Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Education Math Science

Too Many Kids Quit Science Because They Don't Think They're Smart 273

An anonymous reader writes: Carol Dweck, a psychology professor at Stanford, has done years of study on how students' attitudes affect their academic achievements. Her work began at the height of the "self-esteem movement," when parents were told to praise their kids' brainpower at every turn. But Professor Dweck found that praise for intelligence or talent — relatively immutable characteristics — only turned kids off of trying subjects they perceived as difficult, like math and science. Praising effort, perseverance, and problem-solving strategies works better. She also says, "There is such a thing as too much praise, we believe." Instead, she suggests engaging with kids about the process itself, showing interest and encouragement when they talk about how they did something.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Too Many Kids Quit Science Because They Don't Think They're Smart

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:14PM (#48314959)

    There. I said what we're all thinking.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I have to wonder about children these days. When I was in school everyone studied mathematics, science, history, grammar and literature, and often a foreign language from primary/elementary grades through graduation. In high school the girls tended to outperform the boys in most subjects including mathematics and sciences. It seems children born after after 1979 have been coddled and told it is alright not to challenge themselves.

      • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:29PM (#48315019) Journal
        Be fair now. Some are coddled and told that it is alright not to challenge themselves. The rest are reminded that they are so screwed that the outcome of any amount of effort is likely to be equally unpleasant.
        • by TWX ( 665546 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:39PM (#48315047)
          It also doesn't help that our education system isn't really designed to allow kids the room to actually struggle with a subject before attaining mastery without punishing their long-term prospects with bad marks on their records.

          The addage, "the difference between the Master and the Novice is that the Master has failed more times than the Novice has tried," requires the person that becomes the master to have the latitude to fail during the education process without those individual failures costing them the right to advance, assuming that they manage to overcome those failures as they learn. That isn't to say that failure itself should be seen as a positive result, but if failure happens and can be overcome to demonstrate proficiency or mastery of the topic then the pupil should be able to continue.

          It's not uncommon for those kids that are used to easy success without struggle to have quite a reality check once they're out of high school. Indeed, MIT even asks its applicants about their failures during the applications and admissions process; they want to be sure that a school full of kids that were valedictorians and salutatorians in their previous academic pursuits will not crack when they start struggling and failing there.
          • by AthanasiusKircher ( 1333179 ) on Wednesday November 05, 2014 @12:47AM (#48315445)

            Indeed, MIT even asks its applicants about their failures during the applications and admissions process; they want to be sure that a school full of kids that were valedictorians and salutatorians in their previous academic pursuits will not crack when they start struggling and failing there.

            It's even more than that -- MIT wants students who will accept a system, unlike some other top tier schools, where you're not basically guaranteed an A once you're admitted. Grade inflation is a huge problem at top tier schools, and it's really hard to deal with since any professor who tries to give "real" grades will suffer -- poor evaluations, and just the annoyance of dealing with dozens of upset students who are used to getting A's in everything since kindergarten, no matter what effort they put forth.

            MIT has a unique and rather effective way of dealing with this: first semester freshman year is "pass/no record". Not pass/fail, but no record -- meaning if you get an A, B, or C, your permanent transcript only says " P"; if you get a D or F, the class doesn't even show up on your external transcipt, so no one outside MIT gets to even know you took the class and failed.

            Aside from giving students a chance to learn through failing with no immediate consequences, it also allows a bunch of valedictorians and people with perfect SATs to realize many of them are no longer the smartest person in the room, and they're going to have to work harder. Perhaps even beyond helping the students' egos and "self-calibration" to a new environment, it also allows professors to "set a standard" without creating permanent consequences for new students. If you do get a student running to your office -- with tears streaming (or worse, threatening a lawsuit, and yeah those things do happen) -- saying, "But, but... I can't get a B on my test -- I have to get into med school!" you can just tell them to take a deep breath and try their best in the future, since this grade won't influence their permanent record.

            Then by the next semester, many of the freshmen have failed or gotten a low grade somewhere, so they've realized they just won't be handed an A for showing up. So they either try harder or realize that their effort is just now going to get them a B or even a C. A little bit of failure honestly changes the entire culture of the school.

            • I went to RPI. Yes, we had classes with county-high-school valedictorians who were totally shocked to be the least-prepared in the room. Since I had been in an NYC specialized schools (nowadays you'd call it a "magnet" school) it was just another day at the office. Well, maybe a little more painful.
          • by Gryle ( 933382 )
            This is huge. I'm not particularly gifted, maybe slightly above average intelligence, but I sailed through high school with very little effort for the most part. My freshman year of college was, bluntly, a disaster because I wasn't prepared for the time investment required by my field of study. I learned more study habits in that first year of college than in the previous four years of high school combined.
      • by plover ( 150551 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:31PM (#48315029) Homepage Journal

        When you were in school, Leibnitz hadn't yet invented his Calculus, so there wasn't as much STEM to learn.

        I know, I'll get off your lawn.

        • by JustOK ( 667959 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:54PM (#48315093) Journal
          So, you're saying things got worse after integration in our schools?
          • The AC above me is a perfect example of JustOK's point.

    • There. I said what we're all thinking.

      I was self teaching myself Quantum Physics, I read every book the library had, in the end I decided I needed to do the math myself so had a Quantum Physics math book sent from some university.

      I laughed when I saw the book it was just all math no text and so over my head, I'd never seen math like that even more amusing (to me) was the first pages were of corrections so people had done the math and caught many errors (read the book).

      So over my head I couldn't even begin to "do the math" I'd never seen math so

      • I'd never seen math so uncomprehensible

        Was that because it's actually complex, or because the notation reads like an ancient Egyptian curse translated to Greek? Because that seems to be the first problem of pretty much every mathematical explanation of physics I've ever seen: they insist on using greek letters to denote both variables and operands, rather than English words. As a result the average person can't read the formula, and thus can only comprehend it as a pictogram.

        Imagine if the textbook was wri

    • Hard work beats talent every time.

    • For all those who were thinking that.
      Did you get into science from smarts alone, or was it from a lot of work?
      Sure science came easy to me, but I was interested in it before hand and spent a lot of time outside of formal class leading science. So when I took the classes they were an easy A. But it wasn't about me being Smarter then the others but the fact I have invested more time into it.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      The thing is, these kids actually have some wisdom, unlike the Dunning-Kruger sufferers that are so dumb that they think they can to anything. STEM fields are only right for a small group of people, others will never be good at it or happy with it. Not a nice thing to say, and I apologize, but it is an accurate thing to say.

  • Pfft. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:16PM (#48314969)

    Who the fuck cares.

    Nobody is going to give them a job anyways.

    • Re: Pfft. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:19PM (#48314977)

      As a science grad I wish I had been smart enough to pick up a trade instead of buying into the whole "smart enough for science" thing.

  • This. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:18PM (#48314973)
    This is where the whole "precious little snowflake" thing came from. People are only as smart as they think they are. This isn't the first study to show that. People will subconsciously cause themselves to fail in order to fit in with their self image. For all we don't like people getting praised for doing ok it's necessary for children (and adults) to build a positive self image before they can hope to succeed.
    • Re:This. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by lgw ( 121541 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:29PM (#48315017) Journal

      Oh, geez, are we back to "teach self esteem" and "participation trophies"? We need to teach some self-discipline and determination - if we don't teach kids to keep going especially when it seems hard, how are they going to find success as adults? A proper "positive self image" is the result of success. You do the hard things not because you think you're great, but because you don't give up.

      What you advocate leads to college grads who don't know what to do when no one hands them a great job at graduation, so they can only complain instead of persevere.

    • It would probably be safer to say that people will not be smarter than they think they are. If all the people who are less smart than they think they are were only as smart as they think they are we'd probably have cured cancer and be driving our flying cars, on mars, by now.
    • by Livius ( 318358 )

      You seemed to have missed the point.

      There's good praise and bad praise.

      • There is plenty of good, strong scientific evidence that telling kids "thats great" when they are well aware it was crap is a very depressing experience for the kid, and leads to them going slowly off the rails <mild exaggeration for effect> It is not just useless, it is actually a very bad idea.

        Unfortunately, a lot of the school system is allergic to science - so it is hardly surprising the can't teach it.

        Everyone aknowledges some footballers are top rate, and some are not even so-so, but it is no

    • by s.petry ( 762400 )

      I don't believe you read the link, or read any similar studies for that matter. The "precious snowflake" issue is due to psychologists claiming what you are (or seem to be). Praise alone makes the person. While self perception is important, it's not the only factor.

      It's not praise alone that makes people smart, it's accomplishments and praise for those accomplishments. When Johnny fails a math test and the parent's say "Great Job Johnny, at least you tried" the person is praised for failure. What lesso

    • Your initial point is fine: people rise to the expectations others have of them. Low expectations give lower results.

      Your conclusion is flawed, however. My conclusions would be that we need to have higher expectations of kids, and if they fail, no problem - but they need to work at achieving the expected outcome (a good grade). I always tell my son that I know he's smart, but that it just means that for him, the lowest expectation for his grade is an A. If it doesn't work out that way, we look at what went

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      I don't believe that. At all. If you are a regular, mentally healthy and smart person, you will experiment and carefully observe results, but avoid expecting to succeed or fail.

  • by wisnoskij ( 1206448 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:18PM (#48314975) Homepage
    Psychology professor proves that parents retarded their children's development by listening to psychology professors. But totally has the right answer this time.
    • Psychology professor proves that parents retarded their children's development by listening to psychology professors. But totally has the right answer this time.

      Pick your poison. You've got the sources you need to distrust because of their long history of being wrong or the sources you need to distrust because of their long history of claiming not to be wrong.

    • by Kjella ( 173770 )

      Most parents would do great if they only let go of their ego and the proxy competition through their children. They want their children to be smart and successful and end up setting unrealistic standards and goals that makes children feel like failures when reality isn't that easy. And negative feedback on how they're falling short only makes it worse. Don't inflate their ego, don't crush it. Take your children for what they are, motivate them to do better. Show them that through effort they can improve. Re

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Well, according to some Psych professors, most psych professors are psychos. Not all.

  • by NotQuiteReal ( 608241 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:22PM (#48314991) Journal
    "Too many grown-ups go into politics because they think they are smart"
  • "Too many kids..."

    That implies there's a "right" number of kids sticking with science. Does the submitter mean that we need more eternal post-docs who can't get real funding?

    • by AK Marc ( 707885 )

      That implies there's a "right" number of kids sticking with science. Does the submitter mean that we need more eternal post-docs who can't get real funding?

      False dichotomy. Physics is good because it has lots of applications. When getting my pilot license, the other student pilots that didn't do science couldn't pass the aerodynmaics tests. Those of us who loved science took science as electives didn't have trouble. Cg of a helicopter? That's standard force balancing. Fuel range? Easy math, sometimes with some unit conversion. People who "hate" science end up needing it, and not having enough. It's not about people going into science as their primary

    • by Nemyst ( 1383049 )
      We're talking about children here, not post-docs. We should all hope that children get a slightly better understanding of the core sciences, it'd be a significant help in dismantling once and for all a lot of the bullshit that gets thrown around (hello intelligent design!). This in no way means that they should all be applying for a physics undergrad degree, but they should certainly have enough of an education in the subject prior to university to be able to make an informed choice as to whether they want
  • my kid (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Charliemopps ( 1157495 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:31PM (#48315033)

    I'm doing the same with my kid. I grew up in the middle of all this. My parents basically told me I was a genius from the time I was a toddler. The result? I didn't even try. It was all beneath me. I got out of high-school with a C average. Luckily I actually was smart enough to do very well on the ACT after I realized maybe I'd screwed up my grades.

    My kid gets praised for effort. Telling someone they are smart is no more beneficial than praising them for being handsome, or tall. It's something they have no control over and cannot improve. So why praise it? Praise something they can control, perseverance.

    • Re:my kid (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 05, 2014 @12:32AM (#48315393)

      Wow! What an awesome comment. You're so smart!

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by ljw1004 ( 764174 )

      Someone told me that Golden Retrievers are a particularly smart breed of dog.

      I replied "You shouldn't say that: you should just say that they try hard"

      • Someone told me that Golden Retrievers are a particularly smart breed of dog.
        I replied "You shouldn't say that: you should just say that they try hard"

        Everyone who knows dogs, and/or has had them in their lives, knows that golden retrievers are about as smart as a box of rocks. Smooth rocks.

        • Border Collies all the way. I have one... but they are smart like serial killers... so they have their downsides as well. :-p

    • It was all beneath me.

      To be fair, the busywork they assign in school is beneath everyone; it's just trash.

      • It was all beneath me.

        To be fair, the busywork they assign in school is beneath everyone; it's just trash.

        Busywork = money
        That's all there is to it. You can be the smartest person on earth but if you don't have the gumption to get up in the morning and drag yourself to your boring job you'll just end up being a very smart person living in a cardboard box.

        • Busywork != education, which is what schools should be providing. But in our money-obsessed society, it's seen as much more important to pump out corporate drones, regardless of any long-term negative effects this has.

    • I found my parents' praise over my intelligence just pointless. I haven't continued the tradition with my children. Not that I don't praise them, just that I don't go out of my way to praise them over intelligence when it is irrelevant. My oldest is in school and more practical praise doesn't seem to give him any more interest in school tasks than I had.
      • I found my parents' praise over my intelligence just pointless. I haven't continued the tradition with my children. Not that I don't praise them, just that I don't go out of my way to praise them over intelligence when it is irrelevant. My oldest is in school and more practical praise doesn't seem to give him any more interest in school tasks than I had.

        I agree. I should also point out that, it's not like I don't tell my kid he's smart. I just don't go out of my way to do it. If he says something like "I can't do this! I can't figure it out!" then of course he gets "Yes you can, you're very smart!" but it's followed with "You just have to put the effort in." The key to success is application of your skills. Intelligence is a fulcrum that maximizes your effort. You need effort no matter what, intelligence just increases how much work gets done with that eff

  • by AK Marc ( 707885 ) on Tuesday November 04, 2014 @10:56PM (#48315099)
    I don't have any cites. I got a psychology degree years ago, during the "praise everything" movement. And it was known at the time that it didn't work. "You are so smart" said to a child is heard as "everything should be easy because you are already good at it." This was known at the time. The correction is "You are such a good problem solver" where the child hears that they can solve every problem, but must work at it. This has an effect closer to the intended "you are so smart" praise.

    This was known 20 years ago, but it's take 20 years for the change to make it to public knowledge.
    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Well, quite frankly this is obvious to a smart, perceptive person, to this has probably been known for thousands of years.

  • You have to actually study things that might be difficult in order to learn?

  • So, basically ... you're good enough, smart enough, and dog gone it, people like you, then?

    You also have to be careful you don't start rewarding mediocrity just for the sake of it ... because it's not necessarily good to just praise them for nothing.

    Not everyone agreed with the self esteem movement where everything they did was awesome, even if it wasn't.

    Because they didn't always understand that in the real world there's seldom a cookie for a half assed job.

  • by swell ( 195815 ) <jabberwock@poetic.com> on Wednesday November 05, 2014 @12:07AM (#48315331)

    Speak roughly to your little boy
    and beat him when he sneezes
    he only does it to annoy
    because he knows it teases.
    [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... [wikipedia.org] ]

    Every child should read Alice in Wonderland. It's not easy reading, but they will get it. It presents a complex world that is not easy for young Alice, but she has pluck and forges ahead. It is an adventure that requires courage and confidence and a tremendous example for young people- boys and girls.

    Challenge your children. Give them Poe, Swift, R.L. Stevenson, quality scifi, etc. Give them fine music & jazz, fine art and the opportunity to create art, give them geography, history, dinosaurs and bioscience. Don't numb their brains with superhero TV & games.

    There is more to education than job training. There is life. Give them a head start. Love them.

    • by gsslay ( 807818 )

      Give them fine music & jazz, fine art

      What music and art is "fine" is an entirely subjective opinion, so this is a meaningless statement. Personally I find a fair proportion of jazz a turgid cacophony. Why would I subject my children to that?

      Give them whatever they enjoy and whatever will expand their horizons.

      • by quenda ( 644621 )

        Personally I find a fair proportion of jazz a turgid cacophony.

        He did say fine music and jazz, clearly implying a distinction.

  • A large number of the world's best minds seem to be what they are due to fear. Albert Einstein had a huge reason to push himself to a status that enabled him to leave Germany. But even more common are the whiz bang scientists that come from places that have stark poverty threatening everyone at every turn. Even in the US working and living conditions for blue collar and no collar workers are so nasty that some people will make incredible efforts to never have to work at those jobs. But the
  • You don't praise them for being smart but for trying hard.

    If they think they are smart and the new material hard, they assume they are not smart enough. And you can't get smarter.

    If they try hard and the new material is hard, they assume they have to try harder. And you can always try harder.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      You should also praise them for achievements, otherwise they may think that faking effort is enough. (I know, a lot of white-collar jobs involve faking trying hard, and politics is basically 100% of it, but any decent person will that have eat their soul in the long run ...) Of course, the achievement should be seen relative to skills and talents, so the trying hard is an important part.

  • by hyades1 ( 1149581 ) <hyades1@hotmail.com> on Wednesday November 05, 2014 @02:10AM (#48315669)

    Too Many Kids Quit Science Because They Don't Think They're Smart

    The problem is, too many of them are right.

  • The importance of feeling stupid: http://jcs.biologists.org/cont... [biologists.org]
  • ... teaching it are clueless and the textbooks are written by people that have somewhere along the way missed the objective of the text... which is to teach young people science.

    The emphasis is on "teach" not list fucking facts, tell them to write them down, and say "there will be a test on THOR's Day". That is what they so often do and it is no wonder everyone gets bored and passes out. Do more experiments. Do more labs. Do more projects.

    The problem with projects? They're more expensive. They're messy. The

  • NEVER tell a kid that they are smart. ALWAYS encourage them when they apply themselves.

    If they are told that they are smart, they will get a mind-set that says: "I'm smart, I don't need to work at this."

    A wealthy friend of the family once told me: "There are two ways to become wealthy: out smart the other guy. The rest of us out work him."

    • by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Wednesday November 05, 2014 @09:00AM (#48316963) Homepage Journal

      A wealthy friend of the family once told me: "There are two ways to become wealthy: out smart the other guy. The rest of us out work him."

      Most people who are wealthy have wealthy parents. It is overwhelmingly the most common way to become wealthy. Virtually nobody makes it to "the top" solely through hard work. Wealthy people always extol the virtues of hard work, but the truth is that there is no amount of hard work will necessarily make you successful. There are too many people waiting with outstretched hands to take advantage of you, or feet waiting to trip you — mostly to assure that you don't threaten their success in this negative-sum game.

  • News blast! Most people are average. Smart is not what really matters. We want intelligence plus smart. If you don't know the difference then figure it out.

  • Miss Tick sniffed. “You could say this advice is priceless,” she said. “Are you listening?”

    “Yes,” said Tiffany.

    “Good. Nowif you trust in yourself”

    “Yes?”

    “and believe in your dreams”

    “Yes?”

    “and follow your star” Miss Tick went on.

    “Yes?”

    “you’ll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren’t so lazy. Good-bye.”

    Terry Prattchet - "The wee

  • Define "too many"

  • Too many kids quit science because of the way in which it's taught. High-school science classes quickly leave the practical realm for the hidden/theoretical realm, for want of a better word. This hidden realm contains the deeper concepts but the average high-school student doesn't have the resources to play around with the knowledge e.g. electron microscopes, spectrometers, or particle colliders. Kids are being required to regurgitate equations on command or memorize biological taxonomies. That's major

  • There was a thread of this title on a article about they should get into some aspects of calculus instead of endless arithmetic problems that become more like punishment like in the army (long repetition of menial work). I gotta go back and find that article (like everybody else I didn't fully read it). Although arithmetic is important, having lots of "drill and kill" tests are not. I think they should get into drawing curves on graphs, figure out the areas under the curves, slopes of lines, etc. and this w

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Working...