Ship of Fools: Children and parents: different approaches.

Thread: Children and parents: different approaches. Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020464

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

This article which reviews German versus North American parent-child issues is very interesting.

Germany- no home schooling because children have a right to be with others not their parents, they have a right to more freedom of movement, they have gov't subsidized daycare, less academic and more outdoor activity, etc.

I've felt we have it often wrong in Canada since my daughter taught in a forest school in the UK. I would like to see much more play and non-PE physical activity, and more emphasis on children versus what parents want. What do you think?

[ 08. February 2018, 17:16: Message edited by: no prophet's flag is set so... ]

Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :

You realise that homeschooling in Germany is banned to stop Nazis, right?

Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on :

Young children may know what they want yet not what they need.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

Re Nazis, yes of course, I have posted in the past re this. That is one of the reasons, but there are now additional reasons.

There are quite different approaches to children and parenting in other places. Which is the purpose of the thread.

I have had Cree parents (indigenous people) in my office. A child wants to climb onto a low table. They tend to ignore or spot the child at most. The non-indigenous parents will prevent the child from climbing.

We had trees chopped down in a provincial park because a child had climbed and fallen. I suspect there was a settlement to the family for injuries.

I saw children a recess playing in the playground, and they were trying to go into the rink (ice, it is winter), I heard the supervising teacher tell they mustn't because of no helmets. They already won't let them throw snowballs and play shinny (hockey on the ice with your boots on, not skates). Parents protecting children via school board have created this.

Some parents let children roam and take transit or ride bicycles, some chauffeur them everywhere.

Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :

Our neighbors homeschool their children. They are afraid of their kids being exposed to "humanism" in the public schools.

It is a common reason I have heard from other homeschoolers.

The local schools have become quite accommodating to kids that are homeschooled. The kids can sign up for sports teams and the music and theatre programs in the public schools.

My wife had her teaching credential valid in several states, but she never thought of homeschooling our kids. We just thought the kids were better served in the public school system.

Meanwhile, my four-year-old grandson already reads at a second-grade level, It is funny to hear him explain how the dinosaurs disappeared. He loves astronomy. And this is not because his parents are homeschooling him. He just picks up everything so fast.

Posted by anoesis (# 14189) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
There are quite different approaches to children and parenting in other places. Which is the purpose of the thread.

You might be interested to hear of a bit of a movement taking place in New Zealand at the moment. Swanson Primary School took part in a University study looking at modifying playground environments in an attempt to reduce bullying and obesity, and then they just kind of ran with it, and did away with all playground rules (and much of their playground equipment), and let the kids do whatever they liked during playtimes, as long as they weren't fighting each other. (Here's a link to a news segment on it, from an Australian broadcaster No rules school ).

It's captured the attention of some other schools across the country, who are incorporating (usually to a slightly lesser extent) some of the principles they've established. The school my children now go to is one of these schools. I was a bit suspicious about the whole thing when we first rocked up, but I'm right behind it now. The school does have some maintained areas like a playing field, some garden beds, and a couple of traditional playgrounds, but there's a large (?3 acres, maybe?) future expansion area behind the classrooms which is just wilderness. In the past, children were not allowed to play down there. Now, they're encouraged to. They're allowed to dig holes, burrow through the blackberry and lupins, they're provided with discarded wooden pallets, old tyres, lengths of novacoil, and those big wooden reels that steel cable comes on, and left to get on with it. The really interesting thing seems to be (and I only know what I'm told by my own kids, here), that this sort of disorganised play can incorporate children of all ages, with the bigger ones sort of looking out for the little ones. One downside is they do come home extremely dirty, but over time I've relaxed my stance on that as well and only insist on showers if they smell or if they're grimy enough to be leaving smears all over my chairs (they don't like washing - hey, they're kids).

Posted by sharkshooter (# 1589) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

I saw children a recess playing in the playground, and they were trying to go into the rink (ice, it is winter), I heard the supervising teacher tell they mustn't because of no helmets. They already won't let them throw snowballs and play shinny (hockey on the ice with your boots on, not skates). Parents protecting children via school board have created this.

More likely it's lawyers protecting the school board from the parents' lawsuits.

Posted by M. (# 3291) on :

Or insurers not wanting to pay out.

M.

Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :

Perhaps preventing lawsuits as is done with workers compensation schemes?

Posted by jacobsen (# 14998) on :

As a child in the 50s and 60s I walked a mile and a half to and from school. Those were the days when all parents needed to know was where you were going and when you would be coming back. It's rather different now, with horrific tales of child abduction and worse. I'm always glad to hear of children being allowed to play as we used to, climbing trees, getting wet and muddy (inevitably) and even picking up the odd graze or two.

Posted by jacobsen (# 14998) on :

On the edge of the council estate where we lived till I was seven there was a stream, known as West Beck (dialect for stream in the NE of UK), bordered by willow trees which we used to try to climb. Somewhere along it was an old-fashioned cobblestone bridge known as Devil's Bridge. I wonder now if that name has any relation to the folk tales of trolls living underneath bridges as in Billy Goats Gruff

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:

I have had Cree parents (indigenous people) in my office. A child wants to climb onto a low table. They tend to ignore or spot the child at most. The non-indigenous parents will prevent the child from climbing.

IMO, this is an issue of respect for property, not safety. My children climb all sorts of things, but I would be unlikely to let them climb the tables in your office because I don't want them to put their outdoor shoes on your surface. I might make an exception for a baby who doesn't have / isn't wearing outdoor shoes.

I'm a little nervous about letting them go too far from home by themselves in public, because the thing I'm afraid of happening is that some idiot calls the police / DCFS because "There's a child! By itself! Nobody is looking after it!" and I have absolutely no interest in dealing with any of that nonsense. Because exactly that has happened to a number of people I consider responsible parents allowing their children an appropriate amount of freedom and responsibility.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0