5 ms·

If you had actually read the article, you would know that this is a private after-school program whose participants are "upper-middle class and socially liberal

If you had actually read the article, you would know that this is a private after-school program whose participants are "upper-middle class and socially liberal." Your comment sounds like "MY values aren't being taught so this is child abuse!" Maybe some parents don't agree with your values? Maybe they want their children to learn about cooperation and empathy instead of blindly accepting hierarchical power structures and divisions that emphasize the individual over community, which our school systems currently teach as a default. The teachers didn't interpose themselves -- they brought a conversation to the children after the town was accidentally destroyed. Through weeks of conversation, the children created a set of rules that benefited everyone, including the children who were previously excluded.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
legitster 5y ago
> Maybe they want their children to learn about cooperation and empathy instead of blindly accepting hierarchical power structures and divisions that emphasize the individual over community Okay, after weeks of this, they all agreed that now everyone owns the legos together. Which is ironic given that they had power over their legos. Then the teachers took it away. Then the teachers gave it back. It sounds like the lesson here is to blindly accept hierarchical powers. We have to take the teacher's version of events here. But as a parent, it seems equally likely the students learned how to be performative until the teachers were satisfied enough with what they heard to give them their toys back.
- trs8080 5y ago
  You should really read the article. A hierarchy formed where children were actively being regulated and excluded by other children. The teachers guided a conversation that allowed for everyone to participate equitably. Your last sentence says a lot. It's sad to expect your children to performatively participate in community but return to selfish behavior when it no longer benefits them.
  - legitster 5y ago
    I did read the article. Did you? This wasn't one guided conversation - this was months of them. And the children were being recorded and their answers analyzed regularly. Even if I accepted the diagnosis in the premise, I do not want to take their word about their own results.
    - trs8080 5y ago
      > This wasn't one guided conversation - this was months of them. Yes, complex topics often require prolonged discussion. "Conversation" can imply an active exchange over the course of time. > And the children were being recorded and their answers analyzed regularly. If you had read the article, you would know that the initial conversation was recorded so the teachers could take notes. Taking notes and analyzing students' answers is literally part of the job description of a teacher. Teachers are not babysitters, they're educators.
- fallingfrog 5y ago
  Freedom is not when whoever is biggest and meanest gets whatever they want. Society’s gotta have rules, bud. In this case the rules were made by adults, because we’re talking about children.
- mwcampbell 5y ago
  I think I agree with what the teachers were trying to do, but I also would be more convinced that they had actually succeeded if they had discussed the situation and the rules without ever taking the toys away.
  - trs8080 5y ago
    When dealing with children ages 5-9, it is sometimes important to remove an emotional catalyst in order to calmly reflect and have a productive conversation. The Legos were removed, a conversation occurred over several weeks, and the Legos were reintroduced when the conversation resolved.
    - mwcampbell 5y ago
      Still, it leaves the teachers open to criticisms like this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30393372 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30393372 Maybe that matters more in a message board discussion like this one than it does to the actual people involved. Then again, getting buy-in from adults is necessary if a new approach to teaching is going to be replicated on a large scale.
ALittleLight 5y ago
The article is exactly about teaching children to blindly accept hierarchy. The teachers tell them what they can play with and when, how they can play together, and why. Why should the children accept the student-teacher hierarchy? Are they old enough to question it? I suspect you have more in common with the teachers politically than you and I have in common. Perhaps you think it's good for the students to be politically indoctrinated because you agree, to some extent, with what the teachers are saying. Conversely, I would not share my politics with children, even abstractly. I think after-school teachers for young kids are there mainly to help socialize children and keep them busy while their parents work. I don't think it's their role to teach kids any particular ideology.
- crooked-v 5y ago
  > Conversely, I would not share my politics with children, even abstractly. Except, everything is politics. Even basic empathy is now (unfortunately) a prominent political issue.
  - ALittleLight 5y ago
    Everything is physics is more correct, but that doesn't mean kids in an art program need to be learning about quantum dynamics. It strikes me as a leap in logic to say "Everything is politics, therefore we need to indoctrinate young children according to my progressive left politics."
    - crooked-v 5y ago
      I'd be curious to see what exactly you object to about the "indoctrination", given that the actual process here (if you avoid panicking at the mere presence of words like "privilege" in the narration) amounted to good critical thinking lessons around topics like "what does it mean to own something" and "what does it mean to be powerful", then getting the children to talk to each other and work out what they all felt were fair rules about sharing use of the Legos.
      - 5y ago
farmerstan 5y ago
The teachers DID interpose themselves. They removed the legos after the Legotown was damaged even though the kids didn’t want that. Only after months of jumping through hoops and patting themselves on the shoulder did the kids get the Lego back. There are easier ways of teach kids how to share without not only depriving them of toys but making them feel utterly powerless over a random event and having the teachers unilaterally decide to take away the Lego. It wasn’t taken away from some particularly egregious event, it was an accident and the kids wanted to fix things but the teachers response was to show the kids had no agency or power in the decision at all. Way to show the kids what true power is!
- OrvalWintermute 5y ago
  It bothered me when I read about the removal of Legos - I perceived this as group punishment.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

legitster 5y ago

> Maybe they want their children to learn about cooperation and empathy instead of blindly accepting hierarchical power structures and divisions that emphasize the individual over community Okay, after weeks of this, they all agreed that now everyone owns the legos together. Which is ironic given that they had power over their legos. Then the teachers took it away. Then the teachers gave it back. It sounds like the lesson here is to blindly accept hierarchical powers. We have to take the teacher's version of events here. But as a parent, it seems equally likely the students learned how to be performative until the teachers were satisfied enough with what they heard to give them their toys back.

trs8080 5y ago
You should really read the article. A hierarchy formed where children were actively being regulated and excluded by other children. The teachers guided a conversation that allowed for everyone to participate equitably. Your last sentence says a lot. It's sad to expect your children to performatively participate in community but return to selfish behavior when it no longer benefits them.
- legitster 5y ago
  I did read the article. Did you? This wasn't one guided conversation - this was months of them. And the children were being recorded and their answers analyzed regularly. Even if I accepted the diagnosis in the premise, I do not want to take their word about their own results.
  - trs8080 5y ago
    > This wasn't one guided conversation - this was months of them. Yes, complex topics often require prolonged discussion. "Conversation" can imply an active exchange over the course of time. > And the children were being recorded and their answers analyzed regularly. If you had read the article, you would know that the initial conversation was recorded so the teachers could take notes. Taking notes and analyzing students' answers is literally part of the job description of a teacher. Teachers are not babysitters, they're educators.
fallingfrog 5y ago
Freedom is not when whoever is biggest and meanest gets whatever they want. Society’s gotta have rules, bud. In this case the rules were made by adults, because we’re talking about children.
mwcampbell 5y ago
I think I agree with what the teachers were trying to do, but I also would be more convinced that they had actually succeeded if they had discussed the situation and the rules without ever taking the toys away.
- trs8080 5y ago
  When dealing with children ages 5-9, it is sometimes important to remove an emotional catalyst in order to calmly reflect and have a productive conversation. The Legos were removed, a conversation occurred over several weeks, and the Legos were reintroduced when the conversation resolved.
  - mwcampbell 5y ago
    Still, it leaves the teachers open to criticisms like this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30393372 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30393372 Maybe that matters more in a message board discussion like this one than it does to the actual people involved. Then again, getting buy-in from adults is necessary if a new approach to teaching is going to be replicated on a large scale.

ALittleLight 5y ago

The article is exactly about teaching children to blindly accept hierarchy. The teachers tell them what they can play with and when, how they can play together, and why. Why should the children accept the student-teacher hierarchy? Are they old enough to question it? I suspect you have more in common with the teachers politically than you and I have in common. Perhaps you think it's good for the students to be politically indoctrinated because you agree, to some extent, with what the teachers are saying. Conversely, I would not share my politics with children, even abstractly. I think after-school teachers for young kids are there mainly to help socialize children and keep them busy while their parents work. I don't think it's their role to teach kids any particular ideology.

crooked-v 5y ago
> Conversely, I would not share my politics with children, even abstractly. Except, everything is politics. Even basic empathy is now (unfortunately) a prominent political issue.
- ALittleLight 5y ago
  Everything is physics is more correct, but that doesn't mean kids in an art program need to be learning about quantum dynamics. It strikes me as a leap in logic to say "Everything is politics, therefore we need to indoctrinate young children according to my progressive left politics."
  - crooked-v 5y ago
    I'd be curious to see what exactly you object to about the "indoctrination", given that the actual process here (if you avoid panicking at the mere presence of words like "privilege" in the narration) amounted to good critical thinking lessons around topics like "what does it mean to own something" and "what does it mean to be powerful", then getting the children to talk to each other and work out what they all felt were fair rules about sharing use of the Legos.
    - 5y ago

farmerstan 5y ago

The teachers DID interpose themselves. They removed the legos after the Legotown was damaged even though the kids didn’t want that. Only after months of jumping through hoops and patting themselves on the shoulder did the kids get the Lego back. There are easier ways of teach kids how to share without not only depriving them of toys but making them feel utterly powerless over a random event and having the teachers unilaterally decide to take away the Lego. It wasn’t taken away from some particularly egregious event, it was an accident and the kids wanted to fix things but the teachers response was to show the kids had no agency or power in the decision at all. Way to show the kids what true power is!

OrvalWintermute 5y ago
It bothered me when I read about the removal of Legos - I perceived this as group punishment.