"You can learn many things from children. How much patience you have, for instance."
- Franklin P. Adams
Read this article carefully and see that it really support the traditional way of nurturing children. The modern parent have got it WRONG!
Kena cari buku “Nurtureshock” to know about it better…
Art of Good Parenting
YOUR seven-year-old son presents you with yet another drawing of a dinosaur - just like the scores he has produced already. Do you show him how to be more careful about colouring between the lines or tell him that it's your favourite dinosaur drawing of all time, and what a clever, talented boy he is?
A few weeks later, your 14-year-old daughter comes home from school in tears, and admits that she's being bullied by some other girls. They call her names, leave cruel notes in her locker and make a point of ignoring her whenever she speaks.
Do you say that she needs to sort this out herself or do you hug her tightly and promise her that it will never happen again - and you're going to make sure of it?
If you gave the second answer to both questions, you're typical modern parent: loving, protective, and very involved in your child's life. You are also, according to new research, doing all the wrong things - even if it is for all right reasons.
"Nurtureshock" is an explosive new book which has already sparked a fierce debate in America by challenging many of our most basic assumptions about children and parenting.
At its heart is one of the most fundamental questions of our time: why, after decades of caring, progressive parenting and education, do we have so many social problems with children and teenagers from all backgrounds?
Based on a massive review of the latest scientific studies, authors Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman - who are established writers on social issues - insist that much of what we think of as being good parenting is actually wrong.
They argue that many of our strategies for nurturing our children are backfiring because we haven't properly understood the science of how children think or develop.
This isn't, they say, a stick to beat well-meaning parents with, but an opportunity to change family life for the better.
While they are not advocating a return to Victorian parenting, with children seen and not heard, or beaten when they're naughty, what they do argue is that the touchy-feely brand of modern parenting, where parents are too weak to criticise and discipline, will actually damage our children in the long term.
One of the biggest failures of modern parenting, say the authors, has been our belief in the importance of instilling high self-esteem at all costs. We praise our children constantly and indiscriminately. A simple drawing is 'brilliant'; getting a few ticks on their homework earns a delighted 'you're so clever'.
How star charts create 'praise junkies'
We have 'star charts', where children earn rewards for good behaviour. At sports days, no one is allowed to come first, so other children will be protected from feeling like a failure.
The theory is that this will build confidence and self-esteem in all the children - attributes which have been linked to happier, more successful lives and relationships in later life.
But new research from Dr. Carol Dweck at Colombia University, who studied groups of children over ten years, indicates that the opposite is true. It suggests we are producing a generation of brats and 'praise junkies' who can't cope with the inevitable set-backs and failures of everyday life.
For example, if we tell a child frequently how clever they are, we may think we are being supportive and encouraging, when what we're really doing is giving them impossibly high expectations to live up to.
'Clever' becomes a label they have to protect if they want to please us. They will become anxious at the thought of failure and will only attempt 'easy' things they know they can succeed at.
But if we praise a child's effort, telling them after a test 'You must have worked really hard here', they are being praised for something they can control - the amount of work they do. And that will motivate them to work harder.
When a child gets a low grade or fails at a task, our impulse is to say 'It doesn't matter', so they will know we love them whatever he does. But that's not how they interpret it. They know perfectly well that it does matter, because we get so happy and excited when they do well.
And by pretending it doesn't matter, we don't give them what they really need - which is the tools to help them handle disappointment and do better next time.
There is no evidence, say the authors, to show that high self-esteem has any effect on improving academic performance, or reducing anti-social behaviour.
In fact, over-praised children become more unpleasant to others and make poorer team players. Their prime goal becomes a kind of image maintenance, and they will do whatever they can - including criticising and dismissing others - to make themselves look good.
All this doesn't mean we should never give our children positive feedback. But to be effective, praise has to be specific and it has to be genuine, which means it has to be earned. It also has to be balanced with careful constructive criticism, which is something far too many modern parents can't bring themselves to give.
While parents who can't or won't be tough on their children when it's required come under attack in Nurtureshock, there is also an unpleasant surprise for all those men who think they are doing the right thing in being very hands-on dads.
Over the past two decades, there has been a huge rise in progressive dads - the kind of man who is an active presence in his child's life from birth onwards, who has no truck with traditional gender roles, and who is just as likely to wash and dress their child or to take a day off work when their child is sick.
This has generally been considered an overwhelmingly positive thing, and the kind of 'new' parent that both women and children want.
However, new research from parenting expert Dr. Sarah Schoppe-Sullivan shows that while 'co-parenting' has some benefits, it also leads to more arguments over parenting decisions, and to more conflict in the marriage.
Progressive fathers rate their marriages as less happy, and rate their families as not functioning as well as those with traditional fathers where gender roles are more defined, and where the father is the main earner/protector and the mother the main nurturer.
Progressive dads are also weaker at setting and enforcing family rules. They are very clear about ways they don't want to discipline their children (such as hitting or shouting), but confused and inconsistent about what to do instead.
As a result, the children of progressive fathers who are proud to be hands-on are almost as aggressive and badly behaved at school as the children of fathers who are either absent from the home, or play very little part in their children's lives.
One of the other highly contentious subjects the book tackles is the startling rise in levels of bullying in schools in recent years.
The case of Carol Hill, the school dinner lady sacked for telling parents that their daughter was being bullied, and tragic Holly Grogan, the 15-year- old who jumped to her death after being bullied on Facebook, are just two examples from the past week alone that highlight our failure to stop the growth of bullying.
Why has it become such a huge problem? It's because, say the authors of Nurtureshock, we have misunderstood what bullying is, and who bullies are - and our current strategies for dealing with it are making things worse.
Bullying is just 'social dominance'
Bullies, we believe, are Bad Kids, the product of poor parenting or of some personality problem. The research here tells a different and more complicated story.
While some bullies are just thugs, most bullying is done by children who are popular and successful.
Most of what we call bullying behaviour - meanness, aggression, exclusion from groups or activities - is, in fact, the normal struggle for acceptance, popularity and 'social dominance'.
The children who best succeed are those who can call on a wide range of whatever-it-takes social skills and manipulation
Research by Dr. Linda Caldwell and Dr. Nancy Darling at Penn State University shows that a whopping 96 per cent of teenagers lie about practically everything: what they spend their money on, whether they've started dating, what they wear once they leave the house, what they're doing in the evening and with whom.
They lie mostly about sex, alcohol and drug use, but also about whether they've done their homework - even about what music they're listening to.
This isn't as bad as it sounds. Lying is so normal for teenagers that you might be more worried about the four per cent who don't lie.
But they don't do it just to stay out of trouble. They also lie to protect their relationship with their parents, to save us from feeling hurt, worried or disappointed - and to get some healthy emotional distance from their parents.
So if your teenager argues with you, thank your lucky stars. It's their way of being honest and open with you about what is really going on in their life. It is a sign of respect.
Look at it this way: your rule is no drinking. If they are going to drink anyway, they'll just do it and lie about it. But if they are arguing with you about whether they should be allowed to drink, they're telling you truthfully what they plan to do, and thinking you will at least listen to their point of view.
They're not arguing with your right to make rules - they actually want you to do that
- but negotiating about what the rules should be.
Research shows that teens who have moderate conflict with their parents enjoy better relationships with them generally, tell fewer lies, and are better adjusted.
Many of the findings in Nurtureshock are not what we parents expect or want to hear, but we have to hear it. The authors, one of whom admits to being a softlysoftly parent, and who says they have made all the same mistakes, believe we have, quite simply, become scared of our children.
We need to take back our authority, stop being friends with our children, and re-think everything we thought we knew about what's best for them, and for society in general.
- Franklin P. Adams
Read this article carefully and see that it really support the traditional way of nurturing children. The modern parent have got it WRONG!
Kena cari buku “Nurtureshock” to know about it better…
Art of Good Parenting
YOUR seven-year-old son presents you with yet another drawing of a dinosaur - just like the scores he has produced already. Do you show him how to be more careful about colouring between the lines or tell him that it's your favourite dinosaur drawing of all time, and what a clever, talented boy he is?
A few weeks later, your 14-year-old daughter comes home from school in tears, and admits that she's being bullied by some other girls. They call her names, leave cruel notes in her locker and make a point of ignoring her whenever she speaks.
Do you say that she needs to sort this out herself or do you hug her tightly and promise her that it will never happen again - and you're going to make sure of it?
If you gave the second answer to both questions, you're typical modern parent: loving, protective, and very involved in your child's life. You are also, according to new research, doing all the wrong things - even if it is for all right reasons.
"Nurtureshock" is an explosive new book which has already sparked a fierce debate in America by challenging many of our most basic assumptions about children and parenting.
At its heart is one of the most fundamental questions of our time: why, after decades of caring, progressive parenting and education, do we have so many social problems with children and teenagers from all backgrounds?
Based on a massive review of the latest scientific studies, authors Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman - who are established writers on social issues - insist that much of what we think of as being good parenting is actually wrong.
They argue that many of our strategies for nurturing our children are backfiring because we haven't properly understood the science of how children think or develop.
This isn't, they say, a stick to beat well-meaning parents with, but an opportunity to change family life for the better.
While they are not advocating a return to Victorian parenting, with children seen and not heard, or beaten when they're naughty, what they do argue is that the touchy-feely brand of modern parenting, where parents are too weak to criticise and discipline, will actually damage our children in the long term.
One of the biggest failures of modern parenting, say the authors, has been our belief in the importance of instilling high self-esteem at all costs. We praise our children constantly and indiscriminately. A simple drawing is 'brilliant'; getting a few ticks on their homework earns a delighted 'you're so clever'.
How star charts create 'praise junkies'
We have 'star charts', where children earn rewards for good behaviour. At sports days, no one is allowed to come first, so other children will be protected from feeling like a failure.
The theory is that this will build confidence and self-esteem in all the children - attributes which have been linked to happier, more successful lives and relationships in later life.
But new research from Dr. Carol Dweck at Colombia University, who studied groups of children over ten years, indicates that the opposite is true. It suggests we are producing a generation of brats and 'praise junkies' who can't cope with the inevitable set-backs and failures of everyday life.
For example, if we tell a child frequently how clever they are, we may think we are being supportive and encouraging, when what we're really doing is giving them impossibly high expectations to live up to.
'Clever' becomes a label they have to protect if they want to please us. They will become anxious at the thought of failure and will only attempt 'easy' things they know they can succeed at.
But if we praise a child's effort, telling them after a test 'You must have worked really hard here', they are being praised for something they can control - the amount of work they do. And that will motivate them to work harder.
When a child gets a low grade or fails at a task, our impulse is to say 'It doesn't matter', so they will know we love them whatever he does. But that's not how they interpret it. They know perfectly well that it does matter, because we get so happy and excited when they do well.
And by pretending it doesn't matter, we don't give them what they really need - which is the tools to help them handle disappointment and do better next time.
There is no evidence, say the authors, to show that high self-esteem has any effect on improving academic performance, or reducing anti-social behaviour.
In fact, over-praised children become more unpleasant to others and make poorer team players. Their prime goal becomes a kind of image maintenance, and they will do whatever they can - including criticising and dismissing others - to make themselves look good.
All this doesn't mean we should never give our children positive feedback. But to be effective, praise has to be specific and it has to be genuine, which means it has to be earned. It also has to be balanced with careful constructive criticism, which is something far too many modern parents can't bring themselves to give.
While parents who can't or won't be tough on their children when it's required come under attack in Nurtureshock, there is also an unpleasant surprise for all those men who think they are doing the right thing in being very hands-on dads.
Over the past two decades, there has been a huge rise in progressive dads - the kind of man who is an active presence in his child's life from birth onwards, who has no truck with traditional gender roles, and who is just as likely to wash and dress their child or to take a day off work when their child is sick.
This has generally been considered an overwhelmingly positive thing, and the kind of 'new' parent that both women and children want.
However, new research from parenting expert Dr. Sarah Schoppe-Sullivan shows that while 'co-parenting' has some benefits, it also leads to more arguments over parenting decisions, and to more conflict in the marriage.
Progressive fathers rate their marriages as less happy, and rate their families as not functioning as well as those with traditional fathers where gender roles are more defined, and where the father is the main earner/protector and the mother the main nurturer.
Progressive dads are also weaker at setting and enforcing family rules. They are very clear about ways they don't want to discipline their children (such as hitting or shouting), but confused and inconsistent about what to do instead.
As a result, the children of progressive fathers who are proud to be hands-on are almost as aggressive and badly behaved at school as the children of fathers who are either absent from the home, or play very little part in their children's lives.
One of the other highly contentious subjects the book tackles is the startling rise in levels of bullying in schools in recent years.
The case of Carol Hill, the school dinner lady sacked for telling parents that their daughter was being bullied, and tragic Holly Grogan, the 15-year- old who jumped to her death after being bullied on Facebook, are just two examples from the past week alone that highlight our failure to stop the growth of bullying.
Why has it become such a huge problem? It's because, say the authors of Nurtureshock, we have misunderstood what bullying is, and who bullies are - and our current strategies for dealing with it are making things worse.
Bullying is just 'social dominance'
Bullies, we believe, are Bad Kids, the product of poor parenting or of some personality problem. The research here tells a different and more complicated story.
While some bullies are just thugs, most bullying is done by children who are popular and successful.
Most of what we call bullying behaviour - meanness, aggression, exclusion from groups or activities - is, in fact, the normal struggle for acceptance, popularity and 'social dominance'.
The children who best succeed are those who can call on a wide range of whatever-it-takes social skills and manipulation
Research by Dr. Linda Caldwell and Dr. Nancy Darling at Penn State University shows that a whopping 96 per cent of teenagers lie about practically everything: what they spend their money on, whether they've started dating, what they wear once they leave the house, what they're doing in the evening and with whom.
They lie mostly about sex, alcohol and drug use, but also about whether they've done their homework - even about what music they're listening to.
This isn't as bad as it sounds. Lying is so normal for teenagers that you might be more worried about the four per cent who don't lie.
But they don't do it just to stay out of trouble. They also lie to protect their relationship with their parents, to save us from feeling hurt, worried or disappointed - and to get some healthy emotional distance from their parents.
So if your teenager argues with you, thank your lucky stars. It's their way of being honest and open with you about what is really going on in their life. It is a sign of respect.
Look at it this way: your rule is no drinking. If they are going to drink anyway, they'll just do it and lie about it. But if they are arguing with you about whether they should be allowed to drink, they're telling you truthfully what they plan to do, and thinking you will at least listen to their point of view.
They're not arguing with your right to make rules - they actually want you to do that
- but negotiating about what the rules should be.
Research shows that teens who have moderate conflict with their parents enjoy better relationships with them generally, tell fewer lies, and are better adjusted.
Many of the findings in Nurtureshock are not what we parents expect or want to hear, but we have to hear it. The authors, one of whom admits to being a softlysoftly parent, and who says they have made all the same mistakes, believe we have, quite simply, become scared of our children.
We need to take back our authority, stop being friends with our children, and re-think everything we thought we knew about what's best for them, and for society in general.
