Is creativity needed to win?

An interesting chat with another staff member got me thinking. We were discussing the need for creativity in the curriculum. It has been a character trait that is linked with future success, but are we really catering for it and promoting it? I wish I could say the affirmative, but I don't really think that is a valid judgement of the schools I have worked in. There has not been the overt push to retard its growth, but I think at the moment the emphasis is more on the grades. I suppose in many ways this in no way differs from discussions in most schools and homes. But in the end, if will be decided by the parents. They will quietly or overtly push towards the outcome they think best for their child. 

I was doing a cover lesson for a colleague the other day. The students had assigned work and were, for the most part, engaged. A group at the back of the room was discussing their future plans and I could not help but overhear. The discussion centred around grades and colleges and perception of good and bad. I could also substitute acceptable and non-acceptable here. The students were assured and knowledgeable about the needs and outcomes. I wasn't really surprised as our school is an academic one and achievement encouraged. What did surprise me was that this was year 9 students talking and there was never a mention of what they were good at, what they liked and most importantly what their interests are. It looked like a real case of fixed mindset in action. I would not have to look far (or hard) to find the source and/or reasons for the views. 

I was really taken by a cartoon from the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong. It is included here and to me summed up the mindset of the community, if not western societies in general. It pushed the point perfectly - do we value creativity or is it simply a distraction. I think I will leave it with you to decide, but make the point that a society is defined by the culture, and creativity is an integral part of all successful societies. Balance is, and always has been the key, and societies that ignore it do so at their own peril. It seems that the balance is not present and without putting to much meaning into the cartoon, maybe that is the point being made. It seems that creativity based subjects are being ignored in favour of others that are perceived by parents as more important.

The importance of creative outlets cannot be underestimated. Creativity is something that all winners have and is cultivated rather than ignored. I originally thought that the IBDP program provided the opportunity with arts being one of the 6 subject areas, but changes mean that students can opt out and not choose it. I am not saying by any means that other subjects do not have creativity components, but are they are not really in the same league as the creative and performing arts. As a science/chemistry teacher I value the importance of creative thinking, and encourage students to use it in solving problems. But is it really the same as true creativity that comes from the arts? I have had many excellent students who also studied creative arts as part of their program, and seen the benefits of this in both their well-being and ongoing success. 

There have been numerous articles of late about the pitfalls of choosing futures for our children. It seems like they all go unheeded. The rise in student anxiety and even depression among teens is the telling factor, but is largely ignored. So are the number of youth (I include pre-teen in this group) suicides and the holes that is left by these actions. We have and will always have creative and artistic members of our society. They form an important part of our societies fabric and need nurturing not marginalizing and reducing their importance. One can only hope that these two ideas are not linked.

The Resilience of Youth

I think that I am ever surprised by the resilience of the majority of teens and pre-teens. Yesterday I arrived back after 12 days in Xi'an China with 139 year 7 students. One of the major unwritten goals of this trip was to promote resilience and self-reliance in the children, and it forms a culmination to the choices program we offer. Only on reflection do I see what a task that was when you consider that they are all pre-teens. 

Being away from home for the first time presents problems and these are often made into larger than life emergencies. The idea of new being strange was a constant worry for myself, the parents and the accompanying teachers. The number of pre-trip emails I received from parents alerting me to the idea of "homesickness" was more than expected, and I suppose some of the students did suffer. But I think that more parents were prone. But it makes me wonder who they didn't trust, the teachers or the student? I know that in the preparation stages, we considered so many scenarios and worst case situations that I carried around a weighty tomb of "vital information" for all students. 

 

I know the temptation of many parents was to follow and step in if and/or when they thought things were going 'pear shaped', and at pick up yesterday I actually had one couple tell me they were there following us for three days. But such a gesture could easily have backfired and reinforced dependency rather than promoting independence and self-reliance. It appears that the parents did not have as much faith in their children as I did, and I know that stepping in would have undone all of the previous gains. I had unannounced visits by parents during breakfast and of course the ever present electronic chatter confirming a case of sniffles or a slightly raised temperature or ..... I recall the expression "being babied" used in my youth, but in these times it would probably be considered to be inappropriate, even if correct.

We managed a packed schedule that saw tired but content students arrive back at the hotel each night. I fully understand that chatting occurred in rooms after the advertised "lights out" time each day, but I also know that many strategies and tips were shared. This us one of the most pleasing aspects of the so called "free time" built into all school based trips - it tends to be informal chats on how they survived the ordeals of the day. The students actually teach each other better than we or their parents ever could, and come out of the experience as more confident and responsible people. As group leaders we let the children try first before we step in. I was providing encouragement rather than immediate solutions, especially for the few cases of homesickness or teething problems caused by suddenly having a roommate. A stock reply of "how proud will you be when you meet mum & dad next week knowing that you have done this!" Each time I used it, it had the positive impact. 

The growth experienced by each child varied, but I was more than pleased with the growth of the more coddled members of the group. One lad in particular stood out. Initially he was a little lost without the "comforting sound of helicopter blades", but he soon started to experiment with his new found freedom. I think he was a little surprised by the reaction of his peers. But overall, he soon quickly learned that he had the skills and support needed to be independent. I wonder what will happen when the shackles are again applied?

Children are never too young to develop support networks, and this trip proved that to be a fact. The idea of looking after the room mate was stressed, but not overly so. As I tell parents at our introduction evening, it is a chance for students to make a mistake in a safe environment. The fact that this sort of activity is common in kindergarten in Germany, makes me wonder why we feel that children are so delicate and incapable of looking after themselves? I think it is more the parents who suffer, as can attested by the constant barrage of texts and emails from one parent although her son was coping in his new environment. It was a case of imagination overtaking reality, with the silence from camp being construed as a problem or emergency rather than a success. 

The sad question that follows, is how long this feeling of growth and accomplishment will last now the children are back in the protection of the parents? After their performance on the program I would consider them all winners, but I wonder if that will be an accurate description after they have been back in the "safety" of their homes for any period of time? 

It's all about timing

Chatting the other day with the boy. We were watching sport and talking about 'champion players' or what most of us would call winners. A common observation came that they always seem to have 'time', even making time for themselves to make the 'big play'. But really I think that applies to every aspect of your life as 'using time effectively and well' requires practise. I would almost bet that these top players have this in all of their lives. Probably one of the most telling things about time is the fact that it is finite and it cannot be recycled and used again.

The recurring theme at school, and I'm sure in all other schools, is the question of time management. Most often it is linked with the whole idea of assessment, and that leads to the overworked and stressed comment about children. But after being at the chalk face for more than 30 years and witnessing the trials and tribulations of students in the lead up to matriculation (graduation), I can say that life is a constant. There have always been (and probably always will be) well organised and disorganised students in terms of time usage. Every school I have worked in has had some form of remediation or session(s) with students working at this and while there is always improvement in some, there are always a few that don't get it. 

The idea of executive function comes into play here. I know that teens live in the now and that the idea of delayed gratification is lost on most. This means that they will consciously or subconsciously (or both) circumvent the learning process. The first stage in learning us about detecting the information that comes at us each day and then deciding which gets through the first set of filters. Through a process this will enter the short-term and finally long-term memories, but that is a story for another blog. Let us simply say that the filter needs attention as much information is lost and effectively barred from entering the "memory loop". Executive function is the 'gatekeeper' of this filter.

At a conference I attended earlier this year, a senior student from the host school came on stage and gave insights into these and other points. He highlighted that idea of living in the now and the instant rewards as opposed to the delayed rewards that form an integral part of school and life. This in part explains the gaming problem experienced primarily by boys. He explained why students do things like procrastinate in terms of their ability (or inability) to self regulate the executive function. The development of this executive function will continue into adulthood for some, although the time when you can engage it depends on the individual. I have seen teens with it and adults still developing it. 

A common expression heard I'm sure by parents and teachers is "this is boring". It seems to apply to anything at particular times. I am amazed that the same activity can vacillate between boring and 'cool' (or whatever is an appropriate adjective). I see it linked with this instant reward and dopamine surge thing that goes on.  I think that the root cause of this does go back to executive function development. As I said, pre-teens and teens live for the moment and favour instant gratification. This is the main reason why time is wasted and procrastination, especially of school work, is so common and such a problem. The idea of an assignment deadline as 3-4 days away is an eternity for the student. But the problem then develops when suddenly the importance of time surfaces. The problem that develops from this is raised anxiety levels in themselves, their parents and their teachers.  

The idea of time and the need to use it 'wisely' is lost on most pre-teens and teens. Time is something they always have until deadlines loom and then we see the anxiety levels rise and interesting behaviour patterns emerge. Hopefully it will change, but a lot will depend upon the individual child and how we deal with it. 

Transference & Winners

I have been amazed how many talented people have sat in my classes over the years. These were successful (at the time) in their chosen area, and I wonder if they have been able to continue into their future. Some I know did not, but a few have.  I think this was largely due to their growth mindset and an ability to transfer their actions into all aspects of their life. I think that far too many had the fixed mindset and also wanted to compartmentalise their lives.

I often see students who are good in sports or the arts struggle with class. In truth it is more likely to be sports, as I think that students of the arts are able to transfer better or maybe they just develop greater resilience and mental toughness. They have success in their activity, but cannot have the same level of success in other areas, with me that would be academics. In many of the cases, the student sees other activities as separate parts of their lives, with little or no linkage. They simply assumed that they would be able to 'flick a switch' and mentally move from one area to the other. This is not the recipe for further growth in it either area. We carry the 'wins and losses from all areas of our lives' with us, and a simple 'hat swap' is not going to work. I see many of the problems coming from a growth mindset that is heavily goal oriented in one or two aspects of their life, and the 'divorcing' of other aspects as less meaningful in some way.  

Transference is this ability to take successes (and failures) from all areas of our lives and weave them together in a positive way. I suppose it's a growth mindset in action. I think the best introduction and lesson I had on this was from a 15 year old former student. Scott was a very talented sportsman, but struggled at school. He knew he had strengths and weaknesses, and academics was not really a strong point. After giving back another test I saw him at the end of class and started to tell him not to give up as I knew he was working really well and providing effort to his studies. Scott always arrived prepared for class and engaged in all activities so it frustrated me somewhat that he was still struggling. With a smile he turned and told me that it was OK, not to worry and that he would continue pushing himself. His next comment has stuck in my memory and I often repeat it to classes - "I have to train myself. I know that if I give up, it will make it that much easier to give up when I'm having a bad day." I think the maturity and confidence of his words struck a chord. Of course he is right, it goes to other adages like "as you sow, so shall you reap", and the crazy thing is he made it! His dream was always to play at the top level in his sport, thus proving commitment. Amazingly Scott was not always a winner in the more traditional terms, with failures aplenty but a really calm and mature attitude, and perseverance made him one.

I look back and think that Scott might not have been the most gifted sportsperson I ever met or taught, but he is one of the only ones to I know to attain his dream. The difference as I see it is in his ability to transfer all parts of his life into creating a winner. He is able to transfer the lessons learnt in all areas and really did adopt a growth mindset. Weakness, failure and learning all form the foundation of growth and resilience. 

The current mindset of student athletes I see is one of compartmentalization - lessons learnt in one area keep there, as the self-promotion kicks in to hide the weakness and learning experiences. But the resilience that the transference provides is lost. I  think that the resilience that Scott gained by attitude and mindset is obvious, but the continuation of it in current generations seems stymied by the helicopters that constantly circle. 

Tutoring & Mindset

Probably one of the largest changes I have noticed, is the growth of the tutoring industry. The emphasis and goals have changed and make me wonder about the actual benefits that are being passed onto the students. It is a particularly big industry here in Hong Kong where you see the faces of tutors adorning the public buses that ply the streets. The industry has "rock star status" for those on top of the game with a commensurate pay scale accompanying the status. The marketing pushes hard at all parents regardless of the school system or examination their child will encounter. It has almost become a situation that your child is 'disadvantaged' if they do not attend tutoring! So obviously the marketing works.

I recall when I first began teaching that tutoring seemed confined to the students who required remediation in a particular section of the course. Mainly done by teachers of the course, the meeting with students at lunch, before and after school was part and parcel of the job. Spending time giving a variety of scenarios and solutions to help illustrate the concept or theory meant that a growth mindset was established. You tried to help the student to gain the knowledge and skills that would allow them to solve or attempt to solve both familiar and unfamiliar situations that applied to a certain theory or principle. Remediation was seen as part of the education of the student and provided help for those who could not form the links between a theory and its application. 

Times changed and parental expectations and priorities changed with it. Tutorials were seen as extensions and fast tracks towards a goal. The fixed mindset of the goal oriented became more pronounced. Tutorials became group tasks that involved examining past problems. Success equated to goal achieved. Learning however is not really a consideration - rote learning or learning set answers knowing where to plug them in - the skills learnt and nurtured. This system relies on the status quo being present in terms of examiners and their requirements. Once the examiner begins to focus on the application & understanding side of learning, then things start to come unravelled. The shift in emphasis is in response to exams and dare I say it, demand from the students and their parents. The exams from the IB (at least in my teaching area) seem to now be heading towards application through their nature of science initiative, and I now wonder how that will affect the students and their tutors who for so long have been going down the fixed mindset route. With the shift towards growth mindset in terms of questions, it brings into question the worth or gain in using this practice. 

I think the use of time is also a point need considering. Students back then had time to do other things, with the idea of free or leisure time a given. There was always study time but choice or 'my time' was also evident. I wonder if we can say that today? The students I encounter these days have schedules that I find crammed with appointments and externally run lessons. The mental well-being of students is changing and this will most certainly be a contributing factor, of that there can be no doubt. I have mentioned the rise in anxiety in previous blogs and this does little to lessen it, but it also does little to provide self-autonomy skills. Many of these students will soon be in colleges and universities in places removed from the planning influences of home, and ill prepared for the prospect of leisure time and independence that lies ahead. 

Depression, does it stay?

This is becoming an important question particularly with the increase in reported occurrence in teens. The effects of depression are debilitating to many aspects of the child's future, but in many ways it seems that we are not doing enough to assist with the problem. I am in some ways amazed that this epidemic is largely unreported and action seems slow at best. The problem in some cases seems to be the stigma that is associated by many sections of society with any form of mental disease, most of which seems to be based on misunderstandings of the root causes and behaviour of depression. Is it simply that we don't really understand them so we ignore and hope it self heals?

I was reading a short article (linked) about childhood depression and it struck me how little we really know and understand. One of the main findings of the article was that childhood trauma impacted on actual brain development, a worrying notion to say the least. In past blogs I have highlighted the fact that emotional growth and control continues as the brain develops well into the early twenties before any of us become fully socially responsible. This has an effect on how we both perceive and react to changes, challenges and traumas in our youth. We are not really prepared to deal with these and as we are unsure how to verbalise effectively, we internalise. Emotions are learnt responses to outside stimuli and this makes responses to them all the more important. So if we leave them 'festering inside' as is the habit of preteens and teens, then the chances of moving on and recovery are limited. We have all seen that at this age, children are often caught up in a sense of self - working out their place in things. This unfortunately leads to looking inward and traumatic effects are going to be exaggerated in the process. The study suggests there is also a link between this and addiction as the child searches for ways to overcome the negative feelings that come with the trauma and its effects. 

As a teacher I see the changes in behaviour that signify a significant change in the child. I know that many parents also see this and respond with an appropriate reaction of giving time. A case comes to mind where a student of mine was in the midst of a family change involving divorce. Both parents were placing strain on the bonds and effectively asking the child to choose, and this seems to be a growing problem. The changes in her behaviour were very apparent and we spent several days before she started to open up about how it was affecting her. Too often the child is lost in the proceedings and process and has a feeling that they are the root cause of the marriage breakdown. Now that is a huge burden to saddle anyone with, little own a child/teen who is only beginning to grasp the intricacies of emotions and how to manage them. Luckily, she had a great support group of friends to help with the changes and was able to move on. But I wonder how many of children and teens that go through traumas like family breakdown, severe injury & disease, death of a loved one or other experience 'come out the other end' without self-doubt and some form of depression. We seem to forget that they are yet to fully develop the skills and strategies needed to move forward, and simply expect them to grow out of it. But this is difficult if you are not shown or given coping strategies. Far too often we forget this and simply offer platitudes, forgetting that these problems are seen differently by our children. 

Parenting walks a fine line between doing all and allowing our children to grow. The key is as always, effective communication. The ability to help 'train or educate' our children of releasing tension, pressures and concerns through effective communication is surely one of the major parental goals. I know that for some the answer is simple, adopt the helicopter and protection detail and try to keep these trials from reaching our children. But, life is a journey full of trials and although we can shield, the best option is to provide strategies and resilience techniques. Having some strategies that do not involve self harm is essential if our children are going to be able to safely negotiate this period of their life. If we leave it to them, the problem may well remain and come back again to "haunt" them. Ignoring the signs does little to help and makes it more likely that the condition will stay with them into adulthood.

The problem of addiction

It is really funny how the ideas about addiction have changed over the years. When I was a bright eyed graduate it was the alcohol & drugs that presented the major concern to both parents and teachers. Over the years I have seen it change to one of gaming and technology based addictions that now seem to have centre stage (more information here). Although, I think that a pornography based addiction is also "raising its hand" to be a contender. I wonder if the computer and information age really is the boon that we imagine, or simply an extra distraction?

I suppose a good starting point would be to remind ourselves what addiction is, and according to Psychology Today, it is the condition that results when a person ingests a substance or engages in an activity that can be pleasurable, but the continued act becomes compulsive and interferes with ordinary life responsibilities. A huge topic and problem, but I think I will narrow down to look at a problem that is surfacing more and more at schools - gaming & computer dependency. It seems to be a real problem that is becoming more pronounced and the tip of the iceberg is showing rather than the whole problem. I suppose that the first symptoms we see are the usual ones of tired students who skip class and are procrastinators. Now that in itself is a symptom that could apply to lots of problems and it is not until we delve deeper that we find the real problem.


The problem of addiction could well stem back to the style of life and societal pressures. We definitely live in an "instant society where self gratification is a fact of life". And this is part of the problem. Computer use allows us to be anywhere and anyone all at the click of a button. The instant gratification that goes with this tends to feed the pleasure centres of our brain - we get a dopamine surge. It's a simple action reward loop that feeds the addiction - I apologise for simplifying this extremely complex process, but for the sake of understanding I will continue. The child/teen then associates the action with the reward and each subsequent act deepens the physical response as a positive action. In simple terms, I think I can understand why they continue even though they are told it's a bad thing. We provide the negatives but the gaming wins by providing the dopamine and the feeling of pleasure. This is why it is hard for teens to break the cycle.

This immediate response compares favourably with the more mundane activities that come with student life, particularly learning. As a teacher, and I'm sure it's the same with parents, I get the comment that "I am bored" or "it's boring" as a response to why they are slow getting started or completing tasks. As I have mentioned previously, teens are yet to fully master the skills that control their actions and this allows this sort of addiction to flourish. The push for the moment rather than the delayed gratification is a learnt skill and many teens do not have the brain function and confidence to do this. And the younger the teen, the greater the problem, this is why many of the bad habits and addiction begins at an early age. But the problem doesn't really become a huge one until the stakes become higher in the senior school, and suddenly the addiction comes into the light.

Learning is a slow process that gradually builds upon the information and skills we gather, and more importantly the response for doing well is not immediate. But I think this is something that could easily be covered in a future blog.

The Importance of Exercise

I think that having someone at home going through their final exams before graduating from high school is a definite eye opener. Being a teacher for many years and advising students about preparation and planning is part of the drill we all do in the lead up time, but this year seems a little more personal (if you get my drift). The lad in question is a sport lover, particularly partial to basketball, and uses it as a personal stress relief.

A chat today saw me reminding him about the importance of exercise. He has been extremely focused about his studies of late, and that is a great comfort to us. But after seeing so many students "burn out" over the years, I again strongly suggested that he escapes for a bit to let his mind catch-up. I think that the advantages of having him exercise for an hour or two would be far greater than the continuous swatting that seems so prevalent in Hong Kong (and I'm sure other cities). A blog from the New York Times I recently read supported my thoughts (the link to the blog is found here). I was impressed with the strong links between healthy body and healthy mind - especially a new study that reveals "Japanese scientists found that the brains of fit older men were almost as efficient as the brains of younger people". If that does not give a great reason for engaging in exercise, then I don't know what will? While the blog itself was not directed at the general idea of exercise during study, I think that the links are still strong with the links between neuronal growth and exercise so strong.

I think that we also miss seeing the importance of exercise to mental health and well-being. Under stressful situations we tend to make some poor decisions and I know he is going through that now. The stress is much more easily managed if he can continue with his exercise during his exam preparation time. We all know that increased anxiety and stress is a bi-product of the exam cycle and students during this time can be emotionally and mentally fragile. Flips in behaviour and mood swings are an accepted part of the process it seems, but a program of study that integrates exercise will surely have a positive impact. I think that this is essentially the same advice I was given all those years ago, although then there was no real scientific supporting evidence or studies. But simply promoting these simple actions can have a long lasting effect on our charges.

We all know that if something works it is much more liable to be repeated in the future and become a habit that lasts throughout our lives. I really wonder why this does not seem to be part of the plan for many of the students I teach? Parents are concerned about the welfare of their child(ren) but at this time of their lives, they seem to push harder at academics, and by extension, less about their well-being. The really sad part is that we all know the benefits of exercise and yet seem reluctant to push it during these times. We are so caught up with the notion of perceived success that we ignore the big picture that a key parent role is to ensure wellbeing, both physical and mental.

Looking at a meme I recently saw that asked "Is your child's mental health worth more than their grades?" made me think about this very thing. Children tend to reach the goals they have for themselves, but if they achieve a little lower during this period of their life is that such a big thing? Is their life going to be measured against the grades they achieve during matriculation from high school? Is this the real and only measure of their worth?

How important is homework?

I really think that this has been a hot topic within school communities for as long as I have been teaching. I recall getting together to discuss and formulate school-based policy, with many simply following the idea of homework is part of education. But the one discussion that has never been fully explored is that starting with the word, why? We have "discussed to death" the idea of how much a real perennial discussion. This one always seems to end up with the words "parental expectations". It almost seems as if we think parents demand it and parents think we demand it, and now it is sort of a "tradition". Meanwhile the generations slip by.

The idea of homework fits like a hand in a glove inside the control mentality of societies. Some think that it keeps the children gainfully employed and occupied instead of being engaged in activities such as play. In many ways it fits in with the Georgian attitude of idle hands, being vigilant in case a child or teen has free time and "gets into some mischief". In Hong Kong society (and I'm sure this would equally apply to many other cities) this seems to extend right down to the preschool centres and kindergartens, and the homework is seen as a right of passage and a measure of getting value for one's money. If the school or centre does not offer homework, then there can be no "real" learning going on. The true irony though comes when you look closely at the documents governing these areas which stipulates a "play based curriculum". I know that students as young as 4 are schooled in getting into centres in HK, and this surely involves homework and some good old fashioned rote learning. But then the question is "are we getting it right?". I think all we need to do is look at Finland who have been near the top of PESA testing for sometime. Their education system seems more successful and yet they do not even begin homework until students are in their teens! If you want to know some more visit the Business Insider link. Now state education systems have known about this for some time - after all it is not a hidden secret. Yet we still perpetuate the myth that homework is an important part of education of our children.

Recent articles particularly those about primary education are finally beginning to show a slow movement against this. Articles such as the one on the Salon site, take this question to heart and look at what is happening. The idea and importance of homework is now beginning to be questioned in earnest. I think the gaining of importance of the well-being, and positive psychology and education push have again put traditions under the spotlight. I think that the quote that sums up the homework debate is

"A child just beginning school deserves the chance to develop a love of learning. Instead, homework at a young age causes many kids to turn against school, future homework and academic learning."

Students are experiencing more anxiety, social and emotional problems than previously and this is causing concern in many areas of society. If this is really a growing problem, what are the causes and what is being done about it? Homework is an easy target, but surely only a starting point. Maybe it really is time for the respective education systems to make a real effort to solve this and other issues.

The importance of the "f word"

For such a long time the idea of failure was almost a taboo thing to bring up or discuss. But that is not always the case and was dependent upon which culture or group I was teaching. I recall having so much negativity put on the word during the early part of my teaching career when the emphasis on student rights and welfare gained momentum. Essentially we took that word out of the dictionary ad allowed to our students to gain a whole new complexion and belief about the world they grew up in.

I think the first alternative view came when I first ventured out of Australia and into the wider world of education. I recall having a discussion with my principal after I had completed reports, the gist of which was "Every student has the right to fail". I contemplated this and saw that in some ways we were actually doing the student an injustice by not providing them with this option. I saw almost a whole generation of students ill-equipped to cope with adversity because we had taken it away from them. At the time, the "real world" did not mirror this point of view, and much to the consternation of students the driving test proved to be a fearsome challenge. Now obviously this is a good thing considering the option of allowing an untrained or unprepared driver to be in control of a car is a very scary thought. The number of students I saw brought to tears as they encountered the "f word" for the first time was amazing.

I think that the idea of failure was and still is taken out of context by too many. I know as a young person it was used in my schooling, and yes it was a painful pill to swallow whenever it was used. But, it was an impetus to look elsewhere for a solution. Failure is and never was the end, it simply told you that something didn't work, so find another way. I think this was lost in the over willingness to extend the perceived well-being above the learning. Like many other ideas , failure is a learned term, children don't know or understand it unless we teach it, and react and respond to it. Unfortunately, our collective (parents, teachers and society in general) reaction is the big negative and leads to the stigma that we try so hard to overcome! Our actions cause the stigma, not the fact that they could not do something the first time. Too often the idea that you tried is lost under this stigma that we put on the result! Failure is a consequence of a fixed mindset only seeing the end outcome. This causes stagnation in a child's willingness to try and accept challenges, they don't want to be labelled. A growth mindset will see it as an opportunity to learn - plan A didn't work so lets try plan B. I found the diagram on the left, that I'm sure most have seen,  at Belmont teach blog. I think they got it right, or at least closer to the truth than by simply ignoring it. Failure should be seen for what it is, a chance to build resilience strategies.

I think that the catalyst to again chase this idea out from under the dark corners of our psyche was an article on the Quartz site. The article centred on skills that CEOs seek in applicants and surprisingly (or maybe not so) the idea of accepting challenges and trying, and in some cases failing, proved to be a positive. So in essence, employers seek a growth mindset. The idea of failure can mean that you are trying to solve the problem, rather than simply waiting for a solution. The idea that we shouldn't try shows a distinct lack of initiative, and that other should be able to find the answer. The importance of trying to solve and seeing possibilities is surely of greater value to any institution or company that the willingness to do the opposite! As pointed out in the blog, life is not smooth and "ups and downs" part of the daily cycle that we all have to deal with.

I think the idea below that was posed in the article sums it up -

Parents are being reprimanded socially for engineering failure-free lives for their children, producing kids who lack the resilience to function in the ups and downs of daily life. “Young people today, in the US at least, haven’t failed very much,” Crandall says.

Why students lie!

After the last blog, I was intrigued by a short article in the New York Times that follows on well. The basic premise being that students lie to gain leverage. Not big news I grant you, but after reading about the lengths some winners will go to, it seems that lessons begin early.

The basic premise with being a teacher and indeed a parent is the willingness to believe in the best when you consider a child. By that I mean that you always try to look for the best or positive outcome, sometimes regardless of what is actually right in front of your eyes and ears. In her article Ms Konnikova believes that 
“We are so bad at spotting deception because it’s better for us to be more trusting. Trust, and not adeptness at spotting deception, is the more evolutionary beneficial path,”. 
More than once, I have seen the shocked expression on a parents face when the truth about "what is real and what is told" are completely different things. As we know, the more we trust or love someone, the harder it is to accept or even consider the fact that they would lie or try to deceive us.

The idea that telling lies is acceptable is in many ways a norm these days. I doubt whether any of us could say that we have not told a lie, and this leads us to have a "grey" approach to the whole concept of truth. It becomes increasingly difficult to criticise or judge others if we ourselves also engage in the same practises. The old expression about "apples not falling far from the tree" seems to definitely apply here. It is far to easy for us to forget that we are the role models that our children and students tend to learn from and copy behaviours. A great pity that we conveniently forget and then go about our lives. This must really confuse and amaze a teen, who as I have said before, is still developing the reasoning skills associated with social intelligence. They must think that this is typical behaviour for an adult, and they will react accordingly.

But students and teens are sometimes forced into (or at least they think they are forced into) using lies to solve problems. It is amazing as a teacher the number of times this has occurred, but unfortunately the tendency is to look at the action and sometimes we forget about the cause. Lying can be a form of acting out and simply a "cry for help", and that I'm sure we have seen. The main problem seems to be that many teachers and parents look more closely at the occurrence rather than the cause. I see the punishment dealt and then the more than common move on, and I know I have been guilty of doing the same in the past. It takes some time to sit and chat with the child to really get to the cause of the lie, and that often the reason we choose to ignore all but the incidence. Maybe we would all be better off to take the time regardless of how busy we are.

I recall a comment my father made to me in my early teens about being more concerned with not learning from the lie. He encouraged me to admit to the lie rather than try to hide it, and I think that learning from that made me rethink. I have used that tactic with students over the years and see the puzzled expression when I praise them for admitting their mistake. But I have also found that I do not seem to have too many repeat the mistake! I also find that communication between us seems to grow.

Do winners keep on winning?

It is an amazing coincidence that winners keep on winning, or is it? The idea that you beat the odds over and over again seem to fly in the face of statistics. So maybe its the so called "winning attitude or win at all costs" that gives the real edge. There surprisingly more cases of the sense of entitlement this begets, but none more obvious than Martin Shkreli. We have all heard about his attitude and responses to questions about his morality or ethical attitudes, and he really is coming across as a pin-up boy for entitlement. But the amazing (and incredibly sad) part is, this is not an isolated case anymore.

The feeling of invincibility seems evident in many cases of winners being winners. The entitlement and bullying that occurs on some of these cases is getting a little out of hand. If you read the follow up of Shkreli and others make light or even fun of the occurrence on social media. After being a congressional hearing regarding his extravagant episode concerning raising the cost of medicine, he starts "bad mouthing" them on social media - calling them imbeciles. Only the really brave, naive or ridiculously stupid resort to these actions with the belief their will be no repercussions! It really brings to mind the old adage of "9 foot tall and bulletproof" as a saying to denote the impulsive and reckless behaviour of teens. The number of similar cases of so called winners behaving badly is on the increase, and that is a very troubling thought. It really solves the riddle about schadenfreude with winners behaviour going to extremes or the levels shown in the media almost daily. This in itself explains the ridicule that greets their behaviour, which I'm sure is a mystery to them.

But probably even more shocking to us "mere mortals" is the lengths they will go through to keep on winning. It seems that moral and ethical considerations become a little flexible in the mind of winners, with the end more than justifying the means used in winning. An interesting article "A new study shows that winners will cheat to keep winning" brings into question the mental state of winners - I have attached here. But are they to blame, or simply a product of the social pressure to be winners? It almost appears as if winners are able to justify in their own mind ethical or moral hiccups and then simply forget or ignore them. But the sad part is they still judge others based upon accepted social norms while living outside them. A bit of an incongruous thinking perhaps - that some of us would consider a case of double standards.

I have already blogged about the social push in students to be overly self-promoting in their search for the winning recipe. We have created the monsters that we now see. But, and I mean a huge but, adults like Shkreli are old enough to have well-developed social and ethical intelligence. So his actions are more due to swagger and over-confidence rather than anything else.  The quote from Schurr and Ritov above suggest that it is all part of the strategy to either keep winning or give the illusion of winning. Their article on "Winning a competition predicts dishonest behaviour" (linked) dealt with the ethical behaviour, or lack thereof, of perceived winners. Now considering that these "winners" are leaders in business and government, I really think that their bad examples are becoming more prevalent and more selfish in nature it brings into question the role model they are providing for subsequent generations.

I'm becoming more and more concerned by the action of our so-called leaders as they push through with their own agendas and it seems their own rules. But even more worrying is their response when they are faced with an option that does not involve winning or an opinion that differs from theirs. Far too often they resort to unsavoury tactics including cheating, bullying and worse, so again I ask the question do winners keep on winning?

Control or well-being?

In a recent blog, I introduced the idea of control or well-being as the camps that seem to occupy parental and societal interest. There are I'm sure numerous stories and takes on how to handle a child's tantrum in public, and all have their followers. But does it have to be that black and white, or is there a grey?

I posed the question of a noisy child in a movie or theatre. You are sitting and hearing a child misbehave or scream out while you are trying to watch and listen. A hypothetical for most but it actually happened at performance of "King & I". The audience then proceeded to blame the mother for the child's outburst. The child was autistic and this seemed to generate greater anger against the mother. The actors response was quite interesting and I have included it here. I think that many of us forget that social norms are learnt, and most learning is done by doing. Too often we forget that our learning was also slow and done by exposing us to different experiences, some if which we handled well and others were memorable for all the wrong reasons. Thinking back, I can reflect on my first visit to a live show, and the fact that I too was a little "squirrelly" but remained quiet for fear of embarrassment rather than anything else. We have taken the selfish route many times and saw what was best for us forgetting the patience that was part of our parent's repertoire during the learning process.

Most learning for children us mimicking the actions if others around them. If they are constantly surrounded by adults, they can copy the actions and examples they witness. But far from solving the problem, could it in fact make it worse? I have written about the role of play in childhood learning and the real social learning that occurs. Children do copy the actions of their peers, but they also form their own little code of "right and wrong" and other social mores by these interactions. Allowing them to take the ownership of these is seen as positive rather than the imposition by others, including parents. I think that in many ways we get it wrong by imposing rather than allowing a "more organic growth of morals and ethics" especially as they enter teen and even pre-teen ages and begin showing a sense of responsibility.

Perhaps teh Germans have struck a more realistic and effective way of doing just that! The article in the Wall Street Journal (linked here) provides us with a situation where kindergarten-age students are taken into the woods by their teachers. The general aim is to provide students with the ability to develop "independence and social skills". The students learn from each other and the challenges that arise, with teachers there to stop them hurting themselves. I wonder how many western parents, or for that matter those from Hong Kong, would entertain ideas to allow their child to be involved? It does come from good thought and understanding of the role of experiential learning and its importance in child development. Surely this provides an "organic growth, more so that a more traditional lecture based approach adopted by most parents. I wonder how this approach handles the tantrums mentioned earlier, and if it indeed solves this? I think the quote below sums it up so well ...

In rule-bound Germany, growing up is surprisingly rule-free. Parents send 5-year-olds to the bakery alone on Saturdays. Children typically settle their own disputes on the playground. And kindergartens are legally bound to try to develop their charges into self-reliant individuals. 

We are all searching for ways to promote social growth and the development of a moral compass in our children. Using control or well-being is simply changing the focus, and I seriously wonder if the learning through play (or experiential learning) is indeed the solution. After reading about the German experience and then its ongoing benefits, in place of the more helicopter approach that is so common here and in most other western countries, I would be advocating for a trial at least. Lets try to assist the development rather than simply getting in the way. Would you be game enough to give your child such an opportunity at Kindergarten age?

Are we making our children sick?

I think that this in a way follows on from some of the previous posts. It seems that all the pushing and shoving done by well meaning parents is having the reverse effect. We all see the anxious students as part of our class and lives, and in for the majority we don't really give it much thought until the problem surfaces. In essences schools and parents tend to be in a constant game of catch-up as we handle the effects. Perhaps its time to look a little more closely at the root cause if we are really serious about the problem.

An interesting article in a recent New York Times Sunday review caught my eye. Vicki Abeles used an eye catching headline "Is the Drive for Success Making Our Children Sick?" to grab my attention. I have linked the article here. The case presented amazed and shocked me that we, as a society, could allow this to occur. She cites a study by Stuart Slavin, a paediatrician and professor at the Saint Louis University School of Medicine that uses data gathered from a Californian school. The study found that "54 percent of students showed moderate to severe symptoms of depression. More alarming, 80 percent suffered moderate to severe symptoms of anxiety." The really alarming comment made by Slavin, is that this value could be underestimated and that if this one school provides a realistic view of the nation, then real mental health problems will exist in the future.

It really seems that the problems is getting larger and the problems are now starting to surface earlier. Parents see the push to have a tick box list of activities and actions that need to be completed to get their child into the "best university or college". Students are under constant pressure from homework, service and co-curricula activities and all these other commitments that are part of their daily lives. Sleep deprivation and anxiety seem a natural part of their day instead of the rare occurrence due to a bout of procrastination. The statement by Lawrence Rosen that the push is now in early elementary is a real indictment of the levels to which our society has sunk. The cornerstone of most early childhood education principles and programs world-wide is "play based learning". I wonder how we can even try to justify the lip service that appears to be given this considering the endless hours of tutoring and coaching children go through? Many of the children I see, have their days fully planned out for them from an early age. It has also made it seem almost mandatory to adopt the tutor-based culture that is so rampant in certain cultures. I have even heard parents comment about whether they should enrol their children in tutor programs because all other children in the class were engaged in them and they didn't want to be the only ones not doing it! The voice of the herd over the voice of common sense. Tutoring was once the province of remediation and now it appears to be the province of fashion or fad. Where once it was hidden, now it is proudly announced to the world.

Its quite amazing when you consider the response of some European countries to this trend. Children start school and learn by play, it is not until the child is ready that formal education actually begins. Yet we have children as young as 3-4 spending time at tutoring getting themselves ready to be able to tick the box. At some kindergartens in Hong Kong, academics studies have already taken over! A great pity considering that we are robbing the students of their childhood. The Hong Kong Early Childhood Documents though fully advocate a play based program, but it appears that societal expectations have overridden the document and the will of educators.

This is surely the domain of the parents, to ensure that our young children are not exposed to levels of anxiety. However, in their defence they are only "playing the game" that is begun and perpetuated by out tertiary institutions - but I must say that I find that a pretty feeble defence when you think of your own child's well-being. It is a given that the college process must be changed, but parents must take their share of the responsibility as well. They wonder why their child is experiencing anxiety attacks and behaving differently, wanting to attack or treat the symptoms rather than look for the cause.

While I acknowledge the studies that were done in America, but in all honesty would they be too different if conducted here in Hong Kong or for that matter in any other developed society. I know that the parental expectations here are high and the push towards (perceived) success are also present, so it could easily be a global issue. The side-effect of this whole process is the increased medication of our youth and pre-teens. Is that really the legacy we want to leave?

Parenting problems or being in control

I find that the interesting thing about parenting is that everyone has an opinion. This came to a head for me with the comments made by the UK leader (David Cameron) regarding parenting. It came across all 'Gung Ho' even though his country is one of the signatories on the UN convention on the rights of the child. But as with anything it seems that certain things create a polarity if thought and action, and a pity that it often revolves around an unruly child.

I find that at times it's easy to react rather than respond to unruly child situations. I distinguish react and respond as "responding occurs after some thought, and react simply happens". Being human we also have our own ups and downs and this colours or changes dramatically our usual reaction. Not much difference you might say, but I counter that it's the thought that counts. At the end of a long day hearing the high pitched squeal or yelling of a child or being on a short or long haul flight with a child in discomfort is not everyone's idea of a pleasant experience. Soon the mumbling over 'poor parenting' is heard. But is it really poor parenting? I suppose it depends on which side of the scream you are on!

The article in Macleans, gives a perspective to the frustrated onlooker's view of parenting. It appears that the author prefers the 'tiger parent' approach and I'm sure that is adopted in the household! Maybe this is where Mr Cameron gets his ideas, but I wonder if it also shows a lack of tolerance. A teen little own a pre-teen has not the brain structures in place to fully understand much in terms of social intelligence. The child has little control over his (or her) amydala and will quickly "see red" and have act accordingly. It is not until much later in life that they will begin to learn to control their urges and tantrums.  So why try to reason with a child? The idea of tolerance and being put out makes me consider who is really in need of help. The parents are showing restraint and tolerance and providing a role model for the child.  In many ways it is more difficult and challenging to adopt the 'softly-softly approach' than to allow the amydala to take over. 

Well it appears that acting this way has a much wider implications than a simple right or wrong decision implies. I do believe in well-being and positive education, and consider it one of the better advances in education for a while. I was reading an article by Professor Lea Waters from Melbourne University, and in her paper I see that the overall well-being of the child is dependent upon the actions of the parent in establishing the best environment for the child. The thing is that the paper provided real evidence and it was empirical in nature. It also goes on to suggest that it will reduce stress levels on the child, and thus also on the parents. Not ground breaking in many aspects, but at times a reminder is useful in re-enforcing our beliefs. 

However, there are many other things that we must take into account before simply. So the idea of judging the parenting of others is not really a necessary or good idea, and I hope that Mr Cameron realises that old adage concerning people, glass houses and rocks. 

ADHD & our children

I have noticed that in my time as a teacher/educator that the rise of disorders to explain the childhood attention problems that afflict some students. I recall hearing about ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) at a meeting one day regarding the academic progress of a student. The initial response of many to these form of diagnoses is probably less than credulous, but the growth of the numbers of teens affected have since removed much of the disbelief. But the rise in numbers does bring into question the accuracy of diagnostic techniques and treatment strategies and I have seen the vacant expression associated with the misdiagnosis or during a period when trying to get the dosage right, and it is almost like watching the personality disappear in front of your very eyes!

According to the CDC  (Centre for Disease Control) in America, "11% of four- to 17-year-olds in the US have been diagnosed with ADHD, a label for those who are disruptive in class and unable to concentrate; just over 6% are taking medication". This seems to be a very worrying trend in our youth, with such high numbers diagnosed and the resultant use of pharmaceuticals by our teens. It is important to note that the drugs used (e.g. Ritalin) are related to cocaine, and there are number of side effects associated overuse of Ritalin including increased heart rate & blood pressure, anxiety, agitation, nausea, hallucinations and confusion.

It seems that ADHD can often be accompanied by other problems including depression, anxiety, bipolar disorder and Tourette syndrome, and I would think that the push to succeed and the self-promotion that is an integral part of the life of most students and teens must make the problem greater. So is it a positive to have a child with ADHD take on a life of drug taking all so that he or she has a greater chance of attaining goals that are largely imposed by society?

The treatment of ADHD seems to vary considerably, with most advocating a combination of chemical (drug) and behavioural therapies. However, figures from the US CDC (Center for Disease Control) seem to suggest that many, in particular the teens and older, are largely treated using chemical means. The graph clearly shows that the sole adoption of behavioural therapies quickly decrease in the pre-teen years when a greater emphasis is placed upon drugs such as Ritalin. However, there is also an increase in the use of a combined approach that seems to remain more of less steady during the teen years.

Even more worrying is the use, and dare I say abuse, of these drugs by "normal" students. It now appears that Ritalin has become incorporated in the recreational college scene as a drug for study. The Center for Substance Abuse Research at the University of Maryland noted that the misuse of Ritalin is becoming more widespread, and that sales of Ritalin increased 500% in the last decade of the 20th century! A surprisingly large increase considering the number of diagnosed cases. The risky behaviour involved is largely an attempt to compensate for last minute study binges that students are known for, in response to the obvious pressures to succeed. Not only do the students want to achieve at a high level, but they also want the engage in all of the social activities available! So the overuse must lie in the misuse of the drug, with the inherent problems associated with addiction. It also appears that the long term effects of Ritalin are largely unknown and not fully researched and documented.

Now I really wonder if we are doing the right thing? The whole idea of medicating children, and especially teens, to suppress their activity level is not something that we should be proud of. As I stated above, staring into the vacant eyes of a student on Ritalin (or similar) is not the answer. The student was not in any real state to be involved in active or even passive learning, and far too often this occurs as an attempt is made to get the dosage right. Initially I thought that the ADD and ADHD label was being used to as an excuse for parenting skills. But with the increased rate of incidence and diagnosis being recorded, one has to wonder about the real causes. We also need to consider the effects on future generation if the incidence continues to rise - particularly as it is much more likely to occur in boys than girls (I recall a figure of about 3:1 more prevalent in boys than in girls). With the accompanying ailments and mental problems, this is truly a very worrying trend, and it makes me wonder why there is not a huge groundswell to find an alternative way of treating it, and even finding the root cause.

For more information about ADHD I suggest you visit the National Institute for Mental Health site or the Kids Health site, as both provide a good introduction. 

Further Reading
Generation meds: the US children who grow up on prescription meds - http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/nov/21/children-who-grow-up-on-prescription-drugs-us?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other 
National Institute for Mental Health: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder - http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/attention-deficit-hyperactivity-disorder-adhd/index.shtml
Kids Health: What is ADHD? - http://kidshealth.org/parent/medical/learning/adhd.html#

The ongoing affects of stress

As we find out more about our bodies, we are learning that stress has ongoing affects on us all. I have touched on the stress levels that we are placing on our children and especially teens to create winners. We have also looked at the negative aspects in terms of behaviours and even depression, but could there be other long terms implications of this stress? There are of course the obvious physical effects that we know, but a recent link to Alzheimer's and memory loss is a little unexpected. So for just a recap, lets firstly remind ourselves of these physical affects of stress on our bodies:

1. muscle and skeletal pain
2. breathing problems and hyperventilation
3. cardiovascular disease
4. blood sugar problems
5. gastrointestinal and stomach disorders
6. reproductive problems

I have only skipped over the physical affects as I am more interested in the possible effects on brain function, but a more detailed examination of stress is offered by the American Psychological Association website. I would encourage you to visit the site if you require more information.

We tend to think of stress in the terms of "here and now" and not many of us will be concerned about the possible future problems that may arise. We are even told that a mild amount of stress is good for us, and in some cases that it is an evolutionary response that helps us survive. However, a new study seems to suggest that the affects of stress can have a real impact on later life and especially the onset of cognitive impairment. The link between stress and Alzheimer's is not really as well defined as suggested, but these issues make me wonder if the stressful lifestyle of teens can have an impact on early onset of this disease? The transfer of stress to the younger members of our society makes this an even more worrying thought.

It appears that the stress and brain degeneration are linked through chemical means. When the body encounters stress, cortisol is released into the blood system. This is the chemical messenger that prepares us for the "flight or fight" response to these stressors. But cortisol also has affect on the brain. According to the Alzheimer's Research & Prevention Foundation, in excess, cortisol "damages cells in the "memory centre of your brain. It stops glucose from entering your brain cells. It blocks your neurotransmitter function and causes brain cells to become injured. High levels of cortisol also impact your ability to learn and retain new information (this is called short-term memory loss)". I suppose though that the one positive that exists is that our brains have neuroplasticity. In essence it means that if there is no long term damage, the brain can repair and respond.

I suppose we go back to the old adage of "healthy body, healthy mind", and the reduction of stress and maintaining a healthy lifestyle (and diet) a greater imperative. Yet we continue to pile the stress onto our children and teens without thinking about the long term implications. 

Further reading on the subject can be found at: 
High Stress Levels Can Dramatically Increase Your Risk for Alzheimers by Carolyn Gregoire (2015) - http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/56708edee4b0688701db7097?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000067

Stress and its influence on Alzheimer's disease - http://www.alz.uci.edu/stress-and-its-influence-on-alzheimer%E2%80%99s-disease/