Sometimes being a teacher, even one with no children of her own (or, perhaps, at least 30 of her own per year!), leads me to think about child-rearing and school-based education, and a comparison of the two and of how things used to be....
Add to this, waking up to NPR and hearing stories on two successive Thursdays about brain-based research about emotional and cognitive development, after reading about said topics for two courses, makes me wonder how to fit it all together. My "fit" would be how we define the activity of learning and how we construct the school experience based on that belief.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=76838288
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19212514
Well, in the HT100 project I'm working on, there's something to be said about physical activity and its benefits for helping people think better. In the NPR stories linked to this entry, there's something to be said about playing (aka, "goofing off") that helps social and emotional development. So, playing is a good thing. Playing with others--as these stories show (look at the cites of the research!)--is even better. As the stories demonstrate, play can lead to development, even of self-regulation.
I wonder about the conclusions posited in the second story (from this past Thursday, Feb. 28), however. Modelling of process, even affective process, is helpful for the learner. But isn't being instructed by your teacher (being guided through a questionnaire about what you will do while playing) the antithesis of "free play"? It smacks of overdirection and, seriously, I wonder if this use of executive cortex will have some emotional burnout effects later in life. This executive cortex training is eerily reminiscient of what many Boomer parents do when overscheduling their children. I have worked with some of these kids. "Go and play by yourself" is hardly an option in their world, because they're too busy "excelling." To these children, what they've learned to do in school is to find to right answers to they can get good jobs--and they're can be screaming emotional messes when they can't get the knowledge necessary to excel in the commodified educational system. You know who these kids are--they demand to know "Will that be on the test?!"
(Yes, I told you I had opinions...).
School should include play-- running around recess and in-classroom playtime. This would be the opposite of "studying" for standardized tests. The rest of the day should include play and not school.* This does not exclude learning, however.
Some of the most important learning that occurs in the school years is social. Socialization is vital because these children will ultimately live, work, compete with, and love their peer group. (That's peer group, not parents as best friends.) That means knowing how to interact and figure out how to interact with others one's own age and process information by oneself. It means getting hit on the head by Allejandro when you call him bad names. It means learning to share your toys with Keisha. It means letting Carrie get her hair brushed for a change. It means jumping bikes off of ramps, hopscotch and jumprope, and wandering around aimlessly. Later on it means working in a quality circle or living in a democracy. Play is where children practice skills for cognition and for affect that will make them good species members later in life.
Closer to home, it means that running around the Southern Illinois countryside with five other kids, chasing Luna moths and hunting for snipe, was a valuable childhood experience, and I couldn't agree more...
*Depending on the age. Homework can be valuable practice for thinking skills if it is an authentic activity (see Grant Wiggins for more info in this area!)
http://www.grantwiggins.org/
[working on adding tags--will revise...]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Cath--I enjoyed reading your opinions:) Truly, how can a child's imagination run far, deep and wide if it is bounded by all "should-do" activities.
This entry also makes me think of an article I read in the Boston Globe some months ago about high school students applying for college: for several years, students (and parents) have been on a race to excel in several activities and show leadership, etc. to get into competitive colleges.
But what about the child who does not have access to exotic - or even the typical h.s. activities - and instead, works after school and/or during the summers at a local store? There is a lot to be learned in these endeavors (time management, diplomacy, customer service, to name a few). I think these are quite similar to your ideas behind 'free play'.
Post a Comment