Originally Posted by coffeegirl
My larger question....(and I have read every post in this thread, btw.)...Say that as a parent you ARE the producer/director/initiator of most playtime. What exactly is damaging about this? It's disrespectful? Ok, how so?
i don't want to argue on this thread and i don't see this as such. i think it's good to share perspectives, and that is what i am trying to do.
hitting your kid damages your kid. how you choose to educate your child isn't "damaging" in that sense, so that seems like kind of a loaded statement, you know? let's back off that a little bit and if you want to talk about WHY some of us think it's not a great choice for the way we want to parent/school/unskool/whatever, we can.
for me, it's not the greatest idea, as i have done a good bit of reading and research and formal education at the graduate level about different instructional methods and learning styles and child development. i really like what i see from styles like montessori, where a child tends to stay motivated to learn rather than learn to be led, if that makes any sense. i think really the problem with modern public education is that it sets up a paradigm where a child loses motivation and curiosity. i think that letting the child direct playtime and learning stimulates and encourages curiosity, and lets the child realize intrinsic motivation. that's also the problem that i personally have with reward systems-- that they produce a habit of expectation of reward or praise rather than letting knowledge and learning be the reward. education is a process that is never completed, and by breaking it up into little bits and giving out treats or "good job" kinds of things, it really shifts what i see as a child's natural tendancy to explore and turns it into learning by habit or learning when led.
but i think it takes a good bit of conditioning to quell and squash curiosity and eagerness, too, and that some kids will continue to thrive no matter the conditions placed on learning, but in my mind, why go there?