High School Simon Says

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

Its been two weeks since I posted the video of Geno.

I think this one is just as relevant in cheer. It has prompted me to make our cheer program a "cell phone free" environment. This includes parents at meetings.

I will say, I think the age referenced here is probably a little on the old side. It may start with those born in 1984 and later, but it's definitely more pronounced in those born 1994 and later.

 

[TealShades]

Oh man I thought we were going to play Simon says. Lol

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

Oh man I thought we were going to play Simon says. Lol

Lol

You should know me better than that by now

 

[AndyT_T]

This Millennial Rant Deserves A Trophy For Being Most Wrong

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

This Millennial Rant Deserves A Trophy For Being Most Wrong

So, I post an interview with a man who has a law degree and an undergraduate degree in cultural anthropology, is called upon as a keynote speaker by multiple major corporations, and has authored three books on leadership, two of which have made the New York Times best seller list; and you counter with "Mark" whose on byline notes his qualifications are that he has "a twitter" and has "written a book' (which, it turns out, is a collection of 14 short stories).

So, Mark not only doesn't have the attention span to author anything longer than a short story, he obviously didn't have 18 minutes worth of attention to actually watch the entirety of Simon's interview. He also did not have the level of intelligence required to listen to what was stated in the interview in context, as he patently describes things that are said completely out of context. He isn't even bright enough to figure out that Mr. Sinek is not speaking in a way of bringing down Millennials, but in a way of educating corporate America on how to get the most productivity out of this latest generation. He completely ignores that the articles cited within the interview (the article titles and journal titles are flashed on the screen for your reading pleasure) are evidence-based and peer-reviewed, and support the content of what is said. Aside from all of that, the only thing Mark seems to have fully captured is the use of foul language in his writings.

Do you have any actual evidence to refute this expert's opinion, or just more things written by rambling Neanderthals who do not have the capacity for scientific thought?

 

[AndyT_T]

So, I post an interview with a man who has a law degree and an undergraduate degree in cultural anthropology, is called upon as a keynote speaker by multiple major corporations, and has authored three books on leadership, two of which have made the New York Times best seller list; and you counter with "Mark" whose on byline notes his qualifications are that he has "a twitter" and has "written a book' (which, it turns out, is a collection of 14 short stories).

So, Mark not only doesn't have the attention span to author anything longer than a short story, he obviously didn't have 18 minutes worth of attention to actually watch the entirety of Simon's interview. He also did not have the level of intelligence required to listen to what was stated in the interview in context, as he patently describes things that are said completely out of context. He isn't even bright enough to figure out that Mr. Sinek is not speaking in a way of bringing down Millennials, but in a way of educating corporate America on how to get the most productivity out of this latest generation. He completely ignores that the articles cited within the interview (the article titles and journal titles are flashed on the screen for your reading pleasure) are evidence-based and peer-reviewed, and support the content of what is said. Aside from all of that, the only thing Mark seems to have fully captured is the use of foul language in his writings.

Do you have any actual evidence to refute this expert's opinion, or just more things written by rambling Neanderthals who do not have the capacity for scientific thought?

I figured since you used a a talking head from a viral video it was fine for me to use one as well.
Simon is an author who is trying to sell you something, he has a vested interest in convincing you of his opinion and that makes him a biased source who should, at best, be taken with a grain of salt. But more than that, he misconstrues evidence and uses vast generalizations to oversimplify very complex issues and in doing so, he does what every generation before him did to the generation that took the reigns from them: he blames them for the problems that his own generation started.

Want to know what isn't a problem? Participation trophies NO ONE wanted. I never shed a tear when I threw away all my trophies (even the non participation ones) when I went to college - but my mom sure did. Participation trophies were never for us, they were for the parents.

But thats not saying there aren't problems facing my generation, there are. Things like being the first generation to adapt to a society where privacy doesn't exist. Things like being the first generation to be overqualified for a job they need to pay bills, and underquallified for a job they were actually trained for. Things like being raised in a society where secondary education is an expectation, but funding for secondary education is not - which led us to having more student debt than any generation before us.
Things like being the most educated most underpaid generation EVER, for example, which are all actually legitimate reasons to feel disenfranchized and pessimistic about the future.

Instead of saying that, though, he says its cell phones and being told we're special that made us sad.
You know, as opposed to every other generation who's parents didn't tell them they were special, right?

Though I would love to break down every part of his video, I don't have to. Other people already have.
Here are some sources:
Why Simon Sinek's Video on Millennials Was Wrong | The Huffington Post
What Simon Sinek Got Wrong about Millennials in the Workplace
What that viral video about ‘millennials’ gets wrong | Dazed



EDIT: Also, he doesn't understand at all how dopamine works, the brain is MUCH more complicated than that, as is addiction..

EDIT 2: Formatting.

 

[omgitssydthekid]

Disregard.

 

[AndyT_T]

As a side note: I think it is super ironic that he makes a whole speech about how pessimistic my generation is, and then hawks said speech to a generation of people who want to feel pessimistic about the future because it's in our hands.

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

I figured since you used a a talking head from a viral video it was fine for me to use one as well.
Simon is an author who is trying to sell you something, he has a vested interest in convincing you of his opinion and that makes him a biased source who should, at best, be taken with a grain of salt. But more than that, he misconstrues evidence and uses vast generalizations to oversimplify very complex issues and in doing so, he does what every generation before him did to the generation that took the reigns from them: he blames them for the problems that his own generation started.

Want to know what isn't a problem? Participation trophies NO ONE wanted. I never shed a tear when I threw away all my trophies (even the non participation ones) when I went to college, my mom did. Participation trophies were never for us, they were for the parents.

But thats not saying there aren't problems facing my generation, there are. Things like being the most educated most underpaid generation EVER, for example, which are actually legitimate reasons to feel disenfranchized and pessimistic about the future.

Instead of saying that, though, he says its cell phones and being told we're special that made us sad.
You know, as opposed to every other generation who's parents didn't tell them they were special, right?

Though I would love to break down every part of his video, I don't have to. Other people already have.
Here are some sources:
Why Simon Sinek's Video on Millennials Was Wrong | The Huffington Post
What Simon Sinek Got Wrong about Millennials in the Workplace
What that viral video about ‘millennials’ gets wrong | Dazed



EDIT: Also, he doesn't understand at all how dopamine works, the brain is MUCH more complicated than that, as is addiction..

EDIT 2: Formatting.

Now, that's better. You've posted a couple of links that I can actually stomach to read. The first one is actually written by someone with some credentials. The second I haven't read all the way through because I'm multi-tasking, but I'll at least acknowledge that I think it's correct that Simon uses the wrong term to describe the generation to which he is referring.

First, Simon Sinek is not a talking head. Simon is a respected leader in his field. He has been contracted by at least four of the top employers of recent college graduates in the country: Disney, Microsoft, Pfizer, and the U.S. Military. These people have a vested interest in doing what is right by this latest group of college graduates.

You have still managed to miss my point, though. I post these things, in this forum, on this board, as someone who coaches high school athletes. I find them interesting because they speak to me and are describing the athletes I coach to a "T." I didn't go looking for the video about body language by Geno Auriemma. I was looking for insight into coaching females athletes and someone sent it to me. So Geno, who, given his success rate alone, should have no difficulties recruiting athletes of any kind, says that recruiting kids who are enthusiastic about the game is "hard, it's hard, it's really, really hard." I see the same thing in the kids I coach. They're not enthusiastic. He comments that they're "all about me, me, me, me, me" I see that about the kids I coach, they're only interested in themselves. So, I can at least sit back knowing that the most successful women's coach in all of sports is having the same difficulties finding enthusiastic, team-focused athletes out of this latest generation.

I didn't post the Simon Sinek video because I cared that he was talking about "people born after 1984." I posted it because I see EXACTLY what he's talking about in the teenagers I coach now. I even stated in my original post. I think it's more applicable to those 10-15 years younger than he states. He is dead up describing many of the athletes I come across every day. They have been told they're special all the time in a non-productive way. They are addicted to their cell phones. If we allow them to leave their cell phones anywhere within eyesight during practice time, they cannot resist the temptation to go over and check their phone multiple times during a two-hour practice. "Can I get a drink of water?" "sure" Then thirty seconds later you realize they never made it to the water fountain, but they're at their phone. If you're lying about why you need to step away from the group and cannot go more than thirty minutes without looking at your phone, you have the makings of a psychological addiction. They don't have the skills necessary to develop deep meaningful relationships. I have taken away cell phones from our practice area since I saw that video, thinking they would at least interact with each other in the minutes leading up to our open gyms (we haven't had tryouts yet). Today they sat their staring into space. These kids do not know how to break the ice and strike up a conversation with people who, two weeks from now, they may be attached to for a whole calendar year. They DO expect instant gratification. Many of them want to give up on skills when they don't get them the first day. They have no idea what it takes to work hard at something for a long time, and they're not willing to push for it because they don't believe the ends justify the means. They would rather have the instant gratification of having fun now, rather than experiencing the joys of hard-earned success later, because they've never had to delay gratification. That's the reason I posted the video. Not because I felt it somehow proved my point of view that "millennials are evil," but because it provided insight into difficulties I come across as a coach, and I'm certain there's at least one other coach on here has the same problems; and I'm breaking the ice to strike up a conversation with him/her.

 

[omgitssydthekid]

"Are today's adolescents and emerging adults more self-centered and narcissistic than their counterparts in earlier generations? Research by Jean Twenge and her colleagues (2008a, b) indicated that compared with Baby Boomers who were surveyed in 1975, twelfth-graders surveyed in 2006 were more self-satisfied overall and far more confident that they would be very good employees, mates, and parents. However, other recent large-scale analyses have revealed no increase in high school and college students' narcissism from the 1980's through the first decade of the twent-first century (Roberts, Edmonds, & Grijalva; Trzeniewski & Donnellan, 2010; Tresniewski, Donnellan, & Robins, 2008a, b, 2013)." If you want article titles I can find them in my textbook's index, but I assume most can only be found on EBSCO (or another scholarly database) or you'll have to pay an arm and a leg for them if you can find them on google. But I can provide the formal citations if you're interested.

Self-esteem tends to drop during adolescence, but this isn't something that is exclusive to millennials.

And just for fun, here is a generational shifts chart from my lecture a few weeks ago. It all comes back around.

Do I like this video? Nah. I really can't stand it. However, he makes some good points that the future counselor (and current cheer coach) in me can't argue with, but there are some statements he made that I think are misguided based on research I have seen throughout undergrad and now my graduate program in counseling. But, I'm never going to agree with anyone on everything, so I'm not going to try that now either. You can always find two research articles asserting totally opposite findings, it is a matter of which can be replicated with a decent sample size and unbiased sampling methods.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

"Are today's adolescents and emerging adults more self-centered and narcissistic than their counterparts in earlier generations? Research by Jean Twenge and her colleagues (2008a, b) indicated that compared with Baby Boomers who were surveyed in 1975, twelfth-graders surveyed in 2006 were more self-satisfied overall and far more confident that they would be very good employees, mates, and parents. However, other recent large-scale analyses have revealed no increase in high school and college students' narcissism from the 1980's through the first decade of the twent-first century (Roberts, Edmonds, & Grijalva; Trzeniewski & Donnellan, 2010; Tresniewski, Donnellan, & Robins, 2008a, b, 2013)." If you want article titles I can find them in my textbook's index, but I assume most can only be found on EBSCO (or another scholarly database) or you'll have to pay an arm and a leg for them if you can find them on google. But I can provide the formal citations if you're interested.

Self-esteem tends to drop during adolescence, but this isn't something that is exclusive to millennials.

And just for fun, here is a generational shifts chart from my lecture a few weeks ago. It all comes back around.

Do I like this video? Nah. I really can't stand it. However, he makes some good points that the future counselor (and current cheer coach) in me can't argue with, but there are some statements he made that I think are misguided based on research I have seen throughout undergrad and now my graduate program in counseling. But, I'm never going to agree with anyone on everything, so I'm not going to try that now either. You can always find two research articles asserting totally opposite findings, it is a matter of which can be replicated with a decent sample size and unbiased sampling methods.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This looks interesting, Syd. I am having trouble reading it without my contacts in, but will take a closer look tomorrow. Thank you.

 

[omgitssydthekid]

This looks interesting, Syd. I am having trouble reading it without my contacts in, but will take a closer look tomorrow. Thank you.

I've got 20/20 vision and I'm struggling too. I'll see if I can upload it with better quality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

I've got 20/20 vision and I'm struggling too. I'll see if I can upload it with better quality.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the generations on the chart cover too many years. Obviously every area is different, but the class of kids that I am graduating were born in 1998 or 1999 and their parents were born between 1979 and 1985. There is a generation of kids out there born to teen mothers who have their own set of issues when it comes to coachability.

 

[omgitssydthekid]

I think the generations on the chart cover too many years. Obviously every area is different, but the class of kids that I am graduating were born in 1998 or 1999 and their parents were born between 1979 and 1985. There is a generation of kids out there born to teen mothers who have their own set of issues when it comes to coachability.

Are you talking about the literal years the generations cover? Like from 1946-1964 for baby boomers? I know these are roughly agreed upon years (not sure who decides these things) and most charts look pretty similar! However, the millennials portion is a little outrageous as far as years go. The newest generation is actually the "Centennials" or Gen Z, and I think their first "year" is 1994. I assume the chart I posted needs to be updated with the newest generation, and at the time it was created there were not even years of the next generation born to make the"cut" between generations.

Generational Breakdown: Info About All of the Generations – GEN HQ

Found this website and thought it was pretty interesting.

Let me know if this isn't what you were saying or doesn't make any sense, my roommate's barking dogs woke up me this morning and I'm exhausted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OldskoolKYcheercoach]

Are you talking about the literal years the generations cover? Like from 1946-1964 for baby boomers? I know these are roughly agreed upon years (not sure who decides these things) and most charts look pretty similar! However, the millennials portion is a little outrageous as far as years go. The newest generation is actually the "Centennials" or Gen Z, and I think their first "year" is 1994. I assume the chart I posted needs to be updated with the newest generation, and at the time it was created there were not even years of the next generation born to make the"cut" between generations.

Generational Breakdown: Info About All of the Generations – GEN HQ

Found this website and thought it was pretty interesting.

Let me know if this isn't what you were saying or doesn't make any sense, my roommate's barking dogs woke up me this morning and I'm exhausted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yea, that's what I was talking about.