Showing posts with label Stuff Americans Are Made of. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stuff Americans Are Made of. Show all posts

Saturday, April 13, 2013

Forget Lake Woebegon's Above Average Children: America's Children Are Intelligent . . .

. . .at least according to the children's parents.

Writing in Slate, Nicholas Day asserts that the study that produced the following infographic explains  everything about how Americans parent. That claim may be hyperbole, but the graphic does explain "the look." I'm not referring to the look my wife gives me that prompts the words "Yes, Dear! Right away, Dear! As soon as possible, Dear!" to cross my lips with fear and conviction. No, the look comes from parents who sit across from me during parent-teacher conferences. I've just told them that their student works hard, asks good questions, uses her time well, seems respected by peers and staff, and has earned a very solid B. (In the old days, the student would have earned a B+, but pluses and minuses no longer go on the report card.) The parent's brow will furrow;  the chin will jut out, and a scowl will briefly appear before the parent says "Susie is a bright girl; I'm sure she can do better."



Writing in The Atlantic, Olga Khazan points out that Americans are unique:
American parents were the only ones to consistently mention their children's advanced intellect, while other countries focused on qualities like "happiness," being "easy" to manage, or the even more zen-like "well-balanced," in Italy. (Italians also used the word simpatico, a group of characteristics suggesting social and emotional competence).
The study's author, Sara Harkness, a professor of human development at the University of Connecticut points out, “The U.S.’s almost obsession with cognitive development in the early years overlooks so much else.” (italics in original)

That obsession, according to Day, may lead parents to ignore those other important qualities:
. . . nothing in American parenting is anything like the concept of ng’om, which is used by the Kipsigis people in rural Kenya to describe children who are especially intelligent and responsible. This concept of intelligence, as Harkness and Super have written, highlights “aspects of social competence, including responsibility and helpfulness.” These aspects, they add dryly, “have tended to be overlooked in Western formal theories of children’s intelligence.”
Part of the lesson of parental ethnotheories is that when we look for certain qualities, we stop seeing others. It’s a cruel circle: Because our version of intelligence overlooks ng’om, we don’t prize it. Because we don’t prize it, we don’t see it. Because we don’t see it, we obviously don’t encourage it or acknowledge it—we don’t create its condition for possibility. And yet none of this stops us from wondering, years later, why our children insist on leaving their damn coats on the floor.
The study and the charts also point to one other quality that Americans seem to prize above most others: individualism. While plugging his new book, The Little Way of Ruthie Lemming, Rod Dreher recalls his interview with physician Tim Lindsey. Dreher quotes Lindsey:
The American dream is a lie. This idea that if you work hard enough, you can achieve anything — that’s very individualistic. Who’s that really about? Who is that serving? Who is that for? It’s for me. It’s a pursuit of happiness that doesn’t create happiness. There’s nothing with any substance at the end of that. So, if you work hard enough, are you going to defeat cancer? If you work hard enough, are you going to be happy with your job? If you work hard enough, and get a big bank account, does that create happiness? No!
Lindsey goes on to stress the importance of humility, faith, service, and relationships. Perhaps we Americans ought to modify our dreams and priorities and copy the Dutch, the Swedes, the Italians, and the Australians and start hoping that are children are happy, well-balanced, and fulfilled.


Saturday, November 24, 2012

A Minor Musing About Waste And Stupidity

Yeah, I'm gonna be the old curmudgeon who complains that things were better back in the day.

Dana Gunderson notes, "Today, we’re discarding 50% more food in the U.S. than we did in the 1970s." Gunderson elaborates,
People all around the world are investing time, land, water, energy, and loads of other resources to grow, store, process, and transport food, only for nearly half of that food to be thrown away.  Those potatoes on a breakfast platter get shrugged at because of a low-carb diet.  The cheese, for which the kid screamed bloody murder, only gets one bite before that kid is off to play again.  The chips remain at the bottom of the nacho plate because who can really eat that many chips.

In the United States today, about 40 percent of all food goes uneaten.  Each year Americans are throwing away the equivalent of $165 billion in uneaten food, making food the single largest component of solid waste in our landfills. This costs the average family of four between $1350 and $2275 annually.
Maybe there's not connection, but I'm going to blame the increased promotion of Black Friday. The shopping day that's designed to appeal to Americans' irrationality:
The big problem with Black Friday, from a behavioral economist's perspective, is that every incentive a consumer could possibly have to participate — the promise of "doorbuster" deals on big-ticket items like TVs and computers, the opportunity to get all your holiday shopping done at once — is either largely illusory or outweighed by a disincentive on the other side. It's a nationwide experiment in consumer irrationality, dressed up as a cheerful holiday add-on.

As Dan Ariely explains in his book, Predictably Irrational, "We all make the same types of mistakes over and over, because of the basic wiring of our brains."

This applies to shopping on the other 364 days of the year, too. But on Black Friday, our rational decision-making faculties are at their weakest, just as stores are trying their hardest to maximize your mistakes.
There's something perversely American about turning a day of thanks into a day of waste and then following that debacle with a day of stupid consumption. The combination certainly appeals to lesser angels of our nature.

Saturday, April 3, 2010

Some Bricolage on School Reform

At his blog Larry Cuban on School Reform and Practice, Larry Cuban discuss Americans love for change and how that relationship affects education.  (I think that Cuban can put his name on his blog because he no longer teaches, but that's a post for a different time. He can also put his name on his blog because he has more letters after his name that I do.)

Cuban makes two astute observations about how Americans view change and schools.  First, Americans think change is good.  More importantly, change and improvement have become synonyms. 
To put it bluntly: Americans believe that change is good. We need look no further than commonplace patterns that pervade our daily lives. Car models change every year. Elections move public officials in and out of office every few years. And Americans love to move from where they were reared to other places. Change, then, is common; it is no big deal.
Not only is change seen as worthwhile, many Americans also confuse change with improvement. They are different concepts. When a married couple divorces, one spouse sees it as joyful emancipation and the other as a tragedy. The divorce qualifies as a change but each spouse views it dramatically different. Change is not necessarily improvement; improvement is in the head of the beholder. [Larry Cuban 4/3/10]
Cuban illustrates that this confusion detrimentally affects education; ". . . teachers are blamed for being opposed to reform when their fellow Americans see it as a prized 'good,' one that automatically leads to improvement"  [Larry Cuban 4/3/10].  He then goes on to parse the differences between "incremental change" and "fundamental change."

Education seems to face a deeper problem than Secretary of Education Duncan who wants change that goes beyond tinkering or a public confused about the difference between change and reform.  Joshua Hammand's and James Morrison's The Stuff Americans Are Made of:  The Seven Cultural Forces That Define Americans, A New Framework for Quality. Productivity and Profitability indicates that teachers may increasingly be labeled obstructionists.  Hammond and Morrison claim that the seven forces are
  1. Americans demand choices
  2. Americans believe impossible dreams are possible.  (Insert your own windmill joke here.)
  3. Americas love both big and more.
  4. Americans want everything NOW!!!
  5. Americans are willing to forgive mistakes and move on.
  6. Americans like to improvise.
  7. Americans love the NEW!!!
If Hammond and Morrison are correct, public schools face a daunting task and will receive little or no sympathy from either the general public or policy makers.

Schools can't compete with McDonald's or Walmart when it comes to offering choice or being big.  Further, the idea that 100% of students should be proficient in reading and math can be spun as an impossible dream that schools should attempt to achieve.  It's a small step from trying an impossible dream to firing people who can't make the impossible happen.  In addition, educators concentrate on each student's present circumstances, but the main focus is always the student's future.  Finally, no institution supported by local property taxes and politicians' whims can expect to keep up with all that's new.

Lest I appear too negative, Hammond and Morrison also offer hope. For example, standardized tests make improvisation impossible.  These tests also demonstrably limit the choices in each school's curriculum.  However, education leaders at the national, state, and local level need to use the paradigms that these researchers have identified to teachers' and students' advantage.  I'll try to use a few future posts to offer the views of a teacher and blogger from South Dakota about how that little impossible dream can happen.