See if this scenario sounds familiar to you.

There are a group of students playing a PE game, and everything seems to be going fine. Most of the students are having fun, even though many of them are making mistakes. The skill of the game may be tricky, but the game is engaging and the students are having fun. The game purposely does not have an element of direct competition, but a focus on teamwork. In this scenario, the ball is tossed to a student, and it is not caught. The normal reaction is nothing, but some students will laugh, others may say things like “darn” or “oh well.” This student goes immediately into dramatic negative self-talk.

“I suck at this!”

“I’m no good at sports!”

“I’m the worst!”

“I’ll never be able to do this!”

It can be painful to hear these words come out of someone so young. We simultaneously want to help and encourage them, but we also want them show some resilience and try again before seemingly giving up after one try. The term “grit” has become very popular when describing what makes a student successful, but has come under fire lately because it does not take into consideration all the circumstances of the child. We all agree that the ability to persevere is incredibly important, and it can be practiced and made stronger. We also know that not everyone has the same start in life, and expecting the same abilities out of our students, including their ability to persevere, is unfair.

When I experience students who engage in this negative self-talk, I treat it as a two-fold problem.

 1.)   “If you tell yourself something about yourself enough times, you will begin to believe it.”

(A similar side note: If someone of value else says you are something, you will begin to believe it)

Positive self-talk can be very helpful. A perfect example is the adage “fake it til you make it.” It is common for people to psych themselves up so they can produce something or perform beyond expectation, and when they do, this success becomes part of their identity. Overtime, self-esteem is built on these successes to the point where someone becomes confident in themselves and their abilities.

Conversely, I believe the same thing may be true in the opposite regard. When someone tells themself they are not beautiful, smart, strong, or whatever, it becomes part of their self-identity. This is even more dangerous with young children, because this perceived negative trait will ingrain itself into the understanding of that person for the rest of their life. Young and old, how many times have we heard someone say, “I’m not good at math.” This probably started when this person had trouble with math facts at a young age. If they were not able to memorize their math facts as fast as their peers, the comparison of their speed made them feel less than, especially in lessons where their friends could calculate faster. “Bad” at math facts slowly turned into “bad” at math, and that slowly became the identity of the individual to the point where they cut off paths and opportunities that may have been professional, educational, or hobbies that required significant math ability. The amount of potential lost in that person is sad, and when we think of all the people who tell themselves they are bad at math, the amount of lost potential is staggering. And this is not just about math. It could be about any subject, including physical education. Someone who has trouble catching or throwing eventually becomes someone who “is not good at sports,” which becomes someone who loathes exercise or physical activity. We all know that physical activity is important for general health, so this person who avoids physical activity (because of PE class) will suffer more health consequences based on a childhood belief.

When I hear a student engage in this type of talk, after class I will pull them aside and talk to them about their language with themself. I tell them that whatever they say about themself, they will eventually believe, good or bad. I also remind them that whatever they were not good at probably needs more practice. No one can be perfect at everything the first time they try it. We are not asking the student to become an expert, but we are expecting that they don’t give up after only a couple tries. Using a personal story about how one practiced to become good at something can be a valuable tool to get the student to understand the value of trying. This also leads to the second part of the equation.

2.)   The skill needs to be dialed back for the student

 If you deduce that the student is truly trying their hardest, and they are having a super hard time with the skill, then the skill difficulty may need to be dialed back. It is best to dial it back for everyone, not just that one student, so that student does not feel singled out. Make it seem like it was part of the game the whole time to start with the harder skill, and in the “bonus” round they get this new rule, which makes it slightly easier so they can really do their best. More students will have more success than before, and the student who was really struggling will probably have more success as well. Also have an optional harder version of the original skill which is aimed at the students who were already excellent at the original skill, which will keep them interested. Here is an example:

• The game requires throwing and catching a ball with a hand held lacrosse scoop

• Most students are having some success, some can catch it every time, and others have not had one catch yet.

• Change the rule of the game so the ball can bounce once, and it still counts as a catch for everyone

• The harder option is they have to catch the ball with their non-dominant hand

More students will have more success, and will have more fun playing, while the advanced students will get a new challenge which should be hard enough to keep them engaged while still being fun.

A high achieving student athlete typically does not do the same negative self-talk from what I have observed, and if they do, they use it more as a way to regain focus for the next upcoming task. This student rarely up and quits because of one poor performance, and has a good level of persistence and determination. However, if the high achieving student athlete is having lots of trouble with a brand new skill(s) outside of what they are typically good at, instead of negative self-talk, they will blame the game and call it “stupid” or “boring.”

Maybe this is similar predictor to how people respond to negative feelings in “real life.” When they are experiencing negative emotions are they more prone to lash out at other people similar to the way they would blame the game instead of themselves? If they are feeling bad do they internalize their negative feeling and direct it at oneself the same way say they say they are not good in PE? When this person is angry, do they lash out someone else or themself? While I’m sure this isn’t a perfect metaphor, I wonder if there are enough parallels between these examples to be used as a part of observation. Maybe this information would be valuable for mental health professionals to better understand tendencies and belief systems of the people they are working with, and possibly make more accurate diagnosis with this type of information.

In a previous article I described student athletes who cannot seem to play a game that is “beneath their skill level” and cannot enjoy a “fun” game that they are normally very competitive with. This player, when forced to play a fun version of their chosen sport, will want to withdraw citing that it isn’t fun when the competitive nature is taken away (if they can verbally express this reason). While this person may withdraw from the sport for different reasons, I speculate there may be some underlying issues that are similar to their less skilled peers. The high skilled player’s identity hinges on their awesome ability, and if they are not allowed to play with the highest intensity level they are used to (because the game is supposed to be fun and less competitive), they cannot show how good they are. This hit to their self esteem is too much for them to bear the same way that the less skilled student feels shame when they fail at a skill that seems to be easy for others. If this is the case, maybe there is room for empathy because every student wants to appear competent, if not great, in the eyes of their peers. I argue the most important skill moving into the next decade is going to be empathy. With all the disagreements and opposing viewpoints fueled by social media, empathy promotes growth, understanding, and will be the solution that will help heal.