February
A THOUSAND RIVERS
http://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/a-thousand-rivers-what-the-modern-world-has-forgotten-about-children-and-learning/
I found this article really interesting. It was talking about how schools are not natural ways of learning. It linked back to the indigenous people of many different countries and how the children are not forced to achieve a certain attainment at a certain time. It spoke about the fact that these children watch adults to learn and learn at their own pace.
It also talks about how the study of children's learning and development doesn't actually teach us about how children learn.
"The problems with this process are many, but the one that I’d like to highlight is this: the available “data” that drives it is not, as a matter of fact, the “science of how people learn.” It is the “science of what happens to people in schools.”"
"While some children seem able to function in this completely artificial environment, really significant numbers of them cannot. Around the world, every day, millions and millions and millions of normal bright healthy children are labelled as failures in ways that damage them for life. And increasingly, those who cannot adapt to the artificial environment of school are diagnosed as brain-disordered and drugged.
It is in this context that we set out to research how human beings learn. But collecting data on human learning based on children’s behavior in school is like collecting data on killer whales based on their behavior at Sea World."
This made so much sense. We focus on trying to teach children in a habitat that is not actually natural although we assume that all children should be able to learn in this way. Natural human learning however occurs by watching adults or older peers. It occurs by completing tasks that need to be done in their community.
Some of my favourite ideas in this text were around the different ages/stages we are expecting our students to achieve by.
"... any Maori mother knows that children do not learn in a straight upward line but in a stair-step pattern. They leap forward, then plateau for a while, then leap forward again. Their learning is an underground river, you can’t see it, can’t even feel it at times. Then suddenly they soar. You can’t control it; you can’t take credit for it. It’s theirs. You have to be there, providing warmth and stability, providing tools and resources, answering questions, telling stories, having meaningful adult conversations and doing meaningful adult work in their presence. But when they soar, it’s on their own wings."
"Any Cree parent knows that you can tell when a child is ready for something because he will begin to ask questions about it."
"A child who walks at 10 months will not necessarily be more physically talented than a child who walks at 14 months, and pediatricians spend much of their day reassuring us of this and encouraging us not to compare our children to each other. There is no basis, scientific or otherwise, for assuming children will reach any major milestone at a uniform age, and those of us whose kids don’t go to school often joke about the fact that if we were to require all children to take their first steps at the same age, we would be a nation of people with walking disorders."
"it is not uncommon for late readers to have high levels of intellectual ability and even literary interest and talent. Like Einstein who did not speak until age three, some children simply develop their skills in a different order."
So the question is why do we continue to group children into classes based on age. Why are "we" so concerned with accelerated progress to ensure our children catch up to their age based peers? And in doing so are we actually doing our students and future generations a disservice? Labelling children as having "learning disabilities or difficulties" because they haven't met the same target (that someone has just created because they know what all children should be able to achieve at that age), or because they aren't interested in learning to read or write yet is surely creating more damage to their ability to achieve in the future.
The problem I guess is that there are no helpful answers. As mainstream educators we are employed by the ministry who dictate the way in which our schools run. How I as a classroom teacher use some of these concepts to improve outcomes for children? Maybe more buddy class time where they can learn alongside older children? Maybe increased awareness of the need to model without always explicitly teaching. Maybe more opportunities for authentic learning opportunities with community links? I am obliged to have a sense of urgency with my children's learning despite their readiness for it and that is a difficult thing to balance as they seem to contradict each other. So for now I will ponder and consider ways in which to complete my duty as a government employee and to support my students to learn in the ways that suit them, naturally.
