“A torn jacket is soon mended; but hard words bruise the heart of a child.” Henry Wadsworth Longfellow

Should we criticize criticism?

It’s something that we all dislike, but we all do it. No, I’m not talking about booger picking. (And don’t deny doing it!)  I’m talking about criticism.  In the previous two informational e-mails, we addressed praise.  Now it’s time to take a peek at the other side of the pancake: Fault finding.

This mailing is the first of a two-part piece on criticism:  Why it doesn’t work well in its commonly phrased ways; and how to offer it in a manner that supports, guides, encourages, and motivates.

After the “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mom” media hype in mid-to-late January, one might think that the best way to motivate kids to high achievement is to give ‘em a slap and call 'em “garbage".  Amy Chua's “Battle Cry” is found in her book quote: "the solution to substandard performance is always to excoriate, punish and shame the child."  This approach is NOT the way to raise an inner-managed, emotionally healthy child.  To accentuate this point, read the article by Lac Su at CNN.com (reference below),and consider that most of the criticism of Chua’s ways came from people of East Asian heritage who found Chua’s descriptions and urgings to be insulting and promoting negative stereotypes.

Chua’s “Tiger mom” parenting works best in homogeneous, rank-ordered societies, and has proven over the centuries to be quite effective in creating obedience, and somewhat effective in promoting high achievement (except in the 95% of east Asian kids who don’t rise to the top) .  Blind obedience is less desirable in heterogeneous, democratic societies where EQ (“Emotional Quotient”: The ability to relate well with others… something that requires play dates and contact with others of all ages, give and take, experimentation, etc.) has been shown to be more important in career advancement than IQ.  Note that Chua’s examples of success due to her style of parenting are careers that do not require heavy personal interaction: Sciences, Math, and Music.

Be aware that I have great respect for the traditional East Asian cultural markers.  I adore the immigrant from China to whom I am married, promote the language and ways of that culture in our children, and socialize with individuals who also immigrated from that part of the world.  These other parents tend to keep their valued ways, but see the need to modify them for the world in which their children are growing up.  They, like I, view good parenting as thoughtful, supportive mentorship from the captain of the houseboat.  Unlike Ms. Chua, who promotes caustic labels on the child's identity, periodic "show downs" that involve threats of burning toys, and other "bluffs", they do not view parenting as a martial art with a child’s spirit as an enemy to be defeated.  There is no doubt that watchful and dedicated parenting  that requires full focus and effort in one’s child does boosts achievement, but the Tiger mother way is a slow and often hurtful way to reach the goal.

Despite hurtful experiences that remain with her to this day (being whacked with chopsticks, and father saying that he was disgraced by her 2nd place performance), she resolved to raise her kids the way that she was raised. It is fully understandable that parents most often use the style of parenting that they experienced as kids.  All cultures tend to do so.  It is what they know.  However, it is our parental obligation to our children (and our children’s children) to constantly be on the look-out for better ways to lead them to a bright future.  That goal can now be reached more quickly, with less exhaustion and harm, by parenting smarter, not harder.  The research is too massive to cite here, but search for scholary articles on “motivation and achievement.” (I’ll review a few of them in part two of this document.)  Knowing what we know now about childraising practices, it is time to advance to a more savvy, effective, and time/effort saving manner of helping our youngsters reach the pinnacle.

Let me say right here and now that I am on the same path with Ms. Chua and "Super Nanny" with respect to our mission: Create self-disciplined and successful children. We walk together in our belief that children need to feel loved, be held to high expectations, and value persistance and hard work. We part ways when it comes to the methodology for helping our youngsters reach the social and academic pinnacles.

Giving children negative labels, e.g., "You are garbage." leads to kids feeling that way and living down to that imposed identity. One should label the behavior as garbage, not the child. The behavior needs to be trashed, not the kid. Caustic threats, glass smashing, and yelling are evidence that one doesn't know much about changing behavior for the better, and is in need of study in this area.

The goal of high achievement can be accomplished more quickly and with less emotional harm with positive parenting practices.  I’m certainly not talking about the wimpy, laizzai faire ones that Ms Chua rightfully chastises (in her Tiger Mom manner).  But she writes her book and article from an uninformed, ethnic-centered base.  She has not studied parenting, psychology, or behavior.  She is a law professor!  She, like the overly-directive, well-intentioned, but highly misdirected “Super Nanny” (see past episodes on youtube.com) lacks the credentials to be promoting their ways… ways that are frequently ineffective, counterproductive, or damaging to the psyche.  They have good intentions, but are devoid of the knowledge and skill to be promoting their ways of raising kids as truly effective and fully beneficial.  They both offer a way to raise good kids that sometimes results in what they view as “success”, but we can now do it more intelligently and with fewer failures (we only hear of the “successes”) .

I hereby publicly challenge both of them to a civil, respectful debate (I don’t want to be slapped or sent to the “naughty chair”).  I’d like to ask Ms. Chua who collects the garbage, drives the taxis, and washes dishes in restaurants in her native China.  Why is it that the Chinese authorities are increasingly disappointed in their country's educational system because rote learning and memorization fail to create the creative and innovative graduates that they need to lead their expanding economy and compete in today's world with new and novel ideas. Yes, their kids do better on standardized tests, but remember that these tests assess "surface knowledge", not "deep thought", "creative thinking", or ability to take the material to the next level. In our attempt to do better on the tests, America is foregoing debates, projects, and field trips that create thoughtful knowledge bases as we "teach to the test" and create trivia experts. Chua herself acknowledges her failure to become a physician, and having to settle for lawyer.

As for Super Nanny, I'd like to ask her why she promotes her ways as successful when the kids with whom she works dislike her so much. Why does she focus on what the kids do wrong, instead of teaching them what to do right?

As you watch her old episodes on youtube.com, not tone in which the Super Nanny delivers instructions and subsequent consequences. It is not instructional, instead showing audibly her annoyance with the youngster’s behavior. When adults use negative emotions in a situation, they are personalizing what should instead be a "teachable moment" in which we help children to make better choices.

The nanny lacks focus on HOW the student should be acting, and fails to present reasons WHY the child should be behaving in a suitable manner. Given her lack of substance in positively addressing the abberant action, her subsequent consequences are abrupt and surprising to an errant child. Consider her famous “naughty step,” with which I take issue first off due to its negative wording and abstract nature. When she intervenes, her vague and negative phrasing, instead of quelling the behavioral storm, aggitates it and produces more.

The nanny does attempt to provide some reasoning with the older children, but it inevitably fails in each episode because her emphasis was always on threats as opposed to correcting the behavior by showing the child how he or she is SUPPOSED to behave, and the benefits of doing so. She may achieve some small modicome of short term success due to instilling a fear of punishment, but those young ones are not being taught HOW to behave. "Obey me because you fear me." promotes the lowest stage of moral development. These kids are then set up for life failure.

They would probably call me “soft on misbehavior”, but one is not “soft” when one is using informed and effective parenting practices.  In my field (emotional/behavioral disorders and mental health concerns), I have seen the effects of parenting that “lets them know who’s boss”.  One is not “soft” on discipline when one is smart on child management.   One can show love, concern, and caring in ways that make him/her the wise elder and mentor-parent… Someone who is sought out for advice even during the often rebellious, peer-centered teen years.

My study and experiences (and my parents’ non-violent guidance) motivated me to create my Positive Parenting Practices iPhone app, and more recently, the Positive Parenting Practices video podcast that instructs child guardians in positive, respectful, loving ways that are assertive, not wimpy.  Tiger mom was correct that a style she refers to as “western” often fails to create high-achieving kids with inner management of behavior.  I too rail against that uninformed style of childrearing, just like I am against her style of uninformed, over-controlling, sometimes abusive and hurtful parenting.

The research-based practices in the app and podcast also guide kids toward doing the correct thing, not because someone in more authority directed them to do so (although it is often important to acknowledge the authority of others), but because it was the right thing to do.  These methods give kids an internal moral compass, and tools to reach their social, academic, and career destinations.  These kids will have the ability to connect with positive elders to serve as their mentors.  They behave appropriately, not out of fear of “losing face” and shaming the family, but because they have inner control, reflective thought, and want to make their families proud.

*Excerpts from Dr. Mac's podcast and next app on Positive Parenting Practices can be found at: http://behavioradvisor.com/ParentIndex.html

“He has a right to criticize, who has a heart to help.” Abraham Lincoln (16^th President of the United States)

References

Wall Street Journal article "Why Chinese Mothers are Superior," (January 8, 2011; Life & Culture),

The Roar of the Tiger Mom by Annie Murphy Paul. Time. January 31, 2011.

 Link: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704111504576059713528698754.html

& “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother”, Penguin Press, 2011.

Lac Su,  'Tiger Mothers' leave lifelong scars Special to CNN , January 20, 2011, http://www.cnn.com/2011/OPINION/01/20/lac.su.tiger.mother.scars/index.html?hpt=C1

More information