Tuesday, October 30, 2007
The New York Times
October 30, 2007
Personal Health
My Diet Strategy? Controlled Indulgence
By JANE E. BRODY
Most people who know me well know that I love ice cream. It has been my favorite comfort food since early childhood, when the Good Humor truck came around daily and a local luncheonette sold double cones for 25 cents. But a new friend was shocked to learn that I routinely keep about six half-gallons of ice cream in my freezer.
They are not all for me. A few are flavors favored by my twin grandsons, who spend two afternoons a week at my house. Still, quite a few have my name on them, and I don’t hesitate to indulge almost nightly.
Imposing Self-Control
You see, despite my well-known interest in healthful eating, I don’t believe in deprivation. I learned long ago, when I struggled unsuccessfully for more than a year to lose 35 pounds, that deprivation feeds desire and can lead to overindulgence at the first opportunity.
And so I adopted a philosophy that I call controlled indulgence. In the two years it took me to return to a reasonable weight for my 5-foot frame, I allowed myself one small treat each day — perhaps two cookies, a thin slice of cake or pie or a few tablespoons of ice cream. The strategy worked, and I continued to use it in the decades of weight maintenance that followed.
For as long as my twin sons lived at home, rather than buy commercial cakes and cookies, I baked quick breads and muffins that were relatively low in sugar and fat and loaded with healthful ingredients like whole wheat flour, bran, wheat germ, fruits and vegetables. They served as the family’s desserts and between-meal snacks. I took some to work with me every day to enjoy when the coffee cart appeared in midafternoon.
But back to the ice cream in the freezer. My approach starts with smart selection. I read the nutrition label; the only ice cream I buy provides a maximum of 150 calories a serving, and usually less, 100 to 130. Most are the slow-churned reduced-fat flavors, and some are frozen yogurt. But none are fat free or sugar free, which to me tastes ersatz.
Equally important, of course, is how much to eat at any one time. One serving. Do you know what a serving of ice cream is? It is half a cup. I bought some half-cup containers and measure out my daily indulgence. And I made a rule for myself. If I start eating more than that half cup, all the ice cream has to go. Because I would rather have it around when I want it, I stick to the half cup.
Some people I know say they could never do that. If the ice cream was in the house, they would eat far too much of it. They say they are safer buying a cone when an irresistible urge strikes. But I resent spending $2.50 for a cone when I can buy a half gallon (all right, 56 ounces) for $2.99.
Ice cream is not my only passion.
Chocolate, that is, dark chocolate, runs a close second. There was a time when a box of chocolates could sit in my house for months and I would never eat even one piece. Those days, it seems, are gone forever. I blame menopause for my current cravings for chocolate. And I keep quite a lot of it around, especially chocolate-covered almonds and Trader Joe’s minipretzels smothered in dark chocolate. Again, the house rule is portion control. Four almonds or two pretzels a day or out they go.
Strategic Rationing
Having heard too many stories about children whose parents forbid them to have any treats who then sneak and hoard the forbidden fruit at every opportunity, I chose a different approach with my sons. Nothing was forbidden, but some foods were just not readily available.
We kept no candy, soda, chips or sugary cereals in the house. But the boys could order soda when we dined out and eat any cereal they wanted when they spent the night at a friend’s house. And every Saturday, we gave them money to buy a bar of any candy they wanted.
At first, they nursed that candy bar for hours. But after a few months, the candy was nowhere to be seen. Without a word from any adult, they had decided to use the money to buy knishes instead.
What amazes me more than anything is that at age 38, my sons still have no interest in candy; do not drink soda; rarely have cake, pie or cookies; and have no trouble keeping their hands out of a bowl of chips. As with their mother, their main treat is ice cream, which at least has some redeeming nutritional value.
Overcoming Temptation
The philosophy of controlled indulgence goes beyond treats. I apply it across the board, in all occasions when I might otherwise be tempted to overindulge.
For example, at events where food is served buffet style, I start by surveying the entire selection before I get in line to fill my plate. That way, I don’t take everything that is offered. Instead, I end up only with foods I am most likely to enjoy without straying too far from my dietary goals. When salad is among the offerings, I pile it on the plate first, leaving less room for some of the more caloric selections.
Because fruit is usually among the dessert offerings, I eat that first so I have less room and desire for higher-calorie choices.
Sit-down dinners can be more of a challenge. They usually start with salad, and I am not shy about requesting dressing on the side and a second serving if one might be available. I tend to eat all of everything I like, including dessert, but I do not waste calories on food that is not very good. I routinely scrape off sauces, remove the skin from chicken and skip stuffings (unless fellow diners say it’s scrumptious).
I do not count calories or make lists of everything I eat each day. In fact, I have no idea how many calories I consume on a typical day. I eat for enjoyment — foods that I like, most of which happen to be good for me, and in quantities that I find satisfying.
Rather than counting calories, I monitor my weight. I step on the scale every morning before breakfast. If I start to gain, I cut back a little on portions. But consistent with my philosophy of limitation, not deprivation, I don’t cut out my treats.
October 30, 2007
Personal Health
My Diet Strategy? Controlled Indulgence
By JANE E. BRODY
Most people who know me well know that I love ice cream. It has been my favorite comfort food since early childhood, when the Good Humor truck came around daily and a local luncheonette sold double cones for 25 cents. But a new friend was shocked to learn that I routinely keep about six half-gallons of ice cream in my freezer.
They are not all for me. A few are flavors favored by my twin grandsons, who spend two afternoons a week at my house. Still, quite a few have my name on them, and I don’t hesitate to indulge almost nightly.
Imposing Self-Control
You see, despite my well-known interest in healthful eating, I don’t believe in deprivation. I learned long ago, when I struggled unsuccessfully for more than a year to lose 35 pounds, that deprivation feeds desire and can lead to overindulgence at the first opportunity.
And so I adopted a philosophy that I call controlled indulgence. In the two years it took me to return to a reasonable weight for my 5-foot frame, I allowed myself one small treat each day — perhaps two cookies, a thin slice of cake or pie or a few tablespoons of ice cream. The strategy worked, and I continued to use it in the decades of weight maintenance that followed.
For as long as my twin sons lived at home, rather than buy commercial cakes and cookies, I baked quick breads and muffins that were relatively low in sugar and fat and loaded with healthful ingredients like whole wheat flour, bran, wheat germ, fruits and vegetables. They served as the family’s desserts and between-meal snacks. I took some to work with me every day to enjoy when the coffee cart appeared in midafternoon.
But back to the ice cream in the freezer. My approach starts with smart selection. I read the nutrition label; the only ice cream I buy provides a maximum of 150 calories a serving, and usually less, 100 to 130. Most are the slow-churned reduced-fat flavors, and some are frozen yogurt. But none are fat free or sugar free, which to me tastes ersatz.
Equally important, of course, is how much to eat at any one time. One serving. Do you know what a serving of ice cream is? It is half a cup. I bought some half-cup containers and measure out my daily indulgence. And I made a rule for myself. If I start eating more than that half cup, all the ice cream has to go. Because I would rather have it around when I want it, I stick to the half cup.
Some people I know say they could never do that. If the ice cream was in the house, they would eat far too much of it. They say they are safer buying a cone when an irresistible urge strikes. But I resent spending $2.50 for a cone when I can buy a half gallon (all right, 56 ounces) for $2.99.
Ice cream is not my only passion.
Chocolate, that is, dark chocolate, runs a close second. There was a time when a box of chocolates could sit in my house for months and I would never eat even one piece. Those days, it seems, are gone forever. I blame menopause for my current cravings for chocolate. And I keep quite a lot of it around, especially chocolate-covered almonds and Trader Joe’s minipretzels smothered in dark chocolate. Again, the house rule is portion control. Four almonds or two pretzels a day or out they go.
Strategic Rationing
Having heard too many stories about children whose parents forbid them to have any treats who then sneak and hoard the forbidden fruit at every opportunity, I chose a different approach with my sons. Nothing was forbidden, but some foods were just not readily available.
We kept no candy, soda, chips or sugary cereals in the house. But the boys could order soda when we dined out and eat any cereal they wanted when they spent the night at a friend’s house. And every Saturday, we gave them money to buy a bar of any candy they wanted.
At first, they nursed that candy bar for hours. But after a few months, the candy was nowhere to be seen. Without a word from any adult, they had decided to use the money to buy knishes instead.
What amazes me more than anything is that at age 38, my sons still have no interest in candy; do not drink soda; rarely have cake, pie or cookies; and have no trouble keeping their hands out of a bowl of chips. As with their mother, their main treat is ice cream, which at least has some redeeming nutritional value.
Overcoming Temptation
The philosophy of controlled indulgence goes beyond treats. I apply it across the board, in all occasions when I might otherwise be tempted to overindulge.
For example, at events where food is served buffet style, I start by surveying the entire selection before I get in line to fill my plate. That way, I don’t take everything that is offered. Instead, I end up only with foods I am most likely to enjoy without straying too far from my dietary goals. When salad is among the offerings, I pile it on the plate first, leaving less room for some of the more caloric selections.
Because fruit is usually among the dessert offerings, I eat that first so I have less room and desire for higher-calorie choices.
Sit-down dinners can be more of a challenge. They usually start with salad, and I am not shy about requesting dressing on the side and a second serving if one might be available. I tend to eat all of everything I like, including dessert, but I do not waste calories on food that is not very good. I routinely scrape off sauces, remove the skin from chicken and skip stuffings (unless fellow diners say it’s scrumptious).
I do not count calories or make lists of everything I eat each day. In fact, I have no idea how many calories I consume on a typical day. I eat for enjoyment — foods that I like, most of which happen to be good for me, and in quantities that I find satisfying.
Rather than counting calories, I monitor my weight. I step on the scale every morning before breakfast. If I start to gain, I cut back a little on portions. But consistent with my philosophy of limitation, not deprivation, I don’t cut out my treats.
The New York Times
October 30, 2007
Behavior
How to Figure Out When Therapy Is Over
By RICHARD A. FRIEDMAN, M.D.
If you think it’s hard to end a relationship with a lover or spouse, try breaking up with your psychotherapist.
A writer friend of mine recently tried and found it surprisingly difficult. Several months after landing a book contract, she realized she was in trouble.
“I was completely paralyzed and couldn’t write,” she said, as I recall. “I had to do something right away, so I decided to get myself into psychotherapy.”
What began with a simple case of writer’s block turned into seven years of intensive therapy.
Over all, she found the therapy very helpful. She finished a second novel and felt that her relationship with her husband was stronger. When she broached the topic of ending treatment, her therapist strongly resisted, which upset the patient. “Why do I need therapy,” she wanted to know, “if I’m feeling good?”
Millions of Americans are in psychotherapy, and my friend’s experience brings up two related, perplexing questions. How do you know when you are healthy enough to say goodbye to your therapist? And how should a therapist handle it?
With rare exceptions, the ultimate aim of all good psychotherapists is, well, to make themselves obsolete. After all, whatever drove you to therapy in the first place — depression, anxiety, relationship problems, you name it — the common goal of treatment is to feel and function better independent of your therapist.
To put it bluntly, good therapy is supposed to come to an end.
But when? And how is the patient to know? Is the criterion for termination “cure” or is it just feeling well enough to be able to call it a day and live with the inevitable limitations and problems we all have?
The term “cure,” I think, is illusory — even undesirable — because there will always be problems to repair. Having no problems is an unrealistic goal. It’s more important for patients to be able to deal with their problems and to handle adversity when it inevitably arises.
Still, even when patients feel that they have accomplished something important in therapy and feel “good enough,” it is not always easy to say goodbye to a therapist.
Not long ago, I evaluated a successful lawyer who had been in psychotherapy for nine years. He had entered therapy, he told me, because he lacked a sense of direction and had no intimate relationships. But for six or seven years, he had felt that he and his therapist were just wasting their time. Therapy had become a routine, like going to the gym.
“It’s not that anything bad has happened,” he said. “It’s that nothing is happening.”
This was no longer psychotherapy, but an expensive form of chatting. So why did he stay with it? In part, I think, because therapy is essentially an unequal relationship. Patients tend to be dependent on their therapists. Even if the therapy is problematic or unsatisfying, that might be preferable to giving it up altogether or starting all over again with an unknown therapist.
Beyond that, patients often become stuck in therapy for the very reason that they started it. For example, a dependent patient cannot leave his therapist; a masochistic patient suffers silently in treatment with a withholding therapist; a narcissistic patient eager to be liked fears challenging his therapist, and so on.
Of course, you may ask why therapists in such cases do not call a timeout and question whether the treatment is stalled or isn’t working. I can think of several reasons.
To start with, therapists are generally an enthusiastic bunch who can always identify new issues for you to work on. Then, of course, there is an unspoken motive: therapists have an inherent financial interest in keeping their patients in treatment.
And therapists have unmet emotional needs just like everyone else, which certain patients satisfy. Therapists may find some patients so interesting, exciting or fun that they have a hard time letting go of them.
So the best way to answer the question, “Am I done with therapy?” is to confront it head on. Periodically take stock of your progress and ask your therapist for direct feedback.
How close are you to reaching your goals? How much better do you feel? Are your relationships and work more satisfying? You can even ask close friends or your partner whether they see any change.
If you think you are better and are contemplating ending treatment but the therapist disagrees, it is time for an independent consultation. Indeed, after a consultation, my writer friend terminated her therapy and has no regrets about it.
The lawyer finally mustered the courage to tell his therapist that although he enjoyed talking with her, he really felt that the time had come to stop. To his surprise, she agreed.
If, unlike those two, you still cannot decide to stay or leave, consider an experiment. Take a break from therapy for a few months and see what life is like without it.
That way, you’ll have a chance to gauge the effects of therapy without actually being in it (and paying for it). Remember, you can always go back.
Richard A. Friedman is a professor of psychiatry at Weill Cornell Medical College.
October 30, 2007
Behavior
How to Figure Out When Therapy Is Over
By RICHARD A. FRIEDMAN, M.D.
If you think it’s hard to end a relationship with a lover or spouse, try breaking up with your psychotherapist.
A writer friend of mine recently tried and found it surprisingly difficult. Several months after landing a book contract, she realized she was in trouble.
“I was completely paralyzed and couldn’t write,” she said, as I recall. “I had to do something right away, so I decided to get myself into psychotherapy.”
What began with a simple case of writer’s block turned into seven years of intensive therapy.
Over all, she found the therapy very helpful. She finished a second novel and felt that her relationship with her husband was stronger. When she broached the topic of ending treatment, her therapist strongly resisted, which upset the patient. “Why do I need therapy,” she wanted to know, “if I’m feeling good?”
Millions of Americans are in psychotherapy, and my friend’s experience brings up two related, perplexing questions. How do you know when you are healthy enough to say goodbye to your therapist? And how should a therapist handle it?
With rare exceptions, the ultimate aim of all good psychotherapists is, well, to make themselves obsolete. After all, whatever drove you to therapy in the first place — depression, anxiety, relationship problems, you name it — the common goal of treatment is to feel and function better independent of your therapist.
To put it bluntly, good therapy is supposed to come to an end.
But when? And how is the patient to know? Is the criterion for termination “cure” or is it just feeling well enough to be able to call it a day and live with the inevitable limitations and problems we all have?
The term “cure,” I think, is illusory — even undesirable — because there will always be problems to repair. Having no problems is an unrealistic goal. It’s more important for patients to be able to deal with their problems and to handle adversity when it inevitably arises.
Still, even when patients feel that they have accomplished something important in therapy and feel “good enough,” it is not always easy to say goodbye to a therapist.
Not long ago, I evaluated a successful lawyer who had been in psychotherapy for nine years. He had entered therapy, he told me, because he lacked a sense of direction and had no intimate relationships. But for six or seven years, he had felt that he and his therapist were just wasting their time. Therapy had become a routine, like going to the gym.
“It’s not that anything bad has happened,” he said. “It’s that nothing is happening.”
This was no longer psychotherapy, but an expensive form of chatting. So why did he stay with it? In part, I think, because therapy is essentially an unequal relationship. Patients tend to be dependent on their therapists. Even if the therapy is problematic or unsatisfying, that might be preferable to giving it up altogether or starting all over again with an unknown therapist.
Beyond that, patients often become stuck in therapy for the very reason that they started it. For example, a dependent patient cannot leave his therapist; a masochistic patient suffers silently in treatment with a withholding therapist; a narcissistic patient eager to be liked fears challenging his therapist, and so on.
Of course, you may ask why therapists in such cases do not call a timeout and question whether the treatment is stalled or isn’t working. I can think of several reasons.
To start with, therapists are generally an enthusiastic bunch who can always identify new issues for you to work on. Then, of course, there is an unspoken motive: therapists have an inherent financial interest in keeping their patients in treatment.
And therapists have unmet emotional needs just like everyone else, which certain patients satisfy. Therapists may find some patients so interesting, exciting or fun that they have a hard time letting go of them.
So the best way to answer the question, “Am I done with therapy?” is to confront it head on. Periodically take stock of your progress and ask your therapist for direct feedback.
How close are you to reaching your goals? How much better do you feel? Are your relationships and work more satisfying? You can even ask close friends or your partner whether they see any change.
If you think you are better and are contemplating ending treatment but the therapist disagrees, it is time for an independent consultation. Indeed, after a consultation, my writer friend terminated her therapy and has no regrets about it.
The lawyer finally mustered the courage to tell his therapist that although he enjoyed talking with her, he really felt that the time had come to stop. To his surprise, she agreed.
If, unlike those two, you still cannot decide to stay or leave, consider an experiment. Take a break from therapy for a few months and see what life is like without it.
That way, you’ll have a chance to gauge the effects of therapy without actually being in it (and paying for it). Remember, you can always go back.
Richard A. Friedman is a professor of psychiatry at Weill Cornell Medical College.
Monday, October 29, 2007
Are Kids Getting Too Much Praise?
October 29, 2007, 10:03 am
New York Times
An excess of praise may be doing kids more harm than good.
A cover story in this month’s Scholastic Instructor magazine asks whether kids today are “overpraised.'’ The concern is that by focusing on self-esteem and confidence building, parents and teachers may be giving real goals and achievement short shrift. The article cites a recent study in which eighth graders in Korea and the United States were asked whether they were good at math. Among the American students, 39 percent said they were excellent at math, compared to just 6 percent of the Korean eighth graders. But the reality was somewhat different. The Korean kids scored far better in math than the over-confident American students.
The notion that you can praise a kid too much is heresy to parents and teachers who have long believed that building self-esteem should be the cornerstone of education. If kids believe in themselves, the thinking goes, achievement will naturally follow. But confidence doesn’t always produce better students. Scholastic cites a 2006 report on education from the Brookings Institution’s Brown Center that found that countries in which families and schools emphasize self-esteem for students lag behind cultures where self-esteem isn’t a major focus.
The problem with this “rah-rah mentality,'’ as the magazine describes it, is that it can take away the sense of satisfaction that comes from genuine achievement. “Self-esteem is based on real accomplishments,” Robert Brooks, faculty psychologist at Harvard Medical School, told the magazine. “It’s all about letting kids shine in a realistic way.”
The downside of too much praise is that kids may start to focus on the reward rather than what they are learning. Worse, failure can be devastating and confusing for a student whose confidence is based on an inflated ego, rather than his or her actual abilities, the magazine notes. This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t praise our kids or that teachers shouldn’t try to engender self-confidence. But self-esteem should be the result of good grades and achievement, not false accomplishments.
Last month, Cognitive Daily reported that parents and teachers should be specific rather than general when they dispense praise. An example of general praise is telling a child, “You’re smart.'’ Specific praise would be to say, “You did a good job reading,'’ or “You did great on your math test.'’ Kids who receive general praise about their abilities are more likely to exhibit “helpless” behavior when they encounter problems with learning, compared with kids who receive specific praise about their achievement on a task. The reason: a child who knows she’s a smart girl feels defeated if she has trouble reading a sentence. But a child who has been told she is a good reader is more likely to have confidence in that specific ability and work a little harder to tackle a more difficult book.
14 comments so far...
*
1.
October 29th,
2007
10:15 am
Even when I was young (I’m in my 50s) the trend of praising kids just for existing was setting down taproots. (It’s considered heresy to slam Mister Rogers, but he was one of the great proponents of it.) Kids are smarter than you think, and I for one could always tell when I was getting undeserved praise on the principle that, as Lewis Carroll put it: “Everybody has won, and all must have prizes!”
I wonder if part of the issue with the Korean kids is that they are allowed to fail, with the expectation that trying and failing is how you learn. American parenting nowadays, at least in this upwardly mobile tristate area, is high-pressure, and American parents are so over-invested in their children and so micromanaging.
— Posted by ACW
*
2.
October 29th,
2007
10:27 am
I am a concerned parent of school-aged children where the over emphasis on praise/accolades for behavior and accomplishments trumps what should be just normal expected behavior. Good grades and good behavior do not need to be universally praised/celebrated each school quarter. As for Korean students being the model- yes the humility factor is strong but the psychological fallout for those who do not make the grade is definitely overlooked. There has to be a happier medium than these two extremes of what not to do.
— Posted by MLF
*
3.
October 29th,
2007
10:31 am
Praise, excessive or otherwise, is no substitute for paying sufficient attention to children. Today’s childhood obesity epidemic is sure sign of widespread low self esteem.
Much be particularly emotionally tough for our mostly overweight adolescent girls.
The sooner we straighten out our insane borrow and spend economic policies, and end taking on repeated financially ruinous unsuccessful wars, the sooner we’ll restore stable, affordable family life so our children will be properly cared for.
— Posted by MARK KLEIN, M.D.
*
4.
October 29th,
2007
10:49 am
Good article. Most parents have been too easy going. There’s been an increasing number of children who grow up not having any discipline or good role models. Most of the pop icons should not remotely be considers role models. Parents, while ‘overworked’, should still take part in their children’s lives. Schools, governments and other institutions are no substitute for good parenting. Yes, there is a lot of junk and bad influence in the media. However, as parents, they should be moderating what their children are exposed to and explain right from wrong.
— Posted by Good article
*
5.
October 29th,
2007
11:07 am
The real problem in US schools is the insane system of funding public education via property taxes which works great in only rich districts.
— Posted by massimo
*
6.
October 29th,
2007
11:24 am
The name of this column, as it’s typeset, puts me in mind of Jack Benny’s response to the blindingly obvious.
Which, in the case of today’s topic, is particularly apt.
— Posted by Rochester
*
7.
October 29th,
2007
11:57 am
Good topic. I’m aware of this issue and struggle a little w/ it when I work with my 20 month old. Maybe he’s a little young to worry about this, but I do wonder how to achieve the right balance between helping him establish an intact sense of self-esteem and making sure he also feels an internal push to challenge himself and do better.
I’m not interested in pushing him into achievement programs for pre-schoolers, or getting involved in the rat race of ‘the right kindergarten.. the right college, etc..’, like I see other parents doing. I am interested in making sure he feels nurtured and loved (and I think he does), and in helping him find hobbies and activities that challenge him and help him develop different skill sets. Of course, I want him to excel in school, but I think that the key there is actual achievement, not pandering to esteem. (I.e. a push and a couple of well-placed “you can do better than that” nudges are appropriate, coupled with specific positive feedback.)
By the way, I wonder why schools feel the need to help children establish positive self-esteem; I think the responsibility for that lies squarely with parents. I know that parents are not always doing this successfully, and so I’m grateful for other adults being interested in a child’s welfare, but parents need to do their job so that schools can pay attention to the core mission of teaching.
— Posted by as
*
8.
October 29th,
2007
12:24 pm
Tara’s post raises the right questions. Kids are being praised too much, and it’s leading to all kinds of problems. In the DC area, there is an excellent non-profit parenting education program called The Parent Encouragement Program (PEP), which educates parents on how to encourage their children rather than praise them. It is based on Adlerian psych and uses Rudolf Dreikurs’ classic text “Children: The Challenge” as its core text. Check it out.
— Posted by Lynn from Organicmania.com
*
9.
October 29th,
2007
1:59 pm
YES! Too much praise. I see it all the time. While I am not a parent, I am a volunteer tutor at the local elementary school. We are not allowed to tell the kids they are “wrong”. We are supposed to say there is a “better answer”. That’s bunk if you ask me.
This “self esteem” boosting, which has been going on for years, is now creeping into adult life. For example, for years, I have been an avid runner and have participated in many races. Recently, the race organizers have started awarding medals to all finishers, which, IMHO, takes away the sense of accomplishment for the runners who have actually placed in the top 3.
Also, the younger generation at work seems to want the responsibility and all that comes with it (title, bonus, high salary) just for showing up! And try telling these young kids that they’re wrong.
— Posted by Sharon
*
10.
October 29th,
2007
2:41 pm
We actually had a local school system consider NOT recognizing a valedictorian at graduation, for fear of damaging the self-esteem of the rest of the class by singling one student out. Come on, people! I guess, by that reasoning, the Red Sox and (whoever else was playing - I’m not a sports fan) should both have gotten trophies, just for showing up and putting forth their best effort. Gag me.
— Posted by ag
*
11.
October 29th,
2007
3:08 pm
I love myself unconditionally… I love myself unconditionally… I love myself unconditionally…
— Posted by Mark Forstneger
*
12.
October 29th,
2007
3:18 pm
I think that it’s a fair comment I’m sure everyone wants to be praised, especially kids. It definitely helps to boost their self-esteem and gives them the confidence to face challenges as they get older. You guys should check out the articles written by Dr. T. Berry Brazelton on the New York Times syndicate site. Dr. T. Berry Brazelton is a very credited professional in this area. Here is the site: nytsyn.com
Good Luck!
— Posted by Ellen
*
13.
October 29th,
2007
3:25 pm
While this trend is personally aggravating, especially for my peers impressed with the value of humility since childhood, I cannot help but accede that the products of this feel-good, you’re a star-behavior, have an edge when they enter the highly competitive job market. I have stood by and seen friend after friend, each more highly intelligent, qualified, and dedicated than the rest, lose job after job to classmates, acquaintances, and ex-co-workers who were far less qualified than they are, but simply better orators and proponents of their perceived skill sets. Our society rewards the big talkers, the confident swagger of a man or woman who think they are 9 feet tall. Those, sadly, are the ones who push above the pack in the field of finance, investment, sales, and real estate.
— Posted by j.a.g.
*
14.
October 29th,
2007
3:35 pm
In the public school setting in Florida, teachers will actually be marked negatively on an evaluation for giving general praise to students. The ideal is to give academic praise which stresses the correct answer (when a child has answered a question appropriately), but also praises/affirms the process of thought for the benefit of the entire classroom.
I agree with most of the comments…too much praise in general–focusing on the ego, rather than the process of thought and education.
— Posted by Jay
October 29, 2007, 10:03 am
New York Times
An excess of praise may be doing kids more harm than good.
A cover story in this month’s Scholastic Instructor magazine asks whether kids today are “overpraised.'’ The concern is that by focusing on self-esteem and confidence building, parents and teachers may be giving real goals and achievement short shrift. The article cites a recent study in which eighth graders in Korea and the United States were asked whether they were good at math. Among the American students, 39 percent said they were excellent at math, compared to just 6 percent of the Korean eighth graders. But the reality was somewhat different. The Korean kids scored far better in math than the over-confident American students.
The notion that you can praise a kid too much is heresy to parents and teachers who have long believed that building self-esteem should be the cornerstone of education. If kids believe in themselves, the thinking goes, achievement will naturally follow. But confidence doesn’t always produce better students. Scholastic cites a 2006 report on education from the Brookings Institution’s Brown Center that found that countries in which families and schools emphasize self-esteem for students lag behind cultures where self-esteem isn’t a major focus.
The problem with this “rah-rah mentality,'’ as the magazine describes it, is that it can take away the sense of satisfaction that comes from genuine achievement. “Self-esteem is based on real accomplishments,” Robert Brooks, faculty psychologist at Harvard Medical School, told the magazine. “It’s all about letting kids shine in a realistic way.”
The downside of too much praise is that kids may start to focus on the reward rather than what they are learning. Worse, failure can be devastating and confusing for a student whose confidence is based on an inflated ego, rather than his or her actual abilities, the magazine notes. This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t praise our kids or that teachers shouldn’t try to engender self-confidence. But self-esteem should be the result of good grades and achievement, not false accomplishments.
Last month, Cognitive Daily reported that parents and teachers should be specific rather than general when they dispense praise. An example of general praise is telling a child, “You’re smart.'’ Specific praise would be to say, “You did a good job reading,'’ or “You did great on your math test.'’ Kids who receive general praise about their abilities are more likely to exhibit “helpless” behavior when they encounter problems with learning, compared with kids who receive specific praise about their achievement on a task. The reason: a child who knows she’s a smart girl feels defeated if she has trouble reading a sentence. But a child who has been told she is a good reader is more likely to have confidence in that specific ability and work a little harder to tackle a more difficult book.
14 comments so far...
*
1.
October 29th,
2007
10:15 am
Even when I was young (I’m in my 50s) the trend of praising kids just for existing was setting down taproots. (It’s considered heresy to slam Mister Rogers, but he was one of the great proponents of it.) Kids are smarter than you think, and I for one could always tell when I was getting undeserved praise on the principle that, as Lewis Carroll put it: “Everybody has won, and all must have prizes!”
I wonder if part of the issue with the Korean kids is that they are allowed to fail, with the expectation that trying and failing is how you learn. American parenting nowadays, at least in this upwardly mobile tristate area, is high-pressure, and American parents are so over-invested in their children and so micromanaging.
— Posted by ACW
*
2.
October 29th,
2007
10:27 am
I am a concerned parent of school-aged children where the over emphasis on praise/accolades for behavior and accomplishments trumps what should be just normal expected behavior. Good grades and good behavior do not need to be universally praised/celebrated each school quarter. As for Korean students being the model- yes the humility factor is strong but the psychological fallout for those who do not make the grade is definitely overlooked. There has to be a happier medium than these two extremes of what not to do.
— Posted by MLF
*
3.
October 29th,
2007
10:31 am
Praise, excessive or otherwise, is no substitute for paying sufficient attention to children. Today’s childhood obesity epidemic is sure sign of widespread low self esteem.
Much be particularly emotionally tough for our mostly overweight adolescent girls.
The sooner we straighten out our insane borrow and spend economic policies, and end taking on repeated financially ruinous unsuccessful wars, the sooner we’ll restore stable, affordable family life so our children will be properly cared for.
— Posted by MARK KLEIN, M.D.
*
4.
October 29th,
2007
10:49 am
Good article. Most parents have been too easy going. There’s been an increasing number of children who grow up not having any discipline or good role models. Most of the pop icons should not remotely be considers role models. Parents, while ‘overworked’, should still take part in their children’s lives. Schools, governments and other institutions are no substitute for good parenting. Yes, there is a lot of junk and bad influence in the media. However, as parents, they should be moderating what their children are exposed to and explain right from wrong.
— Posted by Good article
*
5.
October 29th,
2007
11:07 am
The real problem in US schools is the insane system of funding public education via property taxes which works great in only rich districts.
— Posted by massimo
*
6.
October 29th,
2007
11:24 am
The name of this column, as it’s typeset, puts me in mind of Jack Benny’s response to the blindingly obvious.
Which, in the case of today’s topic, is particularly apt.
— Posted by Rochester
*
7.
October 29th,
2007
11:57 am
Good topic. I’m aware of this issue and struggle a little w/ it when I work with my 20 month old. Maybe he’s a little young to worry about this, but I do wonder how to achieve the right balance between helping him establish an intact sense of self-esteem and making sure he also feels an internal push to challenge himself and do better.
I’m not interested in pushing him into achievement programs for pre-schoolers, or getting involved in the rat race of ‘the right kindergarten.. the right college, etc..’, like I see other parents doing. I am interested in making sure he feels nurtured and loved (and I think he does), and in helping him find hobbies and activities that challenge him and help him develop different skill sets. Of course, I want him to excel in school, but I think that the key there is actual achievement, not pandering to esteem. (I.e. a push and a couple of well-placed “you can do better than that” nudges are appropriate, coupled with specific positive feedback.)
By the way, I wonder why schools feel the need to help children establish positive self-esteem; I think the responsibility for that lies squarely with parents. I know that parents are not always doing this successfully, and so I’m grateful for other adults being interested in a child’s welfare, but parents need to do their job so that schools can pay attention to the core mission of teaching.
— Posted by as
*
8.
October 29th,
2007
12:24 pm
Tara’s post raises the right questions. Kids are being praised too much, and it’s leading to all kinds of problems. In the DC area, there is an excellent non-profit parenting education program called The Parent Encouragement Program (PEP), which educates parents on how to encourage their children rather than praise them. It is based on Adlerian psych and uses Rudolf Dreikurs’ classic text “Children: The Challenge” as its core text. Check it out.
— Posted by Lynn from Organicmania.com
*
9.
October 29th,
2007
1:59 pm
YES! Too much praise. I see it all the time. While I am not a parent, I am a volunteer tutor at the local elementary school. We are not allowed to tell the kids they are “wrong”. We are supposed to say there is a “better answer”. That’s bunk if you ask me.
This “self esteem” boosting, which has been going on for years, is now creeping into adult life. For example, for years, I have been an avid runner and have participated in many races. Recently, the race organizers have started awarding medals to all finishers, which, IMHO, takes away the sense of accomplishment for the runners who have actually placed in the top 3.
Also, the younger generation at work seems to want the responsibility and all that comes with it (title, bonus, high salary) just for showing up! And try telling these young kids that they’re wrong.
— Posted by Sharon
*
10.
October 29th,
2007
2:41 pm
We actually had a local school system consider NOT recognizing a valedictorian at graduation, for fear of damaging the self-esteem of the rest of the class by singling one student out. Come on, people! I guess, by that reasoning, the Red Sox and (whoever else was playing - I’m not a sports fan) should both have gotten trophies, just for showing up and putting forth their best effort. Gag me.
— Posted by ag
*
11.
October 29th,
2007
3:08 pm
I love myself unconditionally… I love myself unconditionally… I love myself unconditionally…
— Posted by Mark Forstneger
*
12.
October 29th,
2007
3:18 pm
I think that it’s a fair comment I’m sure everyone wants to be praised, especially kids. It definitely helps to boost their self-esteem and gives them the confidence to face challenges as they get older. You guys should check out the articles written by Dr. T. Berry Brazelton on the New York Times syndicate site. Dr. T. Berry Brazelton is a very credited professional in this area. Here is the site: nytsyn.com
Good Luck!
— Posted by Ellen
*
13.
October 29th,
2007
3:25 pm
While this trend is personally aggravating, especially for my peers impressed with the value of humility since childhood, I cannot help but accede that the products of this feel-good, you’re a star-behavior, have an edge when they enter the highly competitive job market. I have stood by and seen friend after friend, each more highly intelligent, qualified, and dedicated than the rest, lose job after job to classmates, acquaintances, and ex-co-workers who were far less qualified than they are, but simply better orators and proponents of their perceived skill sets. Our society rewards the big talkers, the confident swagger of a man or woman who think they are 9 feet tall. Those, sadly, are the ones who push above the pack in the field of finance, investment, sales, and real estate.
— Posted by j.a.g.
*
14.
October 29th,
2007
3:35 pm
In the public school setting in Florida, teachers will actually be marked negatively on an evaluation for giving general praise to students. The ideal is to give academic praise which stresses the correct answer (when a child has answered a question appropriately), but also praises/affirms the process of thought for the benefit of the entire classroom.
I agree with most of the comments…too much praise in general–focusing on the ego, rather than the process of thought and education.
— Posted by Jay
