subjects clearances. Dweck’s experiments, in my opinion, teach elementary-school aged children that people brought into the schools in an apparently official capacity may lie to them. One could argue that it’s an important lesson to learn! On the other hand, I don’t think it’s a good lesson to teach 8-year-olds from whom you want cooperation in the future.</p>
<p>“Can you provide links or citations to Dweck’s other scholarly work”</p>
<p>a list of them are at the bottom of this link from my post above-I dont know how up to date it is. </p>
<p><a href=“Indiana University Bloomington”>Indiana University Bloomington;
<p>This is the same link that was titled Human Intelligence: Carol S Dweck in post 6</p>
<p>Well, “good job, you are smart” negates effort, curiosity, will and control. And interest, the ability to set and pursue goals. “Good job, you worked hard” focuses on the effort and misses other encouragements.</p>
<p>*Fixed-mindset individuals dread failure because it is a negative statement on their basic abilities, while growth mindset individuals don’t mind failure as much because they realize their performance can be improved. *</p>
<p>Seems either category can be subject to harsh self-judgment, when results don’t come as hoped. All these CC kids faulting themselves for their 2250s. If only I had worked harder.</p>
<p>I suppose it’s more complex that all that.</p>
<p>Thanks, menloparkmom. (I clicked on your first link in post #6, but didn’t look at the others.)</p>
<p>This interests me a lot. I never felt as if I was that smart and neither did my spouse. We did think we knew how to work hard. When we had our kids we just never, ever told them they were smart. Ever. And for the older one this took some suspension of disbelief – he was an eerily perfect tester from the start. But we noticed among our nieces and nephews who are certainly bright that their parents told them (and anyone who would listen) how bright they were from the start and they all sort of fizzled when they came up against any real challenge academically.</p>
<p>It waxes and wanes in our kids but our personal theory is that they are pretty brilliant when they are genuinely engaged in learning whatever it is that’s in front of them. The rest of the time they are competent.</p>
<p>We don’t really believe in the concept of IQ.</p>