news-record.com

OPINION

Listen up, parents: Here's what you're doing wrong

Sunday, January 31, 2010
(Updated 3:00 am)

Raising kids is no easy feat. Ask any parent.

They don’t come with directions. Often, it’s only instinct. And like playing a high-stakes game of Twister, you stumble and fall as often as you get what I call The Look, The Grumble or The Conversation full of exclamation marks about, well, everything.

Read “NurtureShock,” the bestselling book from writers Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman , and you’ll realize you got some things all wrong.

But you’re far from alone.

Parents and teachers at Canterbury School, a private Episcopal school in Greensboro, read “NurtureShock” as part of a school-wide read, and they’re bringing in Bronson later this week to talk about it.

You can bet the questions will come. The word “nurture shock” means the panic parents feel when that mystical, magical fountain of knowledge about raising kids doesn’t kick in.

All parents know that.

“NurtureShock” is no manual. It’s full of family anecdotes and the science of the brain. For three years, Bronson and Merryman dug into dozens of studies and found out how children and teens react to race, praise, lying, arguing and the lack of sleep.

So, to pluck a phrase tossed out by Bronson and Merryman in their text, let’s unpack some of what they mean:

  • General praise can backfire and lead to image-conscious kids who won’t take risks.
  • The more diverse a school, the more segregated its students.
  • In an attempt to promote truthfulness, parents end up encouraging kids to be better liars.
  • And the teen brain in a nutshell — fearless to jumping off roofs but terrified of having its love of Nickelback exposed. And if they argue with you, be happy. It’s a sign of respect.

“I know it’s science, I know it’s human development, I know it’s kids,” said Bronson, a 45-year-old father of two , “but it’s fun to tell stories and show how all this conventional wisdom gets it all wrong.”

It’s sure been the talk at Karen Smith’s dinner table.

“Mom,” said her 14-year-old son Cole. “You need to quit reading that book.”

“Well,” responded Karen, the 50-year-old mother of two. “I think we should get more sleep and see what happens and see how much better we all feel.”

In the 327-page world of “NurtureShock,” sleep matters. It’s not just about improving test scores and finding emotional stability. The lack of sleep also is linked to the rise in obesity and attention-deficit disorder.

Mary Ann Waterstradt feels vindicated. She has taught second grade at Canterbury for 17 years, and for 17 years, she’s called the houses of her students to make sure they were in bed by 8:30 p.m.

It worked.

But Waterstradt also feels vindicated about what else she found from “NurtureShock” in her classroom: praise-proud children leery of risks and hovering parents helping their children a little too much.

“I had a parent of a younger child come in after school started one day and said, 'Oh, she forgot another thing,’ and I told him, 'By you coming back, you’re not teaching your child to be responsible,’” Waterstradt said.

“Why do parents have to read a book to get that?”

Lucy Sackett did. She has three daughters at Canterbury, and on weekday mornings, they wrangle over carpool seats. They also tug over the patchwork quilt made by Nana , their maternal grandmother.

Sackett used to get annoyed. Now, after reading “NurtureShock,” she’s begun to understand.

So has Burns Jones, Canterbury’s headmaster. It’s all about the yellow apple.

His 4-year-old son Wyatt brought home a yellow apple from preschool. The yellow apple is a sign to parents that something went a little wrong that day. So, Jones would ask.

But after reading “NurtureShock,” he asked in a different way. “You know, it would really make us happy if you would tell the truth,” Jones told his son. Wyatt told his dad about being loud and running in class.

Wyatt got it, the value of honesty, something Bronson believes children today don’t get enough.

“Ultimately, science does have some wisdom to help us make better future citizens,” he says. “One child at a time.”

 

Contact Jeri Rowe at 373-7374 or jeri.rowe@news-record.com

 

WANT TO GO?

What: Talk and book-signing by Po Bronson
When: 7:15 p.m. Thursday
Where: Canterbury School, 5400 Old Lake Jeanette Road, Greensboro
Cost: Free
Information: 288-2007

Comments

This article has been closed to new comments. Comments are generally closed after 14 days. However, comments may be closed earlier at the discretion of the News & Record.

Inappropriate content? Please report abuse.

DexterG

January 31, 2010 - 8:42 pm EST

With a pre-teen of my own, I was excited to read NurtureShock after I heard an interview with one of the authors on NPR. I requested it from the library and dug into it as soon as I received it.

There are some interesting things in the book, but overall I found it to be flawed, bad scientific journalism. As noted, the authors sifted through lots of studies, but they seem to have mined out only those nuggets that supported their hypotheses, largely ignoring all other results of the studies. (If you are used to reading science books like me, you will find yourself constantly asking "what about this" and "what about that" while reading it.) The authors do not present two sides of a story and then leave you to make your own conclusions. More often, they make the conclusions for you and try to convince you that they are the only conclusions that could be made.

Most of the truly interesting stuff from the book comes from real, scientific studies - brain scans, intensive, long-term observations and the like - but far too much of the data quoted comes from survey studies, asking the children, or sometimes the families, to answer questions about themselves. Surveys like this are highly unreliable, and hardly the type of science that you would use to revolutionize the way you look at anything.

My ultimate conclusion about NurtureShock is that its authors are trying to make themselves into pundits on the subject and to get on talk shows to sell more books. As Bronson is quoted as saying above, I think they went into the research attempting to prove that "conventional wisdom gets it all wrong" because if conventional wisdom wasn't wrong, you wouldn't have to buy their book to find the real secrets of the universe.

There are a few really good finds in the pages of NurtureShock, but, in my opinion, not enough to outweigh the unsupported conclusions it also arrives at. Good science reporting often asks more questions than it answers and, for me, NurtureShock has far too many "answers" in a nice tidy package. Unlike the authors, however, I would invite you to read the book, read the opinions of some of the people who disagree with its findings, and then make your own conclusions.

Get A Clue

January 31, 2010 - 10:32 pm EST

I've discovered a very disturbing trend at the N&R lately: reporters and editors choose a favorite person who won an award or who is pushing a book and "report" on it as if what they have to say is fact, all the while fawning over the author and said product as if it's unquestionably the best thing since sliced bread. In short, these 'articles' are no more than advertisements.
Journalists are supposed to be objective. I expect at least two sides to a story, with each side given more than a passing nod. Honestly, at the end of the day it's just another book. People who already believe it feel vindicated; people who don't believe it can easily find fault. And anecdotes may make for a pleasant read, but they hardly 'prove' anything.

eMail Updates

Advertisement | Advertise with Us

Featured Ads

Search

Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us
Advertisement | Advertise with Us

News & Record Network Sites

User Tools

  • Social Networking
  • RSS
  • Share
  • Sign in to MyNR

Search