Things I found confusing: This chapter really focuses the need for character education, and the difference between moral and performance character, and why it is all more important than academics in terms of being successful. What I wonder is how can public schools possibly do character education without backlash from families? Also, why is it okay for upper class kids to be relaxed and goof arund with their teachers while the lower class is expected to code switch?
Questions: Would you rather teach at Riverdale or KIPP? How could you implement character education into everything you do? How do administrators deem their teachers with good enough character in order to be able to expect the kids to have good character themselves?
What I found most interesting is that the upper class kids were not doing as well as the lower class kids who were taught grit and learned from failure. I never really thought about this before, but the kids who have grit, actually become more successful.
Interesting: I think that the section about grit is interesting! While I was reading, I kept trying to remember how I answered the grit scale questionnaire that we took at the beginning of the cohort. I then thought about how it related to my life & what "MY" passionate commitment to a single mission was/is/has been, etc. It's cool how Duckworth & Peterson found that grit was predictive of success by using this self-report. It sounds so simple & not super high-tech or costly. I think if we do focus in on this in our classrooms, that it could better prepare our students to do better on down the road. Connection: I think that once I set my sights on being a part of the English MAT, I would stop at nothing to make that goal a reality -- even waiting a year to do so. :)
Question: What do you think about the 7 strengths that quantify character -- grit, self-control, zest, social intelligence, gratitude, optimism, & curiosity? Are there any that you would add or take away? And, which do you think is most vital to life satisfaction & high achievement?
Confusing: I get that character is important, but in regards to the "climbing the mountain" section & the character report card, I was wondering how these "KIPP Through College students must feel to be kept up with & rated during their college career. This section mentions that their adviser contacts them at least once a month. I wonder if they are always willing to be a participant just because they attended a KIPP school. I'm sure some of the parents were the driving force behind their kids being there, while their kid just went along with it because their parents made them. (Although, I'm sure some really did see it as a way out of their current circumstances & wanted to utilize the opportunity to the fullest.) From what I remember about KIPP from our readings last semester, the students described KIPP as intense. They would skip dinner & work into the wee hours of the night doing homework, then sleep & do it all over again the next day. The other kids that attended different schools did not understand their workload. No wonder these kids learned how to persist & take advantage of the opportunity to "climb a mountain." But, I'd like to know what happens once that student graduates college & they are so used to getting a "red, green, or yellow?" I'm sure after an education setup like KIPP offers, it prepared them to remain dedicated to their studies & keep them trying even against all odds. I'd just like to know how they transition from always been given a "green light" of sorts during school to being accountable for what comes next in the real world.
Confusing: One concept in this chapter that I found puzzling was the character education. Seligman and Peterson divided character into two categories: moral character and performance character. I understand that performance character is more conducive to success academically and in life in general. After reading this chapter and all of the information that Tough has gathered, I fully agree with the idea that performance traits like grit, self-control, zest, social intelligence, gratitude, optimism, and curiosity should be taught and assessed in schools. However, I also believe that moral character also has a place in schools as well. Is not that what we talked about last semester when addressed the need to teach social justice in our classrooms? I understand that the word “moral” can get quite tricky in schools because you have to ask yourself whose morals we are teaching. I do believe that we should teach both aspects of character in classrooms. Should one be valued over another though? Are they valued in different ways when pertaining to academics? Tough’s research shows that performance character is what we need to address in the classrooms, but should moral character be discarded?
Questions: One question that I had pertained to the malleability of intelligence and character. I just want to know what everyone else thought. Is intelligence malleable? Does the fact that some neuroscientists say that it is indeed fixed matter to teachers? Should we believe and communicate to our students the belief that it is malleable even if research may indicate it is not? What about character? Is character fixed? Can grit, self-control, zest, social intelligence, gratitude, optimism, and curiosity be taught? In what ways can we teach these traits? Another question I had pertains to character report cards or character point average? Are these a good idea? Should they be communicated in a way that reflects the vernacular of academics? Does this communicate the idea that you can pass or fail character?
Interesting point: I loved the discussion of the “coding speed test,” and how it tells us that a student’s ability to sit through a boring test that has no outward motivator for a student will indicate that student’s success in life. IQ is not an indicator for success. Hard work and the amount of intrinsic motivation are. It is amazing to think that you could potentially determine how well a student is going to do in life just by administering this type of test.
In regards to moral character, I think Tough's point was that we are focusing mostly on moral character and the programs are not working. I don't think that eliminating it altogether is the solution, though. At GMC moral character is at the top of the priorities list. In fact, each student must write "I will not lie, cheat, or steal," and sign their name on tests. It is their moral code. I do think that this has a great deal to do with their mostly good behavior. However, I think each student could use a good dose of performance character.
I enjoyed the section where we focused on how different cultures view character and how the lines of morality can become smeared in a multicultural atmosphere. In our classrooms, it has to be difficult to decide on one solid case of what is right and what is wrong. I think as teachers we have to be ready to reconfigure our own definitions of right or wrong at any moment. For so many of us, our morality code comes from the religious or political culture in which we grew up in and it is unfair to impose that structure on others. I think that is why so many teachers are begining their school years by developing a class culture of what is and is not acceptable behavior in class, but I also think that is important to discuss where those beliefs come from. The radiolab podcast treats grit and motivation as something that is that is not alterable. But I feel that conscientiousness can be improved upon by getting students to question their own thoughts. Once I understand how and why I am the way I am I can make better decisions about myself including what I see as important. I can why so many teachers have issues with teaching motivation to a child because they are usually treating the product. You aren't applying yourself, you are procrastinating, you need to try harder... instead of the teacher actually taking some hard time to help the student discover why he or she makes the decisions that they make. Once they understand themselves they can think enough to give an answer to the inquiry of why they don't care about their work..
Things I found confusing: This chapter really focuses the need for character education, and the difference between moral and performance character, and why it is all more important than academics in terms of being successful. What I wonder is how can public schools possibly do character education without backlash from families? Also, why is it okay for upper class kids to be relaxed and goof arund with their teachers while the lower class is expected to code switch?
ReplyDeleteQuestions: Would you rather teach at Riverdale or KIPP? How could you implement character education into everything you do? How do administrators deem their teachers with good enough character in order to be able to expect the kids to have good character themselves?
What I found most interesting is that the upper class kids were not doing as well as the lower class kids who were taught grit and learned from failure. I never really thought about this before, but the kids who have grit, actually become more successful.
Interesting: I think that the section about grit is interesting! While I was reading, I kept trying to remember how I answered the grit scale questionnaire that we took at the beginning of the cohort. I then thought about how it related to my life & what "MY" passionate commitment to a single mission was/is/has been, etc. It's cool how Duckworth & Peterson found that grit was predictive of success by using this self-report. It sounds so simple & not super high-tech or costly. I think if we do focus in on this in our classrooms, that it could better prepare our students to do better on down the road. Connection: I think that once I set my sights on being a part of the English MAT, I would stop at nothing to make that goal a reality -- even waiting a year to do so. :)
ReplyDeleteQuestion: What do you think about the 7 strengths that quantify character -- grit, self-control, zest, social intelligence, gratitude, optimism, & curiosity? Are there any that you would add or take away? And, which do you think is most vital to life satisfaction & high achievement?
ReplyDeleteConfusing: I get that character is important, but in regards to the "climbing the mountain" section & the character report card, I was wondering how these "KIPP Through College students must feel to be kept up with & rated during their college career. This section mentions that their adviser contacts them at least once a month. I wonder if they are always willing to be a participant just because they attended a KIPP school. I'm sure some of the parents were the driving force behind their kids being there, while their kid just went along with it because their parents made them. (Although, I'm sure some really did see it as a way out of their current circumstances & wanted to utilize the opportunity to the fullest.) From what I remember about KIPP from our readings last semester, the students described KIPP as intense. They would skip dinner & work into the wee hours of the night doing homework, then sleep & do it all over again the next day. The other kids that attended different schools did not understand their workload. No wonder these kids learned how to persist & take advantage of the opportunity to "climb a mountain." But, I'd like to know what happens once that student graduates college & they are so used to getting a "red, green, or yellow?" I'm sure after an education setup like KIPP offers, it prepared them to remain dedicated to their studies & keep them trying even against all odds. I'd just like to know how they transition from always been given a "green light" of sorts during school to being accountable for what comes next in the real world.
ReplyDeleteConfusing: One concept in this chapter that I found puzzling was the character education. Seligman and Peterson divided character into two categories: moral character and performance character. I understand that performance character is more conducive to success academically and in life in general. After reading this chapter and all of the information that Tough has gathered, I fully agree with the idea that performance traits like grit, self-control, zest, social intelligence, gratitude, optimism, and curiosity should be taught and assessed in schools. However, I also believe that moral character also has a place in schools as well. Is not that what we talked about last semester when addressed the need to teach social justice in our classrooms? I understand that the word “moral” can get quite tricky in schools because you have to ask yourself whose morals we are teaching. I do believe that we should teach both aspects of character in classrooms. Should one be valued over another though? Are they valued in different ways when pertaining to academics? Tough’s research shows that performance character is what we need to address in the classrooms, but should moral character be discarded?
ReplyDeleteQuestions: One question that I had pertained to the malleability of intelligence and character. I just want to know what everyone else thought. Is intelligence malleable? Does the fact that some neuroscientists say that it is indeed fixed matter to teachers? Should we believe and communicate to our students the belief that it is malleable even if research may indicate it is not? What about character? Is character fixed? Can grit, self-control, zest, social intelligence, gratitude, optimism, and curiosity be taught? In what ways can we teach these traits?
Another question I had pertains to character report cards or character point average? Are these a good idea? Should they be communicated in a way that reflects the vernacular of academics? Does this communicate the idea that you can pass or fail character?
Interesting point: I loved the discussion of the “coding speed test,” and how it tells us that a student’s ability to sit through a boring test that has no outward motivator for a student will indicate that student’s success in life. IQ is not an indicator for success. Hard work and the amount of intrinsic motivation are. It is amazing to think that you could potentially determine how well a student is going to do in life just by administering this type of test.
In regards to moral character, I think Tough's point was that we are focusing mostly on moral character and the programs are not working. I don't think that eliminating it altogether is the solution, though. At GMC moral character is at the top of the priorities list. In fact, each student must write "I will not lie, cheat, or steal," and sign their name on tests. It is their moral code. I do think that this has a great deal to do with their mostly good behavior. However, I think each student could use a good dose of performance character.
DeleteI enjoyed the section where we focused on how different cultures view character and how the lines of morality can become smeared in a multicultural atmosphere. In our classrooms, it has to be difficult to decide on one solid case of what is right and what is wrong. I think as teachers we have to be ready to reconfigure our own definitions of right or wrong at any moment. For so many of us, our morality code comes from the religious or political culture in which we grew up in and it is unfair to impose that structure on others. I think that is why so many teachers are begining their school years by developing a class culture of what is and is not acceptable behavior in class, but I also think that is important to discuss where those beliefs come from.
ReplyDeleteThe radiolab podcast treats grit and motivation as something that is that is not alterable. But I feel that conscientiousness can be improved upon by getting students to question their own thoughts. Once I understand how and why I am the way I am I can make better decisions about myself including what I see as important. I can why so many teachers have issues with teaching motivation to a child because they are usually treating the product. You aren't applying yourself, you are procrastinating, you need to try harder... instead of the teacher actually taking some hard time to help the student discover why he or she makes the decisions that they make. Once they understand themselves they can think enough to give an answer to the inquiry of why they don't care about their work..