- #31
HAYAO
Science Advisor
Gold Member
- 379
- 238
I feel that StatGuy2000 and russ_watters are arguing past each other.
Russ_watters is pretty much saying that people should take responsibility for their choices and understand that not everyone are suited for every jobs. StatGuy2000 is arguing that one should not be judged to be incapable of something prior to doing anything. These two arguments do not conflict with each other. Not telling students that they can be anything does not equal telling students that they are bad at something. Russ implies that one should be rightfully praised for something a student really has.
My personal opinion is that we should not tell children good at science, for example, "you'll be a great scientist!". Instead, we should tell them "you are very good at science!". These very subtle difference can become a big influence on the children. The former forces children to become certain thing, and leaves out other choices. The latter is only telling the truth, and allows children to contemplate on what they want to be based on what they (and others) feel they are good at. Similarly, we should not tell children bad at math, for example, "you'll never be a mathematician!". Instead we should tell them "you need to improve your math skills". The former disencourages certain choice, and the child will most likely be rebellious and say "I never wanted to be a mathematician in the first place". The latter only points out the truth. However some children are slow starters but excellent thinkers, as they improve their skills, they might open up to new choices that they would have never thought of if they were stripped of the choice of becoming a mathematician. So the latter still leaves some choice for the child.
Russ_watters is pretty much saying that people should take responsibility for their choices and understand that not everyone are suited for every jobs. StatGuy2000 is arguing that one should not be judged to be incapable of something prior to doing anything. These two arguments do not conflict with each other. Not telling students that they can be anything does not equal telling students that they are bad at something. Russ implies that one should be rightfully praised for something a student really has.
My personal opinion is that we should not tell children good at science, for example, "you'll be a great scientist!". Instead, we should tell them "you are very good at science!". These very subtle difference can become a big influence on the children. The former forces children to become certain thing, and leaves out other choices. The latter is only telling the truth, and allows children to contemplate on what they want to be based on what they (and others) feel they are good at. Similarly, we should not tell children bad at math, for example, "you'll never be a mathematician!". Instead we should tell them "you need to improve your math skills". The former disencourages certain choice, and the child will most likely be rebellious and say "I never wanted to be a mathematician in the first place". The latter only points out the truth. However some children are slow starters but excellent thinkers, as they improve their skills, they might open up to new choices that they would have never thought of if they were stripped of the choice of becoming a mathematician. So the latter still leaves some choice for the child.
Last edited: