Have you ever received a graded paper from a teacher with numerous red corrections but no comments about what you did well? We all have, of course. Focusing on deficiencies is the norm. The red marks represent an assumption that correcting deficiencies leads to growth and success. We are a remedial society. A 2001 Gallup Poll survey* asked Americans "Which would help you be more successful in your life -- knowing what your weaknesses are and attempting to improve your weaknesses, or knowing what your strengths are and attempting to build on your strengths?"
A minority (45%) said strengths. A majority (52%) of Americans would prefer to shore up their weaknesses.
What would happen if we focused on talent and strengths in school? Gallup has collected data on this subject, and the answer is clear: building on strengths is more effective than trying to improve weaknesses.
A recent Gallup study of a large, urban high school in Chicago provides data about the impact of focusing on strengths. The principal of the school wanted to increase attendance and improve student achievement, both of which were below average. The principal was open to testing the theory that teaching students about their individual talents and strengths could influence such outcomes as academic success and attendance. A four-year study of incoming freshman classes resulted.
As part of the study, freshman-class homeroom advisers interviewed students using a Gallup survey instrument that reveals a student's individual talents and provided feedback to each homeroom student about his/her talents. Approximately half of the students in each of the four freshman classes received this feedback, and the other half received no intervention, creating study and contrast research groups. Gallup collected and analyzed data each year as well as over the four-year period as a whole.
What Did Gallup Researchers Find?
The four successive freshman classes totaled over 1,600 students. The students who were interviewed and received feedback from their freshman-class homeroom advisers:
- exceeded the Grade Point Average (GPA) of the contrast group (made up of the students receiving no feedback) by 8.7%
- had 47.2% fewer times tardy to class than the contrast group
- recorded 28.2% fewer days absent than the contrast group
In addition to the study described above, all students in each class were surveyed about various aspects of the school environment and their experiences as students. Each student rated a series of statements on a scale of 1 to 5 (5 meaning "strongly agree" and 1 meaning "strongly disagree"). The highest predictions of attendance and achievement came from higher student perceptions on the following items:
- In the last seven days, I have received recognition for doing good schoolwork.
- At school, my opinions seem to count.
- At school, someone seems to care about me as a person.
- I know what is expected of me at school.
- At school, someone encourages my development.
- I have an opportunity to do what I do best every day.
- My freshman interview was helpful.
Students who reported receiving recognition for good work were more likely to attend school more often and achieve higher GPAs.
Key Points
A student who is educated about his or her talents comes to school more often and earns higher grades. With such awareness and positive adult interaction, students can build upon and proactively use their talents and strengths. Without that awareness, individuals go through a trial-and-error process before they discover, perhaps accidentally, what they do best. It is no surprise that when consistently recognized for good work, students come to school more often and do better academically – for many, that's just common sense. Yet at times common sense is not so common, and drawing students' attention to what they do well is too often not the standard approach. With a strengths approach, students will eagerly seek and read all of the red marks on their papers because those marks will highlight the strong points of their work.
*Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,016 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 19-21, 2001. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±3%.