When Thomas briefly compares Growth Mindset's popularity to that of policies which stress "grit" and "no excuses," it instantly made me think of Angela Duckworth, a psychologist who recently published a book titled Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance. I actually purchased this book because I found it interesting how at the beginning she detailed her life growing up in her father's shadow; he was a man who sought brilliance and expected nothing less from her. This led her on a journey to figure out, scientifically, what "grit" is -- what enables certain individuals to go above and beyond for their goals, while others seemingly display no drive?
I never ended up finishing the book, but after reading Thomas' post I'm pulled back to the question of grit. How do you "curate" a characteristic in an individual? As he points out, an issue with these philosophies and approaches to poverty-stricken students is this: they place the heart of the problem in the individual, not the outside forces that the individual lives with and struggles through on a daily basis. Why do certain people possess passion and perseverance, whereas others seemingly fall short? Is a person "the end all, be all" in this equation?
Thomas sums the problem up perfectly when he writes, "we are currently misdiagnosing growth mindset and 'grit' (as deficit ideologies) as casual characteristics instead of recognizing them as outcomes of slack (privilege)."
And where can this problem take hold? In classrooms, where we risk adapting literacies -- stories, ideologies, discourses, whatever the name you have for them -- that only tell one version of reality, versus the multitudes that exist. Functional literacy, which teaches students the exact skills they need to function as citizens in society; cultural literacy, which focuses on specific texts or resources that are "culturally relevant" (what does that even mean?); progressive literacy, which is a more inclusive approach to education but doesn't do enough to address "questions of future, power, and politics," and their relevance; and critical literacy, which engages texts, resources, and curriculum, not just teaching it without question.
I think most have an issue with functional literacy (which has a time and place) and cultural literacy, which can teeter into imperialism if left unchecked, and I would agree, especially with the latter. Even progressive literacy can become problematic if no safeguards exist to locate where voices, texts, and curriculum are "founded."
The only way for any approach to not be a problem, as I think Thomas points out, especially with concern for poverty and how it affects the student population, is to regard students not as just students but as whole people, and with that, with whole existences beyond the classroom that can often be out of their control.
In summary, as I think I'm rambling at this point (sorry), I think a major problem is assumption. As teachers, we can never assume to know best, and we should always thoughtfully engage our students and be unafraid to show ignorance in an area coupled with a willingness to learn and listen. This week's readings made me more so reflect and question than come to a definite conclusion about how it is we effectively do this. I agree with Duckworth in her book when she writes, "failure is not a permanent condition," but what we constitute as failure, and on what terms, is what makes the difference.
Your post was eye-opening and made me reflect when you wrote about assumption. Sometimes it is easier to assume but it will be our responsibility to ask questions and engage with each student like you said. It also made me think about students who are quieter than others. It is important to check in on students and talk with them openly about their strengths and weaknesses in order for them to succeed. It was interesting that you added the novel that Angela Duckworth wrote. I also agree, "failure is not a permanent condition". Change is possible. As teachers I hope we will challenge students in a positive and make them feel that they are capable of anything!
ReplyDeleteLike Erica, your comment on "assumption" also got my mind moving. It is incredibly true that as teachers we have to accept ignorance and understand that we are also constant learners. Great post!
ReplyDeleteI totally agree that teacher's make assumptions, it echoed so much of what my Educational Psychology professor talked about during lectures. We absolutely cannot assume that a student standards can never be higher. A student deserves to be believed in no matter and helped until they achieve their goals. Failure is never a permanent condition, it only takes a little encouragement to really change someone or something!
ReplyDeleteAs a teacher it is always important to be available to help our students as best we can, but that doesn't mean we must know everything, that's why I loved your quote, "As teachers, we can never assume to know best, and we should always thoughtfully engage our students and be unafraid to show ignorance in an area coupled with a willingness to learn and listen". That's what teaching is all about!
ReplyDelete