Grit, Money, and Moral Support in Education

Americans have a long tradition of throwing money at a problem. Our focus on the government budget is just one example. But money does not resolve every problem, or even most problems. Andreas Schleicher, in his TED talk goes into great detail about data mining and the findings as a result of research done on education systems from around the world. What he found was that money does help education, up to and including a certain point. Basic supplies and well paid teachers are very necessary to a good classroom. However, he goes on to explain that at a certain point, money does not improve education, the way money is spent is the deciding factor. In America, we have surpassed the level at which money improves education, and yet education has not improved as rapidly as in other countries.

So what can we do to graduate productive students ready for the real world? Angela Lee Duckworth¬†completed an interesting study in which she talked about hard work, what she called “grit,” and how this trait can be the difference between a productive individual and an unproductive individual. Surprisingly, however, the findings showed that the students who did well in school never developed this “grit,” simply because they didn’t know what it was like to have to struggle. Instead, the students with “grit” were those who struggled. These are the students who succeeded in the real world.

So how do we create a work force with “grit?” While some personality traits and personal interests do assist students in school, there is nothing that should prevent a student from doing well in school. In my experience, the most common factor in whether a student will succeed in school and in life is the students’ belief that he or she can succeed. There are other factors, money, other aspects of home life, etc, but I firmly believe that any individual who believes he or she can succeed will succeed.

Support at home cannot be controlled. Teachers can send emails and letters home every day about the role of support, but if a parent or guardian is working multiple jobs, or is simply disinterested, nothing can be done at home. Support at school can be controlled. Placing students in the optimal learning environment, doing one on one work, not comparing, and celebrating goals met are all ways to facilitate a more supportive school environment.

This is all easier said than done. But we need better teachers, we need go pay the profession better to better motivate teachers. We need to do more research on how to discover the best learning environment for each student. There is no one solution, smaller classrooms won’t fix it for everyone, technology won’t fix it for everyone, we need to be able to observe a student and know how he or she learns and produces best.

What do you do to motivate and support your students?


Where should we draw the line regarding computers?

As my father would have said in the 1980s, computers are the future of education. He went on to work for Person County Schools in North Carolina promoting the use of technology before I was born, received his masters in education from North Carolina State University, and in the process was promoted to work for the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction from which he retired when I was in grade school. He created his own company when entrepreneurship and small business was not common, but had the right idea at the right time and was named one of the top ten education innovators by an education magazine. While he was deeply honored by his inclusion in this category, he was almost giddy over the caricature they drew of him. My father set out to improve education, but not be the best. He saw flaws in the education system and foresaw how it would change with the technology revolution long before most homes had computers in them.

Clifford Stoll, I’m sure, sees the benefits of computers, but my fathers introduction to his TedTalk was that he doesn’t believe computers belong in the classroom. I am torn on this idea. Computers, from laptops to cell phones, are drastically decreasing our ability to communicate with others. But they can also be used to portray problems without bringing in costly equipment. I came up with this happy medium:

Clifford Stoll showed an experiment in his TedTalk about sound and wavelengths. He brought in several large pieces of equipment that would be too costly for a teacher and would require a large amount of storage space. Instead, a teacher can use a computer and project the beginning of the experiment onto a screen. To facilitate experimentation, the teacher then asks the students to discuss what will happen next in groups. The students must then do research to discover the outcome of the experiment. They can use discussion, their bodies, instruments found in the classroom, or even the computer. They will be assessed based on their methods, such as discussion or technology, and, if they use the computer, their sources. They will not necessarily be assessed on their answer, but on how they find their answer.

I believe two things have become too much a focus in education, the answer and computers. The answer is important, but what is most important is how one finds the answer. Those who can do math in their heads may not enjoy this, and this ability should be celebrated, but in the beginning a teacher needs to make sure a student is going through the correct steps. These steps won’t be the same for everyone, but they must be analyzed. Secondly, computers are great for finding information, experimenting, and collaborating. These traits should be taught, but also human interaction and that computers do not provide every answer. If there is a temporary power outage, people need to be able to continue being productive. Skills outside of the computer should be harnessed as well.