Ranking our children helps nobody – which is why Singapore is ditching it

Years ago, I remember a friend telling me about her first parent evening. Eager to hear about her daughter’s progress, she asked, “So how is she doing?” – “She’s doing fine, exactly as she should be doing,” the teacher replied. My friend left feeling dissatisfied. What she really wanted to know, of course, was how her daughter was doing compared to everyone else. But, over the years, the teacher and her colleagues stood their ground – until SATs came along and gave parents the comparison they wanted, much to the detriment of many children.

Discussions of grades and rankings tend to focus – rightly – on mental health concerns. But ranking also harms learning. Children who are ranked or openly graded (and can therefore compare) care hugely about their perceived relative performance and much less about what they’ve learnt or how they can find out more and grow their learning. Whether it’s grades, house points or stickers, if it can be compared, it will be. And as parents, we often make matters worse by asking, “so how did it go?” meaning “how did you do?” rather than “what did you learn?”. Any comparative grading (e.g. school prizes) or ranking “shifts the focus from learning (what students are doing) to achievement (how well they’re doing it) but also teaches students to regard their peers not as friends or allies but as potential obstacles to their own success,” according to education expert Alfie Kohn.

Continue reading

Our schools – another way

Our schools are a microcosm of the role of competition in our society. They show how competition becomes increasingly institutionalised, normal and expected as we grow up. We turn from playful, inquisitive and creative toddlers into teenagers and adults who are compared and ranked against each other, measured against standardised benchmarks and conditioned to do “better” than others if we want to succeed.

Most people would probably agree that some change over the course of our childhood is justified or necessary. We try (and often fail) not to compare our babies and toddlers, accepting that every child develops at their own pace. At the same time, we accept that when we leave school, in most cases training and education institutions or workplaces will need to differentiate and select to some degree based on our school record.

But these assumptions do not begin to answer a whole range of questions. For example, what skills and aptitudes do individual employers need in today’s world? Are these the same as those our society will need to thrive into the future? How do we best capture and reflect this range of aptitudes and attidudes? How do we measure and recognise effort and motivation compared to talent? How do we best nurture all of these so everyone has the opportunity to discover and develop their aptitudes and interests and engage fully in society?

Continue reading

Danes don’t brag

In my quest to understand the role of competitiveness in happy Nordic society, I’ve touched on the cultural phenomenon of hygge. I was intrigued by another Danish (and more generally Nordic) concept that may shed some light on the Danes’ high levels of wellbeing: “Janteloven”, or Jante’s law. I learnt that Danes don’t brag.

Jante’s law describes a set of cultural norms articulated in Aksel Sandemose’s satirical 1933 novel A Fugitive Crosses His Tracks, all based on the idea that no-one should think they are special or any better than anyone else. It has been described as promoting an “aggressive modesty”.

But what exactly does Jante’s Law mean in practice and how reflective is it of Danish life? And if so, might it have something to do with competition and Danish happiness?

Continue reading

Happiness and competition – the case of the Nordics

The Norwegians have managed to knock the Danes off the top spot – just. The recently released World Happiness Report 2017 identifies Norwegians as the happiest people on earth, very closely followed by Denmark, Iceland and Switzerland, with other Nordic countries (Finland and Sweden) not far behind. The report identifies six factors that explain international differences in happiness, and where Norway and other Nordic countries score highly: income, healthy life expectancy, social support (having someone to count on in times of trouble), freedom to make life decisions, generosity and trust or absence of corruption.

Continue reading