Out in the playground, in the lunchroom and on the school bus – really in every possible school situation – group dynamics are always at work.

There will be those in the group who are more assertive (sometimes aggressive), and those who are not. Many will be in the middle zone.
In fact, by sheer odds and the laws of the bell-shaped curve, most kids will be in the middle zone, not leaning one way or another.

One law that seems almost immutable is that the weaker kids (the minnows) will be frequent targets of the more aggressive ones (the sharks).

I recently spoke to a minnow named Leo, a fourth grader,  who hated the playground.

Here’s a sample of what he conveyed to me:

Ugh, I hate the playground. No one wants to play with me. I tried to play punch ball the other day, but no one wanted me on their team and they just laughed at me when I missed. The really mean kid put a boogey on my back and then he shoved me in line. I went to my teacher, but she said I was tattling and should just stay away from him. I also told my parents but they didn’t know what to do. Oh no, the teacher is blowing the whistle and we have to get back in line and the mean kid is coming back to me again. I just hate recess.

While I listened  sympathetically, as you can imagine there are no easy answers to the “sharks and minnows” phenomenon.

Schools follow HIB (Harassment Intimidation & Bullying) protocols, but much what was  described by Leo may not fall in the level of a HIB violation.

If that is, in fact, the case, then what?

(We will continue with Sharks and Minnows in Part II.)

(Comments and questions are welcomed, but are blocked by the hosting site.  Please email questions or comments: rselznick615@gmail.com)  

To receive future blog posts, register your email: https://shutdownlearner.com.

To Contact Dr. Richard Selznick for advice, consultation or other information, email – rselznick615@gmail.com. 

Copyright, Richard Selznick, Ph.D.  2023, www.shutdownlearner.com.

(***Please note:  All blogs represent the opinion and perspective of Dr. Richard Selznick.)  

I don’t know how to describe it in more clinical or scientific terms, but there are a bunch of kids I’ve assessed recently who seem to me to lack “oomph.”

While “oomph” may be one of those words that are not currently in modern usage, I think it conveys an important issue not often discussed.

With a low level of “oomph,”  the child comes across with low-energy and very little “push” behind them and the  tasks they are asked to complete.  Typically, parents will be checking the boxes that say things like, “lacks sustained mental effort,” “inattentive,” “easily distracted.”

With these children, I think of them as having a low “OQ,” (i.e., “”Oomph Quotient”)..  While not very scientific I understand, but that’s what it feels like when I’m with them.

Let’s take Blaze, an 8 year old whose parents are worried about how he conducts himself in his day-to-day life.

When I meet  Blaze I do my best to connect with him, but he’s not buying what I’m selling.  Giving me a half-hearted  (“must I do this”) fist bump with a meager smile as a starting point, he conveys that he can’t wait to be out of there.

When the assessment starts I ask Blaze to write down three things that he likes to do.  Instead of writing,  he says something in a mumble like, “I don’t like to do too much – video games.”  (Nothing gets written down.)

Later, on a task where I have Blaze to copy different shape and designs on the page and to put blocks together in patterns, he goes through the motions, but there is no attempt to correct himself when a design or block pattern is obviously wrong.

The sense is that the only thing on Blaze’s mind that matters to him is getting done with this annoyance, probably  so he can go back to his screen time at home or on the phone that his parents have given him on his birthday (with no strings attached).

It would be one thing if what was observed was unusual for Blaze, a function of not liking me or the assessment situation, but this type of thing occurs consistently and his parents are getting their buttons pushed by it.  (Teachers also comment on the low energy.)

Certainly, many kids with low “oomph” are diagnosed as  ADHD – of the inattentive variety – but my sense is that it is deeper than we are owning and understanding and a fairly complex issue.

To my knowledge there is no easy fix to remedy low “oomph.””

A good first step is to recognize it for what it often is – a total disinterest in anything beyond what is giving the child pleasure (which usually comes in the form of a screen).

Once it is recognized for what it is, honest conversations can take place between parent and child about what the low “oomph” means and how much of a problem it is becoming.

Starting to link up very important messages that questions the free access to screen pleasure would be a good next step.

The child has to start understanding the basic formula of “you give and you get,” as the child is typically stuck in “you don’t give and you still get.”

While this may not move the “OQ” needle significantly, it may move it enough to get the child more in the game.

(***Please note:  All blogs represent the opinion and perspective of Dr. Richard Selznick.  Comments and questions are welcomed, but are blocked by the hosting site.  Please email questions or comments: rselznick615@gmail.com)  

Copyright, Richard Selznick, Ph.D.  2022, www.shutdownlearner.com.

To Contact Dr. Richard Selznick for advice, consultation or other information, email rselznick615@gmail.com.

To receive future blog posts, register your email: https://shutdownlearner.com.

Over the last year or so, I’ve noted an interesting trend – I’ll call it the “Child-to-Mom- Sideways Glance.”

Here’s how it goes.

Take William, age 8, who comes in to meet with me for the first time accompanied by his mother.  They sit next to each other perhaps two feet apart.

I engage William.

“So, Will, how old are you?”

Rather than answer the question directly, William immediate glances sideways at his mom before answering.

Once answering I check my chart and jokingly state, “Correct!!!! You’re right!!!!”

Thankfully, William laughs as I ask him another question.

“And, when’s your birthday?  (Sideways glance comes again immediately before responding.)

Teasingly, I joke, “I’m going to ask another one.  This is not a trick question.  You’re not allowed to look at your mother – in fact, I’m going to put up this paper shield so you can’t look at her when you answer,” as I playfully put up a paper between them so he can’t look at her when I ask if he has any pets.

Now I have William fully laughing and his mother is too, because she knows she’s in this dance with him as a co-conspirator.

This segues into another kid, Nicholas, age 10, a budding and brilliant future neuroscientist (and not a sideways glancer).

I explain my observation to Nicholas looking for his opinion on child behavior.

“So, Nicholas, I’ve picked up on this trend of child behavior where kids can’t answer a question without looking at their moms.  I know  there is no right or wrong answer, but what’s your guess why this is happening?”

Without skipping a beat, Nicholas says, “I would have a few hypotheses.”  (Now, I’m dying, laughing and leaning back, enjoying the ride to come.)

“My first hypothesis would be that the kid is maybe a little uncomfortable, maybe a little nervous.”

“That sounds like a good one,” I say.  “And your second?”

“Another hypothesis would be the kid has become too reliant (his word) on his mother. A third would be that they’re looking to their mother for approval too much.”

“Wow…those are pretty good,” I affirm (not that he needs my affirmation).  “I have one more to add,” I tell him.

“And, that would be?”

(Now I have pressure to earn my stripes with this 10-year-old researcher.)

“A hypothesis I would have would be the mom is too ready to speak for the child and he’s gotten very used to her answering for him.”

Nicholas gives me a wise nod, thankfully affirming my hypothesis. (I needed Nicholas’ approval more than he needed mine.)

I ask Nicholas  how he would set up a study and test the hypotheses.  Nicholas tells how he would set up a study to test them.  Nicholas quickly explains how he would research it, a well-designed study worthy of most  graduate programs.

Takeaway Point

All hypotheses are in play when it comes to the child-to-mother sideways glance.

This trend will need to be investigated further. Nicholas is on it.

I can’t wait to start having Nicholas on as a guest or co-host on my future podcasts.

(***Please note:  All blogs represent the opinion and perspective of Dr. Richard Selznick.  Comments and questions are welcomed, but are blocked by the hosting site.  Please email questions or comments: rselznick615@gmail.com)  

Copyright, Richard Selznick, Ph.D.  2022, www.shutdownlearner.com.

To Contact Dr. Richard Selznick for advice, consultation or other information, email rselznick615@gmail.com.

To receive future blog posts, register your email: https://shutdownlearner.com.