阅读理解
By now you've probably heard about the
"you're not special" speech, when English teacher David McCullough
told graduating seniors at Wellesley High School: "Do not get the idea
you're anything special, because you're not." Mothers and fathers present
at the ceremony 一
and a whole lot of other parents across the Internet — took
issue with McCullough's ego-puncturing (伤自尊的)
words. But lost in the uproar (喧嚣)was
something we really should be taking to heart: our young people actually have
no idea whether they're particularly talented or accomplished or not. In our
eagerness to elevate their self-esteem, we forgot to teach them how to
realistically assess their own abilities, a crucial requirement for getting
better at anything from math to music to sports. In fact, it's not just
privileged high-school students: we all tend to view ourselves as above
average.
Such inflated self-judgments have been
found in study after study and it's often exactly when we're least competent at
a given task that we rate our performance most generously, in a 2006 study
published in the journal Medical Education, for example, medical students who
scored the lowest on an essay test were the most charitable in their self
evaluations, while high-scoring students judged themselves much more strictly.
Poor students, the authors note, "lack insight" into their own
inadequacy. Why should this be? Another study, led by Cornell University
psychologist David Dunning, offers an enlightening explanation. People who are
incompetent, he writes with coauthor Justin Kruger, suffer from a “dual
burden": they're not good at what they do, and their very clumsiness
prevents them from recognizing how bad they are.
In Dunning and Kruger's study, subjects
scoring at the bottom on tests of logic, grammar and humor -extremely
overestimated'' their talents. Although their test scores put them in the 12th
percentile (百分位数)
they guessed they were in the 62nd. What these individuals lacked (in addition
9 clear logic, proper grammar and a sense of humor) was "meta cognitive
skill" the capacity to monitor how well they're performing. In the absence
of that capacity, the subjects arrived at an overly hopeful view of their own
abilities. There's a paradox here, the authors note: The skills that lead to
competence in a particular domain are often the very same skills necessary to
evaluate competence in that field? In other words, to get better at judging how
well we're doing at an activity, we have to get better at the activity itself.
There are a couple of ways out of this
double bind. First, we can learn to make honest comparisons with others. Train
yourself to recognize excellence, even when you yourself don't possess it, and
compare what you can do against what truly excellent individuals are able to
accomplish. Second, seek out feedback that is frequent, accurate and specific.
Find a critic who will tell you not only how poorly you're doing, but just what
it is that you're doing wrong. As Dunning and Kruger note, success indicates to
us that everything went right, but failure is more ambiguous: any number of
things could have gone wrong. Use this external feedback to figure out exactly
where and when you screwed up.
If we adopt these strategies — and most
importantly, teach them to our children — they won't need parents, or a
commencement (毕业典礼)speaker,
to tell them that they're special. They'll already know that they are, or have
a plan to get that way.