Well, a new school year is underway. My youngest son is entering Kindergarten. Luckily his teacher has recognized his well developed sense of humor and embraces it. I've been having flashbacks to Billy Madison. News Week just published an article that comments on the latest study concerning the fall out of boys in the education circle and their rise in mental health issues. http://www.newsweek.com/id/157898?gt1=43002
I can't help but agree with the author of the article. I am going to go one step further and say: the biological, physical, and emotional needs of boys hasn't evolved over the last 15 years. Boys today are essentially the same as they were in 1950, or 1800, or 1995. They still experience the ebb and flow of testosterone, they still tend to be bodily kinesthetic learners. Their needs haven't changed, but the world around them has. So duh! Of course they are depressed, and inattentive and lack interest in school. Wouldn't you if you had the uncontrollable urge to be up and moving. An unquenchable curiosity satisfied only by experiential knowledge. How would you feel if you followed your instincts only be told you were being "naughty". I'd hate life, school, myself.
Think about how boys have been depicted through literature, and movies over the last few hundred years. Huck Finn (the boy archetype), Oliver Twist, Sandlot. Instead of having a world of Hucks, Tom Sawyers, McDuffs, and Mercutios we have a lot of Hamlets and Romeos walking around wondering "exactly what is the point". What was once the exception is now the norm, and visa versa. When was the last time you saw a group of boys voluntarily organize themselves into a game of pick up ball, or work together toward a goal of their own? We are failing to let them be. As a feminist the idea of letting boys be boys once terrified me. I figured we'd have a lot of homicidal, testosterone charged woman-haters running around. After 8 years of dealing with growing boys I now understand that they desperately need to learn through facilitated exploration. They need to learn about consequences in a caring environment. They need freedom to play. They learn through doing, through play, and wither when placed at a table with a workbook. They become the rebellious, unhappy Huck driven to the river (an extended metaphor for life's learning curve) for peace, safety, and to do "real" learning. Boys learn very little this (seat work) way other than to hate the "establishment", that they have nothing to offer it, and that the "establishment" is better off without them.
Not only are we not meeting their needs, we are condemning our sons for behaving the way their bodies tell them too. What's the difference between then and now. Sitting in a seat most of the day (and childhood obesity is a mystery? Come on!), paper work, in stead of manipulative learning, and scheduled activities eat-up playtime. So if I hear that either of my sons won't sit still, or jumps down the stairs, or won't pay attention during reading I might just cheer for him because he is doing what his teacher/school is not. He is attempting to meet his needs. I'll work with him at home to help learn to read. (Please note, it's been widely published that until the age of 7 most boys lack the cognitive functions, regarding language, required to learn to read.) I think we got lucky this year. Both teachers seem tuned in to boys, and more specifically, my boys. Good luck to the rest of you, parents and teachers alike. They need us to be their advocates! Mark Twain got one thing right. Boys, in an environment that is stifling to their needs, will "act-out". So listen to them, and to the facts.
I can't help but agree with the author of the article. I am going to go one step further and say: the biological, physical, and emotional needs of boys hasn't evolved over the last 15 years. Boys today are essentially the same as they were in 1950, or 1800, or 1995. They still experience the ebb and flow of testosterone, they still tend to be bodily kinesthetic learners. Their needs haven't changed, but the world around them has. So duh! Of course they are depressed, and inattentive and lack interest in school. Wouldn't you if you had the uncontrollable urge to be up and moving. An unquenchable curiosity satisfied only by experiential knowledge. How would you feel if you followed your instincts only be told you were being "naughty". I'd hate life, school, myself.
Think about how boys have been depicted through literature, and movies over the last few hundred years. Huck Finn (the boy archetype), Oliver Twist, Sandlot. Instead of having a world of Hucks, Tom Sawyers, McDuffs, and Mercutios we have a lot of Hamlets and Romeos walking around wondering "exactly what is the point". What was once the exception is now the norm, and visa versa. When was the last time you saw a group of boys voluntarily organize themselves into a game of pick up ball, or work together toward a goal of their own? We are failing to let them be. As a feminist the idea of letting boys be boys once terrified me. I figured we'd have a lot of homicidal, testosterone charged woman-haters running around. After 8 years of dealing with growing boys I now understand that they desperately need to learn through facilitated exploration. They need to learn about consequences in a caring environment. They need freedom to play. They learn through doing, through play, and wither when placed at a table with a workbook. They become the rebellious, unhappy Huck driven to the river (an extended metaphor for life's learning curve) for peace, safety, and to do "real" learning. Boys learn very little this (seat work) way other than to hate the "establishment", that they have nothing to offer it, and that the "establishment" is better off without them.
Not only are we not meeting their needs, we are condemning our sons for behaving the way their bodies tell them too. What's the difference between then and now. Sitting in a seat most of the day (and childhood obesity is a mystery? Come on!), paper work, in stead of manipulative learning, and scheduled activities eat-up playtime. So if I hear that either of my sons won't sit still, or jumps down the stairs, or won't pay attention during reading I might just cheer for him because he is doing what his teacher/school is not. He is attempting to meet his needs. I'll work with him at home to help learn to read. (Please note, it's been widely published that until the age of 7 most boys lack the cognitive functions, regarding language, required to learn to read.) I think we got lucky this year. Both teachers seem tuned in to boys, and more specifically, my boys. Good luck to the rest of you, parents and teachers alike. They need us to be their advocates! Mark Twain got one thing right. Boys, in an environment that is stifling to their needs, will "act-out". So listen to them, and to the facts.
No comments:
Post a Comment