February 4, 2014--Self-Esteem

In the early 1970s, when concern mounted that minority children were not doing as well in school as white students, researchers began to assert that this was because of a self-esteem gap.

The findings indicated that white kids on average felt much better about themselves than black and Latino youngsters and this in turn led to gnawing differences in academic achievement. Ultimately, this lack of feeling good about themselves meant that many fewer minority children eventually graduated from high school and went on to college. And, as a result, over time, more wound up on the economic sidelines, in jail, or worse.

Based on this research, during the 1980s, many educators embraced what came to be known as the "self-esteem movement," an effort to help low-income students feel better about themselves. It was asserted, without verifiable evidence, that if a kid felt positively about herself, she would do better in school and, ultimately, life.

The evidence that was lacking was not that children of color had lower self-esteem (in many ways they did) but that there was a causal relationship that was proclaimed to exist between that and academic achievement.

Progressive ideologues and educators at the time did not see the possibility of reverse causation--doing well in academics or various other things such as musicality, aesthetic expression, physical adeptness, or leadership skills precedes feelings of genuine self-esteem rather than derives from it.

Thus, the inclination to overpraise and over-coddle children became commonplace. God forbid a child should be allowed to struggle; face difficulty, frustration, or danger; or feel second-best for coming in second in a race.

But this movement coupled with parental hyper-involvement has not gotten the job done.

There are still unacceptable gaps in achievement between majority and minority children (exacerbated by class differences) and, ironically, the over-protected, overpraised children of the affluent themselves have been shortchanged in the process. Study after study shows these children to be risk-adverse, under-motivated, and less rigorously serious than their overseas counterparts.

And there has been a spate of popular books calling this to Americans' attention. Amy Chua's 2011 best-seller, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, slammed American mothers of over-indulging their children, allowing them to spend too much time texting and playing video games, engaging in trivial after school activities, and collecting certificates and trophies for participating rather than actually doing well by achieving something worth celebrating.

She noted that Chinese (and Chinese-American) parents limit TV watching, forbid social networking, praise no grades less than A's, insist on hours of homework, and have their kids taking violin lessons rather than rushing off to Gymboree.

And on Sunday, the New York Times offered a front-page review of another cautionary book by Chua (and Jed Rubenfeld), The Triple Package: How Three Unlikely Traits Explain the Rise and Fall of Cultural Groups in America, about how American, addicted to instant gratification, including overpraising, has "lost its Triple Package."

I think we know which groups are doing the rising and falling--that isn't new news--but the Triple Package is interesting and worth paying attention to--

First, most upwardly mobile and successful Americans, as a group, feel superior to other groups.

Then, paradoxically, individuals are simultaneously riddled with self-doubt and feelings of inferiority. These two elements of the Triple Package supply the motivation to work extra hard to succeed.

And then, third, there is the capacity to control one's impulses, which leads to having long-term goals and respect for various forms of authority, from parents to teachers.

We may not like these messages and what is leeching out of our culture, but we ignore them at our peril.