When a College Takes on American Poverty

https://ift.tt/2LijUSW

Russell Lowery-Hart spent a Texas winter weekend sleeping outside, even when a light rain fell and it grew so cold that he forced muddy shoes into his sleeping bag to warm his feet. By day, the 48-year-old became increasingly sunburned crisscrossing the streets of Waco, applying for fast-food jobs and searching for soup kitchens. He arrived at one charity at noon to find that lunch ended at 11:30; luckily, a homeless woman shared her cinnamon bread with him.

He was unshowered and unshaven, in the same secondhand clothing the whole weekend. By Sunday morning, the humiliations had undone him. When a family heading to church crossed the street to avoid him, he hollered out, “I’m a fucking college president, you can look at me!”

The family hustled away. But Lowery-Hart is, in fact, a college president. And he was on the streets to find a better way to lead a school where poverty intrudes into the classroom every day.

Lowery-Hart is the president of Amarillo College, a community college on the Texas Panhandle, and he had driven seven hours down to Waco to participate in a two-day, two-night simulation of homelessness run by a religious charity, in the hopes of more deeply relating to his many students who live in poverty. “Just having a food pantry like we do isn’t enough,” Lowery-Hart said in a video diary recorded by a friend that Sunday morning last February. He was flat on the grass, still burrowed inside his sleeping bag as if fending off the trials yet to come that day. Then, in a kind of a forlorn chant, he added, “It isn’t enough, we’re not doing enough, we have to do more.”

Lowery-Hart was already doing a lot more than running a food pantry at Amarillo College. The school of 10,000 students has an emergency fund that can cut a check within hours to cover the car-repair or water bill that could push a student to drop a class—or quit school for good. The school employs social workers who counsel students through these types of financial crises, runs a legal-aid clinic, and offers free mental-health counseling (the latter is standard at private colleges but spotty in the community-college world). Last fall it debuted a low-cost day-care center that keeps its doors open 14 hours a day to serve student parents with jobs in the early morning or evening; students who qualify for a state subsidy only pay $5 a week. Tutoring is available evenings and weekends.

Administrators are working on an alert system that flags incoming students who are at high risk of struggling academically, and then assigns professors to reach out to them before trouble hits. In the fall, staff called and emailed over 800 students who had at least one dependent and a family income under $19,600 a year—less than half of what would be a living wage for a single parent or a one-income household with a child—to make sure they know about the school’s support services. In its quest to improve student performance, the college is questioning academic traditions as fundamental as the length of a semester, which has been cut in half for many classes.

Salvador Casanova walks across the Amarillo College campus. (Adria Malcolm)

What separates Amarillo College from most of its peers is not any particular program, but how much it focuses on addressing the effects of poverty. The school and Lowery-Hart are being watched by college leaders all over the country, because finding realistic solutions for student poverty could be transformative for the U.S. higher-education system.

Among the poorest 40 percent of Americans, only 12 percent of young people born in the 1980s earned a bachelor’s degree by age 25. But a college degree is not optional for most good jobs in today’s economy, so more and more students from low-income backgrounds are pursuing higher education, and they are most likely to end up at community colleges. Despite President Trump’s recent comments that “We do not know what a ‘community college’ means,” these institutions comprise more than 40 percent of the country’s undergraduate population. While most community colleges were built after World War II to support the needs of the modern workforce—which would of course improve students’ livelihoods as a result—they weren’t explicitly designed to relieve poverty. Yet by default, given the limited reach of programs such as welfare and food stamps, community college has become one of America’s largest and most important anti-poverty programs.

It is the students in poverty who are taking the biggest gamble.

The federal Pell grant for low-income students maxes out at about $5,900 a year, which is usually more than enough to cover community-college tuition but too little to live on. (Starting in July, the maximum will go up to $6,095.) And the gap between a Pell grant’s value and the cost of living grows bigger every year. The result is that many students are struggling with basic survival. A 2017 survey found that 42 percent of community-college students nationally experienced food insecurity within the past month—which could mean missing meals altogether or not being able to afford balanced meals—while 12 percent were considered homeless at some point in the previous year. Among Amarillo College students who took the same survey, 54 percent had experienced food insecurity within the past month, and 11 percent had been homeless in the past year. So the student body is not significantly needier than those of many other institutions, but the college leadership’s interest in highlighting the extent of the need is much more unusual.

Beyond food insecurity, many students lurch from crisis to crisis, semester by semester. That’s part of why community-college graduation rates are so low, with only four in 10 students earning a degree within six years.  


Related Story

The 9.9 Percent Is the New American Aristocracy


A number of signs suggest Amarillo College is doing better by its students than it did just a few years ago. The graduation rate is rising, more students are studying full-time, and students of color are doing as well as white students, according to Collin Witherspoon, the college’s executive director of analytics and institutional research. But some of Lowery-Hart’s biggest bets have yet to prove effective, and there are at least a few professors who question whether the fixation on poverty is in students’ best interests.

After all, as the college experiments, it is the students in poverty who are taking the biggest gamble. They might be forgoing wages they could earn if they weren’t in class, eating into their six years of lifetime Pell Grant eligibility on a semester they may not finish, or even taking out loans—although the latter is quite rare among Amarillo College students—that they will struggle to repay if they end up dropping out. Ending up worse off than when they started is a real possibility.

Mandi Wheeler, a math professor, loves serving in a coaching program for students who arrive at the college from the two low-income high schools in Amarillo—as an example, she recalled a young man she coached who arrived “scared to death” but soon blossomed in calculus.

But she questions Lowery-Hart’s view that the college itself can be the route to stability for students even in the throes of crisis. Wheeler recalled one homemaker with young children who came to the college in pursuit of employability, soon after leaving an abusive husband. At the beginning of the semester, according to Wheeler, the mother was staying in a shelter and had no computer.

Wheeler was relieved when the woman withdrew from her class in order to take a new job. “They can’t focus on learning the quadratic formula when they don’t know where their next meal is coming from,” she said. “My heart breaks for so many of those students that do have stuff going on … And then here I am saying, ‘Where is your homework?’”

But colleges need to stick with this type of student if they are truly committed to helping lift families out of poverty, according to Sara Goldrick-Rab, a sociologist at Temple University. Goldrick-Rab, the lead researcher on the survey identifying high rates of hunger and homelessness in college, has been a major force in drawing attention to the phenomenon of student poverty.

Goldrick-Rab and a co-author are planning to publish a case study in June about Amarillo College, which drew her attention as one of the few places she’s been able to find that’s taking a systemic approach to fighting poverty. The report, Goldrick-Rab said, will highlight practices that other colleges should consider adopting. For example, she praised Amarillo’s emergency aid fund for making grants within hours and without red tape, which she said makes it more useful to students in crisis. The fund asks for documentation of the expense a student needs help with—a lease or utility bill, for example—but doesn’t require an application.

While emergency aid is spreading in popularity, some colleges worry about “frequent flyers” who keep coming back for more help. Goldrick-Rab called that “naïve to what poverty is.”

“If they really get it, if really there are ‘no excuses,’ when they have impoverished students, then they have to roll with all those punches,” she said, referring to the name of an Amarillo community initiative to address low educational attainment, “No Limits No Excuses.” She continued, “It is not easy, and they don’t get an immediate success story wrapped up with a bow.”

Yet the potential payoff is more than worthwhile, Goldrick-Rab added, noting that a college degree can be transformative for an entire family. Even for students who don’t go on to get a bachelor’s degree, an associate’s degree makes a real difference in earnings, worth thousands of dollars a year. And when parents get more education, their children tend to do better, not only in school but in all sorts of health outcomes.

And if not college, what is the path for the students whom Amarillo College is trying to lift out of poverty? People can’t securely raise a family on a minimum-wage job. In an economy that increasingly has made a college degree practically a prerequisite for decent work, what other choice is there?


A few months after his weekend living “homeless” in Waco, Lowery-Hart was trying to identify the “more” that he’d declared from his sleeping bag the college needed to do. So he asked his director of social services, Jordan Herrera, to set up a lunch with some students who had experienced homelessness.

Lowery-Hart frequently asks students for advice. Once a week or so he sits down to converse with a few of them at random, buying them sandwiches from the Chick-fil-A food truck that replaced the cafeteria shuttered several rounds of budget cuts ago. On this particular warm day last May, he had club sandwiches and iced tea waiting in his office for two students. Justin Allen was a 32-year-old single father who was about to graduate from a dental-assistant program. The college had put him and his two kids up in a motel for a few weeks, after his father kicked them out over a money dispute.

Across the president’s conference table was Alicia Pruett, a 44-year-old mother of six, who had the words “A Roller Coaster Ride” tattooed in curvy script down her left leg, originally a commentary on life with her husband but one that was proving equally germane to her college career. That she was still enrolled, after what she’d been through the last few months, already made her, in one sense, a success for Amarillo College’s poverty initiative. Before signing up for Amarillo College in fall 2016, Pruett had been a stay-at-home mom, and before that had worked as a Comcast customer-service rep and a cook. She was seeking a degree in communications, hoping she could one day do PR for an adoption or foster agency. The main goal, though, was to give her kids a better life.

“I’m going to be able to give my kids everything that every parent wants to give to their kids,” said Pruett, who lives with her husband and their five children, and also has an older son who is in her ex-husband’s custody. “Which is a good birthday, a good home, the opportunity to be able to do things, to take vacations.”

But not long after Pruett started school, her husband Mike fell out of work. A long-time roofer, he suffered from back problems but, she said, was turned down for disability benefits. When he took under-the-table manual-labor jobs out of desperation, he said, he was repeatedly cheated out of his paycheck.

The couple fell behind on their bills. A professor referred Pruett to the Advocacy and Resource Center, or ARC, the nucleus of the college’s poverty work, where a small team including Herrera helps hundreds of students each semester through their financial and life crises, marshals the college’s own resources, and hustles to connect students to every possible community or government program.

Alicia Pruett is a second-year student at Amarillo College, a full-time employee at Sam's Club, a wife, and is raising five children. (Adria Malcolm)

Pruett took advantage of the food pantry, and the college emergency fund covered half a month’s rent and some utility bills. Herrera put Pruett in touch with a local church that also chipped in. More importantly, she helped Pruett get on the waitlist for a Section 8 housing program that provides affordable rentals to college students with families. Months later, just before Easter, the housing program offered Pruett’s family a four-bedroom house for $1,000 a month. But when they gave notice to their current landlord, she put them out on the street with three days’ notice, even though they wouldn’t get the new place for a couple of weeks. Herrera tried to find shelter beds for the family, but no one could offer space for a family of seven. So the college paid for them to stay about 10 days in a Travelodge.

By the time Pruett found herself in Lowery-Hart’s office, she and her family had been in the new house for a few weeks. Pruett and her husband were both interviewing for jobs at Sam’s Club after Pruett’s math professor put in a good word for them. Things were falling into place.

Pruett told Lowery-Hart that she would graduate, “no two ways about it,” and that seemed like a decent bet. She earned a 3.75 GPA in her first semester, she told the president. When I later followed her to class, I learned that she was a star in her math section, beckoned over frequently by her classmates to explain problems.

But her story would be, for a long time to come, more of a cautionary tale than one of clear-cut success. Just the day before she showed up for the lunch in Lowery-Hart’s office, she learned that her aging Chevy Suburban, the family’s only means of transportation, was being repossessed. She was going to ask Herrera for help getting it back, but she had an even more pressing concern, which she kept to herself as she chatted with the president: She didn’t know how she was going to feed her family dinner that night. The Pruetts were receiving $1,022 a month in food stamps, but with three meals a day for seven people, that works out to $1.60 per meal per person. They had a few days to go before the next month’s benefits would replenish. And their bank account held just $17.

When it was time to head home and face dinner, Pruett set out from campus on foot, winding her way first past mansions with rose gardens and fountains near campus, then under a couple of highway overpasses and finally to her down-at-the-heels neighborhood not far from the city’s business district. In addition to the laptop in her backpack, she was lugging a pack of diapers she picked up in Herrera's office. But she couldn’t handle carrying groceries home as well, so she hadn't taken anything from the food pantry.

Mike and their kids, who ranged in age from 2 to 11, were in the yard, attacking the ground with hoes in preparation for a garden where they hoped to grow their own vegetables. Nine-year-old Lena, who aspires to be a cook like her mom, had blueberry bread in the oven.

Pruett stepped into the pantry to survey her options. There was Hamburger Helper, but no hamburger. Tuna fish, but no bread to make sandwiches. Some beans, but the kids don’t like beans. She decided she would ask Mike to go out and get some hamburger so they could have spaghetti with meat sauce.

In between snuggling her two youngest kids and refereeing a video game the older ones were playing, Pruett described to me some of the ways that the family’s financial crisis had impinged on her academic life. They couldn’t afford internet service, so sometimes she would sit in her car at night in a college parking lot to use the campus Wi-Fi, piling on jackets to withstand the cold temperatures of nights on the high plains. Her GPA tumbled. She dropped a media course she loved because she was embarrassed to go to campus when the water was turned off and she couldn’t shower.

That evening last May when they were scrambling to come up with dinner, Mike came back with hotdogs, buns, and canned chili to make chili dogs. Because they had less than $20 in their bank account, he could only get a $10 bill from the ATM, not enough for the hamburger. Pruett spread ketchup and mustard on the kids’ hot dogs in loops so artful they betrayed her professional kitchen experience. The kids came to the table, and Lena and her 7-year-old brother, Robert, said “cheers” as they clinked their hot dogs together.


The Texas Panhandle is a windswept prairie 3,600 feet above sea level and bigger than West Virginia. Its heart is Amarillo, a pancake-flat city of around 200,000 bounded by cattle ranches and corn, cotton, and wheat fields that is in danger of growing poorer. In the view of many civic leaders, the community is overly dependent on meatpacking and trucking as well as on the motels and fast-food joints hugging Interstate I-40, the ribbon of highway tethering the vast Panhandle to the rest of the United States.

Here, the kindness of close-knit church communities meets the bootstraps mentality of pioneer days. In A Strong West Wind, her memoir of growing up in Amarillo in the 1950s and 1960s, the writer Gail Caldwell described the way the people of the Panhandle were hardened by ferocious hail storms, tornadoes, and even blizzards. “There are no trees or rises of the land to break the wind,” she wrote, “and so the cattle can breathe the snow, in its horizontal flight, and drown. People, too, have been brought to their knees for generations by this kind of weather: In the midst of so much nothingness and force, it's difficult not to feel beholden to some larger design.”

Amarillo, Texas (Adria Malcolm)

Over a decade ago, Lowery-Hart got involved with a community initiative to to get a handle on the threats to Amarillo’s prosperity. The conclusion: lack of education, with only a third of adults in the city earning any kind of college degree, and a shortage of high-skilled job opportunities meant a perpetual brain drain.  

At the time, Lowery-Hart was an administrator at the local university, West Texas A&M. He became convinced that he could do something to help the prospects of his region, but more so at Amarillo College, where seven in 10 students are the first in their family to go to college and four in 10 are Latino. He often cites a statistic in the Harvard economist Edward Glaeser’s book Triumph of the City—that as the share of the population with college degrees increases by 10 percent, per-capita gross metropolitan product rises by 22 percent.

He eventually applied to Amarillo College for the position of vice president of academic affairs. To this day, he is sometimes brought to the verge of tears when talking about the challenges his students face. The reasons for his deep feelings harken back to his childhood in a small town outside Lubbock, when he took refuge in school from home life with an abusive, alcoholic father. Teachers “loved me even when I was unable to love myself,” Lowery-Hart told me. “I’ve always been fighting for that student, because that student was me.”

Students don’t get the same level of public support that previous generations did.

When Lowery-Hart arrived at Amarillo College in 2010, he began asking why the graduation rate, which that year was just 9 percent, was so low. He expected to hear students blame academic troubles—poor high-school preparation, perhaps, or inconvenient class schedules. Surveys and focus groups revealed an entirely different set of issues, all related to poverty: food, housing, utility bills, transportation.

Budget constraints have posed the biggest challenge to this work. Community colleges receive less than half the government funding that public research universities do, and, echoing trends in other states, Texas is spending 15 percent less on higher education than it was before the recession. Amarillo College lost a total of $3.5 million in state funding for instruction in the last two state budgets, partially because of an enrollment dip, and cut dozens of staff positions a couple of years ago.

The largest source of the college’s nearly $66 million budget this academic year was tuition and fees, which brought in $23 million, including financial aid awards to students from state and federal governments. The next biggest chunk was support from local taxes, about $21.3 million, with state support third at $13.5 million. However, other than salaries for social workers, the poverty work is largely funded by other means. A private foundation created in 1961 to handle donations to the college, the Amarillo College Foundation, bankrolls the emergency-aid fund, with a contribution of $60,000 this year. Other gifts and grants have helped with bits and pieces of the work. For example, a federal Perkins grant supports transportation and childcare for adult students in career and technical programs.

The college is typical in depending on a combination of tuition and state and local support, with grants from foundations and gifts from local benefactors coming in to support specific initiatives. A gift from a local bank, for example, funded a renovation project that made space for the ARC. Perhaps less typical is that the Amarillo College Foundation is relatively well off with $43 million in assets, and it gave the college and its students over $3 million for the 2015-2016 school year. The foundation for many years was focused on raising money for scholarships, according to Kathy Dowdy, its co-executive director. But in recent years, she said, the board has embraced Lowery-Hart’s emphasis on combating poverty. The money they raise—largely from local families and businesses—is increasingly targeted at helping the college offer support to keep students from dropping out. “We have these students with 3.8 GPAs who all of a sudden find themselves homeless, and if we’re not equipped to help them, we’ve lost the possibility of changing somebody’s life,” Dowdy said.

Students, meanwhile, don’t get the same level of government support that previous generations did. In 1975, a federal Pell Grant covered 79 percent of the cost of attending a four-year public college. Today, it covers just 29 percent. At the same time, more college students look on paper like Alicia Pruett—older, poor, underrepresented minorities. In the absence of more commitment from the states and federal government to higher education, leaders at many community colleges have come to the same realizations as Lowery-Hart—that educating their students effectively requires not just good academic programs, but also a host of supports to tackle poverty. At Patrick Henry Community College in rural Virginia, a scholarship program awards cars, donated by dealerships, as scholarships to a few students each year who need them to get to class. Houston Community College is offering scholarships for groceries. Tacoma Community College in Washington and the local housing authority provide housing vouchers to homeless students. Nineteen schools recently worked with a community-college-reform group called Achieving the Dream to change campus culture around these issues. Poverty is a growing concern, as well, at four-year colleges, where 36 percent of students are estimated to experience food insecurity.

Most colleges, however, have just a discrete poverty program or two—the food pantry, most likely, or the emergency aid. Lowery-Hart’s ardor for the topic has made Amarillo College stand out considerably.

“Quit wishing for a different kind of student. We want to be the right college for the students we have.”

Lowery-Hart was named president of the college in 2014, and over time, he developed what he calls the college’s theory of change. “Life-barrier removal” plus relationships “equals completion,” he says—meaning that if the college can help a student overcome a life barrier, perhaps by connecting them to housing or food stamps, and also offer a meaningful personal relationship, the student will be more likely to graduate.

Sometimes he forms that relationship himself. One day in September, I accompanied him on his Chick-fil-A gambit to listen to students’ concerns, and he approached three young people chatting in a lounge. It turned out only one of them, a 19-year-old named Julie, was enrolled in the college, but she was facing possible eviction and thinking about dropping out to get a second job. Her two friends had just tagged along with her to campus. Alexandra, 18, said she’d recently gotten clean after her mother kicked her out. Eddie, 20, had a young child and had spent time in jail. Both said they wanted to go to college soon, but neither felt ready quite yet.

Lowery-Hart listened to their life stories, then quickly made his pitch: He urged Alexandra and Eddie to sign up for classes that very day. Then he spent 45 minutes shepherding them around to meet advisors. He brought Julie to the ARC, then tried to find out whether there might be an on-campus job for her.

Later that September afternoon, Lowery-Hart told a group of staff that Alex and Eddie are the future of Amarillo. Whether they have a criminal record, or children of their own, or doubts about whether they can succeed, those not traditionally viewed as “college material” are, to him, exactly who the college should be serving.  

“Quit wishing for a different kind of student,” he said. “We want to be the right college for the students we have.”


When Amarillo College renovated the student-commons building at the center of its main campus two years ago, it drew together a variety of programs to create the ARC, which it set up on the first floor, surrounded by glass windows. Some staff worried that students would feel too exposed to come in to use the food pantry or talk to caseworkers, but demand for the ARC’s services has grown dramatically. Herrera, the social-services director, who presides over the ARC, believes the prime location has taken some of the stigma out of asking for help.

Inside is a small suite of offices adorned with succulent plants and Mexican folk art, the neat food pantry, a supply of toiletries and toilet paper, and a clothing closet. Herrera and her staff have gone from restocking the pantry twice a month to twice a week.

Herrera is gregarious, and prone to talking about her work in the language of blessings and prayers. She is herself an Amarillo College graduate and grew up helping her mom, who left school after the sixth grade, run a small janitorial service. The rest of her team also come from backgrounds that help them understand the lives of students they help, including a social worker who was the first in her family to graduate from high school, and an assistant who is a “Dreamer” and spent a year saving waitressing tips in a shoebox to pay for college, because her undocumented status made her ineligible for financial aid.

On my visits to Amarillo, I’ve walked into the ARC to find the assistant on the phone helping students who are parents get reimbursement for babysitting bills, which is available through a federal grant. I’ve heard Herrera on the phone advising a student where to go for affordable car repair. And I’ve seen students dropping off plastic bags filled with donations for the food pantry, for which many professors offer extra credit.

“That’s why social mobility is so hard. The bottom is extremely sticky.”

I visited the ARC with Pruett when she came in, the morning after the chili dog dinner, to find out whether Herrera was going to be able to help her get her car out of repossession. She owed $950 to cover payments, plus $250 in fees. Herrera had done “a little bit of begging,” she said, and the school would indeed be able to write a check—directly to the repo shop—for the $1,200. It would be the last money the college could help with for a while.

The fact that Pruett and her husband were both expecting to start jobs helped make the case, Herrera said. Not to mention that they wouldn’t be able to get to work without the truck.

Pruett did a little dance in her chair. Then they discussed what she could do to raise her GPA back up again.

There is something shocking about a cash-strapped community college shelling out $1,200 to help a student get her car out of repo—on top of the motel bill, on top of the water bill, on top of the help with rent. Certainly, the unusual level of support the emergency fund gets from the Amarillo College Foundation is what makes this possible. But this kind of money still pales in comparison to what wealthier colleges spend as a matter of course on all their students. Community colleges spend less than $1,400 per student each year on all non-academic student services, a category that covers everything from mental-health and career counseling to support for student groups and intramural sports. That’s compared to almost $4,500 per student at private four-year colleges. Of students who got emergency aid from Amarillo College in the fall of 2016, according to the college, 57 percent were still in school a year later, compared to 48 percent of the overall campus population—impressive given that the emergency-aid recipients are more likely to have major distractions in their lives.

When I told Goldrick-Rab, the expert on poverty in college, about Pruett’s troubles, the professor said, “Poverty is going to try to knock her down at every turn and every month.”

“That’s why social mobility is so hard,” she continued. “The bottom is extremely sticky—that’s how we put it in sociology.” But Goldrick-Rab added, “the return to this is not just the return to one woman—it’s the return to her and her five kids. All the research shows that students like her might take a really long time to finish school, and at the same time, that degree will really pay off for her.”

When Pruett left Herrera’s office with the news that she would be able to get her truck back, she headed over to the Math Outreach Center to study for her final. Apart from its colorful grandfather clock that tutors built out of K’nex toys, the center is a drab room full of computers and faux wood tables. Yet during my visits to Amarillo, it was the most bustling place on the main campus.

Scattered around the room were several of Pruett’s classmates, as well as a Navy veteran in his mid-70s who comes every day as he plugs away at his degree, and a tutor who was illiterate at 13 when he came to the U.S. as a Rwandan refugee. He was now about to graduate and pursue his BA in mechanical engineering.

Many students make this their study space of choice, but tutoring is also required for students who earn below a C in certain classes, and data suggest that the assistance can make a major difference. That’s the conclusion of Witherspoon, the college’s executive director of analytics and institutional research. As a former math professor and software developer, Witherspoon can do the kind of sophisticated data analytics for which many colleges pay private companies hundreds of thousands of dollars. And Lowery-Hart—like many of his peers—puts great stock in using data to guide decisions.

Perhaps the college’s most dramatic change precipitated by data is the transition from traditional 16-week classes to 8-week mini terms. Amarillo students across the board are getting better grades in the shorter, more intense terms. One theory is that the shorter the term, the fewer days and weeks there are when a student could get thrown off, as Pruett did, because their water gets turned off, or their car breaks down, or a relative gets sick.

Some professors, however, think the eight-week terms are a big mistake. They say that students can't grapple effectively with difficult concepts in such a short period. The data only look good, the critics say, because instructors are taking pity on drowning students and offering them extra-credit opportunities, letting them rewrite papers, or simply inflating grades.

“These kids don’t know how to read a textbook, they don’t know how to study, they don’t know how to write … and then we’re rushing them through,” said Deborah Harding, who teaches psychology and sociology at the school. “I think it’s a terrible way to learn.”

In a society that offers so little support for a community-college education ... there’s only so much even visionary college leaders can do.

The concerns about grade inflation raise some uncomfortable questions about the “No Excuses” philosophy. Lowery-Hart says that students have to hold up their end of the bargain and earn a fair grade, but this remains a source of confusion among the faculty.

That said, there are a number of signs that Amarillo College is generally doing a better job serving students than it used to. For example, its three-year federal graduation rate for first-time, full-time students was 9 percent when Lowery-Hart joined the college in 2010. It then hovered around 15 percent for several years and most recently spiked up to 23 percent. (The national average for community colleges is 24 percent.) Other aspects of the college’s poverty agenda lack evidence of systemic improvement, including the ARC. The college can point to students for whom help from the ARC clearly made the difference between dropping out and graduating, including Justin Allen, the single dad who was at the lunch with Pruett and Lowery-Hart. But Witherspoon’s efforts to identify a broad impact through data have come up short.  

Goldrick-Rab, the Temple University professor, is planning to conduct a new evaluation in the fall. It's possible, she said, that the ARC’s social workers, pantry, and emergency funds aren’t making a big difference in students’ lives. It's also possible that they are helping students, but it's difficult to prove without an expensive randomized experiment.

Lowery-Hart and his colleagues also know that, despite the earnestness of the “No Excuses” pledge, there will be failures. The gold standard in community-college reform today is a program that was pioneered at the City University of New York called Accelerated Study in Associate Programs (ASAP). It offers students a package of supports including intensive advising, scholarships, and free MetroCards for the New York subway. It’s also very expensive—over $11,000 per student over three years—which is why it has yet to be widely adopted. At CUNY, ASAP has about doubled the three-year graduation rate—but only got it up to 52 percent.

In a society that offers so little support for a community-college education, and where growing up in poverty guarantees immense disadvantages, there’s only so much even visionary college leaders can do.

Just weeks after getting her truck out of repo and starting a part-time job in the cafe at Sam’s Club, Pruett called 911 with an attack of excruciating abdominal pain. It turned out she had a perforated bowel and a raging infection. She had an emergency colostomy, and then wore a colostomy bag the entire summer while the infection healed.

She had to put school on hold the first half of the summer, and missed weeks of work. The second job at Sam’s for her husband, Mike, didn’t materialize, he believes because of his felony record from years earlier. Once again without income, the family went without gas and water for parts of the summer, barbecuing and hauling ice chests from the neighbors.

When she went back to school after a second surgery in the fall, a new crisis hit. A year earlier, Mike had written a bad check at a grocery store when, Pruett says, they were desperate for food and diapers. Prosecutors offered him a plea deal, but only if he first paid back the $340 he owed the store. Now Mike faced a deadline to come up with the $200 he hadn’t yet repaid —or face a jail sentence of up to six months.

Robert Love, the first assistant district attorney in Randall County, said his office does not want to send “hot check” offenders to jail, but rather wants them to pay restitution to their victims. But Alicia and Mike were broke, and neither had any family members in a position to give them cash, so they were convinced Mike was headed for jail. There was no way Alicia could stay in college without Mike pitching in with the kids, so I expected that she would check whether the ARC could help.

The Pruetts at home (Adria Malcolm)

But perhaps she had taken it too much to heart when Herrera had warned her in the spring that the truck was the last thing the college could help with for awhile. At the same time, like many low-income and first-generation students, she has no trace of the sense of entitlement of a stereotypical college student. “The world doesn't owe you crap,” she told me. Over the course of at least a month, Pruett avoided asking Herrera or the other social workers for help. She stopped by the ARC now and then to ask for an emergency gas card or to use the pantry, but when they asked how she was, she told them, wryly, that she was “living the dream.”

“We have students that use the food pantry, for example, and then they bring food back, they'll try to replenish it.”

Pruett told me that she just kept picturing a single parent who needed help even more than she did. “That's where guilt starts to play on me, because I think I'm taking away from another child,” she said.

In the end, Pruett did confide in Herrera, and the school helped out with two utility bills. That allowed Alicia and Mike to scrape together the $200 to repay the grocery store and keep Mike out of jail.

It was a reprieve, for sure. There was no stability in the offing, however. Mike’s plea deal left him owing about another $350 in court costs. Alicia Pruett’s laptop was at the pawnshop. Still, shortly after that crisis passed, she told me she had no doubt that college was the right choice. She had a plan for when she gets her associate's degree—to go on to pursue a bachelor's degree at Louisiana State University. “I try to tell everybody that going back to school, next to being a mom, is probably the best thing I've ever done,” Pruett said.

As the near-catastrophes have piled up in the year I’ve known Pruett, I haven’t always been able to envision that rosy outcome—the diploma, the great job. In March, the family was facing possible eviction after Pruett, who was coping with the deaths of three family members, missed a deadline to submit paperwork to the affordable housing program. I haven’t been able to reach her since then, and Herrera hasn’t heard from her recently, either. So I don’t even know what happened, except that she did finish her spring semester, according to Herrera.

Could she stay in school if her family lost their home, again? It feels like everything could unravel, leaving her with nothing to show for two years of college.

I mentioned Pruett’s struggles to Lowery-Hart at the time when she thought Mike was headed for jail, and his first concern was that she didn't feel comfortable asking for more help.

“That's my biggest fear,” he said. “We have students that use the food pantry, for example, and then they bring food back, they'll try to replenish it. Even when you talk to students that have been ultimately successful, there is that feeling like, ‘oh, I require too much of you.’”

Lowery-Hart’s voice was cracking; he was on the verge of tears. He furrowed his brow as he typed a text message to ask Herrera about Pruett's situation.

I then mentioned to him the concern among some faculty that the college runs the risk of giving troubled students false hope.

“Without us there is no hope,” Lowery-Hart said. “I’ll take the risk of false hope, because then there’s still a chance. But no hope is no chance at all.”



from Hacker News https://ift.tt/YV9WJO
via IFTTT

Why Rich Kids Are So Good at the Marshmallow Test

https://ift.tt/2Jay3RE


The marshmallow test is one of the most famous pieces of social-science research: Put a marshmallow in front of a child, tell her that she can have a second one if she can go 15 minutes without eating the first one, and then leave the room. Whether she’s patient enough to double her payout is supposedly indicative of a willpower that will pay dividends down the line, at school and eventually at work. Passing the test is, to many, a promising signal of future success.

But a new study, published last week, has cast the whole concept into doubt. The researchers—NYU’s Tyler Watts and UC Irvine’s Greg Duncan and Hoanan Quan—restaged the classic marshmallow test, which was developed by the Stanford psychologist Walter Mischel in the 1960s. Mischel and his colleagues administered the test and then tracked how children went on to fare later in life. They described the results in a 1990 study, which suggested that delayed gratification had huge benefits, including on such measures as standardized test scores.

Watts and his colleagues were skeptical of that finding. The original results were based on studies that included fewer than 90 children—all enrolled in a preschool on Stanford’s campus. In restaging the experiment, Watts and his colleagues thus adjusted the experimental design in important ways: The researchers used a sample that was much larger—more than 900 children—and also more representative of the general population in terms of race, ethnicity, and parents’ education. The researchers also, when analyzing their test’s results, controlled for certain factors—such as the income of a child’s household—that might explain children’s ability to delay gratification and their long-term success.

Ultimately, the new study finds limited support for the idea that being able to delay gratification leads to better outcomes. Instead, it suggests that the capacity to hold out for a second marshmallow is shaped in large part by a child’s social and economic background—and, in turn, that that background, not the ability to delay gratification, is what’s behind kids’ long-term success.

The marshmallow test isn’t the only experimental study that has recently failed to hold up under closer scrutiny. Some scholars and journalists have gone so far to suggest that psychology is in the midst of a “replication crisis.” In the case of this new study, specifically, the failure to confirm old assumptions pointed to an important truth: that circumstances matter more in shaping children’s lives than Mischel and his colleagues seemed to appreciate.

This new paper found that among kids whose mothers had a college degree, those who waited for a second marshmallow did no better in the long run—in terms of standardized test scores and mothers’ reports of their children’s behavior—than those who dug right in. Similarly, among kids whose mothers did not have college degrees, those who waited did no better than those who gave in to temptation, once other factors like household income and the child’s home environment at age 3 (evaluated according to a standard research measure that notes, for instance, the number of books that researchers observed in the home and how responsive mothers were to their children in the researchers’ presence) were taken into account. For those kids, self-control alone couldn’t overcome economic and social disadvantages.

The failed replication of the marshmallow test does more than just debunk the earlier notion; it suggests other possible explanations for why poorer kids would be less motivated to wait for that second marshmallow. For them, daily life holds fewer guarantees: There might be food in the pantry today, but there might not be tomorrow, so there is a risk that comes with waiting. And even if their parents promise to buy more of a certain food, sometimes that promise gets broken out of financial necessity.

Meanwhile, for kids who come from households headed by parents who are better educated and earn more money, it’s typically easier to delay gratification: Experience tends to tell them that adults have the resources and financial stability to keep the pantry well stocked. And even if these children don’t delay gratification, they can trust that things will all work out in the end—that even if they don’t get the second marshmallow, they can probably count on their parents to take them out for ice cream instead.

There’s plenty of other research that sheds further light on the class dimension of the marshmallow test. The Harvard economist Sendhil Mullainathan and the Princeton behavioral scientist Eldar Shafir wrote a book in 2013, Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much, that detailed how poverty can lead people to opt for short-term rather than long-term rewards; the state of not having enough can change the way people think about what’s available now. In other words, a second marshmallow seems irrelevant when a child has reason to believe that the first one might vanish.

Some more-qualitative sociological research also can provide insight here. For example, Ranita Ray, a sociologist at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, recently wrote a book describing how many teenagers growing up in poverty work long hours in poorly paid jobs to support themselves and their families. Yet, despite sometimes not being able to afford food, the teens still splurge on payday, buying things like McDonald’s or new clothes or hair dye. Similarly, in my own research with Brea Perry, a sociologist (and colleague of mine) at Indiana University, we found that low-income parents are more likely than more-affluent parents to give in to their kids’ requests for sweet treats.

These findings point to the idea that poorer parents try to indulge their kids when they can, while more-affluent parents tend to make their kids wait for bigger rewards. Hair dye and sweet treats might seem frivolous, but purchases like these are often the only indulgences poor families can afford. And for poor children, indulging in a small bit of joy today can make life feel more bearable, especially when there’s no guarantee of more joy tomorrow.



from Hacker News https://ift.tt/YV9WJO
via IFTTT

How to Get Your Clingy Significant Other to Give You Some Alone Time

https://ift.tt/2snTeIK

This week we have a newlywed woman who’s desperate to get some time to herself. Is there a way for her to ask her husband to leave her alone? Will her husband finally let her get her game on in peace?

Some people have problems that require delicate advice from a qualified professional. Others just need a random guy on the internet to kick ‘em in the teeth (with honesty, that is). I’m the latter. Welcome back to Tough Love.

Note: I’m not a therapist or health professional of any kind. People ask for my advice and I give it to them. End of transaction. If you have a problem with it, feel free to file a formal complaint here. Now that that’s out of the way, let’s get on with it:

Hey Patrick!

I’ve been with my recently-wed husband for about six years now, and we’ve been living in a small bedroom for about five years of our relationship—so there was little room to have our own time. All five of those years he had been unemployed, so every time I came home from work, he was there. This left me with no alone time. He has a job now, but he’s temporarily working only one day a week, so I’m back to him being home all the time. I understand that he’s alone the whole time I’m at work, so I try to spend time with him. But every time I ask him what he wants to do it’s either “idk” or “sex” (sometimes joking, sometimes not).

I like playing video games a lot, it’s a way for me to unwind after I get home from work. I even made sure I found someone who also likes to play video games so he would understand when I want to binge play. I’ve tried to play video games with him, but he’s gotten bored of the games I like to play. I’ve tried to play the games he likes, but since he’s home more than I am he surpasses the level or part of the story I’m in, finishes the game then doesn’t want to play it anymore.

Every time I bring up the fact that normal couples don’t spend all of their available time together, and I should have more me time to myself, he goes on the defense and basically says he’s a horrible husband and yada yada, so we get nowhere. What do I do?

Sincerely,
Barely Alone

Hey Barely Alone:

You’re right, while it varies from person to person, most couples don’t spend every waking moment together, nor do they want to. Having alone time is important. It gives us time to unwind, reflect, and it allows us to miss the person we love a little bit. Even an evening away from one another can be enough to remind you how much you like being with that person, both mentally and physically.

Advertisement

Sharing a single room is tough since it basically makes it impossible to do your own thing. Moving somewhere with more than one room would probably help some, but the real issue here is your husband’s dependency on you. You could almost replace “my husband” in your letter with “my dog” and it would make sense—almost. I mean, what’s sexier than a guy who sits around all day doing jack shit, playing the games you’re supposed to be playing together, clinging onto you the moment you get home like some sort of emotionally-stunted parasite, then making you feel guilty when you want to do something on your own? Sorry ladies, this one’s taken.

I don’t know why he wasn’t working for so long and is barely working now, but unless there’s something keeping him from doing so (injury, illness, etc.), he should probably work more. Not because he needs to be the breadwinner—those old family models are bullshit—but because the guy needs something to do that isn’t video games and waiting around for you. He needs to get out of the house and interact with other people, or at least, you know, walk around a little and breathe air that isn’t mostly flatulence and Cheetos dust.

It’s great that you two could potentially play games together, in theory, but I don’t think he actually does want to play with you, BA. He stops playing the games you like out of “boredom,” and doesn’t wait to play his games with you. If he wanted to play those games with you, he’d play something else during the day while he molds and slowly becomes part of the room you live in. And you know what, that’s fine! You don’t need to play games together. In fact, you’re probably better off not playing together in this situation. You need time to yourself to do whatever it is you want to do. Sometimes that will be binging your latest game obsession, and other times that will simply involve being away from him for a little bit.

For starters, urge him to spend time with his friends, in person. If he doesn’t have any, he should get some. Don’t let him become one of those men that has no friends in his life by the time he’s middle-aged. It’s unhealthy, both for your relationship and for him. The same goes for you. Go hang out with some friends or get some. For the love of all that is holy, go spend time with other people—both of you!

Advertisement

The other part of the problem is your schedule, or lack thereof. You need to define things for each other and make boundaries. I know it’s easy to let every night be loosey-goosey and go with the flow, but that makes it harder to do what you want to do. When a night is open and you come home and say, “I just want to play my game for a bit,” it looks like a choice—like you’ve chosen something over him. If you plot things out, playing your games isn’t a spur of the moment choice, it’s part of the plan. So, you should establish a schedule of some kind. Tell him straight up that you’re going to be playing your games on specific nights each week, and that he should plan on occupying himself on those nights. That lets him know ahead of time that his sad puppy act isn’t going to work, so he should make his own plans.

And be sure to make plans together, too. If he knows he’s guaranteed a few nights with you each week, he might lay off and let you do your own thing. But these date plans shouldn’t be all on you. If he wants to hang out and do stuff with you, he should cut the “idk” crap and come up with some of it.


That’s it for this week, but I still have plenty of blunt, honest advice bottled up inside. Tell me, what’s troubling you? Maybe I can help. I probably won’t make you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, but sometimes what you need is some tough love. Ask away in the comments below, or email me at the address you see at the bottom of the page (please include “ADVICE” in the subject line). Or tweet at me with #ToughLove! Also, DO NOT EMAIL ME IF YOU DON’T WANT YOUR REQUEST FEATURED and PLEASE KEEP IT SHORT. I do not have time to respond to everyone just for funsies. ‘Til next time, figure things out for yourself.



from Lifehacker http://lifehacker.com
via IFTTT

Notes From London Value Investor Conference 2018

https://ift.tt/2LCT0pL

The 2018 London Value Investor Conference recently concluded and we've got notes from each speaker's presentation.  Click the links below to go each speaker's pitch.


London Value Investor Conference 2018 Notes


- Dawid Krige (Cederberg Capital): Long Kweichow Moutai (SHA):600519) & Dong-E-E-Jiao (SHE:000423)

- Nigel Waller & Andrew Goodwin (Oldfield Partners): Long Kansai Electric (TYO:9503) & E.ON (ETR:EOAN)

- Ben Preston (Orbis): Long Peabody Energy (NYSE:BTU)

- Nick Kirrage (Schroders): Long Standard Chartered (LON: STAN)

- Mark Asquith (Somerset Capital): Long Pacific Textiles (HKG:1382), Sunny Friend (TPE:8341), Cia Hering (BVMF:HGTX3) 

- Alex Wright (Fidelity Special Situations): Long Pearson (LON:PSON), Bunzl (LON:BNZL)

- Stephen Mitchel & Bryan Pilsworth (Foyston, Gordon & Payne): Long Transcontinental (TSE:TCL) & Walgreens Boots Alliance (NASDAQ:WBA)

- Adrian Warner (Avenir Capital): Long HCA Healthcare (NYSE:HCA)

- Stephen Anness (Invesco Perpetual): Long National Oilwell Varco (NYSE:NOV)

- Alvaro Guzman & Fernando Bernad (Az-Valor Asset Management): Long Buenaventura (NYSE:BVN)

- Jonathan Boyar (Boyar Value Group): Long Axalta Coating Systems (AXTA), Acushnet Holdings (GOLF), Madison Square Garden Networks (MSGN), Franklin Resources (BEN), Howard Hughes (HHC) 

- Mark Pearson (Arcus Investment): Long Asanuma Corp (TYO:1852)



from Market Folly https://ift.tt/NLWANl
via IFTTT

1Password's Updated Password Manager Is a Must-Have for Your Mac

https://ift.tt/2sn7t0j

Mac OS: It’s been a few years since we’ve seen AgileBits release a major update to its killer password management app, 1Password, which is why everyone’s so excited about last week’s debut of 1Password 7. This app should pretty much be a household name at this point, as it’s one of the major password managers we recommend to create and store super-secure passwords and passphrases.

If you aren’t using 1Password, you’re probably instead using an app like LastPass, which allows you to store and synchronize passwords across your devices without paying a monthly fee. Still, $3 each month is hardly a lot to ask for the convenience and security 1Password provides—and all the fun new features you’ll find in its most recent version.


Rather than going over all the cosmetic- and productivity-themed changes in 1Password 7—including a new font, “Courier Prime Bits”—I’m going to focus on the one big one that everyone should use: the 1Password Watchtower. Spoiler alert for those still needing to watch Battlestar Galactica, but the Watchtower, in this case, won’t turn you into a Cylon.

Advertisement

Instead, this section of the app—accessible via the 1Password 7 sidebar—gives you a ton of information about your passwords’ strength. And I don’t mean using 31 different crazy characters in a row to ensure your password is practically unguessable. The Watchtower takes a look at the logins you store in 1Password 7 and lets you know when they’re compromised thanks to the major data breaches that seem to happen, oh, once a week or so.

Squeaky clean... for now.

If you enable the feature, Watchtower can even check your passwords against the database over at haveibeenpwnd.com. If your password appears, and it’s fairly unique, then odds are good that, yes, it’s floating around the Web somewhere with the rest of your login information also attached. In other words, stop using that password, and change it anywhere you have used it.

Nervous chuckle

I also love how Watchtower tells you when you’re reusing passwords for different services. For most people, the list of repeated passwords is likley huge, because we’re all lazy and we like to just use the same hunter2 password for every online account we have. That’s a horrible security practice that almost guarantees your other accounts will get broken into once your “usual” login is leaked from some kind of hack., this is a tricky habit to break, but hopefully 1Password’s new “reused passwords” warning will be all the prodding you need.

Advertisement

The Watchtower can also let you know when your passwords aren’t very strong—as in, easily guessable or brute-forceable—when you’ve saved login information for websites that use the less-secure http:// instead of https://, and when you’re storing passwords for websites that use two-factor authentication but haven’t yet set up the process in 1Password’s app.

While 1Password 7 has plenty of other fun features to play with—including easier-to-manage password vaults, integration with macOS’ Spotlight, and Markdown support for Secure Notes, to name a few—the app’s new Watchtower adds a lot of justification for its cheaper-than-a-coffee monthly fee. If you only care about creating great passwords, storing them in an easy-to-access fashion, and having an easy way to see when it might be time to change them, 1Password 7 is the password management app for you.

1Password 7 | AgileBits


Do you have a Mac app (paid or free) that you absolutely love? Tell us about it: david.murphy@lifehacker.com. 



from Lifehacker http://lifehacker.com
via IFTTT

Self-criticism can take a toll on our minds and bodies

https://ift.tt/2kdkh5K

Why You Should Stop Being So Hard on Yourself

Self-criticism can take a toll on our minds and bodies. It’s time to ease up.

By Charlotte Lieberman

  • May 22, 2018
Image
CreditGetty Images

“We’re all our own worst critics.” Ever heard that one before?

Yes, it’s an obnoxious cliché, but it’s not just self-help fluff. Evolutionary psychologists have studied our natural “negativity bias,” which is that instinct in us all that makes negative experiences seem more significant than they really are.

In other words: We’ve evolved to give more weight to our flaws, mistakes and shortcomings than our successes.

“Self-criticism can take a toll on our minds and bodies,” said Dr. Richard Davidson, founder and director of the Center for Healthy Minds at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he also teaches psychology and psychiatry.

“It can lead to ruminative thoughts that interfere with our productivity, and it can impact our bodies by stimulating inflammatory mechanisms that lead to chronic illness and accelerate aging,” he said.

But that’s not the end of the story. There are ways around our negativity bias, and it is possible to turn self-criticism into opportunities for learning and personal growth. (Really!) But first, let’s talk about how we got here.

O.K., so, why are we so hard on ourselves?

For one, blame evolution.

“Our brains equip us with a mechanism to monitor our mind and our behavior,” Dr. Davidson said, so that when we make errors, we are able to notice the mistake. “In order to recover, we first must notice that a mistake has occurred,” he said.

Just noticing that we’ve deviated from our expectations or goals — whether that’s eating too much or not completing a daily to-do list — isn’t necessarily the same thing as degrading ourselves into a shame spiral. In some cases, like when our safety or moral integrity are on the line, it’s crucial that our brains tell us good from bad so that we learn the right lessons from our experiences.

But sometimes, assigning negative value to our experiences and behaviors can “ensnare” us, Dr. Davidson said, into cycles of unhelpful rumination — like when you lie in bed at night needlessly replaying an awkward interaction or repeatedly revisiting that minor typo. This is where we get into the harmful, counterproductive side of self-criticism.

And it’s that type of self-criticism that can have measurably destructive effects, including symptoms of depression, anxiety, substance abuse, negative self-image and, in a particularly vicious twist, decreased motivation and productivity, according to a study published in the Journal of Psychotherapy Integration. Another study, published in Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, found that self-criticism leads people to becoming preoccupied with failure.

Basically, beating yourself up for finishing only three of the five items on your to-do list is going to make you less likely to finish those last two items — and yet we’re programmed to fall into that pattern.

That seems … conflicting. What should I do?

If this feels a bit like a Catch-22, that’s because it is: We’re evolutionarily predisposed to nitpick at our failings, yet doing so has the opposite of the intended effect.

The solution? It’s called self-compassion: the practice of being kind and understanding to ourselves when confronted with a personal flaw or failure, according to Dr. Kristin Neff, associate professor of psychology at the University of Texas at Austin.

“Research shows that the No. 1 barrier to self-compassion is fear of being complacent and losing your edge,” Dr. Neff said. “And all the research shows that’s not true. It’s just the opposite,” meaning that self-compassion can lead to greater achievement than self-criticism ever could.

In fact, several studies have shown that self-compassion supports motivation and positive change. In a 2016 study researchers found that “self-compassion led to greater personal improvement, in part, through heightened acceptance,” and that focusing on self-compassion “spurs positive adjustment in the face of regrets.”

This is, of course, easier said than done. But core to self-compassion is to avoid getting caught up in our mistakes and obsessing about them until we degrade ourselves, and rather strive to let go of them so we can move onto the next productive action from a place of acceptance and clarity, according to experts.

“When we get caught up in self-referential thinking — the type that happens with rumination, worry, guilt or self-judgment — it activates self-referential brain networks,” said the psychiatrist and neuroscientist Dr. Judson Brewer, director of research at the Center for Mindfulness and associate professor in medicine and psychiatry at University of Massachusetts Medical School.

“When we let go of that mental chatter and go easy on ourselves, these same brain regions quiet down,” he said.

Developing an approach of self-compassion and a willingness to let go starts with practice. So where and how to start?

3 steps to self-compassion

First: Make the choice that you’ll at least try a new approach to thinking about yourself. Commit to treating yourself more kindly — call it letting go of self-judgment, going easier on yourself, practicing self-compassion or whatever resonates most.

To strengthen the muscle, Dr. Brewer suggests “any type of practice that helps us stay in the moment and notice what it feels like to get caught up. See how painful that is compared to being kind to ourselves.”

One of the most portable and evidence-based practices for noticing our thoughts and learning to let them go is meditation. Try mindfulness meditation, which involves anchoring your attention on the breath as a tool to stay present without getting lost in judgments, stories and assumptions.

(Read more: How to Meditate)

You can also interrupt the spiral of negative self-talk by focusing your energy on something external that you care about, which can help you establish perspective and a sense of meaning beyond yourself.

“If you can do things to get yourself out of your own head, like going out and volunteering or doing something nice for a family member, these things can help lift the negative voices that are going on in your head,” said Emily Esfahani Smith, author of “The Power of Meaning: Crafting a Life That Matters.”

The second step to self-compassion is to meet your criticism with kindness. If your inner critic says, “You’re lazy and worthless,” respond with a reminder: “You’re doing your best” or “We all make mistakes.”

But it’s step three, according to Dr. Brewer, that is most important if you want to make the shift sustainable in the long term: Make a deliberate, conscious effort to recognize the difference between how you feel when caught up in self-criticism, and how you feel when you can let go of it.

“That’s where you start to hack the reward-based learning system,” Dr. Brewer said.

A part of our brains called the orbitofrontal cortex is, according to Dr. Brewer, always looking for the “BBO — the bigger better offer.”

“It compares X vs. Y,” he said, “and if Y is more pleasurable or less painful, it will learn to go with Y.”

Think about it this way: How much better might it feel to take a breath after making a mistake, rather than berating ourselves?

“All you have to do is think of going to a friend,” Dr. Neff said. “If you said, ‘I’m feeling fat and lazy and I’m not succeeding at my job,’ and your friend said, ‘Yeah, you’re a loser. Just give up now. You’re disgusting,’ how motivating would that be?”

This is the linchpin of being kinder to ourselves: Practice what it feels like to treat yourself as you might treat a friend. In order to trade in self-abuse for self-compassion, it has to be a regular habit.

So the next time you’re on the verge of falling into a shame spiral, think of how you’d pull your friend back from falling in, and turn that effort inward. If it feels funny the first time, give it second, third and fourth tries.

And if you forget on the fifth, remember: Four tries is a lot better than zero.

Related
Check out this article for a different take on how to think about human nature.

Advertisement



from Hacker News https://ift.tt/YV9WJO
via IFTTT