Anyone know of any studies that indicate whether computer based training is effective when used in an individual setting as opposed to a school setting?
I credit most of my education on just having loved to read. The internet wasn't around and encyclopedias were my friends. For myself, i can envision that i would have done well with CBT but i wonder if I would be the exception rather than the rule?
I have a well-read 12-year-old son who has spent many hours of his life looking up the answers to anything he wanted to know on Wikipedia. He regularly read random Wikipedia articles just for fun. It is the reason that so many people over the years thought he must have a really high IQ. If he wanted to understand something better, he found things like the "In plain English" videos on Youtube or howstuffworks.com. When he was younger, I was bombarded with questions any time we were in the car and I found it very distracting, especially when I didn't know the answer. Now there is the iPhone and iPad so he can learn even more on long car rides. Not only do I not have to find answers for him any more, he shares the interesting things he is learning with me.
Our public school didn't offer any kind of computer based training or an appropriate education for my son, which is why we have to homeschool. Computer based training definitely works for us.
Sorry I don't have the link, but isn't there some research suggesting we use a different part of our brain when reading online versus reading a book?
As homeschoolers we've certainly used some online options and we enjoy noodling around reading online, but I don't see it as an adequate substitute for other approaches. Simply reading is very different from producing something (drawing, writing, etc.) The kinds of interaction that happen in good discussion groups, in a classroom, working with mentors are different educationally than simply absorbing facts from reading online. Also, and I think most of us have experienced is that being online it is easy to flip from one thing to another rather than focusing on indepth study. It may lessen persistence and the willingness to stick with and tackle a problem because there is always another shiny pretty thing that requires less effort.
I agree. Real learning is more than just taking in facts, and I don't know what part of his brain my son is using when he reads online, but he retains enough of it that he is able to relate his knowledge of one subject to another and come up with even more questions that lead to even more study which seems to result in a deeper knowledge of a lot of different subjects.
When online learning is the only option, it can work if a child is really motivated to learn. Online learning leaves more time for learning fun things. Through online learning my son learned to do a lot of different accents and a really good general knowledge of different countries that add to his ability to do comic improv which is a very useful social skill, not only in his musical theater class but in discussions with friends or family. If a discussion starts to get a little boring or if he is trying to make a point he can make up a scenario that not only helps him get his point across but makes people laugh.
His interest in sociology and psychology which he learned about online were useful in dealing with feeling shunned in our community because he does musical theater instead of sports. When he has a problem he looks for solutions on his own online and it works really well for him.
The internet is superior to a book in that the information is interconnected and browsable in any direction, much more easily than in books. And there's a lot of good reference material out there on the web-- Wikipedia alone is worth the cost of entry IMHO.
Then you have online learning sites, some of which have active as well as static content. That's something you just can't get from books.
I don't think the notion that learning can and should involve more than engaging in memorization of facts (which is also "real learning" of a kind, as intelligence depends in part on knowledge) means that reading and/or interacting with non-static content on the web or elsewhere isn't a learning activity. Austin's link is a good one.
The main drawback to the internet is, of course, danger, e.g. from inappropriate material and predators. But as long as use of the internet is made safe, I don't see much to argue about: in addition to everything else that a child can be exposed to for learning, the internet can be quite a useful resource.
The internet is superior to a book in that the information is interconnected and browsable in any direction, much more easily than in books. And there's a lot of good reference material out there on the web-- Wikipedia alone is worth the cost of entry IMHO.
Wikipedia is superior to a book in that it's larger, much more interconnected than almost any book, and easily, quickly browsable. While it might not be ideal for medical students doing a research paper for a final source, here we are talking about children using the web to learn. I'm not sure I understand how your medical education experience is directly relevant to that.
Overall, I have to say that Wikipedia is a more useful general learning resource than, say, the Encyclopedia Britannica. While it contains some inaccuracies, at a higher frequency than a standard encyclopedia-- as well as other faults, such as some biased information-- it also has much, much more information on the whole, and much more unbiased, correct information. As an information hub which is also to some extent an authority, it can't be beat.
That isn't to say that information shouldn't be verified, or that children shouldn't be taught to verify. I think it's a little off topic, though you're certainly right. The topic is whether the web in general is a useful learning tool for kids; it is, and Wikipedia is a good example of a part that's useful for that.
My main reservation with letting kids use Wikipedia is not the accuracy of the content, but the appropriateness of some of the content.
Formal vs. real vs. plain ol' learning. Isn't it really all the same? Any source whether book, web or teacher can be wrong. Maybe the real learning begins when a student is able to get past taking everything as gospel from an "authority".
The gist of my question was more along the lines of how effective is CBT compared to having a live teacher, but i am now thinking that's pretty moot. There are all sorts of different styles of learning and it may even depend on what's being taught.
Mmm, I'm sorry if I came off a bit touchy there. I didn't mean to. Really what I am trying to get across is that while I understand what you're getting at, and Wikipedia isn't perfect by any stretch, I think it can be useful for learning on some level, and I can see how it would be fun and useful for a self-teaching kid. I really do agree that it's not great as an ultimate authority on anything, though it may be good enough for some purposes. (But my concerns about appropriateness/safety are real... I am currently setting up my DD4's computer for internet access. If I can't figure out how to keep him to "safe" areas of Wikipedia, I will have to just block the site for now.)
Anyway, it's just one example off of the top of my head. We might agree on the self-directed learning usefulness of some other sites where the content is not user-edited. Many of them are free.
I see inaccuracies fairly often in children's media, which I chalk up to the likelihood that both writers and editors of such stuff tend toward the less technical end of the spectrum. But I freely grant that Wikipedia, due to its basic nature, will have sections with a higher inaccuracy rate than almost any decent edited or peer-reviewed source.
My D15 is also a big Wikipedia surfer, mostly used for picking up info that would be useful in Quiz Bowl, but I think she also does it for fun. She is well aware that the info is "user provided", and that it COULD be incorrect, but Wiki is still a great way to learn quickly about a new topic. I have no qualms about this, I know she wouldn't depend on it for any super critical info. And just take a look at the non-fiction kids section of any library these days... so many of the books are 30 years old and completely out of date, I would trust Wiki over many of them!
I look up technical terms all the time on it at work; I had one client that blocked it, and it really bugged me when someone would mention a new encryption algorithm or technical acronym, and I couldn't pull up a description on Wiki so I could sound smart about it As a pretty heavy user, I actually only rarely see something out there that I consider inaccurate.
Not saying it is the best way to learn... but I actually think it has a whole lot to recommend it over the old Encyclopedia set we had when I was a kid.
As a pretty heavy user, I actually only rarely see something out there that I consider inaccurate.
Not saying it is the best way to learn... but I actually think it has a whole lot to recommend it over the old Encyclopedia set we had when I was a kid.
Absolutely. Also, Wikipedia is genuinely super easy to edit, and if anyone is sure they've found an error, what's stopping them correcting it? You may need a reliable source, but that's not usually too hard, and there's no better way to get across the message that anyone can edit than doing it yourself! DS and I put in a redirect one time when we looked some mineral up under one name and only found it under another, i.e. we made the alternative name we'd first tried redirect to the correct article - even that was pretty impressive to him.
A friend of mine once confessed that he'd tried to convince his child of the danger of Wikipedia by inserting a false statement into an article just before the child was about to use it as a source. Didn't work, because the false statement got removed in the 10 mins between his inserting it and the child looking. (I am not recommending this, though!)
In fact, far commoner than outright errors, IME, are articles that are confusingly written. Structuring an article well takes a lot more work and skill than correcting the odd fact. Still, it's where I go first, too.
I used to teach college classes back when the Internet was pretty new, and the garbage the students would use as sources was mind-blowing. It is always good to remember that anyone can put up anything on the Web; that doesn't make it true. At least with published books (not self-published), some publisher and/or editor somewhere had to say, "Yes, this is good. Let's print that." There's nothing like that on the Internet.
With that HUGE caveat, however, I love Wikipedia for factual material that is not controversial, like what the difference between granite and marble is, say, or what defines a hypergiant star.
The live links to sources and further material on the topic can be extremely useful and are *right there*. So easy!
Anything that might prompt any sort of fight? I don't look at Wikipedia. Even info about colleges is ripe for changes from collegiate rivals. And the battle over the Sci*nt*logy page is legendary! They finally shut that one down, I read.
And finally I am extremely wary about *any* Internet source for medical advice. Even relatively respectable sources make me skittish. I don't know their biases or who pays their bills. Waaaay too many people turn to Wikipedia for medical advice, IMHO.
Through online learning my son learned to do a lot of different accents and a really good general knowledge of different countries that add to his ability to do comic improv
I don't think anyone would question a person can learn things online. I think it is more a question of how big of a role that it should play. Your above example is a good one. He's learning something fun and applying to his life and that's a good thing. However, contrast learning accents to learning advanced foreign language or translation skills. Those sorts of skills would be difficult to develop online and time surfing from place to place may not be a good foundation for having the sort of focused persistence it takes to really learn a foreign language.
Originally Posted by Lori H.
His interest in sociology and psychology which he learned about online were useful in dealing with feeling shunned in our community because he does musical theater instead of sports. When he has a problem he looks for solutions on his own online and it works really well for him.
And, this would be an example of something else that concerns me. It can be helpful to find support online and this board is an example of that. But there can also be a point where that focus can take away from in real life relationships and not all online support or information is helpful. To give an example there is a proliferation of anorexia how to groups online. Support groups can actually promote feelings of being misunderstood by outsiders. And, feeling some sense of online connection may take away the push to find in real life friendships which is something all people need. Surely not everyone in the town shuns your son for an interest in musical theater. If that was the case there would be no musical theater group.
Absolutely. Also, Wikipedia is genuinely super easy to edit, and if anyone is sure they've found an error, what's stopping them correcting it?
There are a lot of edit trolls on wikipedia, some of which are state sponsored.
Check out the entry on the Korean War. Someone put a lot of effort into it two years ago and then the NK trolls showed up and replaced it with garbage. This entry was partly restored and then locked.
Wikipedias in-house editors can be very biased no matter what support you provide. One person in particular who is high up in Wikipedia tried to ban me. I got tired of arguing with him. Google Roman Warm Period and then try to find it on wikipedia. Or google wikibullies.
I will start with wikipedia and then google a particular topic and read in-depth.
Google books has a lot of stuff online now for free, too.
I thought it a little amusing that a discussion about on-line learning became a debate on wiki.
I think CBT (as someone signified) can be great, as we are going to use CTY to supplement DD's education. They even have Chinese modules, which are really interesting to me. She goes to Mandarin once a week. Using some sort of model where she can hear it more would be great and being able to connect with other kids online (when she gets older) and have a discussion would be very cool.
And with CTY you do have help and interaction if you need it. The options are growing, which are wonderful as we struggle with homeschooling vs what we have. We can customize and give both.
I think wiki is great for looking up species. There are pictures and simple details. Great for a young child that wants to know "what is a ...?"
Surely not everyone in the town shuns your son for an interest in musical theater. If that was the case there would be no musical theater group.
Have you ever watched the television show Glee? I read this in the Wikipedia article: Michele plays Rachel Berry, talented star of the glee club who is often bullied by the Cheerios and football players.[35] Monteith plays Finn Hudson, star quarterback of the school's football team who risks alienation by his friends to join the glee club.
My son and some of the older kids in my son's musical theater group watch this show because they see the humor in the stereotypes. What they see in that show is similar to what they see in our stereotypical small football obsessed town. Our public school doesn't do musical theater but the kids in band are bullied by the sports kids and adults ignore it.
When my son says he is shunned, he is exaggerating only a little. Adults that don't know him will ask him what sports he plays and when he says that he doesn't do sports, he does musical theater, he just gets a funny look and an "Oh" and that is the end of the conversation, but when they ask the sports kids the same questions, they are treated much differently. Sports kids hear him talking like a very articulate adult to me at a local restaurant and talk about him being "gay" when he is not.
I talked to a college age friend of my son's in the group and he said he found it easier to just not tell people that he does musical theater. He thinks that some people here think if you are a boy in musical theater you have to be gay and he is not and my son is not. My son has friends but they are all in this musical theater group or are former members of the group. He is sad that there is no one here that shares his academic interests, but he has found friends that share his interests online.
For us, online learning is very important and when I asked my son if he thought he needed teachers, he used the following analogy. I don't remember exactly what he said but it was something like if he were a character in a video game, his character would require developers or designers but he has been audodidactic since birth. He thinks I worry too much about this and says we don't have to worry about an "early release date" causing his character to not be the best it could be because he is a "work in progress" and he always will be. I have no doubt that he will be lifelong learner.
Because he has all this wonderful information available to him online, he found that he could learn what he needed to learn, without much help from me, and no help at all from teachers in public school who believed their job was to make him color in the lines and stifle his curiosity and fit in when he couldn't, forcing us to find an alternative education. By the way, my friend is a special ed teacher at our public school and she got so tired of fighting the teachers' attitudes and getting no support for trying to do the right thing for the kids that she found another job. It is sad. It shouldn't be this way, but it is.
My husband, a Vietnam vet, who knows a lot about being shunned from personal experience, sees that we don't fit in here, but we can't move because of family responsibilities. He wondered if it might have something to do with the dancing in musical theater because our community is also very religious. I don't know, but when my son and I visit a church that my mother went to for years, they look at us like we don't belong there and only a few of them speak to us. When I talked my son into trying another church we listened to the preacher say that migraine headaches and chronic pain and high blood pressure are caused by holding a grudge and if we would just forgive whoever we are so mad at we will be cured.
Have you visited a predominantly black church in your area? From my experience, they tend to be more accommodating, open minded, and use music and theater in services. Your son might get a kick out of it.
I have seen Rosetta Stone but since the program at Columbia is amazingly cheap for the year ($300 for the whole year, 2.5 hours every Sat.) and the CTY is flexible, I am OK with the plan. But thank you.
I have realized I have seriously overscheduled DD. But at the same time, overscheduled PG kid, may be an oxymoron.
So that is my throw out topic. Can a PG kid be overscheduled?
Here is DD's framework: Mandarin on Sat. Ballet on Sun. Piano on Mon. Gymnastics on Tues. Chess on Wed. Science program on Thurs. Tennis on Fridays.
Tennis isn't her absolute favorite but the school offers it as an afterschool. She does a little in the summer. I do not expect Serena Williams. Just enough to go to tennis parties in her twenties. As I know I got a few dates...
Seriously, if the kids is PG, tends to boredom in the classroom, does overscheduling work? Maybe I should have started a new topic.
This is what I get for not going to the beach after going to dog beach and deciding to shower since I had to carry a 25 lb fish, the dog decided to drag in, instead of her plastic toy and I had to grab it and throw it into the bushes. I should have put the dog in the house and gone to the people beach instead of showering and having a glass of wine and posting....
My kid likes her downtime. Your DD's schedule would drive mine to breakdown in 2 weeks or less. We're going to try 3 activities this year (2 days of dance, one of swim), and I anticipate having to drop one of the dance sessions.
OTOH, there are kids (of unknown giftedness, but their parents have never mentioned any academic "ahead-ness") in her dance class who have an activity a day, multiple activities on some days, and then additional competitions for some activities, and love it.
DD needs a lot of sleep (11 hours or so), so needs to be asleep around 8:30pm on school nights. She gets home from school at 4:15, so there's not a lot of time for anything more than re-activity snack (without which activity is a fiasco) / travel (we live way out) / activity / travel back / dinner / shower / bedtime. One day with no downtime isn't too hard on her, but multiple days back-to-back tend to lead to bedtime creep, and then she starts the day off sleep-deprived, and it snowballs from there.
Yes, some PGs kids are easily overscheduled. Mine are both homebodies who moan and groan if they have to participate in any activity that takes them away from their Legos and imaginative play. Even if they love the activity, they hate to go to it. They absolutely need a lot of unscheduled time.
But that doesn't really matter. The real question is to figure out whether *your particular kid*, who (if memory serves) has always liked a lot of activities, is overscheduled.
What does she say? Does she want to do less? Does the running around seem to be leaving her stressed out?
I don't necessarily agree with it, but just recalled it. I would say that if one's kid likes a lot of scheduled activities, it can't be too wrong to schedule them.
In my own case I was kind of introverted and shy as a kid, and enjoyed reading a great deal. I don't think I would have enjoyed such a full schedule. But that's just me. I can see that even though I would have perhaps chafed a bit, I might have come out the other end of a full schedule with better social skills.
To answer the question you asked, certainly a PG kid can be overscheduled. Whether yours is is of course another matter. But it sounds as though you're wanting to explore the theory that lots of organised out-of-school activities can be a generally applicable antidote to an understimulating school environment, and I feel positive that as a general rule that won't work. This is not to deny that it might work for an individual child!
My DS does two or three one-hour afterschool activities at school - and they aren't skill-focused ones, either - and that is absolutely enough for him, to such an extent that weekends when he has two parties are really too much. For him, I think what he gets too much of is organised group activities, of which school counts as one. He finds it tiring to deal with group interaction, and needs time alone. Whether an individual child feels that way is personality rather than giftedness, but I guess that PG children are more likely to feel that way than others, because they are likely to have additional stress in the interactions imposed by their outlier status.
I don't have a well-formulated opinion, but am throwing out my two cents anyway:
1 - Of course, this is highly subjective, and somewhat influenced by where one lives, but I can't imagine having a 7-day/week scheduling. We like to get out of dodge as often as we can: there are cities, mountains, beaches, museums, etc. to explore. I need my weekend (and preferably my Friday evenings. Of course, half the time we are homebodies, but that means half the time we aren't!
2 -- Putting aside the differences in kid's comfort levels regarding structured activity vs. downtime, what are the relative pros/cons of scheduling one activity on multiple days vs multiple activities? For instance one's dc could do theoretically do piano or ballet or gymnastics or tennis (or band or the school newspaper or theater or what have you) 3 or 5 times a week instead of having 3 or 5 different activities.
I think ideally, one would combine CBT with other types of learning. Off the top of my head, I think some points for consideration about judging the merits of a specific instance of CBT vs. other format for learning are:
-- Is the learning differentiated or pre-packaged? Some software is very good at figuring out what kids know, and skipping over it, and what they don't, and reinforcing it with extra instruction and/or practice. Some software runs every kid through the same exercise. Some teachers (or what have you) can differentiate, and others treat everyone the same, for better or for worse.
-- Is the learning multi-sensorial? You can read on a screen, or you can read from a textbook. OR you can watch a multimedia presentation, be asked to do a virtual project, etc. (Or, at the very least, does the style of teaching/presentation at least somewhat match the child's preferred learning modality).
-- What is asked of the students? A lot of CBT stuff is multiple-choice, which I think is less than ideal for assessing knowledge, skills, and ability to apply. But a lot of "regular" teaching relies on multiple-choice, too. Some CBT (like ALEKS) has open-choice short-answer response, which is a definite step up. But most CBT is not going to have the ability to grade essay-type responses, lab reports, etc. unless there is a human on the other side of the interface. The other side of "what is asked of students" is that computer-based projects may often be replicating a 3-dimentional task in a 2-dimentional world. While sometimes it is advantageous to do this -- perhaps because the expense involved in doing the actual project is too great -- other times, it is less than optimal.
-- What sort of feedback does the child recieve, vs what type of feedback they'd like? What sort of incentives does the training/teaching offer? A lot of educational software gives kids points/coins/etc for getting the correct answer, or working for a certain period of time, so the kid can then go play. I think in many instances, if you do a good job of pairing a gifted child with CBT, the computer program is its own reward. Of course, there can be a lot of problems with what gets rewarded in the classroom, as well.
-- What is the level of expertise of the teacher? Most elementary school classroom teachers are expected to be masters of all, which is a tall order -- and they may not have sufficient background in something to fill a gifted kid's needs; CBT can be done cutting corners, or with lots of content experts using the latest, greatest information.
I'm sure there are other plenty of other factors, but hopefully that's some food for thought.
Sorry so slow to respond to Lori's post about shunning, but I have a few minutes today and wanted to answer.
Originally Posted by Lori H.
When my son says he is shunned, he is exaggerating only a little. Adults that don't know him will ask him what sports he plays and when he says that he doesn't do sports, he does musical theater, he just gets a funny look and an "Oh" and that is the end of the conversation, but when they ask the sports kids the same questions, they are treated much differently.
To me "oh" doesn't equate to shunning or anything remotely close to it. I would talk about ways to handle those sorts of conversations. My personal experience has been if you express enthusiasm and happiness about your choices most adults will join with you. So something like "My big thing now is musical theater, I'm going to be in Grease next month. It be at the Elm Street Theater. Have you seen a show there? It is a beautiful theater and we are really excited about it."
My belief is there are interesting and intelligent people everywhere and that includes small towns, rural areas and the South. If you start from the perspective that you are superior to others or that people will hate you because they are ignorant you are predisposing yourself to a life of self imposed shunning. This is an attitude of pessimism that doesn't promote happiness. We have the option to choose to live differently. When you are open to it, I believe you find interesting people everywhere. The grandma down the street may not have gone to college, but if you take the time to listen she may astound you with her knowledge of hybridizing flowers. If you are genuinely interested in who she is and what she's passionate about, you will likely find the same is returned in your direction.
This is not to say that every kid in high school is cool, but my understanding is that your son doesn't go to high school so that should not be a driving force in defining his life.
Originally Posted by Lori H.
When I talked my son into trying another church we listened to the preacher say that migraine headaches and chronic pain and high blood pressure are caused by holding a grudge and if we would just forgive whoever we are so mad at we will be cured.
I don't agree with the entire sentiment, but I think anyone who has read any research on the mind-body connection knows there is quite a strong connection. Holding on to negativity doesn't make us healthier and there are reasons to question if it this is healthy way to live.
The "oh" response was not a good example, but it did add to our feeling of being shunned. There were members of our homeschool group that were angry with us for saying that we wished part time school and OT and PT were available for my twice-exceptional son because I would like for my son to go to some classes at the public school. I told them I had written letters to legislators. They said if I pushed for this that it would make things harder for them because somehow the government would tell them how to educate their children. Some of them thought it was terrible that I wanted to expose my child to the public school kids and some of the things they are being taught at the "government school." One woman in the group saw us at a Walmart, looked at us without saying a word, grabbed one of kids, and turned around walked the other way. We stayed out of the group for a few years but joined it again after a few people left the group, new people joined that didn't know they weren't supposed to talk to us and that was the end of that but my son still doesn't exactly fit in because he doesn't want to learn how to hunt and gut a deer or raise cows and pigs and chickens and it is hard to carry on a conversation for very long with people who are excited about these things just like they find it hard to talk to him about things he enjoys. So he isn't really being shunned by some members of the homeschool group any more. He easily wins their spelling bees, and wishes they had more academic type competitions, but most of the other kids don't seem interested.
My mother is one of those people who didn't go to college because she couldn't afford to go, except for a few classes, but learned so much on her own (without the internet) that she could answer more Jeopardy questions than anyone I knew, including people who had graduated from college, which is why I knew that my son could learn on his own.
Regarding the negativity, I do think this was why I was shunned for a while by some members of our church, so we stopped going there and only visit once in a while. I made the mistake of speaking negatively about our "perfect" school that refuses to even consider other teaching methods for kids who learn differently. All kids are supposed to be the same. All kids must learn to color in the lines before being allowed to learn anything else. IEP's? How dare anyone tell them how they need to teach, when they have been teaching the same way for years. They ignore IEP's. Nobody does anything to enforce it. They don't have a library in this town because the majority of the people don't believe we need one. They think that if people don't like the way they do things here, they just need to leave. I guess I am a little negative about that, but not enough to cause a headache. I really am happy that we can homeschool now. My son does have a lot of musical theater friends and they really are good friends.
I think it's dreadful that coloring would ever be part of a school curriculum. I have told my son to refuse any coloring books or similar material given to him in any context.
Of course there will always be people who make different choices and who disagree. The way we think about situations does really influence what our experience will be. I can easily imagine a homeschooler describing a group where they had little in common but focusing most of their memories on the one or two good friends they made along the way. That is the difference between positive and negative thinking.
I think it's dreadful that coloring would ever be part of a school curriculum. I have told my son to refuse any coloring books or similar material given to him in any context.
Why would you instruct him to refuse. What if it is something that is appealing to him. Sure, coloring can be very easily overdone but I don't see it as all bad. We found some science coloring books to be helpful tools. Great for reinforcing memorization and also good for continuing to develop fine motor skills. Here's an example http://www.amazon.com/Botany-Coloring-Book-Paul-Young/dp/0064603024/ref=pd_sim_b_5
Because I believe strongly that coloring books stunt creative growth and increase passivity. I allow my son to add color to his own line drawings, paint, etc., but the forms all come from him.
I don't decide what to give my kid just on the basis of what appeals to him. Lots of kids like playing shoot-'em-up video games. Some people like smoking crack. I'm just sayin'.
As coloring books go, the one to which you linked is not bad. I will probably never buy it for my son, but I will allow that it is not the sort of thing I'm really concerned about either. If those sorts of subjects were often seen in coloring books, I wouldn't have such a problem with them. I have also seen some other ones that aren't in the "He-Man vs. Skeletor Battle for the Universe" vein: mandalas and other geometric designs, etc. In the end, I think it best to just condition him to avoid them.
I doubt that anyone near me here in New Hampshire, within the school system or without, would offer a random kid a coloring book like the one you've pointed out. My kid will continue to be instructed to firmly refuse if he's offered a coloring book by anyone when I'm not there. If it's a good one, I might consider it.
It wouldn't personally for me have been worth coaching the child to refuse because I can't think of a single situation prior to middle school when it ever came up and then only in the form of something like the botany coloring book. I must say I have a bit of envy for a childhood with so few worries or challenges that coloring books would be one of the biggies worth coaching the child about. And, I mean that in a serious way, it is a happy comment on life that this can rank as an issue.
In K last year, our DS was given a "cut the poem apart and put it in order, glue it down, and color it" assignment literally every day. The kids were told what order to put it in several times, the right answer was up on a board that they could copy directly, and the pieces were numbered so that a kid who could count could just put it in numerical order.
IMHO, with a kid doing 3rd or 4th grade math in his head, it was at least as bad as coloring that his job *every day* was to put numbers in order.
It wouldn't personally for me have been worth coaching the child to refuse because I can't think of a single situation prior to middle school when it ever came up and then only in the form of something like the botany coloring book.
That's amazing to me, that someone would offer a botany coloring book (unless it was in a private school setting, in which case I can understand and am envious). Today coloring books are offered everywhere-- at the doctor's office, restaurants, even recently at the bank. They appear to be the "shut the kid up" toy of choice at all sorts of establishments.
It's not that raising my kid is free of other challenges-- far from it. It's that I just don't want to dull his mind with coloring books, in addition to all the other challenges. Children are naturally very creative, in a way that is quite often dulled by adulthood, sort of the way many people learn to do math badly. Cookie-cutter "art" projects, coloring books, etc. can all combine to stunt a child's artistic development.
At a preschool my son was at around the age of 3, they used to do a lot of "art" projects, really carbon-copy crafts projects. They were along the lines of gluing eyes to egg cartons in the same places, painting things in exactly the same way, etc. They were pretty obviously designed to show the parents some output, not to encourage creativity or anything useful like motor development.
At the preschool my son was at last year, the same thing happened. Meanwhile there was a slavish adherence to multiple intelligences theory (which was not pushed so obviously in the initial information session or I probably would have taken my son elsewhere), and a complete lack of understanding of how to teach gifted children, how to foster a love of art, or anything else I would prefer my child to learn.
When someone offers a generic coloring book to my kid, I take it as a warning that they are simply trying to make my kid shut up and go away for a while, and/or that they don't know how to teach art, or what it means to be creative. Coloring, though it may develop some motor skills which can be developed in other ways too, is pretty much a non-thinking activity.
It's that I just don't want to dull his mind with coloring books
Please, please, please rethink your position.
While i'd agree you have an issue if coloring books were the only offering in lieu of classwork, I have to say that coloring books were a savior to me as a kid. I could easily get lost coloring. I learned all sorts of techniques for shading, complimentray colors, texturing, etc. and just the sheer ability to color something how I WANTED to was a creative freedom that was allowed on a world where kids were supposed to listen rather than think. That was one of the few things that kept me sane.
What a sad place the world would have been had I not been allowed to color.
As far as the carbon copy aspect of art. Here's a little story for you... My daughter applied to the fashion Institute in NYC and I remember the portfolio review of her designs. The woman was quite excited and gushed that they usually don't get applicants with such a well defined "voice" (a unique sense of style all her own), saying "People just don't do work like this!". Needless to say she was accepted. What does that have to do with carbon copy art? My daughter told me that her art ability was woken somewhere like 3rd grade when she had to do a soap sculpture. She had no idea what to do so she and I sat at the kitchen table and she decided she wanted to carve a fish. So we sketched a design and i had a block of soap and she had a block of soap and she copied what I did. I didn't hold her hands, she did it herself, but she had an example to follow and it just opened her eyes as to what she could do. You never know when a spark is kindled.
I still think it is better for our mental health to limit contact with certain people.
My son remembers the positive as well as the negative. I don't think he dwells on the negative, but he also doesn't forget. He remembers that a few things in kindergarten were fun, but he also remembers lots of coloring when he hated coloring, especially having to color the letter of the week and listen to very boring lessons when he could already read at a 5th grade level. He remembers talking to the teachers on playground duty instead of actually playing because there were bullies on the playground who were much bigger because they were older, having been redshirted, which is the custom here, and he didn't feel safe when they were around.
Teachers seemed to be blind to the bullying or maybe they were just thinking positive--bullying is not really that bad, it builds character, and boys will be boys, etc.
Luckily, a few teachers with a more balanced view of the reality at that school recommended that we homeschool.
Lori, i think you've done right. I happen to live in THE town that has been spotlighted nationally recently and it's literally torn the town apart. I don't even want to get into the issues being raised but I will say this: A parent needs to do what they have to to ensure that safety of your child. Period.
Clay... thanks for the input. I agree that CBT isn't (today?) the whole solution and should be used in conjunction with other things, but I do think based on my own learning style it could have been a much larger part - for me.
I think at a minimum, CBT Based assessment might help to provide snapshots of where our kids are in school and why. Surely it can't be the only tool but gosh! what a step in the right direction it would be if every kid could bee assessed at least once a year!
Today coloring books are offered everywhere-- at the doctor's office, restaurants, even recently at the bank. They appear to be the "shut the kid up" toy of choice at all sorts of establishments.
We didn't run into this, but as I said our child is a teenager. When he was younger we typically brought along our own stuff like puzzles and books so if there were "shut up kid" options we didn't use them.
Originally Posted by Iucounu
At a preschool my son was at around the age of 3, they used to do a lot of "art" projects, really carbon-copy crafts projects. They were along the lines of gluing eyes to egg cartons in the same places, painting things in exactly the same way, etc. They were pretty obviously designed to show the parents some output, not to encourage creativity or anything useful like motor development.
Yes, I agree that can be a huge problem. We toured schools like this but fortunately had also saw other preschool options that were much more appropriate. I really appreciated the art options at our son's preschool. It was definitely open ended access, process not product oriented. While we did plenty of messy stuff at home too, it was a treat to know that at school he spent happy time with paint, clay, without the home clean up.
No one is suggesting you have your child in a situation where he's bullied Lori. I'm a homeschooler and a big advocate for putting the emotional health of kids at the center of educational decision making.
The article you posted contains this passage: "Behaviorally what starts happening is you avoid interactions and situations that could be quite positive for you."
This is what I'm getting at. How do you acknowledge the negative and move on in a way that allows you to engage in more positive and meaningful relationships with other people. Dwelling on every small negative comment or imagining an "Oh" contains shunning is not helping a child build the sorts of social connections that are protective against anxiety and depression.
The question is can we find ways in our lives to nurture optimism and positive feelings of goodwill and security in relationships with other people. How can we find ways to acknowledge challenges but also keep them in perspective by focusing more of our energy on nurturing the positive aspects of our relationships with other people?
It's that I just don't want to dull his mind with coloring books
Please, please, please rethink your position.
While i'd agree you have an issue if coloring books were the only offering in lieu of classwork, I have to say that coloring books were a savior to me as a kid. I could easily get lost coloring. I learned all sorts of techniques for shading, complimentray colors, texturing, etc. and just the sheer ability to color something how I WANTED to was a creative freedom that was allowed on a world where kids were supposed to listen rather than think. That was one of the few things that kept me sane.
What a sad place the world would have been had I not been allowed to color.
As far as the carbon copy aspect of art. Here's a little story for you... My daughter applied to the fashion Institute in NYC and I remember the portfolio review of her designs. The woman was quite excited and gushed that they usually don't get applicants with such a well defined "voice" (a unique sense of style all her own), saying "People just don't do work like this!". Needless to say she was accepted. What does that have to do with carbon copy art? My daughter told me that her art ability was woken somewhere like 3rd grade when she had to do a soap sculpture. She had no idea what to do so she and I sat at the kitchen table and she decided she wanted to carve a fish. So we sketched a design and i had a block of soap and she had a block of soap and she copied what I did. I didn't hold her hands, she did it herself, but she had an example to follow and it just opened her eyes as to what she could do. You never know when a spark is kindled.
Poppa
I've rethought it, and I still hate coloring books. I will also never sit with my children and have them copy my movements in doing an art project. What I might do is have my kids view other art, form their inspiration partly from it, and do their own designs afterward. Another thing I do is have my five-year-old son refine his own concept through multiple stages, then implement it.
You would have had even greater artistic freedom if you had started with a blank page, created your own outline and done your own shading, etc. after that. There's simply no argument on this that will convince me.
Without meaning offense, I take your comments in a similar spirit as stories about someone's grandmother who smoked all her life, yet lived to 102 without a bit of lung cancer. That is probably true for some people, but it doesn't mean that smoking is good for you. I don't doubt that you enjoyed coloring as a kid, or that your daughter got accepted to art school, etc.-- and just for the record, I don't think my son would be instantly tainted by doing a coloring book either, and think the botany one posted earlier is actually pretty cool-- but I just think that in general they tend to stunt creativity.
My son remembers the positive as well as the negative. I don't think he dwells on the negative, but he also doesn't forget. .. He remembers talking to the teachers on playground duty instead of actually playing because there were bullies on the playground who were much bigger because they were older, having been redshirted, which is the custom here, and he didn't feel safe when they were around.
Teachers seemed to be blind to the bullying or maybe they were just thinking positive--bullying is not really that bad, it builds character, and boys will be boys, etc.
Its is called "Big Boys and Girls Rules of Life."
I was in 5th grade when I figured this out. The bully beat me up in the locker room and the gym teacher did nothing about it. I was so mad at the injustice that when the bully got the ball, I just cleaned his clock so hard that he was crying to the gym teacher who consoled him and gave me a mean look.
I learned that bullies are really children inside and that they are often protected by those in power who use the bully as proxies.
When he got back on the field, I nailed him again because I was still mad at the gym teacher and when I got up I looked right at the teacher. The bully left me alone after that and other boys welcomed me as friends.
Much of the world is still governed by the use of physical violence and it is a deep part of human nature. Some people you cannot reach by argument, but they can reach out and punch you. You have to have an answer for this rather than pretending it does not exist. Running away is a legitimate defense.
A lot of kids cannot use the sports field or for other reasons, cannot strike back. You then either take it, or avoid it altogether. I think taking it will destroy most peoples' ability to form boundaries and how to deal with anger. Therefore, avoiding it also protects you. Striking back risks becoming a bully oneself or becoming callous to others' plight.
I don't have much of an opinion on coloring books, as I don't have much artisitic talent. But I do think it is cool for kids that love art to take that to the next level, coloring pictures online and doing graphic art.
I am not an expert on what it does to your creativity, having little. And I don't think I did that much coloring as a kid...
But DD loves to do it in restaurants and in her downtime (which she does have) she actually will color sometimes, usually blank sheets and draw her own pictures.
So my point was that taking coloring and transfering to computer may be a great learning tool for kids that are interested.
Coming from an art background and being an artist myself, I honestly roll my eyes at no use of color books. Plain and simple: it helps with fine motor skills. My DD colors when we are out and about, usually at restaurants. She also draws and writes and I have yet to see her creativity stifled by such acts.
As for over use in school ... I see this as a problem and it is part of the issue of repetition in general. Teachers rely on coloring books/pages because they can't seem to think outside of the box.
I do have a problem when teachers roll their eyes at a child's drawing and consider it scribble when clearly there is something there of imagination and creativity. I've witnessed this first hand and it set me off as I listened to the teacher put this little girl's work down because she refused to stay in between the lines as she colored. But, to jump to absolutely NO coloring books allowed ... it's just as extreme as constant assignments of coloring.
I guess you couldn't see with your naked eyeballs the extra development in fine motor skills, any more than you could the stunted creativity, am I right?
You of course wouldn't see her creativity stifled when coloring; you are predisposed against the idea, and you'd have to observe what she could have drawn by herself without someone else's lines in the way, and then compare it to the colored book. Which would show and encourage more creativity?
I think for most children, scribbling is a natural part of the development of early art ability and interest. It's just another thing that's discouraged by the stay-within-the-lines mentality of most coloring books, and of the people that rely on them to keep kids quiet and occupied.
It would be hard to measure the impact of coloring books on creativity, though I guess one could form a study. But just like I don't let my kids watch a lot of TV, I don't/won't let them do coloring books. It's passive; why color in someone else's drawing when one could be drawing instead? I just don't see the point. Plain paper is easy to keep around.
I wasn't meaning to be confrontational on this. Remember, I started by commiserating with someone. I just feel the way I do, and am honest about it. It's okay for us to disagree. I don't think anyone here seems to be doing a bad job with their kids, and I'm no expert on raising kids in general.
You of course wouldn't see her creativity stifled when coloring; you are predisposed against the idea, and you'd have to observe what she could have drawn by herself without someone else's lines in the way, and then compare it to the colored book. Which would show and encourage more creativity?
Since I've allowed my child access to coloring books I clearly have no ability to judge her creativity? Seriously? I love your assumptions that since my child has actually used a coloring book or page that she is only allowed such activities for her creativity. This extreme attitude is cracking me up. As I stated in my first post, I am an artist and have degrees in art. Many a time has been spent with my daughter just drawing on an art tablet. She has her own art supplies (Tablet and art pencils) and happily draws nonstop throughout the day. She also enjoys watching mommy draw.
My DD has been writing and drawing way before she turned 1 and way before she was interested in coloring. I have seen no decline in her creativity, just an advancement of her skills. She still creates her mystical creatures with volume. Is coloring her favorite thing to do? No, but if and when she wants to she is more than welcome to it. Does she prefer to just draw? Actually yes and of course this is where we see her creativity but the argument of stifling her creativity because she has colored between some lines is silly.
And again, I'm not arguing against the logic of coloring being over used, especially in schools. And I feel this argument is valid in that if all they ever give them is these structured projects then the children have no real outlet to create. My DD has the bonus of mommy and the chance to let loose and just see where it leads her. Some kids only get 'art' time in school and this is sad.
But I certainly do not have a hate of coloring books. And by no means am I saying you should change your mind ... it is your right as a parent such as it is my right as a parent to be fine with it. What I am sensing is you on a soapbox and that is what I'm reacting to.
My kids love getting the crayons and coloring sheets at restaurants. They just turn the placemat over to the blank side and draw their own stuff.
My DD too. She is all about drawing no matter if there are printed lines or not. First thing she does is flip it over to the blank side and draw away. Sometimes she flips it back over and colors a section and sometimes she uses the printed side to continue on with her imagery. Whatever she wants to do is fine with me.
Since I've allowed my child access to coloring books I clearly have no ability to judge her creativity? Seriously?
The way this space-time thingy works is that it goes in one direction only. You can't observe your daughter doing freeform art during the time she's coloring, and you can't observe what she would have been like if she hadn't colored at all.
Quote
I love your assumptions that since my child has actually used a coloring book or page that she is only allowed such activities for her creativity.
I don't think we're on the same page.
Quote
I am an artist and have degrees in art.
Wow! You win!
Quote
My DD has been writing and drawing way before she turned 1 and way before she was interested in coloring. I have seen no decline in her creativity, just an advancement of her skills.
Did I suggest that use of coloring books would bring development to a screeching halt?
Some unschooly type mothers I tried to show it to said I would stifle his creativity and that I really shouldn't have showed him how to do that. Maybe it's true. Maybe art isn't about observing and interpreting what you see onto paper. Now at 2 yrs. 9 mos. what he has drawn independantly recently looks like this: http://i945.photobucket.com/albums/ad296/Hablame_today/b8c64c58.jpg He told me the curved parallel lines is a dog, the little circle is his nose, the line beside it is his mouth, and the line on the other side is his "butt" (guessing he meant tail). And recently he's looked at the picture again and asked me, "where's the patas?". (spanish for feet). I don't know what to think of this debate. Sorry to follow this off-topic tangant. I just felt like fishing for someone to say something positive about my sons talent development. Sorry. This debate has had me kind of bummed for months, even though it happened a few months ago. Putting artistic talent into computer graphics is a great career choice, from what I've heard. My little brother just graduated from video game design school. He collaborated on the production of the Disney/Pixar videogame "UP" for X-box. I've thought it would be cool someday to make an entire cartoon on my own, which would have been impossible just a few years ago and is now doable with computer graphics software. Look at King Kong for example, super low budget set in various public places in a few different cities but the cg made it spectacular.
I do have to agree with the person who argued against instructions of anatomically correct body, mostly because of your child's age. At two it really isn't important for them to be taught this, but do I think you have destroyed his creativity by doing so? No, of course not and from your post I get the impression that they delivered that message in an aggressive manner. Sorry you had to deal with that. I would suggest just handing him the paint and letting him have fun. You could always use the primary paints and introduce him to how they create secondary colors. Another fun project for toddlers is exploring nature. Take some paper and crayola outside and let him trace leaves or even shadows but if he goes outside and just wants to scribble that's fine too. It is just about opening their eyes to different environments.
As for the two pictures you posted and creativity. The line drawing is way more interesting and the sweet narrative of what he saw seals the deal. I love to see drawings and painting by children and listen to how they interpret it. DD always has a story about her creations. It is never, "hey I drew a monkey" but more this is my monkey and he did x, y and z and on and on and next thing you know we are all involved in the story.
Big hugs to you and don't worry about other people's opinions especially when they take it to the extreme and if I'm going this route you most definitely don't have to consider mine either. Just have fun with your DS.
Anyone know of any studies that indicate whether computer based training is effective when used in an individual setting as opposed to a school setting?
If reputable universities are now offering some of their courses online is it wrong to assume they put the research and development into it and that CBT alone at home is effective, or is it that they're doing the R&D right now by offering them?
My problem with coloring books comes from two main ideas. First, the idea that most of the forms in children's coloring books are of such low artistic and other merit that I don't want my son using them as a template for anything. I don't even want him looking at them. That problem is solved by high-quality coloring books, such as the one posted earlier on botany, but still exists for a great number of coloring books, what I would consider a vast majority.
Second, if my son has only so much time in his young life for creative expression, I would simply rather that he maximize his efficiency during that time toward development of whimsy, his own artistic sense, etc. In other words, I view time spent coloring as a missed chance in some important ways, even if it doesn't actually set a child back.
Of course, if it's really true that doing coloring books helps in certain other ways, doing nothing but freeform art would represent a number of missed chances from another point of view that places importance on different things. And I will allow that coloring even the most insipid coloring book is less passive than, say, watching TV, and some coloring books may even be teaching tools, like the one at passthepotatoes's link. I am sure all of our children will muddle through just fine despite different views on learning and child-rearing.
Anyone know of any studies that indicate whether computer based training is effective when used in an individual setting as opposed to a school setting?
If reputable universities are now offering some of their courses online is it wrong to assume they put the research and development into it and that CBT alone at home is effective, or is it that they're doing the R&D right now by offering them?
I don't think it's really in question that CBT at home is effective to some degree. I would wonder whether you're missing out on some things without the school setting, and if so, what sort of things and how much. My guesses as to some possible differences: a home-based approach may lack structure compared to a school setting with a stricter curriculum and/or curriculum order (which may be good or bad), and when a child hits a problem area at home there is only the parent available, who would not usually be a trained teacher (but a bad teacher may be worse than none, and an attentive parent may be a better natural teacher than the average trained teacher, and a bright person shouldn't have a problem teaching at least elementary-school topics).
Your question about R&D is interesting. I would think that there are some interesting uses for data gathered on the learning sites.
Iucounu: Certainly you have you own theories and I wouldn't presume you are correct or not. What i can tell you is my own experience, not that of my child or anyone else's studies. What I know is this: I had access to all sort of coloring books before I started school, so before kindergarten here's what I learned.
- I learned that it was difficult to stay inthe lines until someone showed me a trick that i could put my index finger along the lines and "Bump" it with the crayon forcing me to staying the form. That didn't teach me that i needed to conform to someone else's idea of a picture, it taught me that there sometimes are tricks that can be used to solve a problem when you don't have the skills to be successful.
- I learned that a flat 2D image could pop out at you by adding shading, to look for places where shading would be expected (EVEN if it's not drawn in the picture. That taught me that even though there were "rules" to the picture i could challenge those and take the image beyond what was expected. It also taught me that i should look at the natural world to observe and see how things work in the real word and try to apply them to the picture.
I have a hard time with your logic that coloring books stifle creativity. Anything that exposes you to something other than you normlly would have thought of enhances creativity, not stifles it.
As much as i like to learn independantly, there are time when i wish i had someone that i could have sit with me and show me what they do. Music for example. I am a self taught hack on the guitar and I do fairly well, but i don't play enough to be able to play something by ear ( I USED to but that takes practice!) so it's great to use Youtube to watch how joe blow plays a particular piece. Would it be more creative to invent my own song? LOL Maybe, but it might suck too. I happen to think by emmulating someone else, you enhance your ability and learn to grow outside of yourself.
Back to CBT, (This is a song about CBT, Remember? - Arlo Guthrie, sortof) The fact that colleges are heading more towards CBT is really validation to me that it should be viable. I have since found that there are some 27 states that have some form of virtual high schools online. I am more convinced that CBT is the way to go if you have a child who works independantly well.
I would agree with you that if a child is interested in CBT (and most of them are), it makes sense to include it in the curriculum. Then the question becomes: -- for what purpose? (Eg, to learn what subject) -- which programs? (For, just like all schools -- or even all classrooms -- are not created equal, not all programs are created equal)
I use a lot of informal CBT with my dd in the form of YouTube, on the theory that a moving picture is worth 10,000 words. So, when we read something offline that she doesn't have the context for, we often look up a photo or video of it so she can get a greater sense of what we're talking about. And, most of her "music appreciation" has come from YouTube, both in the form of examples of specific instruments being played and, at her insistance, how they are made. Now, my dd is young; doubtless, when she is your ds's age, she will be looking up videos and a dizzying plethora of informational websites. Now, this isn't even vaguely structured or "correlated to state standards", but I think it's part of that ability "to chase rabbit holes" when learning occurs outside of the context of formal schooling. It's like that old encyclopedia commercial -- "Look it up, dear" -- has come to its own in a big way. We use formal CBT, too, but just wanted to provide a different perspective.
PS -- There is TONS of research on CBT. Most of the major CBT providers have published reports on their effectiveness, though typically in the classroom setting, where it is easier to have a control group, standardized delivery, etc., etc.
Oh my gosh, lucounu! DD4 is not ready for that yet, but tonight I'm getting the popcorn and having a Dr Quantum-fest with DH. He's very interested in Theoretical Physics, but has NO background in it and very little in (college-level) math, so he's going to love this.
At two it really isn't important for them to be taught this, but do I think you have destroyed his creativity by doing so? No, of course not and from your post I get the impression that they delivered that message in an aggressive manner. Sorry you had to deal with that.
Actually, I thought we were pretty nice about it (though not everyone was, those who weren't were not the unschooly ones). Sorry you've been worrying about it, hablame. Your son seems like a delightful, healthy child from what I've heard of him...and I'm not sure why you want more than that.
So I'm guessing that Turkish coloring books are particularly bad?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
LOL. Normally we're not into coloring books here (DD is totally uninterested in them), but a TURKISH coloring book might be an exception. Especially if it will teach my child to dance & sing. Gosh, that still cracks me up.
My son has learned so much from Youtube videos and so have I, but I was so wrong when I thought I would get a break when my son discovered how easy it was to find his own answers without asking me. Those endless questions turned into all day "Mom, you have to see this!" But then I did tell him we would be co-learners since there are so many things I didn't learn in school or if I learned them, I have forgotten. Some of it, I realize now, was "surface learning" only, just enough for me to do well on the test and then forgotten. My son not only doesn't forget but he constantly builds on prior knowledge and connects it to other subjects. Wikipedia and Youtube make learning so much easier.
As wonderful as CBT is, my son really likes to learn and play (video games) in co-op mode if he gets the chance.
He has had an electric guitar for months now and didn't get around to teaching himself how to play, but is very eager to take lessons from an older friend. There is no way he could learn what he is learning in musical theater on the internet even though he does watch Youtube performances of the songs he is learning. I think he would still have to have that interaction with other performers to really learn what he needs to know to do well. He needs that positive feedback from the other performers to fine tune his skills.
Clay's right. It only matters what it is and who made it. "Multiply this!" hip hop songs will get the multiplication facts stuck in your head just as good as filling in the multiplication chart every day for two weeks. Watching Nova will spark your imagination of the endless possibility and wonders of this world. Starfall.com's "About Me" wordshapes CBT does the same thing as the wordshape cut and paste worksheets used in school I would think. Actually my neighbor said her sons teacher told him to use starfall to reinforce what they were learning in class that he wasn't getting. The few things you can't get from a computer would be handwriting, which is reportedly important for balancing the two hemispheres of the brain. Co-operation and teamwork. A software program can teach you the right answer and how to get there with self-correcting answers. Really you'd be missing the other students thought processes from the class, but you could see every known opinion in the world. Then again I'm basing these impressions on stuff I've read online
But what you bring up is really something that I am trying to wrap my head around and discussed somewhat in the CBT thread. We, as a nation, built the interstate highway system that opened this country to become much of what it is today. It seems building a national educational system would do the same. Imagine any child able to access any level of education from wherever they are! Whether they get online from school or from home if homeschooled, or through the library in cases like you describe� well, it just makes sense to me.
Oh. �I thought you meant in general and hypothetically and were quiestioning the effectiveness of CBT programs available at the present moment. �You wanna build the "Ender's Game" e-school, or the Jetson's private computer tutor. Let's see... That would take the four best things from Grinity's DI school find- solid foundational teachings for basic skills, frequent functional evaluation tests, and acceleration or remediation, and a noted lack of pointless busywork. �You'd couple that with an idea I think I saw Kriston quoted as saying in the 2010-2011 (?) Kindy & 1st grade, or first and second. �(too many drugs in the 1960's, I apologize.). I only saw the quote not the post because I was just skimming the thread to relax after the boy went to sleep. �But the idea was a homeschool co-op where the classes were treated like college courses in that you just took whatever you needed from the course menu. �So nationalize it and put it online. �Then you would blend it with my NCLB thread core standards to make sure everybody's course selection met the bare minimum core standards for their functional level in each subject. Then you would have a spreadsheet of all the school-aged kids in the census. �You would have 1 column for each of the core standards subjects required by law. �Parents could select from an exhaustive unabridged list of cirriculum publishers for each subject that meets the core standard requirements of their latest functional evaluation for that subject, or for a single skill remediation program for that subject if the most recent evaluation warrants. �There would be no need for the school, the parents, or any online agency to sign off on the fact that the student took the course, the evaluations will tell. �But you could add an extra column for that purpose just to make it look official.� Now for the financing. �The church has been whining for years about establishing a federal voucher system where each child takes a coupon for whatever the amount the public school earns per head in it's classroom and then they take their little coupon to the private school of their parents choice and that makes private school affordable to anyone who wants in it in theory. �But that means taxing the unwilling public to pay for religious education as well. �But that's a whole different debate. �Hey, wait. �They could make the vouchers for each credit rather than for each student. �Then they could say that the cirriculum covered can not contain religious material and does not meet core standards. �Uh, nevermind. �I don't know how you'd level the playing field financially and equitably for every child and family. �Also you would scare the Big Brother crowd into fearing that the system will enforce this program on every child and not just those families that want to participate in the society the rest of us are cultivating. �Oh. �And I don't know how the unschoolers would like the evaluations and expectations because it wouldn't allow for asynchronous imterests in the present moment, even though it would be tailored to each child's individual develpment so much better than things are now. �Maybe flexibility in how you balance the course load could accomidate them. �Just say you have to choose so many credits at one time, even if it's unbalanced, and you have to eventually choose all of the core subjects sometime in this decade. �And you're not going to get the Christians to co-operate unless you pay for their agenda. �They won't participate, they'll bargain. �Aye, maybe I'm just too cynical. �There has to be a compromise. �We'll pay for the Abeka reading cirriculum even though it's religious, but let your church pay for the bible study and no it doesn't count as a credit. The core standards board is asking for feedback on what we should expect as a nation from our children. �I'm keeping it on the back burner of my mind, keeping in mind that they say "grade" and mean "age". �I'm trying to think of how to incorporate Waldorf, Montessori, unschool idealism, fast track yuppie ivy league preschools, and those poor kids in New Oreleans and take all these different philosophies of healthy age-appropriate development and expectations and combine them into one set of universal core standards. �It would help if parents representing these philosphies could chime in on that thread and we could contribute to the nationwide school standards they're writing at this moment. My posts are always too long when I think about anything. �Embarrasing.��
Excellent thoughts. I like the idea of cirriculum publishers. Meet some guidelines of content and it can be offered online via the "United Network for Controlled Learning Environments via Smart Advancement Methodology) or UNCLE SAM! *grin*
Standards for grade /age seem moot and maybe it's replaced by "tracks" - a set of standards that pertain to a job group, licensure or dicipline. I suppose you could you could use standards so that if you fail to meet some level (NCLB) you qualify to go to intensive teaching school based on the traditional model.
Funding is just a matter of priorities. At some point we need to stop funding pork and get serious about the things that matter. Less libraries and museums deicated to the memory of shyster politicians IMHO.
I do like imaginary projects also, so tell me what you'd like to accomplish with your centralized CBT program and we'll brainstorm and flesh out more of the working details. I like the "carreer tract" only as long as it's flexible enough for the student to change their minds up to the last minute. I'll say grade level as a point of reference even though with functional evaluations grade would not be tied to age and the system wouldn't assume the student is working at the same grade level across the board.
I guess you're saying this system would make it easier for parents to patchwork a education tailored to their child with one class in a public school and one class online and one class at a private school. Unless you're asking for more clear national school standards. Or maybe you're asking for more efficient tracking of individual students education? What do you want man? I can't read your mind.
I like the "carreer tract" only as long as it's flexible enough for the student to change their minds up to the last minute.
The secret is there is no "last minute" anything. No deadline to finishing. No age groups. The key is determining which componants apply to which track(s). You are not limited to a track. Complete all the associated componants, voila! you are a professional! Add a few more for track B and viola! you are multidimensional!. The requirements toward a career track might be that you pass some final exam based on the standards as set forth within the track, which would enforce that outside institutions conform to the national standards even if they don't like the system itself.
Learning is lifelong and open to anyone with access. Not just a highway to learning but a SUPER-highway. NCLB is moot cause we all have access to everything!
Yes, I am saying national standards make sense. Sure, there's the battle over states controlling what 'educated' means but it's well worth defining. I know that at the moment states may have various requirements as to what is required to be a teacher. They have completetly different requirements form other states, and at other times they may require the same knowledge but set different proficiencies. It's a mish-mash.
I am asking for all of it - this is thinking BIG after all.
Yes, you could access this wherever. Your gifted child can sit in the lab and proceed at his or her whim. The normal child can proceed at the normal pace but is still required to use the CBT for assessment. The homeschooled child... ditto.
Well there kind of is national standards with the Taks or Cat or whatever the heck it is the end of year test, but it's crappy standards promoting content over skill from what I can see. I think that's what everybody's complaining about, having to drill facts until they're memorized for the test instead of teaching basic foundational skills (which would be harder to test without showing just how much better some students are doing than others). Thanks for talking to me it helped me clarify and edit my thread for better clarity. I love the idea of continuing education available even to the retired grandpa who wants to learn a new carreer path. It doesn't fit humanity's current business model. Even communism which is supposedly different from capitalism is a business model, treating the country like a business and the people like employees there just to do a job and that's it. What you're describing is a sci-fi fantasy utopia like Star Trek the next Generation where humanity has evolved from surviving to exploring. Good luck with that. I mean there's some nerds working on it, that's what the open access college files on the Internet is trying to start. But it's too little and too sparse. Maybe if free and appropriate public education was offered as an opportunity rather than a requirement in a very unschooly nation, maybe the world would be curious enough to educate themselves.
which is why i picked up on your suggestion of content publishers as a method of keeping capitalism's paws involved.
Doesn't have to be free... just available. Access to the network, setting of standards etc. would be public service. Content would be greed.. um.. er... a business commodity.
BTW, the problem i see with a business model is that really once the content is built there's not really any expansion until new knowledge is gained. The only outlet for new sales (other than population growth) is to make a new product that is more complex and bloated - just look at the evolution of any software development.
The tracks would have to be defined. The available curriculums would be assigned to those tracks. Obviously there's oodles of reporting mechanisms as to where you are in a track or across related tracks). Could be smart enough to evaluate progress and suggest related tracks (or more suitable tracks? "Would you like fries with that?")
...and just think of the job creation possibilities! You think the IRS is bloated?
So, would it just be a list of resources, an exhaustive list of options, maybe with an automated carreer guidence counselor, with "carreer tract overviews" and maybe a student progress tracking function? What am I missing? I'm guessing this is for middle-school and highschool students. Sounds like it's designed to serve home-schoolers, mixed partial homeschoolers, to help them find a direct route to a carreer path. I'm saying homeschoolers because I believe the school already offers this service, right? Do you have in mind career aptitude and placement Tests?
Look at this! It's AT&T's international searchable database of zoos, aquariums, museums, libraries and stuff. It looks like they offer classroom videoconferencing for hire. A quick search showed me that you can learn about Alaska's marine biology by videoconference. It's for schools, not for home use. But it's still pretty cool. http://www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/vidconf/directory.cfm
Hey! Check this out!. . Supposedly It uses the same "buying history software" that amazon uses to tell us "other customers who liked your choices also bought.". For a comprehensive, non-linear cirriculum that still covers all the bases. Sadly, only a computer could keep up with "kid's on so many levels". And here's a link,zhian. See if this could further your hopes for the school system
As a pretty heavy user, I actually only rarely see something out there that I consider inaccurate.
Just have fun with your DS.
