3 ms·

Like IQ, EF is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy with regard to success and failure. IQ was used to justify the failure of some students relative to others--

Like IQ, EF is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy with regard to success and failure. IQ was used to justify the failure of some students relative to others--so the students with a reason why they were allowed to fail did so, and the teachers paid more attention to the students expected to succeed, so that they did so. EF, being a measure of "mental discipline" (read: obedience + creativity) separates the students that teachers typically like to teach from those that teachers typically do not. But the students that teachers like to teach are the ones that they focus on, so those students do well academically. Presto--instant self-fulfilling prediction. Of course, this implies no correlation at all with what it takes to do well outside of these sorts of environments.

demallien 18y ago
I don't think that's what the article is saying at all. EF is not some supposedly innate ability, such as IQ. It's rather a skill that can be taught, and the actuall measured EF is just a way of examining how well the teaching of the skill is going. This gives teachers another tool in the toolbox, to work with those students that are difficult to teach - specifically, give them extra training to improve their EF. Of course, my fad detectors were going off big time reading the article. I think I'd like to see some data on whether this produces longterm benefits before jumping on the bandwagon. Otherwise it might just be nothing more than showing that kids that get extra attention - such as those in a research study - do better in the short term, something that we know already. I think perhaps the most interesting aspect of the article is that this potentially gives preschool teachers something actually useful that they can teach to their students, something that could aid the students when "big school" begins :-)

demallien 18y ago

I don't think that's what the article is saying at all. EF is not some supposedly innate ability, such as IQ. It's rather a skill that can be taught, and the actuall measured EF is just a way of examining how well the teaching of the skill is going. This gives teachers another tool in the toolbox, to work with those students that are difficult to teach - specifically, give them extra training to improve their EF. Of course, my fad detectors were going off big time reading the article. I think I'd like to see some data on whether this produces longterm benefits before jumping on the bandwagon. Otherwise it might just be nothing more than showing that kids that get extra attention - such as those in a research study - do better in the short term, something that we know already. I think perhaps the most interesting aspect of the article is that this potentially gives preschool teachers something actually useful that they can teach to their students, something that could aid the students when "big school" begins :-)