Argument:
On pg.140,Shenk describes the experiment done by a psychologist from Stanford, Walter Mischel, tested 4-year olds on their patience and self discipline and the
affect of their future academic successes. In the experiment, the children were given
an option to either take a single marshmallow, or wait for an
indefinite amount of time in order to receive two marshmallows. The results were
about the same for 1.the taking of the initial single marshmallow 2. waiting for a while, but eventually
settling for the single or 3. waiting for a full fifteen minutes for two
marshmallows.Later the experiment was followed up with The study of the SAT scores of the subjects
fourteen years later. The results were that for those that could wait for the two marshmallows, they scored on avg. of 210 pts higher than the group that could not.
How does this experiment support Shenk's argument on the growth mindset and how does it
go against? How does the experiment (141), a side experiment, reviewing the idea of developing skills, support Shenk's theory of GXE.
Christine Park (go2christine@hotmail.com)
David Shenk explains Walter Mischel’s “marshmallow test” in which he found that the patience of a four year-old reflects the child’s SAT score when they are eighteen. In fact, the children who were able to wait the fifteen minutes to receive two marshmallows (rather than one) scored on average 210 more points on the SAT (Shenk 141). Mischel’s experiment supports Shenk’s argument on the growth mindset by showing how the children who waited for the marshmallows did better on their SAT.
ReplyDeleteA person with a growth mindset is always looking for more intelligence and improvement. They welcome challenges as learning experiences, and they “see effort as a path to mastery” (http://michaelgr.com/2007/04/15/fixed-mindset-vs-growth-mindset-which-one-are-you/). On the other hand, people with a fixed mindset see their intelligence as something that cannot be improved. Mischel’s experiment proved Shenk’s idea of a growth mindset because of the teenagers’ performances on the SAT. When the children were four and presented with the marshmallows, the children with a fixed mindset took the single treat right away. They didn’t see the possible reward that could come out of a challenge. Thus, when taking the SAT fourteen years later, these children had the same fixed mindset towards the test, which lowered their SAT scores. Along with these children were the children who tried to wait but gave in to the single treat. They saw the possible reward at the end of the challenge but gave up because the immediate reward of one treat was satisfying enough. However, the children that waited had a growth mindset. They took the challenge of waiting as an obstacle that could be achieved. In the end, when they achieved the obstacle, they were rewarded with two marshmallows rather than one. This is reflected in their SAT scores because since the children grew up with a growth mindset, they saw the SAT as a learning experience and in turn scored higher than those with a fixed mindset.
This test within itself provided a growth mindset environment for the children by providing an environment that faced the children with challenges that they could embrace and overcome. This then reinforced Shenk’s GxE model. In The Genius in All of Us, Shenk explains three tactics that parents can take to ensure a growth mindset environment. He explains that these tactics can “encourage self-discipline and delayed gratification” (Shenk 141). The first is to be who you want your kids to be when they grow up. If you are a good role model, then your children will follow in your footsteps. This includes demonstrating self-control by not giving into instant gratification. This will help the growth mindset because it allows for your children to realize that although waiting for gratification to occur may be a challenge, the challenge itself will become a learning experience that the children can take away from. The second tactic is to not “immediately respond to [a child’s] every plea” (Shenk 142). This coincides with the first tactic on showing that overcoming challenges can lead to greater intelligence. Finally, Shenk states “EMBRACE FAILURE” (Shenk 142). This can be the difference between a growth mindset and a fixed mindset. A person with a growth mindset will embrace their failures and view them as learning experiences. They will take what they did wrong and try to make it right the next time. This tactic, if used by parents, will teach their children to grow up with a growth mindset, and can lead to their child’s success in later life, like on the SAT.
(Continued on next comment)
(Alexis Bauer, abauer9182@gmail.com)
(Continued from previous comment)
ReplyDeleteThe idea of a growth mindset and the effects of the environment prove the evolutionary theme of continuity and change. A species will tend to keep genetics constant unless some “genetic mechanisms” create the genes to change (http://biologyzone.edublogs.org/2008/07/20/theme-4-continuity-and-change/). In Shenk’s theory, these “mechanisms” are affected by the environment. The environment can affect the genes within a person, and turn them “on” or “off.” The way an adult treats their child can change the continuous fixed mindset of the child, and create a growth mindset rather than a fixed mindset. This can then lead to the inner genius of people to be exposed, this allowing the individual to succeed in their life.
However, this test does not 100% model Shenk’s growth mindset. This is true because there were one-third of the children who clearly had a growth mindset, since they were willing to wait for the two marshmallows, but they gave up halfway. These children had a growth mindset since they were willing to embrace a challenge and learn from it. However, part way through the experiment, they gave into a fixed mindset and took the single marshmallow. This shows that not everyone is either one mindset or another. However, this could have been caused by their environment. If the adults in their life showed similar behaviors, then the children modeled their behavior after them.
Mischel’s experiment does support Shenk’s idea of a growth mindset and how it is affected by its environment. However, the group that gave up after a period of time went against his ideas. The environment had a large role in this experiment by showing the relationship between a parent and their child. The children modeled after their mentors, their parents, and their behavior reflected that of their parents’.
(Alexis Bauer, abauer9182@gmail.com)