Let's do some talking about this idea of Johnston's that when we tell a child he is a "good boy" ...or a "good reader"...it automatically sets up a fixed performance frame for students. If one can be "good", one can also be "bad"...we confirm the idea that people have fixed and unchanging abilities.
Johnston shares some thought-provoking research that we need to consider. He writews on page 11: "When children holding fixed theories encounter difficulties, mistakes become crippling. Worse, if they think a task might be difficult they choose to not even try so that they won't fail and look stupid. They choose not to try, even if it means losing an opportunity to learn something important. They choose instead to look good, or at least not to look bad at whatever they are doing." I am thinking back to several students I had difficulty motivating and am considering now the damage I might have been doing when I encouraged struggling students that they were indeed "good readers" instead of focusing them on their process. With Common Core coming up for many of us...where we will be asking students to work in more complex texts...to persist in solving difficult problems in mathematics...to design their own inquiries in science...What implications do our students' theories about being smart or becoming smart have for us in this new and rapidly changing educational environment? Do you agree with Johnston's points that our language can develop childrens' worlds and views about learning? What changes will you make in the language you use with your kids TODAY, in your classroom? Jennifer L. Palmer, Ed. D. Instructional Facilitator National Board Certified Teacher, Listserv moderator "Reaching, Teaching, Learning, Changing Lives!!" _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive
