Article about creative play

[KBecks]

OK, this supports play based education.... any thoughts about how it might connect to Montessori?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=19212514

We will be looking to foster creative and imaginative play at home. I don't expect this to be in conflict with M school.

[MattBronsil]

Listen to the audio too. The part about self-regulation is key to Montessori.

[gottaknit]

What is funny is that I just read this earlier today when another parent at our Montessori school posted it to our email list. I certainly don't think she meant it as a criticism of Montessori schooling! Watching the kids in my DS's class, they sure look like they're "playing" even when they are working.

We've been having trouble at home getting DS to pick up after himself. I asked him if he puts his work away by himself when he is at school. He said yes. I said, "Does your teacher have to tell you to do it?" and he said, "No. I tell myself to do it."

[Zadee]

I don't think it supports play-based education so much as the idea that children should have time to play. So many children when they are not at school are either in front of a tv, a game console or in some form of structured lessons instead of just "playing", by which I mean "engaging in unstructured activities with other children".

[Lillianna]

I thought the crux of the article was promoting the idea that children need activities that develop "self-regulation". The Montessori prepared environment is, in fact, full of activities that exercise self-regulation, the development of coordination and self-discipline. The fact is that during the 3 hour work cycle, children are engaged in a flow of activity that is very similar to what we normally call "play" - to choose activites freely, to choose how long to do each activity, to move about and all the social interaction. The topic of how Montessori activity is similar to "play" is also examined in the book: Montessori:The Science behind the Genius.

[GuildJenn]

I'm about to be criticial but just for the record, I do believe that kids need to regulate their own learning and be able to move around and play and all that. I don't think I'm in conflict with the core idea that making kids sit still all day might be detrimental, or that more passive reactionary activities (responding to quick sound-colour-motion on television or video games) might impact on self-regulation. I think Montessori addresses these concerns just fine because it allows kids to follow their own interests, and to engage with the three dimensional world in a calm way.

But what I didn't like about the article (I couldn't listen to the audio so maybe this was addressed) is that it threw all the kids into the same age category.

Just from observing my son at his current age (2.5), all his "imaginative" play is pretty much either a) mimicking what we do, so playing kitchen, playing cleaning, playing store, etc. or b) mimicking the stories we've personally told him, so if we tell him about a "treasure chest" then he will play "treasure chest." He comes up with surprising and delightful stories, but he's not really into a fantasy world yet - he is still learning this one!

For me Montessori was a good fit because it does have the practical life, etc., activities which are perfectly in line with my son's "play" at this age. Given the choice between a sparkly "magic knife" and the actual butter knife I use to spread butter, my son will go for the real one every time. And to me that's what the children's house is all about - his choosing concrete activities which are of interest to him.

As he gets older, sure, he may construct elaborate fantasies that go all day or week and we'll make sure he has space to do that one way or another.

I also think that during this fantasy time that children ran free across the prairies playing (ignoring how in many cases children were engaged in subsistence level activities - food growing and preparation, childcare, animal care, etc.) it was probably that the older kids were coming up with the elaborate games and the younger were following them and mimicking them - again what the multi-age 3-year cycle allows for.

I guess I am suspicious of very class-specific views of childhood (with a pinch of nostalgia).

In addition, maybe the kids stood more still because they used to get whipped if they didn't, or were taught to mind adults out of fear. Or maybe it's the physical motion that's the key and it doesn't really matter what they're imagining so long as they are moving around. There are just so many variables here.

[MattBronsil]

The written part does not do a good job of really focusing in on what the audio part is saying.

Originally Posted by GuildJenn

But what I didn't like about the article (I couldn't listen to the audio so maybe this was addressed) is that it threw all the kids into the same age category.

I'm going to have to go back and listen to it again. I'm wondering if that is all the focus was going to be about. Studies often tend to focus on specific groupings of people to get more accurate results.

Just from observing my son at his current age (2.5), all his "imaginative" play is pretty much either a) mimicking what we do, so playing kitchen, playing cleaning, playing store, etc. or b) mimicking the stories we've personally told him, so if we tell him about a "treasure chest" then he will play "treasure chest." He comes up with surprising and delightful stories, but he's not really into a fantasy world yet - he is still learning this one!

Here's where the text does not do the audio justice. In the audio, the whole basis of the piece centers around this time when play changed for children. Right now, your child is not as influenced by the media. Give him a year and he'll be begging for every toy made by Mattell that is marketed for boys.

The history of play in the last 50 years is what the audio file focused on. In the 1950s, advertisements for toys suddenly became a year-round adventure. Before then, toys would be advertised at Christmas time. What has changed in the way children play is the toy has now become a central focus of the play. Before, the central focus was the imagination, the story plot, how you could make something as insignificant as a rock turn into an important golden treasure that you must keep safe on your journey. Now, with toys being the way they are and the marketing for toys so rampant, unless you have a toy that looks like a treasure, you do not think of it as a treasure. A rock is just...well....a rock.

In addition, maybe the kids stood more still because they used to get whipped if they didn't, or were taught to mind adults out of fear. Or maybe it's the physical motion that's the key and it doesn't really matter what they're imagining so long as they are moving around. There are just so many variables here.

But it does make an interesting point. I know my parents limited my television time as a child and I spent many days outside playing with my neighbors, who also had limited television time. I'm not against television in moderation because I can think back and remember a time when we did have to improvise things. (Maybe that's a reason I enjoy performing improv comedy so much now).

I so often see children that do not have those skills. There is a gap between what they are able to imagine and what their classmates are able to imagine. That may be a variety of factors, but I am willing to bet (to a large degree), it might have a lot to do with how many of what type of toys they have. Again, I'm far from advocating "don't give your children toys." I would never say that. I just think we rely on toys too much, especially when we hear the "I am bored" statements come out of their mouth.

When was the last time you heard about a child taking an oversize table or blanket cloth and putting it on a card table to make his own fort? I don't think I have heard parents talk about that at all. I wonder if that is lost to the past.

Just thinking out loud. I hope what I said was clear. Didn't think of making it clear as much as making a ramble.

Matt

[GuildJenn]

Originally Posted by MattBronsil

Here's where the text does not do the audio justice. In the audio, the whole basis of the piece centers around this time when play changed for children. Right now, your child is not as influenced by the media. Give him a year and he'll be begging for every toy made by Mattell that is marketed for boys.

The history of play in the last 50 years is what the audio file focused on. In the 1950s, advertisements for toys suddenly became a year-round adventure. Before then, toys would be advertised at Christmas time. What has changed in the way children play is the toy has now become a central focus of the play. Before, the central focus was the imagination, the story plot, how you could make something as insignificant as a rock turn into an important golden treasure that you must keep safe on your journey. Now, with toys being the way they are and the marketing for toys so rampant, unless you have a toy that looks like a treasure, you do not think of it as a treasure. A rock is just...well....a rock.

Well - maybe that's an experience a lot of kids are having. And maybe not. My niece & nephews, who lived with us for a while, have grown up with a lot of marketing and television. And yet when we take them to the cottage they're perfectly capable of turning trees into castles and forts. Because they do that with their cheap plastic toys, in front of the television, every day.

I guess I think that the human imagination is a little more robust than some of this recent push towards the concept of a utopian period of time (fueled by the nostalgia of the faux-revolutionary "Dangerous Book" thing) when kids were not marketed to.

I agree, they are marketed to and a lot of the toys are lousy, and we don't have television in our home in part because we don't want to pay to be advertised to.

But I am still not sure that ONE SPECIFIC kind of play is the golden key or somehow missing. I am not sure that EVERY child was out imagining themselves in Terabithia.

I'm also wary of the idea that self-direction can be measured by standing still when someone tells you to.

Originally Posted by MattBronsil

But it does make an interesting point. I know my parents limited my television time as a child and I spent many days outside playing with my neighbors, who also had limited television time. I'm not against television in moderation because I can think back and remember a time when we did have to improvise things. (Maybe that's a reason I enjoy performing improv comedy so much now).

I so often see children that do not have those skills. There is a gap between what they are able to imagine and what their classmates are able to imagine. That may be a variety of factors, but I am willing to bet (to a large degree), it might have a lot to do with how many of what type of toys they have. Again, I'm far from advocating "don't give your children toys." I would never say that. I just think we rely on toys too much, especially when we hear the "I am bored" statements come out of their mouth.

When was the last time you heard about a child taking an oversize table or blanket cloth and putting it on a card table to make his own fort? I don't think I have heard parents talk about that at all. I wonder if that is lost to the past.

Just thinking out loud. I hope what I said was clear. Didn't think of making it clear as much as making a ramble.

Matt

The last time I heard about a child making a fort was... yesterday when my neighbour's two kids (white bread, cheeze whiz, and television consumers that they are) made one in our living room.

I want to know where these kids live who aren't doing this stuff 'cause I just haven't come across them. I have come across older children (10+) who seem addicted to the rush of video games but once unplugged from them and after going through a brief withdrawal period, they don't seem to have lost the capacity for imagination.

[greeny]

When was the last time you heard about a child taking an oversize table or blanket cloth and putting it on a card table to make his own fort? I don't think I have heard parents talk about that at all. I wonder if that is lost to the past.

My 3-year-old ds does that every single day.

[hedgewitch]

My 2.5 ds goes to 'work' every day to buy us imaginary apples which we then eat. He thinks that you go to work to buy apples...not too far off the truth
He also chases us around the house as a monster/dinosaur/dragon but he 'fixes' us when we are 'hurt'. My son does have limited tv time and we record the programmes in order to cut out the adverts for ourselves and him. To be honest if I am not in the room or even cuddling on the sofa with him he wanders away from it. He'd prefer time with me to the tv.

I can't imagine a child without a rampant imagination, to me it is the definition of childhood.

BTW I heard a great definition of nostalgia. It is the the longing for something we never had. There was no golden age for kids, we should look to the future not to the past. Especially when that past probably didn't exist in the form we think it did.

[MattBronsil]

Originally Posted by greeny

My 3-year-old ds does that every single day.

I officially, and happily, stand corrected by 2 people (you and Jenn). Thank you.