Vicki, you have certainly created some wonderful conversation with both this piece and the Edutopia piece! Grit can mean many things to many people, and I certainly had no idea how controversial the term was until I started researching it yesterday. There are many perspectives.

I have a friend who is a hard scientist, and he is very enamored of the word “grit”. To him, I think “grit” means strength, no whining, stick-to-itiveness and resolve. It also means an ability to think beyond a current situation or failure. He values the ability to find creative solutions, with or without the support of others.

If we think about William Perry’s (1970) stages of development – grit occurs at the highest level of privilege and functionality – Commitment to what one believes is right. Perry was quite criticized for the small sample size of his study, and the fact that the subjects were all white males who attended Harvard. The very word “grit” has a sound like biting on steel. It’s short, clipped, and mono-syllabic…indicating a no-nonsense word with little room for variation. My association of “grit” with the highest level of Perry’s scheme is my own – and I take responsibility for it :-). It is the connection that I make – and not one that anyone else (to my knowledge) has endorsed.

But this is very different from Belenky et al (1986) who in Women’s Ways of Knowing created a different progression of intellectual development, of which the highest was constructed knowledge which focuses on the integration of knowledge from our network, and is markedly different from deciding who is “right” when listening to the network. Valuing all voices (Belenky) is far different from choosing which voice to value (Perry). Okay that was maybe a birdwalk, but I think it does have to do with some of the reactions people are having to the word “grit”.

To me, grit has a bit of a different meeting. I believe that what general teachers believe is grit is a combination of resilience and self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is very important to ongoing success and innovation in my own opinion. Some will argue we went overboard with self-efficacy in the 80s and 90s, creating a generation of students who felt good about themselves and their abilities without any real reason to do so. But that isn’t really creating self-efficacy, that is more creating a cushion, protecting children from natural consequences, and from the real impact of their actions and performances. Self-efficacy on the other hand has to do with setting real challenges, giving real and honest feedback about performance (Wiggins – Authentic Assessment) and helping students understand they can adjust, overcome, grow and achieve. This is very important to risk-taking – a person has to believe, based on reasonable experience and evidence, they can be successful.

Resilience is of course very important. I have said before in committee meetings and in class- we either bend or we break. Understanding that even when our circumstances are dire we can survive, we do have support, and we can overcome eventually with support is key to my own understanding of resilience. Key to this is support. We have to have a strong support network, and we have to know when to rely on them. Not everyone has the support it takes to be resilient in my own mind, and in my experience. To ask those who don’t have support to be resilient is like asking someone with blonde hair to turn their hair gray. It just isn’t possible. Some people can find that support in themselves, some cannot. It isn’t good or bad. It is only human. There are times everyone needs help.

So…that’s a long and maybe over intellectualized interpretation of what I think the core of the controversy with the word “grit” might be. I don’t disagree with developing “grit” in students; however, I do agree that we need to perhaps take Belenky’s structure over Perry’s (understanding that neither are perfect) and acknowledge that a network and the contribution of others is important over individual excellence. I am better because I can integrate the understanding of others into my own behavior, knowledge base and way of life – and I am who I am (and where I am) in no small part because of the network who has supported me.

I know you believe these things because you live them Vicki! I am grateful to have you as a part of my support network, and I appreciate this opportunity to flesh out a little of what I think I am beginning to understand about the controversy surrounding the word “grit”.

Lee

What is Grit?
I like the definition for Grit that I found in Wikipedia, “Grit in psychology is a positive, non-cognitive trait based on an individual’s passion for a particular long-term goal or endstate coupled with a powerful motivation to achieve their respective objective.”

I think that phrase “Non-cognitive” is an important consideration because it doesn’t link to high or lower order thinking. It has to do with the disposition of the learner. It is an affective trait.

They also noted that “Duckworth et al (2007) defines Grit as a stable trait that does not require immediate positive feedback. Individuals high in Grit are able to maintain their determination and motivation over long periods despite experiences with failure and adversity. Their passion and commitment towards the long-term objective is the overriding factor that provides the stamina required to “stay the course” amid challenges and set-backs. Essentially, the Grittier person is focused on winning the marathon, not the sprint.”

An interesting aspect of this realization is that millennials are known for their need for immediate feedback. Does that mean that they don’t have grit? If so, then how can they have achieved all that they have done?

As a lifelong educator, researcher on resiliency development, empowerer of humans, and believer in the power of resiliency, I sugest that when we speak of “Grit” we must consider that it is our collective responsibility to strive at all levels of our educational communities to provide environments for students that are calm, supportive, encouraging, thoughtful, planned, which provide opportunities for students to ignite their latent capabilities to be resilient. I have begun to bring forth the idea of “Transformational Resiliency” which denotes just this, a purposefully designed environment where students are afforded the opportunities to be resilient, develop responsibility, and build positive relationships with others. Some might argue that this is an impossible task, however, I would argue that this task is absolutely achievable, and is necessary in order for our students to actually develop, grow in peace, and enhance their personal abilities and capabilities. For so many children who have experienced trauma, difficult family situations, poverty, etc., we must understand that they are not lacking “grit” as they have survived so many difficulties already. It could be that these children actually have an internal grit which has helped them to survive, yet may not have had an opportunity to tap their latent resiliency. I put forward the notion that no matter the socio-economic situation a school is located, no matter the content area of the teacher, and no matter the grade level, it does become essential for a teacher to consider the social-emotional health of his or her students, and then plan accordingly to indeed provide high rigor, as they focus on developing healthy human beings.