‘Not suppost to cry’: 9-year-old lists the worst things about being a boy ‘Not suppost to cry’: 9-year-old lists the worst things about being a boy CHRISTOPHER HOOTON Author Biography Friday 21 November 2014 8K PRINT A A A When a teacher asked students to list what they don’t like about being the gender that they are, one boy’s answers were surprisingly poignant and perceptive. His bullet points cover stereotypes in careers and sports, the expectation to enjoy violence and machismo and even the negative judgement some may make of men before they’ve even met them. His responses to ‘What I don’t like about being a boy were (sic): – Not being able to be a mother – Not suppost to cry (sic) – Not allowed to be a cheerleader – Suppost to do all the work – Suppost to like vilence – Suppost to play football – Boys smell bad – Having a automatic bad reputation – Grow hair everywhere The image was being shared a lot this week in relation to International Mens Day but actually originates from a class that took place earlier in the year. “Masculinity is toxic” commented one Twitter user. The ‘boys smell bad’ bullet point ties neatly in with two scientists’ abhorrant idea this week to ‘biohack’ vaginas so that they smell like peaches.
Futurity Research news from top universities.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
green cables on yellow background SHARE THIS ARTICLEFACEBOOKTWITTERACTION
“A very interesting finding is that, contrary to previous studies, the brain is much more plastic than we thought,” says Ping Li. “We can still see anatomical changes in the brain [in the elderly], which is very encouraging news for aging.” (Credit: iStockphoto)
NEW LANGUAGES RE-WIRE BRAINS OF ALL AGES
PENN STATErightOriginal Study
Posted by Victoria Indivero-Penn State on November 12, 2014
Learning a new language can change the function and structure of your brain network, say researchers.
“Learning and practicing something, for instance a second language, strengthens the brain,” says Ping Li, professor of psychology, linguistics, and information sciences and technology at Penn State.
“Like physical exercise, the more you use specific areas of your brain, the more it grows and gets stronger.”
Johns Hopkins University
Brain’s ‘GPS’ gets us from here to there
laser light brain
See into living brain with lasers and nanotubes
According to the new research, the most vulnerable white matter pathways—the core “scaffolding”—are not necessarily just the connections among the most vulnerable areas of gray matter. These findings help explain why seemingly small brain injuries may have such devastating effects. (Credit: Pete Jordan/Flickr)
University of Southern California
‘Scaffold’ map reveals brain’s weak spots
Li and colleagues studied 39 native English speakers’ brains over a six-week period as half of the participants learned Chinese vocabulary. Of the subjects learning the new vocabulary, those who were more successful in attaining the information showed a more connected brain network than both the less successful participants and those who did not learn the new vocabulary.
The researchers also found that the participants who were successful learners had a more connected network than the other participants even before learning took place. A better-integrated brain network is more flexible and efficient, making the task of learning a new language easier.
Li and colleagues report their results in the Journal of Neurolinguistics.
CONNECTING THE NODES
The efficiency of brain networks was defined by the researchers in terms of the strength and direction of connections, or edges, between brain regions of interest, or nodes. The stronger the edges going from one node to the next, the faster the nodes can work together, and the more efficient the network.
Participants each underwent two fMRI scans—one before the experiment began and one after—in order for the researchers to track neural changes. At the end of the study period, the researchers found that the brains of the successful learners had undergone functional changes—the brain network was better integrated.
Such changes, Li and colleagues suggested while reviewing a number of related studies, are consistent with anatomical changes that can occur in the brain as a result of learning a second language, no matter the age of the learner, as they reported in a recent issue of Cortex.
“A very interesting finding is that, contrary to previous studies, the brain is much more plastic than we thought,” says Li. “We can still see anatomical changes in the brain [in the elderly], which is very encouraging news for aging. And learning a new language can help lead to more graceful aging.”
Meanwhile, Li and colleagues have begun working on interactive ways to teach language using virtual 3D-like environments with situation-based learning to help the brain make some of those new connections more effectively.
Such studies hold the promise that the process of learning a second language as an adult can in fact lead to both behavioral and physical changes that may approximate the patterns of learning a language as a child.
The National Science Foundation supported this research.
Source: Penn State
CHAT0 COMMENTS ACTIONSHARE
You are free to share this article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported license.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2014.09.004 rightOriginal Study
Related Topics: brains, languages, learning
GOLD WIRES GET ‘BRITTLE-LIKE’ AT NANOSCALE
McGill University, Rice University
PENCILADD A COMMENT
Your Email Address*
We respect your privacy.
© 2014 Futurity. All Rights Reserved.
Sci-Tech Health Environment Culture Contact Archives About Futurity
The right mindset: How a theory of intelligence can improve the way your child learns
© 2008-2014 Gwen Dewar, Ph.D., all rights reserved
What is your theory of intelligence? In East Asian countries, people often take the view that intelligence can be enhanced through effort. In the West, another, more deterministic view is popular: We are born with abilities that remain fixed throughout our lives.
The deterministic view sounds more depressing, and as we’ll see, believing it has important consequences for how you learn. But is it also wrong-headed?
I think it is. While it’s undeniable that hereditary and prenatal factors influence our cognitive performance, that’s far from the whole story.
Consider what research suggests about our ability to improve cognitive performance:
Regular, aerobic exercise may stimulate the growth of brain cells and enhance executive function, that master self-regulator that helps us pay attention, plan, and resist distractions
Adults and children can better retain newly learned information by scheduling study sessions shortly before they sleep (Gais et al 2006; Wagner et al 2004; Kurdziel et al 2013).
We can enhance reasoning and possibly boost IQ scores with formal instruction in logic and critical thinking. We can protect children from brain-shrinking stress by using sensitive, responsive parenting techniques (Luby et al 2013; Landry et al 2003; 2006).
Kids show more focus in school when given opportunities to play.
We can improve recall by learning mnemonic strategies.
Training can also expand working memory. In controlled, randomized experiments, people who practiced daily working memory exercises were subsequently tested with higher “fluid intelligence,” i.e., the inventive, analytical problem-solving capacity thought to be the least malleable aspect of intelligence (Jaeggi et al 2008; Rudebeck 2012).
Exploration — beginning in infancy — contributes to long-term academic achievement. Experiments on rats suggest that exploratory behavior boosts brain growth and memory (Huber et al 2007; Dong et al 2012), and recent research hints that exploration influences the cognitive performance of children, too. In one study, babies who explored more actively at 5 months achieved higher academic levels at 14 years, even after controlling for maternal intelligence, education, and other aspects of the home environment (Bornstein et al 2013).
And there is the most obvious point: People develop impressive levels of expertise through hard work and practice.
So there is good reason to think that we can get smarter. What are the practical consequences of embracing this theory of intelligence?
People who believe that intelligence is malleable are better learners
Cognitive neuroscientist Jennifer Mangels and her colleagues tested Columbia undergraduates who subscribed to one of two beliefs about intelligence (Mangels et al 2006).
Undergraduates who held the “entity” theory of intelligence said they agreed strongly with statements like “you have a certain amount of intelligence and you can’t do much to change it.”
Undergraduates who held the “incremental” theory of intelligence viewed intelligence as more malleable.
For the experiment, each student sat at a computer and was quizzed on a variety of academic subjects, ranging from history to science. Students were also asked to rate how confident they were about their answers.
After answering each question, students were told if their answer was right or wrong. They were also told what the correct answer was.
Then, once they’d answered all the questions, the students were tested again. But this time students were tested only on those questions which they had gotten wrong previously.
Throughout the experiment, researchers measured the students’ brain activity by recording event-related potentials (ERPs)—the electrical activity that accompanies our thoughts and perceptions.
The results were eye-opening.
Both groups did equally well on the first test session, and both groups were equally confident about their answers.
But students holding the more flexible, “incremental” theory of intelligence responded differently to errors.
When “incremental” students answered incorrectly and were told the right answer, they seemed to pay more attention. Their brains were more likely to show evidence of sustained, “deep” processing.
Moreover, the “incremental” students were more likely to come up with the correct answers the second time around.
In other words, the students who believed that intelligence is malleable actually learned better than students who believed that intelligence is fixed and unchangeable.
These results have replicated by another team of researchers working more recently (Moser et al 2011). People embracing an incremental or growth-minded theory of intelligence were better at monitoring and rectifying their mistakes.
What’s going on? Why beliefs influence the way we learn
It seems likely that our beliefs about intelligence affect how we feel about failure.
For instance, people who believe that intelligence is fixed and unchangeable may be more uptight about failure.
To these folks, how we perform is an indication of our innate ability. Failure signals lower intelligence. Such beliefs make people more reluctant to tackle challenges. They may also hinder learning by making people too upset or distracted to learn from their mistakes. And they make people feel helpless. If intelligence is fixed, what is the point of trying to improve (Dweck 2006)?
By contrast, people who believe in the malleability of intelligence are more likely to view failure as an opportunity to learn.
What about kids?
Kids aren’t born believing that intelligence is fixed and unchangeable.
Research on American kids suggests that young school children tend to believe in the malleability of intelligence (Kinlaw and Kurtz-Costes 2007).
Ask a kindergartener, and he’s likely to tell you that the smartest person is the one who tries the hardest. Most American kids don’t distinguish effort from ability until the third grade (Nicholls and Miller 1984).
And people living in different cultures have decidedly different views of intelligence and achievement.
Studies suggest that East Asians are particularly likely to believe that effort and persistence are the keys to success (Heine et al 2001; Chen and Stevenson 1995).
But Westerners often take a different view. When asked to explain their children’s academic achievement, Chinese and Japanese mothers placed a stronger emphasis on hard work than did American mothers. The American moms were more likely to cite innate ability (Stevenson and Lee 1990).
So it seems that kids—in at least some cultures—come to adopt the entity theory during their later school years. And it’s pretty obvious how that happens: They learn it from adults.
For instance, longitudinal research tracking kids’ development over time have uncovered a link between a child’s beliefs and the type of praise he gets.
In one study, 10-year-olds who were praised daily by their mothers for their intelligence (“You are smart!”) seemed to be learning that intelligence is innate and unchanging. Over time, they became ever-more invested in the “entity” theory of intelligence, whereas kids who received other sorts of praise (celebrating a child’s effort, persistence, or manner of tackling problems) did not (Pomerantz and Kempner 2013).
Moreover, the kids who were praised for their intelligence became increasingly likely to avoid challenges — an ominous result that is consistent with other evidence:
One study tracked 373 American middle school students for two years. Seventh graders who professed a belief in the malleability of intelligence tended to improve their math grades over the next two years in school. Kids who believed that intelligence is fixed showed no improvement over time (Blackwell et al 2007).
Another study of American 4th- 5th- and 6th-graders found that some kids subscribe to an entity theory of intelligence. These kids were more likely to value the appearance of performing well over learning to master a subject (Erdley et al 1997).
Even preschoolers may be held back by their attitudes. A study that presented puzzle tasks to 4- and 5-year olds found that differences in the way that children approach problems. Some kids preferred easy puzzles, others more difficult puzzles. Those kids that preferred the difficult puzzles were focused on honing their skills—even if they encountered failure. Those kids that preferred the easy puzzles were more likely to feel helpless when they failed (Smiley and Dweck 1994).
Change your mindset, improve performance
People who believe in the malleability of intelligence have a learning advantage. And this makes sense if our beliefs influence how we respond to difficulty.
But does this mean people can become better learners if they change their mindsets?
In other words, if you change your beliefs about intelligence, will you change your capacity to learn and cope with failure?
Researchers behind the study of 7th graders and math achievement put this question to the test (Blackwell et al 2007). They enrolled students in one of two instructional programs. One program taught kids study skills. The other program combined study tips with information about the brain. The brain-based program encouraged kids to think of the brain as a muscle that becomes stronger with use.
The results? Kids enrolled in the brain-based program improved their math grades. Kids enrolled in the study skills program did not improve (Blackwell et al 2007).
Research on adults has reported similar findings.
One study focused on college students whose sense of self-worth depends on academic performance (Niiya et al 2004). When these students were primed with an incremental theory of intelligence, they responded less negatively to failure.
Another study demonstrated improvements in academic performance: When college students favoring the entity theory were coached to focus on self-improvement rather than social comparison, they performed better in puzzle-solving tasks (Thompson and Muskat 2005).
What can parents do?
Based on the research I’ve seen, parents can probably do a lot to help their kids acquire the right mindset for learning:
Get on board yourself
Are you convinced that intelligence is unchangeable? If so, you’ll probably pass this belief along to your child. You might argue that intelligence really IS unchangeable—whether we like it our not. But rest assured–it’s not just wishful thinking.
As noted above, there is real scientific evidence that we can sharpen are own our thinking. Read more about it in Richard Nisbett’s book, Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count.
Teach your child the good news
…that the brain is like a muscle that becomes more powerful with exercise (Dweck 2006).
Be careful with praise
Praise can be a great motivator for academic achievement. However, the wrong kinds of praise can backfire. As noted above, praising kids for their smarts may actually encourage kids to adopt the entity theory of intelligence.
On the other hand, praising kids for effort may encourage them to develop an incremental theory of intelligence. In a recent study tracking children from the age of 1 year, kids who received more praise for effort during the toddler years were more likely to endorse the incremental theory when they were in the 2nd and 3rd grades. They were also more likely to agree that persistence and hard work pays off (Gunderson et al 2013).
For more information about the effects of praise, see these articles on praise and intelligence and tips for effective praise.
In addition, check out Carol Dweck’s popular book, Mindset: The New Psychology of Success .