Tiger-Dad?

At a wedding recently, I was seated next to a man who has a daughter the same age as mine. We both showed admirable restraint in not comparing photos, however we did get chatting about parenting styles, and, in particular, the way we praise our children’s artworks when we pick them up from daycare. In spite of my previous admonitions against broad, nonspecific praise, I must admit that my reinforcement of my children’s smallest artistic efforts generally borders on enthusiastic. My neighbour at the table, however, told me that he peruses his daughter’s efforts before they leave the centre, and, if they don’t show some specific noteworthy element, he doesn’t take them home. “Tiger-mother!” leapt to mind as I recalled reading of Chinese mother Amy Chua, who sent her four-year-old children’s handmade birthday cards back because she deserved a better one.  But then I realised that my dinner companion’s approach, actually, is probably likely to have a far better impact on his daughter’s self-esteem, persistence, and enjoyment of tasks than mine.

With my unrelenting positive reinforcement,  my daughter is likely to learn that it doesn’t matter if she half-heartedly slaps a bit of paint on a piece of paper or spends half an hour painstakingly drawing a portrait of Mummy. If she gets the same level of praise for both, why would she bother to try? (I do recognise that there are benefits to art work that are not just about representative images – but the general principle stands). If I tell her that I love the picture, but not anything about her effort or technique or persistence, she won’t learn what it is that she needs to do to achieve a similar outcome in the future.

On the other hand, my erstwhile dinner companion’s daughter is learning lots of things. Firstly, that her Daddy is interested in her enough to take the time to talk to her about each of her paintings. She’s learning that things like technique, persistence and effort lead to positive outcomes, and that these are things she’s got control over. This will build her sense of competence and self esteem and lead her to persist in the face of difficult tasks as she gets older. And last but far from least, she’s learning that she can trust her father to tell her the truth, which is a foundation far better for a solid relationship than unconditional praise will ever be.

What do you think? Which side of the praise fence are you on?

When is praising your child not a good thing?

As I go along, learning how to be a parent, there have been many times when my best intentions have come crashed head-on into my conditioning. Particularly under pressure. For example, I know that forcing children to “eat what’s in front of them” leads to stressful dinner times and sometimes to eating disorders in later life. But I seem unable to stop myself from begging, cajoling or threatening my two-year-old to eat every last mouthful. And I know that smacking is the absolute least effective way of changing a child’s behaviour but there’s been particularly devilish times when the words “Do you want a smack??” have been out of my mouth before I’ve even consciously formed the thought. And so it is at the moment – I’ve just read a couple of books setting out an extremely convincing theory about motivation and development, and I’m trying to put it into practice in the way I parent. But, old habits die hard.

Carol Dweck is a Professor of Psychology at Columbia University in the United States. With her team, she’s developed a theory that calls into question one of our most firmly held parenting practices – and has done study after study to show it works. Do you praise your children’s good qualities? So do I. But according to Professor Dweck, we shouldn’t.

We all have implicit theories. Deeply held, even unconscious beliefs about who we are, our relationships with others, and the way the world works. One of these has to do with intelligence. Some of us have a belief that intelligence is fixed. That you’re born with a certain amount of it, and there’s not much you can do about it. Others believe that intelligence is changeable. That if you work hard, use different strategies when you face difficulties, and persevere, you can become smarter. Which do you believe?

Professor Dweck has shown that, if you have a “fixed” theory of intelligence, you’re more likely to spend your life choosing goals that you are able to achieve easily. No-one wants to look stupid, right? So you choose something easy, and “prove” how smart you are. On the other hand, if you believe that intelligence is something you can change, you’ll choose harder tasks, even if you think you might fail at first. That way, you learn more things. Gain more skills. Get smarter.

So what’s all this got to do with praising our children? Think about all the times you say to your children “You’re so clever!”, “You’re so good at this” or even “I’m so proud of you!” This is “person-oriented” praise that gives children the message that they have these qualities. Which is all well and good, until the child comes up against difficulty and failure. If a child who believes they have a fixed amount of “clever” fails at a task, they are likely to rate themselves negatively, experience negative emotions like shame, lack persistence, and have feelings of badness. However, a child who has been given strategy-oriented or effort-oriented praise (“You worked so hard on that, well done!” or “I like the way you did…”) is likely to want to persist, to have positive emotions and ratings, and have feelings of goodness.

So this afternoon as I watched Miss Two do a jigsaw puzzle, I tried really hard to praise her effort. But when that tricky piece suddenly slipped into place and she looked at me with those shiny eyes and that big proud smile, the good girl’s and you’re so clever’s were flying out before I could stop them.  But I don’t believe that being a good parent is a fixed quality. So I shall persist!