Paul Tough’s “How Children Succeed”
In this Sunday’s New York Times Book Review, I write about a new book by Paul Tough, “How Children Succeed”:
“Most readers of The New York Times probably subscribe to what Paul Tough calls “the cognitive hypothesis”: the belief “that success today depends primarily on cognitive skills — the kind of intelligence that gets measured on I.Q. tests, including the abilities to recognize letters and words, to calculate, to detect patterns — and that the best way to develop these skills is to practice them as much as possible, beginning as early as possible.” In his new book, “How Children Succeed,” Tough sets out to replace this assumption with what might be called the character hypothesis: the notion that noncognitive skills, like persistence, self-control, curiosity, conscientiousness, grit and self-confidence, are more crucial than sheer brainpower to achieving success.“Psychologists and neuroscientists have learned a lot in the past few decades about where these skills come from and how they are developed,” Tough writes, and what they’ve discovered can be summed up in a sentence: Character is created by encountering and overcoming failure. In this absorbing and important book, Tough explains why American children from both ends of the socioeconomic spectrum are missing out on these essential experiences. The offspring of affluent parents are insulated from adversity, beginning with their baby-proofed nurseries and continuing well into their parentally financed young adulthoods. And while poor children face no end of challenges — from inadequate nutrition and medical care to dysfunctional schools and neighborhoods — there is often little support to help them turn these omnipresent obstacles into character-enhancing triumphs. The book illuminates the extremes of American childhood: for rich kids, a safety net drawn so tight it’s a harness; for poor kids, almost nothing to break their fall.”
Read more here, and tell me what you think: Is character more important than IQ to success? And are our children, rich and poor alike, at risk of not developing these character strengths?
Anne,
I liked Tough’s profile of Canada so I imagine his latest will be a compelling read.
As a parent (and a profesional in the ed consulting space) there is an element of books like this that drives me crazy.
So the research says non-cognitive skills are as important (or more important). Like everything else in life, poorer kids don’t get much of this from their families, and the schools don’t know how to deliver it. Rich kids, ironically, may not get as much of it as you might think too, but for different reasons.
But when you unpack the research cited (and admittedly I don’t have a copy of his book yet to do so) you often find the studies are not as strong as the author claims them to be. Or they’re remarkably devoid of actual steps parents could take to enhance their non-cognitive efforts, or better suport their kids in this regard.
So it’s a bit like being told (and I’m obviously exaggerating here) that if you want to live like the one percent, it’s important to have a lot of money. And the policy problem we’re facing is not many people have that much money.
Finally Pinker chimes in to say, “it’s all in the genes so it doesn’t matter how much you try.”
Tough perhaps does his bit by highlighting the policy issue. But being told “more study is needed” to identify solutions is rather frustrating.
Especially when, according to the latest PDK poll, Americans are not in the mood for more spending on education.
Matthew