Fostering Healthy Conflict

This week’s article summary is Fostering Healthy Conflict.

Teaming is an integral aspect of teaching today.

If you’ve been in education as long as I, you remember what teaching was like before teaming: one teacher alone in a classroom. Yes, teachers in the Faculty Room or in after-school faculty meetings might share a little about their craft, yet overall teaching was a very independent existence. I learned more by trial-and-error than by mentorship.

As I mentioned in preplanning, there are many benefits to team teaching and being on a team: more ideas and perspectives shared, greater willingness to experiment and pilot new ideas, more support and feedback, closer relationships, and better productivity.

Yet, there are potential pitfalls as well: personal agendas, power dynamics, tension (overt, covert), distrust, passive/aggressive behavior, lack of follow through and accountability.

Patrick Lencioni in his classic book The Five Dysfunctions of a Team writes that the foundation of effective teaming is trust.

A vital aspect of trust is the willingness to be honest with team members. However, many of us shy away from honesty for fear that we will hurt the feelings of others.

The brief article below provides some sentence stems to help encourage healthy skepticism and disagreement in team meetings.

In our personal and professional lives, we know and work with some people who have excellent bedside manners. They have the ability to push and disagree in a non-threatening, respectful manner. They have natural empathy and can put themselves in the place of others.

Others, however, can overly blunt and confrontational. These people need support and scaffolding to help them work effectively with others.

One of the qualities of a high-functioning team is the ability to productively disagree. The article below helps provide some guidance for those teams that struggle with this and consequently aren’t maximizing their potential.

 Joe

----

If educators are to have the kinds of conversations necessary to meet the needs of every child, then we’re going to have to learn how to navigate conflict.

Not angry, personalized, win/lose conflict, but healthy exchanges where colleagues wrestle with ideas, ask questions, demonstrate curiosity, change their minds, and keep students at the center.

How can we build the skills necessary for productive conflict?

One way is using sentence stems that lead the conversation in the right direction. Some examples:

Can you elaborate on your thinking, because I’m not sure I understand?

I have some concerns about that suggestion. Could you explain it more?

I want to push back on that idea. I’ve noticed ___ and would like to suggest ___.

I hear what you’re saying, but have you considered ___?

Can you help me understand why you believe that? My experience has led me to a different conclusion, but I want to understand your perspective.

I disagree with you about that, but I want to hear your thoughts.

It would help me get behind that idea if I could hear more about ___.

I agree with several points you made, but I want to challenge you on this idea. 

I have a request to make. Are you open to hearing it?

Is Lecture Good Pedagogy?

This week's article summary is Been To a Good Lecture?

My previous school was very progressive: it emphasized the process of learning over the final product; gave students ample voice and choice over what they learned, when they learned it, and how they demonstrated their understanding of it; and employed active, experiential, problem-based activities.

I arrived at the school with much more experience in and familiarity with traditional teaching: lecture, textbooks, note-taking, tests, and research papers. Anything I had done that could be considered progressive was accidental and more a result of an intuitive sense that kids learn better when engaged in what they’re learning.

So in my first year as Middle School Director, I spent as much time as I could observing classes to see progressive teaching in action.

Of all the sixth, seventh, and eighth grade teachers I observed, by far the most popular was the school’s eighth grade history teacher: the kids loved her, worked and laughed hard in her class, and learned much content. Whenever I visited her classroom, I was equally mesmerized by her narrative tales about American history.

The problem: all she did every day was sit in the front of the classroom and talk. She was the classic sage on the stage. Her typical class was 97% teacher talk, 3% student-to-teacher talk, 0% student-to-student talk.

Imagine my surprise: a funky, progressive school with its most popular and effective teacher violating every precept of John Dewey’s child-centered pedagogy upon which the school had been founded in 1922.

Just from observing her in the classroom I learned a lot about teaching:

• One teaching method does not fit all teachers
• Essential to student learning is teacher engagement with their students, not the pedagogy the teacher employs
• To optimize learning, teachers first need to earn the trust of their students by creating an emotionally safe and comfortable classroom
• All of us, including kids, love to learn from hearing stories

So, is lecture bad pedagogy? Is hands-on learning preferable?

It all depends on the teacher.

Joe

------

It’s hard to avoid telling students things that we think they need to know. Thus, the lecture.

Unfortunately, evidence suggests lectures are not a useful way to improve learning. In fact, the effect size of lectures is negative. Three meta-analyses of lectures have focused on a comparison between a lecture and active learning or innovative teaching—and the lectures fare worse.

But we’ve been to good lectures. We’ve been challenged and entertained by a lecturer. Our curiosity has been piqued and our critical thinking has been provoked by someone standing in front of the room sharing information. Thus, there must be some good that can come from a lecture.

So, perhaps this is a case of a false dichotomy. Maybe lectures, done well, can be active and innovative.

What students don’t need is an information dump. Simply regurgitating information students could have read or watched on video doesn’t constitute a good lecture.

Students benefit from the following characteristics in lectures:

Presentation Skills:

• Is knowledgeable, current, and accurate in the subject
• Uses relevant and meaningful examples
• Verbally fluent in public speaking

Mode of Lecture:

• Paces lecture so students can take notes
• Provides summaries during the lecture

Motivation:

• Arouses curiosity and interest in audience

Social Equity:

• Uses inclusive examples
• Uses non-biased language

Modeling:

• Shows enthusiasm for topic and audience

 Critical Thinking:

• Encourages independence in learning
• Challenges audience’s views to prompt critical reasoning

 Cognitive Processes:

• Clearly structures the lecture
• Builds on audience’s knowledge
• Pauses for students to consolidate their thinking

Effective lecturers model expert thinking, tell compelling stories that illuminate concepts, and share experiences that provide context and insight.

Accessibility and interactivity are key to effective presentations of information. By accessibility, we mean that the content must be relevant to students, understandable to them, and designed to build on existing knowledge while stretching them to consider new ideas.

The interactive nature of the lecture is equally important. It is designed with motivation in mind and considers students’ learning needs, such as posing questions, pausing for notetaking, and providing ­opportunities for reflection.

Time—including both pace and length—is another important aspect of a good lecture. A pace of about 100 words per minute generates higher levels of comprehension, and students perceive the information to be more valuable, compared to more typical speaking rates of 150 to 200 words per minute.

For length, the focus should be on the ways students are asked to recall and retrieve information: When lectures are interspersed with opportunities to practice and apply information, interact with peers, and retrieve information from their minds, the overall length of time spent in the lecture is less ­relevant.

Good lecturers often asks the audience to interact with the material by making annotations and asking questions. They speak for brief amounts of time, then pause to allow the audience to discuss the content with one another in small groups and collaboratively generate ideas about an idea or concept.

While there are both good and bad examples of lectures, it’s unlikely that lectures will be eliminated from the educational landscape. So, we need to focus on how to improve these learning experiences. Importantly, lectures should be integrated into other learning experiences in class. Lectures can be effective as part of the gradual release of responsibility, with other instructional experiences planned as part of the overall lesson for students.

By viewing lectures as one component of learning, not the sole way of learning, we can build students’ capacity to pay attention and receive information in this format. Emphasizing interactivity, pacing, and frequent opportunities for retrieval and practice can change the effectiveness of lectures.

Has the Novel Become Obsolete in Schools?

This week's article summary is Students Are Reading Fewer Books in English Class, and it’s a continuation of previous summaries about middle, high school, and college students lacking basic literacy skills.

As you’ll see in the article, today’s middle and high school English teachers rarely if at all assign full-length novels to their students due to the pressure of high-stakes standardized testing and the need to cover an overly-broad curriculum.

While short reading passages from famous novels may help teachers cover their course’s curriculum, it unfortunately isn’t helping students fully develop their literacy/reading skills. I like reading snippets of books and short stories, but there are critical reading (and executive function) skills you develop, use, and practice when reading a novel from beginning to end.

The current data is stark: few kids today read proficiently or for pleasure--although if you’re not competent in whatever area, why would you focus on it during your free time?

I am a member of a dying breed: a reader of books. I’m the lone member of my family who reads books. I typically have two or three books going at once. Most weekends I spend idle time browsing the shelves of bookstores; my favorite is Half-Price Books in Decatur, near Emory University where the customers are as interesting and diverse as the used books for sale. Whenever I’ve moved to a new city, one of the first things I did was get a local library card. Every year I look forward to Jill asking  me to preview an array of books for the upcoming faculty/staff summer learning options; in fact, she gave me my first preview read earlier this week.

As we live in an age of distraction and instant gratification, I recognize that our attention spans have shortened—even an avid reader like me now prefers short paragraphs and chapters.

Yet, I still see the need and value in students reading complete novels, not just short passages. Some of my favorites from high school and college were The Great Gatsby, To Kill a Mockingbird, Crime and Punishment, Animal Farm, Frankenstein, and The Martian Chronicles.

I’m skeptical if the novel will ever regain its popularity, yet for the sake of our students’ critical thinking skills and focus/attention, we need to keep the novel alive in middle and high schools!

Joe

-----

Chris Stanislawski didn’t read much in his middle school English classes, but it never felt necessary. Students were given detailed chapter summaries for every novel they discussed, and teachers often played audio of the books during class. Much of the reading material was either abridged books or online texts and printouts.

“When you’re given a summary of the book telling you what you’re about to read, it ruins the whole story for you,” said Chris, 14. “What’s the point of actually reading?”

In many English classrooms across America, assignments to read full-length novels are becoming less common. Some teachers focus instead on selected passages — a concession to perceptions of shorter attention spans, pressure to prepare for standardized tests, and a sense that short-form content will prepare students for the modern, digital world.

The emphasis on shorter, digital texts does not sit well with everyone.

Deep reading is essential to strengthen circuits in the brain tied to critical thinking skills, background knowledge — and, most of all, empathy, said Maryanne Wolf, a cognitive neuroscientist at UCLA.

“We must give our young an opportunity to understand who others are, not through little snapshots, but through immersion into the lives and thoughts and feelings of others,” Wolf said.

There’s little data on how many books are assigned by schools. But in general, students are reading less. Federal data from last year shows only 14% of young teens say they read for fun daily, compared with 27% in 2012.

Teachers say the trend stems from standardized testing and the influence of education technology. Digital platforms can deliver a complete English curriculum, with thousands of short passages aligned to state standards — all without having to assign an actual book.

“If schools are judged by their test scores, how are they going to improve their test scores? They’re going to mirror the test as much as possible,” said Karl Ubelhoer, a middle school teacher in Tabernacle, New Jersey.

For some students, it’s a struggle to read at all. Only a third of fourth and eighth graders reached reading proficiency in the 2022 National Assessment of Educational Progress, down significantly from 2019.

Leah van Belle, executive director of the Detroit literacy coalition, said when her son read “Peter Pan” in late elementary school, it was too hard for most kids in the class. She laments that Detroit feels like “a book desert.” Her son’s school doesn’t even have a library.

Still, she said it makes sense for English classes to focus on shorter texts. “As an adult, if I want to learn about a topic and research it, be it personal or professional, I’m using interactive digital text to do that,” she said.

Even in well-resourced schools, one thing is always in short supply: time.

Terri White, a teacher at South Windsor High School in Connecticut, no longer makes her honors ninth-grade English class read all of “To Kill a Mockingbird.” She assigns about a third of the book and a synopsis of the rest. They have to move on quickly because of pressure for teachers to cram more into the curriculum, she said. “I maintain rigor. But I’m more about helping students become stronger and more critical readers, writers and thinkers, while taking their social-emotional well-being into account,” she said.

In the long run, the synopsis approach harms students’ critical thinking skills, said Alden Jones, a literature professor at Emerson College in Boston. She assigns fewer books than she once did and gives more quizzes to make sure students do the reading.

Will Higgins, an English teacher at Dartmouth High School in Massachusetts, said he still believes in teaching the classics, but demands on students’ time have made it necessary to cut back. “We haven’t given up on ‘Jane Eyre’ and ‘Pride and Prejudice.’ We haven’t given up on ‘Hamlet’ or ‘The Great Gatsby,’″ Higgins said.

 

His school has had success encouraging reading through student-directed book clubs, where small groups pick a book and discuss it together.  “It’s funny,” he said. “Many students are saying that it’s the first time in a long time they’ve read a full book.” 

 

 

 

Reading Struggles in High School

 This week's article summary is Older Students Need Help with Basic Reading, and it’s a follow-up to an earlier summary on how college freshmen today struggle with academics.

A number elementary schools, including Trinity, have implemented Science of Reading programs and formative assessments to identify areas where early remediation is needed.

While many of our current students will reap the benefits of enriched early literacy development, many current middle and high school students will continue to struggle due to poor literacy skills, from phonetics (sounds of language), orthnographics (spelling), semantics (word meaning and general knowledge), and syntax (arrangement of words and phrases in a sentence).

I am bullish about the literacy foundation we are building in our students, including the additions we’ve made this year to strengthen their content knowledge, a critical factor for reading comprehension.

Yet there’s a generation of older students who will never reach their academic potential due to poor basic literacy skills.

Joe

------

Helping students learn to read is usually the job of early elementary educators.

But teachers of older children—who report that nearly half of their students have difficulty reading—say they need more training in this area, too.

The survey from the RAND Corporation included 1,500 teachers in grades 3-8. Teachers in these grades reported that 44 percent of their students always or nearly always faced challenges reading the content in their classes. Ninety-seven percent of teachers said they modified their instruction to support struggling readers at least once a week.

The results come on the heels of previous RAND survey that found many secondary teachers still work with students on foundational reading skills like sounding out words and spelling.

As states have pushed school districts to adopt evidence-based practices in early elementary reading instruction, a movement known as the “science of reading,” these two reports suggest they might also have to fill in knowledge gaps for teachers of older students.

“K-3 is when we expect that most students learn these skills,” said Anna Shapiro, policy researcher at RAND. “But we’re at a point where we have older kids in some grades that are still developing these skills.”

Reading problems for older students can have disastrous ripple effects across the school day. In these older grades, it’s not only English/language arts classes that require strong reading skills, but social studies, science, and math. In the RAND survey, teachers of subjects other than ELA said their students spent about half of class time reading and writing.

But teachers of older students usually don’t receive training on addressing the kinds of foundational reading difficulties that can hamper students’ access to more complex text. And there often isn’t time to remediate basic skills when teachers are working with their students toward higher-level concepts.

The reasons why older students struggle with reading can also be more complex and layered than they are for younger children.

“There’s no ceiling to learning to read,” Shapiro said. “As soon as a child has mastered the foundational skills that they need to look at a word and decode it, the higher-order reading skills that students continue to develop just get more and more complex as students get older. For a student who has gotten to 4th, 5th, 6th grade and is still struggling with those foundational skills, it is making it harder for them to access that higher-order literacy skill development that we hope students are achieving.”

“We feel like the national literacy discussion has still almost exclusively focused on young readers,” said Christina Cover, a special education teacher and literacy coordinator. “We know that shift to reading to learn—that doesn’t happen for kids who are still struggling.”

To help students make that shift, teachers say they need more resources. More one-on-one help for students was particularly popular: 48 percent of middle school teachers said they had a moderate or major need for reading specialists, while 45 percent identified a moderate or major need for tutors.

“It might be that teachers are thinking, ‘I need somebody else’s help, I don’t have the training or the expertise that I need to do this,’” Shapiro said.

Teachers also wanted more training: Two in 5 teachers surveyed held at least one misconception about how children learn to read, such as agreeing with the statement that “most students will learn to read on their own if given the proper books and time to read them.”

Shapiro stressed that training and resources for teachers in older grades should be age-appropriate for their students. “When we’re thinking about policy changes, … we’re not suggesting that you should throw all the 3-8 teachers in the reading class that the K-2 teachers take in their teacher preparation,” she said.

For example, research shows that intervention targeting multiple skills at once--such as fluency and comprehension—can have higher positive effects for older students than single-skill practice.

Students who have gone from grade to grade without seeing much progress tend to develop avoidance strategies for reading.

The Benefits of Underparenting

This week's article summary is Parents Should Ignore Their Children More Often, and it's a follow-up to last week's summary on free-range parenting.

I mentioned last week that free-range parenting suffers from poor branding.

This week’s summary posits another name for parents who want their children to develop self-efficacy: underparenting.

While there are many benefits (listed below) to kids from underparenting, there are also huge benefits for parents. The trend today is to overschedule kids with activities (typically adult-run) outside of school, While not intentional, a competition arises: which parent can  provide their child with a better cornucopia of after-school opportunities?

The article below harkens back to the time of hunter-gatherers when kids were not the center of their parents’ attention and more on the periphery. The lessons children learned back then came from their observation of the adult world.

By not over-scheduling children, parents send their children the message that they trust their children to manage their lives and entertain and amuse themselves. How to cope with boredom is an important lesson everyone needs to learn—constant stimulation and attention can stymy a child’s social-emotional development and make them overly egocentric.

The author also makes the point that overscheduling kids inadvertently makes them more reliant on technology.

 Whether we call it free-range parenting, underparenting, or some more positive name, I am hopeful that the prevalent parenting style of over supervising and overscheduling children will begin to abate—to the benefit of children and their parents.

 Joe

 ----

I recently spoke with an anthropologist named Barry Hewlett who studies child-rearing in hunter-gatherer societies in Central Africa. He explained to me that children in those societies spend lots of time with their parents — they tag along throughout the day and often help with tasks like foraging — but they are rarely the main object of their parents’ attention. Sometimes bored, sometimes engaged, these kids spend much of their time observing adults doing adult things.

Parents in contemporary industrialized societies often take the opposite approach. In the precious time when we’re not working, we place our children at the center of our attention, consciously engaging and entertaining them. We drive them around to sports practice and music lessons, where they are observed and monitored by adults, rather than the other way around. We value “quality time” over quantity of time.

This intensive, often frantic style of parenting requires a lot more effort than the style Professor Hewlett described. I found myself thinking about those hunter-gatherers last month when I read the advisory from the surgeon general, Vivek Murthy, warning that many parents are stressed to their breaking point. There are plenty of reasons for this worrisome state of affairs.

One is that we don’t ignore our children often enough.

The modern style of parenting is not just exhausting for adults; it is also based on assumptions about what children need to thrive that are not supported by evidence from our evolutionary past. For most of human history, people had lots of kids, and children hung out in intergenerational social groups in which they were not heavily supervised.

Of course, just because a parenting style is ancient doesn’t make it good. But human beings have spent about 90 percent of our collective time on Earth as hunter-gatherers, and our brains and bodies evolved and adapted to suit that lifestyle. Hunter-gatherer cultures tell us something important about how children are primed to learn.

A parenting style that took its cue from those hunter-gatherers would insist that one of the best things parents can do — for ourselves as well as for our children — is to go about our own lives and tote our children along. You might call it mindful underparenting.

Children learn not only from direct instruction, but also from watching and modeling what other people around them do, whether it’s foraging for berries, changing a tire, or unwinding with friends after a long day of work. From a young age, that kind of observation begins to equip children for adulthood.

More important, following adults around gives children the tremendous gift of learning to tolerate boredom, which fosters patience, resourcefulness, and creativity. The research tells us that the mind gets busy when it is left alone to do its own thing — in particular, it tends to think about other people’s minds. If you want to raise empathetic, imaginative children who can figure out how to entertain themselves, don’t keep their brains too occupied.

An excellent way to bore children is to take them to an older relative’s house and force them to listen to a long adult conversation about family members they don’t know. Quotidian excursions to the post office or the bank can create valuable opportunities for boredom, too.

Leaving kids’ screens at home on such trips can deepen the useful tedium. It also forces parents to build up their tolerance to their child’s fussiness, an essential component of underparenting. Parents too often feel the need to engage their children in “fun” activities to tempt them away from screens. But by teaching children to crave constant external stimulation and entertainment, intensive parenting can actually worsen screen dependence.

To be sure, when kids are upset, in danger, or require guidance, parents can and should swoop in to help. But that is precisely the point: It is only by ignoring our children much of the time that we conserve the energy necessary to give them our full attention when they actually need it.

In recent years there has been a lot of hand-wringing about so-called helicopter parents and their hopelessly coddled children. But we rarely talk about what parents ought to do instead. In an ideal world, we would set children loose to roam free outdoors, unsupervised. As a small-town Ohio kid in the 1990s, I spent hours with my brothers playing in the creek behind our house, with plenty of time to get good and bored. When that sort of “free range” experience is not an option, however, mindful underparenting is the next best thing.

This approach can take the form of bringing children with you not just on boring errands, but also when you work, socialize, or exercise. I was at my gym the other day when a father came in with his 4-year-old son. The two of them took turns working out with a trainer teaching them martial arts moves. When it wasn’t his turn, the 4-year-old scrambled around the gym and, when he got tired, lay on his belly on the mat and watched his father practice kicks. Observing the boy, his big eyes taking in a ton of social information, I thought about all the parents who say that they have no time to exercise because they’re too busy with their kids.

Underparenting requires structural change, and not just the obvious changes that we think of as parental stress-relievers, such as family leave and paid child care. It also requires that as a society, we build back our tolerance for children in public spaces, as annoying and distracting as they can be, and create safe environments where lightly supervised kids can roam freely. In a society that treated children as a public good, we would keep a collective eye on all our kids — which would free us of the need to hover over our own.

Becoming a Free-Range Parent

This week's article summary is A Conversation with a Free-Range Parenting Pioneer, and it's a follow-up to an earlier summary on helping students develop self-efficacy.

To me, Free Parenting suffers from poor brand naming—the term implies parents being overly lax with their kids.

Most parents conceptually understand the importance of children having unsupervised opportunities make decisions, to solve disputes with peers, and to figure out how to entertain themselves without adults or technology.

Yet parents also worry about the potential dangers of the world. Jonathan Haidt in his popular book Anxious Nation bemoans that parents give their kids too much freedom online but not enough in real life.

Throughout the country, schools have been tightening their technology policies to limit or ban student-owned devices at school. Yet for the most part, schools and parents have ignored Haidt’s other major recommendation: letting kids play with other kids without adult supervision.

Parents today are fearful of what could happen to their child in real life even though Haidt reminds us that the world today is actually very safe for kids. I fault the 24-hour a day news cycle for this: highlighting the dangers and violence of the world is good for ratings but adversely skews our world view.

While technology plays a role in the rise of loneliness, anxiety, and depression in kids, I also feel children’s lack of unsupervised play time is a critical factor as well. The positives of giving kids opportunities to do things by and for themselves include building self-confidence, self-efficacy, and independence.

I have a vivid memory of one particular night when I was eight. I was in my pajamas watching TV in the living room. My dad’s car wouldn’t start at his office, so he called my mom and asked her to come pick him up (a commute of 15 minutes each way). My mom told me to put on a coat and jump in the car to pick up my dad. I asked if I could stay home by myself as it was only going to be a half hour alone in the house. Somehow I convinced her and she let my stay by myself for the first time.

It was pitch black outside and after about 10 minutes I was scared. I had the TV to keep me company but I heard all sorts of noises inside and outside the house. Thirty minutes felt like an eternity. My parents finally got home, and I remember being nonchalant about being by myself for 30 minutes. But, as this memory is deeply etched in my brain, it clearly had an impact on me. I had accomplished something and felt more confident for it.

I know it’s difficult for parents today to be less hovering over their kids, yet as the article recommends, they can start by doing little things to give their kids opportunities to build their confidence.

Joe

--------

Lenore Skenazy was once reviled as the worst mom in America for letting her 9-year-old son Izzy take the subway by himself.

The newspaper columnist has since become a champion of the “free-range kids” parenting style and helped spark a national movement, Let Grow, which encourages parents to gradually give their children the kind of small freedoms they were allowed as children, such as walking to school or to the park.

Skenazy recently took a few moments to chat about what she sees as the serious developmental impacts of curtailing the natural impulse for free play and how we went from a country where it was normal for children to ride the bus to a nation where parents try to manage all aspects of their child’s schedule.

Amid the deepening youth mental health crisis, Skenazy suggests that free play is a serious matter for human development. She suggests that coddling our kids may limit their cognitive potential, holding them back from peak educational experiences, pointing to research showing a link between lower independence and higher anxiety. Independence, she says, is the key to developing happy, well-adjusted children.

Do you think that giving kids more independence can help fight anxiety? 

We’ve taken out opportunities for kids to practice becoming independent. You were allowed to play outside as kids, weren’t you? We were allowed to have free time after school. Kids today aren’t. You were allowed to be unsupervised sometimes, and our kids aren’t. This has resulted in a massive downturn in child mental health, We need to give them back some independence and free play

Why do kids need time interacting with their peers face to face?

You want kids to be off their phones, learning how to interact, learning how to make things happen, learning how to deal with frustration because you can’t all be first. And also learning empathy, the older kids helping the younger kids and learning a little bit of maturity, because the little kids don’t want to look like babies. These cool older kids, you need to have them interacting like humans. Playing. That’s how they have always interacted and that’s how they make friends. We’re worried about loneliness. How do kids make friends? They make friends because they play with them. This is the way kids used to spend their entire childhoods.

How do you convince parents to let their children do the things they took for granted?

There’s something called the Let Grow Experience. It’s a homework assignment that teachers give their students, and it says, go home and do something new on your own without your parents. They could do anything from making pancakes to walking to school to walking the dog or using a sharp knife. 

Does that help parents feel empowered as well as kids? Does it give all of us more agency?

The reason we love this project so much is that once your kid goes and does something on their own, parents are generally so excited and so thrilled that that rewires you. You are excited to send them out again. And then the kid gets rewired because, instead of my mom loves me, but she doesn’t think I can go to the store, she knows I’ll screw it up, or I’m too shy or whatever. Then the kid says, wait, no, my mom believes in me. I can do this. And knowing that somebody believes in you turns out to be the greatest gift to a kid’s psyche because, sometimes, somebody has to believe in you for you to believe in yourself.

How do you feel about the proliferation of ed-tech in the classroom? A lot of schools are deeply invested in ed-tech as a way to make kids smarter. This is the opposite of that. Is it hard to make an argument for the relationship between free play and intellectual development?

It’s really easy to make the argument. It doesn’t necessarily land, but the argument is this: The brain comes ready to be wired, right? How do you learn to deal with somebody who’s annoying? How do you learn to come up with an idea? How do you learn to innovate? How do you learn to solve a problem? You have to do all these things to learn how. People love solving problems and love coming up with ideas and love playing. Ed-tech did not get us to this place in human history.

The rub is that taking the screens away is a really hard thing to do. 

You can’t just take the screens away and leave them staring at blank walls. But if you have become the entertainment center, you’ve goofed. The world is actually more entertaining than the phones because you can smell it, taste it, feel it. So you just have to give them back the real world. Take away the phone and open the door.

How to Be More Optimistic

This week's article summary is  How Learned Optimism Can Improve Your Life.

I used to have a fixed mindset that people from birth fell into two categories: those who by nature were optimistic and those who were inevitably prone to pessimism. Your outlook on life was based on the luck of your gene pool.

I considered myself lucky that I inherited the positivity gene from my parents. In nearly all situations I see the proverbial glass as half full, not half empty.

But as you’ll see in the article below, even if you inherited the negativity gene from your parents and view the glass as half empty, you can train yourself to be more positive and optimistic.

Just as Carol Dweck pioneered the importance of  developing a Growth Mindset, Learned Optimism was developed by psychologist Martin Seligman. People like me naturally see the positive, but others can also see the best through the practice of Learned Optimism. It’s all about one’s attitude and the way we handle misfortune.

We all know life is far from perfect and filled with disappointments (which I’m constantly reminded of as a New York Jets fan).

But like the ancient Greek/Roman philosophy of stoicism and the precepts of Buddhism, Learned Optimism advises us to accept and manage both the highs and lows that befall all of us.

Optimists don’t have better luck than pessimists; they just cope better with setbacks.

As you’ll see in the article, there are many benefits having an optimistic outlook, in particular stronger physical and mental well-being.

So, as we leave the back-to-school honeymoon period of a school year and your students begin to struggle and you get tired and frustrated, this article is an apt reminder to maintain your natural or learned positivity and find the good in all and everything!

 Joe

------

When it comes to how you view the world and your everyday experiences, you probably fall into one of two categories: optimist or pessimist.

For people with pessimistic tendencies, or a “glass half-empty” mindset, it can feel like second nature to talk down to yourself and expect the worst in each situation. There’s a way to break out of that negative self-talk and teach yourself how to become more optimistic—this concept is known as “learned optimism,” and it was developed by psychologist Martin Seligman. Learned optimism involves recognizing and challenging negative thoughts to develop a more positive outlook.

The concept is rooted in the belief that anyone can switch their mindset, no matter how pessimistic they are to begin with. Optimism is one way to achieve resilience so that you're not stuck in a rut and you're able to flexibly navigate a situation. Just a glimmer, a micro-experience of optimism, can have profound and transformative outcomes.

“Learned optimism is a core mindset of resilience and well-being that helps people to approach challenges and navigate adversity,” says Karen Reivich, from the University of Pennsylvania’s Positive Psychology Center.

The term “learned optimism" was coined by Seligman, who’s widely considered the father of positive psychology. This branch of psychology that explores the many tools, techniques, and skills that allow people to thrive. During his earlier clinical studies on learned helplessness—which is the belief that you have no control over negative situations or life events—Seligman found that people who are more resilient and optimistic are better able to resist feeling helpless and apathetic in the face of adversity.

“Seligman wrote: “One of the most significant findings in psychology in the last twenty years is that individuals can choose the way they think.” He argued that, through resilience-building strategies, anyone can learn to break out of a pessimistic, powerless mindset and become more optimistic. The word ‘learned’ emphasizes that we can all develop, practice, and strengthen this perspective.

When a person starts to believe that they have no power over what happens to them, they begin to feel helpless and unmotivated to take action. In turn, this may contribute to the onset of several psychological disorders—such as depression and anxiety--and can lead to a vicious cycle of continually giving up, avoiding certain situations, and having little to no motivation to take care of yourself and make positive changes.

“Learned optimism is the opposite of that,” says Reivich. “It's developing a belief system of agency—the belief that you can affect change in your life and you can bring about better outcomes.” For example, a person experiencing learned helplessness will likely give up after failing or repeatedly struggling to succeed at a particular task, whereas a person practicing learned optimism won’t blame themselves for the failure and would likely keep trying until they succeed.

There are a number of benefits associated with having an optimistic mindset. Among the many advantages of practicing optimism is better mental health. “People who have a more optimistic mindset tend to be happier and have greater life satisfaction,” says Reivich.

People who are more optimistic also experience better physical health outcomes, such as having less pain, fewer complications after surgery, and shorter hospital stays. Optimists have a lower chance of developing infections, cancer, and diseases as well. This is likely because optimistic people tend to have better coping skills when dealing with major stressors and setbacks. As a result, they usually engage in activities that promote good health.