Strengths-Based Learning & Leadership
This article was originally published in the Fall 2018 SEAHO Report
Asking an individual about their strengths can elicit a variety of responses. Some people discuss their successes at work, others their quality relationships, or intrinsic qualities they’ve identified in themselves. Rath (2007) defines a strength as a consistent and near-perfect performance on an activity, with three associated factors: talents or naturally recurring patterns of thought, feeling, or behavior; knowledge, which consists of facts and lessons learned; and skills, or the steps of an activity. Rath (2007) created a helpful equation for strengths: talent x investment=strength. This definition also works under two principles: the strength must be a predictable part of an individual’s performance; and, the strength does not have to be present in all aspects of an individual’s life for them to excel (Bowers, 2008; Bowers and Lopez, 2010). The StrengthsFinder Assessment serves as the talent identification portion of the equation. Our job as supervisors, mentors, and advisors is to encourage students to invest in their talents and give them opportunities to develop their talents into strengths.
As a student leader and then a graduate student, I knew that my philosophy on education was to approach each situation and student individually, doing my best to capitalize their strengths and areas of interest while meeting the goals of a meeting (career advising, conduct meetings, personal development, etc.). Lopez and Louis (2009) paraphrased Anderson (2000) to describe the overall goal of strengths-based educational models. Their description perfectly sums up what I have spent many hours on reflections trying to say: “Strengths-based models embody a student-centered form of education with the primary goal of transforming students into confident, efficacious, lifelong learners whose work is infused with a sense of purpose” (p. 2). This is the framework that I work with when pursuing development with my students.
Many students report positive outcomes after the assessment. The benefits of strengths-based programming have been studied by Anderson (2004), and include increased awareness of talents, increased personal confidence, increased academic confidence, increased motivation to achieve, increased confidence about the future, increased use of talents, development of strengths, improved interpersonal understandings and relationships, and other impacts of strengths awareness.
Infusing Strengths-Based Techniques into Daily Work
Strengths-based education is a multidisciplinary endeavor, best understood as a philosophy and “daily practice that shapes how an individual engages the teaching and learning process” (Lopez and Louis, 2009, p. 1), and focuses on positive properties of student learning and engagement, including strengths. The strengths-based education perspective assumes that any one person is capable of success and focuses on labeling characteristics that are correct and positive.
Lopez and Louis (2009) go on to describe the five principles of strengths-based education. The first principle is measurement. This includes strengths assessment, academic achievement, and behavioral data. Combining these types of data gives a more rounded picture of a student and brings in positive elements, not just areas in which a student can be lacking. Second is individualization, where educators personalize learning to meet the strengths of each student. This requires that the educator “spontaneously [think] about and [act] upon the strengths, interests, and needs of each student” and then teach accordingly (Lopez and Louis, 2009, p. 4). Another option for application of the principle is for the educator to provide options for students to demonstrate their learning. Networking is the third principle, focusing on relationships with personal supporters. This principle allows students to build relationships where sharing of strengths is encouraged, but also highlights the importance of students ability to recognize and honor strengths in others. As an educator, I focus on this principle when affirming a success and when providing constructive criticism. By focusing on what the students have done correctly, inadequacies can be framed in a different context. That is, the student has not failed because of an intrinsic lack of ability, but approached this task or situation with a strategy that does not use their strengths. The fourth principle is deliberate application. Just as educators are intentional with planning learning outcomes and assessment tools, the strengths-based education model requires intentional application of these principles. The authors provided me with another great description for my philosophy:
Building upon the idea that “to educate” literally means “to draw out” or “to bring forth,” strengths-based educators believe that part of their core responsibility is to draw out the strengths that exist within students by heightening students’ awareness of them and cultivating a greater future orientation around how students’ strengths might be catalyzed as they approach their education (Lopez and Louis, 2009, p. 5).
As an educator, this means that I spend time learning about my students and provide positive feedback when they use their strengths successfully. I also promote peer feedback, so students can learn to recognize and capitalize on the strengths of others. Clifton, Anderson, and Schreiner (2006) describe this as creating a learning environment where students see themselves and others through “strengths-colored glasses” (p. 73). Finally, the fifth principle is intentional development. Similar to the fourth principle, this intentional development is centered on deliberately seeking new opportunities to apply and cultivate individual strengths.
The authors also stipulate that the ideal model highlights that effort and energy are necessary to continue their personal growth in their theme areas. Louis (2011) discusses implicit self-theory in relation to this principle. When we focus on strengths as intrinsic or definitive, we allow students to view themselves with a fixed mindset, believing that “personal attributes are fixed, trait-like qualities” (p. 206). In order for students to have a growth mindset, we must always highlight the effort required for talent and strength development.
Research in strengths-based education is moving away from what Louis (2011) calls talent identification towards efforts to create strengths development interventions. Strengths development interventions also include identification, but then “[expand] upon this information by including specific activities aimed at helping a participant move beyond resonance with an affirming label into considering strategies for building and refining strengths… [requiring] intentional effort” (p. 205). The difference between these two methods lies in capitalizing, that is, “the enthusiastic application of strengths” (Bowers and Lopez, 2010, p. 4). Bowers and Lopez (2010) conducted exploratory, in-depth interviews of eight college students and found three essential “ingredients” for capitalizing; continual social support, experiences of success, and reinforcement of personal strengths. These ingredients are where student affairs professionals can do their best, most impactful work for students.
In the daily work of supervision, accountability, and student support, using our strengths-colored glasses can show up in different ways. In one-on-one conversations, it means asking about a student’s strengths and facilitating a conversation that keeps those strengths at the center to address issues with performance, reframe interpersonal conflicts or struggles, and make suggestions for techniques that the student can use with their strengths. In team environments, being strengths-focused means taking a step back and viewing your team as a whole, then assigning tasks and challenging individuals based on the teams goals. When an individual or team is successful, take a few minutes to be excited and explore how their strengths contributed to that success. Keeping track of what works allows you to use it again in the future, and reference the skills that have been developed. Largely, strengths-based education is already a part of what we do. The assessment gives us a shared language to use for ourselves and one another as we continue to improve.
Talent identification and development are directly impacted by giving individuals situations in which they can use their strengths to be successful. In order to truly foster talent, or strengths development, we must “characterize ability or talent as a set of functional relations distributed across person and context, and through which the person-in-situation appears knowledgeably skillful” (Barab and Plucker, 2002, p. 174). My goal this semester has been to give my students the opportunities and situations in which they can be successful in applying and growing their strengths.
The burgeoning work of positive psychology researchers demonstrates that identifying and developing strengths and understanding talent in context are effective strategies for success in students. The identification process is an excellent first step, but is not the full picture in creating strengths-based educational models. Future research should study the strength development process, how students capitalize on their strengths after identification. In my personal work, I will be moving from identification to development with weekly professional development tasks. I will provide activities that allow students to use their strengths in context and provide opportunities for reflection.
References
Anderson, E. C. (2000, February). Affirming students’ strengths in the critical years. In National Conference on the First Year Experience, Columbia, SC.
Anderson, E. C. (2004). What is strengths-based education?: A tentative answer by someone who strives to be a strengths-based educator. Unpublished manuscript, 51.
Barab, S. A., & Plucker, J. A. (2002). Smart people or smart contexts? Cognition, ability, and talent development in an age of situated approaches to knowing and learning. Educational Psychologist, 37(3), 165-182.
Bowers, K. (2009). Making the most of human strengths. Positive psychology: Exploring the best in people: Discovering human strengths, 23-36.
Bowers, K. M., & Lopez, S. J. (2010). Capitalizing on personal strengths in college. Journal of College and Character, 11(1).
Clifton, D. O. (2002). StrengthsQuest: Discover and develop your strengths in academics, career, and beyond. Gallup Pr.
Hodges, T. D., & Harter, J. K. (2005). A Review of the Theory and Research Underlying the StrengthsQuest Program for Students. The Quest for Strengths. EDUCATIONAL HORIZONS, 83, 190-201.
Louis, M. C. (2011). Strengths interventions in higher education: The effect of identification versus development approaches on implicit self-theory. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 6(3), 204-215.
Lopez, S. J., & Louis, M. C. (2009). The principles of strengths-based education. Journal of College and Character, 10(4)
Rath, T. (2007). StrengthsFinder 2.0. New York: Gallup Press.
Rath, T., & Conchie, B. (2009). Strengths based leadership. City: Gallup Press.
