A high school principal sent the Grit Scale that is used in KIPP charter schools and possibly in other schools as well to measure whether students have “grit” and how much of it they have. The idea of “grit” was popularized by Paul Tough in his best-selling book “How Children Succeed.” The commonsense idea that is summarized as a four-letter word is that character, perseverance, and determination enable children even in the most difficult of circumstances to overcome obstacles and succeed. Who would disagree? But the question I have after reading this scale is whether it actually measures the qualities it says it measures, and whether those qualities can be taught in school. Is saying that one has perseverance the same as persevering? I don’t know. What do you think? I am reminded of the self-esteem craze of about 20 years ago, when California actually created a task force to study how to teach self-esteem; the bubble was burst (I think) by scholars who said that the typical measures of self-esteem might identify a bully, whose ego was so inflated that he became aggressive when anyone challenged him. I am not saying that character cannot be taught, but that in my experience it is taught best by a combination of modeling, expectations, and behavioral guidelines of family, school, religious institutions, and other environments in which children live. What do the adults do? What do they admire? What do they expect?
Grit Scale
Directions for taking the Grit Scale: Please respond to the following 17 items. Be honest – there are no right or wrong answers!
1. I aim to be the best in the world at what I do.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
2. I have overcome setbacks to conquer an important challenge.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
3. New ideas and projects sometimes distract me from previous ones.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
4. I am ambitious.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
5. My interests change from year to year.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
6. Setbacks don’t discourage me.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
7. I have been obsessed with a certain idea or project for a short time but later lost interest.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
8. I am a hard worker.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
9. I often set a goal but later choose to pursue a different one.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
10. I have difficulty maintaining my focus on projects that take more than a few months to
complete.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
11. I finish whatever I begin.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
12. Achieving something of lasting importance is the highest goal in life.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
13. I think achievement is overrated.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
14. I have achieved a goal that took years of work.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
15. I am driven to succeed.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
16. I become interested in new pursuits every few months.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
17. I am diligent.
- Very much like me
- Mostly like me
- Somewhat like me
- Not much like me
- Not like me at all
Directions for scoring the Grit Scale
For questions 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17, assign the following points: 5 = Very much like me
4 = Mostly like me
3 = Somewhat like me
2 = Not much at all like me 1 = Not like me at all
For questions 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, 13, and 16, assign the following points: 1 = Very much like me
2 = Mostly like me
3 = Somewhat like me
4 = Not much at all like me 5 = Not like me at all
Grit is calculated as the average score for items 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, and 17. The Consistency of Interest subscale is calculated as the average score for items 3, 5, 7, 9, 10, and 16. The Perseverance of Effort subscale is calculated as the average score for items 2, 6, 8, 11, 14, and 17.
The Brief Grit Scale score is calculated as the average score for items 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 17. Ambition is calculated as the average score for items 1, 4, 12, 13, and 15.
Grit Scale citation
Duckworth, A.L, & Quinn, P.D. (2009). Development and validation of the Short Grit Scale (Grit- S). Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 166-174. http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~duckwort/images/Duckworth%20and%20Quinn.pdf
Duckworth, A.L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M.D., & Kelly, D.R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9, 1087-1101.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
they have already tested minority students in Boston to compare public school students with charter school students on “Grit”… It was reported to the NAEP governing board back in 2013 as “Blue Sky” and you know that means it will be showing up on the tests ; since we have a captive audience of students in these schools, why not experiment? don’t bother to ask the parents or get their consent…. Here is the agenda…. and the Martin West study is the one that I speak out against while they are “blue skying” at the expense of our students with their personality theory from Duckworth et al… it is just that theory and it belongs in a lab not in the public schools.
———————————————————————————————-
Panel Presentation: Assessing Learning and Innovation Skills
At the May 2013 quarterly Governing Board meeting, members engaged in a “blue sky” brainstorming session to explore topics the Board and NAEP might pursue. Among the ideas presented was one that focused on whether NAEP should examine how to measure 21st Century Skills, which are sometimes referred to as learning and innovation skills, work readiness skills, and other titles.
In August 2013, Board members discussed several of the “blue sky” ideas in more depth. To provide additional background information on measuring 21st century skills, it was suggested that a panel of experts present information on the latest research and work in this area.
On Friday December 6, Chairman Driscoll will moderate a panel discussion on the assessment of learning and innovation skills (a.k.a. 21st Century Skills). The panel members are listed below. Biographical information and background materials are included on the following pages.
• Steven Paine, Partnership for 21st Century Skills
• Martin West, Harvard Graduate School of Education
This is a bizarre case of giving credibility to the work of Ken Kay, a lobbyist for the tech industry.
The 21st Century Skills meme and rainbow graphic is a mishmash of words (not developed concepts) formulated by Ken Kay an expert in marketing who tried twice to get this vacuous scheme hard-wired into federal legislation.
Kay did not succeed, but he became a thorn in the side of promoters of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) who had no desire to be engaged with the quite popular rhetoric that he had cultivated within the business community and among educators.
In the midst of hard-nosed federal and state standardization and high stakes testing, teacher groups swooned at the idea that someone was promoting ideas like creativity, innovation, problem solving, and so on. Educators helped to give credibility to a diagram and list of skills packaged as 21st century. Arguably, the only thing relevant to this century are skills in information technologies. Most of the key words in the scheme are from personnel managers and recruiters for jobs, especially in high tech jobs.
Promoters of the Common Core State Standards were not happy to see the uptake on Kay’s package of skills because that package had gained traction by 2009 and 2010 when the campaign for state adoptions of the CCSS was in play. So, the promoters of the CCSS (Achieve, Inc. an operational arm of the National Governor’s Association, and the Council of Chief State School Officers did two things. They gave Ken Kay a short term a job managing the tech side of the CCSS and they set up a side operation and website called EdSteps to develop tests of some of the “21st century skills” that were “hard to test,” among these creativity, problemsolving, global awareness–a short list from Kay’s inventory.
There is more to this odd history, but it is interesting that after all the hoopla, researchers are being enlisted by NAEP to look at Kay’s vaporware about “learning and innovation skills.”
What on earth are thinking?
The question is why the NAEP board has so little depth in their scholarship (or knowledge about the 21st century skills meme) that they will devote resources to this “research” and with the aid of someone representing the Partnership for 21st Century Skills.
thank you for the added information; I wish someone would ask David Driscoll; he has some kind of job in Boston (it seems like the revolving door from commissioner to lobbying to corporations ) and he headed up that meeting where the people like Martin West (Fordham Institute) could do their blue sky… paid for by Gates naturally..
good question: “The question is why the NAEP board has so little depth in their scholarship (or knowledge about the 21st century skills meme) that they will devote resources to this “research” ”
Those groups have “interlocking” boards of directors. I wrote to one on F.I. who is a lawyer and he said the board doesn’t get into policy; another on the F.I. board is Michael Podgursky and he writes economics articles with tiles like “principal pension payoff” so I have been following this crew from 3 or more years…
Shouldn’t this just be one question?
1. I have grit.
Very much like me
Mostly like me
Somewhat like me
Not much like me
Not like me at all
Nailed it.
Dienne: what you said!
😎
https://www.nagb.org/content/nagb/assets/documents/what-we-do/quarterly-board-meeting-materials/2013-12/tab09-panel-presentation-assessing-learning-and-innovation-skills.pdf this Martin West study (Fordham Institute/Education Next) says they don’t want to be quoted… more secrecy….. notice how they excuse the fact they didn’t get the results they wanted on their “lousy” questionnaire — yes, I am using the vernacular…. as a description…. these are a bunch of “dilettantes” in my opinion… Martin West included
Nothing says “good science” like “please don’t quote us.”
I hope public schools don’t adopt this because I think it’s just very risky for schools to start deciding which character traits are desirable in this rigid, defined way.
There’s a way to do this that doesn’t involve naming the specific trait and then applying this crazy, narrow measure. If they want to encourage “perseverance”, do they really have to define it, collect data from children and then measure it? What about just encouraging it thru actions like giving them work to do that they might no immediately succeed at and then helping them stick with it?
People have all different definitions of “persevere”, and so do families. Arguably one shouldn’t stick with something forever if one hates it and isn’t very good at it. “Perseverance” in one family could be “rigidly and irrationally stubborn” in another.
Do they not trust students to make the leap from their encouraging specific behavior to the larger “character” concept? Do they really think they have to both define and impose their definition of the character trait or kids won’t understand what it is they want? It’s as if they’re afraid to give them any agency at all. I think even little kids get that we encourage specific behaviors because there’s a larger character concept behind it- we don’t have to give them a definition and then poll them on it.
Agree totally. This is dumb.
One way of looking at this is just as another example of Campbell’s Law. Duckworth’s original research showed that questions like this were a better predictor of college completion than more indirect objective measures. It is an interesting and somewhat surprising result. Setting aside the broader questions about “grit,” it should be clear that if you start teaching kids to answer these questions a certain way, you’ve invalidated the value of the survey.
quote from abstract: “We provide suggestive evidence that this paradoxical result is an artifact of reference bias, or the tendency for survey responses to be influenced by social context. Our results therefore highlight the importance of improved measurement of non-cognitive traits in order to capitalize on their promise as a tool for informing education practice and policy.”
if you don’t get the results you want, blame the kids because they have reference bias…. they don’t say that they used a “lousy” questionnaire or the students are at a developmental age where these kinds of questionnaires can be misleading. The parents that I know even in the inner city don’t want these issues being tested; when we had a health project in Lawrence MA the parents agreed the nurses could interview the students one at a time and there would be no health questionnaire en masse and, in this case, I agree with the parents … don’t bring those personality questionnaires around my kids…
The fact that it happened in Boston or Greater Boston is because they know the parents won’t speak up as they would in Sudbury or Wayland or Weston or Dover-Sherborn. They have to stop using our students as guinea pigs with their personality research theories.
One professor type wrote to me a comment: “teachers are scared”… of whatever and I wrote back , no we are angry. They do this all the time with their power tactics assigning an emotion to a teacher or parent who disagrees with them. Be careful how they use their algorithms to assign a personality type to your child.
Grit is for sandpaper which is what KIPP needs to use where the sun don’t shine.
I find #12 most disturbing.
I think goals like being a thoughtful, caring person, or loving family member, or developing your individual gifts and talents are just a few things more important than a drive to generate a legacy.
What is most important to me is that I live each day authentically from who I am, with awareness of how my actions effect others.
This is what I want for my children.
The fakeness in this survey just leaves me feeling sad.
I don’t see how these are mutually exclusive. In my experience, knowing what your gifts and talents are and being a caring person lead to creating change in the world.
However — and again, I am speaking from my own experience — having grit as a teenager does mean putting your own success ahead of anything else. Keeping your eyes on the prize of getting up and out. THEN after you get an education or whatever qualification you need, the real work of changing the world for the better begins.
In my case this meant going against blood family to attend a highly selective college, but then eventually going to teach in a rural school and fight for the rights of GLBT kids to be represented in the literature we read the classroom. When my school fired me (I fought them and won and am still there), I used the publicity for a bully pulpit to advance this cause. And I gained the most wonderful brother-of -choice in the world as I did the bulk of this some 20 years ago. I regret nothing, and none of it would have happened without grit.
As usual, I am sure people on here will find something to disagree with in my story, but honestly, it IS my experience. # 12 is me– which I guess if fitting since I have disturbed many people over the years.
I commend you and your successes. They indeed took the sort of grit that is tested for in this questionnaire. But you succeeded only because you were born at a certain point in time, when society was ready to take a much closer look at discrimination against GLBT culture. So society helped you, because its laws supported you.
My kids have had a difficult row to hoe, too. Their eldest brother (deceased at 23 y.o. 4.5 yrs ago) was cursed with twin physical and mental illnesses; he fought like hell and achieved a measure of social and scholastic success [by conventional standards] until he was sidelined into medical leave & eventually succumbed.
Our society is not even close to taking a closer look at discrimination against the mentally ill, & has serious issues with any physical illness which cannot be easily categorized & preferably cured [my kid had multiple autoimmune issues– painful rheumatic diseases which are still in medical limbo & hence always suspect, as cancer once was.]
I find myself going through the ‘grit questionnaire’ with great cynicism. My surviving sons have ‘grit’, but it was acquired differently from those with conventional social challenges, & the results are different. What did they learn from their brother’s trials? That life is short, & ‘justice’ is irrelevant. Do what you love to do, & love your friends & family, they will soon be gone. They would not score high on this frivolous questionnaire.
Actually, there were no applicable glbt-inclusive human & civil rights laws at that time in NH or federally (still aren’t). The was a just-cause arbitration case. I had the most wonderful attorney, who also became a loved one. The decision was a “time-served” suspension, resulting in a loss of a years’ pay, seniority and benefits. For what it’s worth, I have had a much easier time getting section 504-related accommodations for myself because of psycho-neurological issues that I ever had or ever will have regarding lbgt inclusion. In either case, people aren’t going to pat you on the back and send you flowers.
Oh, and justice always matters.
pculliton: did section 504 help you as a teacher? I had only known it as a law to protect students.
Yes– IDEA is the law for students only.
So if you tell a 5 year old to get back on their bike after they fall because they have to learn to ride it, do you also have to define “persevere” and then measure it, or will they maybe figure “persevere” out eventually because they got back on the bike and can now ride it? I think you can give them room to get to the “bigger lesson” themselves and plenty of people obviously did get there prior to grit measurement and training since “getting back on the bike/horse” is so common people use it as a slogan.
If I tell a 4 year old not to hit people do I also have to tell him “and not just THIS person- the broader character trait we’re learning is “kindness”!”
If this is meant in any way, shape or form for educators working with young people—
It is frighteningly misleading. Just think about assigning numerical figures [quantities] to personal characteristics of great value [qualities]. *If any question, please refer to comments in threads on this blog by Duane Swacker re Noel Wilson.*
For example, just take #1.
What if the student is thoughtful and caring and thinks outside of the KIPP box? It could easily be interpreted by such a student as ‘They are asking me if I want to be a winner at the expense of everyone else and I don’t think that is the right thing to be or do.’
Is that such a great leap? No, not if the student feels that they want to change the world so that everyone is a winner and no one is a loser. Sound impossible? At least it’s a laudable aspirational goal that shows vision, creativity and the willingness to defy the odds.
Such a student gets penalized by the KIPP Index.
The very notion that people put any stock in this mathematical bludgeon makes me nauseous.
I really can’t go on. I ask others to take up the unpleasant burden of using a rapier—or a heavier implement with a sharp edge—to this unpleasantness.
😡
We actually have a much less intrusive version of this in this area. It started with a public school district that has a large Mennonite population- they use signs with character traits. My district adopted it but they don’t track whether the kids “have” this or that, thank God.
I think parents would object if they did- she’s a “4” on the grit scale, or whatever.
How much grit or how little grit does a student have to have in order to graduate? Who determines what that standard would be? How do you remediate or do interventions in the affective domain? Who is responsible for doing these interventions? Teachers? Psychologists? Who is liable for damages if something goes wrong? What if parents disagree? The prototype for this is in the SCANS, Department of Labor, 1992 where they had proficiency levels for interpersonal skills and levels of attainment for personal qualities,
1-10.
It’s all about mental health. This is a set up to bill MEDICAID and code DSM codes on every child in the NCES/IES state longitudinal data systems in every state. MENTAL HEALTH DISABILITIES.
HR 5 will legislate this agenda. Senator Alexander’s Reauthorization explains this explicitly. Stop the Reauthorization of ESEA.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Hoge/anita114.htm
I don’t understand, re the Mennonites in your area: “they use signs with character traits. My district adopted it but they don’t track whether the kids “have” this or that, thank God” What do you mean?
does anyone else here read Ohio E&A? I love this description : “What should be the counteraction to bad law, such as the glut of student testing?
Bad law is often conceived in the dark recesses of budget bills placed there by those who intend to slip daylight past the rooster. Ohio charters and vouchers illustrate this point.
Other times, bad law is the result of a trendy fad and/or the force of outside influences that overpower opponents by threats and intimidation. Ohio’s injurious student testing affliction fits this category.” grit is one of those “trendy fads” but the fact that they have this permeating the policies of schools …. too many roosters must be sleeping…..
So true. One can observe little girls at a certain age, experimenting with such choices as letting others win as they begin developing tact and other group social skills. The contrast to boys at that age is partly hormonal, mostly cultural. This questionnaire would call this a ‘personality trait’ & rank boys higher.
good grief
we have used BASC in special education for years and it can be helpful when used appropriately; Pearson bought it up — so I don’t trust anything any more; they want to computerize the data, build algorithms, and cannibalize everybody’s “traits” in their spin so they can sell more product$$$ ….
Here ya go …
Everything You Wanted To Know About Grit But Were Afraid To Ask …
Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition
Behavior Assessment System for Children, Second Edition
(BASC-2)
Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD, Randy W. Kamphaus, PhD who owns it now Pearson….
I haven’t seen the Grit Scale. I’d love to.
Perseverance at what? etc. Just getting through the ay tkes more tenaciousness, toughness etc for some than others. Especially at tasks not inolved with surviving or having much connection to personal relistic goals, etc.
In the ordinary sense of the word I’d say poor kids have moregrit than rich kids, even if one wouldn’t be likely to notice it in the setting of school.
Deb
debmeier:
TAGO!
😎
Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function® (BRIEF®)
Gerard A. Gioia, PhD, Peter K. Isquith, PhD, Steven C. Guy, PhD, and Lauren Kenworthy, PhD
Purpose: Assess impairment of executive function
Age range: 5 to 18 years
Admin: Individual
Admin time: 10-15 minutes to administer; 15-20 minutes to score
Scoring time: 20 minutes
—————————————–
another one used in special education; Pearson will buy it up probably; this is the same thing that computer firms have done with genealogical data and they gather all the birth, marriage, death records and dump them into a compute to sell…. ——————————————
methodology in the Martin West/Boston study: Non-cognitive Measures:
All students participating in our study completed a battery of surveys designed to measure non-cognitive abilities along various dimensions. These surveys, which were administered in the students’ regular classrooms, included questionnaires probing students’ Conscientiousness, Self-Control, Grit, and ITI that have been validated for adolescents.
To assess students’ Conscientiousness, we administered the Big Five Inventory (John and Srivastava 1999), a well-established 44-item questionnaire measuring the “Big Five” personality traists: Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness. Students endorsed items (e.g., “I think I am someone who is a reliable worker”) using a 5-category Likert scale, where 1= strongly disagree and 5 = strongly agree. Each student’s Conscientiousness score is calculated as the average of their response the 9 items that comprise the Conscientiousness scale. Among the students in our data, this Conscientious scale had an internal reliability of 0.76.
Our Self-Control scale is based on an 8-item questionnaire developed to measure school- age students’ impulsivity (its obverse), which is defined as “inability to regulate behavior, attention, and emotions in the service of valued goals, impulsivity” (Tsukayama et al. 2013). This questionnaire asked students to indicate how often during the past school year they exhibited each of a set of behaviors indicative of a lack of self-control, with 5 response options ranging from “almost never” to “at least once a day.” Importantly, the use of response categories specifying objective, discrete time periods was motivated by a desire to “avoid reference bias” in students’ responses (Tsukayama et al. 2013, p. 881). The questionnaire included 4 items measuring inter-personal self-control (e.g., “I interrupted other students while they were talking”) and 4 items measuring intra-personal self-control (e.g., “I forgot something I needed for class”). We calculated an overall Self-Control score for each student as the average of their (reverse-coded) responses to all 8 items. This scale had an internal reliability of 0.83.
Students also completed the 8-item Short Grit Scale (Grit-S) developed by Duckworth and Quinn (2009) to measure trait-level persistence toward long-term goals.2 Students endorsed
2 Duckworth and Quinn (2009) demonstrate that adolescents’ Grit-S scores predict future GPA independently of IQ and are inversely related to the number of hours of television watched.
14
a series of items (e.g., “New ideas and projects sometimes distract me from old ones” and “I finish whatever I begin”) using a 5-category Likert Scale, where 1 = not like me at all and 5 = very much like me. Student’s Grit score was then calculated as their mean response across all 8 items. This scale had a somewhat lower internal reliability among the students in our sample than our Conscientiousness and Self-Control scales (0.64). ————————————————————————————————-
They claim they have “validity” for these scales… there is a lot of disagreement about personality-theory; at any rate, this is the province of the MD. trained psychiatrist and the psychologist. Schools should stay out of these measurements of personality and refer the students’ parents to an appropriate professional with the training necessary to administer and interpret .
“They claim they have “validity” for these scales… there is a lot of disagreement about personality-theory; at any rate, this is the province of the MD. trained psychiatrist and the psychologist. Schools should stay out of these measurements of personality and refer the students’ parents to an appropriate professional with the training necessary to administer and interpret .”
Glad to hear where you stand, after reading your above cites with dismay.
My eldest (high-IQ, w/a grab-bag dg of low-spectrum Asp & bi-polar) needed high-caliber shrink & therapists well grounded in reality to bolster sturdy parenting– to counter the relentless onslaught of armchair SpEd public-school ‘psychologists’ who had him at various ages ‘add’, ‘slow-processing’, et al false diagnoses in an effort to rationalize why performance didn’t match IQ– all based on their periodic batteries of personality-et al-trait tests.
It took us several years of allowing their influence to harm him before we understood the need for “appropriate professional with the training necessary to administer and interpret.” & thereafter, continuing & vigorous advocacy.
I was pointing out the Martin West study as what NOT to do; I hope you didn’t interpret that I was welcoming this type of study? I have been vehemently against everything coming out of Fordham Institute and have told them so repeatedly for the last two years. If you had seen many of my other posts I think it would be clear where I stand. Sorry to cause “dismay” even for a few minutes. I more frequently try to instigate some humor with Duane or with Lloyd…
Glad to hear where you stand, after reading your above cites with dismay.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
quote: ” all based on their periodic batteries of personality-et al-trait tests” .–just out of curiosity, what did they use? were they just checklists? or opinions? even good tools with reliability and validity can be mis-used …. for example a BASC questionnaire filled out by one person is not reliable and has no value. I find these instruments are often mis-used when I go to an IEP meeting with a parent; also, at one IEP meeting I asked “do you have the report from the neurologist” and the staff responded “we don’t need that because we can only do educational things here in the school … I was certainly dismayed at that — it is because of budget cutting and the principal in the building is going to be fired if the budget exceeds certain amounts so the staff are following her commands.
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
@Jean: I wish I knew enough to answer your questions. Even though I sat through every battery of psych tests with my son. I can say this much: the SpEd machine [i.e, going thro’ everything the public-school SpEd requested at the various stages of my eldest’s schooling] resulted– in our thankfully-wealthy district– in his being able to access “self-contained classes” as-needed, from 10th-grade on. This meant he could be in a 6-pupil go-at-your-own-rate class as-needed (he also attended other ‘regular’ classes where there was a Sp-Ed co-teacher). The ‘self-contained’ classes were LD kids & could include anyone from severely-LD to G&T/LD like my son. He was able to progress well due to the 1-on-1teacher-attention. IMHO, SpEd worked well for him; by sr yr he was mostly ‘mainstreamed’.
What is most important here: due to his SpEd & Guidance Dept connections, when he experienced physical & mental crises/ hospitalizations in jr year, his public-school team was able to mobilize in concert with his post-hosp 1/2 day program. Together w/the 1/2 day-program [county social] & public-school SpEd tutoring folks, he was able to catch back up to his cohort, graduate, & move on to college.
there is certainly credit due to you and the working team to build the program and supports that were needed… I would hope that could be in many school districts but I think it is rare and you were fortunate to have the staff to create the programs…
I’m writing my dissertation on self-regulated learning, and have reviewed the current research on “grit” as these two constructs have much in common. The most current research on grit comes from Angela Duckworth of the University of Pennsylvania. Her research indicates human characteristics of perseverance, determination, stick-to-it-ness which she calls “grit” is a better predictor of academic success than IQ, ACT, SAT, and other intelligence/achievement tests. Her research also indicates grit is a better predictor of success in areas such as health, finances and marriage.
This is research that wonders what helps students achieve the most? What the student does versus what the student knows.
Self-regulated learning is all about effort regulation, and is also measured by what the student does to learn.
In a review of research, results in both areas have suggested:
1. Both self-regulated learning and grit are better predictors of academic achievement than any other achievement measures we have (IQ, ACT, SAT, AP Exams, NAEP)
2. Self-regulated learning shows a positive relationship to problem-solving skills, critical thinking skills, and fluid intelligence. All of which are necessary skills for the 21st century.
3. High stakes standardized tests appear to have little to no relationship to student achievement, nor does it appear to foster student motivation.
Although I have not done the statistical analysis on my data, I am assessing the connection between self-regulated learning and average STAAR math and english scores in the state of Texas. I expect to not find a connection which would be consistent with existing research. So why am I doing this? We have tremendous teacher focus (because of job security), and are using $500 million of tax payer money on something (standardized tests) that appears to do little in the way of building the necessary skills (self-regulation, grit) for student success beyond formal schooling that will help them be the leaders of tomorrow.
Self-regulation and grit build self-efficacy, which is different from self-esteem. Self-efficacy is a belief in yourself that you can rise to a challenge when faced with one, and it is built through experience at failing, trying again, and succeeding. Carol Dweck is the leading researcher in this area, and has researched and written extensively on the mistake we have made by focusing on self-esteem instead of self-efficacy in our schools.
Good books to read: Mindset by Carol Dweck, NurtureShock by Po Bronson
Also, Angela Duckworth has a TEDTalk: The Key to Success: Grit
I’d suggest you read what Alfie Kohn has to say about grit. He has several articles on the topic, but here’s one representative: http://www.alfiekohn.org/article/downside-grit/
Thanks for the suggestion, and I will thoroughly read this article. However, I was immediately disturbed by the title, enough to stop and make a comment. Angela Duckworth’s research came from an observational perspective. As a 7th grade math teacher, she observed that successful students in her classes were the ones that were not necessarily the “smartest” students, but rather the most persistent. This caused her to want to study this characteristic. This research field is in no way trying to suggest that we need to pressure students to persist.
I can understand your concern, as we have seen our educational system take one thing and shove it down the throats of the American public. My humble opinion is students are not working hard enough for their education. I have this opinion because I was a high school teacher for 18 years and with the advent of high-stakes testing I saw a steady decline in student work ethic towards anything other than preparing for the test. As a university professor, I’m seeing students coming to college that are ill-prepared to work hard for their education. This has driven my own research, as to whether there is a manner in which teachers can encourage, support and foster a stronger work ethic in students and in the educational environment.
I’m just very surprised at the negative reactions to this research.
Think about areas in your life in which you show the most persistence – most likely things that you’re interested in or things that are necessary, relevant and/or meaningful in your life. Maybe you’re persistent at work because you love your job or maybe just because you know you need the paycheck.
If students are, in fact, becoming less “gritty” and showing less “work ethic”, we might ask ourselves why that is? Perhaps students don’t find school to be interesting, meaningful or relevant to their lives? And maybe that decrease of interest is related to the standardized testing/test prep regime? I mean, even the most “lazy” student has something in his/her life that s/he devotes a great deal of time and energy to, even if it’s something generally viewed as useless like playing video games or anti-social like drug dealing. Trying to encourage students to persist with activities that they see no purpose in (like standardized testing) is a form of control. We need to tap into kids’ intrinsic motivation by connecting their educational lives with the real lives they live in the world.
I wish we could all persist in just those areas of our lives that mean the most to us, but that would mean everyone had a perfect life.
I am about 3 months away from earning my doctorate degree. It has been an intense, tedious, and arduous journey these past 4 years as I have worked full time and been a full time doctoral student at the same time. My GRE score was less than stellar, and indicated I would not be a good candidate for graduate school. However, I have maintained a 4.0 GPA throughout, and will be the first in my cohort to finish, so thank goodness for my perseverance. I have not found every course interesting, nor valuable, and much will not be useful once I am finished, but that did not distract me from doing my very best.
There is a lot about school that is useless. I was just having this conversation with a colleague this morning. I mean….just how much Shakespeare do we need in order to be successful in life??
Unfortunately, for most of us, we have to do things we really don’t want to do, or that we find useless because a superintendent, administrator, supervisor, boss, spouse, president deems it is necessary. Even culture, tradition and norms figure in to this.
I would rather give students all the tools to manage and succeed in life no matter what they run into, because we cannot control what they will have to go through in life.
please don’t knock Shakespeare;
one of my colleagues was captured and held captive by the Iran Revolution (they were not students!) and he was a teacher who could quote Shakespeare ; this doesn’t have any Shakesperean overtones but he would say to us in Bedford Public Schools “the blackbirds come home to roost” ; i.e., decisions have consequences.
That was one of the things that I found helpful in the Deborah Waber research because she says when we spend so much money on the wrong things we don’t have resources to work on the major things — what she points out is an important priority for urban schools and she has some reasonable opinions as to what to do about it.
.just how much Shakespeare do we need in order to be successful in life??
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
The fact that you’re pursuing a doctorate alone shows that you understand how education is relevant to your life – you believe it will advance you in some way, whether personally, economically, whatever. So you personally have decided that it’s worth it to persevere through the hard parts.
But if you’re a poor kid of color and you see that you’re likely to be dead before or soon after graduation, and even if you do survive you probably can’t afford college and whether you go to college or not you’re likely to be unemployed or working a grunt-level job, then what is your motivation to persevere at an institution you consider meaningless to your life?
Research is done to try to explain phenomenon. In order to do this you have to narrow it down to see if one variable causes another variable. Any good researcher realizes that what is discovered becomes a (one) part of a puzzle, and would never presume to think one part is the world’s answer to a problem. Unfortunately, our educational system has a history of taking one thing and applying it across the board (which cannot realistically be done equitably) and expecting miracles to happen. What often has happened are unintended negative consequences that have hurt students and teachers.
I think the research on grit is worthy of consideration. But, it’s one variable in a whole host of variables that influence, positive or negative, academic achievement.
I’ve enjoyed the discussion and exchange of ideas. Thanks!
undeardofWriter: I am wondering how on earth you test for “Self-regulated learning”, which “shows a positive relationship to problem-solving skills, critical thinking skills, and fluid intelligence. All of which are necessary skills for the 21st century.”
My family situation is obviously anecdotal. Yet my observation (as my 3 sons proceeded through public school & college) is that they have a large cohort whose abilities are barely elicited in conventional schooling.
One might categorize them as ‘art-tech’: above-ave to hi IQ; meditative & verbally articulate/ logical; facility in music-art-lyrical poetry/ computer, but achieving barely-mediocre grades with book&pencil.
I had one who could have conducted a class [verbally] in quadratic theory yet could not complete a written quadratic equation to its solution. He could instruct a bassist (not his instrument) in technique, & had a high grasp of musical structure, yet could not read music. None were athletic in the team sense, yet by age 18 all had gained hi social/ teamwork & mgt skills thro’ a decade of initiating/ organizing/ rehearsing/ performing bands. All that musical ability & organizational skill went almost completely unrecognized & unsupported by public school.
Although our wealthy district found places for all 3, & got them through, they were essentially, & successfully, self-educated, due to their prowess at “problem-solving skills, critical thinking skills, and fluid intelligence” [& of course thanks to computer & internet resources].
Does your research into “self-regulated learning’ tap into kids like this? There are many more types besides mine– kids who can’t read by 3rd grade but have advanced house-building skills by age 14 [despite the present void of vo-tech in h.s., learning solely from those in their home environment]. There is a host of kids out there whose gaming/ programming/ computer skills are very good, but perhaps they’ve slipped thro the book-pencil-achievement crack to the point where they can’t hope to enter one of the few 4-yr niche college programs. Ditto for the artists who’ve learned computer-graphics on their own.
I draw this to your attention only because I see so many highly-intelligent & skilled kids slipping through the cracks created by a public-school system which has diverged so far from reality that all kids are put on a college track & vo-tech training is inaccessible to most. There seems to be a disconnect from the once-obvious need for mentoring in the trades– yet there are still trade people needed in ‘artsy’ fora, such as piano-tuning/ repair, audio-engineering, computer-graphics, CADD, & more. There may be many among these candidates who could succeed in entry-level IT, if only it were taught 7 promoted in high school.
bethree5, I couldn’t agree with you more, and the single-mindedness of our public schools is one of the reasons I left public school and am now teaching at the college-level. I taught in an elective area (child development, parenting, nutrition, and money management classes), but my high school felt those classes were no longer necessary in light of standardized testing, and completely shut down my department. This was in 2005 when No Child Left Behind was in full swing. I moved to the state of Texas (ironically where NCLB started) and began working at another high school. The complete and utter focus though was on math, english, social studies and science, and getting these kids to college. Even though there were other classes (like mine) it was as though we didn’t exist. From 2005-2011 I observed a steady decline in student work ethic except for anything to do with preparing for the standardized tests. Outside of this, it just felt like students didn’t care. The focus for achievement also turned completely on the teacher’s shoulders. If students failed, it was the teacher’s fault, not the students. This is when I became interested in what students do to learn.
Interestingly enough, during the “accountability” era, there is no research on “student accountability.” If you put in “student accountability” in a search box for a research data base, you get all kinds of research on teacher accountability, but almost nothing about student accountability. I had to try other words, and finally I discovered research on self-regulated learning under “student responsibility.”
Research on self-regulated learning has been going on steadily since the 1970’s, but mostly at the college level. The survey instrument I am using, called the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ) was developed to assess at the college level. However, it has been used in numerous studies, around the world, at all levels of education and has even been translated into several languages.
My research is in its infancy. The dissertation process is a learning process for a doctoral student to understand how to conduct research. I am just at the start of my research. My study population are college students (freshmen starting college) at private and public universities and at a community college. I purposely chose these three types of colleges to get a more realistic cross-sample of students.
My intent once I finish with my dissertation is to replicate my study but use high school students, and get a cross-sampling from different schools, so I might have a better representation of all students in my sample.
What a lot of people don’t realize is how time consuming and expensive research is. To get a sample from high school students, I will have to go through an approval process from my institution, then approach different school districts gaining written approval from superintendents and school boards (this could take months). Then, because I will be getting information from minors, I have to gain parental permission, then solicit classroom teachers who are willing to take time out of their class to allow their students to take a survey. This would most likely be done through a computer, so I would have to select classes where students had access to computers. Since I’m trying to get a cross-section of students, my chosen school districts might be at a distance, which could require travel, time and expense out of my own pocket. Unless I want to try to get grant money for research, which a whole new set of details, and work to do. Once, I get the data, time has to be spent inputting the details into a statistical program, including (if I’m comparing this to STAAR tests) I have to go out onto the TEA website and retrieve this information too. On top of all of this, I teach classes at the university which means prepping, grading, advising students.
This isn’t the scenario for every University researcher, but rains true in some form or fashion for most. I have a lot of respect for researchers, but I also read research with a critical eye. I know the work involved, but I also know it lends itself to short cuts that can weaken the results of a study. I have a colleague who just finished her doctorate which was to do an analysis of the most used survey in her field. This was at the request of the man who created the survey. She found major weaknesses in it which invalidated all the research connected with this survey for the last 15 years! It’s not an exact science, especially when connected to human behavior. Most do the best they can with what they’ve got. Good researchers will always include weaknesses to their studies, because we’re not perfect and no research is perfect either. To be honest, its when media, administrators and politicians use research to exploit is when research gets a bad rap.
BTW, your question about connecting self-regulation to fluid intelligence, etc. is a good one. Each of those studies were separate and different. But one way that was done, is divide a sample population into two groups, one is the control, the other is the experimental group. Now, each group has the same task (one that is representative of fluid intelligence) to do. What’s representative of fluid intelligence? The scene in the movie Apollo 13 is a good one, “We have to redesign a round filter to fit in a square hole, using only these parts.” I also saw a Social Studies teacher do a project with students where they were to analyze the Titanic sinking and see if they could come up with ideas where more people could be saved. Now, the experimental group gets an extra lesson in self-regulated learning strategies. But the control group doesn’t. Then you observe the results of both groups. If the experimental group has better results, a researcher could say, within a certain degree of probability, self-regulation positively affected fluid intelligence. This is just one example.
Fascinating stuff. I wish you luck.
you might want to read Deborah Waber’s study at Boston Children’s Hospital; she does ethical research and she is an experienced medical professional…. there is a lot of medical research that is yet to be done on these constructs….
Deborah Waber also discusses the consequential validity of the studies with the students in public schools and where we should be placing emphasis when cities and towns are running out of money /resources and we have students coming from large sectors of the population living in poverty.
At any rate, I would re-direct your thesis to medical references and away from the disputed “personality” research. These are theories and the construct validity is open to question even though they say they have “valid” research; don’t trust… verify. The “lab marshmallow” tests have to be interpreted in light of the context and the developmental levels of children and adolescents.
here is the front page; please direct attention to the population (urban schools) these are the students they are using mostly as “guinea pigs” because the parents in suburban districts might not allow it (if they knew what was going on) Please note that Dr Waber releases studies based on children where she has parental consent. I have already told you what I think of Martin West’s study that uses the Dweck and Duckworth (this has been discussed over the past year on previous dates; please refer back to comments)
Executive Functions and Performance on High-Stakes Testing in Children From Urban Schools
Deborah P. Waber
Department of Psychiatry Children’s Hospital Boston, MA
Emily B. Gerber
Institute for Prevention Science New York University Child Study Center
Viana Y. Turcios and Erin R. Wagner
Department of Psychiatry Children’s Hospital Boston, MA
This is totally illegal. Any test in the affective domain / the testing of attitudes, values, beliefs, or dispositions, must have informed written parental consent. It is in direct violation of the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, PPRA. I have the prototype complaint in Pennsylvania when the PDE had to withdraw the EQA, Educational Quality Assessment, which was measuring, scoring, and creating curriculum for interventions in personalities. This is being pushed by NAEP, CCSSO in their expansion of COMMON CORE INTO DISPOSITIONS.
The REAUTHORIZATION of ESEA, HR 5 and Senator Alexander’s ESEA, is all about measuring student psychological personality traits. ( All children are at-risk under Title I not meeting Common Core + correct government attitudes.) see RTI, PBIS, Specialized student instruction support, mental health wrap around services. It’s not just truly special Ed. It is every child. The next step is MEDICAID billing at school where every child is coded for those mental health disabilities. Pennsylvania is the model. See Pennsylvania Investigation Legislative Committee, Rep. Sam Rohrer HR 37.
This investigative committee explains the direction of where this is all going.
It’s mental health.
See Pennsylvania parents original Press Release last November. It explains it all.
quote: “This is totally illegal. Any test in the affective domain / the testing of attitudes, values, beliefs, or dispositions, must have informed written parental consent. It is in direct violation of the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, PPRA. ” it is also unethical therefore malpractice.
Greg Thompson in Utah wrote a letter to this effect and many parents have read it. I hope all the parents are aware.
Pennsylvania Press Release:
http://abcsofdumbdown.blogspot.com/2014/11/pa-citizens-ask-gov-corbett-for-data.html
I am reading your link and it is frightening. Can you explain “Common Core provides 2394 foolproof validated scripts with which to remediate each child’s affective domain to achieve proficiency.”? How does CCSS relate to “each child’s affective domain”?
Also, re: “We have also discovered that these Interpersonal Skills Standards are also embedded in other academic areas of Career Education and Work, Family and Consumer Sciences, and Health Safety and Physical Education. The test contract in Appendix B for the Keystone Exams states, “The diagnostic assessments are intended to be easily administered online and provide immediate feedback of students strengths and weaknesses.” Is this phenomenon unique to PA, or should we each be examining our state’s agencies to see if “Interpersonal Skills Standards” are being assessed? Is this in order to determine whether taxpayers are ‘worthy’ of receiving services, or what?
The interpersonal skills standards are the Common Core expanded into the affective domain. These are values, attitudes, beliefs, and dispositions. http://www.ccsso.org/Documents/ILN%20Knowledge%20Skills%20and%20Dispositions%20CCR%20Framework%20February%202013.pdf
The ESEA flexibility Waivers were expanded into the social, emotional, and behavioral non-academic areas. The agenda is to move into the mental health arena at school with government preferred scored values. Pennsylvania has been one of the model states to test and score attitudes and values in our past state assessment. I filed a federal complaint for violating privacy rights without informing the parents. PDE had to withdraw the test. We found that Pennsylvania was the model for the National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) to test attitudes and values. ( Duckworth is creating her grit scales in cooperation with NAEP.)
When I say there were over 2000 prescribed activities and lesson plans, the contracts that we requested through a legislator because of the expansion of FERPA TO ACCESS PERSOANLLY IDENTIFIABLE INFORMATION ON OUR STUDENTS, we found that the standards aligned system ( SAS) created a model curriculum to be used to change those attitudes and values on a prescribed list. When you search the portal for interpersonal skills, 2300+ lesson plans, activities, and curriculum are returned. The same standards are also embedded in other subject areas.
This criteria had been developed by the Department of Labor, 1992, in the document Secretaries Commission for Achieving Necessary Skills, SCANS. The federal agenda was laid out with criteria for the affective domain for the future worker of tomorrow.
The problems are, the governemnt cannot set a standard for personality traits in the United States. It is illegal, unConstitutional, and violates Civil Rights.
The Reauthorization of ESEA IS TRYING TO MANDATE THAT THIS SYSTEM CAN MOVE FORWARD LEGALLY BY CHANGING THE LAW TO MONITOR INDIVIDUAL CHILDREN WHO ARE AT RISK BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT MET STATE STANDARDS. THE INTERVENTIONS ARE ALL PSYCHOLOGICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH REMEDIATION FUNDED UNDER IDEA. The following link will expalin the problems facing our country if this legislation is passed:
SEN. LAMAR ALEXANDER AND REP. KLINE SELLING OUT YOUR CHILDREN
http://www.newswithviews.com/Hoge/anita114.htm
If at first you don’t succeed, try again. Then quit. No sense being a damn fool about it.
– W.C. Fields
🙂
Let’s not forget it’s corollary: “That which needn’t be done, needn’t be done well.”
A thought for teachers facing mindless busywork disguised as “accountability.”
danielkatz2014: I am surprised that you haven’t given credit where credit is due.
The Broad Academy has an entire series of classes, and special facilities, designed to Get The Pluck Up!
The class setting is informally named the Hazing Room. There are two slogans posted above the one and only door [which is locked during ‘training’ sessions so the students can’t, er, escape].
The first, in big letters:
“If at first you don’t succeed…so much for skydiving.” [Henny Youngman]
The second, recently added in fine print below the first, comes from Gov. Chris Christie’s Education Commissioner:
[start quote]
“It will take time to see the type of progress we all want,” he said. “Whatever we’re doing, we need to double down.”
[end quote]
Link: https://dianeravitch.net/2015/03/04/lyndsey-layton-governor-christie-fails-in-newark/
Most interesting part of the class occurs outside, during the practicum. ¿? Well, it involves an airplane full of Broad hopefuls WITH parachutes and everyone else with them WITHOUT parachutes. The distinction is necessary because the former forcibly push the latter out at 20,000 feet but never have to actually jump themselves.
This is to practice inflicting, er, imposing, er, nobly providing “education reform” to public school staffs and students and parents and communities. Steely-willed determination is a necessity if one is to not waver in pushing the agenda of the “new civil rights movement of our time.”
However, just like the victims, er, lucky beneficiaries of rheephorm, the pushees have so far not been able to successfully land on terra firma [lack of moral character and perseverance?]—but the folks at Virtual Blending Earning are working on the technical glitches that have so far prevented safe landings. *Disclaimer: the folks at ViBE [as they like to call it] have also been working at producing meaningful and useful standardized tests, just to give one example, but still have a ways to go before they work out all the kinks. They just need more grant money and they are sure they’ll get it right the next time.*
Just like skydiving without parachutes and everything associated with self-styled “education reform” the ViBErs are working full-time, doubling down, to make the impossible possible.
And that, folks, is the story of why those two quotes are on that classroom door.
If you have persisted to the end of my meanderings, give yourself an A or 100% graduation rate or feel that you’ve taken yourself from the 13th to the 90th percentile on the KIPP Pluck Index.
Demerits if you don’t.
Go figure…
😎
Gee next thing you know we will be assigning numerical values to womens body parts. When will we finally figure out that it is uselessand impossible to
rate intelligence, beauty, personality on scales and say it isscientific.
The idea of “grit” was popularized by Paul Tough in his best-selling book “How Children Succeed.”
A book writen about grit by a fellow named Paul “Tough”?
The “Grit scale”?
Could this stuff get any more ridiculous?
By the way, I thought “grit” was popularized much earlier, by John Wayne, in the movie “True Grit”..
This is another absurd pseudo-scientific attempt to pigeon hole students. Human beings are not static; we are not statues fixed in stone. Life and and responses to it is how we are formed from whatever raw material we have. It’s the nature versus nurture argument. What you would do with these results from this nonsense is what concerns me. Is this another attempt to track students? We need schools that will open doors and provide access to opportunity, not schools that will slam doors in their faces, based on psychobabble.
yes, it is a severe form of tracking; it also creates an “outcast” or a “pariah” and that individual can then be scorned, bullied or made to conform. there are a couple of books about the “tyranny of the normal” but actually Carol Burris’ book on tracking in schools is really the best and someone here mentioned Alfie Kohn: I like all his books especially the myth of the …. and he labels the child as society is doing to create these ideas and influence priorities and budgets …showing who is deserving of participating in advancing their education
results from this nonsense is what concerns me. Is this another attempt to track students?
jeanhaverhill@aol.com
We should always be rather concerned when we find that a bunch of affluent white people are interested in teaching a bunch of poor kids of color about “character” traits and “grit”.
Especially given that “grits” (ground corn) are of Native American origin
You said it, Dienne! LIKE!
I had a daughter who had more grit than most kids I’ve known in 37 yrs of education. It appears to me this scale would not have shown her to have a lot of grit. Looks more like an identifier of kids a school might not want.
Diane’s description is much better.
Also looks highly inappropriate for inner city kids. Daily survival takes more grit than surburban kids, on average, ever possess. An example: the oldest sibling makes sure their brothers and sisters don’t go hungry each day. That is a whole lot more and valuable grit than the kid who worked for months to finish a science project.
I also wonder how the true GT kid might do on this scrape, particularly the rebellious ones.
unheard: I wish you would take the time to look at Sternberg’s view of intelligence; it might not be a “popular” but I believe it to be sound. He is somewhat older (before Multiple Intelligences he was writing) so look at how Scott Barry Kaufman updates the Sternberg work and adds to it. Your bibliography should cover the items S. B. Kaufman writes in his book: “Ungifted”… the title should not scare people away — it is a legitimate book — but you know the authors don’t title their books just like newspaper journalists don’t get to write their headlines.
Sternberg can describe the construct in terms without using “grit”; and I think it is a sound approach. S. B. Kaufman has a whole chapter on “deliberate practice.” To me these books are essential because so many people go around saying “rigor” 15 times and they have no substance behind the flag they are using (or the dog whistle)… Kaufman puts “meat on the bones” and he is also writing something new every week practically — with a specialty in creativity etc. If you sign up for Research Gate you can find something new by him frequently. Try not to get drawn into “pop” psychology.
I will take a look. Thanks!
My eldest, [deceased from illness at age 23 4.5 yrs ago]– tho he was hampered by phys & mental illnesses– was one of those G&T rebellious types. He would have scored low; he had too much empathy for others. In my book, he scored very high on grit. I learned only thro the posts at his memorial website that– at a most vulnerable point, when he was in a post-hospitalization medical halfway-house, age 16– he nurtured & inspired others, some suicidal, to press on & have hope.
“Grit is for pancakes”
Grit is for pancakes
For sandpaper too
It’s even for fruitcakes
But not me and you
S. B. Kaufman: Scott Barry Kaufman is an American psychologist, author known for his research and writing on intelligence and creativity. Most media attention has focused on Kaufman’s attempt to redefine intelligence….Kaufman is Scientific Director of The Imagination Center the University of Pennsylvania. He is also co-founder of The Creativity Post [5] and author of Ungifted: Intelligence Redefined.[6] Kaufman won the 2011 Daniel E. Berlyne Award from Division 10 of the American Psychological Association for outstanding research on aesthetics, creativity, and the arts by a junior scholar,[7] and is a 2011-2012 recipient of the Mensa International Award for Excellence in Research.[8]
after writing messages to Unheard i realized I had my two Kaufman authors mixed up ; that is why I am posting here; the psychological research of Horn, cat tell, Sternberg is still useful in understand how people learn.. I wouldn’t go off into the “Duckworth” territory….
James C. Kaufman is a psychologist known for his research on creativity. He is a Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Connecticut in Storrs, Connecticut. Previously, he taught at the California State University, San Bernardino, where he directed the Learning Research Institute. He received his Ph.D. from Yale University in Cognitive Psychology, where he worked with Robert J. Sternberg. At the University of Southern California as an undergraduate, he worked with both John L. Horn and famed novelist T. C Boyle. James is best known for his theoretical contributions to the study of creativity.[1] With Sternberg and Jean Pretz, ; with Ron Beghetto, is the Four-C Model of Creativity that includes everyday creativity (“little-c”) to include “mini-c”—creativity that is inherent in the learning process—
Thanks for all the information, and I will certainly look into it. I am bound to a certain extent by what my committee mandates, and I was told for my literature review to try not to go back any further than 10 years. The real subject of my research is self-regulation, and I went clear back to the 60’s and the work of Albert Bandura. I only brought in Duckworth and grit in because it is current and findings are consistent with findings on self-regulated learning.
But I will definitely look into what you have posted. Thanks.
Tell me one charter school idea that public schools should replicate? I though grit was something you got under your nails.
Wow.
There it is. Perhaps the most precise and exacting assessment I’ve ever seen for determining if someone is or will be an ambitious, compliant, goal-oriented, competitive, earnest, diligent asshole.
“Grit” and all of its apostles are of the corporate, monied classes who are doing what they have always done: working hard at defining how they have been so masterful at life, and then, via their economic and political power, endeavor to bend public policy to create a system that reinforces their identity experiment.
They have done nothing but create an aspirational (you know what the correct responses should be, and you then force yourself to become like that if you aren’t already) quiz that will help craft a new bunch of elite pricks.
Simple story. We overcomplicate it by trying to attack it as if it were serious thinking….not just the extravagances of the fragile identities of a privileged lot of people.
I think there’s truth to that with the testing obsession. If your SAT score was the golden key that let you gain entrance into that group, I think you’re more likely to put a whole lot of weight on a standardized test score. You really heard the elitism with Bloomberg- his concern that teachers didn’t come from the “better” schools.
I think they forget that the vast majority of people don’t come from the “better” schools. That’s why there’s a middle SAT score. Half of people have scores in that lower section 🙂
“The Bell Curve Boys”
The Bell Curve Boys
Just love the tests
Like favorite toys
They tout their bests:
“A perfect score on SAT”
Is what I got in school, you see
And how successful I’ve turned out
The test tells all, there’s little doubt
“The Colemanbot”
Designed in a lab at MIT
The Colemanbot for SAT
Unequaled for the standard test
Can beat Commander Data’s best
“Test to the Top (TTTT)” (also known as “The Billionaire’s T Party”)
“The measure of success
Is score on standard test”
Said William Gates
Who did quite great
On SAT, no less
(I just finished gathering my old poems together and it just happens that I have quite few on the “test identity” subject)
“InSATiable”
InSATiable is what they are
For VAMming and for test
They dote upon the testing star
Ignoring all the rest
“Grit is facing your Goliath, and not leaving till the job is done.” Anne Gollias Peterson
And I, personally, believe everyone who posts here, and most especially Diane, have enough grit to face down reform and all the Goliaths behind it.
This is interesting. It’s from the COMMENT’s section of a piece penned by former KIPP teacher who is now decidedly anti-KIPP, anti-grit, and anti-TFA:
http://edushyster.com/?p=4240
Here’s part of a comment under the above article…. written by “DAISY” in response to a pro-KIPP comment by “Anthony”:
———————————————–
DAISY:
“The worst part, really, Anthony, is when I hear about the US Department of Ed discussing methods of measuring grit. It makes my stomach turn. I was at KIPP when they rolled out the assessments for measuring character. We ALL knew it was a sham then, and it’s a sham now. KIPP’s PR machine is well funded and hard at work pushing this BS forward.
“My student who dropped out last week to work with her mother in the factory – she somehow lacks the grit needed to sustain her formal education? The 10-hour shifts standing, painting fabric all night, doesn’t indicate her grit? When she walked across the desert for three days, carrying a 2-gallon jug of water and a backpack of food, that didn’t demonstrate her perseverance?
“Meanwhile, KIPP peddles the teacher-hero narrative, peddles the concept of grit, all the while losing teachers and students in droves.
“How do you measure the grit of the 45 remaining 8th graders from an entering 5th grade class of 80? Why do the African-American boys who leave have less of it than the girls who stay?”
Oh, and we mustn’t forget one of the ways that KIPP instills “grit” —-
locking misbehaving students in padded closets:
http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/12/11/mother-schools-use-of-padded-room-abusive/
Corporate America doesn’t want GRIT anyway, They want yes man drones.
That’s their idea of “grit” – people who will persevere no matter how boring or mindless or meaningless the task is. Such people make excellent data entry clerks or shelf stockers.
KIPP’s slogan says it all:
“Be Nice (to the Boss)
Work Hard (for low pay)”
Wow. Pretty heavy stuff for young kids to answer. My worry, with all the data being collected from cradle to grave, do I want my child’s answers out there? Do I want someone else answering these questions about my child and then becoming part of his or her record? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Do you remember when the word “effort” was enough to describe whether or not a student was doing their best and working up to their potential? I’m sorry, but we are going overboard in this country. Let teachers teach, let parents parent, and let children be children!
i had the fortunate experience to have Eliot Eisner as a professor: his work on creativity would expand our outlook on teaching and learning…. There has been criticism of Eisner’s approach from those who view education either as commodity or as something that should be approached as a product. These viewpoints dominate the agendas of many edu-crats and their policies. Those who want to reduce education to training; constrain exploration by specifying preset outcomes; and I fear that is what “Grit” is al about — whereas creativity is a broader perspective on human learning that involves approaching education in a completely different frame of mind – (I guess I am “grit-less” )
Among the long list of studies conducted by Duckworth and colleagues, some data came from a short Grit Scale (Grit-S) given to cadets at the US West Point Military Academy and to adolescent competitors in the Scripts National Spelling Bee. Among cadets, the scale predicted retention in the program. Among the spelling bee competitors, the scale predicted final round attained, mediated by lifetime practice.
This study had some caveats. First, Grit-S for adults was associated with higher education and fewer job changes, Second, for adolescents, the scale predicted GPA scores and less television watching. Third, the two major TRAITS of “perseverance and passion for long-term goals” measured by the scale had not yet been tested item by item in relation to specific contexts.
The researchers clearly call the scale a “personality” measure, but note, for example, that the stability of traits across time and situations had not been established. They note that a person may be “gritty” in his or her professional life but not in maintaining personal relationships; a person may invest grit is a serious hobby but not a profession or career.
Work on these questions continues at the Duckworth Lab at the University of Pennsylvania. From the website (references omitted):
“Our lab focuses on two traits that predict achievement: grit and self-control. Grit is the tendency to sustain interest in and effort toward very long-term goals….. Self-control is the voluntary regulation of behavioral, emotional, and attentional impulses in the presence of momentarily gratifying temptations or diversions…. On average, individuals who are gritty are more self-controlled, but the correlation between these two traits is not perfect: Some individuals are paragons of grit but not self-control, and some exceptionally well-regulated individuals are not especially gritty….”
There is a long list of scholarly publications is at this website, along with a “Character Lab” where you will find the several versions of the scales for non-commercial use and with several cautions:.
“These scales were originally designed to assess individual differences rather than subtle within-individual changes in behavior over time. Thus, we do not know whether they are valid indicators of pre- to post-change as a consequence of interventions. We also discourage the use of the scales in high stakes settings where faking is a concern (e.g., admissions or hiring decisions).” Further— “Our scales are copyrighted and cannot be published or used for commercial purposes or wide public distribution. Journalists and book authors should therefore not reproduce our scales nor any part of them.”
I think that all variants of the grit scale should be clearly identified as a measure of “personality.” I also think that this message from the reasearchers should be widely circulated: The scales “are NOT valid indicators of valid indicators of pre- to post-change as a consequence of interventions.
BUT, after all those caveats and reservations what do you also find at the Character Lab section of the website? A “Character Growth Card” available for Beta testing by volunteers. It is described as “A tool designed to help kids and adults talk about character skills.”
The narrative for the Character Growth Card says: “We’ve designed our student surveys to be hassle-free for educators and students. Educators submit scores for each of their students, and students can submit scores online or on paper to their teacher. Creating and tracking goals for students has never been easier. Educators can help students set effective goals by focusing on specific strengths and skills to grow. Access scores and goals any time by viewing reports online or by printing them out. Reports aggregate feedback from each educator and display them alongside student self scores.”
So after all, it looks as if the grit scale is on a path for tracking student scores. That will be one version (non-profit) for how to measure one version of “character,” but certainly not the only one.
For some real insight into the version of character tied to grit and to KIPP versus alternatives, I highly recommend the following historically informed article, especially for anyone who is uneasy about the version of character promoted by KIPP and from the Duckworth Lab. Count me among the uneasy.
The author of this article enrolled in a KIPP training program on character education.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117615/problem-grit-kipp-and-character-based-education
I’m curious to know if I have grit.
You see, there was no multiple choice test for grit when I was a child.
So, if I have grit, I wonder if it came from how my parents raised me, or from me growing up with my family being my roll model—I was the youngest. My brother was 12 years older than me and my sister 14 years. My brother would spend 15 years of his life in prison by the time he died a chain smoker and alcoholic at age 64. My sister never went to college and was a housewife for half of her life.
My father was a smoker, an alcoholic (he quit drinking in his late fifties but he never stopped smoking) and a gambler, but he did work in construction for most of his adult life (that started at age 14 when he dropped out of school) and earned enough to pay the bills, keep a roof over our heads, and put food on the table. We never went hungry, and he only beat me once with his belt.
If I have grit and it didn’t come from the family, maybe it, came from the U.S. Marines after 1965 when I reported to MCRD right out of high school and went through boot camp and then ended up in Vietnam.
Or maybe—if I have grit—it came from the PTSD that followed me home from Vietnam and has plagued me to this day.
Maybe we could change the Marine Corps to KIPP Core and start out with bubble tests to determine what five year olds must go through boot camp and then be shipped off to fight in one of Americans endless wars to insure they grow up with grit and are college and career ready by 18—that is if they live long enough to reach the age of 18.
Do I have grit? I have no idea, and I don’t think a multiple choice test will embed grit in a child as young as age 5, or even identify if a child has grit.
Amen!
L. Lofthouse… I have a marshmallow test for you; I will promise you 4 marshmallows if you can sit for 1/2 hour with 3 marshmallows on the table in front of you without even touching them? or looking in that direction; if you eat the three, then i guarantee my predictive validity algorithm says you will never develop anything like (here they will plug in postpone gratification) etc. etc. ……. (fill in the blank) …
LOL
I stopped eating marshmallows when I became a Vegan and health aware in 1982. Offer dark chocolate instead—with at least 80% or more cocao and very low sugar content.
sorry, test cancelled… all marshmallows have been recalled because the manufacturer found “gritty” bits of metal in the last 500 cartons that were shipped….
What about using dark chocolate? If one test doesn’t work, then try, try, try again with another test using the same flawed bubble questions but called them dark chocolate instead of marshmallows.
The grit scale would be more believable if it has been rigorously confirmed by either palmistry or phrenology.
Did you forget to include astrology, and seances to communicate with the spirit world
Well, at least the geologists have validated it with “Moe’s hardness scale”
Or was it the Three Stooges?
Can you get a Master’s or PhD. in “Grit-ology” or “Grit Studies”.
“I’m working on my Master’s in Grit-ology.”
“I’ll soon be defending my thesis for a PhD. in Grit Studies.”
Paul Tough at least got us talking about the role of “non-cognitive attributes” in long-term success. I have to admit I’m not fond of the term “Grit” because it’s too John Wayne. I really like the goal of resiliency and persistence, particularly as they look at the attributes gained from experiences that support us long-term. Teacher are too often teach as if we are always climbing a long series of three-foot mountains…no Everest here, failure is BAD!.
Looking at context, application, developing entrepreneurial energy for even young children is more like doing something significant—and yes there’s a developmental sequence, but just as a young child strives to explore, to walk, to communicate, we can learn from these human attributes that motivated this learning long before we had schooling, and restructure learning to be more humane.
One might argue that the greatest talent humans have is the balance between accepted knowledge and innovation…and anyone who teaches MS knows that they need context, a purpose, a connection to their reality, and an empowered voice. So why is this such a mystery to us as educators? It’s those damn Harvard MBA’s who preach their metricianisms–“if you don’t measure it it doesn’t matter.” And the “learning outcomes” Skinnerians who forget that once you get past fish there is culture, context and personal connections to meaning-making.
“How Children Suceed” by Paul Tough…any one see the humor and irony in this guys name…he might just be compensating…
I read recently that “grit” is on a gene and can not be taught.
Where, exactly, did you read that?
Dienne I was curious too but I didn’t want to ask; I’m glad you did…..
So I took the test and in each category I my average scored “Mostly like me.”
Very useful.
BAZINGA
The questionnaire reads like an admittance test to a charter school and if you don’t tick the “right” boxes, you don’t get in, or you get thrown out, counseled out, etc.
Though turkeys and chickens need grit
To make sure their gizzards stay fit
I’m not sure it follows
When kids grits have swallowed
It increase grades (math & lit)
Some questions are inappropriate as the interpretation of “ambition” or “pursuing a goal for years are either subjective to personal bias or simply lacking the experience to understand the context of the question – what 3 year plans does a 10 year old have that they can follow through on???
Aside from is this meaurae le in the first place. A snapshot even if it was accurate, does not prove without follow up with a large randomized group over a few decades, that they are measuring what they intend to measure, that it is taught and discerning what mental issues impact it, and most important in “the results” that someone who learned their “grit score” and received interventions that raised it, then went on to better life outcomes against a demographically similar control group without those interventions.
Did they do this research to confirm what the heck they were actually measuring, its teachability and that it gets better outcomes in life?
Those are some mighty big jumps to overcome.
Are you sure this isn’t a parody? Paul Tough has been a propagandist for corporate “school reform” for years, but his “Grit” nonsense is the worst of all. It’s eugenics-style Horatio Adlerism at its worst. Having grown up in “the shadow of the refinery” (the Standard Oil Bayway Refinery in Linden) and watched my working class friends to into the Marines because of the Vietnam era draft (some died; one a POW for six years) because we were all working class, I have always disliked guys like Paul Tough, who get these New York Times soap boxes to preach to this era’s “lesser breeds outside the law” (to quote one of Tough’s sociological ancestors). Tough is almost as odious as the Atlantic crowd, cowards like James Fallows and all those Ivy League guys who ran away from both the war and the challenges of draft resistance and anti war organizing.
Strip away all the self-righteous nonsense and the puffy prose and Tough’s stuff is just the latest version of centuries-old Divine Right of Kings stuff.
If only I had picked a wealthier Mom and Dad (both of mine were working class from Elizabeth and served in the Army in the rough stuff during World War II) I could have grown up to be a cool guy like Paul Tough. Then I’d get a license from the ruling class to preach to the lesser breeds in places like Linden about bootstrapping and all that…! At least Rudyard Kipling was honest about his biases, while the Paul Toughs of the world get away with it for decades.
@M & @George Schmidt: Both your comments are so spot-on. M shows how this questionnaire (& I’ll posit, many more like it which are mis-used in ed & other fields) have zero value as science. And George Schmidt shows how they make us FEEL. As Jean Haverhill points out, such tools, even if they have some value as one bit of data in a complex of personality-evaluation tools, can be misused– that this is territory that should remain the province of trained professionals. I would add that personality-testing cannot help but be misused in the hands of school personnel. When it is used to determine teaching & learning placements it is “classification”– which is categorization. In my opinion the use of personality-evaluation tools in the public schoolplace is in fact depersonalizing and humiliating to the child, a betrayal of the public trust, and a perversion of public education.
Want to see grit? Look at a teacher.