It is tempting as parents to scaffold so
tightly that our children never experience failure, that they never learn how
to pick themselves up when things don’t go well and discover that the world
doesn’t end, no matter how uncomfortable the might feel. Being able to persist
in the face of challenge is a crucial element of grit or perseverance, a really
important factor in becoming successful.
Learning what doesn’t work helps build
resilience. Not knowing can also help build independence, self reliance and the
ability to problem solve. Ultimately this can reinforce the belief that we can control
our destiny to a degree rather than being a victim of circumstances. Monitoring
too closely can interfere with our children learning these valuable skills. As
much as we would like to see them do well, they need to learn how to do that
independently, to learn that their actions (or inaction) have a consequence,
whether it is forgetting their lunch, not completing homework, or preparing
insufficiently for a test. The important thing for parents to do is not to stop
them falling, but to provide a safe environment in which they can do so and
help them learn from the experience.
It turns out that error-free learning is inefficient.
Learning becomes stronger and more long lasting if conditions are arranged so
that we make errors. It sounds contradictory but it has been shown that we
remember things better and longer if we are given really challenging tests before we learn the material. It appears
that an unsuccessful attempt to retrieve information before we are given or
find an answer helps us remember information better than simply studying the
information. Trying and failing to retrieve an answer actually helps learning.
Pre-testing, or giving a test before content is taught, then studying
or learning just the bits you missed will improve learning. In some ways this
makes sense, spending time covering material you already know isn’t likely to
move your learning forward. But perhaps more important is becoming comfortable
with not knowing. Students who find school easy, who get high marks without
effort are missing the chance for deep and long term learning.
Thursday, September 8, 2011
Friday, September 2, 2011
The role of frustration in learning
When we learn something new, progress is rarely seen in a smooth and steady line. It happens in bursts. At first progress seems to be slow, then we break through to the next level where we might sit for a while consolidating our skills before we move on again to the next stage.
Schools on the other hand are set up for steady progress. Despite the fact we know that the brain develops in bursts of activity followed by consolidation, and this is what we observe in learning ourselves, there is pressure to show continual learning.
It is frustrating to reach a certain level of expertise and then feel ‘stuck’ and feel that no matter how hard we work, we cant get past that stage to the next. It doesn’t matter whether it is learning a piece of music, playing a computer game or learning a physical skill like water skiing. But think about how often have you felt frustrated when you couldn’t break through to the next level of something and you left it alone for a while. When you came back to work on it again, it seemed much easier to make the progress that had been alluding you previously. It was as if you had been working on it in the back of your mind while you were doing something else.
It just might be that the frustration actually serves a purpose in learning. Perhaps frustration is designed to get us to leave something we have been working hard on, so that we can continue the work subconsciously and refresh our energy by changing to a different activity. Perhaps it is the brain’s way of being efficient.
If we jump in when our kids are frustrated and help them out or do it for them, we might just be taking away a valuable moment of learning. Sometimes kids are really annoyed when an adult jumps in to ‘fix’ something for them, perhaps with good reason! We might not be doing them a favour after all when we helped them out.
Perhaps one reason we jump in is to avert the risk of the child feeling like a ‘failure’ for not being able to do something themselves. Certainly with regard to school work, we worry that if a child cannot do something they might feel badly, but perhaps the feeling of ‘failure’ is a result of us telling them (or showing them by jumping in too soon) that we don’t believe they can do it.
The frustration of not being able to do something doesn’t stop a young child from persisting with learning to control their body and become independently mobile. And persistence is rarely a problem when they are trying to complete self directed tasks, perhaps moving on to the next level of a computer game. Maybe the differences is that no-one is telling them they cant do it and they are following the natural learning process.
Schools on the other hand are set up for steady progress. Despite the fact we know that the brain develops in bursts of activity followed by consolidation, and this is what we observe in learning ourselves, there is pressure to show continual learning.
It is frustrating to reach a certain level of expertise and then feel ‘stuck’ and feel that no matter how hard we work, we cant get past that stage to the next. It doesn’t matter whether it is learning a piece of music, playing a computer game or learning a physical skill like water skiing. But think about how often have you felt frustrated when you couldn’t break through to the next level of something and you left it alone for a while. When you came back to work on it again, it seemed much easier to make the progress that had been alluding you previously. It was as if you had been working on it in the back of your mind while you were doing something else.
It just might be that the frustration actually serves a purpose in learning. Perhaps frustration is designed to get us to leave something we have been working hard on, so that we can continue the work subconsciously and refresh our energy by changing to a different activity. Perhaps it is the brain’s way of being efficient.
If we jump in when our kids are frustrated and help them out or do it for them, we might just be taking away a valuable moment of learning. Sometimes kids are really annoyed when an adult jumps in to ‘fix’ something for them, perhaps with good reason! We might not be doing them a favour after all when we helped them out.
Perhaps one reason we jump in is to avert the risk of the child feeling like a ‘failure’ for not being able to do something themselves. Certainly with regard to school work, we worry that if a child cannot do something they might feel badly, but perhaps the feeling of ‘failure’ is a result of us telling them (or showing them by jumping in too soon) that we don’t believe they can do it.
The frustration of not being able to do something doesn’t stop a young child from persisting with learning to control their body and become independently mobile. And persistence is rarely a problem when they are trying to complete self directed tasks, perhaps moving on to the next level of a computer game. Maybe the differences is that no-one is telling them they cant do it and they are following the natural learning process.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Surviving and Thriving at Work Home and School
Thriving is a little more complicated than surviving isn't it? Knowing what makes the difference so you can get the best results via the shortest route can really make a difference especially when life is busy and the demands of a household with the added intensity of giftedness is added on top.
While I was sorting out my books for the Book Sale recently I found one I had forgotten about. It is a great book with lots of information about making the most of what we have got, called Brain Rules: 12 Principles for Surviving and Thriving at Work School and Home by John Medina.
His short list of the 12 Rules he believes we all should know are
EXERCISE Rule #1 – Exercise boosts brain power
SURVIVAL Rule #2 – The human brain evolved, too.
WIRING Rule #3 – Every brain is wired differently
ATTENTION Rule #4 – We don’t pay attention to boring things
SHORT TERM MEMORY Rule #5 – Repeat to remember
LONG TERM MEMORY Rule #6 – Remember to repeat
SLEEP Rule #7 – sleep well, think well
STRESS Rule #8 – Stressed brains don’t learn the same way
SENSORY INTEGRATION Rule #9 - Stimulate more of the senses
VISION Rule #10 – Vision trumps all other senses
GENDER Rule #11 – Male and female brains are different
EXPLORATION Rule #12 - We are powerful and natural explorers
A nice easy list to remember, perhaps not so easy to put all of them into practice at once, but it is worth aiming for. Helping our kids to remember them too might mean more thriving rather than simply surviving for them too.
(If you are interested in reading more, this book will be available in round 2 of the book sale next week. It is a hard cover book and comes with a DVD)
While I was sorting out my books for the Book Sale recently I found one I had forgotten about. It is a great book with lots of information about making the most of what we have got, called Brain Rules: 12 Principles for Surviving and Thriving at Work School and Home by John Medina.
His short list of the 12 Rules he believes we all should know are
EXERCISE Rule #1 – Exercise boosts brain power
SURVIVAL Rule #2 – The human brain evolved, too.
WIRING Rule #3 – Every brain is wired differently
ATTENTION Rule #4 – We don’t pay attention to boring things
SHORT TERM MEMORY Rule #5 – Repeat to remember
LONG TERM MEMORY Rule #6 – Remember to repeat
SLEEP Rule #7 – sleep well, think well
STRESS Rule #8 – Stressed brains don’t learn the same way
SENSORY INTEGRATION Rule #9 - Stimulate more of the senses
VISION Rule #10 – Vision trumps all other senses
GENDER Rule #11 – Male and female brains are different
EXPLORATION Rule #12 - We are powerful and natural explorers
A nice easy list to remember, perhaps not so easy to put all of them into practice at once, but it is worth aiming for. Helping our kids to remember them too might mean more thriving rather than simply surviving for them too.
(If you are interested in reading more, this book will be available in round 2 of the book sale next week. It is a hard cover book and comes with a DVD)
Tuesday, August 9, 2011
The dangers of speed
I came across a warning about the dangers of mistaking speed for efficiency in an article in a business newsletter (Is speed killing our communication skills?) but in many ways it applies equally well as a warning about education. Perhaps business is just catching up with what education has been doing for ages.
The immediacy with which we can now communicate has placed an increasing focus on speed, for better or worse. Why do we think fast is better? Have we mistaken speed for understanding (and in the case of business for efficiency)? Is it better to have an answer however shallow rather than to think.
The concern about the effect the Internet with its ready answer to any question has on our ability to think is gathering speed, but perhaps the problem is not so much the ready access to answers but the fact that we value ready answers over thought out ones.
Is speed at mental computation an adequate indicator of maths ability? While it is a part of a balanced program and it is important to know basic facts readily, asking students to demonstrate the skill in an arbitrary time limit (I wonder has anyone measured whether 2 minutes is the best time, or whether 5 or 7 be more appropriate) might actually hinder some children’s learning, establishing a belief that they aren’t good at maths, influencing their effort and enthusiasm in future. Some students respond well to competition and timed situations and thrive on the pressure to bring out their best. Others have a different reaction. The focus on timed tests as a standard measure of how much a child knows also clearly spells out to children that ‘faster is smarter’. Our ‘smartest’ students by this measure are the best test takers, not necessarily the brightest students.
‘Thinking Time’ is a rare thing in a classroom, despite its proven value in getting beyond superficial thinking or narrow answers. A teacher posing an open question but insisting that no-one answers for 30 seconds would be an unfamiliar experience for most kids.
Divergence is not highly valued, it is more convenient (and therefore faster or more efficient) for everyone to behave the same way or produce the same product.
Our reflective kids who need to consider things from many angles before feeling ready to contribute often feel they don’t have time to answer or contribute to discussions, teacher often comment that these kids appear to be ‘somewhere else’ or a little bit behind the conversation, with the implied message that they aren’t that clever (or not fast enough to be clever)
Our divergent kids often have off the wall ideas to contribute but many quickly learn that these are less welcomed than the expected answer, which allows the teacher to continue on the planned path of a lesson. They may come into their own if there is a brainstorming opportunity, but often these are also cut short at the point where the initial ideas dry up, rather than waiting for the deeper more considered ideas to have time to come to the fore.
The need for children to develop thinking skills, to be innovative or demonstrate creativity is clear when employers are spending time and money re-igniting these skills in adults. They need not be add-ons to the regular curriculum, if we shift the emphasis away from speed and begin to appreciate depth of understanding as a measure of learning.
The immediacy with which we can now communicate has placed an increasing focus on speed, for better or worse. Why do we think fast is better? Have we mistaken speed for understanding (and in the case of business for efficiency)? Is it better to have an answer however shallow rather than to think.
The concern about the effect the Internet with its ready answer to any question has on our ability to think is gathering speed, but perhaps the problem is not so much the ready access to answers but the fact that we value ready answers over thought out ones.
Is speed at mental computation an adequate indicator of maths ability? While it is a part of a balanced program and it is important to know basic facts readily, asking students to demonstrate the skill in an arbitrary time limit (I wonder has anyone measured whether 2 minutes is the best time, or whether 5 or 7 be more appropriate) might actually hinder some children’s learning, establishing a belief that they aren’t good at maths, influencing their effort and enthusiasm in future. Some students respond well to competition and timed situations and thrive on the pressure to bring out their best. Others have a different reaction. The focus on timed tests as a standard measure of how much a child knows also clearly spells out to children that ‘faster is smarter’. Our ‘smartest’ students by this measure are the best test takers, not necessarily the brightest students.
‘Thinking Time’ is a rare thing in a classroom, despite its proven value in getting beyond superficial thinking or narrow answers. A teacher posing an open question but insisting that no-one answers for 30 seconds would be an unfamiliar experience for most kids.
Divergence is not highly valued, it is more convenient (and therefore faster or more efficient) for everyone to behave the same way or produce the same product.
Our reflective kids who need to consider things from many angles before feeling ready to contribute often feel they don’t have time to answer or contribute to discussions, teacher often comment that these kids appear to be ‘somewhere else’ or a little bit behind the conversation, with the implied message that they aren’t that clever (or not fast enough to be clever)
Our divergent kids often have off the wall ideas to contribute but many quickly learn that these are less welcomed than the expected answer, which allows the teacher to continue on the planned path of a lesson. They may come into their own if there is a brainstorming opportunity, but often these are also cut short at the point where the initial ideas dry up, rather than waiting for the deeper more considered ideas to have time to come to the fore.
The need for children to develop thinking skills, to be innovative or demonstrate creativity is clear when employers are spending time and money re-igniting these skills in adults. They need not be add-ons to the regular curriculum, if we shift the emphasis away from speed and begin to appreciate depth of understanding as a measure of learning.
Friday, August 5, 2011
How challenge can reduce stress
A while ago I worked with a family with a young girl who had completely turned off learning at school (at home it was a different story although she was selective in her interests and increasingly preferred to know she would succeed even at home). Her teachers were concerned about her anxiety levels and the way she was (not) coping with year level content.
After a thorough investigation looking at potential, achievement levels and other background information the family arranged for their daughter to be accelerated to the next year level. The change of expectations, finding the bar had been raised (along with an expectation that she could manage the work at that level) and being offered more meaningful challenge led to higher achievement levels as we expected but also to her parents noticing that her stress levels reduced and that she was coping better, even at the times when things were not still challenging enough. Had the focus simply been on the emotional state of the child without an appreciation of what might be happening at a chemical level in her brain, the opportunity she needed to turn things around might have been denied.
Making decisions about what is best for a child does need to include the whole child, but it also needs to consider the whole picture. Focussing on one aspect without consideration of it’s place in the whole is a bit like putting a band aid on a blister but not removing the stone from your shoe.
After a thorough investigation looking at potential, achievement levels and other background information the family arranged for their daughter to be accelerated to the next year level. The change of expectations, finding the bar had been raised (along with an expectation that she could manage the work at that level) and being offered more meaningful challenge led to higher achievement levels as we expected but also to her parents noticing that her stress levels reduced and that she was coping better, even at the times when things were not still challenging enough. Had the focus simply been on the emotional state of the child without an appreciation of what might be happening at a chemical level in her brain, the opportunity she needed to turn things around might have been denied.
Making decisions about what is best for a child does need to include the whole child, but it also needs to consider the whole picture. Focussing on one aspect without consideration of it’s place in the whole is a bit like putting a band aid on a blister but not removing the stone from your shoe.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Boredom turns the brain off
Or the importance of meaningful and achievable challenge
Lets think about skiing as an example, seeing as it is winter. If you already know how to ski, this analogy will probably be more meaningful, if not, you can substitute any other sport or skill you know better. Imagine you are being able to ski at a fairly expert level having put in practice elsewhere, but you find yourself having to spend the day on the easy slopes. It is unlikely that your skills will continue to improve in this setting and you will probably begin feeling frustrated and somewhat bored. You will probably have trouble keeping your mind on what you are doing and probably not ski as well as you could. Quite possibly, before long, you will lose interest in skiing. Unless you feel the achievement is a challenge, there is no intrinsic satisfaction from your success or progress.
This is a similar situation to one gifted kids find themselves in when there is insufficient challenge in the classroom. It is difficult to remain motivated without appropriate challenge.
We only experience the rewards of our competence and effort, or perseverance, when the achievement is authentic. That means that doing something easy, perhaps getting full marks on a task which required a skill we learned ages ago (think adding single digit numbers perhaps) doesn’t have the same effect as something challenging and new that we have to work at.
Meaningful challenge is a powerful motivator.
In fact, it appears that the impact happens at a chemical level in our brains. Our brain is a pleasure focussed so that once it has experienced the rush of dopamine that comes with success at an authentic task it seeks out opportunities to repeat the feelings of satisfaction and pleasure. Meaningful challenge helps build confidence and curiosity and even perseverance. Gifted students need achievable challenges (just as all children do) in order to grow as learners and to develop their potential. The tasks however, need to be appropriate to their learning needs.
What happens in our brains when we are bored? Our reptile brain kicks in. The amygdala actually blocks learning when students are bored. It goes into a stress reactive state when learning activities are not at the appropriate level. The only options open to it are Fight, Flight or Freeze. In the classroom this can show up as lack of participation in activities, disruptive behaviour, zoning out or raised anxiety levels.
If that rings any bells in the way your child is responding at school, try to engage them in a conversation about school, what they enjoy, if there are any subjects where they spend time waiting, or are not engaged. While these behaviours could be attributed to other things, probing can help you gauge whether boredom or lack of appropriate challenge might be contributing.
It is also important to talk to the teacher, find out what they are seeing. While you are working on a plan with the teachers, be on the lookout for opportunities to help your child go into more depth in areas they find least stimulating at school. Look for books or interactive websites (Gifted Children: Resources for Parents andTeachers in WA has plenty to use as starting points).
A match between the curriculum and the child’s learning needs will be important in bringing about changes in brain chemistry and turning around lack of engagement, disruptive or anxious behaviours. As adults we find it very difficult to feign ongoing interest in or motivation for something that does not provide us with a meaningful challenge. Our children are no different.
Lets think about skiing as an example, seeing as it is winter. If you already know how to ski, this analogy will probably be more meaningful, if not, you can substitute any other sport or skill you know better. Imagine you are being able to ski at a fairly expert level having put in practice elsewhere, but you find yourself having to spend the day on the easy slopes. It is unlikely that your skills will continue to improve in this setting and you will probably begin feeling frustrated and somewhat bored. You will probably have trouble keeping your mind on what you are doing and probably not ski as well as you could. Quite possibly, before long, you will lose interest in skiing. Unless you feel the achievement is a challenge, there is no intrinsic satisfaction from your success or progress.
This is a similar situation to one gifted kids find themselves in when there is insufficient challenge in the classroom. It is difficult to remain motivated without appropriate challenge.
We only experience the rewards of our competence and effort, or perseverance, when the achievement is authentic. That means that doing something easy, perhaps getting full marks on a task which required a skill we learned ages ago (think adding single digit numbers perhaps) doesn’t have the same effect as something challenging and new that we have to work at.
Meaningful challenge is a powerful motivator.
In fact, it appears that the impact happens at a chemical level in our brains. Our brain is a pleasure focussed so that once it has experienced the rush of dopamine that comes with success at an authentic task it seeks out opportunities to repeat the feelings of satisfaction and pleasure. Meaningful challenge helps build confidence and curiosity and even perseverance. Gifted students need achievable challenges (just as all children do) in order to grow as learners and to develop their potential. The tasks however, need to be appropriate to their learning needs.
What happens in our brains when we are bored? Our reptile brain kicks in. The amygdala actually blocks learning when students are bored. It goes into a stress reactive state when learning activities are not at the appropriate level. The only options open to it are Fight, Flight or Freeze. In the classroom this can show up as lack of participation in activities, disruptive behaviour, zoning out or raised anxiety levels.
If that rings any bells in the way your child is responding at school, try to engage them in a conversation about school, what they enjoy, if there are any subjects where they spend time waiting, or are not engaged. While these behaviours could be attributed to other things, probing can help you gauge whether boredom or lack of appropriate challenge might be contributing.
It is also important to talk to the teacher, find out what they are seeing. While you are working on a plan with the teachers, be on the lookout for opportunities to help your child go into more depth in areas they find least stimulating at school. Look for books or interactive websites (Gifted Children: Resources for Parents andTeachers in WA has plenty to use as starting points).
A match between the curriculum and the child’s learning needs will be important in bringing about changes in brain chemistry and turning around lack of engagement, disruptive or anxious behaviours. As adults we find it very difficult to feign ongoing interest in or motivation for something that does not provide us with a meaningful challenge. Our children are no different.
Saturday, June 11, 2011
Preparing for the Future
I am currently in the USA at the Future Problem Solving International competition.
Dr Peter Bishop Director of the Graduate Program in Future Studies at the University of Houston spoke at the opening of the Future Problem Solving International Competition in La Crosse Wisconsin last night (local time) and made some thought provoking comments. In front of the 2400 young people who had qualified to represent their state or country, and their coaches (and some parents), he proposed that EVERY child should be studying the future. The young people who have embraced FPS are fortunate in that they have a chance to consider issues and solutions to problems their world may face and to be able to potentially influence the future, not only their own. But we know this is not the case for every child.
Dr Bishop recounted how throughout his study towards a series of degrees in various fields, his teachers never mentioned the future, which he pointed out was perhaps is not surprising considering that their teachers never mentioned it to them.
If you ask teachers, they will tell you their role is to prepare students for the future, yet at school we study the past (history) but it is rare to consider studying the future. History is without a doubt important, but the pace of change is accelerating and it is becoming increasingly difficult to adequately apply lessons from the past to the future. Now more than at any other time in the past is it important to be forward looking.
We know that the fate of the world will be in the hands of our young people.We know that every child will live their lives in the future (as we will). It seems important that they develop the skills of critical and creative thinking, of evaluating ideas and working with others across disciplines as they prepare for a future we can not even imagine. Dr Bishop proposed that teaching about the future should be part of the regular curriculum in every classroom and school. If the array of possible outcomes imagined by groups of students who completed the Global Issues booklets today is anything to go by, our future can only be better for wide exposure to future based thinking.
If you would like to hear more of Dr Peter Bishop's ideas, there are several You Tube presentations which may be of interest. (sorry, I don't seem to be able to post links from my iPad but if you search Dr Peter Bishop futurist there is part 1 and Part 2 of a presentation worth watching. Links will hopefully be in the next newsletter, or maybe on Facebook)
Dr Peter Bishop Director of the Graduate Program in Future Studies at the University of Houston spoke at the opening of the Future Problem Solving International Competition in La Crosse Wisconsin last night (local time) and made some thought provoking comments. In front of the 2400 young people who had qualified to represent their state or country, and their coaches (and some parents), he proposed that EVERY child should be studying the future. The young people who have embraced FPS are fortunate in that they have a chance to consider issues and solutions to problems their world may face and to be able to potentially influence the future, not only their own. But we know this is not the case for every child.
Dr Bishop recounted how throughout his study towards a series of degrees in various fields, his teachers never mentioned the future, which he pointed out was perhaps is not surprising considering that their teachers never mentioned it to them.
If you ask teachers, they will tell you their role is to prepare students for the future, yet at school we study the past (history) but it is rare to consider studying the future. History is without a doubt important, but the pace of change is accelerating and it is becoming increasingly difficult to adequately apply lessons from the past to the future. Now more than at any other time in the past is it important to be forward looking.
We know that the fate of the world will be in the hands of our young people.We know that every child will live their lives in the future (as we will). It seems important that they develop the skills of critical and creative thinking, of evaluating ideas and working with others across disciplines as they prepare for a future we can not even imagine. Dr Bishop proposed that teaching about the future should be part of the regular curriculum in every classroom and school. If the array of possible outcomes imagined by groups of students who completed the Global Issues booklets today is anything to go by, our future can only be better for wide exposure to future based thinking.
If you would like to hear more of Dr Peter Bishop's ideas, there are several You Tube presentations which may be of interest. (sorry, I don't seem to be able to post links from my iPad but if you search Dr Peter Bishop futurist there is part 1 and Part 2 of a presentation worth watching. Links will hopefully be in the next newsletter, or maybe on Facebook)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)