Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums GT Research Only praising kids for working hard

I'm sure most of you are familiar with the research that shows that telling children that they are smart or gifted can end up backfiring on them and that praising them for hard work is more motivating. The reasoning behind this is that if a child thinks that their success is due to being smart then they will fear trying again and possibly failing because then they won't be smart anymore. It makes sense and I believe it.
The problem is that I think educators are using this as a mantra and it is almost overused. My son's teachers are always telling him that he does well because he is such a hard worker. The funny thing is that my son really isn't a hard worker. I personally think that it appears he has worked hard because he makes 100s.
I've noticed that the teachers and counselor at this fairly progressive school are reluctant to say that a child is gifted. His current teacher did tell me that he is a 'bright' boy, but there was an odd tone to her voice when she said this like she didn't want to have to say it.
And my son is starting to see though the line. I told him that he is doing well in school because he is working hard and puts in a lot of effort. He told me that makes little sense because he sees students who work much harder, but still make poor grades. So much for being PC!

I don't think it makes the least bit of sense to lie to kids about this stuff. I do think it is best to avoid gushing about intelligence...or anything else, for that matter, including hard work. We have always talked frankly about how everyone is different, with different abilities and different interests, etc., and so far that has worked well for us.

We speak very matter-of-factly about intelligence. Just as I wouldn't praise my child's eyes because he did nothing to earn them, I don't praise his innate intelligence. But I also don't praise him for hard work if he doesn't work hard.

It seems to me that this is a very good reason to argue for challenging work. Teachers basically shouldn't praise a child at all if the work isn't challenging!

I agree with your post. Very intelligent kids figure out that they are very intelligent. Our 2nd grader (by age he would be a 1st grader) is doing Singapore Math 5 at home, and he knows can do work 4 years ahead of his age because he is good at math. There is the danger that believing one is talented at something can cause one to slack off because even a little effort will let one get by. My answer to that is to challenge my son not just to do well in math at school but to participate in contests such as the Math Olympiads or Math Kangaroo where he is competing against the best students in the country.

Really there are two different schools of thought. Carol Dweck is the one who really popularized the research emphasizing the importance of praising work versus innate ability. This is the research that has gotten a lot of attention in the media. Alfie Kohn has a bit of a different approach. He emphasizes that the problem is external evaluation and praise takes away from a child developing their own internal motivation and self understanding. Praise can be manipulative and put children under pressure.

It sounds like the original poster's son might appreciate Alfie Kohn's position more. http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/gj.htm

Passthepotatoes, interesting that the former theory was forumulated by a woman and the latter a male. I think females in general have more of a need for approval and males emphasize their performance from a more objective standpoint.

I think whether you actually tell a child that they are putting in effort or not, it is absolutely necessary that they put in some degree of effort. But how do teachers know that one child who makes a 100 put in a lot of effort and another child who received the same 100 put in little effort? I don't think that most teachers are observant enough to tell the difference. Even I remember as a child being called a 'bookworm' and studious because I had a decent verbal IQ, not because I really was studious. I actually was extremely lazy and non-academic until much later.

I wonder if it is almost more advantageous for an intelligent child to perform very poorly because then the incongruity is noticed when they ace the standardized tests. They end up getting special services because it is obvious that they are not challenged and something is amiss.

Good point, passthepotatoes.

I would also add that I think the original point of the praise-hard-work idea has gotten lost in the popularization. What I take from it is that you don't want your smart kid to get invested in a self-image that prevents them from trying things they aren't already good at. I wouldn't say the idea is to *praise* hard work, but to help them to see that work can get them from being not-good at something to being good at it, and that it's worth trying things they don't already excel at because they possess the ability to *become* good at things, not just to *be* good at things.

I won't attempt to speak for Dweck but having read her book I don't think she was at all advocating turning "good job working hard" into the contemporary substitute for "good job" (which was really the replacement for the "good boy" a generation ago). She's not advocating a constant stream of praise and thinking that's cool as long as it is hard work.

And, I'm agreeing with the point made by gratified. There is no substitute for students having access to work that is actually challenging enough that they get to make mistakes, experience frustration, and actually get to work hard. Nothing adults can say is a substitute for those experiences.

I agree. I also think that the idea of not praising someone for a trait s/he was born with is being bundled with the idea of not being honest about a talent. Praising or over-praising and being matter-of-fact are two different things.



Hmm...well, I think intelligent kids know that they learn faster, but I'm not sure how readily this translates into understanding that their thought processes --- such as how they view the world --- are very different from everyone else's, and that this difference is due to their IQs (as opposed to being because they're weird, a misfit, or whatever).

I wonder how much of the social skill "problem" is due to true introvertedness and how much is due to the fact that gifted kids just don't think the same way as other kids. Obviously some gifted kids are introverted and don't have great social skills. The question is, are there more true introverts among gifted kids than there are in the general population? Does gifted-introversion become less pronounced when these kids are with intellectual peers? In other words, how many gifties are truly introverted and how many are keeping quiet deliberately, because it's better to stay quiet than to stand out when you don't want to?

Similarly, are there more extroverts in the general population than there are among the gifted?

This idea is why I think it's important for me to be honest and matter-of-fact with my kids about their abilities.

Val

Sometimes suffering through the easy work IS more challenging LOL