Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My grandmother began teaching in 1918. Decades later she could still name the kids she called "jitterbugs". She told me once she picked those kids to go get more coal for the stove since they couldn't sit still.
My own brother, genius level IQ, was in trouble constantly for leaving his seat and wandering around. He was way ahead of the rest of the class, and often the teacher, and a very sociable kid. He'd done the work, was bored and was looking for someone to talk to. They eventually put him in the back of the room with advanced books to read because keeping him after school every.single.day. did absolutely no good.
Kids can't sit still in class today for the same reasons they couldn't a century ago. Making children sit behind desks for extended periods of time is unnatural.
The brightest kids do get bored, and need extra work to stay busy in class. That's why gifted programs were invented.
idk. When I was in school, nobody had any trouble staying at their desks. But there were also recesses for kids to burn off excess energy.
The brightest kids do get bored, and need extra work to stay busy in class. That's why gifted programs were invented.
idk. When I was in school, nobody had any trouble staying at their desks. But there were also recesses for kids to burn off excess energy.
We always had one or two kids who had problems sitting still. The class clown and another kid who would get very frustrated and start crying in class. That's just the way they were and the teachers dealt with it as well as they could.
We had morning and afternoon recess plus an hour for lunch during with you rode your bike home and back. When we were in class, we usually settled down. We also had weekly scheduled pe, art, and music with special teachers. So we had a schedule and we knew what was expected of us.
The parents kept the kids under control and also there was a lot of playing and running outside so when we were in class, we just sat there. Of course we had more than just sitting and watching the teacher or having class discussions. We also put on class plays--lots of rehearsals and the entire school would attend, had big art projects and at certain times our class would be responsible for the main school bulletin board decorating, some kids got to go and help with the kindergarten class. There was a time and a place for everything and when it was class time, we usually knew it and acted accordingly.
I don't think much of it is due to sugar or artificial food colorings, maybe a little bit, not much. Most of it is due to lack of good habits and discipline at home.
We always had one or two kids who had problems sitting still. The class clown and another kid who would get very frustrated and start crying in class. That's just the way they were and the teachers dealt with it as well as they could.
We had morning and afternoon recess plus an hour for lunch during with you rode your bike home and back. When we were in class, we usually settled down. We also had weekly scheduled pe, art, and music with special teachers. So we had a schedule and we knew what was expected of us.
The parents kept the kids under control and also there was a lot of playing and running outside so when we were in class, we just sat there. Of course we had more than just sitting and watching the teacher or having class discussions. We also put on class plays--lots of rehearsals and the entire school would attend, had big art projects and at certain times our class would be responsible for the main school bulletin board decorating, some kids got to go and help with the kindergarten class. There was a time and a place for everything and when it was class time, we usually knew it and acted accordingly.
I don't think much of it is due to sugar or artificial food colorings, maybe a little bit, not much. Most of it is due to lack of good habits and discipline at home.
And that is also seen in the recent trend of "No children allowed" restaurants, no strollers allowed events and child free zones.
But schools are different and teachers will need to find new ways to teach.
The brightest kids do get bored, and need extra work to stay busy in class. That's why gifted programs were invented.
I don't necessarily think this has to be the case, though. I was a gifted student, and while I was in elementary and middle school, participated in gifted enrichment programs (mainly extracurriculars, after-school programs...I participated in the regular curriculum with peers as well). By the time I was in high school, funding had been slashed for such programs, and they ceased to exist. So it was the regular curriculum with no formalized enrichment programs for those last four years. I was, by all accounts, one of "the brightest kids." So were all my siblings (two of the three, boys...you know, boys...who according to some, can't possibly be expected to sit still in class, under any circumstances). We never caused classroom disruptions. I was never so bored in school that disruption of class was the only option for curing the horrible, horrible, agonizing boredom caused by breezing through an assignment and having time left over to do my own thing. If I got through the work, I read, wrote, drew, found something else to do. My teachers gave me (and others who finished early) fun options for things to do when we finished early, and they worked with the students who were struggling. Disrupting class was not a consideration. If you're a bright student, you're bright enough to stay busy. I feel like "But students act out when they're bright and bored!" is yet another cop-out sometimes. Bright or not-so-bright, if a student gets bored and the only possible alternative is to act out and disrupt class, that's a behavioral issue. It's not because they're so smart. Being disruptive is not a natural trait of being bright. Bright kids can have behavioral problems. Many don't.
Quote:
idk. When I was in school, nobody had any trouble staying at their desks. But there were also recesses for kids to burn off excess energy.
Oh, I know there were kids who had who trouble sitting still when I was in school (and we had recess up through grade five, and mandatory daily PE for all grades K-12). But they weren't the majority.
There were also more solid consequences when rules were not followed, in many cases. If you were disruptive, your disruption was actually addressed (I had disruptive friends, much to may parents' chagrin, and they faced disciplinary consequences when they were disruptive at school...one of my best friends spent more time suspended than IN school). A more common practice for disruptive students, particularly those in pre-k to lower elementary school currently, is "The instructor will address disruptive behavior by redirecting." Which is fine, if you are able to redirect to an activity that is more reinforcing to the student than the disruptive behavior. Most of the time, those activities don't exist. The student is being disruptive, because it is working, and thereby reinforces itself. I fully recognize, through years of working in applied behavioral analysis and positive behavioral support, that ignoring negative behavior often CAN be the most effective means of extinguishing it. But when a child is being disruptive in class, even if the teacher ignores the behavior and pushes through, he or she can't prevent the other students from attending to the behavior, and their attention reinforces it.
You can only change behavior if you can reinforce with things that are meaningful and appealing. If a child is most reinforced by the attention he or she gets from classmates by acting out, you will not be able to change that until you can introduce something to redirect the child to that is more meaningfully reinforcing to that child. And, for attention-seeking children, good luck with that. Now, not all fidgeting, disruption, etc. is done for the express purpose of attention-seeking, of course. But the fact is, attention-seeking and task avoidance are by far the most commonplace reasons for disruptive behavior. If the behavior works for getting attention or getting out of doing things, you'll see more and more of it. Bottom line.
I don't necessarily think this has to be the case, though. I was a gifted student, and while I was in elementary and middle school, participated in gifted enrichment programs (mainly extracurriculars, after-school programs...I participated in the regular curriculum with peers as well). By the time I was in high school, funding had been slashed for such programs, and they ceased to exist. So it was the regular curriculum with no formalized enrichment programs for those last four years. I was, by all accounts, one of "the brightest kids." So were all my siblings (two of the three, boys...you know, boys...who according to some, can't possibly be expected to sit still in class, under any circumstances). We never caused classroom disruptions. I was never so bored in school that disruption of class was the only option for curing the horrible, horrible, agonizing boredom caused by breezing through an assignment and having time left over to do my own thing. If I got through the work, I read, wrote, drew, found something else to do. My teachers gave me (and others who finished early) fun options for things to do when we finished early, and they worked with the students who were struggling. Disrupting class was not a consideration. If you're a bright student, you're bright enough to stay busy. I feel like "But students act out when they're bright and bored!" is yet another cop-out sometimes. Bright or not-so-bright, if a student gets bored and the only possible alternative is to act out and disrupt class, that's a behavioral issue. It's not because they're so smart. Being disruptive is not a natural trait of being bright. Bright kids can have behavioral problems. Many don't.
This is it. Teachers addressed kids' individual needs like that. But class sizes tended to be smaller, so that was possible. It's not always possible in the larger classes some schools have today. As for the underlined, good food for thought.
This is it. Teachers addressed kids' individual needs like that. But class sizes tended to be smaller, so that was possible. It's not always possible in the larger classes some schools have today. As for the underlined, good food for thought.
Great post overall.
I think, and this comes largely, but not entirely, from my experience in behavioral disorders classrooms, that students (and not just BD ones), are overall inclined to be less independent and self-directed than they may have been in the past.
Like I said, more individualization and differentiated instruction is going on in classrooms now than ever before...even though, with larger classes, it's a hell of a lot more work to do so. In the past, bright students who were working ahead of grade level/where the class was at could be turned loose on independent activities and be fine, so educators could have those supplemental activities on hand for those students, and they could do their self-directed thing. Now, though, students are accustomed to much more handholding, and cannot handle going about some self-directed learning experience without it descending into disruption, more often than not. Even in the case of some "good" students. Short attention spans and the need to be babysat and continually prompted to remain on task is more often the case than truly independent learners who are interested and inquisitive enough to work on their own when need be.
There are a lot of reasons why this may be, both educationally and sociologically-related. I hesitate to harp on the "accursed technology" angle, because it's pretty clear that, used judiciously, well, and properly, tech can absolutely allow for great INcreases in independence. But, at least in my observation, with the current generation of young children I've worked with, it may be hurting their ability to self-direct and self-regulate. They demand and expect to be entertained at all costs, and the range of scope of what they find entertaining has become much more narrow, overall. They are passive participants in their own learning...it needs to be served up on a touch screen, inquiry and curiosity about a wider world is shrinking. So many children, bright or not, lack the basic skills to be truly self-directed learners, because they've, for various reasons, never really had to be. They haven't ever been taught to be, so they're not equipped. Even conversationally, when I work with young kids, and ask them to make predictions and hypotheses, much more often than not, they turn to me and shrug and look blankly...even the ones I know to be generally bright and precocious in other contexts. It's really kind of heartbreaking. They want/need all the answers served up, and aren't all that curious. It's like it's been bred out of them.
I worked in an early childhod classroom where there was a small afternoon snack served, and about ten minutes allotted for children to be seated, and eat the snack. Remaining seated while eating was the requirement, from a safety standpoint, among other things. We had numerous children who refused to remain at the table for snack time, and parents appalled that their children would be required to remain seated for ten minutes, because "boys can't sit still that long." Interestingly, these would also have been the first parents to sue the school if their children choked to death running around the clasdroom with a mouthfull of food, "while nobody was making them sit down."
The truth is, there are parents (and teachers!) who use the "it's unrealistic to expect kids to sit down and attend for a developmentally appropriate length of time" argument to justify their own personal inability or lack of desire to maintain structure or control. "All these rules and restrictions are unrealistic and stifle my child's freedom," is often code for, " Yeah, my kid is out of control. Don't question me about it."
I agree with this! My son is in preschool, and during the first few weeks my son's teacher came to be with concerns about his not being able to sit for a few minutes at circle time, or sit at the table for lunch/snack. When I brought this up to other mom friends, they told me not to worry about it, it was unrealistic to expect my preschooler to sit still, etc etc. I disagreed. I worked with the teacher and an occupational therapist to develop some techniques to help him sit and pay attention for at least a few minutes at circle time, and stay seated until finished eating and then clean up before going to play. We practiced at home too. Within a few months he was doing great. It IS a parent's responsibility to help teach their child how to sit still and follow direction for a developmentally appropriate period of time. My kid's teacher thought I was mom of the year just because I didn't dismiss her concerns. What is wrong with parents these days?
You should look at the parenting forum and the thread on the Marshmellow Test. We do need to teach our children how to delay gratification as well as how to pay attention for short amounts of time.
There is a book of activities for preschoolers published by NAEYC called Follow Me, Too which has many activities for developing preschoolers attention spans using games. It has activities that work on many other skills that preschoolers need as well.
It IS a parent's responsibility to help teach their child how to sit still and follow direction for a developmentally appropriate period of time. My kid's teacher thought I was mom of the year just because I didn't dismiss her concerns. What is wrong with parents these days?
I could draw a parallel withe the video games.
I now feel "out of line" for NOT buying any video games to my children.
Most parents seem to believe that it is unrealistic, "mean", not-normal, weird parenting or something to NOT buy any video games for children. The teacher didn't know how to thank me when she found out that we just "say no" and expect children to fill whatever free time they have in their hands with somehing else other than VG. Even if that something else is staring at a wall. In fact, staring at a wall is a grossly under-rated activity nowadays, so if they have a chance to do it, we encourage it. :-)
Many parents say that they "place limits" on VG but we don't want them at all. Even 10 minutes spent on VG would be spent better elsewhere as far as I am concerned.
My point is an old one: when people define things as real, they become real in their consequences. Yes, the Thomas Theorem. :-)
When adults start labeling "sitting still" as "unrealistic" for children, they will indeed become unable to sit still.
We have been informed for so long now about "developmentally appropriate" steps; but all these experts ignore the fact that a child's development is not a 100% fixed biological clock and it is also dictated by the expectations placed on children by their environment.
If an entire society expects children to jump rope by x age, chances are most will.
I agree with this! My son is in preschool, and during the first few weeks my son's teacher came to be with concerns about his not being able to sit for a few minutes at circle time, or sit at the table for lunch/snack. When I brought this up to other mom friends, they told me not to worry about it, it was unrealistic to expect my preschooler to sit still, etc etc. I disagreed. I worked with the teacher and an occupational therapist to develop some techniques to help him sit and pay attention for at least a few minutes at circle time, and stay seated until finished eating and then clean up before going to play. We practiced at home too. Within a few months he was doing great. It IS a parent's responsibility to help teach their child how to sit still and follow direction for a developmentally appropriate period of time. My kid's teacher thought I was mom of the year just because I didn't dismiss her concerns. What is wrong with parents these days?
Doing what you did (props to you!) takes time and effort beyond what you are already expending. Many parents are both resistant to and resentful of any suggestion that putting in more time or effort than they already are might be a good idea. Especially if it comes from a teacher.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
