A remarkable article in the New York Times expounds the Power and Perils of praising your kids. If you have children, you simply cannot afford to ignore this finding…
Offering praise has become a sort of panacea for the anxieties of modern parenting. Out of our children’s lives from breakfast to dinner, we turn it up a notch when we get home. In those few hours together, we want them to hear the things we can’t say during the day — We are in your corner, we are here for you, we believe in you. In a similar way, we put our children in high-pressure environments, seeking out the best schools we can find, then we use the constant praise to soften the intensity of those environments. We expect so much of them, but we hide our expectations behind constant glowing praise.
Offering praise has become a sort of panacea for the anxieties of modern parenting. Out of our children’s lives from breakfast to dinner, we turn it up a notch when we get home. In those few hours together, we want them to hear the things we can’t say during the day — We are in your corner, we are here for you, we believe in you.
In a similar way, we put our children in high-pressure environments, seeking out the best schools we can find, then we use the constant praise to soften the intensity of those environments. We expect so much of them, but we hide our expectations behind constant glowing praise.
A series of experiments reveals that it’s not just the praise but the kind of praising that gets different results…
For the past ten years, psychologist Carol Dweck and her team at Columbia (she’s now at Stanford) studied the effect of praise on students in a dozen New York schools. Her seminal work—a series of experiments on 400 fifth-graders—paints the picture most clearly. 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 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. I am smart, the kids’ reasoning goes; I don’t need to put out effort. Expending effort becomes stigmatized — it’s public proof that you can’t cut it on your natural gifts.
For the past ten years, psychologist Carol Dweck and her team at Columbia (she’s now at Stanford) studied the effect of praise on students in a dozen New York schools. Her seminal work—a series of experiments on 400 fifth-graders—paints the picture most clearly.
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
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.
I am smart, the kids’ reasoning goes; I don’t need to put out effort. Expending effort becomes stigmatized — it’s public proof that you can’t cut it on your natural gifts.
Luckily for us, there are a few things we can do differently…
In the first stage, I fell off the wagon around other parents when they were busy praising their kids. I didn’t want Luke to feel left out. I felt like a former alcoholic who continues to drink socially. I became a Social Praiser… Then I tried to use the specific-type praise that Dweck recommends. I praised Luke, but I attempted to praise his “process.” This was easier said than done… … every night he has math homework and is supposed to read a phonics book aloud. Each takes about five minutes if he concentrates, but he’s easily distracted. So I praised him for concentrating without asking to take a break. If he listened to instructions carefully, I praised him for that. After soccer games, I praised him for looking to pass, rather than just saying, “You played great.” And if he worked hard to get to the ball, I praised the effort he applied. Just as the research promised, this focused praise helped him see strategies he could apply the next day. It was remarkable how noticeably effective this new form of praise was.
In the first stage, I fell off the wagon around other parents when they were busy praising their kids. I didn’t want Luke to feel left out. I felt like a former alcoholic who continues to drink socially. I became a Social Praiser…
Then I tried to use the specific-type praise that Dweck recommends. I praised Luke, but I attempted to praise his “process.” This was easier said than done…
… every night he has math homework and is supposed to read a phonics book aloud. Each takes about five minutes if he concentrates, but he’s easily distracted. So I praised him for concentrating without asking to take a break. If he listened to instructions carefully, I praised him for that. After soccer games, I praised him for looking to pass, rather than just saying, “You played great.” And if he worked hard to get to the ball, I praised the effort he applied.
Just as the research promised, this focused praise helped him see strategies he could apply the next day. It was remarkable how noticeably effective this new form of praise was.
Read the entire essay. This one is a must-read.
If you are a parent, you most likely spend more than 80% of your memory card (or film?!) photographing your children. As a photography enthusiast and parent, I thought it would be a good idea to share with you some helpful tips on making the most of this pursuit.
Does the camera matter?
Any camera is basically a device that lets you capture light in an instant. To that end, if the available light is adequate, just about any camera will do. However, when it comes to photographing young children, you will do a whole lot better with a camera that has a fast response-time.
Most modern DSLRs (or SLRs) offer ultra-fast startup times and shutter speeds that will allow you to capture that “Kodak” moment in a flash! For the more technically inclined, there are decisions to be made about shooting modes, film/ISO speeds, lens choices, etc. As a rule of thumb, higher ISOs will allow you to extract the most from available light, especially when you’re shooting indoors. And, using a fast lens (with a large maximum aperture) in Portrait or Aperture Priority mode will work wonders, especially when photographing children. If you are trying to capture a moving child or pet, choosing faster shutter speeds (or switching to Shutter Priority mode) will help you snap that action shot without causing motion-blur.
What about the Technique?
As with any subject, learn to hold your camera steady so that your movements don’t cause blur in the pictures. If you’re planning an outdoor trip or vacation, avoid taking a camera that you are unfamiliar with – the last thing you want is to miss a great shot while trying to figure out which settings to change in your camera. If you’re using Flash, know that most modern cameras have a red-eye reduction mode that lights up the flash bulb more than once for each shot – this can confuse your young (or even older) subjects, so turn that off before you begin. My personal preference is to avoid using the built-in Flash as far as possible – you get much better skintones and the results look much more natural if you can work with the available light.
Coming to the actual shooting, it’s been said countless times that photographing children is best done when the child is comfortable with the surroundings and the photographer. Whatever you can do to make them more comfortable will help, and whatever you do to cause stress will not! If you’re unfamiliar with the location, it may help to do a small walk-around and plan your shots in terms of where the children will feel most naturally at ease. Candid shots may yield far better results than your attempts to make the child pose in a certain way, but sometimes a child’s attempt at artificially posing can make for a memorable photograph. If your camera has a burst mode, you can get interesting results of your kids in action as the camera tries to capture one motion in a series of shots.
Most importantly, try to get down to their level and see their world from that height – the photographs you shoot from their height may turn out to be the ones you most want to keep.
For good measure, read this excellent article from Digital Photography School on How to Photograph Children; it also sports some great children shots for inspiration.
Happy clicking!
A few weeks ago, Rajesh Jain in a post entitled ‘Rethinking Education‘ blogged about the various approaches towards changing the prevalent Education system in India, and about his own thoughts on what’s needed:
One approach is to work within the current system and see what best can be done. It assumes that the legacy that exists will be very hard to change — everyone has a vested interest in keeping things the way they are. Parents are not keen to take risks with their kids, the ones in the education business would prefer to stick to the status quo since they are already in the business, the government seems to be quite happy with the way things are, and the kids don’t have much of a choice anyways. So, even as some of us believe that the current education system needs a dramatic revamp, it is not easy to figure out where to begin. (Perhaps, there isn’t an entrance at all for those not already in.) The second approach, advocated by Atanu, is to create a parallel system from scratch — encompassing K-12 and beyond. This thinking starts with the belief that the current education system is fatally flawed and there is no way to apply band-aid. What is needed is a new system, a new standard. And there will be early adopters among parents and kids who will be drawn to this new system. My personal vote goes for the second approach. The world has changed a lot, especially in the past couple decades, and the simplicity that needs to be there in the education system has vanished. One hears of kids as young as two and three years going for coaching so they can get into the preferred school of their parents. IIT coaching now starts in the sixth standard. It is reaching ridiculous heights (or lows). And then look at the quality of the product that comes out of this system.
One approach is to work within the current system and see what best can be done. It assumes that the legacy that exists will be very hard to change — everyone has a vested interest in keeping things the way they are. Parents are not keen to take risks with their kids, the ones in the education business would prefer to stick to the status quo since they are already in the business, the government seems to be quite happy with the way things are, and the kids don’t have much of a choice anyways. So, even as some of us believe that the current education system needs a dramatic revamp, it is not easy to figure out where to begin. (Perhaps, there isn’t an entrance at all for those not already in.)
The second approach, advocated by Atanu, is to create a parallel system from scratch — encompassing K-12 and beyond. This thinking starts with the belief that the current education system is fatally flawed and there is no way to apply band-aid. What is needed is a new system, a new standard. And there will be early adopters among parents and kids who will be drawn to this new system.
My personal vote goes for the second approach. The world has changed a lot, especially in the past couple decades, and the simplicity that needs to be there in the education system has vanished. One hears of kids as young as two and three years going for coaching so they can get into the preferred school of their parents. IIT coaching now starts in the sixth standard. It is reaching ridiculous heights (or lows). And then look at the quality of the product that comes out of this system.
This is a burning issue for many parents, and naturally, Rajesh’s post saw a flurry of comments in a short span. Here’s what I wrote in response :
My view is that disruptive innovation has a place in many things, but not in something as well-rooted in society as our present education system… There is just too much at stake for parents. … most people within the system are averse to change of any sort – that is typical human response to any new idea. However, with a new system, even if you get some folks to switch over, many others will not fearing what will happen to their children once the system’s runway ends. Already, I hear many concerned and informed parents voicing their fears of how their children will eventually have to cope up with the “mainstream” once they graduate from their gurukuls or whatever liberal-minded school system they follow. That fear is what keeps many of them from sending their kids down the less-trodden path in the first place! And until a critical mass of people *do* choose the new route, the fear of the majority would always remain… … I think a more agreeable option would be to make small but significant changes in the existing system (even if that takes more effort), so that more and more people eventually benefit from the changes. As a parent of two, I would certainly welcome a move in that direction.
My view is that disruptive innovation has a place in many things, but not in something as well-rooted in society as our present education system… There is just too much at stake for parents.
… most people within the system are averse to change of any sort – that is typical human response to any new idea. However, with a new system, even if you get some folks to switch over, many others will not fearing what will happen to their children once the system’s runway ends.
Already, I hear many concerned and informed parents voicing their fears of how their children will eventually have to cope up with the “mainstream” once they graduate from their gurukuls or whatever liberal-minded school system they follow. That fear is what keeps many of them from sending their kids down the less-trodden path in the first place! And until a critical mass of people *do* choose the new route, the fear of the majority would always remain…
… I think a more agreeable option would be to make small but significant changes in the existing system (even if that takes more effort), so that more and more people eventually benefit from the changes. As a parent of two, I would certainly welcome a move in that direction.
Rajesh sent me an email in reply, later that day, in which he mentioned that the best solution may well be a combination of the two approaches. What do you think?
The BabyCenter website carries a detailed write-up on how you can address discipline issues in your children, irrespective of their age. It’s a subject that should strike a chord with every parent, as sometime or the other, we’ve all been at the receiving end of unacceptable behaviour by our children.
Why is discipline such a big dilemma? Because it feels like a tightrope act. On one side there’s the peril of permissiveness - no one wants to raise a brat. On the other side there’s the fear of over-control – who wants to be the hardliner raising cowed, sullen kids?
The article provides interesting tips for children of various age-groups, with examples of “real-life applications” for each of the rules. Here’s just a small sample of the Ground Rules it speaks of:
1. We’re all in this together… Right from the start, teach your kids that your family is a mutual support system, meaning that everyone pitches in. 2. Respect is mutual… Set a good example early on: When your child tries to tell you something, stop what you’re doing, focus your attention, and listen. Later you can require the same courtesy from her. 3. Consistency is king… Even if you pick just one chore to insist on, your child will be better off, Kindlon says. “Being firm and consistent teaches your child that you care enough about him to expect responsible behavior.” 4. Life’s not always fair… So if your child’s upset because a younger sibling got a different punishment, for example, it’s okay to say “I understand that this seems unfair to you, and I’m sorry you’re upset, but life isn’t always fair.”
1. We’re all in this together… Right from the start, teach your kids that your family is a mutual support system, meaning that everyone pitches in.
2. Respect is mutual… Set a good example early on: When your child tries to tell you something, stop what you’re doing, focus your attention, and listen. Later you can require the same courtesy from her.
3. Consistency is king… Even if you pick just one chore to insist on, your child will be better off, Kindlon says. “Being firm and consistent teaches your child that you care enough about him to expect responsible behavior.”
4. Life’s not always fair… So if your child’s upset because a younger sibling got a different punishment, for example, it’s okay to say “I understand that this seems unfair to you, and I’m sorry you’re upset, but life isn’t always fair.”
I strongly recommended you read it in entirety.
The world is divided among those who think that TV is harmful to young children, and those who don’t.
ParentCenter has a page on TV watching guidelines that says: “The best way to approach television is to think of it as refined sugar: You want your kids to enjoy the seductive stuff without consuming it to excess. So you’ll need to stay on top of the time your child spends in front of the television.” It offers some helpful pointers, among them:
- Make television physically inconvenient - Help your child become a critical viewer - Go with calm, quiet programs
BabyCenter has a Community Debate section on TV viewing that gets parents to respond to the question: Do you think television contributes to developmental and/or behavioral issues in children?
There’s even an article in Slate arguing that TV really might cause Autism!
The other side of the argument? If you haven’t already, read the brilliantly-insightful Freakonomics by Stephen Dubner where he writes that “children who watch TV don’t do any worse (or better) on early childhood test scores than kids who don’t watch.” (And then, read his blog post on how TV Really IS Dangerous!)
These articles are about all you’ll need to read on this subject, to make up your mind on the issue.
My take? As a child, I could only dream of exploring new worlds in full-blown multimedia on almost any topic of my interest… something that NatGeo and Discovery enable today, at the mere click of a remote control. Modern TV has opened up entirely new worlds for my little ones, and I’m glad it has.
As a parent, I restrict my 4-year-old to about an hour or two of TV per day*, so that other forms of activity and learning are also a part of her routine. I also make sure my 1-year-old does not get more than a few minutes exposure, until he’s past the age of two. But, I don’t ban TV viewing completely.
As the old saying goes, any thing can be good, as long as it’s in moderation.
* Update: Aug 2011: Given the plethora of screens that surround us, this criterion has been revised to reflect at most two hours per day of “screen time” that includes TVs, computers, iPads, electronic games, etc. The only exclusion is the amazing Kindle which encourages reading without causing eye strain.
