A narcissistic generation?

[DanaC]

I put this here, because it's about educating the younglings.

Some time ago, possibly a couple of years, I recall a discussion in the Cellar in which people posited that schools were teaching children that failure was not an option: everybody succeeds. Essentially it was suggested that with this attitude, no child is ever allowed to be last, to fail a test, to be bad at stuff. The emphasis on boosting self-confidence had swung the pendulum too far and created an atmosphere in which kids felt they were entitled to success almost regardless of effort or ability.

I was unconvinced at the time. I felt this was a very negative slant on something that might actually be positive: the removal of intense levels of contest and competition between kids and the fostering of an ethos in which all are valuable, all are contributing.


This morning I read an interesting article on BBCNews, which basically suggests that the above phenonenon is starting to become apparent in our schools. It attributes the philosophy behind it to American teaching ideas which we have apparently adopted here. It suggests that the result is narcissitic children with a sense of entitlement.

I hadn't realised that our countries had such different approaches prior to this. I thought that what was being described in our earlier discussions, was something like what I'd seen in my own country. but viewed negatively. Actually, we'd been doing things differently and hadnt yet felt the full effects of these changes in educational theory and practice.

Anyway, here's the article. I'd be interested to hear if it tallies at all with observations of the American system.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7943906.stm

[Trilby]

Tis an Age-Old Pickle:

"The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for
authority, they show disrespect to their elders.... They no longer
rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents,
chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their
legs, and are tyrants over their teachers."

Or this one?

"The young people of today think of nothing but themselves. They have
no reverence for parents or old age. They are impatient of all
restraint. They talk as if they alone knew everything and what passes
for wisdom with us is foolishness with them. As for girls, they are
forward, immodest and unwomanly in speech, behaviour and dress."

I am not certain, but I think Plato said these?


I see it as part of the business of dealing with youth. But I also feel that this generation of teens and early 20-somethings are more slothful, less caring, than even MY generation. I suppose that marks me right away with the Old Fogey set, shaking my cane and saying, "In my day we didn't wear our pants to our butt cheeks and we WORKED and we were DAMN happy to have WORK, too!!" The student-workers at my Uni are univerally reviled due to their complete dissimilairities to awake, animated, alert human beings who'd like to cash a pay check now and again. They pratically dare each other to do any actual work.

I think the kids are narcissistic doody-heads for the most part. I also think the kids will be allright.

[skysidhe]

ah Brianna, you have a wide vision for understanding the human condition.

Dana,I heard this kind of story a year ago. I think it was a news program where the commentator was talking about how we have not taught our kids how to fail or some such thing that leaned toward narcissism.

Ignoring the fact I was bristling at the idea this is a problem from America I highlighted 'narcissitic pupils' then googled it for results. I wanted to find the article I heard a year ago.

I found articles on the subject from 2007,2004 and speculations from child specialists from 1989.
http://ceep.crc.uiuc.edu/eecearchive.../distinct.html

So I only confirmed what I already knew. I am boringly pragmatic and not from raw instinct and smarts as Brianna's seem to be. You amaze me sometimes Bri.


{edit}
I was wondering at the distinction between China's and India's high emphasis on excelling in school and why that does not make narcissists of them?

I am also wondering why this is a new idea in the U.K. What was the U.K. school body like before our narcisstic tendencies invaded their psyche's? (sp?)

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by skysidhe

I am also wondering why this is a new idea in the U.K. What was the U.K. school body like before our narcisstic tendencies invaded their psyche's? (sp?)

Highly competitive. I recall primary school used to divide us into Houses and have lots of interhouse contests. Prizes for competition and/or academic success only ever awarded to 1st, 2nd and 3rd place. You weren't in the top 3 there was no recognition to speak of. Liberal use of red pens to mark work (this apparently not allowed now as it is considered demotivating), gold stars and black marks, merit and demerit registers. Public humiliation of kids that weren't doing well (not exactly 'sanctioned' as a teaching method but fairly endemic within the system). If, for example, you were struggling with maths or English, you might be put into a 'special class'. There was no real attempt made to mitigate the obvious humliation of such a thing, if anything it was waved about practically like some kind of sanction. Kids were often called stupid, thick, or told they'd never amount to anything. The idea was, I think, to toughen them up and shock them into trying.

Work being handed back in such a way that ensured everyone was aware of how everyone else was doing *rolls eyes*, including very demonstrative returns of F-graded work. Tests for streaming wold rank kids within their class.


What there wasn't, and I think this might be where some of the changes have come in in a positive way, was a parrallel merit system that recognised difference in capacity, potential and kinds of intelligence in kids, Didn't take account of value-added measures either: no recognition for example of a child who came into the school way behind their peers and then dragged themselves up to just behind their peers...that's an achievement worthy of recognition, but it doesn't fit into a 1st place, 2nd place, 3rd place mentality.

I've seen in schools now, there is a tendency to award prizes for everything from having a good attitude to good improvements in reading. I am inclined to think this is probably a positive development, and frankly if we end up with a group of kids who are a little self-centred, that's probably not any worse than the legions of children who've been sent back out into the world with a damaged sense of their own worth under the older systems of teaching.

@ Sky: the reason it says it comes from America, is because it derives from an American school of thought in teaching theory. There has been a conscious attempt to bring in changes in keeping with those theories. It peaked my interest, because some American dwellars had characterised American education in those terms a couple of years ago.

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by DanaC

@ Sky: the reason it says it comes from America, is because it derives from an American school of thought in teaching theory. There has been a conscious attempt to bring in changes in keeping with those theories. It peaked my interest, because some American dwellars had characterised American education in those terms a couple of years ago.

Thanks for the clarification. I guess I was confusing teaching theory with human development theories.

Originally Posted by DanaC

I've seen in schools now, there is a tendency to award prizes for everything from having a good attitude to good improvements in reading. I am inclined to think this is probably a positive development, and frankly if we end up with a group of kids who are a little self-centred, that's probably not any worse than the legions of children who've been sent back out into the world with a damaged sense of their own worth under the older systems of teaching.

I remember this too was part of the commentary of which I was speaking. If everything kids do is praised then this is where the sense of entitlement comes from. I believe we are changing course to teach critical thinking skills. The positive reinforcement for some teachers is still there but I think it it is changing starting from the way employers were seeing college grads. The kids who had a sense of entitlement even with good grades were not as hireable as those with critical thinking skills and who had other traits deemed desirable such as community service of some other unique talent and possibly not stellar grades. A trend trickling down so that the schools are beginning to teach children how to problem solve and be good thinkers and observers over the accumulation of gold stars by rote thinking. I know this is a fluid movement and the old standard is still there however I believe it is slowly changing.

I do get what you are saying. A little positive can go along way in comparison to putting kids down.


I hope this makes sense. I have not had to think for a long time. That saying use it or lose it is so true.

My thoughts as I write: If I plan to go finish my degree I wonder how I can manage when I can barely put together a concise thought on a webpage.

[Shawnee123]

DanaC: I saw a comedian talking about a kid getting a huge trophy for participating in a baseball league. He asked the kid what it was for and the kid says "because I participated." The comedian says "that just proves your mom dropped you off: hey kid, good job getting out of the car."

Certainly we want to encourage kids, but I think that encouragement should come with a degree of honesty, such as "well, you know what Johnny? Your talent doesn't seem to lie in baseball, but I noticed a great drawing you did the other day. What are you interested in pursuing? If you're having fun with baseball by all means, continue...you can also invest some time in your artistic skills as well."

Childhood is a time to find out what kinds of things spark your interest, what sort of things you're good at: for a child to never be allowed to fail is not doing them any favors, imho.

[skysidhe]

yep

[monster]

I love "paper plate" awards for this reason. Every child gets one, and you can use them to praise true excellence and also to motivate the slackers in a way that isn't too disparaging. it's a happy medium. Kids aren't failed, but for those who aren't the best, their award relates to some other aspect of them rather than their prowess in the task at hand and the coach says how they should apply that skill to the task next year/season.....

[ZenGum]

Phrase from a grade-schooler"s award certificate:

"has made great strides in sitting still"

Wha?

[Trilby]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

Phrase from a grade-schooler"s award certificate:

"has made great strides in sitting still"

Wha?

Perhaps the child is the unfortunate offspring of a MexicanJumping bean or two. Can't really blame him for that, can we?

sitting down, for this lad, WOULD be tatamount to a certificate-getting bit of recognition. what? You've got something against mexican jumping beans?!

[Clodfobble]

I think he was referring to the pun of making "great strides." If you're looking for a kid who would deserve a freaking medal for sitting still, look no further than the Fobble household...

[monster]

Report home today from one of mine....

"Is doing much better at following directions in the classroom. is now working on this skill in other settings -speacial area classes and math class. Has gained some control over response to frustrating social situations, but still requires much adult support for appropriate social problem solving"

Sigh.

[ZenGum]

I understand you, Clod. I had to teach one hyperactive nine-year-old in Japan, the only thing that worked was miming nailing his feet to the floor. God knows how his parents (in Japan - Mother) coped. Probably used real nails.

[SteveDallas]

In my experience . . . they know. When I was in elementary school, they had us in different reading groups, and the groups were named after birds depending on which reader we were using (the one with the blue cover was for the "bluebirds" group, etc.), rather than "A, B, C" or "1, 2, 3" or whatever. It may have been somewhat more polite, but everybody knew that some groups were getting "Let's go for a ride! I like to rid in the car!" and some were getting "Susan wasn't sure what her mom would say about the broken vase, so she decided to not say anything."

Like the baseball/softball league my kids play in... up to 8 they give out a little trophy or medal to everybody. (But it just says "Podunk Little League Rookie Division, 2008"... Not "#1 Champions or something like that.) Hell, they barely keep score, much less standings. The emphasis is on teaching the kids how to play--when do you throw it to first? when do you throw it to second? Etc. For the two older age groups, there are playoffs and trophies for the champions and first runner-ups. The kids know the difference between the "thanks for showing up" trophies and the championship ones.

I admit I haven't finished the book (yet), but in "The Optimistic Child," psychologist Martin Seligman says that the problem isn't the idea of building self-esteem, but the way it's done. Bad: Tell the kids they're geniuses no matter how bad they screw up. (It doesn't work and they can tell they've screwed up.) Good: Put them in a position where they can actually achieve something or be successful at something.

[monster]

oh they know, they just care less because they're still getting trophies anyway. They care, but not as much and maybe not enough to make the extra effort.