class clown

Tonight we were reviewing "don't stand on your friend's blood" and then I was trying to think of a different mitzva to do.  Immediately prior, I had spent a lot of time learning with Jack (age 4) who was so excited that he's old enough to learn Torah, too, and he chose hilchos Shabbos and we were running through what he knows about Shabbos and then I asked why Hashem made Shabbos and they were pretty stumped.  It was good learning but explains why Elazar (age 6) was already kind of worn out by the time it was his turn (he was participating with Jack).

I didn't realize it, though, so I said, how about Maakeh?  Elazar repeated it and I said it again so he would get the correct pronunciation.  Then he got silly and when I said, "So what is the mitzva of maakeh?" he said, mimicking the exact intonations I used, "So chicken chicken the chicken of chicken?" and then he cracked up.  I didn't realize at first what was happening and said, "Do you want to learn the mitzva of maakeh?" and he said, "Chicken chicken chicken chicken chicken?" and cracked up some more.  At that point I realized that he was fatigued from learning and didn't want to learn anymore.

Although this doesn't come up that frequently in home school with individualized learning and small ratios and tailored lessons, I think it happens that boys (though girls, too) have a hard time realizing they are fatigued and are not able to express it.  So they stop paying attention, lose focus, or start acting silly.

There have been so many times where I felt a lesson was very much within the capacity of my child.  But my child communicated otherwise--whether by fidgeting, not focusing, being silly, refusing to do the work, or tantrumming.  It's always a very tough balancing act when to push them that little bit harder because it teaches them to persist through it and achieve, vs. when it's time to reevaluate the lesson or the way it's being presented or the duration or the type of work you are asking them to do.  Listen to your gut.  You won't get it right every time.  But over the course of thousands of interactions, you get a sense.

Silliness is a big indicator to me that my child is overloaded.  I like to take 5, cuddle, be silly together, have a good laugh, and regroup later.

my thoughts are not your thoughts

I read an evaluation of an "active child" age 4 who is considered to be not functioning well in the classroom.  To be fair, they were careful to say that it's not a problem with the child, it's just that they are not equipped to manage him.  And it's true, in a classroom of 20 children in a small space, an extremely active child is going to be difficult to manage, even if he has a shadow.

Some of the issues that were brought down:

• doesn't play with toys in the appropriate manner.
• brought a chair over to reach something
• is not able to attend lessons about letters etc.

Rebuttal:

• There is no "playing with toys in the appropriate manner." The appropriate way of playing with something is however the child's interest or imagination drives him or her to play with it.  If you are trying to say that the child is using the toy in a way that breaks the toy or that injures or disturbs others, then say so.  It is ridiculous that adults think that children should play with toys in specific ways.  This kills creativity.  It is specifically those children who find ways to use toys that are not the way they are "supposed" to be used who are the people who can think out of the box and find solutions to things and ways to use resources that other people don't see.  This should be encouraged and certainly not inhibited.
• I understand that dragging furniture about in a classroom with 20 children is disruptive and I am not criticizing the teacher.  I am critical of the underlying assumptions that allow the classroom to be set up so that this is a problem.  If a four-year-old child wants to reach something and has the independence, the strength, and the ability to move a chair to reach it, then this is an obvious and excellent method of problem solving.  This is to be commended, not criticized.  I personally would guide the child to put the chair back when he is finished, and consider this child resourceful and capable.  
• There are some children who are capable of sitting in circle time and of learning letters and other "academics" via passive listening at age 4.  AGE FOUR.  {The Mishna says 5 and the Gemara says (or 6 or 7).}  Leonard Sax says that boys most commonly diagnosed with ADHD in kindergarten are those who are the younger half.  Some children are highly tactile and energetic and the LEARNING that they are engaged in at age 4 is exploration and mastery of their environment.  They like to touch things, explore things, climb things, build and break things, look at things, try things and see what happens.  This is very important learning.  A child who learns this way should not be stopped.  He should not be forced to sit and listen to circle time.  You are interfering with the efficient way that he is being impelled to learn.  You are making him miss out on extremely valuable learning opportunities.  You are boring him.  Instead of letting him learn what he wants and allowing his creativity and urge for discovery to guide his learning, you are stifling him.  An active child like that will learn in his own way if you let him.  He will learn how things work.  He will increase independence.  He will do amazing things.  Forcing him to focus on letters is absurd for a child of his age with his temperament. It's painful and it's actually impeding the learning he is psychologically and intellectually designed to do.

homeschool vacation

I'm on vacation from the high school I teach at (1st period, 5 days a week).

Before I had kids, I once saw a news story about a woman who homeschooled her 5 children.  She woke up at 5am every morning to do housework and prepare lessons.  The kids had off from school on two days: Christmas and I can't remember the other one.  All other days of the year they homeschooled.  I remember thinking it looked like a lot of work and that she was an unusually dedicated person.

Unschooling is very different than that model.  It's predicated on the premise that humans enjoy learning and that they will be driven to seek knowledge and that what children pursue will lead to acquisition of knowledge in the most effortless and pleasant way.  

During "vacation," Chana (7th grade) finished Parshas Shmini.  She's reviewing now.  We didn't do very many rashis in this parsha and I don't think she knows them very well, but perhaps she now knows what אע"פ stands for and that is great.  She is also continuing along the algebra program of mathtv.com.  Jack (age 4) has been counting things all over the place.  He's counting and subtracting and counting in different groups to make sure they all add up the same.  I assume this will eventually lead to a certain math intuition.  It's kind of funny that at some point in life, a small child isn't really sure his hand always has 5 fingers.  

Yesterday, when I was up to my elbows in pizza dough, with Jack helping me, Sarah (college) started playing with Jack and he started talking about his bones by his mouth.  I asked her to show him some pictures of skulls and jaw bones, and Sarah pulled her ipod out of her pocket and Jack was fascinated to see what the bones looked like under the skin.  He noticed there were sockets for eyes and nose, and Sarah explained that those weren't made of bone and she told him about cartilage and they squeezed their ears and noses.  (Just how unbelievably cool is it that children have access to science images of whatever they want whenever they want?!  In their pockets!! What a world we live in!)  

Jack is also (and Aharon, age 2) asking me to run through the aleph beis flashcards nearly every day.  He's learning a few of them, too.  Personally, I don't care whether he learns them or not, at this age.  He also keeps looking over my shoulder when I'm reading and pointing out different letters.  Also, during commercials, he keeps seeing letters that he knows and shouting them out.  I'm not teaching him anything (though of course, when he asks me which letter that is, I answer).  Even before I unschooled, I always considered 4 an age where I don't really have to actively teach anything, and I find a lot of kids learn the letters somehow and get a rudimentary grasp of biology and body systems.  

Elazar (grade 1) woke me up this morning at 8am (I'm grateful he held himself off for so long) because he needed help writing.  He has a piece of paper with a few words that he writes frequently, but he needed some more words.  He's discovered that when he creates games, he can make a text box pop up and taunt the player (Hahaha! Bowser will get you!).  Also, he needed some help for some of his google searches.

So "vacation" doesn't really end up being different from any other day.  

unlimited media: it's not always like this, but sometimes it is

Jack, age 4, yells to me as I'm closing a drawer:  "I WANT that!!"

I look around.  There is his DS with a little cartridge next to it.  He must be talking about that.  I pick up the cartridge and hand it to him.  "No! Do it with me!" he says.

Okay.  Maybe he needs help. I pick up the cartridge and begin to insert it into the DS.  "Noooo!  Thaaaaat!"  He's pointing to the aleph-beis flash cards.

a night off

7:30pm and I'm thinking about who is in bed and who has to go to bed and what work Chana has left to do.  When I realized that Chana asked me to do math with her earlier (we started algebra already, woohoo!) and she also did chumash earlier without me asking.  It almost makes me want to do some Ivrit with her.  But maybe I'll clean up the house instead. hahahahaha just kidding.  Maybe I'll curl up with a book and enjoy the evening off.

beware lest

Chana suggested I not get too carried away with giving her rashis.  She reminded me of a time not too long ago when she had so many rashis that she got burnt out we had to take a break for a few months and do no rashis whatsoever.

I'm happy we are still working in the book with no nekudos in the rashi.  Some of them she's not getting, but some of the words she reads really nicely.

Killing Monsters by Gerard Jones: book review

An unschooling mom suggested this book to me when we were talking about violent shooting games for her 13yo and I asked her why she allowed them.  My boys are currently 6, almost 4, and 2.  So violent games are not really on their radar now.

As I've encountered so frequently in the past, what people say about the book gives me a certain feeling about a book, which is completely different than how I feel when I actually read the book.  I was reluctant to read Freud for years, feeling that he was arrogant and obnoxious.  In reality, when I read him inside, I found him charming.  The reviews of Killing Monsters either felt what he said was obvious and simplistic, or they raved about how wonderfully he defends violent video games.  I had a completely different experience reading the book.

Of special note is his analysis of the research that states that violent video games and media lead to violent behavior.  He makes a compelling case that the research is insufficient, out of date, too simplistic and incorrectly interpreted.  He discusses how nuanced the range of violence is (from Tom & Jerry to slasher films, from a few punches to lots of blood) and how inaccurately the ensuing "violent behavior" was diagnosed, and how we would really have to categorize each type and study the effects in better designed studies.

In order to better explain how this book affected me, I should explain that 17 years ago I started off parenting opposed to all multimedia.  In general I felt that it's preferable to make up games and stories rather than watch or play them.  I hoped to avoid all movies, books and TV shows that encouraged fantasy, preferring stories that dealt with conflicts that children have and present emotionally healthy resolutions.

My first misconception was that children are blank slates and that they won't have unrealistic fantasies without being exposed to them.  I eventually came to see the absurdity of that, and realized that there is an inherent human struggle between fantasy and reality, and this is a human conflict that every person will wrestle with, regardless of how many or how few movies and stories that person has been exposed to.  (However, I still felt that there is no need to go out of my way to show them to my children, and thought there might be a possibility that a fantasy might be unhealthily concretized by a movie or story.)

Gerard Jones brought up Bruno Bettelheim and how he wrote about the psychological value of fairy tales.  I had heard of the book but never read it.  I wonder if I should read it now.  I've now been looking at all entertainment through the lenses of Killing Monsters and I feel like I'd been looking at everything too literally and completely missing the point and not understanding what it does emotionally for children (and probably for adults, too).

I am not certain I understand exactly what the book says about the benefit of violent games and stories.  At times I found what he said incredibly insightful and eye opening, and at times I felt he was unclear or contradictory or not really on point psychologically.  

What I gained from the book:

1. Stories help kids deal with fears and conflicts by playing with them.
Children have their internal aggression to cope with, and are concerned about violence in society.  Stories that show people being violent are a relief because then they know other people are thinking about it, too.  Media expresses the fears that kids have and makes them explicit.
The stories also play with different endings and possibilities.  It shows that these thoughts are not inherently scary, but part of the range of human possibility.

2. Really insightful analyses of girl action fantasies and of Pokemon.
I never really understood why the girls have to be so scantily clad.  It turns out it's not just for hormonal young lads.  He explained the incredible fascination with Buffy the Vampire Slayer and how it plays with girl power and being sexy/attractive and physically and mentally powerful at the same time.
His explanation of Pokemon showed me how it is a metaphor for childhood and how no matter what type of mood or personality, there is a pokemon that matches it.  And how it's a metaphor for growing up, and learning to work with unruly aspects of themselves that refuse to stay in their pokeballs.  He also explained why Misty was such a beloved character.  I always felt that characters that displayed immaturity or explosiveness or thoughtlessness were not good role models because they "teach" children that it's okay to behave that way.  What I missed is that seeing characters struggling through life with their explosiveness etc. is exactly what children are thirsty for.  They are so relieved that their conflicts are being expressed.
3. How important play is, and how media gives children forms to play with.
I don't think that Gerard Jones said this explicitly, but based on what I read in Playful Parenting, play is vitally important to help children sort through their emotions.  Play is the best way and the most fun way and the easiest way.  Perhaps the most valuable thing that multimedia provides are paradigms that children seize upon and use in their own play.  He brings the example of his own five year old son fusing Power Rangers and Teletubbies to play through his desires for both power and nurturing.  I saw immediately how this related to Chana playing "Marth and Roy" when she was five with the neighbor's son for hours.  And how Elazar plays "Young Link" and his friend plays "Captain America."  I don't know what exactly they see in these characters, what themes of power and strength, but they take them and make them theirs and play with their conflicts and fears and desires.  In my opinion, although Gerard Jones doesn't say so, having children play using the characters they see is perhaps the most valuable aspect of watching media.
He does mention that comic books and movies and video games are really useful for preteens and teenagers, when it is no longer socially acceptable to play.  It gives them a forum where they can playfully and fictionally deal with these thoughts and conflicts.
He did talk about when teenagers get too entrenched in it and either I didn't understand it or he wasn't clear.  It does seem very important that adults be available to converse about it if the child wants, and to approach it from the standpoint of interest and not criticism.  We must understand that the media is speaking to the emotions and conflicts of the child in a profound way.  An example that he brought is how so many teenagers love Eminem.  They are so relieved that he is expressing their rage.  That they aren't alone in these overwhelming feelings.  That he isn't being hypocritical.  That he is real.
4. Parents are the ones who aren't distinguishing between reality and fantasy.
This was a really eye opening point.  Children use stories as a way to help them process their feelings.  They know the difference between hurting people in real life and hurting people on TV, and in case they don't, the first time they do so they are going to get a very quick lesson (Playful Parenting talks a lot about roughhousing and how it helps children learn appropriate force).  Children who have trouble with self control and aggression will do better if they can play appropriate games for these issues.  It is us parents who are concerned that because our child enjoys watching or playing killing that they might end up killing.  The child knows s/he is just engaging in fantasy.  Have some conversations with your child and you will see that s/he knows the difference.

Although I used to disapprove of many shows, movies, songs and other media that told stories with unhealthy or unrealistic messages, I have begun looking at them all with the question: What powerful feeling is this expressing, and what enjoyment is my child getting?  What fantasy is this child playing with, and how does it reflect a frustration, concern, or stress that s/he has in real life?  What does s/he LIKE about this?
Instead of threats to my children's optimal development, I now see expressions of struggles and conflicts.  I see paradigms for them to play with and explore.  I see meekness, power, sexuality, violence, fear, anger, love, and the full gamut of human emotion that our society tells children not to express and to control.  As long as civilization demands self control, there will be stories grappling with and expressing the lack of it.  And they will grip our thoughts and minds as we struggle.