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.
Cross-eyed badger spit - that's what you just put out there. I suppose the "point of adulthood" is death. The sooner the better right?
What a clown.
The point of adulthood is productive happiness. The point of being a child, the only point, is becoming a productive, rational, and happy adult. Death is simply the end of existence. But while you exist, you should be happy and productive. And that is only achieved through reason and logic. And that is only achieved through effective teaching and hard work.
Play has a role, but it is not primary, and should only be used as break from formal learning. Not to say formal learning can't be fun. It certainly can be. And should be. But that should emanate from the fact that being an effective human being is basically fun in and of itself.
The sooner that is instilled, the sooner all learning becomes a pleasurable exercise with big payoffs. And that should start at the age of 1.
I have a theory. The terrible twos are the first symptom of a deficient learning environment.
The point of adulthood is productive happiness. The point of being a child, the only point, is becoming a productive, rational, and happy adult. Death is simply the end of existence. But while you exist, you should be happy and productive. And that is only achieved through reason and logic. And that is only achieved through effective teaching and hard work.
Play has a role, but it is not primary, and should only be used as break from formal learning. Not to say formal learning can't be fun. It certainly can be. And should be. But that should emanate from the fact that being an effective human being is basically fun in and of itself.
The sooner that is instilled, the sooner all learning becomes a pleasurable exercise with big payoffs. And that should start at the age of 1.
I have a theory. The terrible twos are the first symptom of a deficient learning environment.
The terrible two's are just another developmental stage. All kids go through them in one way or another. Their personality will have an impact on how "terrible" they really are though. Do you have kids?
The point of adulthood is productive happiness. The point of being a child, the only point, is becoming a productive, rational, and happy adult. Death is simply the end of existence. But while you exist, you should be happy and productive. And that is only achieved through reason and logic. And that is only achieved through effective teaching and hard work.
Play has a role, but it is not primary, and should only be used as break from formal learning. Not to say formal learning can't be fun. It certainly can be. And should be. But that should emanate from the fact that being an effective human being is basically fun in and of itself.
The sooner that is instilled, the sooner all learning becomes a pleasurable exercise with big payoffs. And that should start at the age of 1.
I have a theory. The terrible twos are the first symptom of a deficient learning environment.
Balderdash. And I say that as someone who has a hard science PhD, and a JD, a very good income, and two children of my own doing very well, ....all started off on play.
I'd hate to have been your kid. This isn't a Brave New World factory. THE unequivocally most important pre-5 abilities and skills to learn are SOCIALIZATION skills.... which primarily comes through play - with others. That is primary. Play-centered interaction. Not textbooks, not sitting and listening to pontificating adults - nor any other age-inappropriate didactic techniques. Nowhere mentioned in your pedagogical theory whatsoever. Focusing on age-inappropriate skills leads to academically talented and socially inept or developmentally introverted kids crying out from isolation. THAT is a problem, borne by missing the big picture. Reading milestones, math milestones.... completely missing it.
As to your assertion as to some absolute "Point" of childhood - I cannot even respond to such a notion, and the idea you starting "instilling" a 1 year old with "formal" learning for the idea of some "productive" output - you should write science fiction horror.
There's a song for you by Supertramp. The Logical Song.
Hanscom is the founder of TimberNook, a nature-based development program designed to foster creativity and independent play outdoors in New England.
Since when did you need a "program" to "foster independent play outdoors"? Sounds like the author is making up a deficiency in order to keep herself in business.
I like the new way of doing things in school, so do our kids, so do our friends kids. Astonishingly, they are learning multiplication in 1st grade! I didn't learn it until 3rd, and by the time my generation graduated HS, only the "gifted" students in the AP courses were on par with their international peers from Asia. I have no idea about Europeans, since there are few European immigrants in my STEM field.
I was amazed to discover that my spouse (then girlfriend) had completed several years of college-level (in the United States) calculus and non-linear algebra, prior to going to the University in her home country. Even though she had been working for several years in a non-technical field, she was able to crush the standardized testing required to be accepted in technical Master's program at a US University when she decided she wanted to change careers. This clearly illustrated to me, the value of advanced education; it provides opportunities throughout your life.
If my kids graduate HS with no higher knowledge than Algebra and spend a few years as Fashion Designers or Social Workers--then want to change fields, they're going to have a heck of a time making the switch. However, if they've already completed courses in advanced math, biology, chemistry, and physics, then the world is their oyster.
Free play is great, and appropriate for young children. The same goes for structured and unstructured social interactions with other children, but there's no need for teachers and schools to provide this. They should be getting that at home.
Finally, with more direct regard to the ideas espoused in this thread; it's always easy to go from structure to freedom, from work to fun. It is much harder to move in the opposite direction. To focus on free play and "letting kids be kids" for the first 5-6 years of a child's life, and then demanding that they sit still and pay attention in class in subsequent years is asking a lot. Better to introduce structure and age-appropriate learning right from the start, rather than try to suddenly impose martial law Where the Wild Things Are at some arbitrary 1st or 2nd grade year.
Free play is great, and appropriate for young children. The same goes for structured and unstructured social interactions with other children, but there's no need for teachers and schools to provide this. They should be getting that at home.
Finally, with more direct regard to the ideas espoused in this thread; it's always easy to go from structure to freedom, from work to fun. It is much harder to move in the opposite direction. To focus on free play and "letting kids be kids" for the first 5-6 years of a child's life, and then demanding that they sit still and pay attention in class in subsequent years is asking a lot. Better to introduce structure and age-appropriate learning right from the start, rather than try to suddenly impose martial law Where the Wild Things Are at some arbitrary 1st or 2nd grade year.
You and several others on this thread don't get it. Play is work for young children. They learn through play.
Note that one of the problems I see in our society and in our schools is the lack of social skills. Since we no longer allow the children to learn this in preK and K, kids have a much harder time working together or paying attention in school. Kids seem to think that it's ok to fight with others, talk back (both to other kids and teachers) and they don't know how to cope with bullying. When I was growing up, kids learned how to cope by playing with kids of all ages and solving their own problems. Because we are pushing them into classrooms and having them rely on adults to solve problems, they don't have a clue how to cope. Play is how kids learn to deal with their emotions.
Note that one of the problems I see in our society and in our schools is the lack of social skills. Since we no longer allow the children to learn this in preK and K, kids have a much harder time working together or paying attention in school. Kids seem to think that it's ok to fight with others, talk back (both to other kids and teachers) and they don't know how to cope with bullying. When I was growing up, kids learned how to cope by playing with kids of all ages and solving their own problems. Because we are pushing them into classrooms and having them rely on adults to solve problems, they don't have a clue how to cope. Play is how kids learn to deal with their emotions.
Unstructured freely chosen play is a testing ground for life.
They won't ever get it. Research is firmly in the "learning through play" in the early childhood years, but they either don't know about it or ignore it.
That is sad. Recess, art and play time should be the main components of a good preschool program. Academics should be secondary. I don't understand what the rush is towards trying to force kids to read earlier and earlier. It seems completely pointless and counterproductive.
A creative teacher should have been able to make any lesson at that level an art project or game. I can do it with most 4th grade lessons. There is no reason for those to be cut. The only result I can see is poor behavior from lack of movement.
A creative teacher should have been able to make any lesson at that level an art project or game. I can do it with most 4th grade lessons. There is no reason for those to be cut. The only result I can see is poor behavior from lack of movement.
I agree that the teachers can make lessons fun. Good teachers make all of the difference in the world. Kids still need plenty of time for free play though. Unstructured, child led free play is just as important as a fun game that a teacher uses to teach language or math. That unstructured free play time is what is getting lost in the push towards increased academic standards and that is what I find sad. There needs to be a balance.
I agree that the teachers can make lessons fun. Good teachers make all of the difference in the world. Kids still need plenty of time for free play though. Unstructured, child led free play is just as important as a fun game that a teacher uses to teach language or math. That unstructured free play time is what is getting lost in the push towards increased academic standards and that is what I find sad. There needs to be a balance.
I agree, but if you can make the lessons fun, engaging, and thought provoking the students learn quicker allowing for the free time. Students learn by doing and teaching others not listening. As a teacher there is no way I could cut recess. I think I need it as much as the kids.
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.
