Headmaster's Journal

It is amazing to reflect upon the fact that a little more than ten years ago a small group of people came together to talk about the possibility of starting a Sacred Heart School for boys in the Princeton area. That possibility took its first step to becoming a reality when the certificate of incorporation of SACRED HEART SCHOOL FOR BOYS, PRINCETON, NJ, INC. was filed on October 15, 1998. This October 10th we will begin our year-long celebration of the tenth year of Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart.

Much has been accomplished in those ten short years. Most importantly, we have attained the goal of full membership in the Network of Sacred Heart Schools. This past April 26 Princeton Academy was unanimously voted into the Network after years of self-reflection, which culminated in a report issued by the Sacred Heart Commission on Goals visiting team that stated: "The Goals and Criteria are part of every aspect of life at Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart. Just as the Spirit called Princeton Academy into life, it is evident through your continually saying "yes" to the grace of that same Spirit, a new community witnessing to the Mission of Sacred Heart has been born."

Our teachers are dedicated to teaching boys and bring a variety of backgrounds and styles to their work. They participatein professional development to continually improve their skills and their knowledge of boys and their subject matter. This year the entire faculty participated in a series of Schools Attuned workshops designed to help them better understand and address the variety of neurodevelopmental profiles that students have. We ended the year with a workshop on differentiated instruction, a theme that will continue in next year's in-service training. Additionally, individual teachers attended workshops in the areas of Spanish, math, language arts, science, and social studies instruction throughout the year and the summer. The administrative team and four teachers attended workshops and conferences at the Network of Sacred Heart Schools in St. Louis.

We have built a strong program. Our graduates continue to gain acceptances into a wide variety of independent day and boarding schools in the area and throughout the country. We constantly seek to improve our program. This was the first year of our departmental curriculum overlay, which was developed to allow us to look at the entire program every year, rather than review a couple of subject areas each year according to a predetermined cycle. We have completed an initial review of the content of our curriculum by subject and year.

Although blessed with beautiful buildings and grounds, the need to develop it into a campus for a boys' school presented us with many challenges. Over the years we have modified classrooms and offices, created a new entrance, installed a new roof, stabilized the Manor House, brought a fire alarm system and internet access online, put in wireless technology, updated electrical wiring, and built playgrounds, athletic fields, and a new Athletic and Convocation Center. This year we completed the William E. Simon Chapel Library, began the process of replacing all the classroom windows, renovated Our Lady's Grotto, and purchased 5 additional acres adjacent to the campus at 41 Drake's Corner Road. We have completed a thorough review of our master plan, which will guide us as we proceed with the development of our campus in the next few years.

Blessed by rapid growth, Princeton Academy has enjoyed solid finances in its early years. Yearly operating surpluses have helped us to purchase the property, aggressively address some of the physical plant needs, and establish an endowment for the school.

What we have accomplished over these past ten years would not be possible without the hard work and enthusiastic support of our faculty, staff, parents, grandparents, friends, and trustees. For this I thank you from the bottom of my heart. To continue to move ahead with the planned development of Princeton Academy will require the same level of support, enthusiasm, and engagement we have seen in these early years. Much has been accomplished in the past ten years, and much remains to be addressed in the next ten. As we celebrate Princeton Academy's tenth year, we have many accomplishments to be proud of, yet we have more work ahead of us as we seek to become the best school for boys in the nation.

Olen Kalkus

As headmaster of a JK — 8th grade school, I often find myself in conversations about the relative value or importance of elementary education. There is a growing body of research pointing to the importance of developing an attitude inclined toward learning early in life, and the lasting effects of such attitudes (see "Lasting Effects of Elementary School", D. Entwisle and L. Hayduk. Sociology of Education, Vol.61, No.3, July 1988). My favorite study is one carried out by Dr. Egil Pedersen of McGill University. Published in the Harvard Educational Review, Vol.48, No.1, February 1978 under the title "A New Perspective on the Effects of First-Grade Teachers on Children's Subsequent Adult Status", this article is now known among educators as the "Miss A" study. The study, done over time, was atypical in that the direction of the study was influenced by three unexpected findings: (1) the discovery of a regular pattern of IQ change, (2) the discovery that IQ change as measured from grade 3 to grade 6 varied by first grade teacher and by the gender of the student, and (3) the discovery of a relationship between first-grade teachers and adult status.

There were three permanently employed first grade teachers in the school where the study took place. They were presented in the research paper as Miss A, Miss B, and Miss C. An initial analysis showed that Misses A and B taught a high proportion of the pupils who showed and increase in IQ score. Miss C taught a high proportion of pupils who showed a decrease in IQ. Further analysis showed that it made no difference whether Miss A's students were male or female. Both males and females were equally likely to show an increase in IQ score. Likewise, it made no difference if Miss C's students were male or female. Students of either gender were equally likely to show a decrease in IQ score. With Miss B, however, female students were more likely to show an increase in IQ, and male students a decrease in IQ. Interestingly, further inquiry seemed to indicate that Miss B had different expectations of boys and girls as she seated girls in the front row and relegated boys to the back rows of her classroom.

In the second phase of the study the researchers located and interviewed 60 adults who had attended the classrooms of Misses A, B, and C as children to compare their current life with their elementary school records. Here the data revealed the amazing fact that while only 29% of the other teachers' former students currently fell into what the researchers described as "high adult status," 64% of the Miss A's students fell into "high adult status" and 0% fell into "low adult status."

Finally, in looking at the interview data, the researchers discovered that the adults had difficulty remembering who their first-grade teachers were. For the adults whose first grade teachers were other than Miss A, fewer than half identified their teacher correctly. But every single adult who had been a student of Miss A remembered her correctly.

Miss A could not be interviewed at the time of the study because she was in the final stages of a terminal illness. However, interviews with her former pupils reveal some of her qualities as a person and teacher. She never lost her temper and showed obvious affection for all her students. She gave extra hours to pupils who were slow learners. She believed every student could learn. One of her former pupils commented, "it did not matter what background or abilities the beginning pupil had; there was no way that pupil was not going to read by the end of first grade." Her secret for success was summarized by a former colleague with these words: "How did she teach? With a lot of love!"

I have always believed that the best investment one can make is in the education of one's child. The "Miss A" study shows that the dividends of an early investment in elementary education can compound and pay off throughout one's lifetime. It is important for us to find the current and future "Miss A's", and make sure that we have the processes and environments in our schools that allow them to be and to become the wonderful teachers that they are.

In the spring of 2006, I wrote about the origins and purpose of our tradition of "Friday Thank Yous." Since then psychological studies have shown that our intention to develop in our students a healthy sense of thankfulness will result in giving them healthier and happier lives. Two weeks ago during our first Friday Thank You of the new year, we all shared our happiness and joy while dedicating the William E. Simon Chapel Library, a wonderfully welcoming space that will inspire our boys both spiritually and intellectually as they engage in reading.

The current issue of Independent School Magazine, dedicated to ?Reading and Writing in the 21st Century, states, "It's time we turned our national attention into transforming every child into a reader, to creating conditions in our schools to support, encourage, and reward every child in becoming a fully competent, fully engaged reader." Thankfully, we have been focusing on this since the founding of Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart.

In the two weeks that have passed since that opening, I have had the opportunity to reflect on how much more we have to be thankful for:

A little over a year ago, we dedicated the new Athletic and Convocation Center, which our community has used in so many ways this past year.

This summer, we completed the expansion of our playing fields, which our community will be able to enjoy next year.

The number of after school activities available to our sons has increased, and this winter we are able to offer something every day for students in grades Kindergarten through 8th grade.

Most importantly, our students - your sons - continue to enter Princeton Academy every day with energy and enthusiasm for learning that makes having these wonderful new spaces so much more exciting.

All of this has resulted in the fact that number of applications for the coming academic year is, to date, higher than the past five years at this time of year. Also, our annual fund support is earlier and stronger than it has ever been.

For all of this, I thank you, and I urge you to adopt a simple resolution for this new year, to pause for a few minutes every Friday, in the middle of whatever pressing deadlines and difficulties you may have, to reflect on all that you have to be thankful for. You will be healthier, happier, and you will be sharing this custom with your sons.

Last fall on these pages I wrote an article explaining the deliberate reasoning behind how and why we work to develop a culture of reading at Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart. As we begin construction of the William E. Simon Chapel Library I want to share with you some of the same deliberate thinking that has gone into its design.

The location of the chapel library was chosen for a number of reasons. It is at the center, the very heart of the school. Easy access from both the lower and middle school areas validates the importance of reading as a habit of self-education, recreation, and personal growth. Its location at the entrance of the school lets visitors and prospective students know the value that we put on reading. Finally, combining a chapel and a library supports the idea that the spiritual and intellectual are not in opposition, as too many in the 21st century would have us believe. In fact, they are intertwined. A religious I know put it very succinctly when she said; "We want our students to see God in poetry, in physics, in all of His creation."

Combining the collections of the lower and middle school supports our culture of reading by encouraging every student to read at his own pace. Many of our students read above grade level, and separate libraries can limit a growing reader's choices or force a school to waste resources on multiple copies of books for two locations. Just as adults don't mind occasionally re-reading a book they read when they were younger (I highly recommend Huxley's Brave New World), students, too, enjoy the comfort of re-reading a favorite story or author. Finally, adults and older boys in the same space as our younger boys serve as powerful role models to one another, reinforcing reading for information, for knowledge, or just for the sheer joy of it.

Studies consistently show that boys, to a greater extent than girls, are drawn to technology. Unfortunately, they also tend to show that more often than not the draw to technology is in the form of the many games available for computers and computerized gaming devices. Consequently, we have decided that our library, while high tech (it will have wireless connectivity and a computerized catalog), will have low visibility technology. Rather than rows of desktop computers taking up space and enticing our students with promises of games and instant messaging, we intend to create large open areas for reading and study that will have comfortable chairs and cushions for relaxation and study carrels and tables for work. Laptops will be available at the circulation desk, and students will be allowed to check these out for purposeful use. But the main intent of the design is to draw our students to the printed word.

Developing a love of reading is one of the most important things you can do for your children. Make sure to visit the library regularly this summer, and when our chapel library is completed, visit it as often as possible.

Click here to download Reading for Life II.

In the 1960s Walter Mischel conducted a fascinating experiment in which he took 4 year old children and put a marshmallow on a plate in front of them. He then told them that the marshmallow was theirs, but if they waited to eat it until he returned he would give them a second marshmallow as a bonus for waiting. He left the room and the children were observed and timed as to how long they waited before eating the marshmallow. The most fascinating thing about this study is not that some children could wait the entire time he was gone (10—15 minutes), but the longitudinal study that followed the children throughout their early educational lives. It demonstrated that the amount of time a child could wait was an almost direct predictor of future academic and personal success. Fourteen years later Mischel found that the "grabbers" suffered low self-esteem and were viewed by others as stubborn, prone to envy, and easily frustrated. The "waiters" had better coping skills, were more socially competent, self-assertive, trustworthy, dependable, academically successful, and scored about 210 points higher on the SATs. In fact, the ability to delay gratification through self-discipline (as measured by the "Marshmallow Test") was a better predictor of future success than any other measurement.

Today, Martin Seligman and Angela Duckworth are referring to studies such as the one above as they study "grit" and how it may be developed in children. Briefly, the research suggests that no more than 25 percent of the differences between individuals in job performance - and no more than a third of the differences in grade point average - can be attributed to IQ. Perseverance, self-discipline, hard work, and other similar attributes that they have bundled under the broad concept of "grit", along with creativity and luck, contribute to the other 75 percent. In other words it's not only talent that matters, but also character; and it seems to matter more.

Their research indicates that "grit" and intelligence are completely independent traits, and suggests that schools and parents should be more interested in developing "grit", rather than preoccupying themselves with the almost constant measurement of intellectual and other abilities and aptitudes. The research of Carol Dweck indicates that one impediment to developing "grit" may be the seemingly innocent act of parents' indulgent praising of a child's intelligence.

An article in the December 2005 issue of Psychology Today referred to Louis Terman, an early researcher in "giftedness", who reported that "persistence in the accomplishment of an end" was a major factor that distinguished the most successful from the less successful. More recently, Joseph Renzulli, director of the National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented has identified "task commitment" (i.e. perseverance, endurance, and hard work) as one of the three essential components of giftedness along with ability and creativity. In fact, he says the evidence that these non-intellectual factors are critical to giftedness is "nothing short of overwhelming."

As we make our New Year's resolutions let's resolve to have the self-discipline to focus on developing "grit" in our children. After all, it was one of New Jersey's most famous citizens, Thomas Edison, who said, "Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up."

Click here to download a copy of Marshmallows & "Grit".

It seems that every summer someone new to our school asks me why Princeton Academy does not have a required reading list. Isn't required reading a measure of academic excellence? Princeton Academy deliberately designs and develops all of its programs with our mission and long-term goals for our students in mind. We want our students to be life-long learners.

An important aspect of life-long learning is the development of a love of reading. Social psychologists have long studied how we develop our likes and dislikes. One area of this research, which seems particularly applicable to educators and parents is in the area of self-justification. Specifically, research into what has been called the "psychology of inadequate justification" holds that most people are motivated to justify their actions and beliefs. Usually, we can find external justification for what we do or do not do. Often we are motivated to gain a reward or avoid a punishment. When we can easily identify external reasons (this is especially true when a behavior is followed by a strong reward or punishment), there is no need for us to internally justify our actions. However, when there is inadequate external justification (that is, no promise of reward or threat of punishment), justification theory holds that we are likely to develop some sort of internal justification. If no one is making me read this book, yet I am reading it, I must like reading. To "like reading" is an internal justification of the behavior. Over time this attitude, with repeated reinforcement, can become a strong attitude that becomes self-reinforcing.

In 1975 Mark Lepper and David Greene conducted a fascinating study in which "play was turned into work." Preschool children were induced to work with plastic jigsaw puzzles. One group was promised a reward, the other was not. A few weeks later all were allowed to choose the puzzles as one of their free time activities. The group that had worked on the puzzles with the promised reward spent less of their free time with the puzzles. By offering the children a "reward," it seems that the researchers had turned the puzzle play into work.

A recommended reading list offers neither punishment nor reward for reading books. It is our hope and experience that the justification for reading comes in the form of an internalized love of reading, which leads to the many rewards associated with life-long learning.

So let your children read whatever interests them. If they read a lot, their interests and tastes will naturally grow and develop.

Recently, The Washington Post carried an article claiming that a new study indicates that the "boy crisis" as described in various media, including Newsweek and Esquire, does not exist. In fact, the study, an analysis of selected data by Sara Mead of the Education Sector, agrees that research shows that boys are not only underperforming compared to girls in the area of reading and writing, but also are continuing to fall behind at the same time that girls have pretty much bridged the gap that indicated a lag in their achievement in math and science compared to boys. The author's concern seems to be with the use of the word "crisis" by the mainstream media. Unfortunately, in her attempt to downplay the "crisis" in boys' academic achievement she writes that "the girls are just improving faster than the boys." One cannot begin to imagine the furor that would be caused if the situation were reversed by gender and a writer/analyst wondered why there was a concern when boys were merely improving faster than girls. Certainly, the Post seems to be ready to create a polarized debate.

I, for one, agree that the word "crisis" is perhaps overused. As the author points out, the facts of the situation have been around for some time, and have been relatively unchanged for many years. However, the real crisis exists in the fact that most educators and adults were not aware that these gaps in boys' achievement existed and continue to exist today. Rather than debating whether or not a crisis exists, all of us, including the media, should be urging policymakers and educators to focus on how to educate students in the best way possible. If girls are "getting ahead faster" than boys, then we must not be doing the right thing for boys. We don't have to call it a crisis, but I am baffled as to how anyone can admit to persistent gaps and growing gaps in achievement and insist that there is no problem.

Perhaps Mead's true concern and motivation can be found in the last two paragraphs of her report. After admitting that "policymakers should support and fund more research about differences in boys' and girls' achievement, brain development, and the culture of schools to help teachers and parents better understand why boys' achievement is not rising as fast as that of girls," she concludes, "these steps can help establish a more reasonable conversation and lead to effective responses to the achievement problems facing some boys, without unfairly undermining the gains that girls have made in recent decades."

This fear, that new efforts by those concerned with boosting boys' achievement will somehow undermine girls' achievement, is understandable. In the 90s the news media widely distributed an AAUW report that "schools shortchanged girls" even as girls were catching up in math and science and boys continued to lag in reading and writing. Some suspect that some of the changes made to boost girls scholastic achievement may have inadvertently resulted in undermining boys' achievement in the coed classrooms of most schools. Fortunately, single-sex schools like Princeton Academy have the advantage that adjustments can be made to curriculum, teaching strategies, and school culture to improve the academic achievement of boys, without creating negative effects for girls. Educators would do well to look to us, and schools like us, for information and strategies to address the issue of boys' academic needs. There is no boy crisis at Princeton Academy.

Each Friday the entire student and faculty community of Princeton Academy gathers to offer "Friday Thank Yous." The time of thanks begins with words of welcome and reminds everyone of the wonderful week of exploration and learning they have experienced. Students and faculty are then invited to share with the gathered community a special thank you. Over the years these thank yous have ranged from "I want to thank my teacher for teaching us checkers," to "I want to thank my dad for driving me to school yesterday," to "I want to thank Tommy for sharing the swing with me," or "I want to thank my classmates for welcoming me into the school."

The concept of Friday Thank Yous owes its origins to the early discussions I had with the founding faculty about the type of school we would like to build for our boys. I remember sharing with them my experiences as an educator and how much I enjoyed the flexibility of independent schools: the freedom to change "on a dime" to benefit student learning or growth. I also mentioned the one thing I had experienced at independent schools that I did not like. It is what I call "the rising sense of entitlement." By this I meant the experience that students who, when younger, could appreciate how fortunate and privileged they were to attend schools such as ours too often grew into adolescents who assumed that they were entitled to attend such schools. They all too often would complain about things they thought they were entitled to, but might not receive, from a particular institution (new uniforms, a hockey rink, a plush bus, etc.) I believe it is important for our students to develop an understanding that we are so much better off than the vast majority of people around the world, and that it is important to go through life with a healthy sense of thankfulness. I believe that this thankfulness (not guilt) can guide us to become more compassionate people and a more compassionate community

Many of our students look forward to the opportunity to offer a word of thanks or recognition at Friday Thank Yous. Many parents come just to observe and are certainly welcome to participate; all they need to do is raise their hand just as the boys do. Occasionally, the middle schoolers are reluctant to participate perhaps realizing that their younger "prayer buddies" are cuter than they are. However, it is interesting that middle schoolers do participate and that tells me that they are truly sincere. I think that in our popular culture it is "uncool" to say thank you. By having a tradition such as this we give them permissions to do it.

From Friday Thank Yous evolved the tradition of sharing a Reflection, in the form of a reading or a quotation, at Middle School Assembly and inviting our gentlemen to offer a reflection on it. It is my hope that the middle schoolers learn that it is important to stop and reflect on how we are living, particularly in our increasingly fast-paced world. Again, even though they may kid about it outside of Assembly time, they do reflect on what the reading means to them and they do so earnestly and respectfully.

A couple of years after starting this tradition, I discovered that the origin of the word Eucharist is the Greek eucharistia, which means "thanksgiving." As a Sacred Heart school I believe it is important that we give thanks on a weekly basis. Providing an opportunity for our boys and young men to stand up in front of a large number of their peers and mentors and share a belief or sentiment is a vital component of our mission to develop young men with active and creative minds, a sense of understanding and compassion for others, and the courage to act on their beliefs.

Over the years I have worked with many capable and accomplished students and athletes. There were always some who seemed unwilling to risk making the mistakes that are often a necessary part of learning or developing a skill. Now, research is shedding light on how otherwise capable students can become risk-averse, while students who struggle can emerge as strong learners.

Recent studies by Carol S. Dweck (Columbia University), and others, examine the notion of how one's view of intelligence influences one's motivation to learn. Her work focuses on how one's view of intelligence and ability influences one's behaviors with respect to learning, academic challenge, and response to setbacks. Dweck and her colleagues have identified two broad views of intelligence. One view is that intelligence is a fixed quality and cannot be developed; the other view is that intelligence is a malleable quality that can be developed.

Dweck's research reveals evidence suggesting that students with a fixed view of intelligence tend to choose new tasks that are "safe." These students tend to place more value on appearing to look smart than learning something new. When these students perform poorly at a task, they are set back and often feel they cannot be successful at that task. They do not believe that hard work will make one good at something, and seem to "choose" failure over effort by engaging in self-defeating behaviors such as loss of interest, lack of initiative, procrastination and cheating.

On the other hand, students who see intelligence as a malleable quality want to learn new things, even at the risk of making errors. Setbacks signal them to approach the task differently by studying more, working harder or differently, or trying a new strategy. They believe that the harder one works, the better one will be; that effort powers their ability and achievement.

In one study it was noted that students with the malleable view of intelligence tended to transition well from one academic environment to another. Specifically, students moving from middle school to a more academically challenging high school were more likely to be successful if they had the malleable view of intelligence. Students with a fixed view, who were successful in middle school, often could not recover from the setbacks that new challenges brought them, while students with a malleable view of intelligence, who had difficulty in middle school, could become successful in high school.

Shedding light on the dynamic involved is a study at the University of Hong Kong where all classes, assignments, and examinations are in English. In that study (Hong, Chiu, Dweck, Lin, & Wan, 1999) the researchers assessed new students' theories about their intelligence and obtained their scores on English proficiency exams. They then asked them if they would be willing to take a remedial English course, if offered. Students with low English proficiency and malleable intelligence said yes whereas students with low English proficiency and a fixed view of intelligence said they would not. These students seemed more willing to place their academic career in jeopardy than risk errors.

Dweck's research also supports the notion that one's view of intelligence can be influenced. Specifically, it shows that when a student's traits are praised (i.e. "you are smart, good at," etc.), it reinforces and even develops the fixed view of intelligence in that student. In contrast, when a student's process is praised (i.e. "you worked hard, used a good strategy,") it reinforces and develops the malleable view of intelligence in that student.

Some years ago a study in California examined why Chinese American children generally outperformed any other grouping of students in the area of academic achievement. The study observed that in Chinese American families, academic success was attributed to hard work, whereas in other families, academic success was attributed to being "smart" or "good at something." The recent research of Dweck and her colleagues supports this observation.

I believe that this same dynamic applies to all abilities. Although well-intended, a childhood of praises that focuses on traits can result in that child developing a fixed view of his intelligence and other abilities, leaving him unprepared to know how to respond when he is not as successful as he expects. However, praises that focus on process can result in that child developing a malleable view of his intelligence and abilities leaving him well prepared to face the challenges of an ever more rapidly changing world.

Recently, my 8 year old daughter proudly showed me a math test on which she had earned a grade of 100%. Rather than tell her she was smart, I commented on how carefully she must have worked on it, so as not to make any mistakes. It was music to my ears when I overheard her later showing her test to her older brother and saying, "I worked really carefully on this...."

As I look back over this school year, I am reminded of the words of Epictetus that hang above my desk: "No great thing is created suddenly." After five years of rapid growth and expansion our patience was certainly put to the test this spring as we waited for the approvals to begin construction of our new Athletic and Convocation Center.

While our patience was tested in the area of construction, our faculty, staff, students, and trustees continued the wonderful work that has enabled Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart to grow and thrive. Everything that we do as a community is dedicated to the mission of Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart, which is to develop young men with active and creative minds, a sense of understanding and compassion for others, and the courage to act on their beliefs.

Our teachers participate in professional development programs bringing new information, skills, and ideas into our classrooms. Our students finished the school year with energy and enthusiasm both in and out of the classroom. The maintenance staff improved the grounds and facilities we use to deliver our program. The trustees successfully began the transition process of saying good-bye to founding members and welcoming new members in leadership roles. They continue to plan for the future growth of Princeton Academy.

And grow it does! Last spring we added a Celebration of the Arts evening to our calendar that was wonderfully attended, and which showcased visual, performing, and literary accomplishments of our students. In its first full year the Princeton Academy Choir grew to over twenty students and in its first public performance sang the national anthem at a Trenton Thunder game this May. Baseball was added as an interscholastic sport in the Middle School this spring. The growth of our middle school almost doubled the size of the middle school faculty. Kathleen Humora has been appointed as the first-ever head of middle school, a position she has embraced with enthusiasm and professionalism.

Most importantly, a visit last fall from representatives of the Network of Sacred Heart Schools resulted in a unanimous vote by the members of its board to accept Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart into the Network as a provisional member. We look forward to continuing the process towards attaining full membership over the next few years.

As construction continues on the Athletic and Convocation Center we look forward to the expansion of our facilities and the growth of our programs. We have accomplished much and with your continued support, we look forward to accomplishing even more.

This year I have read some books and articles that have given me much food for thought. I'd like to share some of that "food" with you.

In Just Let Them Play, Bob Bigelow addresses the growing craziness of youth sports, decrying, among other things, "select" T-ball teams for five-year olds and tournaments for those "select" teams. Bigelow, a former NBA first round draft choice, very methodically debunks the fantasy that identifying a talented five, eight, or ten year old ensures the development of a highly successful teen athlete and the offer of a college scholarship. He laments the fact that late bloomers, who do not make the "select" teams at an early age, may never try a sport that they might be good at as adolescents because they have already been told that they are not good enough. He worries about the development of those who do make the teams. How many suffer from the burnout of constant play and practice of one sport?

While Bigelow wonders if the motivation for some parents might be a selfish reliving of their own athletic success or failure, he acknowledges that most parents see the craziness in the system, but worry that if so many others are doing it, they may be doing their child a disservice by not getting them on a travel team as soon as possible.

Although I have not yet read Michael Thompson's new book, The Pressured Child, I did hear him speak at the NJAIS Conference this fall. He tackled the same topic of parental anxiety and the pressure it places on children to constantly achieve. Thompson suggests that this trend dates back to what was referred to as the Japanese miracle, which resulted in many American families wanting to emulate the Japanese. Whereas the Japanese model stresses acacademic achievement, Thompson points out that many American families want to emulate that model in all areas: academics, sports, arts, etc. The result is that children experience a strong expectation to achieve in all of these areas as they are shuffled from school, to practices, to lessons, and so on. Summer too often is seen as yet another opportunity to build a child's resume, prompting one child whom Thompson interviewed to state, "I don't want to be 'gifted' in the summer."

In Family Matters, Rob Evans takes a look at the growing evidence that students seem to be harder to reach and teach, their attention and motivation are inconsistent, and their language and behavior are more provocative. He believes this is happening because parents are increasingly anxious about their children's success and at the same time less confident in their own ability to support and guide them. The result is a parenting style that demands constant, measured growth and achievement, while at the same time protecting "self-esteem" by "bubble-wrapping" children to shield them from experiencing frustration and failure.

How legitimate are the concerns of Bigelow, Thompson, and Evans? In the December 2004 issue of Psychology Today Hara Estroff Marano writes:

"Through 1996, the most common problems raised by students were relationship issues. That is developmentally appropriate, reports Sherry Benton, assistant director of counseling at Kansas State University. But in 1996, anxiety overtook relationship concerns and has remained the major problem."

Marano argues that many young adults who have been raised with continuous expectations of high achievement while at the same time "bubble-wrapped" from experiencing failure or frustration, enter college unable to be resilient, independent, resourceful adults. She writes:

"Taking the discomfort, disappointment and even the play out of development, especially while increasing pressure for success, turns out to be misguided by just about 180 degrees. With few challenges all their own, kids are unable to forge their creative adaptations to the normal vicissitudes of life. That not only makes them risk averse, it makes them psychologically fragile, riddled with anxiety."

Thompson and Evans specifically share a concern that the pressures on children increase as educators too often "buy into" this parental anxiety and reflect it in the school's demands on students. They strongly urge educators to speak up about the true developmental journey; one that should include time and space for children to work through frustrations, difficulties, and failures.

The good news is that all of the writers above understand that the parental behaviors they observe and write about are motivated by a love for, and concern about their children. They just believe that we are getting it wrong; that we need to refocus on child-rearing and education as a developmental journey not a process of product development where children are fit into some molded model for success. The developmental journey includes opportunities for both successes and failures, both of which are critical to children growing into healthy, resilient, young adults. Children need room to "own" their interests and discover what they truly enjoy doing. Allowing children to experience the developmental journey helps them learn to solve difficulties, manage frustrations, build self confidence, take healthy risks, make choices, and provides them with opportunities to have fun. It is the journey, not the destination, which makes academics, arts, and athletics fun, and keeps our children growing in body, mind, and spirit.

Dear Parents and Friends,

I hope you and your families enjoyed your holiday vacation and are feeling rested and ready for the start of 2005. Christmas has always been a time to reflect on all that we have to be thankful for, and on the hope for the future that we may have as individuals, families, and communities. I had planned on writing a letter describing the wonderful progress of Princeton Academy, and the goals we had for the remainder of the school year, but decided to put that letter on hold, for now. The terrible tragedy of the tsunami in the Bay of Bengal certainly reinforced in me all that we have to be thankful for, but it also reminded me of the importance of developing a sense of hope for ourselves and for the world. A hope that recognizes that life can be hard, unjust, and calamitous, but still motivates us to find meaning, live well, and do good in the midst of those realities.

We have much for which we are thankful. We have a growing school on a beautiful campus. We are building a new gymnasium, followed by a library, chapel and renovated classrooms. We have wonderful teachers and staff members that continually review and strengthen their teaching skills and the curriculum they teach. We have students with supportive families ready and eager to engage in their learning. All this has resulted in alumni who are doing well at a variety of college preparatory schools throughout the US.

However, with so much focus on growth, academic quality, and high school placement as benchmarks of the success of a new school, I could not help but wonder if we were truly successful in the most important part of the mission of Princeton Academy of the Sacred Heart: to develop young men of understanding and compassion with the courage to act. My question was answered as our students returned to school. Our Middle School Student Council met on Tuesday and decided that funds raised at all of their events for the remainder of the year would go to the tsunami relief fund. Our Community Service Committee has been meeting to identify ways in which we can raise additional funds for relief and how we can ensure that the funds are disbursed appropriately. Individual faculty, staff members, parents, and students asked how they could help organize a school wide effort. In addition to relief for the victims of the tsunami, a student has given me a proposal to develop a care package drive for our soldiers serving in Iraq.

It is heartwarming to see our students returning from a holiday, too often associated with the question "What did you get?," with the statement, "I believe we can do this to help." I thank you for sharing your sons and working with us as we guide them in becoming "young men with active and creative minds, a sense of understanding and compassion for others, and the courage to act on their beliefs." We are truly blessed, for they are our hope as well as the hope of the world.

Sincerely,

Olen Kalkus
Headmaster

This fall I read an article describing how some colleges, as part of their freshman orientation, were teaching students how to organize themselves to have fun. Apparently, after spending childhoods that were a series of organized enrichment activities micromanaged by adults, more and more freshmen were coming into their college experience not knowing how to organize an event or activity themselves. It seems that in a quest to develop our children's "resumes," we have deprived them of the opportunity to learn how to organize and entertain themselves. While on the surface this may seem to be a small issue, I would contend that we have also deprived them of the opportunity to develop their character, which is built and reinforced through decision making. Each time someone makes a decision, particularly a tough one, he is given an opportunity to reaffirm his ethics.

I have long wondered about the compounding effects of adult-organized activity on children five years of age and older. Jean Piaget observed that children develop their concepts of rules and rule making by playing games. These concepts of rules and rule making are the foundation of the moral development of every individual. Are we developing a culture that limits the opportunities for this type of moral development? I grew up playing pick-up games in every season. In the winter we played hockey on a frozen pond. We had to develop our own rules (no lifting was an important one, since most of us had little or no padding) and apply them (was that shot that pushed the goal marker out of place a goal or was it a post?) We had to make sure that the teams were balanced and everyone was having fun. It was no fun to have lopsided scores, and if we didn't involve the less skilled players, we might lose them. Besides, most of us were in the less skilled group during at least one season. All of these activities required us to develop and practice critical thinking skills, negotiation skills, and people skills. Each time we had to make a decision, we had a chance to grow and affirm our ethics by coming to grips with such questions as: was that puck really in, or do I want to win a close game? Are the teams truly balanced, or did I argue to put more of the less skilled players on their team because I am tired of losing close games?

Unfortunately, we cannot turn the clock back on all the organized sports and activities that have been developed for our children. Organized leisure activities have become businesses that serve a variety of expectations and aspirations. As parents, we should be aware of the philosophy and expectations of those who are working with our children, and whether they agree with our own expectations. I remember coaching a junior tennis team in a doubles match when one of my players served a ball that was clearly going out of the intended service box. However, rather than hitting the ground, the ball hit the foot of the receiver's partner, who was standing outside the service box. My team rightfully claimed the point. An argument ensued. The other team claimed that, because it hit the foot of a player clearly outside the correct service area, the serve was out. Both teams came to me for a decision. Rather than make the call, I explained the rule that a ball is not out until it bounces out. Technically, my team could claim the point. I also pointed out that the player on the other team was clearly not aware of the rule, and that he might have moved his foot out of the way more quickly had he understood the rules better. I left it up to them to decide whether to claim the point or offer to replay it. I do not remember how they decided that point, but I do remember the reactions of two different parents. One admired how I had handled the situation and the other excoriated me for not doing my job, by not making the decision for the players. The latter clearly did not agree with my approach to teaching my players about the game and sportsmanship.

I believe we all need to be more aware of the opportunities lost to our children as a result of adult over-involvement in their activities. We should look for opportunities to give children some "down" time from adult organization and give them a chance to explore and organize some of their own activities. The other day my sons had some friends over, and they went out to play. They made up their own game. It had rules I did not understand. They played, they argued, they laughed. They played, argued, and laughed some more. Boy, were they having fun!

I am often asked about the origins of our school logo. This visual symbol for Princeton Academy, much like the school itself, began with some ideas shared and initiated around a kitchen table, that were developed and brought to fruition through the work and input of others in our school community.

It all began shortly after I arrived at 101 Drake's Corner Road, when I noticed some red tailed hawks soaring gracefully above our campus. When I shared the idea of having the hawk as our mascot, the initial reaction of my colleagues was sometimes receptive but mostly "aren't they symbols of war or aggression?" — effectively putting a damper on the idea of a hawk as our mascot.

Fortunately, the red tailed hawks continued to soar above our campus, and one of our teachers discovered some literature that described red tailed hawks as soaring "for the sheer joy of it." For those of us disposed to the hawk as a mascot, this description was inspiring. In the autumn of our first year we created a bookmark for our small school community with the quote, "Soar for the sheer joy of it" written underneath the image of a soaring hawk drawn by my son Jan.

This story might have ended with that bookmark, except that shortly into our first year, the Network of Sacred Heart Schools very politely informed me that the school was using the network logo on its letterhead, and kindly asked that we stop. We now needed to develop a new logo.

One evening, I discovered a website that listed what certain objects and animals symbolized for some Native American tribes. The hawk was listed as a symbol of Truth. When I shared this with my colleagues, we all agreed that it should be our mascot. At the same time, while working with the Everyday Math website hosted by the University of Chicago, I noticed that the University's crest was that of a shield with an eagle in it, and a bar across the top of the shield with a book in the bar. It inspired me to develop a similar crest with symbols important to Princeton Academy.

The first drawing of the crest took place around my kitchen table. One evening I asked my wife, Kim (a far better artist than I), to make a sketch of a shield filled with a hawk, and in a bar above the hawk draw the other symbols important to the mission of Princeton Academy. The result was the image on the right: a hawk for truth, a heart for compassion and courage, a cross for faith and spirituality, and an open book for knowledge and intellectual growth. (Note that the cross is in the same shape as the cross on the Manor House. Headmaster's challenge: decipher the words in Latin at the bottom and translate into English.)

I shared the initial sketch and ideas with Deb Gwazda, our art teacher, and asked her to play with it. Our immediate reaction was that the hawk looked too aggressive and would be better replaced by a soaring hawk, like the one on the bookmark. Deb's work resulted in the crest much as it is today. At the top of the crest, Deb incorporated the gable of the Manor House. The bar was moved into a diagonal position and filled with the hawk in flight. The book was put underneath the hawk. We struggled with how and what type of heart to incorporate in the crest. Deb continued to work with various models of the "Sacred Heart," while I took the crest to Isabella Palowitch, the designer of our admissions materials, and asked if she could put it into a digital format that we could use for a variety of purposes. I shared with her the development of the crest, the important symbolism of the heart, and how we were still trying to make it part of the crest. When Isabella returned with her work, she surprised us with a sample of how she had incorporated the heart very subtly into the body of the shield. If you look closely at the crest, you will see that the upper corners of the diagonal bar that fills in the interior are slightly rounded, creating a heart in the interior of the shield.

This symbol of faith, truth, intellectual growth, and courage all linked by compassion was adopted as our crest and has since been incorporated into a logo for Princeton Academy. Like so much about Princeton Academy it is a work that was started by a vision, and developed through the efforts and input of many in the community.

Some time ago, I gave a talk called "Why All Boys?" Although it is impossible to replicate the talk, let me share with you some of the information I gathered.

In 1990, the American Association of University Women publicized a widely disseminated report that focused on the data indicating that boys tended to 'lead' girls in schools, particularly in the subject areas of math and science. At that time, boys also tended to hold more leadership positions, hence the title of the report: How Schools Shortchange Girls. What the report failed to acknowledge was the fact that although boys led girls in math and science, girls led boys by an equally significant margin in the language arts. In fact, an ETS Gender Study, also from 1990, showed that while girls were catching up to the boys in math and science, boys were not making similar gains in the language arts.

The report resulted in schools focusing on how to make education more friendly and supportive of girls. These efforts were successful, but also produced some unintended consequences. While girls are now doing as well as boys in math and science, there has been no catching up on the part of boys in language arts. A commonly accepted tenet is that the average 11th grade boy writes at the level of the average 8th grade girl. Since 1991, more girls than boys are taking AP exams; since 1994, more girls are taking upper level math courses, and more women than men are enrolled in undergraduate college programs; and since 1998, more girls participate at a leadership level in academic clubs, student government, newspaper or yearbook, service clubs, and school plays or musicals.

Currently, the only area where boys 'lead' girls is in sports.

It seems that in making coed schools friendlier to girls, we may have made them more difficult for boys. One solution might be to undertake the same effort to make schools friendlier to boys that was expended in the 90s to promote girls' needs. As a former Head of an all-girls school, I worry that such an effort might result in a flip-flop, basically wiping out the gains that girls have made in the past 12 years.

In a single-gender school, however, this is not a worry.

From birth there are notable differences between girls and boys. Girls are born with a higher proportion of nerve cells to process information. More brain regions are involved in language production and recognition. By five years of age, girls are well suited to schools. They are calm, get along with others, pick up on social cues, and reading and writing come easily to them. The start of school is comparatively tough on boys, as they must curb aggressive impulses. They lag behind girls in reading skills, and hyperactivity may be a problem. While some boys surge ahead, typically the students with the greatest academic difficulty are boys. Recent studies have found that boys do better in environments that:

• provide opportunities for movement;
• allow louder expression. Recent research shows that boys actually hear differently than girls;
• provide critical feedback on performance and progress through coaching. Boys have unrealistically high estimates of themselves; they are more likely to need a reality check than girls, who tend to be more self-critical and need encouragement;
• supply interesting materials. Unlike girls, boys are primarily motivated by material that interests them, rather than a desire to please adults;
• allow appropriate competition;
• give them their own space;
• furnish opportunities to learn by doing;
• do not compare them to girls.

As early as 1983, Cornelius Riordan, a sociologist then at Providence College, was researching the "hot topic" of why Catholic schools regularly outperformed public schools, even when socioeconomic and other factors were accounted for. In the process he discovered that 42% of the Catholic schools were single-gender. As he looked more closely at the data, he discovered that the single-gender schools were nearly twice as effective as either coed Catholic schools or public schools. However, he was so uncomfortable with his findings that he tempered his conclusions when presenting his final report. In 1994, Riordan finally wrote: "Single-gender schools are more effective academically than co-educationals."

Over many years the data consistently and persistently confirm this fact. While there are some that have reported a null effect (no difference), no study in the US has demonstrated that coed schools are more effective. Each fall the Financial Times' 500 tables rank England's independent schools according to results on A-level exams. Single-gender schools overwhelmingly dominate. Rarely does a coed school break into the top thirty.

A pilot study in a Michigan public middle school separated the sixth grade into single-gender and coed sections of science, math, band, and computer classes. The study yielded the following results:

• Teacher-assigned grades in single-gender classes consistently increased.
• Pre- and post-study testing showed stronger learning in single-gender math classes.
• Behavior was reported as better in single-gender classes.
• Parent surveys were overwhelmingly supportive of the single-gender classes.
• Teacher observation included an improved working atmosphere and a reduction of attention-getting behaviors.

The data in support of single-sex education, especially for boys, are compelling. Perhaps the correct response to the question "Why all boys?" is: "Why not?"

It seems that it is almost impossible to discuss education these days without referring to the concept of self-esteem. Probably because of its overuse, it has become a very misunderstood concept. I'd like to share with you some of the history of the development of this concept and some recent relevant research.

In the sixties, Stanley Coopersmith, a psychologist at the University of California, Davis, devised a scale for self-esteem in which children would answer true and false to such statements as I am pretty happy, Its pretty tough to be me, and I often wish I were someone else. Coopersmith then assessed the child rearing practices of parents whose children had high self-esteem according to his scale. He came up with a finding that some might find surprisingly old fashioned. He discovered that the clearer the rules the parents set and the more consistently they were enforced, the higher a child's self-esteem. The more freedom a child had, on the other hand, the lower the self-esteem. Since then the idea of self-esteem has become an ever more widely embraced goal of child-rearing. Many schools have been urged to make self-esteem a goal of the curriculum. Unfortunately, Coopersmith's conclusions about the origins of self-esteem have been largely ignored in the myriad programs developed with the goal of promoting self-esteem.

There is no effective technology for teaching feeling good that does not first teach doing well. Feelings of self-esteem develop as side effects of mastering challenges, working successfully, overcoming frustration and boredom, and winning. Trying to achieve the feeling side of self-esteem directly confuses the means and the end and can result in long term harm to a child. In one study researchers found that students, whose self-esteem had been artificially raised, became more angry and violent when frustrated or criticized than students who had not been artificially praised. More recently, a controlled study by psychologists at Columbia University has lent support to the notion that certain types of praise may hurt children in the long run. In the study students were asked to do a series of math problems. After completing the problems successfully, some were praised as being intelligent and others were praised for their hard work. Then they continued to assign problems of greater difficulty and noted how each child responded to the challenges. They found that the children praised for hard work focused on learning something new and new approaches to solving the problems. On the other hand, students who had been praised as being intelligent tended to worry about failure, choose tasks that validated their intelligence, and displayed less determination when faced with difficult problems.

What should we do? Martin Seligman, a professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania suggests the following as the right way to raise kids self-esteem: To raise children who approach life with energy, optimism, and self-assurance, you must teach them how to tolerate frustration, not avoid it, and to view adversity as a challenge, not a forerunner of failure. Follow these three simple guidelines:

1. Pay attention to how your child explains problems and setbacks. Help him identify factors that contribute to the problem, particularly ones that he can control. Then select one controllable factor and help him develop a plan of action.
2. Teach your child the difference between behavior and character. Behaviors are changeable (I didn't study enough; I told a lie). Character traits are less so (I'm lazy; I'm bad). Some years ago a study was conducted in California that investigated whether or not there were any significant cultural differences that could account for the fact that, on average, Asian American students performed significantly higher on math exams than any other grouping of American students. One of the major differences found in this study is that the general population tended to attribute good performance to a personal characteristic or aptitude (he's good in math because he is smart), whereas Asian Americans tended to attribute good performance to hard work (he has done well because he has worked hard). If your child says things that denigrate his aptitude or character, help him identify the behavior with which he is unhappy and generate some ideas for changing it.
3. Teach your child to persevere in the face of frustration. Children who cannot tolerate frustration learn to become helpless and give up. Help your child set manageable goals and select activities that are neither too hard nor too easy. Encourage persistence and offer guidance. The mastery that a child experiences when accomplishing a goal teaches him most effectively that he can surmount adversity.

This summer I read an article discussing the observation that children brought up in the suburbs seem to have a higher incidence of asthma, allergies, and similar respiratory ailments than children brought up on farms. The article went on to say that some doctors are beginning to wonder if there is a connection between the highly sanitized housing typical of modern suburbs and the lack of resistance that children with these ailments seem to have. While I am not a doctor, I find this line of thinking interesting.

I have often feared that we may be doing a similar disservice to our children's psychological development by sanitizing their learning experiences. By attempting to remove all stressors and challenges that could lead to setbacks and disappointments, we may be inhibiting the development of what psychologists call resilience in our children. Resilience is defined by Webster as springing back into shape, recovering strength, spirits, etc. quickly. Psychologists have noted that resilience is a characteristic shared by many successful people in today's world of uncertainties and risk.

A good part of my growing up included creating and organizing games with the other kids in my neighborhood. When we wanted to play soccer, hockey or other games, we had to create and monitor our own rules. The arguments that arose were an important opportunity for learning. We learned that rules grow out of a common agreement among players. We learned how to negotiate. We even learned that you can argue over something with a good friend and still be friends.

When picking teams we learned that creating sides that were evenly matched resulted in the most fun for all. Were there opportunities for hurt and frustration? Of course! Imagine being me, the American, among European kids choosing sides for a soccer game. I was usually the last to be picked.

I am thankful that my parents did not have a coach or supervisor to whom they could complain about the possible damage to my self-esteem. I doubt they would have anyway. Their advice tended to be in the direction of, What can you do to change that situation? I could have quit, accepted the fact that I was chosen last, or worked hard on my skills to improve my standing. It was my choice.

Today I worry that too many adults feel a responsibility to intervene and make sure that all the stressors are eliminated and that everyone is happy all the time. As our children spend more and more time in programs that are structured and run by responsible adults they are missing opportunities to develop the skills and attitudes that are important components of the characteristic of resilience.

The opportunity to try and fail is a powerful learning experience for children. The need to protect and guide is a powerful response for parents. Perhaps we can learn from the advice of one of the five Goals and Criteria of the Sacred Heart which encourages us to give to our children an opportunity for personal growth in an atmosphere of wise freedom.

I have often been asked why I refer to our students as gentlemen whenever I speak to them in a group. The answer I give is simple: because it is what we want them to be as they grow up. But will simply calling them gentlemen help them to grow up as gentlemen? They would first need to know what being a gentleman is. I suggest you ask your son what he thinks the word means. I am sure it will lead to an interesting and fruitful discussion. Once a student has an idea of what a gentleman is, I believe that addressing him as one will add to the likelihood that he will be one. My confidence is rooted not only in experience, but also in some interesting research in the areas of self-fulfilling prophecies and attribution.

I believe one of the most important areas of psychological research for educators is in the area of expectations. In 1968, Robert Rosenthal conducted a study in a Boston elementary school which led to a series of studies that came to be labeled the Pygmalion effect. These studies were designed to look at how expectations actually influence the behavior of individuals, and later to try and understand what caused the effect. In the initial study, teachers were told that testing had revealed that some of their students were academic spurters who would show unusual gains during the academic year. In fact, the names of these spurters were chosen randomly. However, by the end of the year 30 percent of the spurters had gained an average of 22 IQ points, and almost all of them had gained at least 10. These gains were significantly greater than those of their control group classmates. This and further studies clearly demonstrate the power of self-fulfilling prophecies.

Research in the area of attribution tends to look at how people determine the causes of events and behavior. The research has resulted in some interesting observations, such as; the less we know a person the more likely that we will attribute their behavior to dispositional characteristics rather than situational ones. We may see someone stumble while walking and think oh, how clumsy, rather than must have been a crack in the sidewalk. In 1975 Richard Miller, Philip Brickman and Diana Bolan decided to look at whether attribution effects a change in behavior. Specifically, he and his colleagues looked at whether or not attribution could change the littering behavior of a group of elementary students. The results were fascinating in that a group that was reminded of how good they were and how important they knew that it was to not litter (attribution group) actually showed greater change than either the control group, or the group which was given the usual lecture and teaching about the harmful effects of littering on the environment (persuasion group). Apparently, attributions made about us effect change in our behavior if we accept them and they are within our ability.

With neither space nor time to discuss the research on labels, I hope it suffices for me to say that the power of a label is related to that of a self-fulfilling prophecy and attributions. I invite you to join me in the expectation that your son and all our students be gentlemen.

I recently went to watch a former student play at a squash tournament here in Princeton. After the first round of matches we went for some hot chocolate and conversation in one of the cafes in town. The father of this student commented on how many of the under 13 year old players were coming to tournaments with their personal coaches and what I thought about that. It led to a discussion that included my observation that, during the soccer season in the fall, I wondered how the kids on the field could be expected to communicate with one other, as they were constantly being yelled at and barraged with instructions from parents, coaches, and others on the side lines. My experience in Europe had been that as parents we would bring our kids to a Saturday morning "league," and let the kids play. We would socialize and occasionally comment on a nice play, regardless of whose child made it. The shouting on the field was that of the children, with an occasional direction from one of the coaches.

Why this over-participation on the part of the adults? I have two theories (neither proven.) The first is that we often look to short term results, rather than long term. Parental urging and over-instruction does have some influence on the motivation and performance of a youngster. Children want to please the significant adults in their lives. The other theory is that the most traditional American sports have been very "Coach" driven. (Plays are designed and sent in by the coach.) In either case, the emphasis is on execution of skills rather than creative play.

But, what concerns me most as an educator, is not so much the cause, but the possible consequences of all of this external direction. Social psychologists have developed a theory that basically states—the more external motivation a person has to behave a certain way, the less likely it is that the person will develop internal motivation to behave that way. Consequently, when the external motivation is not present, the behavior is less likely to take place. For example, a child over-rewarded for reading will think of reading as work and will be less likely to read for pleasure. In many cases enjoyment goes hand in hand with internal motivation. This concept has caused many educators to critically review the practice of rewarding at every step in the process of learning.

Interestingly, my friend (the squash player's father) mentioned that one of the top junior players in the world (not an American) had mentioned in an interview that American players currently cannot play with the best, because for all their training, they do not "have enough drive". My feeling is that it is probably related to this idea of too much reliance on a coach. They are externally driven: if the coach can't help them beat another player, than it just isn't going to happen. As a player and a coach, I know that only the player can get himself to the top. When we coach, we help players grow and learn to the best of their ability. The best teachers and counselors know this, and work to make their students/clients independent and internally motivated, rather than dependent and externally motivated. We should know this as parents, as well.

So, if you want to help your sons to be strong players give them the following advice:

• practice hard
• keep your eye on the ball
• bend your knees
• be able to go left as well as you go right
• above all never give up

...and then let them play.