Recently I told someone that I got an A- in a class which I thought was pretty good but then he asked what I had been shooting for. I said "an A. That's what I always aim for."
Shortly before that someone had told me that you (in the general sense) "should always shoot for a B" because then you don't get stressed about little things that don't really matter.
Then there is the saying that I will purposefully misquote* "shoot for the stars and even if you miss you will land on the moon."
So which is it? Should you aim high, super high, or just moderately good. Or does it all just depend on your personality.
I had a conversation with a friend who said that if you have the mentality that you are below average, average, or above average in a certain area, no matter what group you are in (whether a really skilled/talented group or a dull one) you will find yourself in that place within the group. So basically if you think you are average at school (easy example) instead of telling yourself to be above average you should just start hanging out with a smarter group of kids and you will end up being average in that group and doing better overall in school.
So I guess you could just shoot for average but seek out skilled groups.
Or just don't set expectations at all :)
*"Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars." But that really doesn't make sense...
I have heard that you should praise a child's actions, rather than some purportedly inherent state of being. So instead of saying, "you are so smart!" you'd say "you worked so hard." So if a child doesn't do well on something, instead of thinking that failure is an innate part of themselves ("I guess I'm dumb.") they think, "I need to work harder." So maybe instead of shooting for an outcome you can shoot for a work ethic? Or maybe that is too lofty and ambiguous. I know in parenting situations I have definitely found it useful to lower my expectations :o
ReplyDelete