Do you get worried that it's not really for the kids?

[cybermommy]

I know we all love our kids and want what is best for them. But do you ever wonder if all this emphasis on early learning achievement is more for our own satisfaction and pride than to promote the future happiness of our children?

I know that when I was young, I thought that my mother pushed me in piano because she wanted to show off my abilities in front of others. I knew my mother loved me and was dedicated to my education. But even now, having my own son, I actually think that encouraging to reach milestones early may be more about me and my sense of competitiveness than because I think he needs it to "succeed."

I see that my son is bright. I am sure he will be able to learn and do well academically whether or not I teach him a few years early. I would like to say that early teaching is because I know he enjoys it, but the truth is that he would rather be watching TV like the other preschoolers.

Maybe I'm just not as pureminded as most other parents, but I can see how fostering early academic achievement in our kids might become more of a vicarious competition than encouraging a child to love learning.

[Joha]

I have thought about that too, but I have to say that we are definetly doing it for her. I wish I would love to read, but we don't have that habit in our culture. We have clear that we want to do as much as she wants to and we don't want to put her in a lot of activities. We want to find where her passion is and encourage it. We see this process as help for her for the future, so she relates learning with fun and not a boring and obligated subject. We also think that estimulating her brain from the beggining is going to facilitate things for her later in life not only intelectually but with problem solving in life. Because we are doing it for her, we decided not to talk about it with everybody, so we don't feel tempted to show her off. The reason why we have this so clear is because my aunt and her husband did early education 16 yrs ago. My cousin is brilliant, but she felt that they always pressured her to be the best. One thing is to encourage your kids to work hard for what they want and tell them they are the best and another thing is to pressure them to do it.

About the TV, I think you can't miss what you don't know. We use the TV as a educational tool, so that is what she knows. She doesn't know there are other million types of cartoon out there because she doesn;t see them in the tv.

[trinity papa]

we talked about that and we conclude that she is still young, so the key is start as early as possible, she won't know what from what, so we just teach her reading maths music .....  she just absorb them all .....

we know how other children can influence other children so we control the environment, what kind of parents and hence children we mixed with. So hardworking self motivated children can also help motivate other children. Lazy undiscipline ones can also affect other children. At a young age children studies and learns what is the norm and follows. Sure we can be a big motivator, but when they start to have friends .... they tend to learn from one another more.

But in so saying, we can only push when they allow you to push, at a ver young age they don't know the difference. But as they get older, you will have to gradually release the strings, and hope that what you taught sticks .... so that they can continue the god value you past on to them. They may say stop playing the piano for a while, but they already have music in them, so over the years they may take back to playing or practising piano again. Idea isn't pushing them to show off, but to expose them, to tell them if they want sucess they need to put in determination, hardwork, dedication, and most importantly passion.

Upto a certain age pushing doesn't work, reward and punishment, or logic discussion, motivation talk, maybe the next step. Though i know some uses emotional black mailing .... which is bad but somehow most mothers or parents likes to use it ......

The other children likes to watch TV is because that was the norm in their baby and toddlering years where irresponsible parents dump them in front of the tv to be their baby sitters ..... sooner or later they grow up to be couch potatoes. So you have to look for alternative events for your children that is both fun and educational, like visiting a museam, zoo, birdpark, old age home etc to learn about science, charity and life.

[khatty]

Yes, I worry that teaching my dd is more about my need to 'do something productive' with my days.  I constantly remind myself that to her it is just a fun game she enjoys.  I am really conscience of not testing her, so there is no pressure for her.  I haven't shared that I am teaching her with anyone except my immediate family, so thankfully there is desire to show her off. 

[PY]

 Of course I want my kid to be different in a good way, who doesn't? Because as parents we don't want to fail, we want them to be good humans, and we need to stimulate them as far as we can, since they are babies.
I think we do this for us because we want to be succes as parents and the most important we do this for them because we want them to be succesful as parents some day( smart, brillant, inteligent, so they can take good decisions on live for them and for their own kids and family).

[Curly]

The prophet on children
An excerpt from "The Prophet" by Kahlil Gibran

Your children are not your children,
They are the sons and daughters of Life's longing for itself.
They come through you but are not from you,
And though they are with you yet they belong not to you.

You may give them your love but not your thoughts,
For they have their own thoughts.
You may house their bodies but not their souls,
For their souls dwell in the house of tomorrow,
which you cannot visit, not even in your dreams.
You may strive to be like them, but seek not to make them like you.
For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday.
You are the bows from which your chilren
as living arrows are sent forth.
The archer sees the mark upon the path of the infinite, and
He bends you with His might that His arrows may go swift and far
Let your bending in the archer's hand be for gladness;
For even as He loves the arrow that flies,
So he loves also the bow that is stable.

[LDSMom]

I think it's a highly personal decision to teach your child and many people do it for various reasons. Perhaps a some of us had a very difficult time in school with reading/learning, perhaps we were excellent in school and want to give our child the same opportunity, etc.  My brother had an extremely hard time in school and with reading, still spells bear the animal "bare"  but he has pushed and pushed his way through University and is now about to get his bachelors. I on the other hand breezed through school but have no higher learning (university) to show for it.  (Just FYI my problem wasn't that I didn't want to go to school, it's just that I was already making more $ out of highschool than a lot of people I knew with degrees so I didn't see the point. Now I know better and want to encourage my child to go whether or not he "needs" it.) A big part of the reason I want to teach my child is because I don't want him to struggle like my brother did and I want him to be able to learn on his own what interests him.

For me, I believe reading is the key. I personally am teaching my child reading, a little bit of math, music, and a second language. I chose not to do the bits of intelligence and the physical program.  We get plenty of excercise on our own, and I would rather my child read and want to learn about subjects on his own rather than me filling his head with facts about everything, I want him to have passion about things he wants to learn and not just to be able to rattle off any bit of information at the drop of a hat.  This is my personal choice and I hope it is the right one for us.  I would also say that since I started a reading program, I definitely feel more fulfilled as a parent. I don't necessarily think this is a bad thing. When we have something good we are working towards it helps everyone in the family.  I think the key here is to keep pressure of the kids and help them explore their own interests.  A lot of you may disagree with me over the bits cards but this is my personal decision so be nice! :o)

So to answer your question plainly: it's for both. I feel fulfilled and he gets to have fun learning to read. And later we'll both have a lot of fun exploring dinosaurs or cars or rocks. Whatever it may be I look forward to it wholeheartedly.  He just started counting to 10 this past week at 20 months old...still amazes me.

[DadDude]

This is an important question, one I've thought some about myself.  Critics of very early education simply assume that parents are merely competitive.  But I think this needs to be put into perspective.  I hope this won't be too boring (poetry, it ain't), but this is how I think through these sorts of issues, rambling and self-critical...and this is as much for myself as for anyone reading this.  I like to think these things through for my own benefit!

cybermommy, you ask, to begin with, "do you ever wonder if all this emphasis on early learning achievement is more for our own satisfaction and pride than to promote the future happiness of our children?"  Well, presumably, if we do believe we're promoting the future happiness of our children (by giving them a lot of knowledge at an early age), then we will quite naturally derive satisfaction and pride from that.  There would probably be something wrong with you if you didn't.  We seek satisfaction in everything, in life, including raising our children, and proper pride is not a bad thing, but a perfectly healthy thing.

But that is perhaps too glib.  Your question is very interestingly formulated, just the right way for us to think philosophically about this stuff.  The suggestion is that we are more motivated, somehow, by seeking our own satisfaction and pride than by promoting the interests of our children, whenever the two might come into conflict.  In other words, perhaps we place our own pride in their achievements above their own actual interest; if so, no doubt the problem is that we ignore or do not investigate their own interest, because we get such personal satisfaction in their "academic progress," and really, that is all we care about.

Now, placing your own satisfaction above the child's interest doesn't have to mean you're motivated by vicarious competitiveness.  One might be unhealthily obsessive about a child's academic progress not because it will help the child beat out other children, not because it will make you think you're the best parent, but because (for whatever reason) you place an unreasonable or unhealthy value on "academic progress."

The reason I'm splitting hairs here is kind of personal.  I used to be very competitive.  Now, I'm not so much.  Mind you, I don't think there's the slightest thing wrong with being competitive, as long as it's healthy--but, since we're dealing with young lives and minds, we should worry very much about whether our competitiveness is "healthy."  Ultimately, if we rationalize, if we make excuses, then we might ignore or fail to see our children's best interest, and they can suffer as a result.

I'm no saint, but I don't think I have that problem, competitiveness--at least, I hope I don't, maybe I'm just rationalizing. But, and here is why I was splitting hairs above, I worry that I might be inclined to ignore my child's best interest, again not because I'm competitive, but because I place too much value on knowledge and the life of the mind.  If my boy turned out to have low earning potential but be deeply knowledgeable and curious, I'd be much happier than if he were a "material success" but no interest in learning and no concern for ideas.  But that's because those are my own values.  And we can sometimes take our values to an extreme, which means that we place them over other legitimate interests.

Mainly what I worry about is pushing too hard--insisting, or "suggesting" too much, in a way that makes my boy unhappy or turns him off to learning.  More about this further down.

But, cybermommy, it seems like your worry is that, after we put aside all our rationalizations, the only reason we might have for wanting to do very early education is to make ourselves feel good, and that the child isn't really benefitted.  But this seems simply wrong.  There is a fair bit of persuasive evidence, even if there aren't as many scientific studies as we would hope for, that children really do benefit from very early education.  If you think that's just a rationalization, then you ought to explain why you think so.  Saying simply, "we compete vicariously through our children" does not prove the point in the slightest way.  Besides, a little bit of vicarious competition, as long as it doesn't blind us to our children's true interests, isn't an obviously bad thing.  What's wrong with it?

But against me personally, I guess the more interesting attack would go like this: "Hey DadDude, you just want to see the trappings of academic success.  You want to see your son learn to read at an early age, you want to see him use big words, you just want immediate evidence of progress, to convince yourself that his mind is developing very well.  But in this you are really just obsessive about the value of knowledge, so that you ignore his other interests.  Maybe he isn't as happy-go-lucky as he could be.  Maybe he'll be socially stunted, somehow--a geek.  And maybe, in your desire to see immediate results in terms of his mental development, you're ignoring his long term academic interests.  He'd be more creative, more passionate about knowledge, and he'd be better able to reason things through later, if you were to teach him things when 'age appropriate.'"  People say things like this.

The topic question is, "Do you get worried that it's not really for the kids?"  Well, in short, for me, the way I worry the most in which it might not be "for the kid" is that my desire for instant academic results might have somehow blinded me to his long-term interests, including intellectual interests.

But I'm still doing it as much as ever, which means my worries haven't stopped me.  Why not?  Because I don't get the appeal of the arguments on the other side.  He seems no less happy-go-lucky than any other little kid--probably more so.  Socially stunted...well, I don't worry about that really at all.  I don't think having knowledge or being "a geek" is a bad thing, because I'm proudly geeky myself, and most of my friends are geeks too.  The item I've most worried about is this one: "He'd be more creative, more passionate about knowledge, and he'd be better able to reason things through later, if you were to teach him things when 'age appropriate.'"  Well, I'd like take those each up in turn.

The notion that a person is more creative if he plays more as a young child, and doesn't learn so much, seems to me not grounded in studies (I don't know of any studies that establish any such thing) so much as a philosophically romantic attitude toward childhood.  The attitude began with Rousseau's Emile, I guess.  Well, I've read Emile and let's just say I wasn't convinced.  Besides, the minds of the most brilliant artists and the most creative scholars are filled with facts.  (Mind you, I think play is excellent for all sorts of reasons and our boy spends most of his waking hours outside of meals playing.)

But, one scientific argument (as I understand it) goes, the mind is more "plastic" at an early age, and if you start "hard wiring" a lot of knowledge at an early age, you reduce its "plasticity," which is not much different from creativity.  You get a child that is able to recite many facts but who cannot hypothesize creatively or create interesting art.  Well, I'm not a brain expert by any means, and maybe I have something to learn here, but from everything I've read, this is all very speculative at best.  In lieu of harder science that does not look like metaphor and biased speculation, I prefer commonsense considerations.  Some great artists, like Mozart, began "hard wiring" their artistry from an early age, and this made them better artists, not worse.  I've seen art online from home schoolers who began their "academic" learning well before age six, and it's remarkably good.  And then there are the many anecdotes of people who began with Doman and are now in professions that demand constant intellectual creativity, such as computer programming.

OK, but what about the desire for knowledge getting dampened by too much early learning?  "Early ripe, early rot," I saw somewhere online recently.  When children get to school after learning the K-3 curriculum before age 6, they get to school and have lost their desire to learn.  Well, if so, that's probably because they're incredibly bored and are used to being challenged and being listened to.

In my own experience with my boy, I not infrequently see that he's getting bored--but then I almost always immediately stop whatever I'm doing and switch to something that is not boring.  The sad fact for "Doman moms" is that there isn't always the best material ready to hand to satisfy our children's insatiable curiosity.  For example, earlier this morning my boy demanded to play with one of those U.S.-European converter plugs, so I explained to him as best as I could about it.  He was in rapt attention.  I think people don't realize that a kid doesn't look on this sort of thing just as another weird-looking play thing, they really want to know what it is and something about how it works.  Then I asked him if he wanted to learn more about electricity, and he said "yes."  Well, I haven't made any new electricity presentations, or tried to find new electricity-related books, or done any electricity experiments (lemon battery!)...but it turns out he's still interested.  He doesn't like to look at Electricity 1-3 anymore because, I think, he already knows what they have to teach.

The bottom line is precisely the reverse of what our critics imply: kids who get taught a lot early, like our kids, greatly increase their desire to learn, and if they're bored, it's not because their curiosity is any less, but because they want to learn something new.  If you put a really curious early learner in a regular school, I think they're a good chance the kid's going to be really bored.  That's not a sign the kid's curiosity has been drained out of him by soul-killing learning, but that he now has a very special, highly-developed curiosity, and the regular school curriculum just doesn't satisfy it.

Finally, there is the old canard of educationists, who say that teaching a lot of facts (at any age!) is unnecessary, and that what is really necessary is that we focus on teaching reasoning or critical thinking, and direct experience.  The criticism of Doman-style very early learning is that teaching a lot of facts is not actually in the child's academic interest because this puts the recitation of meaningless, out-of-context facts in the place of careful, creative reasoning.

This is just complete nonsense.  The suggestion is often made that people in Japan, China, Korea, and Brazil (no doubt other places) just memorize a lot of stuff and therefore never learn to think critically.  Ignoring the dubious conclusion, I have to say: what an obvious non sequitur!  The fact is that we deeply need data to reason about, and the main way that we learn how to reason and think critically is not through abstract lessons in logic or by "problem solving" exercises, but by carefully thinking about various facts we have at our disposal, and how they are interrelated.

OK, I've been rambling on for a long time here and probably anyone who's still reading is wondering what the point of this is.  The point is that, as far as I've been able to ascertain, there is little in the way of persuasive data or argument that indicates that very early education, a la Doman and others, tends to harm the academic/intellectual development of children.  In fact, the evidence seems to point to great benefits in this regard.  Maybe this is overstating the case, though.  All I really want to say is that it is rational, not irrational, to do what we're doing--as far as I can tell so far.

This means that as long as we aren't rationalizing really harmful behavior, and we don't have an unhealthy interest in our children's education, then it's not a terrible thing if we take some proper personal pride in the results and derive a little satisfaction from the positive comparison with other children.

Let me finish up by listing off some of my real, practical worries:

* That I will insist on showing a presentation, book, or some other media when my boy doesn't want to see it--and that, as a result, he does get turned off to it or even to the whole subject it's about.  I'm sure that can happen, but so far it has happened only very rarely with us, I think.  If he doesn't like what I spent an hour making, too bad for me...I'll try again in a month or three.

* That I will lose my enthusiasm for teaching, and so not take the time to make/gather new materials, and set a bad example for my boy in terms of interest.

* That I will "test" my child too much and make him too self-conscious.  This can kill his motivation, as Doman warned.

* That I will praise my boy too much.  Beyond a certain point, praise is unnecessary, it doesn't increase healthy self-esteem--it just makes the kid into a vain and spoiled little know-it-all.  To keep a person's curiosity alive, it is necessary that he have some humility and ability to see that he does not already know everything worth knowing!

Sorry for the length...obviously, I care about the topic.

[khatty]

Fascinating opinion DadDude, thanks for taking the time.

* That I will lose my enthusiasm for teaching, and so not take the time to make/gather new materials, and set a bad example for my boy in terms of interest.

I agree with this comment.  My motivation to keep up with materials has waxed and wained since I began the process 6 months ago.

[staceycanada]

I am loving the responses to this question. I have thought about this also.I do have to admit that I quite enjoy that my daughter can read and want to show her off.

However I have someother motivations. I have 4 children 20, 16, 10 and 17 months.

I did not use any early teaching methods with my 20yr or 10yr olds other than talking to them constantly and using larger words.
They have incredible vocabularies but struggled a lot with math and reading.

With my 16yroldI started early with reading, advanced shapes, advanced colours and impressionist painters. She read easily and still retaines all the info I taught her. The only area she has ever struggled in is the one area I never taught her early- MATH.

So with my youngest we are doing reading, math, geography and encyclopedia knowledge. Already she is learning Continents, and reading. She loves it and I honestly believe it will help her later.

[cybermommy]

Thank you for all your responses, especially for the very thoughtful analysis from DadDude.

Referring to another thread that I think you originally posted, I am from Missouri in reality, as well as in spirit. I, too, like to see empiric evidence in the form of well-designed, reproducible studies that action a leads to consequence b, but unfortuately, the nature of learning and the fostering of a creative, intelligent, and well-adjusted mind have way too many variables to control. It's not as if we can inject a randomly selected sample genetically similar litter of Chinese hamsters with early education, and let the other hamsters run on the wheel, and see which of them seem happier and more successful in their own hamster way.

I am concerned that I will let my personal agenda--what I think is important to learn--will dictate what I make the greatest effort to teach, not my child's personal interest. My child loves music, so I'll spend hours trying to find the best way to introduce it, and he'll find it boring, because he's moved on to other pressing curiosities--what happens when I throw the yoga ball off the balcony? The interest in things is so fleeting, it's hard to seize upon a teachable moment and come up with a worthwhile and toddler friendly lesson on the spur of the moment.

I don't think there's anything wrong with being a geek, as I am one myself, as are most of my friends. I rather expect my child to be one, as well, but you never can tell, since his father isn't nearly as geeky.

I suppose I am worried that:
1. My child will start equating his academic achievement with his self-worth.
2. I will be upset when the younger child next door, who has been fed a steady diet of McDonald's and the Teletubbies will whip my kid in the spelling bee.
3. My child will decide he hates learning, and I have to wonder if it was in spite of the early start, or because of it.
4. My child will do brilliantly in school and choose to be a neurosurgeon not because he really likes neurosurgery all that much, but because he didn't know what else to be, and it seemed a waste of a brilliant academic career otherwise.

[hypatia]

At the moment, it is purely a selfish reason pastime (baby is still little so I do not get much feedback). I love teaching, reading, discovering..
I love creating EK, watching the foreign language videos with my daughter, showing her flashcards and doing physical activities.
When she is older and able to tell me what she likes and dislike, I'll make sure there is no pressure from my part and will teach her what she is interested in. I'm hoping to 'benefit' from my daughter's knowledge, especially in foreign languages, she'll be my translator when we go to Japan or China :-)

I am a French teacher and see 20 year old uni students everyday struggling to master this foreign language, which is taught in the most unnatural way. I believe early contact or total immersion are the only way to master a language.
I tremendously enjoy seeing my students progress, but only a few will attain a great level, unfortunately.

 

[staceycanada]

I suppose I am worried that:
1. My child will start equating his academic achievement with his self-worth. (yeah I can see your point I certainly hope that doesn't happen it didn't with my dd)

2. I will be upset when the younger child next door, who has been fed a steady diet of McDonald's and the Teletubbies will whip my kid in the spelling bee.
It's a possibility but very unlikely. However like I always tell my children there will always be someone smarter and that's ok.

3. My child will decide he hates learning, and I have to wonder if it was in spite of the early start, or because of it.
This could happen to the McDonald's eating Teletubby watching kid too. I think it's less likely to happen to the child that was taught that learning=fun from an early age.

4. My child will do brilliantly in school and choose to be a neurosurgeon not because he really likes neurosurgery all that much, but because he didn't know what else to be, and it seemed a waste of a brilliant academic career otherwise.
Well I certainly hope that my child doesn't choose to do something only because they feel it's the best match for their intelligence but it could be worse. A lot of the children my daughter is in school with (grade 10) have no clue what they would like to do.

[akalori]

No, I never worry because my daughter (age 2 yrs + 6 days old) is happy and enjoys learning.  When she doesn't want to do something then we don't do it.  But I do worry and feel awful that I didn't teach my son earlier.  I followed all of the common place teaching process with my son.  I let him watch all of the kids programs that were suppose to be somewhat educational.  I bought the black + white picture books, read stories together, finger painted, played at the playground as often as possible, enrolled him in baby gymboree, and a baby art class.  We used all of the baby einstein videos and music.  He had a great vocabulary and I was pleased.  Then finally at age 2, I became worried because I couldn't teach him to identify his colors.  Everyone said he is just a busy boy so let him play and there will be time for learning later.  In preschool at age 3, he was supposed to learn to identify his own written name, colors, and shapes; but the teacher said "I can't teach this boy anything - there is something wrong."  He went to the Child Study Team, they were amazed by his self-control, and polite manners.  They thought his vocabulary was above average, and told me to have him tested for color blindness but to not worry because it is probably just a developmental issue that will resolve itself.  Then again in Pre-K, another teacher told me that there is something unusual going on, and that she has never seen a child with such learning difficulties.  So back to the child study team, where I am told that my child has a learning disability, fine motor deficits, and borderline gross motor deficits.  Overall, he was about 2 yrs behind in school readiness.  Suddenly dedicating every moment and any amt of money to preparing my son for school, was socially acceptable.  After all it is easier to learn when one is younger.  Duh? Oddly enough if my son was a normal learner then providing the same amt of educational training and support is discouraged.  Everyone had nothing but praise for early intervention and too bad we hadn't identified the problem sooner.  So I sent him to an expensive summer camp for kids with learning disablities.  Now he is struggling in an integrated kindergarten class with support from a special ed teacher.  After school, while other kids are playing outside because they finished their homework in 15 minutes, my son struggles to complete in it in an hour with lots of help.  While other kids will be playing outside this summer, my son must go to summer school.  Also my son desperately wants to acheive at school just like everyone else, so he does about 3 extra hours of math and phonics per week.  I spend every day thinking of ways to increase his self esteem because, at school, it has taken a beating.  I am sure it would have been easier to teach him when he was baby.  Perhaps he would not have acheived early independent reading but I bet he would have been at least on grade level.  So consider the extremes, would I rather that my daughter seemlessly learns to read at age 2 just as she learned to talk?  Of course, and I will gladly expend whatever energy it takes on my part; because it isn't about me (or my sacrafices) it is all about improving the quality of her life.  Why isn't earlier intervention or stimulation the goal for all children? 

Lori

[cybermommy]

Thank you so much for sharing your story, Lori. My heart goes out to your child who is working so hard to achieve what the other kids are taking for granted.

You are right that we have different standards for the intervention that we give our children--what is socially acceptable and encouraged. It reminds me a little of a story I read about a fictional society where people who were athletically talented were weighed down so they would compete equally, and people who were beautiful had to wear ugly masks for the sake of trying to equalize the playing field.

Your children are blessed to have you working for them, fighting for them, and pouring heart and soul into giving the best possible opportunities to learn.

document.getElementById('recent_loading').style.display = 'none';document.getElementById('recent_page_box').style.display = '';

Page: 1/4  

Loading...

Members

• Total Members: 214772
• Latest: addisonjones

Stats

• Total Posts: 110526
• Total Topics: 19136
• Online Today: 522
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 391
• Total: 391