ANSWERS BACK - Q&A on motivation with award winning journalist and author of Bounce, Matthew Syed

[RachelMumsnet]

With exam season about to start, we are all looking at ways to help our children to succeed but could we be hindering them by praising their talent instead of their effort? This week we're running a Q&A with Matthew Syed, all about best ways to motivate your kids.

Times columnist, three-times commonwealth table tennis champion and award winning author of Bounce, Matthew is hoping to help parents motivate their children by applying the philosophy he writes about in Bounce. In Bounce he dismisses the idea that talent is the key to success. He argues that David Beckham wasn't born with an innate free-kick ability but it came about as a result of hard work and practice and the path to the top is a combination of opportunity being in the right place at the right time and hard work.

So is it possible for all children to achieve grade A* Maths, given the right opportunity and guidance?

Send in questions to Matthew about motivation, his own success and Bounce and ask him how you can help motivate your children ahead of their exams. We'll link to his answers from this thread the following week. We have five copies of Bounce to give away to those who send in questions and will announcing the winners on Monday.

[TheNumberTaker]

No specific question, just wanted to say Bounce got me through a very long day in hospital giving birth to my second child, so a huge thank you, Matthew! I was at college with you and feel absurdly proud of that fact every time I read one of your columns.

[senua]

Definitely, orienteerer! But it went beyond that.
I remember reading an article where Jonny explained that it was more than 'practice makes perfect'. The key was that he knew that he had practised enough to be near perfect. When he was striking the ball for that drop goal there were no gremlins running through his mind saying "what happens if you fluff this? how will you feel when you blow the chance to win the WWE Cup for your country? how can you look your team-mates in the eye afterwards?". The practice gave him self-belief, stopped any nerves, dispelled any crisis of confidence. It went beyond the mere mechanics and into psychology.

[RachelMumsnet]

Many thanks for all your questions which we'll be forwarding on to Matthew tomorrow morning. We'll plug the transcribed Q&A as soon as we have his answers - hopefully before the end of the week.

[WobblyWidgetOnTheScooper]

Damn only just seen this. Probably too late now :( but I'll ask it anyway just in case...

My stepdaughter may need to be homeschooled due to poor health. She's 13. She has always struggled with dyslexic tendencies and has pretty much given up on herself due to low self esteem.

Thing is, she is actually really smart, but not in a schooly way - because she struggles to read and write.

I'd love to know if Matthew (or anyone else!) has any tips on how to get her love of learning and curiosity back.

[KevinM]

Hi Rachel,

My wife just told me about the Q & A and asked me to add to the discussion.

I've actually interviewed Matthew on this subject - you can listen to it here: www.maximisepotential.co.uk/matthew-syed-author-of-bounce/

It will give everyone a really good intro to him and the subject matter and probably give them more ideas / questions.

I'm a father of two (mostly) wonderful girls and after meeting Matthew / reading the book, my wife and I instantly changed our communication style - to praise effort rather than intelligence.

We've been praising this way for almost 6 months now and I personally feel that my eldest child is showing far less hesitation when trying new things now. I feel it had made a positive difference.

Hope this helps the discussion!

Kevin

[Cortina]

Thanks for posting, Kevin, very interesting.

I am not an expert but so much of what Matthew says make sense. What's interesting is how many seem to disagree including the majority here on Mumsnet I would imagine. The majority would argue that most talent we see isn't largely due to hidden practice, some are simply born smarter than others - especially when it comes down to the academics.

Teachers tend to say they can spot the tutored ones as they are slower to grasp new concepts too. Most teachers/schools believe that some are simply far naturally brighter than others, and this intelligence is largely innate. Most believe we can increase IQ only marginally - you are either grammar school material or you are not (put simply) and you really can't do much about it. At most it's 50% nature and 50% nurture and so on. There was an article in the Times on Monday that said we are all largely a product of our genetic inheritance when it comes to IQ, happiness, likely job etc. Our school system doesn't lend itself to Dweck Mindset type ideology etc with incremental targets those that are ahead and being expanded/exposed to more in depth material have an advantage. The system means it's harder for those at the bottom to catch those at the top especially as they will probably been seen, albeit subconsciously, as less bright. In my view every teacher in the land should have to read Mindset by law. I've asked Matthew why he thinks these old ideas about intelligence and 'being bright' are so rigid & resilient despite recent developments in cognitive science etc. Should we be challenging schools and teachers? Given this situation what can we do to help our children navigate the school system?

Interestingly Matthew says he sees no difference between those at his state school that left with minimal O'levels and those 'clever' academic people he met at Oxbridge. Does he think these school friends would also be capable of a first I wonder? From what i've heard it would seem the answer would be yes. Perhaps he will see this and answer. I hadn't realised he only had a few O'levels and achieved a prize winning first. He's very impressive. I agree that we can all get 'incrementally' better. I am putting his ideas into practice too and I have to say the results so far are very encouraging.

[Cortina]

Just to add I am not sure he is talking about increasing IQ - what he is saying is that it's possible to get good academic results, and yes, even a first from Oxford, through hard work and an average IQ?

[Cortina]

Just been giving this yet more thought and eagerly anticipate Matthew's response to everyones questions!

Is another problem that people generally believe intelligence is solely logic/IQ - being good at the abstract reasoning on an IQ test for example? Most won't and don't accept intelligence is composite and give this particular ability very high status. Apparently Binet himself, the father of the IQ test, thought intelligence was much more than a unitary, fixed commodity.

Also how many believe intelligence is expandable? Certainly when I suggest it might be I find generally I can't move the conversation forward. People say that you can get your IQ maybe one or two points higher, but that's pretty much it. Your IQ was fixed at birth. For most it seems, as this demonstrates, intelligence is all about IQ. This is the case despite the advances in cognitive science which show that new connections (neural pathways) in the brain can develop and things are not quite so clean cut. Dweck has shown that when students are told they are in charge of their minds, rather than the other way around, their performance, especially in maths, can improve tremendously. Apparently - as Bill Lucas and Guy Claxton have explored and stated - there is no scientific justification for labeling children as having different amounts of 'intelligence' and 'ability' at all and just doing so makes a fatalistic prediction about their performance going forward.

[Idratherbemuckingout]

Hi, I've got a DS who is ten, about to do scholarship and entrance exams to several independent schools, home educated for last two years.
How do I get him to concentrate better? The least little thing distracts him, he forgets the simplest things at crucial moments and makes silly mistakes all too frequently that I know he should not be making because he knows his stuff. He is motivated because he really wants to be at one of the schools he is trying for, but despite me dangling carrots, trying tiger mother tactics and all manner of other methods, he doesn't seem able to concentrate.
Should I resign myself to the fact that he is just not ever going to be a real "tryer"?

[stickgrain]

How should I help my 10 year old son? He is studying steadily for grammer school entrance in October. Our focus is on effort. He works well - with good results. However he is not particularly competitive or 'driven'. His calm/laid back nature means he doesn't seem to 'feel' pressure too much - great - but how can I help him focus on 'the prize?' Could I 'over cook' him with preparation?

[Cortina]

Hi Matthew - you were on Radio 4's Today Programme last week I believe. I didn't manage to catch it but have heard about it and read up on it since.

If I've understood correctly Peter Saunders put the other side of the argument across on the programme - that we are all born with a certain amount of 'raw ability/talent' and there isn't much we can do to change this. This is a view that the majority have, including most here on Mumsnet it seems if you read across the boards. Most would argue that it is about 50/50 nature versus nurture etc and you can't argue that it's all completely about hard work and practice? Peter cited the National Child Development Study to give evidence for his view. This test apparently proves that a young persons' score on an early IQ test is the single most important factor in their performance going forward. There was also an article in the Times recently that said we are all largely the prisoners of our genes (as I mentioned before) and largely it's these that decide how happy and successful we are in life etc too.

Claxton has made some arguments that Saunders view might be due to the fact resources are increasingly limited and we have to decide who is worthy of an academic education etc. He's also given many other compelling & very interesting reasons why Saunder's views prevail. Have you read any of his books?

Another question to you might be do you think Saunders's view and others like it have any value at all? Have you modified your opinion in the light of these contrary opinions at all? Others have argued that whilst an IQ test is not an accurate test of 'raw talent' it is this 'raw talent' that we all possess in varied quantities that determines our success and academic potential going forward. The problem is there is no test as yet to determine 'raw talent'. Just as Dweck's views and yours gain some popularity it seems there is a backlash and contrary views are in the media with some strong evidence to support them. Would you agree with that and if so why do you think this might be?

As Claxton and Dweck have said it isn't helpful to believe it's all in our genes, as it's a bit of a cop out, we won't practice, we'll think we don't have the academic endowment to begin with, are not 'built for sport' etc. I agree a growth mindset will take us far in life & most are capable of more than they ever thought possible but I have to admit I waver about how much 'raw talent/ability' makes a difference at times. I believe the danger is when people, sports coaches and more importantly educators believe early on that some children don't have the raw ability and what it takes.

Even if teachers don't tell us it's communicated loud and clear to children most of time in my experience. Subconscious views for example, more people seem to agree with Saunders than you which is unfortunate in this regard. Jim is 'bright' he got a 3 at KS1 and a 5 or even a 6 at KS2, he's worthy of an academically selective education at 11, Sarah is a trier and may spurt academically later but let's face it she simply isn't as clever as Jim. It might be she has other gifts and talents? The danger is it means many of us grow up secretly thinking we are a bit stupid (especially as academic subjects usually have higher status), even if we spurt later.

Sorry to repeat myself but thought these points were worth reiterating in the light of your recent radio interview.

Rachel, when is the Q&A session likely to be transcribed? Will it be here on the secondary education board? I realise Matthew must be very busy but it's such an important subject I think and an area that isn't debated nearly enough! I for one am very excited about it.

[Cortina]

I've now listened to the interview, the view that ability is entrenched seemed to win out I thought? The world is a much simpler place if we believe our ability is largely fixed at birth. Matthew didn't get much of a chance to talk about his research/observations and the main thrust of 'Bounce' etc. Gets people thinking which is good though.

[RachelMumsnet]

Thanks for all you questions to Matthew. His answers are now back and you can read the full transcribed Q&A here:

Matthew Syed Q&A

Congratulations to merrylegs, snorkie, Senua, shoonaBee and WobblyWidgetOnTheScooper who have each won a copy of Bounce. We'll be contacting you by PM to organise distributing the books.

[Cortina]

Brilliant! Thank you and Matthew so much.

[WeirdAcronymNotKnown]

I am really excited to read the book! It's wobblywidget here - changed my name, hope rachelmumsnet still got the PM with my postal address

[Cortina]

Congratulations, please post when you've read, I for one would be so interested in what you think.

[snorkie]

Will do Cortina, I'm looking forward to it. And thank you to mumsnet and Matthew too.

[RachelMumsnet]

Weirdacronym - no worries - got your pm and will send all addresses over this weekend.

[senua]

ooooh. My book arrived today. It should be interesting and it will be on the DCs' holiday / post-exam reading list.

Thanks Matthew / MNHQ.