Paul Tough popularized the term “grit” in his best-selling book How Children Succeed, but EduShyster decided to avoid that topic in this interview.
Tough has done something close to a 180. In his new book Helping Children Succeed, he admits that grit can’t be taught.
Instead, he reviews the latest research on child development and concludes that what matters most is attachments, human attachments.
He recommends programs that engage children with caring adults, and he is critical of the rote learning that now predominates in so many test-obsessed schools.
EduShyster confided to me, Paul sounds a lot like you in Reign of Error. That’s a compliment. His previous book was one of their favorites. I hope they read this one too.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
The honesty is really refreshing:
“The forces that are driving inequality at the top end are pretty powerful right now. So to me, this seems like the best lever to use.”
It’s honest. “The forces” that are driving inequality are too powerful, no one is willing to challenge those, so public education is the lever THEY CHOOSE.
I’m fine with it as long as we all admit it up front- we COULD challenge some of these other “forces” but public education is a softer target and “reinventing” public education doesn’t upset or inconvenience those more powerful forces – forces like tax policy or wages or real estate values. Education is the LEAST disruptive to the status quo.
LikeLike
Tough appears to be endorsing constructivist learning activities under the direction of a caring adult. This is nothing new. Many school districts implemented constructivist practice prior to NCLB. This was always the way I taught content to my ELLs who were very poor. Poor young children can be creative and good problem solvers in a constructivist setting that is engaging and social. Since most of us learn better by doing rather than passively filling out worksheets, it is an effective way, especially in math, for students to grasp concepts in concrete form before they start moving to abstract operations. This is not a new discovery; it is as old as Maria Montessori.
Frankly, I am sick of public education being a capitalistic target. Free public education should be the right of all students, and people should not have to fight off corporations, billionaires and the government to get it.
LikeLike
A recent examination of the Duckworth(less) griterature has revealed that Angela Duckworth had/has no clue what she was/is doing and made claims about grit that were wildly exaggerated.
Here’s a synopsis of the findings
Duckworth basically renamed something that has been known about for a very long time: conscientiousness.
What is much worse, Duckworth grossly exaggerated the impact of the latter.
From the linked article:
“Gross error in results
The most well-known data source on grit is based on West Point cadets who complete basic training at the United States Military Academy. According to one paper describing these cadets, those with above-average levels of grit are 99 percent more likely to finish the training than cadets with average levels of grit. However, Credé says the original data were misinterpreted. His analysis shows the
increase in likelihood is really closer to 3 percent, rather than 99 percent. “It’s a really basic error and the weird thing is that
no one else has ever picked it up. People just read the work and said, ‘It’s this massive increase in people’s performance and how likely they are to succeed.’ But no one had ever looked at the
numbers before,” Credé said.
“Don’t invest in grit interventions
Credé wants to make others aware of this error because many educators have bought into the concept of grit and are exploring ways to improve this trait. In the paper, Credé cited examples of schools that are training teachers to foster grit in students as well as school districts considering adding grit to the curriculum. A 2013 U.S. Department of Education report also recommended incorporating grit in school interventions.”
“Nobody wants to hear that success in life is made
up of many small factors that all add up. It’s your
education, it’s how hard you work, it’s your
conscientious and creativity – all these little pieces
that add up,” Credé said. “We want to be told here’s
one big thing that explains everything.”
But if educators want to improve student academic
performance, Credé says there are other more
effective ways to accomplish that goal.”
LikeLike
It’s been a while since I read Tough’s second book (the one that popularized “grit”), so maybe I’m misremembering, but I seem to recall that Tough didn’t necessarily use it as what poor kids are lacking and, hence, why they fail. I seem to remember him comparing KIPP with a private, rather elite school (River-something?) and it seemed like he applied the lack of grit to the private school kids, point being that they have easier lives to begin with and when they do encounter hardships, mom and dad are more likely to be there to smooth things over for them, so they don’t learn how to apply themselves and work through obstacles. The KIPP kids, on the other hand, had to have grit just to make it to school every day, given what many of their lives were like.
Maybe I’m misremembering and imposing my own biases, but if so, that would make a lot more sense than what “grit” has become these days.
LikeLike
As an aside, I crack up every time I read that the guy who popularized the term “grit” is named Paul Tough.
LikeLike
Interesting brief piece. I like that Tough emphasized the role of human interaction. This could be the old man in me, you know from a previous generation, but I think that technology has severed the bonds that kids have usually developed. Lots of communicating via text and social media.
I developed a course based on board games. (Euro style games that are historically themed and moderate to deep strategy.) I run after school sessions where any kid can drop in and play some games. I get 20-30 kids depending on what’s going on. The kids loved it but the district won’t run the class because of, you guessed it, testing and the pressures of core courses. My district liked the class but electives are highly limited.
When I asked students why they liked the games, here’s the most common answer: We just like hanging out with each other. The games are interactive but it supports that human connection piece.
LikeLike
A game can be a very effective learning tool. While games may inject a bit of competition, it is a safe no stakes form. There are tweaking of rules that can help slow learners save face such as “ask a friend.” While students enjoy the social interaction, watching students’ strategies or lack thereof can be informative to a teacher. A game can be a form of test prep or even an observable form of informal assessment, and they can be a positive motivation.
LikeLike
In my book I say “According to Paul Tough, childhood stress has been scientifically proven to slow the brain. Any child would have trouble functioning in school if he or she was living in a chaotic home where the family has trouble dealing with daily life.” But I go on to say “Yet we simply throw up our hands and blame others while accepting an educational system design that supports privilege and destroys those who don’t fit in its tiny box” (Brainstorming Common Core, Roman and Littlefield)
The point being that Paul hits the nail on the head when he talks about the reason students have difficulty functioning in today’s test driven world. But we are to blame for not presenting a system and philosophy that waits for those who learn at a different rate and assesses and teaches kids in the way they learn best.
Rigor and grit is driven by empowering students to find their passion, not ours and not that of Common Core testing. I quote Dr. Angela Dye ” traditional school outcomes as level “B” achievement (test driven) can occur in the absence of learning how to work and learn independently;learning how to synthesize, transfer and apply knowledge to the world beyond the classroom; learning how to value self as subjects and not as objects; and learning how to engage in and share power in democratic spaces”
The current system and philosophy of education was designed in the 18th century with its purpose, according to Thomas Jefferson, “raking a few geniuses from the rubbish” was never designed to serve all students. And as long as we try to fit every child into the same artificial box of word games and math riddles, we will fail.
LikeLike
I think the corporate fraudsters fueling this war on community based, democratic, transparent and non-profit public education, public school teachers and teachers’ unions will ignore the message in the new book because it won’t lead to profits from public dollars. They will only use what helps boost the profits they are chasing. Even if that means burning the U.S. Constitution and destroying the republic the Founding Fathers created with their sacrifice and blood.
LikeLike
I’m sorry but what makes him an authority on childhood education? What are his credentials? Sure he is an author, journalist, and a broadcaster but what was his research, studies, and experiences that made him a reputable authority in the field of education? He may be a good journalist, broadcaster and a good researcher but that is not enough to be an expert.
That is like some people in Holywood; just because they are phenomenal actors/actress they think they are an authority on everything. Is Paul Tough’s studies, research on par with Dr. Elkind, Dr. Carlson-Paige, Dewey and a host of other psychologists, educators, and philosophers who have already zeroed in on the how children learn, important aspects in their lives, and how to deal with the problems of today? Our classroom teachers have more background knowledge of what is necessary for a child to succeed than Tough but they don’t have time to write a book.
LikeLike
I have taught junior high students who had better analytical abilities than people like Tough.
He was wrong and now he’s changed his tune. Good for him but should we give him a medal? I think not.
LikeLike