[ann_of_loxley]

So, being a mum of one (for the moment!) I read a lot ...and a lot of that (even without choice, its just everywhere in a mothers world) that a child should be doing XYZ at such and such age... This goes beyond just physical development (sitting up by 6 months, walking by a year etc)... So, as an unschooler (chatting here with the rest of you unschoolers) - I am curious at what the 'natural' age of things is (because all these things I am told and read are not from an unschooling setting). Am I making any sense? lol.. For example, from the 'school' world - children should be reading by the age of 5. However, from the unschooling world 8+ seems to be the more 'natural' age for children to pick up reading. So what about other things? (obviously going to differ from child to child, but theres always a statistical average right? lol). I was at a playgroup the other day that we go to every Thursday (its actually more for me than DS as he always plays alone but its the most calm and quite playgroup there is so something he can handle!) and noticed that all the girls, by the age of 3+ (all whom go to preschool and will be going to school) develop/or are developing the concept of 'friendship'...its like all they do all day is 'you are my new best friend' and 'you are no longer my friend' and 'come be my best friend' - holding hands, hugging, etc. Now there is a lot of competition around this and the friendships are always 'conditional'... So perhaps in a more natural setting (say the unschoolers world) the age for this development might be much older? or sooner? (without the competition and conditions?)... So if I am making any sense, thats sort of what I am on about! hehe... ???

 

[majikfaerie]

see, even in the mainstream world, the age at which a child should start teething is anything from birth to a year. the age to start walking is anything from 8mo to 20mo. the age to start reading is not actually "by 5", but to start learning reading at 4-5 and be reading and writing by 7. the age for puberty is anything between 9 and 16.
so that's already a huge range.

heck, even human gestation by a mainstream count is + or - 2 weeks on either side of 40!

and I believe the only answer is to let your children grow organically and then you'll know what is the right age for each child.

Without pressure to achieve X by age Y, the children are free to learn and develop in different areas at the pace that is suited to their own mental and physiological development.
In a school setting, children who are behind the average in any academic field are generally streamed into remedial classes and made to feel stupid or inferior, regardless of said child excelling in other areas such as sport or art.

 

[SagMom]

Quote:

I am curious at what the 'natural' age of things is... theres always a statistical average right?

I think it would be just as meaningless as the averages we have now. Some kids read at 2 or 3, some kids read at 9 or 10--either way, you're left with the same "average" and people will be proud of their 2 year old readers and worried to death about their 10 yr old non-readers.

Quote:

...all the girls, by the age of 3+ (all whom go to preschool and will be going to school) develop/or are developing the concept of 'friendship'...

That they talk about friendship doesn't mean they understand the concept. Friendship is something that's talked about a lot in schools and it's a subject of many stories. Plus when kids are removed from their family units, peer friendships become more of a focus. At 3, my kids weren't in daycare/school and had family (primarily me) as their main focus. Two of them were still nursing. They'd play with other kids, but they didn't have any of that "best friend" stuff going on. I really think it's the difference in who they're with--family or peers. It wasn't until they were older that they looked outside the family for friendships.

 

[moominmamma]

I agree with majikfaerie. "Averages" aren't particularly helpful if you don't have a middle-of-the-pack child. The range of healthy normal is far wider than we normally appreciate. For example, my eldest is on the 1st percentile for height. Much shorter than average. But it doesn't mean she's abnormally short. It means that "one percent of perfectly healthy normal people are shorter than her."

I have two children who learned to read without any formal teaching at age 3. That was their natural age to learn to read. I have a 12-year-old who still can't write legibly. I'm sure that's totally normal for him. I find it helpful to read stories and anecdotes that show me how wide the range of normal is. They reassure me that the 'natural age' for any one child to acquire some skill will be determined by that one child.

Miranda

 

[ann_of_loxley]

Quote:

see, even in the mainstream world, the age at which a child should start teething is anything from birth to a year. the age to start walking is anything from 8mo to 20mo. the age to start reading is not actually "by 5", but to start learning reading at 4-5 and be reading and writing by 7. the age for puberty is anything between 9 and 16. so that's already a huge range.

Thats a very good point!

Quote:

and I believe the only answer is to let your children grow organically and then you'll know what is the right age for each child.

I know

- I was seeing this more as just making discussion rather than gathering information to make my son a time sheet hehe I spent the first year of his life in enough worry about his achieving all his physical milestones extremtly late that I know all children develop differently and in different areas from the other - to not be worried about the rest of his development. I know it will be different simply because he is an individual and because we do things very differently from our peers. Just sort of interested in what the 'findings' are between these differences. (without having a them and us argument)

Quote:

That they talk about friendship doesn't mean they understand the concept. Friendship is something that's talked about a lot in schools and it's a subject of many stories. Plus when kids are removed from their family units, peer friendships become more of a focus. At 3, my kids weren't in daycare/school and had family (primarily me) as their main focus. Two of them were still nursing. They'd play with other kids, but they didn't have any of that "best friend" stuff going on. I really think it's the difference in who they're with--family or peers. It wasn't until they were older that they looked outside the family for friendships.

That about hits the right spot! - Something along these lines! That is a very ineresting anthropological view on the why and how of my one example! - Some things there I have not though about (such as the reason for their focus on 'friendship') - There are many other things of course, but that is just one of the more recent ones I have noticed.

 

[petra_william]

hey just wanted to say hey - how r u?

 

[ann_of_loxley]

Hey petra - give me a call sometime

lol

 

[majikfaerie]

just as another point that I thought of now (I know, beating a dead horse and preachin to the choir, but...)
as a kid, I was *really* advanced in math, science and literacy. I was light years ahead of the other kids in my class, until about age 7, by which time they'd dummed me down enough to be merely "advanced. meanwhile, I was hopelessly pathetic in sports and no big shot in art either. but that was no big deal.
then my little sister was absolutely amazing in sport and art and music, but she had to work really really hard to make 'average' on math, science and literacy stuff. no one cared that she was artistically gifted, just that she was below average, and a lot o emphasis was put onto that, and trying to "catch her up"

so my point is that a "natural age" for anything is going to be different in every child. you can rarely find one kid who is "behind average" in *everything*. my dd teethed, crawled, walked and talked "late", but she also started reading at age 2

 

[Adasmommy]

Just to weigh on on 3 year old girls and friendship, my dd is 4 and I'm sure she was talking about friends when she was 3, though she has never spoken of someone no longer being her friend, or changing friends.

There is one family that we are really close with because they're the only friends we have that have a SAHM. So she and I like to spend time together during the week while our kids play. DD sees a lot more of them than any other kids. Pretty much she considers this one girl to be her friend, and for the sake of order, her friend's mother must be my friend, and her friend's father must be dh's friend. So that if either of us says to dd, "I was talking to my friend, so-and-so . . . " she insists that "No, you were talking to Rachel--Rachel's your friend!"

As if we could only have one

But then if I do mention one of the other kids in our life (ie. your friend Emily is having a birthday party), she does not disagree with having that person for a friend also.

Her philosophies on just about everything are pretty much mysterious to me.

Anyway, I imagine the concept of friendship came from our reading material, as well as things we say to and around her. When she was 2 she would hit her friend so I'd tell her that we don't hit people, and we're nice to our friends, and have you ever noticed that I don't hit Rachel and instead I'm nice to her and that's why we're friends? So, yes, friends have come up. But I do not take responsibility for her interpretation of the subject!

 

[rmzbm]

It's so individual! My 10 yr. old read at 7. My 9 yr. old read at 5. My 6 yr. old read at 5. My nearly 3 yr. old is already starting with MANY sight words and knows most letters. There's just no way to know what any given kid will do.

Which is why I think unschooling is perfect!

 

[LoMaH]

I only skimmed through here, but wanted to add that not only are there individual differences, but also differences between the genders.

Most boys don't play in the way you described, they tend to roughhouse, race around- people might say it's that way because of the way the sexes are socialized, but I disagree and *I think* it's actually inherent to each sex.
Of course, I was always the type of girl who enjoyed doing "boy" activities, like running around playing tag, riding bike...... but even so, the way in which I interacted with friends differed from the way the boys interacted with each other.

I always find it amusing that my daughter, who's very much a daddy's little girl (joining him to wash the car, watches football with him,)..... even while a very young tot, loved to carry around stuffed animals that she carefully tended to- wrapping them ever so gently in anything she could find.
Son, has never done that.

Anyways.... of course there are boys who carry stuff animals too, I'm not saying there aren't..... just that those behaviors are more common among girls...

It's hard not to compare our kids to others, but I don't think you'd be as worried if you were watching boys at play instead of girls, kwim?

P.S- I think at 3 specifically, lots of boys still play more alongside each other unless there are older kids there to direct their play.

 

[2mama]

every kid is going to be different, mainstream or not. But when you unschool you are attempting to let go of the standard and go with the flow. I wouldn't worry as long as they seem to be gaining experiences.