Posted in Homeschooling

St. Nicholas knows me very well, and his present to me this year was a book I had on hold at the library - Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell.  I am thrilled to have my own copy!

I first heard of this book in Reader's Digest and thought it sounded interesting.  Basically, it studies what it takes to make someone successful.  In America we have the ideal of the "self-made man," who starts from nothing and through hard work, grit, and determination becomes a multi-millionaire.  Gladwell shows us that this is a myth.  No one makes themselves - they had help and opportunities along the way.  That's why Part One is called "Opportunity." 

However, they also worked very, very hard, and Gladwell tells us about the 10,000 hour rule.  It seems that in pretty much any field, you need 10,000 hours of practice to become a world-class expert.  As an example, he tells us of a study done at Berlin's Academy of Music.  The violinists were separated into 3 categories: possible world-class soloist, merely good, destined to become music teachers.  They were all asked how many hours over their entire careers they had practiced.  They all started violin at 5 years of age and practiced the same amounts in the early years.  Then the ones who were in the best group began practicing more and more, and totaled 10,000 hours at about age 20.  The good group totaled 8000 hours each and the music teacher group only 4000 hours.  (He doesn't explore the possibility that the lower group might be satisfied with where they are, and of course, to misquote the movie Mulan, "Well, we can't all be world-class soloists!")

Here's a quote from the end of that section: "ten thousand hours is an enormous amount of time.  It's all but impossible to reach that number all by yourself by the time you're a young adult.  You have to have parents who encourage and support you.  You can't be poor, because if you have to hold down a part-time job on the side to help make ends meet, there won't be time left in the day to practice enough.  In fact, most people can reach that number only if they get into some kind of special program...or...get some kind of extraordinary opportunity."

Another interesting chapter deals with "practical intelligence" - the way that you get what you need from others basically.  "Social savvy" is another term used to describe it.  Gladwell tells us of a study done by a sociologist who studied third graders from all different backgrounds and focused on 12 families.  Gladwell says,

"You might expect that if you spent such an extended period in twelve different households, what you would gather is twelve different ideas about how to raise children...what Lareau found, however, is something much different.  There were only two parenting 'philosophies,' and they divided almost perfectly along class lines.  The wealthier parents raised their kids one way, and the poorer parents raised their kids another way.  The wealthier parents were heavily involved in their children's free time, shuttling them from one activity to the next...That kind of intensive scheduling was almost entirely absent from the lives of poor children...What a child did was considered by his or her parents as something separate from the adult world and not particularly consequential...One girl from a working class family sang in a choir...Lareau writes: What Mrs. Brindle doesn't do that is routine for middle-class mothers is view her daughter's interst in singing as a signal to look for other ways to help her develop that interest into a formal talent.  Similarly Mrs. Brindle does not discuss Katie's interest in drama or express regret that she cannot afford to cultivate her daughter's talent."

After telling us more about this study, Gladwell sums it up by saying, "When we talk about the advantages of class, Lareau argues, this is in large part what we mean.  Alex is better off than Katie because he's wealthier and because he goes to a better school, but also because...the sense of entitlement that he has been taught is an attitude perfectly suited to succeeding in the modern world."

So basically, success is some natural talent, lots of hard work, and opportunities that help you get there.  Part 2 of the book examines cultural legacies, how some cultures are well suited to bring success in something, while others need to be changed to allow success.  It discusses the same thing I learned from the Right Start Math program I bought for Ryan: one reason that Asians are better at math is because their languages have more logical number systems.  It is easier for a child to learn to count in an Asian language, so by the age of 5, American children are already one year behind. 

In English, we count 1-10.  The next number is eleven, an entirely different word that must be learned.  In contrast, eleven is ten-one in Asian languages.  American children get stuck learning the names for the tens - my five year old currently knows twenty, thirty, and possibly forty and fifty.  If we had a number system like the Asian languages, he could count to 100 without having to learn any new vocabulary beyond 1-10, and the concept of place value would be so much more transparent.

There's a lot more that's fascinating in this book, but the two things I am most interested in are: how can I apply these findings to my children's lives and homeschooling, and how can I apply them to my own life?  I intend to reread the book with these thoughts in mind, but I do have some initial reactions.  Children who are homeschooled have much more time to pile up hours in their areas of interest, thus reaching 10,000 sooner than they could otherwise. Homeschooling parents do not have the attitude that the lower class families in Lareau's study displayed ("the school is responsible for my child's education), because they have already taken on that responsibility regardless of family income.  Most homeschool parents I know try to actively encourage the interests and talents their children show, as I have tried to do with Mary's interest in Swedish.

Another thing discussed in the book is the advantage that some children have by being born closer to the cut-off date, whether it's in school or a sports league.  Many NHL hockey players are born in January, February, or March. Why? Because Canada's very well organized youth hockey programs have a cutoff date of January 1.  The kids born in January are nearly a whole year older than the ones born in December of the same year, so they are bigger and more mature and play better, so they are chosen as all-stars and go on to elite leagues and receive more practice and training which makes them better, and on and on.

The effects, especially in regards to education, are never made up.  Gladwell mentions a study that "looked at the relationship between scores on...math and science tests given every four years to children in many countries around the world and month of birth. They found that among fourth graders, the oldest children scored somewhere between four and twelve percentile points better than the youngest children...[which] means that if you take two intellectually equivalent fourth graders with birthdays at the opposite ends of the cutoff date, the older...could score in the 80th percentile, while the younger one could score in the 68th."  I believe this could have been a factor in my husband's education, since he started school as a four year old with a late September birthday.

Obviously, homeschooling helps a lot with this issue.  There is no pressure to keep up with the class, and kindergarten can begin when the child is ready.  My five year old, whose birthday is also in September, could have started kindergarten this year if we didn't homeschool.  He is academically ready for the work, but would have floundered in the school environment as a very young five.  At home, he can work at his own pace and not have to compete with children a year older than him.

As for applying these findings to me, it's a wake-up call that goes perfectly with my last couple of posts.  Basically, the idea is to spend my hours wisely.  Right now I cannot write for 20 hours a week (20 hours per week, 50 weeks per year, for 10 years will get me to 10,000), but I can set a goal of 10 hours and work to increase.  The important thing is not to waste those hours with non-essential activities.  And I need to examine the cultural values I have and see what might need to be adjusted.

This is my 200th entry! It seems appropriate that it was a book review!