The Trouble With Bright Girls

Successful women know only too well that in any male-dominated profession, we often find ourselves at a distinct disadvantage. We are routinely underestimated, underutilized and even underpaid. Studies show that women need to perform at extraordinarily high levels, just to appear moderately competent compared to our male coworkers.

But in my experience, smart and talented women rarely realize that one of the toughest hurdles they'll have to overcome to be successful lies within. Compared with our male colleagues, we judge our own abilities not only more harshly but fundamentally differently. Understanding why we do it is the first step to righting a terrible wrong. And to do that, we need to take a step back in time.

Chances are good that if you are a successful professional today, you were a pretty bright fifth grade girl. My graduate advisor, psychologist Carol Dweck (author of "Mindset") conducted a series of studies in the 1980s, looking at how Bright Girls and boys in the fifth grade handled new, difficult and confusing material.



She found that Bright Girls, when given something to learn that was particularly foreign or complex, were quick to give up; the higher the girls' IQ, the more likely they were to throw in the towel. In fact, the straight-A girls showed the most helpless responses. Bright boys, on the other hand, saw the difficult material as a challenge, and found it energizing. They were more likely to redouble their efforts rather than give up.

Why does this happen? What makes smart girls more vulnerable and less confident when they should be the most confident kids in the room? At the 5th grade level, girls routinely outperform boys in every subject, including math and science. So there were no differences between these boys and girls in ability, nor in past history of success. The only difference was how bright boys and girls interpreted difficulty -- what it meant to them when material seemed hard to learn. Bright Girls were much quicker to doubt their ability, to lose confidence and to become less effective learners as a result.

Researchers have uncovered the reason for this difference in how difficulty is interpreted, and it is simply this: More often than not, Bright Girls believe that their abilities are innate and unchangeable, while bright boys believe that they can develop ability through effort and practice.



How do girls and boys develop these different views? Most likely, it has to do with the kinds of feedback we get from parents and teachers as young children. Girls, who develop self-control earlier and are better able to follow instructions, are often praised for their "goodness." When we do well in school, we are told that we are "so smart," "so clever, " or "such a good student." This kind of praise implies that traits like smartness, cleverness and goodness are qualities you either have or you don't.

Boys, on the other hand, are a handful. Just trying to get boys to sit still and pay attention is a real challenge for any parent or teacher. As a result, boys are given a lot more feedback that emphasizes effort (e.g., "If you would just pay attention you could learn this," "If you would just try a little harder you could get it right.") The net result: When learning something new is truly difficult, girls take it as sign that they aren't "good" and "smart," and boys take it as a sign to pay attention and try harder.

We continue to carry these beliefs, often unconsciously, around with us throughout our lives. And because Bright Girls are particularly likely to see their abilities as innate and unchangeable, they grow up to be women who are far too hard on themselves -- women who will prematurely conclude that they don't have what it takes to succeed in a particular arena, and give up way too soon.



Even if every external disadvantage to a woman's rising to the top of an organization is removed -- every inequality of opportunity, every chauvinistic stereotype, all the challenges we face balancing work and family -- we would still have to deal with the fact that through our mistaken beliefs about our abilities, we may be our own worst enemy.

How often have you found yourself avoiding challenges and playing it safe, sticking to goals you knew would be easy for you to reach? Are there things you decided long ago that you could never be good at? Skills you believed you would never possess? If the list is a long one, you were probably one of the Bright Girls -- and your belief that you are "stuck" being exactly as you are has done more to determine the course of your life than you probably ever imagined. This would be fine, if your abilities were innate and unchangeable. Only they're not.

No matter the ability -- whether it's intelligence, creativity, self-control, charm or athleticism -- studies show them to be profoundly malleable. When it comes to mastering any skill, your experience, effort and persistence matter a lot. So if you were a Bright Girl, it's time to toss out your (mistaken) belief about how ability works, embrace the fact that you can always improve and reclaim the confidence to tackle any challenge that you lost so long ago.


Heidi Grant Halvorson, Ph.D..Motivational psychologist and author
Posted: March 1, 2011 07:36 AM

Dyslexia's Special Club

What do Charles Schwab, David Boies, Tom Cruise, Nelson Rockefeller -- and it's suspected even Albert Einstein and Thomas Edison -- have in common?

They are all famous, yes. And also dyslexic.

Of course, considering 15 to 20 percent of the population is affected with a language-based learning disability -- and dyslexia is the most common of these -- purely statistically a handful of dyslexics are going to make it big. But research suggests it goes deeper than that: Experts are discovering a link between dyslexia and success.

In the spirit of raising awareness, the Child Mind Institute, an organization devoted to children's mental health, hosted a lecture series on dyslexia last week in New York City. President of the institute Harold Koplewicz, M.D. interviewed one such dyslexic-turned-success, actor and all-out movie star Orlando Bloom.

"It was a struggle. It was a lot of work," Bloom told the audience at Rockefeller University. "I had to work three times as hard to get two-thirds of the way.

"I was frustrated with that learning disability. It makes you feel stupid."

A great relief came for the actor at age seven, when he was tested and diagnosed with dyslexia, and also told he had a high IQ score. It was a blessing to get that diagnoses, he said. He knew he wasn't dumb.

A blessing indeed it was. The generation before Bloom's didn't fare so well. For decades the learning disability has been misunderstood -- or not understood at all -- and dyslexics knew only that they weren't "normal." They couldn't keep up in class, couldn't spell or read properly. They were called stupid or lazy -- and too often, they believed it.

The 1990s marked a crucial turning point, when scientists discovered the disability was linked to neurological differences in the brain -- differences that had nothing to do with cognition, IQ or intelligence.

Technology became available that enabled scientists to observe the brain while a person read, spoke or processed phonological structures of language -- i.e. what the brain is doing when we "sound out" words, or make links between the way a word sounds and what it looks like on a page. Scientists discovered the sections of the brain that process language work differently in people with dyslexia.

Nowadays, research is showing not only that dyslexics aren't stupid; they're often exceptionally bright in other areas. With reading, spelling and organization a constant struggle, dyslexic children (and adults) are forced to find alternative, innovative strategies to learn.

They often rely on creativity, reasoning, problem-solving and empathy to achieve their goals -- building skills that can serve them well in life beyond the classroom, explained Sally Shaywitz, M.D., co-founder of the Yale Center for Dyslexia and Creativity and author of Overcoming Dyslexia, at the lecture series.

"Creativity is the key for any child with dyslexia, or for anyone for that matter. Then you can think outside of the box," said Bloom. "Teach them anything is attainable. Let them run with what you see is whatever they need to run with."

Growing up, he was able to capitalize on his acting talent, his natural leadership (captain of the school soccer team, of the hockey team ... ) and his "way with the ladies" (he sheepishly admitted he could often get by with "a wink and a smile").

"I'm lucky," he conceded. "I've always been lucky."

But many other children aren't as lucky, and the low self-esteem brought on by dyslexia often takes an unrecoverable toll.

"Obviously, most people don't turn out like Orlando," said Dr. Koplewicz after his interview with Bloom. Many people don't make it through school. They end up with substance abuse problems and addictions, or even in jail, he said.

Youth with untreated dyslexia are more than twice as likely to drop out of high school (36 percent of students) and become unemployed, underemployed or incarcerated, according to the society for neuroscience, 2004.

Children who are bright and talented often won't see it come to fruition because the dyslexia stands in the way. And a big part of that self-esteem. Proper diagnoses can bring peace of mind. It can also mean getting the appropriate attention, extra time and special help needed to manage the challenge.

The earlier, the better: There's a big difference between beginning special training in kindergarten or first grade versus third grade or later. By the third grade 74 percent of kids who are already poor readers will remain so into adulthood, research has shown.

"It's not something that ever goes away," said Bloom. "But you learn how to manage it."

He offered advice to children: First, don't be shy or ashamed. Ask for help. Say, "I have dyslexia. I need some extra time on this test or homework assignment."

Also, don't see it as a problem, but a gift -- a special club. "It's not a disability; it's a challenge," he said. Even an opportunity.

Dyslexic children grow up to be brilliant doctors, lawyers, actors, writers and inventors. Bloom encouraged kids to never give up on their dreams: "Take this obstacle and make it the reason to have a big life."

The Huffington Post Meghan Neal

Language Development

Language has a number of interacting parts: phonology (speech sounds), morphology (word formation), syntax (sentence formation), semantics (word and sentence meaning), prosody (rhythm of speech), and pragmatics (use of language). All of these components develop at varying levels during the primary years after birth. Unlike reading acquisition, language development is largely considered innate, children are born to talk. Young children become masters of imitation as a means of learning words. However, not all learning is done through imitation. They also learn language through a constructive process whereby they create hypothesis about how language works. For example, they construct sentences such as, “Daddy goed running”, which is clearly something you wouldn’t hear from an adult. Creating a hypothesis about how language works, young children note that ed- is used to express past action and then over apply this generalization. With experience and feedback they adjust their hypothesis and learn that some action words have special past-tense forms.

There are critical periods for language development. The most intensive period of speech and language development is during the first three years of life (National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, 2003). By age three, children are talking in sentences and have a speaking vocabulary of 1,000 or more words. By Kindergarten, this could be as high as 5,000 or more words. The largest influence on the size of a child’s vocabulary is the quantity and quality of talk they are exposed to. According to many language experts, the most important thing parents and other caregivers can do for their children is to talk to them. The amount of talk directed toward infants and toddlers is related significantly to their verbal abilities and their later success in school.

Quantity and quality varies quite a bit from the most talkative parents to the least talkative parents. The least talkative parents use talk primarily as way of controlling and guiding children. The most talkative parents use talk in this way, but also provide extra talk that includes descriptions and explanations that is filled with more complex vocabulary and added positive reinforcement.

One extensive study, Wells (1986) found that some parents intuitively provided the greatest development for their children’s language. Instead of acting as directors of what their children said, these parents were mutual constructors of meaning. As great listeners, they made genuine attempts to use verbal and nonverbal clues to understand what their child was saying. Through this listening and active involvement in the conversation, parents were able to help their children expand their responses so that both knowledge of the world and linguistic abilities were fostered.