Patty Hunt

Anybody hear/see this?

NPR Old-Fashioned Play Builds Serious
Skills<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19212514>

I'm not sure I'd draw all the same conclusions from the research, and I
can't see pulling my son away from video games to play Simon Says, but it's
still good to see some of the "experts" discovering that free play is just
as important for kids as all those hours of soccer practice and piano
lessons.

Patty


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

keetry

My friend was telling me about this and I've been wanting to ask
questions on here about this. Specifically, the stuff about TV and
video games not being good. She's very anti-TV and video game and
I'm pretty sure she's planning to send her child to a private school
rather than homeschooling. So, I've been wondering how to address
this with her since my perspective is so different. I wonder if
she's doing her child harm by regulating so much of her life (not
that I would necessarily tell her that). It's funny how we can read
or hear the same thing and come to two such different conclusions.

I think that report needs to be taken in a specific context. I get
the impression they are talking about mainstreamed children who are
or will attend school. It seems to me that with RU children learn to
self-regulate with TV and video games as well.

My 4yo watches a lot of TV (it's one of those things I still have a
hard time with) but he's also almost always engaged in some sort of
play while the TV is on (which is what keeps me from throwing the TV
out). He likes toys for specific things but also finds other pretend
uses for them. Just recently we bought a handheld bug vacuum. As
soon as we got home and took it out of the package he grabbed it and
said, "It's my gun!" and ran off shooting. His favorite sword is a
kitchen utensil even though he has "real" play swords. After
watching Pokemon this morning he grabbed a plastic ball that has a
spinning thingie in it (the baby's toy) and decided that was his
pokemon ball.

I guess there's no way for me to measure how much "private speech"
is going on in his head but I'd think that the expression of his
imagination in those ways is a pretty good sign. Does that make
sense or am I missing something?

Alysia

--- In [email protected], "Patty Hunt"
<pattywithawhy@...> wrote:
>
> Anybody hear/see this?
>
> NPR Old-Fashioned Play Builds Serious
> Skills<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?
storyId=19212514>
>
> I'm not sure I'd draw all the same conclusions from the research,
and I
> can't see pulling my son away from video games to play Simon Says,
but it's
> still good to see some of the "experts" discovering that free play
is just
> as important for kids as all those hours of soccer practice and
piano
> lessons.
>
> Patty
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

pattywithawhy1

--- In [email protected], "keetry" <keetry@...> wrote:
>

> I think that report needs to be taken in a specific context. I get
> the impression they are talking about mainstreamed children who are
> or will attend school. It seems to me that with RU children learn to
> self-regulate with TV and video games as well.

Yeah, the idea I got out of it was that mainstreamed children don't
have enough free time for this kind of play, so maybe for them tv and
video games would suck up the rest of their time . Of course I think
it makes more sense to toss out the school, not the tv and video
games. ;-)

I also think it's kind of weird how they concluded that just because
today's kids supposedly can't sit still as long as the 1940's kids
it's because toys are different. Seems to me you could pin it on a
lot of other things, like maybe today's kids need a better reason to
sit and be quiet than just because some adult authority is telling
them to. And since when is it "self" regulating to sit and be quiet
when you're told to?

> I guess there's no way for me to measure how much "private speech"
> is going on in his head but I'd think that the expression of his
> imagination in those ways is a pretty good sign. Does that make
> sense or am I missing something?

Makes sense to me.

While I agree it made sense that free play time does good things for
kids' ability to think for themselves, I think making their own
decisions about what to do with their own time is going to have a far
more importance. That's why I'd rather have my kid *choose* tv or a
video game (or soccer practice or piano lessons) than have some other
activity that supposedly encourages self-talk and free thinking
imposed upon them. I'd say it's more about free-dom than free play.

Patty

>
> Alysia
>
> --- In [email protected], "Patty Hunt"
> <pattywithawhy@> wrote:
> >
> > Anybody hear/see this?
> >
> > NPR Old-Fashioned Play Builds Serious
> > Skills<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?
> storyId=19212514>
> >
> > I'm not sure I'd draw all the same conclusions from the research,
> and I
> > can't see pulling my son away from video games to play Simon Says,
> but it's
> > still good to see some of the "experts" discovering that free play
> is just
> > as important for kids as all those hours of soccer practice and
> piano
> > lessons.
> >
> > Patty
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

Pamela Sorooshian

On Feb 25, 2008, at 3:27 PM, pattywithawhy1 wrote:

> I also think it's kind of weird how they concluded that just because
> today's kids supposedly can't sit still as long as the 1940's kids
> it's because toys are different. Seems to me you could pin it on a
> lot of other things, like maybe today's kids need a better reason to
> sit and be quiet than just because some adult authority is telling
> them to. And since when is it "self" regulating to sit and be quiet
> when you're told to?

Besides, isn't there a contradiction in saying that they can't sit
still and blaming it on them sitting too still (watching tv/playing
video games)?

-pam



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

pattywithawhy1

<<He likes toys for specific things but also finds other pretend
uses for them. Just recently we bought a handheld bug vacuum. As
soon as we got home and took it out of the package he grabbed it and
said, "It's my gun!" and ran off shooting. His favorite sword is a
kitchen utensil even though he has "real" play swords. After
watching Pokemon this morning he grabbed a plastic ball that has a
spinning thingie in it (the baby's toy) and decided that was his
pokemon ball. >>

I remember years ago a friend of mine was trying to get into the
Director's Guild of America's trainee program, and had to take a test
that was intended to measure her level of creativity. She came out of
it complaining about how stupid it was, because it asked her to list
ten uses for a pencil other than writing, and she couldn't do it. I
couldn't believe THAT was something that kept her out of the program,
it seemed so incredibly simple to me! But that's when I learned,
clearly it's not, for everybody.

So if creative ability is measured by one's ability and inclination to
use objects for uses other than those for which they're intended,
sounds like your son's doing fine. And if it's any reassurance, my dd
watched a LOT of tv when she was little, and still does, often
drawing, reading, playing with toys, sewing, reading while she
watches. And she's no less creative at 11 than she's ever been, and
she still surprises and amuses me with all the unusual ideas, stories,
characters and solutions she comes up with. AND if she had a really
good reason, I think she could sit still for a very long time. (Like
if there was something good on tv. LOL)

-Patty

Ren Allen

~~Besides, isn't there a contradiction in saying that they can't sit
still and blaming it on them sitting too still (watching tv/playing
video games)?~~

Yeah, that always bugs me. Adults whine about how "distractable" their
children are but as soon as the child is engrossed in something like a
tv show or video game, THEN they're "zombies" or "vegetables". How
rude is that? Can't win.

Ren
learninginfreedom.com

Ren Allen

~~And she's no less creative at 11 than she's ever been, and
she still surprises and amuses me with all the unusual ideas, stories,
characters and solutions she comes up with. ~~

None of my children are lacking in the creativity department either.:)
All that unlimited tv and video games actually seems to be helpful
that way. Jalen has an especially interesting vocabulary (I have no
idea if it's all the tv and Zelda or not, but maybe it plays a part).
A couple nights ago we were reading a bedtime story. It's a Dr. Seuss
COOKBOOK! Yeah, he wants me to read the ingredients and the entire
recipe, one after the other. He even has a special drawer for this
particular cookbook.

Anyway, there was a picture of a stack of pancakes on one
page..."Flapjack Flaper's Flapjacks" on page 14 to be exact. He took a
look at the stack of pancakes and said "Wow, those are really floopty
pancakes".
"Oh really?"
"Yep, that means they're wiggly Mom".

All of my children express themselves in a variety of creative
methods. I see absolutely NO damage from the tv and video games we've
utilized along with all the other interesting things in our lives over
the years.

Ren
learninginfreedom.com

swissarmy_wife

and speaking of contradictions...

people (namely friends and family) are totally amazed that my three
year old is so good at video games. but in the same conversation will
alude to the fact that my 9 year old plays too much.


>
> Yeah, that always bugs me. Adults whine about how "distractable" their
> children are but as soon as the child is engrossed in something like a
> tv show or video game, THEN they're "zombies" or "vegetables". How
> rude is that? Can't win.
>
> Ren
> learninginfreedom.com
>

keetry

--- In [email protected], "pattywithawhy1"
<pattywithawhy@...> wrote:
>
> AND if she had a really
> good reason, I think she could sit still for a very long time. (Like
> if there was something good on tv. LOL)
>
> -Patty
>

Haha! Yeah, that's another thing I was thinking.

And, whoever posted about kids maybe thinking they need a better
reason to stand still other than because an adult told them to. My
understanding of the 50s was that children were to be seen and not
heard a lot of the time. They were made to "respect" their elders no
matter what. They weren't allowed to think for themselves. I'm
generalizing a lot here. I'm sure not everyone was like that all the
time.

Alysia