Join the conversation

"High expectations" has become a tagline in education circles. Repeat it enough times in enough contexts, and watch it lose most of its meaning. That's why I'm grateful for Carol Dweck's new article in Principal Leadership magazine. She reminds us that there is a good deal of science behind the slogan.

Dweck's argument, in a nutshell, is that mind-set matters. If you believe your intelligence is a fixed quantity, then you're not likely to learn very much. If you believe the same of your students, they're not likely to learn very much either. Even if you praise students for their intelligence, you're liable to stifle their motivation, feed their insecurities, and stunt their growth.

If, however, you praise them for their hard work and progress, then they're likely to stretch themselves and improve. They develop what Dweck calls the "growth mind-set." Her claims might just rescue the concept of self-esteem from disrepute.

The research she cites is compelling. Take, for example, the research on students of color:

Teaching a growth mind-set seems to decrease or even close achievement gaps. When Black and Latino students adopt a growth mind-set, their grades and achievement test scores look more similar to those of their non-stereotyped peers. 

Students of color suffer from the perception that they can't achieve much. It's the not-so-soft bigotry of low expectations. Though Dweck's argument may seem like a truism to some, far too many influential people still claim that IQ scores are destiny. Even worse, a number of those still claim that some races are genetically disposed to lower intelligence.

Charles Murray has tried to put a kinder, gentler face on such claims, arguing that we should use IQ tests to protect "slow" children from the inevitable failure and stress he says they'll encounter on the college track. Lower your sights for those children, he tells us--for their own good. Don't be fooled. He's calling for a kind of academic mercy-killing. He's promoting a mind-set that will drive children to academic suicide.

Dweck's research is invaluable, because it reminds us why "high expectations" is so much more than a slogan. It's a moral imperative and a tool for real change. Dweck even describes some concrete strategies for boosting students' performance by helping them change their mind-sets.

Her final observation puts an important spin on high expectations:

Teachers and administrators should send messages that intelligence is fluid, and they need to hear such messages too. They need to keep growing, especially in these challenging and changing times. Thus, they, too, need permission to learn—the freedom to stretch themselves, make mistakes, and try again. Only in growth mind-set cultures, where teachers and administrators are encouraged to fulfill their potential, will they be able to help their students fulfill their potential in schools that are free of bias.

Dweck makes as strong a case as any for staff development. The culture of high expectations demands it.