O.T. Failure is no longer P.C.
curmudgeon
http://www.click2houston.com/education/4753905/detail.html
Basically, a group of "....teachers [in England]
propose to replace the word
"failed" with the phrase "deferred success."
So the Terrorist bombings in London, on the 21st of July
was a Deferred Success ?
Or should I say an Incomplete Victory ?
Suzy Charnas
"curmudgeon" <britica...@bresnan.net> wrote:
Oh god oh god oh god; it's catching. We're doomed.
SMC
Pogonip
Their point is well taken, if the school calls the child a failure.
However, I think it is the performance that was a failure. The student
failed to complete the requirements. That does not make the student a
failure. It's even possible that the student did it deliberately,
thereby succeeding. Why do educated people not understand the difference?
On this side of the Atlantic, there is much ado about "self-esteem"
without ever addressing the need to earn it by achievement. How can an
entitled self-esteem be of any worth? It is only by challenging oneself
and conquering some difficult bit that a person can increase
self-esteem. At least, that's my view of it. I think we cheat children
of the opportunity to gain real self-esteem by overcoming some obstacle
or learning some new material. But maybe I'm just a cranky old woman.
--
Joanne
stitches @ singerlady.reno.nv.us.earth
ToddM326
stickers to honor roll students because it was making the non-honor
roll students feel bad? (i.e. "My child is an honor roll student at
XYZ School.")
I think we NEED to encourage these kids to feel bad about not
succeeding, not coddle them. Perhaps they will care more if they
realize that unless they work hard, they fail.
I truely wish that I could go back and fix the mistakes I made during
my education based on what I know now.
Mary
>without ever addressing the need to earn it by achievement. How can an
>entitled self-esteem be of any worth? It is only by challenging oneself
>and conquering some difficult bit that a person can increase
>self-esteem. At least, that's my view of it. I think we cheat children
>of the opportunity to gain real self-esteem by overcoming some obstacle
>or learning some new material. But maybe I'm just a cranky old woman.
Eehhhh, maybe. But the stronger possibility is that you're intelligent
and made an astute observation.
Mary
Annie C
"Mary" <mrfea...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1122049527.7...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
I have to agree with that intelligent, cranky old woman ;)
There's a lot to be said for learning by one's mistakes..
and it's from working through real challenges (winning or losing) that we
grow, learn, and gain confidence...
Annie
Pogonip
> "Mary" <mrfea...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1122049527.7...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> |
> | and made an astute observation.
> |
> | Mary
> |
>
> I have to agree with that intelligent, cranky old woman ;)
> There's a lot to be said for learning by one's mistakes..
> and it's from working through real challenges (winning or losing) that we
> grow, learn, and gain confidence...
>
> Annie
>
No wonder I like this group so much! What an intelligent bunch of
people are contributors. ;-)
Now, if they would just put us in charge of things.......
Peter Meilinger
>"Mary" <mrfea...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:1122049527.7...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>| >On this side of the Atlantic, there is much ado about "self-esteem"
>| >without ever addressing the need to earn it by achievement. How can an
>| >entitled self-esteem be of any worth? It is only by challenging oneself
>| >and conquering some difficult bit that a person can increase
>| >self-esteem. At least, that's my view of it. I think we cheat children
>| >of the opportunity to gain real self-esteem by overcoming some obstacle
>| >or learning some new material. But maybe I'm just a cranky old woman.
>| Eehhhh, maybe. But the stronger possibility is that you're intelligent
>| and made an astute observation.
>I have to agree with that intelligent, cranky old woman ;)
>There's a lot to be said for learning by one's mistakes..
>and it's from working through real challenges (winning or losing) that we
>grow, learn, and gain confidence...
I can agree with all this, but. And unfortunately I'm going to have
a hard time expressing the but part.
Kids have to learn about failing, yes. And failing can often lead
to later success, yes. On the other hand, there really is a self-
fulfilling prophecy or downward spiral for some kids in our
school system. They don't meet whatever standard is set for them
(and sometimes that's because of things that are completely out
of their control) and so they don't do as well. They don't do
as well, and so they get treated as and feel like second class
citizens. They're being treated like second class citizens,
so why bother. And so on. And not all of that is the school
system itself, by any means. A failing kid's peers and family
can have a pretty horrible effect on them.
Now, I don't think changed "failure" to "deferred success" is
going to fix a damned thing. A different, better term might
do a little bit of good - "failure" is a fairly loaded word,
after all - but changing terms is just treating the symptoms.
Hell, most of the time it won't even do that much good, no
matter how well intentioned it is.
So I don't know. This is an idiotic story, granted. But I
think it's a dumb attempt to address a real problem, more
than just plain dumbness all the way through.
Pete
Pogonip
Well, I don't disagree at all. Way back in the day when I was teaching,
I tried a small experiment with a couple of students. It was very
limited because, like all teachers, I had way too many kids to do this
with all of them, but with these guys, I never addressed what they got
wrong but only what they got right. Sometimes it was only one answer in
a quiz, but I pointed out that they got it correct and didn't mention
the ones they missed.
I was astonished to watch both these boys improve week after week.
So, when I see administrators say that the number of students in a class
doesn't affect the quality of teaching, I reply B.S.!
About 8 years ago, I was subbing in an alternative education high
school, and it is clear that what you say is true. These kids tended to
be the rejects from the traditional schools. Some of them thrived in
the alternative setting, but some took their "failure" to heart and
lived it. The "graduation" rate is lower than any of the traditional
schools.
If we really want to leave no child behind, we need to make the effort
to reach each child to help him maximize his own potential. Children
are not widgets to be put on an assembly line and run through the
system. Changing the labels is not changing anything significant.
Larisa
>I tried a small experiment with a couple of students. It was very
>limited because, like all teachers, I had way too many kids to do this
>with all of them, but with these guys, I never addressed what they got
>wrong but only what they got right. Sometimes it was only one answer in
>a quiz, but I pointed out that they got it correct and didn't mention
>the ones they missed.
>
>I was astonished to watch both these boys improve week after week.
I do this with all my math tutorees - I tell them that they're good at
math, that they can get this stuff, and praise them to the skies when
they actually get it (and refrain from insulting them when they don't).
It works every time. Praise - deserved praise - can be a
self-fulfilling prophecy.
I even have some rubber bracelets with "MATH GENIUS" on them - when a
kid gets an A, or solves a really tough math puzzle, they earn a
bracelet. Amazing, how hard some of the kids work for those things.
Though I do have to say that undeserved self-esteem is the worst thing
you can encourage in a child, *deserved* self-esteem is probably the
best.
LM
Annie C
"Larisa" <purple...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122063595....@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Yes -- because they know it's real and deserved and they want it.. I think
when children are praised incessantly for every single thing, that they pick
up on the disingenuousness of it (kids have 'radar' for this :). On a train
recently from NY city up to White Plains, there was a mom, grandma, and
little girl. The little girl had a new doll with a new wardrobe.. and no
matter what this child would do - styling the doll's hair, selecting the
outfit, etc -- the mom would whoop with praise. Loudly. It was actually
rather weird, not to mention annoying because whe never stopped talking..
and I wondered if the child really believed her. It just sounded over the
top and rather insincere. Which is why I think your comments are oh so
true..
Annie
Larisa
>when children are praised incessantly for every single thing, that they pick
>up on the disingenuousness of it (kids have 'radar' for this :). On a train
>recently from NY city up to White Plains, there was a mom, grandma, and
>little girl. The little girl had a new doll with a new wardrobe.. and no
>matter what this child would do - styling the doll's hair, selecting the
>outfit, etc -- the mom would whoop with praise. Loudly. It was actually
>rather weird, not to mention annoying because whe never stopped talking..
>and I wondered if the child really believed her. It just sounded over the
>top and rather insincere. Which is why I think your comments are oh so
>true..
Yeah. I've seen teachers like that, too. :) Of course the kids pick
up on that - kids are not stupid. I don't know why so many adults
assume that kids are unable to distinguish between sincerity and
falsity.
I have often noticed that in order to make real contact with a kid -
particularly a pre-teen age kid - you need to be real with them. You
can't fob them off with a false front; they see right through it. When
I praise a kid, it's real praise - I am really sincerely proud of the
kid. When I'm dissatisfied with their performance, I make that known
too (What?!! Only 98% on a test?!! What happened to the other
2%?!!!). You do need to be somewhat theatrical in dealing with kids -
but there needs to be real emotion and real concern underneath all the
drama. You have to see the kid as a real human being with real,
individual concerns and worries and likes and dislikes. That's the
only way they'll take you seriously.
LM
KLee
<<The thing that intrigues me most about all this is that the reaction
that people have to, say, a child's 'failure' in its first attempts
walk is quite different to that which many if not most have to the
same child's 'failure' to achieve a particular goal or standard in
school. Parents will spend endless hours encouraging the child to
walk, but later on will not spend even minutes helping the child to,
say, learn their tables, or to use correct grammar or even, dare I say
it, to use decent table manners. Yet, once again, those same parents
will spend even more endless hours teaching kids to play their (the
parents') favourite sports and helping them to attain the necessary
skills. >>
As an educator, I find it incredible that there are parents out there
who, even at the kindergarten level, who are unwilling to assist their
child with homework or school assignments. I had one child this past
year who never brought in even *one* homework assignment. Apparently,
the parent didn't think it was important, and every, that child got a
"U" (unacceptable) on his report card. We even discussed it in
conferences, and the parent couldn't be bothered. I had another child
who had an absolutely *awfu* home life, but she brought her homework
every time. It was obvious that she took the initiative to complete
the assignments herself -- they were often incomplete, or done
incorrectly, but the child explained that she didn't have any help. I
gave her credit because she at least tried. And all on her own, too.
It amazes me, the apathy these parents display. It crosses all social,
racial, and income levels, so it's not anything you can pinpoint, and
say "Ah! So, that's the cause!"
And the things some of these kids *say!* My mother would have made my
life flash before my eyes if i would have even *thought* half the
things these kids say!
Parents would rather complain to the administration that the demands on
their children are overly burdensome, rather than spend five minutes
showing them how to write the letter "B" correctly.
KLee
Pogonip
>
> Parents would rather complain to the administration that the demands on
> their children are overly burdensome, rather than spend five minutes
> showing them how to write the letter "B" correctly.
>
> KLee
>
These children tend to live in homes with absolutely no reading
material, too. Not a book, a magazine, or even a newspaper. We won't
even get into the lack of pictures on the walls, or music beyond the
radio. Which is usually turned to talk programs, come to think of it.
KLee
<<These children tend to live in homes with absolutely no reading
material, too. Not a book, a magazine, or even a newspaper. We won't
even get into the lack of pictures on the walls, or music beyond the
radio. Which is usually turned to talk programs, come to think of
it.>>
Not all of the time. You, having been in education, would not be all
that surprised at how many of the parents seem fairly intelligent, but
who don't care a smidge for the education of their children.
Often, the homes *are* devoid of reading material, and any sort of
mind-expanding influences. The trend is that the school is to blame
for all of the child's ills. Never the parent. The parent wants to
put the onus on the education sector -- Johnny isn't *bad*, the teacher
is mean. Susie punched another child in the face -- the teacher must
not good control over the class. What did the girl do to provoke my
beloved Susie? -- and nothing is ever the child's fault.
It takes up so much time that you could use for teaching.
KLee
Turk
"failure" label can be catastrophic for a child, especially when he
hears it from a parent or authority figure. "Failing", on the other
hand, is something event-driven for a child, such as failing a test.
"Failing" is not a good thing but it is something you can do something
about, and can be a motivator for a young mind. A child can grasp the
notion of "passing" a test, and working towards getting good grades.
Turk
needles
*Politically Correct*
Culturally Sensitive,
Multicultural Unexceptionable,
Appropriately Inclusive.
The term "politically correct", co-opted by the white power elite as a tool
for attacking multiculturalism is no longer "politically correct".
The American Hyphen Society (circa) 1992.
***********************************
"It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and
Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought, should be literally unthinkable,
at
least so far as thought is dependant on words."
George Orwell *1984*
Catherine Fiorello
> You have to
> see the kid as a real human being with real, individual concerns and
> worries and likes and dislikes.
There's the key! I'd send a kid to you anytime!
Cathy
Hurricane7
Patricia
[to email remove the knot]
"Turk" <chica...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1122141871.4...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Mary
KLee wrote:
>> As an educator, I find it incredible that there are parents out there
> who, even at the kindergarten level, who are unwilling to assist their
> child with homework or school assignments. >>
Why children are given homework in kindergarden?
Oh, but, I know the answer. It's because we're trying to create future
wage slaves accustomed to the idea that work is 24 hours a day and that
one doesn't have a single moment when one is not at the beck and call
of a boss.
Five year olds should be outside getting some fresh air,
sunshine and exercise after school.
If it's pouring buckets or a blizzard, five year olds should be
drawing or playing with clay or putting a tablecloth over a table and
making a fort. May I note that playing with clay will improve their
fine motor skills more than endlessly printing the alphabet?
If you want to create life-long learners, you've got to leave
kids time to exercise their imaginations. They've got to develop their
own lines of inquiry. That's what play free of adult structures does.
cheers,
Mary Askew
Joan in GB-W
>
>
> Why children are given homework in kindergarden?
> Oh, but, I know the answer. It's because we're trying to create future
> wage slaves accustomed to the idea that work is 24 hours a day and that
> one doesn't have a single moment when one is not at the beck and call
> of a boss.
> Five year olds should be outside getting some fresh air,
> sunshine and exercise after school.
>
I agree to a certain extant. But I don't think a little homework hurts
them. My granddaughter Sofie finished kindergarten this spring. They
occasionally had homework and she just loved it. It made her feel a little
"grown up." She left kindergarten so far ahead of where my generation was
at that age. I only hope the progress they make at that early age
translates to the upper grades.
Joan
Mary
> Oh, but, I know the answer. It's because we're trying to create future
>wage slaves accustomed to the idea that work is 24 hours a day and that
>one doesn't have a single moment when one is not at the beck and call
>of a boss.
> Five year olds should be outside getting some fresh air,
>sunshine and exercise after school.
> If it's pouring buckets or a blizzard, five year olds should be
>drawing or playing with clay or putting a tablecloth over a table and
>making a fort. May I note that playing with clay will improve their
>fine motor skills more than endlessly printing the alphabet?
>
> If you want to create life-long learners, you've got to leave
>kids time to exercise their imaginations. They've got to develop their
>own lines of inquiry. That's what play free of adult structures does.
Go, Mary. I have a (former) co-worker who actually limits his kids to
one after-school activity per quarter so that they have time to play in
addition to their homework and their soccer/music/volleyball/whatever
lessons.
If I hadn't had a lot of time to myself as a child I don't know if I
would have developed into the voracious reader that I am today. An
awful lot of kids I know now seem to regard reading as something that
they only do for school. After school they have sports and lessons and
almost no free time. It seems sad to me.
Mary
Hurricane7
Patricia
[to email remove the knot]
"Mary" <mrfea...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1122477984....@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
KLee
<< Why children are given homework in kindergarden?
Oh, but, I know the answer. It's because we're trying to create future
wage slaves accustomed to the idea that work is 24 hours a day and that
one doesn't have a single moment when one is not at the beck and call
of a boss.
Five year olds should be outside getting some fresh air,
sunshine and exercise after school.>>
Children in kindergarten are given *very* simple homework. Or, at
least, the ones in my class are. As in the case of "Draw two things
that begin with the letter B." Or, "write the capital and lowercase
letter "M" five times each." The homework is not taxing in the
slightest. The reason that my class has homework is because the
administration demands that we assign it. Homework is good in the
sense that it gives the parents (the ones who bother to do homework
with their children) an idea of where their child is in the education
process. It also reaffirms what we are teaching in school. Most of
the homework my class gets is on simple letter formation -- handwriting
drills. If a child learns how to correctly form letters and starts off
his writing with good form, then he's less apt to make mistakes later
that would cause him to have to unlearn bad habits. When he
matriculates to first grade, the first month or so of school isn't
spent with him having to relearn how to correctly form his letters. It
also aids in reading. When we drill letters, the more quickly they
learn them. And, when they learn them quickly, they begin to associate
sounds with the letters, and that is the building block of reading.
Early readers are more successful in school.
I agree with you that kindergarteners need to be outside. They need to
be playing with clay and playing dressup. We do all those things. We
also sing songs, count, do science experiments, and a thousand and one
other things. We do not stress that our children become slaves to the
time clock -- you must not have spent a lot of time with
kindergarteners lately if you think that you can get them to do
anything they don't want to do.
Instead of assuming right off the bat that I'm some sort of
slave-driving martinet, why don't you ask me first about our classroom
routine? I don't automatically assume you're normally snappish,
although that's how you're coming off. I don't know whether this is an
issue that you're very sensitive to or what. It was not my intent to
offend anyone, just to remark about how I marvel at the fact that some
parents don't want to help their child be successful in school. It is
not my intent to offend you now, although I'm a little puzzled at your
contentious tone.
I do my best to foster a life-long love of learning in my students. I
would not do this job otherwise. I would also not volunteer my time
teaching children to read, or be a Girl Scout Leader. I have dedicated
my life to children, and not one of them has turned out to be a little,
time clock-punching robot.
Hurricane7
kindergarten do not need home work...under no circumstances and I do *know*
that these programs incorporate play time it is still not the same as being
at home with family /friends. School environment is still not a replacement
for home (ok so I am being very very general here) but the principle of
giving these children homework at this age is just nonsense and I (if I had
children in that age bracket) would bring it up with the school board and
the teacher involved.
Sorry we may have to agree to disagree
Just for the record I am the mother of 2 boys ages 24 & 29, and as we have
always lived in a large city (Toronto) they both started school at either 3
or 4 (depending on when their birthdays fall) so they had 2 years of a
kindergarten format before attending all day. I know that teaching methods
have changed/improved/moved forward and backward since my kids were young
but it did no harm for either of them to *not* have had formal homework
until the later.
I also have been a Brownie leader then on to Girl Guides even though I had
boys!
My boys were in organized sports/clubs but they also had down time, as a
matter of fact that down time in the elder led to a very successful job as a
IT geek (yes we do call him that!) and his love of computer games was the
beginning of his love of computers of which he only had exposure to at home
in those days of early home pc's....in fact it is due to him that I learned
anything at all about the internet/newsgroups/elists as I had never used a
pc except at home (I work in retail and still do)
I hope this sheds a little bit of light on why I hold this opinion and I
think most will attest here that I have a very high regard for the teaching
profession (right Melissa ;-0 )
Patricia
[to email remove the knot]
"KLee" <mistres...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1122491471.6...@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
KLee
<<I ment no offence to you Klee but I still stand by my agreement that
kids in
kindergarten do not need home work...under no circumstances and I do
*know* that these programs incorporate play time it is still not the
same as being at home with family /friends. School environment is
still not a replacement for home (ok so I am being very very general
here) but the principle of giving these children homework at this age
is just nonsense and I (if I had children in that age bracket) would
bring it up with the school board and the teacher involved.>>
I take no exception with people who have differing opinions from me --
everyone is allowed their opinion -- but I do take exception to people
who codify me because I follow standard operating procedures. I can
hardly tell the school system that I don't think homework is a Good
Thing. I would rather stay employed. I was offended by Mary's post
because it seemed to me that she judged me before she ever asked me
question one. She never bothered to ask if my class had down time.
(They do. They have recess daily, and sometimes twice a day. We have
free time every day. They also go out of the classroom for Art, Music,
and P.E.) I felt liked she judged without getting all the information
first. I would never presume to make a comment without at least asking
for more information first.
As far as the homework goes, like I said -- it's not taxing in the
slightest. The assignments are timed to take only about five minutes
each. We study a letter a week -- the assignments could be: draw two
things that start with that letter; write the letter five times; or
bring in something that begins with the letter. At the beginning of
the school year, the homework is generally a tool for the parent -- it
lets them know what we are doing in school, and allows them a chance to
see how their child is progressing. It's not even assigned every
night! I give homework about twice a week, three times if I see a
particular child needs extra practice. Homework is never given over
the weekend. And, I allow homework to be turned in late, so it's not
like if you miss it, you've totally messed up, and there's no chance to
redeem yourself.
Is school comparable to being surrounded by family and friends, no. I
agree that children need down time. They need socialization time.
They need time to experiment, and laugh, and make mud pies. They get
all that. They also get learning, a safe enviornment to learn in, and
a teacher who loves them dearly. At least, mine do. I can only speak
for me. I don't think I'm doing a bad job. I have children that I
taught *years* ago still coming to see me. I still get Christmas cards
and graduation cards from former students. They don't think I did such
a bad job, either.
I would rather have people ask me questions than make snap judgements
based on what they think they know.
Hurricane7
Canadian kids at the age attend only half day, I know their day is
structured around certain activities which also includes a period of time
out of doors...it sounds like where you teach they go for a full day?
SOP--well of course we all have to do that no matter what our jobs are and
of course you could not hope to keep your livelihood if you advocated
otherwise....same as the rest of us
Patricia
[to email remove the knot]
"KLee" <mistres...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >
>
Larisa
Thanks. If the kid wants an online math tutor, incidentally - by all
means, send them to me.
LM (who acquired yet another new student today...)
Larisa
>>kids time to exercise their imaginations. They've got to develop their
>>own lines of inquiry. That's what play free of adult structures does.
>
>Go, Mary. I have a (former) co-worker who actually limits his kids to
>one after-school activity per quarter so that they have time to play in
>addition to their homework and their soccer/music/volleyball/whatever
>lessons.
>
>If I hadn't had a lot of time to myself as a child I don't know if I
>would have developed into the voracious reader that I am today. An
>awful lot of kids I know now seem to regard reading as something that
>they only do for school. After school they have sports and lessons and
>almost no free time. It seems sad to me.
Hmm. I had very little free time as a child, and yet it didn't prevent
me from becoming a book junkie. It helped that I traveled to all my
after-school activities on public transit - what else is there to do on
a subway train but read? But still - I went to school, I did
homework, I spent 1.5 hours a day every day practicing the piano (and
went to music school 3 times a week) and 3 hours twice a week doing
advanced math (not including the homework), and it didn't hurt me any.
I'm still a bookworm. I still carved out little bits of time for doing
things I liked - mostly reading, though I was also fond of science
experiments, improvising on the piano, and walking my tortoise.
The best way to make a kid into a lifelong book addict is to treat
reading like TV or movies - as entertainment. Limit the kid to 1 book
a week. Forbid them to read if their homework is not done. Let them
see you relaxing with a book and a cup of hot chocolate at the end of a
hard day. Then they'll connect reading with pleasure.
Larisa
>sunshine and exercise after school.
That's what my mother kept saying to me when she wanted me to go
outside and play, and I wanted to stay inside and read. As a result,
I developed a hatred of the outdoors that took me quite a while to
overcome. I still prefer to exercise indoors.
> If it's pouring buckets or a blizzard, five year olds should be
>drawing or playing with clay or putting a tablecloth over a table and
>making a fort. May I note that playing with clay will improve their
>fine motor skills more than endlessly printing the alphabet?
5-year-olds, just like 25-year-olds or 75-year-olds, are all different
and have different tastes and desires. Some like to play outside and
run around and jump. Some like to stay indoors and draw flowers. Some
like to listen to stories or to read books; some like to write stories
or to act them out. Some like to play with dolls, and others don't.
Some actually like to print the alphabet, even. There's no "should"
about what one finds enjoyable - it's either fun or it isn't.
LM
Lynn allen
> walking my tortoise
Okay, this made me laugh.
"Mommmm, I'm gonna go walk my tortoise. Be back Saturday!"
Hahahaha!
Lymaree
Mary
KLee wrote:
>
> Instead of assuming right off the bat that I'm some sort of
> slave-driving martinet, why don't you ask me first about our classroom
> routine? >>
I'm sorry you were offended but I really do not think it
necessary to ask every teacher about his classroom routine before
opining about education policy.
I think the adminstration in your school district is wrong to
assign homework to kindergarden children. I think it is silly to
assign homework in grades 1-4 for all the reasons previously stated.
And, emphatically, I think this entire trend--which seems to be
national in the US-- is geared solely to producing docile future
employees. None of those statements should or need be read as comment
upon your own teaching skills or committment to your students.
I want to be really clear here: as education policy is
currently formed in the USA, I believe the intellectual development
of children is being destroyed through punitive practices like
mandatory testing and piling on of repetitive homework. In essence
such policy entrenches the unconscious belief that people are born
lazy and have to forced to learn. I think that is hooey and anyone who
thinks that shouldn't be allowed near a classroom let alone a very
young child.
Human beings are born wanting to learn: it's in our DNA.
cheers,
Mary Askew
KLee
<<oh wait....how long is a school day for kindergarten child?>>
Our day is full-day. We have a LOT of time to get in all the things we
need to get done. Plus, there are always contingency plans in place
for inclement weather. I always have a cache of "bad weather" stuff
that only gets dragged out on those days that it's too terrible to
play. Which, in my section of the country, means rain. We don't get
snow all that often, and when we do, you'd better believe that we are
outside in it, with microscopes and bells on!
Mary Askew said:
<<I think the adminstration in your school district is wrong to
assign homework to kindergarden children. I think it is silly to
assign homework in grades 1-4 for all the reasons previously stated.
And, emphatically, I think this entire trend--which seems to be
national in the US-- is geared solely to producing docile future
employees. None of those statements should or need be read as comment
upon your own teaching skill or committment to your students.>>
I apologize if I wrongly inferred insult where you meant to offer none.
I agree that excessive homework is prohibitive, and can discourage
certain students. As the students age, the homework load increases. I
have a child entering fourth grade, and her assignments have increased
each year. She is now to the point that homework takes an hour each
night. I expect the bar to be raised ever further for next year's
assignments. That's just the way it is. I don't know any school
system that does not require homework from primary grade students,
except certain Montessori places.
For students that enjoy school, and who perform well in school,
homework is no agonizing trial. For those that dislike the typical
institutional education, homework is often a chore, and one that the
student will often just not complete.
Whether or not the US is moving toward a trend in creating "docile
future employees" is not for me to say. I think if you look hard
enough, you can find bad things to say about nearly anything. My
husband is a great detractor of organized religion. He has his reasons
for disliking it, as you do about your distaste for the state of
education. Again, my apologies if I took things a little more
personally than you had intended.
KLee
Larisa
>>> Five year olds should be outside getting some fresh air,
>>>sunshine and exercise after school.
>> That's what my mother kept saying to me when she wanted me to go
>> outside and play, and I wanted to stay inside and read. As a result,
>> I developed a hatred of the outdoors that took me quite a while to
>> overcome. I still prefer to exercise indoors.
>
>form of cabin fever if I'm not out walking for at least a half hour every
>day. I usually manage a couple hours, because I walk most places I go, and
>when I don't walk all the way, I walk to and from bus stops. I get antsy
>if I'm kept inside all the time.
People are different. I hate walking outdoors - specifically walking.
I love climbing trees, splashing around on the beach, turning
cartwheels in the grass, or practicing yoga poses or martial-arts moves
in the park. But every walk I take begins to feel like a death march
after about 5 minutes. Maybe it's a function of being out of shape,
cardiovascularly speaking - but it's always been this way for me.
>> 5-year-olds, just like 25-year-olds or 75-year-olds, are all different
>> and have different tastes and desires. Some like to play outside and
>> run around and jump. Some like to stay indoors and draw flowers. Some
>> like to listen to stories or to read books; some like to write stories
>> or to act them out. Some like to play with dolls, and others don't.
>> Some actually like to print the alphabet, even. There's no "should"
>> about what one finds enjoyable - it's either fun or it isn't.
>
>I have one "should" - children should be exposed to a wide range of
>activities, and keep at each one long enough to give it a fair trial.
Fair enough - I'd agree with that one. With the caveat that if a child
really really hates an activity, they shouldn't be forced to stick with
it for any length of time at all.
>Not all at once of course - I tend to think that one major, must be
>transported, takes more than one session a week, activity per child per
>time period is plenty, especially during the playoff or competition or
>concert season. But you can't find out what you like unless you have a
>chance to try lots of different things.
True. Though as a child, I wasn't happy unless i was involved in at
least 4 or 5 major, must be transported, more than one session a week,
activities. The nice thing about taking lots and lots of lessons as a
child, though, is that you reap the benefit of all those lessons as an
adult. Every skill I learned through my extracurricular activities has
made me money at some point in my adult life - even the skills I
thought were completely useless (origami, for instance).
LM
Larisa
>homework is no agonizing trial. For those that dislike the typical
>institutional education, homework is often a chore, and one that the
>student will often just not complete.
It depends on how much homework is assigned. I have a student who is a
very responsible child, does well in school, enjoys school, etc etc
etc. No dislikes of institutional education here. But then her math
teacher assigned her 84 pages of homework to complete in 5 days. Yes,
84. We counted. At least 15 problems on each page, which makes 1260
problems to complete in 5 days. The problems were all different, too
- this was a new teacher, and she "wanted to see what the students
knew". The child was in tears - she had other homework to do, too,
and she was staying up till midnight or later trying to get it all
done.
She didn't get it done, incidentally. Nor did anyone else in that
class. It just wasn't possible. And when her mother complained to
the teacher, the teacher's response was "Oh, I didn't mean that they
should do *all* of it!" Funny - the assignment sheet seemed to
indicate that she did, in fact, mean for them to do all of it.
LM
Pogonip
--snip---
>
> I want to be really clear here: as education policy is
> currently formed in the USA, I believe the intellectual development
> of children is being destroyed through punitive practices like
> mandatory testing and piling on of repetitive homework. In essence
> such policy entrenches the unconscious belief that people are born
> lazy and have to forced to learn. I think that is hooey and anyone who
> thinks that shouldn't be allowed near a classroom let alone a very
> young child.
>
> Human beings are born wanting to learn: it's in our DNA.
>
>
> cheers,
> Mary Askew
>
What worries me is the effect on imagination. Children's lives are so
organized now, so regimented, that many children respond to free play
time by asking for direction. Without someone clearly in charge, or a
commercially packaged product, some -- perhaps many -- children are at a
loss as to how to proceed. "What are the rules?"
The incredible variety of commercially prepared toys, games, etc. is
truly amazing to me. As a child (back in the middle ages, of course) I
had few toys relative to today's standards, yet created toys from empty
boxes, sticks of wood, bits of fabric and paper, crayons, string. I
don't see children doing that today.
I remember making myself a bow and arrows from wood found on the ground,
and my father going off and buying me a "real" bow, then expecting me to
learn to use it. Which I did, but which I never enjoyed the way I did
my own. Mine was a toy. His was serious sporting equipment.
Bud
Having been born in the middle ages also, play was more important than
school. Getting hollered at by Mom for tearing apart things just so I could
see how it worked. I begged for an Erector set when I was very young and
spent a lot of time with that. But being outside playing with the neighbor's
kids was more fun than recess at school and we were out until we were
hollered at to get inside and get ready for bed. Yeah, home work is rather
onerous for a young kid who should be playing and arguing with the kids
around them. At around 10 we were making our own kites using a paste made of
flour and water and using thread to fly them, surprising how strong a few
hundred feet of thread is. And when the thread did break, the chase was on
to get it back before we lost sight of it. The only homework I remember is
book reports, and I hated to read as it took away my play time and I found
nothing I wanted to read that was interesting to me. It was when I was past
14 until I started reading SF, now that was interesting.
Bud, lots of more stories to tell of younger days without homework in the
way
--
Pogonip
>
>
> Having been born in the middle ages also, play was more important than
> school. Getting hollered at by Mom for tearing apart things just so I could
> see how it worked. I begged for an Erector set when I was very young and
> spent a lot of time with that. But being outside playing with the neighbor's
> kids was more fun than recess at school and we were out until we were
> hollered at to get inside and get ready for bed. Yeah, home work is rather
> onerous for a young kid who should be playing and arguing with the kids
> around them. At around 10 we were making our own kites using a paste made of
> flour and water and using thread to fly them, surprising how strong a few
> hundred feet of thread is. And when the thread did break, the chase was on
> to get it back before we lost sight of it. The only homework I remember is
> book reports, and I hated to read as it took away my play time and I found
> nothing I wanted to read that was interesting to me. It was when I was past
> 14 until I started reading SF, now that was interesting.
>
> Bud, lots of more stories to tell of younger days without homework in the
> way
I loved to read, and hung out at the library. Also played with friends
and neighbors. As I recall, we did anything that involved getting out
of the house. Long bikerides, picnics, games, make-believe, from a
young, young age through high school. Today, I don't see kids allowed
out of sight of a parent or care-giver, even though there were nasty
predators in the middle ages, too. My parents were over-protective. I
wasn't allowed to ride my sled down the hill next to the house where all
the other kids in town did. When I got to high school, my mother didn't
allow me to leave the house without a specific destination and return
time. But that was very unusual. Today, it would seem 'normal.'
We actually survived without video games, computers, even television.
Not that I'm willing to give them up now.
Mary
>Not that I'm willing to give them up now.
Well, I don't need video games, but I'll keep my TV and computers.
Still, there's a great deal to be said for just playing in the way you
described. We used to roam all over the place -- there was one big old
house that we (inevitably) assumed was occupied by an old lady with a
wart on her nose. We used to put pennies on the railroad tracks before
a train went by, played all sorts of games (some dumber than others --
I remember jumping off my friend's parents' garage roof), climb trees,
play kickball in the street, and so forth. And read. Lots of reading.
Mary
Jenni
cper...@mun.ca wrote on 7/28/05 6:52 AM:
> Larisa <purple...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Five year olds should be outside getting some fresh air,
>>> sunshine and exercise after school.
>
>> That's what my mother kept saying to me when she wanted me to go
>> outside and play, and I wanted to stay inside and read. As a result,
>> I developed a hatred of the outdoors that took me quite a while to
>> overcome. I still prefer to exercise indoors.
>
> My mother said it to me, and I still like walking outdoors, and get a mild
> form of cabin fever if I'm not out walking for at least a half hour every
> day. I usually manage a couple hours, because I walk most places I go, and
> when I don't walk all the way, I walk to and from bus stops. I get antsy
> if I'm kept inside all the time.>>
Am I the only one who got around this by going outside with a book??
Jenni (sure, Ma, I'll go outside, no problem!) ;-)
Bookwyrm
Nope.
We often built 'tents' outside with blankets and the clothesline.
So..........I just went outside and read in the 'tent'.
Hotter than Hades some days, but outside and out-of-sight.
:)
'wyrm
Catherine Fiorello
>> Five year olds should be outside getting some fresh air,
>>sunshine and exercise after school.
>
> That's what my mother kept saying to me when she wanted me to go outside
> and play, and I wanted to stay inside and read. As a result, I developed
> a hatred of the outdoors that took me quite a while to overcome. I still
> prefer to exercise indoors.
I spent a lot of time reading on the swing set....
Cathy
Mary
>> and play, and I wanted to stay inside and read. As a result, I developed
>> a hatred of the outdoors that took me quite a while to overcome. I still
>> prefer to exercise indoors.
>
>I spent a lot of time reading on the swing set....
>Cathy
I preferred to be under the mimosa tree. (This was when we lived in
Louisville, KY, where mimosa trees can grow.) It's a smallish tree
with gorgeous pink flowers in the spring, and the branches were low
enough that it really felt like you were UNDER something. It was a
cool place to read. On the other side of the driveway we had a catalpa
tree that was great for climbing.
Mary
Pogonip
under a spreading banyan.
Bud
I think we would have had a lot of fun Mary if we were kids together.
Not that I had trouble reading, I was first in my class in the first grade,
I just did not care to read out of school.
We got chased off the railroad tracks a lot. It was right next to the area
where we could fly our home made kites. Jumping off the nieghbors garage and
staying on your feet was the object of the game. That was hard to do.
Bud
--
Fran Read
> staying on your feet was the object of the game. That was hard to do.
> Bud
Bloody hard to do!
Fran (with leg elevated)
Catherine Fiorello
> I preferred to be under the mimosa tree. (This was when we lived in
> Louisville, KY, where mimosa trees can grow.) It's a smallish tree with
> gorgeous pink flowers in the spring, and the branches were low enough that
> it really felt like you were UNDER something. It was a cool place to
> read. On the other side of the driveway we had a catalpa tree that was
> great for climbing.
>
> Mary
Ooh, I wish! We were in a new suburb and our trees were little saplings.
*Behind* the house, though, was a great swamp/stream/woods/bird sanctuary
conglomeration. Great for wandering through and catching snakes and stuff,
but not so good for reading.
Cathy
Bud
Fran, that is for younger people, like me 60 some years ago. Once you have
reached maturity, those bones are not so forgiving.
Bud, with porus leg bones
--
kat >^.^<
"Bud" <b...@bud.localhost> wrote in message
news:3l0e7sF...@individual.net...
You tell her, Bud. She's still trying to fly!
--
kat >^.^<
Welcome to Malaria Gardens
Mosquito rides Now Open for the Season
Please hold tightly to small children and pets
Larisa
Alas, my mother forbade that sort of thing - she thought I read too
much as it was, and wanted me to run and jump around like a "normal"
kid. She was probably right about my reading too much, but boy am I
glad that I'm a grownup now and that I don't have to justify my reading
addiction to anyone.
LM (pleasantly contemplating two new mystery novels I just downloaded
onto my PalmPilot...)
Larisa
I spent my summers this way - though usually, alone or with my mother
rather than with other kids. From the time I was 3 to the time I was
10 or so, we spent our summers in a beautiful village in Lithuania; I'd
wander around in the forest picking berries, or splash around in the
nearby lake, or play with our landlady's chickens (or pet the
neighbor's sheep), or just lie around in the grass and stare at the
sky. Oddly, I can't remember reading there - I'm not even sure if we
took any books along. I just remember the forests, the raspberry
thickets, the lakes, and the farm animals.
Alas, they built a nuclear power plant there when I was 10, so we
stopped going there. Pity; it was such a lovely place.
LM
Fran Read
>>>> staying on your feet was the object of the game. That was hard to do.
>>>> Bud
>>>
>>> Bloody hard to do!
>>> Fran (with leg elevated)
>>
>> Fran, that is for younger people, like me 60 some years ago. Once you
>> have
>> reached maturity, those bones are not so forgiving.
>> Bud, with porus leg bones
>
Hahahaha! I'm just working on being able to walk without a limp before I go
back to flying practice!
Fran (planning on dressing up as Quasimodo for the Bookweek Parade)
Charles Bishop
"Larisa" <purple...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Am I the only one who got around this by going outside with a book??
>
>Alas, my mother forbade that sort of thing - she thought I read too
>much as it was, and wanted me to run and jump around like a "normal"
>kid. She was probably right about my reading too much, but boy am I
>glad that I'm a grownup now and that I don't have to justify my reading
>addiction to anyone.
I've been wondering about this for a while now. Like you, I remember being
told to go outside and play, rather than reading. Now, however, there are
all kids of rewards to get kids inside and reading. Looks like we were
right all along.
--
charles