Search This Blog


Thursday, July 24, 2014

How to Talk to Your Daughter About Her Body

From the HuffPost Parents Blog

By Sarah Koppelkam
July 30, 2014

How to talk to your daughter about her body, step one: Don't talk to your daughter about her body, except to teach her how it works.

Don't say anything if she's lost weight. Don't say anything if she's gained weight.

If you think your daughter's body looks amazing, don't say that. Here are some things you can say instead:

"You look so healthy!" is a great one.

Or how about, "You're looking so strong."

"I can see how happy you are -- you're glowing."

Better yet, compliment her on something that has nothing to do with her body.

Don't comment on other women's bodies either. Nope. Not a single comment, not a nice one or a mean one.

Teach her about kindness towards others, but also kindness towards yourself.

Don't you dare talk about how much you hate your body in front of your daughter, or talk about your new diet. In fact, don't go on a diet in front of your daughter. Buy healthy food. Cook healthy meals. But don't say, "I'm not eating carbs right now." Your daughter should never think that carbs are evil, because shame over what you eat only leads to shame about yourself.

Encourage your daughter to run because it makes her feel less stressed. Encourage your daughter to climb mountains because there is nowhere better to explore your spirituality than the peak of the universe. Encourage your daughter to surf, or rock climb, or mountain bike because it scares her and that's a good thing sometimes.

Help your daughter love soccer or rowing or hockey because sports make her a better leader and a more confident woman. Explain that no matter how old you get, you'll never stop needing good teamwork. Never make her play a sport she isn't absolutely in love with.

Prove to your daughter that women don't need men to move their furniture.

Teach your daughter how to cook kale.

Teach your daughter how to bake chocolate cake made with six sticks of butter.

Pass on your own mom's recipe for Christmas morning coffee cake. Pass on your love of being outside.

Maybe you and your daughter both have thick thighs or wide ribcages. It's easy to hate these non-size zero body parts. Don't. Tell your daughter that with her legs she can run a marathon if she wants to, and her ribcage is nothing but a carrying case for strong lungs. She can scream and she can sing and she can lift up the world, if she wants.

Remind your daughter that the best thing she can do with her body is to use it to mobilize her beautiful soul.


This post originally appeared on

A.S.C.E.N.T. - Advocacy, Social Skills, Career Exploration, Networking and Transitions

From the The Price Center

July 22, 2014

The ASCENT program is a non-profit, skills-focused afternoon program for people ages 16-30 living with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The program is now accepting applications for 2014-2015 enrollments.

It should be noted that The Price Center is prepared to provide behavioral structure, particularly for those on the autism spectrum. However, they are not equipped to provide intensive behavioral support. All prospective participants will have a screening preformed to make sure that the ASCENT program is the right fit for the individual and his/her family.

If you need clarification about this description, please email Karen Manning at or call her at 617-332-7477 x 222.


Advocacy, Social Skills, Career Exploration,
Networking and Transitions

ASCENT is for participants with intellectual and developmental disabilities age 16 to 30. Would you like to have your son or daughter’s plans for afternoons September to June planned ahead? Why not check out ASCENT?
  • Monday - Problem-Solving
  • Tuesday - My Future at Work
  • Wednesday - Planning My Social Calendar
  • Thursday - Developing Healthy Habits
  • Friday - Rights and Advocacy

A.S.C.E.N.T. will be operating a minimum of 4 afternoons per week beginning in September (Monday’s pending on participant interest). They are are open Tuesday - Friday, 2:30 – 5:30pm.

To learn more, contact Karen Manning at The Price Center, at
38 Border Street in West Newton. Please all 617-332-7477 or email

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

Being Kind Makes Kids Happy

From Greater Good
The Science of A Meaningful Life

By Delia Fuhrmann
August 1, 2012

A new study is the first to show that kids get a happiness boost from sacrificing for others, suggesting our strong inclinations for altruism.

Are kids born kind or do we need to teach them kindness? This nature versus nurture debate is an old one, but new findings published last month in the journal PLoS ONE may provide some novel insights.

The study, by Lara Aknin and her colleagues in the psychology department at the University of British Columbia, builds on the idea that if altruism is a deeply rooted part of human behavior, serving an evolutionary purpose, we’d find kind, helpful—or “prosocial”—acts intrinsically rewarding from the earliest stages of life, even when these acts come at a personal cost.

In other words, performing selfless acts would make kids happy—even before they’ve been socialized to fully appreciate the cultural value placed on kindness.

Photo Credit: Shawn Gearhart

Encouraged by the results of a preliminary study they ran, which showed that toddlers who shared a toy with someone else appeared happier than toddlers who simply played with the toy, the researchers developed a more elaborate experiment.

Twenty toddlers, all a month or two shy of their second birthday, were introduced to a monkey puppet who, they were told, “liked treats.” Soon afterward, an experimenter “found” eight treats—either Teddy Grahams or Goldfish crackers—and gave them to the toddler, saying all the treats belonged to that child.

Then the experimenter performed three more steps, in varying order: found another treat and gave it to the monkey while the child watched; found another treat, gave it to the child, and asked him or her to give it to the monkey; or asked the child to share one of his or her own eight treats with the monkey. Watch the video below to see one toddler going through the experiment.

Independent observers rated the toddlers’ happiness in all three scenarios. The results show that the children appeared happier when they gave away a treat than when they received a treat, and they displayed the greatest happiness when they gave away one of their own treats; this “costly giving” even made them happier than giving away a found treat at no cost to themselves. See the graph below for a breakdown of the toddlers’ happiness levels at the different stages of the experiment.

These results suggest that children might not need much encouragement to be kind. “While the role of socialization can almost never be completely ruled out,” the authors write, “the present results support the argument that humans have evolved to find prosocial behavior rewarding.”

But couldn’t the toddlers have seemed happier simply because they sensed they were making the experimenter (and the monkey puppet) happy?

“It’s definitely plausible that children have learned that adults value kind behavior and therefore smiled more because they expected to get rewards from adults when they gave away treats,” says Aknin. But she believes she and her colleagues accounted for this by comparing the children’s happiness when they gave away one of their own treats with their happiness when they gave away a treat that didn’t belong to them.

“In both of these cases, children were engaging in identical giving behavior—giving a treat away—that should be equally praised or rewarded by adults,” she says. “They were just happiest when this treat belonged to them and therefore required personal sacrifice in giving.”

Plus, to make sure that the experimenters were not influencing the children’s reactions, the researchers had their independent observers rate the experimenter’s enthusiasm in each scenario. They found that the experimenter’s enthusiasm did not correlate with the children’s apparent happiness.

While other studies have suggested adults are happier giving to others than to themselves and that kids are motivated to help others spontaneously, this is the first study to suggest that altruism is intrinsically rewarding even to very young kids, and that it makes them happier to give than to receive.

These findings complement recent studies that have shown that giving kids rewards for their prosocial behavior may actually undermine kindness. One possible explanation for these somewhat counterintuitive findings is that, in order for children to grow up seeing themselves as kind and giving, it is important for them to feel that they do good because they want to, not because others expect them to.

Of course, this does not diminish the importance of a loving and kind environment, in which adults teach the importance of prosocial behavior, including by modelling that behavior themselves. It merely suggests that nature may have given us a happy head-start in the task of raising kind kids.

Sunday, July 20, 2014

How Playing Music Affects the Developing Brain

From WBUR 90.9 FM's Blog

By George Hicks
July 17, 2014

Listen to this story (11:22) HERE.

Remember “Mozart Makes You Smarter”?

A 1993 study of college students showed them performing better on spatial reasoning tests after listening to a Mozart sonata. That led to claims that listening to Mozart temporarily increases IQs — and to a raft of products purporting to provide all sorts of benefits to the brain.

In 1998, Zell Miller, then the governor of Georgia, even proposed providing every newborn in his state with a CD of classical music.

But subsequent research has cast doubt on the claims.

A cellist at the Conservatory Lab Charter School in Boston
plays during a recital rehearsal. Research has found music
nstruction has beneficial effects on young brains.
(Jesse Costa/WBUR)

Ani Patel, an associate professor of psychology at Tufts University and the author of “Music, Language, and the Brain,” says that while listening to music can be relaxing and contemplative, the idea that simply plugging in your iPod is going to make you more intelligent doesn’t quite hold up to scientific scrutiny.

“On the other hand,” Patel says, “there’s now a growing body of work that suggests that actually learning to play a musical instrument does have impacts on other abilities.” These include speech perception, the ability to understand emotions in the voice and the ability to handle multiple tasks simultaneously.

Patel says this is a relatively new field of scientific study.

“The whole field of music neuroscience really began to take off around 2000,” he says. “These studies where we take people, often children, and give them training in music and then measure how their cognition changes and how their brain changes both in terms of its processing [and] its structure, are very few and still just emerging.”

Patel says that music neuroscience, which draws on cognitive science, music education and neuroscience, can help answer basic questions about the workings of the human brain.

“How do we process sequences with complex hierarchical structure and make sense of them?” he asks. “How do we integrate sensation and action? How do we remember long and difficult sequences of information? These are fundamental neuroscience questions, and music can help us answer some of these questions, because it’s in some ways simpler than language, but it’s still of sufficient complexity that it can address these very deep and important aspects of human brain function.”

In addition, Patel says music neuroscience research has important implications about the role of music in the lives of young children.

“If we know how and why music changes the brain in ways that affect other cognitive abilities,” he says, “this could have a real impact on the value we put on it as an activity in the schools, not to mention all the impact it has on emotional development, emotional maturity, social skills, stick-to-itiveness, things we typically don’t measure in school but which are hugely important in a child’s ultimate success.”

El Sistema At One Boston School

At the Conservatory Lab Charter School in Boston, every student receives music instruction.

“It doesn’t matter whether they have had music instruction before or not,” says Diana Lam, the head of the school.

The school, which accepts new students by lottery, is bucking a national trend, as more and more cash-strapped school districts pare down or eliminate music programs.

Lam says music is part of her school’s core curriculum because it teaches students to strive for quality in all areas of their lives — and because it gets results.

“Music addresses some of the behaviors and skills that are necessary for academic success,” she says. “Since we started implementing El Sistema, the Venezuelan music program, as well as project-based learning, our test scores have increased dramatically.”

Kathleen Jara, co-director of the El Sistema program at the
Conservatory Lab Charter School in Boston, directs orchestra
students during a rehearsal for their year-end recital.
(Jesse Costa/WBUR)

Musically Trained Kids with Better Executive Functioning Skills

But what does the latest scientific research tell us? The question, according to neuropsychologist Nadine Gaab, is not simply whether music instruction has beneficial effects on young brains.

“There’s a lot of evidence,” Gaab says, “that if you play a musical instrument, especially if you start early in life, that you have better reading skills, better math skills, et cetera. The question is, what is the underlying mechanism?”

At her lab at Boston Children’s Hospital, Gaab leads a team of researchers studying children’s brain development, recently identifying signs in the brain that might indicate dyslexia before kids learn to read, as we discussed in an earlier report from this series. Gaab and her colleagues are also looking for connections between musical training and language development.

“Initially we thought that it’s training the auditory system, which then helps you with language, reading and other academic skills,” she says.

Instead, in a study published last month, Gaab and her team delineated a connection — in both children and adults — between learning to play an instrument and improved executive functioning, like problem-solving, switching between tasks and focus.

“Could it be,” Gaab asks, “that musical training trains these executive functioning skills, which then helps with academic skills?”

MRI scans show brain activation during executive functioning testing.
The top row, row A, is of musically trained children. The bottom row,
row B, is of untrained children. There’s more activation in the
musically-trained children. (Courtesy Nadine Gaab)

To find out, researchers gave complex executive functioning tasks to both musically trained and untrained children while scanning their brains in MRI machines.

“For example,” Gaab says, “you would hear the noise of a horse, ‘neigh,’ and every time you hear the horse, whenever you see a triangle you have to press the left button and whenever you see a circle you have to press the right button. However, if you hear a frog, the rule switches.”

While noting the children’s ability to follow the rules, the scientists also watched for activity in the prefrontal cortex of the brain, known to be the seat of executive functioning.

“We were just looking at how much of the prefrontal cortex was activated while they were doing this ‘neigh-froggy’ task in the scanner,” Gaab says. “And we could show that musically trained children and professional adult musicians have better executive functioning skills compared to their peers who do not play a musical instrument. We could further show that children who are musically trained have more activation in these prefrontal areas compared to their peers.”

So does music-making enhance executive functioning?

Gaab hastens to add, “We don’t know what’s the egg and what’s the hen.” That is, whether musical proficiency makes for better executive functioning, or vice-versa.

But Gaab cites other studies which imply the former.

“It’s most likely the musical training that improves executive functioning skills,” she says. “You could just hypothesize that playing in an orchestral setting is particularly training the executive functioning skills because you have to play in a group; you have to listen to each other.”

And Gaab says that’s analogous to what happens in the brain of a musician.

“There are a lot of different brain systems involved in successfully playing even a small musical piece: your auditory system, your motor system, your emotional system, your executive function system; this playing together of these brain regions, almost like in a musical ensemble.”

Changing ‘Brain Plasticity’

But the question remains: Why would acquiring musical skills influence language and other higher brain functions? Neuropsychologist Patel has developed a theory he calls the OPERA hypothesis.

“The basic idea is that music is not an island in the brain cut off from other things, that there’s overlap, that’s the ‘O’ of OPERA, between the networks that process music and the networks that are involved in other day-to-day cognitive functions such as language, memory, attention and so forth,” he says. “The ‘P’ in OPERA is precision. Think about how sensitive we are to the tuning of an instrument, whether the pitch is in key or not, and it can be painful if it’s just slightly out of tune.”

That level of precision in processing music, Patel says, is much higher than the level of precision used in processing speech. This means, he says, that developing our brains’ musical networks may very well enhance our ability to process speech.

“And the last three components of OPERA, the ‘E-R-A,’ are emotion, repetition and attention,” he says. “These are factors that are known to promote what’s called brain plasticity, the changing of the brain’s structure as a function of experience.”

Patel explains that brain plasticity results from experiences which engage the brain through emotion, are repetitive, and which require full attention. Experiences such as playing music.

“So this idea,” he says, “that music sometimes places higher demands on the brain, on some of the same shared networks that we use for other abilities, allows the music to actually enhance those networks, and those abilities benefit.”

One striking example of this is the use of singing to restore speech. At the Music and Neuroimaging Lab at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Dr. Gottfried Schlaug has pioneered singing as a therapeutic method of rehabilitating victims of stroke and other brain injuries, as well as people with severe autism.

And some of the most recent music neuroscience research is using music as a tool to better understand, and even predict, language-based learning disabilities.

But not all of the ideas behind this research, or even the methods, have come from scientists.

Using Music To Test Literacy Ability

Paulo Andrade teaches music at Colegio Criativa, a private school in Marilia, Brazil. He and his wife Olga, who’s also a teacher there, became interested in the relationship between musical and language skills among their elementary school students.

“We both work with the same children,” Andrade says, “and we started to exchange information about how the children were going. I could relate the musical development of children to their language ability and literacy.”

Andrade developed some collective classroom tasks to identify children at risk of learning disabilities. He asked his second-grade music class to listen to him play a series of chord sequences on the guitar, and identify each one.

“I asked [the] children to write visual symbols to represent the sound sequence they were hearing,” he explains, “a simple line to express chords in the high register and a circle to represent the chords played in the low register.”

Andrade made the students pause before writing down the identifying symbol. This would test their working memory, a kind of mental Post-it note crucial to language comprehension.

“What I presented to children was simple rhythm, for instance, [Andrade imitates the sound of his guitar] ti-tum-tum-chi. I counted the meter one, two, three, four, and then they start to write.”

What Andrade saw was that the kids who had severe difficulty with the task were also struggling with reading and writing. He knew he had good data, but he needed help from a scientist to analyze his data and methodology, and to write up the findings for publication.

“I read some papers by Nadine Gaab, and I searched for the page on the Internet and found Harvard and emailed her,” he says.

Recently, Andrade was in Boston on a Harvard fellowship, working on a follow-up to his research at the Gaab lab.

“We have found that this task, given to second-graders, can predict their literacy ability in the fifth grade,” Andrade says.

About her collaboration with the Brazilian music teacher, Gaab says, “I think that’s a really nice example of neuroeducation, bridging neuroscience and education.”

And she adds that Andrade’s musical test is particularly useful, in that it can be administered cheaply and easily to whole classrooms, regardless of the students’ native language.

“What we would love to do is replicate this study in the U.S.,” Gaab says, “but there’s no funding right now, so we’re working on that.”

Funding Concerns

Patel, the Tufts professor, says that getting funding for research in music neuroscience is often a challenge. It’s still a young field, he says, “and funding bodies tend to be very conservative, in terms of the kind of research they fund.”

The difficulty in sustaining funding may be similar to what music educators are facing.

“In terms of music in the schools,” Patel says, “it’s interesting that music is often the very first thing to be cut when budgets get tight, and as far as I know, that’s never based on any research or evidence about the impact of music on young children’s lives; it’s based on the intuition that this is sort of a frill.”

Gaab, Patel’s fellow neuropsychologist, agrees.

“Currently there’s a lot of talking about cutting music out of the curriculum of public and private schools, and I think it may be the wrong way to go,” Gaab says. “It may cut out some of the important aspects, such as to train executive functioning and have fun and emotional engagement at the same time.”

Both Gaab and Patel believe that music neuroscience is paying off, not only in showing the tremendous practical importance of music education, but also to help answer fundamental questions about the deepest workings of the human brain.

Friday, July 18, 2014

Why Self-Esteem Hurts Learning but Self-Confidence Does the Opposite

From Open Colleges Australia
via InformED

By Saga Briggs
July 5, 2014

It’s all about confidence, they say. Success in any form, be it vocational or interpersonal or what have you, all boils down to self-belief (or at least the appearance of it). But what about more quantifiable forms of success, like academic performance? You either ace the test or you don’t, but did confidence–or lack thereof–play a part in getting you there?

It may not surprise you to know that confidence plays a huge part in learning. Decades of research support the notion that believing in your ability to do something enhances your ability to do it. What you will be surprised to hear is that this is not the same as “believing in yourself” or cultivating a sense of self-worth.

In fact, as you’ll see in a moment, when we tell our students to “believe in themselves,” we may actually be doing them more harm than good.

Confidence vs. Self-Esteem

Roy F. Baumeister, professor of psychology at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, has been studying self-esteem for decades, and has published more research on the topic than any other specialist in the U.S.

In his essay, “Should Schools Try to Boost Self Esteem?” he warns us not to conflate self-esteem with confidence.

“Self-esteem is, literally, how favorably a person regards him or herself,” Baumeister writes. “High self-esteem can mean confident and secure–but it can also mean conceited, arrogant, narcissistic, and egotistical.”

What’s more, there’s little to no correlation between self-esteem and academic performance, and Baumeister’s not the first to discover this.

To encourage the lower-performing students to regard their performance just as favorably as the top learners – a strategy all too popular with the self-esteem movement – is a tragic mistake

“There is no getting around the fact that most educators who speak earnestly about the need to boost students’ self-esteem are unfamiliar with the research that has been conducted on this question,” says educator and psychologist Alfie Kohn. “At best, they may vaguely assert, as I confess I used to do, that ‘studies’ suggest self-esteem is terribly important.”

The relationship between self-esteem and student outcomes is limited, at best. In a careful review of 128 studies on this topic, two Australian researchers, B. C. Hansford and J. A. Hattie, found that the average correlation was in the range of .21 to .26, which means that differences in self-esteem can account for only about 4 to 7 per cent of variation in academic performance.

“The effects of self-esteem are small, limited, and not all good,” Baumeister says.

And that’s to say nothing about the idea of boosting self-esteem in order to improve student performance.

“To encourage the lower-performing students to regard their performance just as favorably as the top learners–a strategy all too popular with the self-esteem movement–is a tragic mistake,” Baumeister warns. “If successful, it results only in inflated self-esteem, a recipe for a host of problems and destructive patterns.”

Boosting confidence, on the other hand, can make all the difference.

In a representative University of Iowa study, college students were divided into high confidence and low confidence groups by being told that they were taking a test designed to measure intelligence of Ivy League versus high school students. Test scores for the groups were compared, and peer evaluations of participants’ performance and academic confidence were examined. The researchers expected group assignment to affect participants’ academic confidence and academic performance, and they were right.

Students assigned to the low confidence group performed worse than students assigned to the high confidence group.

In another study, researchers examined first year engineering students’ learning of mathematics in a university college during 2005–2007. The aim was to better understand students’ confidence and determined whether it affected performance. Surveys were administered, with questions asking about previous mathematics qualifications, student confidence, attitude, liking of the subject, and motivation. The responses were analyzed and compared with marks achieved by the students on their first year engineering mathematics examinations. Student confidence influenced performance by as much as 12 per cent.

When it comes to academic performance, confidence is a much stronger predictor of success than self-esteem. But when we talk about boosting students’ confidence, we may be focusing on the wrong thing. While general confidence refers to a person’s character or personality, academic confidence more closely resembles a perceived ability to accomplish a set of tasks.

Confidence vs. Self-Efficacy

Kansas State University professor Candice Shoemaker looks at the psychological constructs of “confidence” and “self-efficacy” (a fancy term for academic confidence, in this case) to evaluate the effectiveness of targeted learning objectives on student achievement.

“Confidence is a measure of one’s belief in one’s own abilities and is considered a psychological trait that is related to, but distinct from, both personality and ability traits,” she says.

“An interrelated construct is ‘self-efficacy,’ which refers to a person’s belief in one’s capabilities to learn or perform behaviors. Research shows that self-efficacy influences academic motivation, learning, and achievement. “

Although confidence and self-efficacy are interrelated, she says, a defining aspect of self-efficacy, which distinguishes it from the more general construct of confidence, is its domain-specific nature.

In one of Shoemaker’s recent studies, self-assessments were given to students enrolled in the course in the fall semesters from 2005 to 2008 to assess whether the learning objectives were being met. The 50-item assessment asked students to record their confidence in ability to do something such as “distinguish between transpiration and respiration” or “write a scientific plant name.” Students were asked to indicate how confident they were on that day,from “not confident at all” to “very confident.”

Most students reported slight confidence at the start of the course and confidence at the end of the course in performing the 50 tasks. Students’ reported confidence at the conclusion of the course was correlated with their academic performance in three of the four years that were examined.

But Shoemaker says measuring confidence within a specific domain turns it into something else.

“It is more likely that self-efficacy, rather than confidence, was impacted as students moved through the course,” she says, “because all the activities associated with a course means a course is a domain-specific construct, and the students’ reported confidence at the end of the semester was correlated with academic performance.”

Vrugt et al. (1997) saw a difference between confidence and self-efficacy too. While they defined self-efficacy as pertaining to specific activities, making it more of an interaction between a person and a task, they considered self-confidence to be a personal characteristic.

“Since confidence generally has been regarded as a personality trait, academic self-confidence can be viewed as a separate and more specific term, which can be referred to in educational settings as a predictor of academic performance.”

The difference between academic self-confidence and general self-confidence is that the former can “more easily be influenced by elements of the situation (e.g. surroundings, people, and recent success or failure) than the latter.” Studies have found consistent and enduring evidence that academic self-confidence–confidence in one’s academic abilities–is a significant predictor of academic performance.

Research suggests that academic performance in general is related to one’s perceived self-efficacy. Taylor, Locke, Lee, and Gist (1984) demonstrated that academic staff members with higher self-efficacy produced more scientific material.

Tuckman and Sexton (1992) suggest that students with higher self-efficacy are better at searching for new solutions and are more persistent at working on difficult tasks, whereas people with low self-efficacy give up more easily when dealing with difficult tasks and cannot concentrate on tasks as well.

These patterns of behavior, if they continue, lead to the development of different levels of actual ability, which results in varying levels of achievement.

The Benefits of Studying Confidence

At the National Institute of Education in Singapore, professors Lazar Stankov, Suzanne Morony, and Lee Yim Ping have found that students who think they are skilled in math tend to perform well on math tests.

Lazar and his team point out that there is plenty of evidence indicating the effects of self-concept, anxiety, and self-efficacy on student achievement, but fewer studies investigate the role of confidence.

Collecting data from more than 600 Secondary 3 students in 5 schools, the researchers found confidence to be highly predictive.

“From this study, we know that confidence is a much better predictor of students’ achievements than any other non-cognitive measure,” notes Lazar. “In fact, it acts in a way that it overcomes everything else; so confidence is very important.”

The team measured students’ self-confidence by asking them to complete a math test and, after each item on the test, asking how confident they were that their answer was correct. They then calculated the students’ confidence rating (or “bias score”) by comparing this measure to the actual percentage of correct answers.

Lazar believes these confidence tests can benefit both learning and teaching. For example, the scores from the self-confidence tests provide students with insights into the topics they are weak in. Students who think they have given a correct answer to a question but are proven otherwise may gain the necessary knowledge of the kind of math topics they are weak in.

[Read more about how to practice effectively.]

This could encourage self-reflection in students and motivate them to pay more attention to these weaker topics. “It teaches students to really think about what type of math questions they struggle with and which questions they thought were easy,” says Morony.

“When we went to share the findings with schools,” Yim Ping adds, “teachers were very interested to know their students’ bias scores. They wanted to know how correct their students’ answers were and how confident the students were about their responses being correct.”

Some of the findings enabled to the teachers to sharpen their selection of specific strategies to increase their students’ confidence. “They realized they could leverage on certain topics to explore enhancing students’ self-confidence and interest,” she adds.

Similar findings are documented in a 2012 study called “Confidence: A better predictor of academic achievement than self-efficacy, self-concept and anxiety?” Researchers assessed confidence together with scales measuring self-efficacy, different kinds of self-concepts, and anxiety among the 15-year old students from Singapore. A distinct confidence factor was identified in both mathematics and English.

“Confidence as studied in our work to date has been the best predictor of achievement in both mathematics and English,” the authors write.

Can You Train Yourself to Be a More Confident Learner?

For example, Haywood (1992) described a case study in which a thirteen-year-old boy’s scores on the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children rose 28 points in four months as a result of a significant change in motivational circumstances, which increased his self-confidence and engagement in mental work. The boy was exposed to a few hours of dynamic assessment, a program in which he was not allowed to fail, and was given any help needed to succeed.

The majority of participants were overconfident in their ability to use a product before trying it out, but grossly under-confident after one attempt.

As a result, his enthusiasm for and confidence in his mental abilities rose dramatically. So it may in fact be possible for students to improve their academic confidence in ways other than simply studying harder.

Another study highlights some of the confidence-related limits we impose on ourselves when it comes to learning. BYU professor Darron Billeter had subjects test a range of new products, from a high-tech fishing pole to a computer program. The majority of participants were overconfident in their ability to use a product before trying it out, but grossly under-confident after one attempt.

Billeter says this illustrates our tendency to give up at the first sign of ineptitude.

“(The learning curve) is really steep initially,” Billeter said. “There’s some pain associated with it, but we’re actually improving. You’re going to be better than you think you are and are going to learn it quicker than you think you are.”

What happens in the brain is that first-time tasks are solved using controlled processes, which are slow and flexible. But over time, the task becomes automated and is delegated to the back of the brain.

“The reason people underpredict their own rate of learning is they don’t appreciate how quickly these controlled processes are going to become automated. My advice to individuals is to stick with it. You’re going to get better at the task faster than you expect, almost always.”

The same can be said for students.

About Saga Briggs

Saga has taught and tutored writing at the elementary, secondary, and post-secondary levels. Her educational interests include psychology, creativity and system reform. She earned a B.A. in Creative Writing from Oberlin College, and lives in Portland, Oregon, USA. You can reach her on Google+, @sagamilena or saga.briggs @

Thursday, July 17, 2014

Parent Like There's No One Watching

From the HuffPost Parents Blog

By Janel Mills
July 9, 2014

My friend told me once that I could find the silver lining in anything. Here's a big one that I've found: being a parent of an autistic child has humbled me and made me a better parent.

Specifically, I've stopped caring about what strangers think of my parenting skills. It took me a lot of searching to find that particular silver lining, and it wasn't easy to find.

Sometimes Bella can't handle all the people at the store. Sometimes she doesn't want to leave the spring fair at the elementary school. Sometimes she can't share or take turns the way other kids can at her age. It could be anything, or nothing at all. But her reaction is often huge, her meltdowns epic, and when they're public meltdowns, well, you can imagine how fun that is.

I've been screamed at full-blast in Target over a toy I didn't buy. I've had to coax an anxiety-overloaded child off of the floor at Jo-Ann Fabrics because she'd just had enough. I've left parks carrying my child like a sack of potatoes, kicking and screaming, because she wouldn't leave any other way.

I've been slapped, scratched, kicked and almost bit while strangers watched (or pretended not to watch, but lingered just a little too long to leave any kind of doubt as to whether or not they were shopping or watching).

It's not always meltdowns, though. Sometimes it's just all the quirky things that you don't notice around the house, but are glaringly obvious when you venture out into the real world. I had to tell Bella once that no, not everyone in the store thinks it's funny when you stand in front of their cart, put your hand up, and shout, "STOP!"

Also, kids tend to notice when your daughter licks every doorknob in the hallway at morning drop-off. Her eccentricities are amusing at home, but were mortifying in public. I found myself saying, "No, Bella..." the entire time we were out, which only aggravated me and put her on edge.

I used to walk out of public places feeling embarrassed and humiliated. Partly because of how my child behaved, but also partly because of how I behaved. So often, I found that I was parenting for the benefit of those around me. I felt their eyes watching me, judging me, and so I would perform for them. I said what I thought I "should" say, what I thought people were expecting me to say.

Instead of calmly and patiently waiting for Bella to cool down before talking to her, I would jump the gun and reprimand her when she wasn't ready to process what I was saying. I would speak harshly to her so people could hear that I was in charge, that I was doing the "right" thing -- even though the "right" thing for Bella doesn't look or sound anything like what the "right" thing might be for other kids.

My worst parenting moments, the ones I am least proud of, happened because I was trying to impress a bunch of strangers I'll probably never see again.

One day, after a particularly awful meltdown at the grocery store, I was driving home and had a simple but important thought flash in my head:

I'm not responsible for those people.

I have no control over those strangers' reactions towards or perceptions of me. To put it simply, who the hell cares what those people think?

The only people whose opinions matter, the only people I am responsible for, are my kids. I'm only beholden to them. I care about what they think of me, and how they feel. No one else.

Those lingering people in the store can just f*ck off.

Once I stopped trying to impress strangers, my life got a whole lot easier. I don't worry about what people will think of Bella and her behavior in public anymore, because I seriously don't care. I focus only on my kids and how they're feeling. If they're happy, I'm happy. If they're upset, then we deal with it the same way we would deal with it at home.

Sometimes that means I have to stand in the store and wait a minute for Bella to pull herself together. Sometimes it means I have to stay calm and not react when my daughter tries to claw my arm. I know it's because she doesn't know what to do with the overwhelmingly intense feelings she's experiencing, and reacting physically towards me is the only way she knows how to deal with those feelings. Other people don't know that, but I don't have to explain myself to them.

If someone says anything dumb, I ignore them -- I literally pretend they're not talking. If someone lends sincere help, I accept or decline politely (depending on whether or not it will make things better or worse, in my opinion).

People stare, and I'm sure some people go home and judge the hell out of me. Why should I care? I get to go home and feel good about how I treated my children.

This girl's opinion of me means a whole lot more than your opinion, lady.


Follow Janel Mills on Facebook and Twitter. You can also read her essays in I Just Want to Be Alone and You Have Lipstick on Your Teeth.

Study IDs Teens Prone to Emotional Problems After Concussion

From PsychCentral

By Janice Wood
Reviewed by John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

July 13, 2014

A new study has found that after a concussion, teens who are sensitive to light or noise may be more likely to have emotional symptoms such as anxiety.

“While most people recover from a concussion within a week, a number of factors affect people’s recovery, and studies have shown that teenage athletes may take up to seven to 10 days longer to recover than older athletes,” said study authors Lisa M. Koehl, M.S., and Dong (Dan) Y. Han, Psy.D., of the University of Kentucky in Lexington.

The study, presented at The Sports Concussion Conference in Chicago, involved 37 athletes age 12 to 17 who had persistent symptoms for an average of 37 days following a concussion. The researchers noted that teens who had a previous history of psychological issues were excluded from the study.

One group, made up of 22 teens, had emotional symptoms, such as irritability, aggression, anxiety, depression, apathy, frequent mood changes, or excessive emotional reactions after the concussion. The second group of 15 teens did not have emotional symptoms.

The researchers report that there were no differences between the two groups in factors such as the percentage that experienced loss of consciousness or amnesia, indicating that the groups were likely comparable in the level of severity of concussion.

The study found that of the 22 teens who had emotional symptoms, five teens — or 23 percent — were sensitive to light while three teens — 14 percent — were sensitive to noise.

In comparison, of the 15 teens without emotional symptoms, only two — 13 percent — were sensitive to light and none were sensitive to noise.

The researchers note that the number of concussions experienced by the teens and whether they also had headaches or nausea were not related to whether they also had emotional symptoms.

The researchers also found that having a family history of psychiatric problems did not make teens any more likely to have emotional symptoms after a concussion.

Teens who had anxiety were 55 percent more likely to self-report attention difficulties than those without anxiety, while teens with irritability/aggression were 35 percent more likely to report problems with attention than teens without irritability, according to the study.

The researchers noted that the findings are preliminary because of the small number of participants, emphasizing the importance of replicating the study with a larger number of teens.

“Identifying factors such as these that may exacerbate issues teens experience after concussion may help in planning for the appropriate treatment and in making decisions about when to return to play and what accommodations are needed at school for these athletes,” the researchers concluded.

The study was supported by the American College of Sports Medicine Research Foundation.


Source: The American Academy of Neurology