The Myth of Talent – Chapter 2

How do we learn the capacity for sustained effort?

In my last blog, I discussed the role of deliberate practice and sustained effort in achieving high levels of performance and accomplishment. This week I explore the fundamental importance of social inclusion and psychological safety in creating an environment where students can learn the capacity for sustained effort.

This blog discusses the rationale behind setting up student affinity groups at SFDS. To read more about student affinity groups click here.

Here is a story from my personal experience that helped me understand how the social context of a learning environment can dramatically influence one’s capacity for sustained effort. This is a true story.

The well-known author of Reviving Ophelia, Mary Phiper, was coming to town to give a lecture at the local college. As Head of School and advocate of empowering female students, I invited several female students to attend the lecture. They needed a ride, so I volunteered to do car pool.

As I entered the voluminous lecture hall, the girls saw some friends and scurried off. I was alone. I looked around for someone to sit with, noticing that I was one of only about a dozen males among hundreds of females. Everyone was talking excitedly in small groups about the upcoming lecture, eagerly anticipating bonding around a common purpose and commitment. I was feeling quite proud of myself, as an evolved, progressive male, for supporting female empowerment. Of course, I was anticipating all the praise I would receive for being supportive of women. (The male ego is a fragile construct.)

I approached a group of women to join the excitement about the event and receive some of that praise. The group simply ignored me. They turned away and didn’t even acknowledge my presence. I turned away, a little put off, and approached another group. The same thing happened. Then I tried making eye contact with some women colleagues I recognized. Again there was no eye contact and no acknowledgement of my presence. Clearly no one was going to talk to me, and certainly I was not going to receive that praise that I thought I deserved.

I was starting to feel anxious. My stomach got tight and my palms a little sweaty. No one was being mean to me. No one said anything insulting. I was just invisible. I got the message. I was not really welcome. They would tolerate my presence at the lecture, but I was not going to be included in any of the animated conversations. So I quietly sat down and accepted my appropriate place in this setting.

I listened attentively to the lecture, found the students at the end, and drove home. As I was pulling into my driveway, I realized I had no memory of anything Mary Phipher had said. I couldn’t recall a single idea or theme. My social isolation had impacted my short-term memory, and therefore prevented me from learning. Even as a highly accomplished middle-aged white male, known and respected in the community, my social isolation in this specific situation inhibited my capacity for short-term memory, which is obviously connected to sustained effort.

This brief encounter taught me a valuable lesson about the importance of psychological safety. If this could happen to me, what is the impact of a similar situation for a six-year old or twelve-year old in our school? Do our students who are a racial minority, family income minority, or in a family structure that is not the norm experience similar isolating messages in our school? Do we unintentionally send others a message that they are not welcome in our school community? If we understand that unintentional social isolation can have a powerful affect on memory, attention, and the capacity for sustained effort, don’t we have an obligation as a school community to make every child feel welcome?

It is the recognition that social isolation, intended or unintended, can impact learning, that forms the basis for organizing affinity groups in our school. This year we invited parents who identify as Asian, Latino, African-American, mixed heritage, or LGBT to have an informal gathering at school with each other and the Head of School. In these gatherings, participants talked about their common experiences as parents and the experiences of their children. While all parents said they and the kids’ experiences were fundamentally very positive, there were many stories of difficulties they faced because of their minority status. The time together and shared stories was affirming and energizing, serving as a sanctuary acknowledging that they were not alone. This affirmation and acknowledgement generates psychological energy and safety that builds the capacity for sustained effort when faced with an uncomfortable learning environment.

Last week we provided an opportunity for Upper School students of color to participate in affinity groups. In Advisory meetings all students were introduced to the idea of affinity groups and provided an opportunity to ask questions. Later in the week in Study Hall, students of color met in an affinity group to be together, to share common experiences, and to feel affirmed for who they are.

Knowing that social isolation and psychological insecurity reduces ones capacity to learn, we are forming affinity groups to help students affirm their identity and know that the School truly welcomes their whole self in this community. The intended result will be an increased capacity to learn at SFDS. For more information on affinity groups both in general and at SFDS please read a letter from Renée Otero, Director of Diversity at SFDS.

Stay tuned for a story about how the myth of inherited math ability can be used to generate sustained effort.