Skip to main content

The Optimist’s Toolbox: Mindset

I read a lot when I was young. I started writing. I dreamed I might write like Hemingway someday. I got good feedback from teachers at school. Writing seemed easier for me than it was for other kids.

When I went to college, I started as a Journalism major. I got a job at the college newspaper and was assigned some stories. I had no idea what I was doing. I didn’t know how to prepare, how to interview, how to investigate, or how to structure information. I had never written with such tight constraints and quick deadlines.

I worked hard to finish stories, only to have them come right back for major revisions. The dream I had, that I was a great writer, suddenly felt foolish. A year later, I had largely given up on writing. My new college majors were Psychology and Advertising. I left writing behind.

I had a ‘fixed’ mindset about writing skills. “I’m a really good writer.” I possessed a special skill; all I had to do was apply my talent and I would shine. When the challenge level increased and I got feedback that threatened my dream, I didn’t see alternatives. I just thought my dream was a farce, and I might as well move on.

This is what Psychologist Carol Dweck has called ‘mindset’ theory. Our mindset about a skill is on a continuum from a ‘fixed’ mindset to a ‘growth’ mindset. Mindset is a nice addition to the optimist’s toolbox.

A ‘fixed’ mindset means someone thinks their skill is a possession. It’s like believing that you have a certain amount of innate talent, and that’s just the way it is. Whether you think you have a little talent or a lot, this can lead to problems.

My fixed mindset about writing skill is part of the reason I gave up on journalism. One day I possessed talent, and the next day I thought I saw evidence that the talent was gone. I started looking for somewhere else to shine.

Another trap of the fixed mindset is when people intentionally stop trying so they can protect their ego. A student might not study for a test. Their ego is then protected, because a bad grade in the class doesn't mean they lack talent--it was because they didn’t try.

A ‘growth’ mindset is when people believe their skill is built through effort and time. The skill they have today is because of the effort they put in yesterday. They believe they can be bad at something today, but good at it in the future.

If I’d had a growth mindset in college, perhaps I would have given journalism another year. Perhaps instead of thinking “I’m actually not that good at this,” I would have thought, “I mastered high school writing assignments, and eventually I can master this, too.” Perhaps I’d have seen feedback as an opportunity to learn and not a threat to my ego.

It’s a common trap, and it’s easy to fall into. When I was in high school, some kids were just considered ‘smart’. Later, when I worked with college students at universities, I saw what happened when those ‘smart kids’ were no longer the smartest kids in the room.

It was just like when I discovered I wasn’t the best writer in the room. When things get challenging, mindset matters.

I’ve been so aware of mindset with my kids. I can see that Dweck’s mindset theory has had some influence in the schools, but people tend to interpret it as simple ‘you can do it’ cheerleading. It’s not cheerleading. There are different thought patterns that lead to different outcomes.

When my kids do well, I tell them: You do well because you love learning. You do well because you like to figure things out. It wasn’t easy to learn all that but I’m glad you got it. Good job working hard.

That's about mindset. It’s a great tool in the optimist’s toolbox.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

New Yorker letter to editor

(In The New Yorker, 2/4/08, p5) Jeanne Guillemin, a senior fellor in MIT's Security Studies Program, wrote an excellent letter to the editor regarding how Americans talk about casualties. I'm unable to find a link to a full-text example, but here is an excerpt: "In wars since 1945, American combat mortality figures have sharply declined, while the exclusivity of the American claim on memorialization has intensified, as if U.S. soldiers were the only casualties in Korea or Vietnam or, more recently, Iraq, and the deaths of many thousands of civilians killed in those distant conflicts merited no acknowledgment and carried no meaning. Whose deaths matter and whose do not always tells a great deal about American politics and culture."

Real Estate in America

We sold our house this summer and bought a new home. The experience has led me to reflect on homes and home-buying in America. As in any industry, there are good and bad incentives at work in real estate. A home seller would like to get the highest price for their house and sell it in a reasonable period of time. The industry operates on a commission system so that the agent seeks to sell the house at a higher price. This incentive works, but only to a point. Consider the impact of $5000 on the seller vs. the agent. Six percent of $5000 is $300. After the realty company and purchasing agent take their cut, the agent isn't left with much. A $5000 difference in the price of the house means little to the agent, but a lot to the home owner. Does an agent become successful by getting the highest price or by turning over lots of houses? The answer is obvious. An agent's ideal world is not one where people get exactly the right price for their homes, it is a world where everyone is wi

Welfare for the wealthy

I was struck by today's Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. Not literally, but in the Crossroads section, on opposite sides of the spread, were two articles that reflect our nation's "welfare for the rich." On 2J, a local economics instructor's article "Tax for Miller Park didn't help economy." He criticized a previous article which had suggested the opposite. The previous article was based almost entirely on reports by Major League Baseball, which clearly has a huge bias. This week's article takes an objective look, and summarizes that taxpayer's don't get much in return, but the fat cat players and executives of MLB walk away with huge paychecks. The drive to fund new ballparks almost never starts with taxpayers--it starts with the deep pockets of baseball executives, PR campaigns and connections with political power. On 3J, George Will was taking on the Fed ("What the Fed should never do"), rightly criticizing it for bailing out Bear