How Children Learn/How Children Fail
The books whose titles I borrowed for the post title are by John Holt, the father of unschooling. We are unschoolers. For me, that means no structured lessons but instead following Sam’s interests and cues and natural interest in the world around him. However, I am totally open to borrowing from other schools of thought (pun intended) wherever it fits.
I had a very interesting conversation a few weeks ago with a friend’s neighbor. She has just signed up her son, who is several months older than Sam, for Montessori preschool, to start this summer. Now, I love Montessori. I love the idea that children learn to perform tasks by actually doing them at their own level and self-correcting their mistakes until they get it right. (I plan to buy a Sam-sized broom one of these days, because he loves to sweep and I want to encourage him by making it more feasible for him to succeed.) There are many things I love about the philosophy, but there is one huge problem with it and it’s a deal-breaker for me. I would actually consider sending Sam part-time (if we had the money) if not for this: imagination is discouraged. Montessori theory is 100% practical. So I tell this woman, who has no idea that we are not planning to send Sam to school at all, that I love Montessori except for this one thing. And I say that I know it varies from school to school and teacher to teacher, but that I disagree with the basic philosophy on that point.
And here is a good example of how defensive parents are: she started to argue with me. She insisted that it’s not true of all schools… and I could actually see the wheels turning as she registered what I’d said, because she backpedaled a little and became friendly again, saying, “as you said, it varies.” And then she told me that the school they visited is very into imagination. They have a library that is arranged by reading ability, and the students have to demonstrate ability before they’re allowed into the advanced section. When they read a book, they sit in a group and talk about how it made them feel.
And I just… said how nice that must be. Because seriously? THAT is imagination?
No. I’m sorry. Just… no. Imagination is not knowing where you are because you were a Knight. It’s forgetting what you were doing because you were thinking about what fairies eat. It is putting on a play with your friends. It’s writing your own book or drawing a picture. Imagination is NOT STRUCTURED (which does not mean you can’t encourage it in a more structured way). And I realize that this woman was just unimaginative herself, and the school may not think that is encouraging imagination. But it still blew my mind.
And according to an NPR article Shelby sent me, imagination is crucial to developing skills we need as adults. And you know what gets in the way of imaginative play, according to the article? All those annoying toys I don’t allow in my house.
Yes, I am being obnoxious. Sometimes it is nice to feel vindicated.
My bad attitude notwithstanding, what do you think about the article? I am really fascinated by the thought that “play” has changed meanings. It’s true, though — it used to mean games and now it means toys.
I’m thinking it’s time to break out my copy of The American Girls Handy Book
Coming soon: my ideas on alternatives to schooling AND homeschooling.
February 23rd, 2008 at 4:23 pm
That doesn’t sound very imaginative to me either. I admit to not knowing *that* much about Montessori, but I think I read that they don’t allow… non-sequential playing. I just made up that term, but it was basically something like the child has to play with the toy in *this* way before he/she can play with it in *this* way. Am I making that up too? What you said about the mom saying the kids weren’t allowed to go up to the next level made me think that I was remembering correctly though. It’s all ridiculous to me because (and here I’m *only* speaking to books) kids do actually *get something* from looking at books they don’t know how to read yet! To not be *allowed* to learn by checking out the next level up (or even further up) is absurd.
Moving on. In the article it said this,
“for most of human history what children did when they played was roam in packs large or small, more or less unsupervised, and engage in freewheeling imaginative play. They were pirates and princesses, aristocrats and action heroes. Basically, says Chudacoff, they spent most of their time doing what looked like nothing much at all.”
This is basically what the play looks like at our unschooling park days. Except for the unsupervised part, but the adults are just there if needed (and that “needed” part varies of course, Irina needing me more than my older girls do and each family approaches it according to their own childs needs), not hovering. Of course it’s not exactly the same, it’s just one day a week for one thing, but we work with what we’ve got.
About the toys, I’m not so sure it’s the toys that stifle imaganation. I think a child can be imaginative with a plastic Star Wars light saber just as easily as with a stick or um, nothing. I think the bigger problem is lack of time. Free unstructured time. I could have a house full of crappy plastic cheap toys, but if my kids had plenty of free time to just play, they’d still be fine in the imagination camp. I think there a lots of good reasons for not wanting to buy cheap crappy plastic toys, but I guess lack of imagination is not one I’m concerned about. Even a electronic, noise-making, light-flashing annoyance of a toy can be used for something it wasn’t intended for.
I don’t argue that there are better things out there to spend money on though.
Stephanie’s last blog post..Some Photos and a Few Words
February 23rd, 2008 at 6:51 pm
Interesting article.
Stephanie nailed one thing – I don’t necessarily think toys are bad (sheer volume of toys is a whole other rant), mainly because I’ve seen my kids use toys in all sorts of unintended ways. It’s more an issue of having enough time to play with them. In this crazy, overscheduled world, kids just don’t have enough time to be kids if we as parents are not careful.
Preventing children from looking at books is absolutely ridiculous. (Fahrenheit 451 anybody?? LOL) Yes, I kept my children from my paperbacks when they were babies, but to have an entire room full of children’s books and not be able to look at them? Pointless.
Another effect that I certainly see but am not sure if it’s related (suspect that it is though) is the ability to develop critical thinking skills. I spend quite a bit of time on this as I teach science, and in my class it’s kind of crucial, since I keep linking things together all year long. My students hate it during the process but I’ve heard back from more than one about how valuable it was. So many children are taught to compartmentalize as opposed to seeing how things really do interrelate.
Jaime’s last blog post..Biking Shoes
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:45 pm
[...] This is a story I heard on NPR the other day, link via NoirBettie at Through the Looking Glass. [...]
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:10 pm
My mother in law was a kindergarten teacher for 40 years and now runs a nonprofit that distributes books to children in underserved schools and communities, and so any teacherly knowledge I have about kids and reading comes from her.
She told me that at Sami’s age, correcting how she wants to play with a book can be incredibly damaging to her ability and drive to learn to read later on. So with that in mind, the fact that a Montessori school wants to dictate how a child plays with ANY OBJECT, let alone regulate the books a child is allowed to play with or read just absolutely blows my mind. I don’t claim to be a Montessori school expert, but it sounds like all the wrong kinds of structure, to me. Though I had found interesting the idea of encouraging children to learn through play, which I understand to be the founding philosophy of the Montessori model. Perhaps it is executed well in some settings, but what you’ve written sketches me out. (And my husband flat out hates what he’s read about them, apropos of nothing in this thread.)
I know that eventually Sami will learn to read properly, but she’s not even talking yet. So if she wants to look at all the pictures upside down while singing the little opera in her head as if it clearly were what’s written on those pages, I am THRILLED.
Cheryl’s last blog post..Free play isn’t just wasted time!
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:26 pm
I think you are thinking of Waldorf education, which is founded on the idea of learning through play. Montessori education is set up so that the teacher demonstrates an activity and the children copy it. I don’t like that aspect of it, and the more I read about it the less I like it. What I do like is the tools of Montessori — the fact that everything is child-sized and is real, not a toy — and to a certain extent the repetition, which is something I think children are naturally inclined toward. But we’re homeschooling because I think Sam will get there on his own and doesn’t need to be told to do something over and over till he gets it right. I think he just… will. On his own time table.
About toys — while the article makes a pretty direct link, I think far more detrimental than the toys themselves is the advertising that leads us to believe that he who has the most toys wins, and the way children are encouraged to play with each toy in just one way. I mean, what? That is insane. And it is why we have simpler toys (for the time being, anyway). It is just easier to use your imagination on a plain wooden block or a lego brick, which can become anything you can think of, than on something you’ve been told IS a specific thing. That doesn’t mean that kids can’t use toys for uses other than intended (of course they can, and do) but I do think it’s easier to not have to unmake something before you can make something else. You know? But most important of all is volume. If there are a thousand toys, I really and truly believe there will be less creativity. Not none, but less.
February 24th, 2008 at 6:39 am
“It turns out that all that time spent playing make-believe actually helped children develop a critical cognitive skill called executive function. Executive function has a number of different elements, but a central one is the ability to self-regulate. Kids with good self-regulation are able to control their emotions and behavior, resist impulses, and exert self-control and discipline.”
Wow, this article really rings true for me.
One of the huge issues I face as a special educator of middle-school age children is lack of ability to “preview” from a lot of my students. These kids are unable to control their impulses, often because they have no skill in considering ahead of time how their action or words might be interpreted. I also see a tremendous number of children who can’t stay still for any length of time. I see children really hampered in their learning and social development by this. Plus, I think the explosion in the number of ADD/ADHD diagnosises can be directly linked to this failure to develop self-regulation.
As teachers, we often comment on many of our students’ inability to play. They seem to need constant stimulation. When we ask them how their weekend or long holidays were, often they reply “Boring.” It turns out all they did was sit around the house and watch television or play on the computer. It is very sad. These children don’t know how to have fun without props.
Obviously, as an educator, I think there can be value in formal schooling, but I support your decision about how to raise Sam 150%. You have clearly considered your options and made the choices that you feel will most benefit your child. I know he will grow up to be a well-balanced, empathetic and intelligent adult.
allison’s last blog post..Naughty dream…
February 24th, 2008 at 7:57 am
I do think that each Montessori school needs to be looked at individually, however. My sister went to one for 6 years and they REALLY allowed the kids to use their imaginations. As long as she got her work done, she was allowed to do whatever she wanted – read, play, or do crafts, which is what she spent most of her time doing. The school was excellent for her – she really learned the consequences of doing her work in order to have extra time to play. Her only complaint was that they were so relaxed about letting her go at her own pace that they didn’t challenge her enough with math, and so she had to go to tutoring for a year in high school to relearn simple things like fractions and long division.
Although the philosophy excludes imagination, it is my personal experience that it’s just not true in all schools, so I think that anyone who is interested really just needs to check out what’s around them before ruling it out – you may find some of the most amazing, imaginative people are teaching there (like in my sister’s case). One of her teachers WAS walking around thinking about what faeries eat – she actually built faerie houses in her spare time and set them out in her backyard! Certainly someone like THAT will be encouraging imagination.
February 24th, 2008 at 8:20 am
And to think that you went from reading Steven Kellogg’s Pinkerton book straight to The Secret Garden. Hmmm, was that above your level/age? And your main “toy” was an empty refrigerator box that got a ton of mileage and became so many different things! That was the best time, when you had so few toys that you ‘had’ to make stuff up.
February 24th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Annika, I agree with you on many fronts and we hope to find a preschool for Evan in which he can thrive and build his imagination on his own. The Waldorf education really appeals to me. My brother and sister in law have their kids in Waldorf and they are creative, bright, happy, and well-mannered kids.
I have read a few times that you let Sam watch TV. TV and movies for that matter are, in my mind, the worst teaching of unimaginative, passive thinking around – fed to us by corporations that just want to sell toys, cereal and licensed merchandise. Given all you write here, I am curious, why?
February 24th, 2008 at 9:13 am
I’m glad someone sent you the article. When I read it, I thought of you, but didn’t think of sending it to you.
When I remember playing, my favorite toys were ones that had multiple purposes, and/or Mom and I had made ourselves. We spent a long time renovating her old Barbie house, and while I spent more time unpacking it and packing it up (everything in it’s place – it fits so nice together!), that was more an aspect of my personality than lack of imagination. So I agree that toys can be a tool of imagination, but they’re even better when you can make them yourself/together.
February 24th, 2008 at 9:35 am
I did not know that about Montessori schools! It’s rather shocking to me that anyone would limit imagination, or put limits on what kids can do (i.e. which books they can read). We are going to have a hard time finding a good school for Jack, I think.
Ewokmama’s last blog post..Daycare transition
February 24th, 2008 at 9:56 am
any school can call themselves a montessori school, no matter how trained or untrained the people running the school. so there is variation among schools.
but i completely agree – at the schools at which i have observed, creativity is almost nil. i actually find montessori schools creepy – little robotic children going about their assigned tasks. i saw no group work, no kids working together on a big important idea. bleah.
loved the npr link – thank you!
February 24th, 2008 at 11:30 am
As for you question about the article, thank you, it was extremely interesting to read and got me thinking as all the best things in life do. I don’t agree with all of it – The Star Wars comparison in particular doesn’t ring true from my childhood – but it brings up great thoughts on playing. I know I lost myself in imaginative play, sometimes with toys (like Star Wars action figures used for Star Wars play or not; sometimes they stood in for other kinds of people, too…), sometimes with drawings and books. I already see my child doing the same as she uses her toys in interesting, non-intended ways, talks to her animals and dolls, “reads” aloud to herself. It’s a marvelous thing to watch, her grasp of the world illustrated as she plays. The thing that set me off most is that this woman is sending her kid to Preschool now (only several months older than Sam)…I’m just not a preschool kind of person. I think unstructured play is all a child should be doing at this age, at least when they aren’t busy sleeping. While I fully intend at this point to have my child attend Kindergarten and beyond in a structured school, I’m also obnoxious enough to believe at this stage that I’m able to provide her with the basics of life that she needs to learn until that time comes.
February 24th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
I think this discussion highlights the need to understand the “system” of education that you’re choosing for your children – too many times, I’ve spoken to parents who put their child into an “alternative” setting not understanding the founding philosophies of those systems, who are then shocked or frustrated by how their children are treated or what’s being taught.
Do some research people! Figure out what’s important to you! “Alternative” is not a singular school of thought!
Katherine’s last blog post..High Roller
February 24th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
My sister is a Montessori teacher. What Lori said is key – there’s virtually no regulation of what constitutes a “Montessori” school. I happen to think that my sister is a fantastic teacher. I think this because she is universally adored by the children she teaches. The same cannot be said of everyone. Everything that I know about Montessori comes from her, but I have to admit that I don’t know that much. Like whether or not the curriculum stifles imagination – no idea.
I have been wondering about your views on Montessori for a while, though, so thank you for disclosing!
As for the article – The New York Times Magazine just the other week ran a cover article on this subject. Interestingly, it didn’t say anything about self-regulation as this article does. I don’t know!
I do agree with Stephanie, though, about the amount of time available for unstructured play being important.
February 24th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
One of my granddaughters attended a wonderful Montessori school..all the teachers had been trained and were certified in the method. S never showed imaginative play…3 months after she began attending, it was as if the world had opened up and imaginative play dominates her playtime now. Because different people put diffent spins on educational methods, it is important not to condemn Montessori without looking into the training and philosphy of the teachers who are running a program. As a former educator, I still feel that self directed learning is a wonderful way for a young child to begin. If a teacher demonstrates how to do something and then stands back, observes and monitors, children make wonderful progress.
Grandmere’s last blog post..Culture QotD: School Shootings
February 24th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Great article…but you are preaching to the choir here, sister!
SilliGirl’s last blog post..The Fun: It Never Ends
February 25th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Well, I’m going to be a lone voice of dessent. I disagree with the article as it just doesn’t ring true for me.
I had lots of toys when I was young (and I consider the article talking about me, because I was definitely a child in the latter half of the 20th century), but that didn’t stop me from imaginative play with my friends. I think it’s perfectly possible to have both. I know Rohan plays with plenty of his toys in ways that aren’t expected, and I’m sure that will continue.
I would agree that it is possible to stifle a child’s imagination with toys, I don’t think it is inevitable.