ORIGINAL: Growth mindset can be used to enact useful change in the world and how we understand each other. Dweck explains how she observed which children possessed a growth mindset out of all the children who received the same math problems as mentioned before. “Some of them reacted in a shockingly positive way…They understood that their abilities could be developed. They had what I call a growth mindset” (00:36). Those students weren’t held back by their emotions, but were stimulated at the idea of trying something new. They understood that the problems were hard but they also knew they would try their best to solve them. Understanding the fact that your critical thinking abilities can be developed is a huge factor in developing a growth mindset. Lukianoff and Haidt stated in their article that, “Rather than trying to protect students from words and ideas that they will inevitably encounter, colleges should do all they can to equip students to thrive in a world full of words and ideas that they cannot control” (para. 59). Introducing students to the idea of a growth mindset will better prepare them for things they cannot control. Having a growth mindset allows a person to think critically about the problem or situation in front of them, and figure out a way to confront it without fear. Having a growth mindset when discussing personal issues or world wide problems will help everyone in the long run to become more understanding of one another.
My argument: L/H seems to have a fixed mindset, given Dweck’s interpretation, when confronted with the idea of trigger warnings.
REVISED: A growth mindset can be used to enact useful change in the world and how we understand one another. Dweck describes how a growth mindset can be observed in the students she studied as “ [reacting to math problems] in a shockingly positive way… They [the students] understood that their abilities could be developed” (00:36). The students did not think about the fact that their skills might not be enough to solve the problems, they just dove right into them. They were excited by the idea of trying something new, which is pivotal for having a growth mindset. Understanding the fact that your critical thinking abilities can be developed is a huge factor in developing a growth mindset as well. Lukianoff and Haidt stated in their article that, “Rather than trying to protect students from words and ideas that they will inevitably encounter, colleges should do all they can to equip students to thrive in a world full of words and ideas that they cannot control” (para. 59). L/H believe that colleges need to extensively prepare their students for encountering triggering words out in the “real world” environment. I agree that students should be knowledgeable of the fact that these triggering words will pop up, but I feel like L/H still don’t understand the reason why trigger warnings are more frequently used in the first place. Students should be mentally prepared to have run-ins with triggering words, but trigger warnings are more common to try and stop the use of such triggering words and phrases. L/H think that colleges are trying to shield their students from such words, but the students are trying to create a change throughout society and the world so people understand why those words and phrases can be such a problem. Having a growth mindset allows a person to think critically about the problem or situation in front of them, and figure out a way to confront it without fear. Having a growth mindset when discussing personal issues or world wide problems will help everyone in the long run to become more understanding of one another.
Explanation of Changes for this Paragraph: I mainly just tried to change the explanations of each quote to more thoroughly explain their connection to my main idea. I changed the explanations because I was basically just re-stating the quote each time which is not helpful towards the paper.
NEW Paragraph: Why exactly I think L/H have a fixed mindset-
Lukianoff and Haidt’s article pushes the idea that trigger warnings are stunting students’ learning ability and restricting professors in what they can teach. But when reading their article, it seems like they are just upset that their comfortable way of living and speaking is changing before their eyes. One paragraph of the article is used to compare the political correctness movement of the 80’s and 90’s to what’s happening in the present day saying “there are important differences between what’s happening now and what happened in the 1980s and ’90s. That movement sought to restrict speech (specifically hate speech aimed at marginalized groups), but it also challenged the literary, philosophical, and historical canon, seeking to widen it by including more-diverse perspectives. The current movement is largely about emotional well-being. More than the last, it presumes an extraordinary fragility of the collegiate psyche, and therefore elevates the goal of protecting students from psychological harm” (para. 5). When they’re comparing now and then, they completely miss the fact that the use of trigger warnings widens the perspective even more. The current movement is extremely similar to the past movement. Younger generations are building off the movement from the 80s and 90s to include even more diverse narratives. We are trying to include more and more marginalized groups that were either never talked about, or considered taboo to speak on such as mental illness, domestic violence, and sexual assault to name a few. Trigger warnings acknowledge the fact that not just hate speech can be hurtful, they target sensitive topics while also allowing those personally affected to avoid being presented with information they can’t deal with at the moment. To me, trigger warnings upset Lukianoff and Haidt because they are so comfortable living in the past where they feel they can speak on these things freely. Society is changing around us specifically to be more considerate of others and their experiences which is much needed so people can learn what they’ve done wrong in the past and change for the better.
Explanation of New Paragraph: I wanted to add this paragraph because I felt like I couldn’t completely explain my argument with just 2 Barclay’s paragraphs. I wanted a clear paragraph that is solely for the use of me explaining why “The Coddling” and Lukianoff and Haidt rub me the wrong way.
