Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I personally have a somewhat lenient definition: "Someone who doesn't do enough for themselves to make THEMSELVES happy, both short and long-term."
But most people, in action if not in words, seem to define it as someone who doesn't perform as well as others. I believe most "underachievers" are simply people in the wrong group for comparison, and/or people who haven't been discovered for the things they actually do BETTER than others.
I personally have a somewhat lenient definition: "Someone who doesn't do enough for themselves to make THEMSELVES happy, both short and long-term."
But most people, in action if not in words, seem to define it as someone who doesn't perform as well as others. I believe most "underachievers" are simply people in the wrong group for comparison, and/or people who haven't been discovered for the things they actually do BETTER than others.
I agree and disagree with your definition. I love your first sentence and agree with what I bolded in your last one.
I think this word really has two meanings: First is one that the schools use to label a group of students who are not "up to par" on state tests. These are the students who are behind due to a myriad of reasons, usually with economically being the biggest factor leading to the rest of the problems.
And the second what teachers use to label students who frustrate the bejesus out of them because they are not working or living up to their potential and either will just "slide by" as doing all the work or doing it well is just "too much trouble" or maybe even fail as he/she could care less. GRRRR And, to be honest, from my experience, this group has been slowly growing since the advent of all this technology. GRRRR again!
Last edited by Sagitarrius48; 12-24-2011 at 07:14 AM..
From an education point of view, I would define an underachiever as someone who's content with just passing their classes and expending the absolute minimum as far as effort goes even though they are thoroughly capable of higher grades.
And the second what teachers use to label students who frustrate the bejesus out of them because they are not working or living up to their potential and either will just "slide by" as doing all the work or doing it well is just "too much trouble" or maybe even fail as he/she could care less. GRRRR And, to be honest, from my experience, this group has been slowly growing since the advent of all this technology. GRRRR again!
I'm glad you brought the word 'label' up. I almost forgot: No one should be labeled an underachiever. It's only going to make them less motivated. Though it may take a few more seconds of a teacher's precious time, they should instead say "Good job! But I know you can do better. Let's keep workin on it, okay?"
From an education point of view, I would define an underachiever as someone who's content with just passing their classes and expending the absolute minimum as far as effort goes even though they are thoroughly capable of higher grades.
I'm glad you brought the word 'label' up. I almost forgot: No one should be labeled an underachiever. It's only going to make them less motivated. Though it may take a few more seconds of a teacher's precious time, they should instead say "Good job! But I know you can do better. Let's keep workin on it, okay?"
Nope. Nix the "Good Job". Telling a child they did a good job when they didn't sends the wrong message. It sends the message that what they did was good enough. Part of the problem with today's students is they've heard "Good job" too many times when it wasn't deserved. Tell them they can do better.
underachiever, loser in the making but does not know it yet bek its early.
those who think they are laid back but are in fact laying down.
those who think they are cool but are wasting their youth without any direction or realistic goals
youth without ambition is an ego without any proof of its inflated size
those focused on looking like something rather than being something
Nope. Nix the "Good Job". Telling a child they did a good job when they didn't sends the wrong message. It sends the message that what they did was good enough. Part of the problem with today's students is they've heard "Good job" too many times when it wasn't deserved. Tell them they can do better.
"Good job" can be used to praise performance OR effort. And if you want kids that are initially unmotivated to continue putting forth the effort, you'd better encourage that effort any way you can. Successive approximations. Basic psychology.
"Good job" can be used to praise performance OR effort. And if you want kids that are initially unmotivated to continue putting forth the effort, you'd better encourage that effort any way you can. Successive approximations. Basic psychology.
The problem with kids today is they've heard "Good job" for minimal effort all their lives. They were raised on praise and have fragile egos that need to be stroked as a result. Far better to give them objective evaluations of their work. They should know that the effort they put in before was not good enough and encouraged to try harder not told "Good job" just for handing something in. It is the praise of minimal effort that makes them put in minimal effort.
My dd has the highest self esteem of all of her peers. She's grown up without praise. What she's grown up with is constructive criticism. I'll tell her what she did right, so she keeps on doing it, and tell her what she did wrong so she'll change it. I learned form her piano teacher. She says "Good job" only once a year. After recitals when it's all over. When dd was about 7, we were on the way to piano and she said to me "If Miss C is happy..." stopped herself and then continued "If Miss C isn't mad, can we go get ice cream?". She knew the score. If Miss C didn't criticise her playing, she did what was expected of her. You only get praise from Miss C for going well above and beyond and then it's presented as "I like the way you did....." Not "Good Job".
Praise like "Good Job" is bad because it doesn't point out what was good. It's left up to the individual to decide what was good and they may decide it was all good when it was really dismal. I see no point in telling a child they did good when they didn't. I'd rather say "I know you can do better than this...have you tried...X, Y or Z???? "I know you can do better" conveys belief in the child's ability without praising poor performance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
