My faith in society took a hit yesterday

[Dedman]

Mrs. Dedman was in a parent teacher conference with the director of our daughter’s (she’s three) daycare yesterday. At some point in the conversation, the director made the statement that they don’t like to correct the children because they don’t want to hurt the child’s self confidence. This really struck me as a very odd and ultimately counterproductive position to take. It seems to me that self confidence that is built upon ignorance can be embarrassing at best, and be dangerous at worst.

The particular incident in question started when they were teaching the kids their colors in Spanish. We were going over the colors at home one evening and our daughter mispronounced one of the words. She said blanca instead of blanco. When we tried to correct her, she got very defensive and insisted that she was saying it the way her teacher had taught it. Mrs. Dedman brought it up in the conference only to find out if the teacher had indeed instructed the kids incorrectly. That is when she was told that the kids aren’t corrected.

I know she in only three and mispronouncing a color is nothing in the grand scheme of things, but it got me wondering. Is this an isolated thing at this particular facility or does it reflect a broader trend in child education. I have been out of public school for over twenty years, so I am a bit out of touch with what the current child education philosophies are. If the schools are putting a greater emphasis on self esteem and self confidence than on education, it may be time to consider other educational options.

[TIGERassault]

Wait...
You have faith in society?
AHAHAHAHAHAH!

All jokes aside, I'm guessing it's an isolated case. But let's not forget how stupid people really can be.

[CDN_Merlin]

That's messed up. If you don't teach a child properly at a young age, they will tend to not want to learn the correct way. Also, teaching them correctly builds self-confidence.

[Testiculese]

I hear a lot of this with children in school. 6-7yo's are being coddled FAR too much. You cna't reprimand a child's behaviour by sing-songing

\"You've been a bad boy, Timmy, don't do it again\"
...
\"You've been a bad boy, Timmy, don't do it again\"
...
\"You've been a bad boy, Timmy, don't do it again\"

There are dumploads of kids I see where parents take this stance, and the kids are horrible.

[woodchip]

I'd want to know why they are teaching a 3 yr old spanish? Why not German or heavens forbid...French.

Dedman you are experiencing first hand everything wrong with the \"I'm O.k. you're O.K.\" philosophy

[Dakatsu]

She said blanca instead of blanco.

Blanco is masculine, blanca is femenine, "casa blanca" "camiseta blanca".

Learn to read!

[Dedman]

She said blanca instead of blanco.

Blanco is masculine, blanca is femenine, "casa blanca" "camiseta blanca".

Learn to read!

I wasn't aware that colors had a gender identity in spanish. Neither did Mrs. Dedman who is Mexican and speaks Spanish. I will inform her of her ignorance

[CDN_Merlin]

French is similar in terms of having masculine/feminine.

[dissent]

I'd want to know why they are teaching a 3 yr old spanish? Why not German or heavens forbid...French.

mais, pourquoi pas?
blanc, rouge, jaune, noir ...
Très facil, n'est-ce pas?

btw, if you were saying just the name of the color in spanish, it would still be incorrect to say "blanca" instead of "blanco". As a modifier of a feminine noun, then the "o" would switch to "a"
Una paloma blanca ...

[Mobius]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with the Transactional Analysis technique of \"I'm Ok, You're OK\"!

What you are getting confused with is ★■◆●ing stupid Political Correctness gone awry - on a par with \"And The Oscar Goes to...\" instead of \"And the winner is.\"

Sheeit - actors and actresses are prettyy fucked up if they can't handle being \"the loser\", and someone else being \"the winner\". What a load of fucked up crap!

This is being extended into the classroom obviously - where if you make a mistake, it's because you are \"cognitively different\" or \"Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder\" (A condition which does not exist by the way!) or some other stupid rubbish.

No - when kids are wrong - they're wrong and should be corrected. I'm with you on this Dedman - 100%. In fact, when ADULTS make mistakes they need to be corrected too. Some of us actually CARE that you look like a fool when you write \"definately\" and \"there\" or \"they're\" instead of \"their\".

If kids don't get corrected then they're gonna end up thicker than a whale-meat sandwich and capable of doign nothing except listening to their iPod, \"TXTNG MI BR0S\", and waiting for their shift at McDonalds or Walmart to end.

Honestly, what's the point of going to school if your mistakes are not corrected? How about finding out if there are other pre-schools in the area who DO correct kids, politely but firmly ensuring that only correct behaviour if rewarded, and incorrectness pointed out.

[Shadowfury333]

Honestly, what's the point of going to school if your mistakes are not corrected? How about finding out if there are other pre-schools in the area who DO correct kids, politely but firmly ensuring that only correct behaviour if rewarded, and incorrectness pointed out.

Yeah, I agree from the correctees point of view. Even though it may seem harsh, I always find it helps when I'm corrected. This is mainly because it is easier to be told in a harmless environment that what you are doing is incorrect, then to learn it through cold, hard experience.

BTW if you think that spanish can create havoc through pronounciation problems, try learning Japanese. Let's just say that the word for "cute" is very close to the word for "scary", same with "beautiful" and "loathesome".

[Chaos Death Saurer]

If kids aren't being corrected in schools, then my kids are getting homeschooled. If they don't learn properly in school just to make sure they have high self-esteem, then they are going to become suicidal when they reach the real world.

[Grendel]

Young humans only learn by consequences of action. Take away the negative consequences and you'll get all kind of behavioral problems..

[Dakatsu]

I agree too, and I am 13. It is retarted crap, not saying you should scream at your kid if their 8, but correct them.

[Dedman]

and I am 13

Damn that explains a lot

[d3jake]

This is being extended into the classroom obviously - where if you make a mistake, it's because you are "cognitively different" or "Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder" (A condition which does not exist by the way!) or some other stupid rubbish.

No - when kids are wrong - they're wrong and should be corrected. I'm with you on this Dedman - 100%. In fact, when ADULTS make mistakes they need to be corrected too. Some of us actually CARE that you look like a fool when you write "definately" and "there" or "they're" instead of "their".

If kids don't get corrected then they're gonna end up thicker than a whale-meat sandwich and capable of doign nothing except listening to their iPod, "TXTNG MI BR0S", and waiting for their shift at McDonalds or Walmart to end.

Honestly, what's the point of going to school if your mistakes are not corrected? How about finding out if there are other pre-schools in the area who DO correct kids, politely but firmly ensuring that only correct behaviour if rewarded, and incorrectness pointed out.

^2

[akula65]

Dedman, if the approach used by the school extends to all activities and subjects, then there may be cause for concern. But if you are talking strictly about language acquisition, then I wouldn't be too concerned.

I taught an introductory linguistics course to undergraduates for two years as a graduate student, and one of the topics we covered is child language acquisition and how it differs from the way adults (i.e. anyone who has hit puberty) acquire second languages. Briefly, the kids go through three phases:

a) Everything they learn about a language requires a separate rule. They learn the names of things and associate particular words with activities, but they don't have any sense of systems of rules to help them in general situations (they have no useful knowledge of syntax or phonology, etc.).

b) The kids reach a point where they begin to recognize rules and the systematic aspects of the language to which they are exposed, and they can generalize the use of those rules to new situations. For instance, in this phase a kid would recognize that the general rule for creating the past tense in English is to tack on \"-ed\" to the present tense form (I fish, I fished, I wink, I winked, etc.). But of course, English has all of those hideous exceptions inherited from the Germanic branch of Indo-European from which linguists claim it developed. So in this phase the little beggars say things like \"goed\" (\"He goed to the store.\") or \"writed\" (\"He writed the book.\"). So the kids make mistakes, but they do it in a systematic way, and they may even seem to regress compared to things they knew in the first phase since they start generalizing the new rules to everything.

c) In the third phase, the kids learn the myriad of exceptions that exist in a given language and when the general rules don't apply.

The important thing to note is that the kids will make it through all three phases without formal instruction as long as they get sufficient input from their environment before they hit puberty. If the guttersnipes are exposed to multiple languages, they will mix and match rules from the different languages, and they will borrow lexical items (words) back and forth to their hearts content, and research has shown that there isn't a thing in the world adults can do about it, no matter how much correction is applied. You can try to bring things to the kids' attention, but you can't force them to adopt or learn specific language rules.

Since your wife (and perhaps you) speak Spanish, then the best way to make sure they get the right input is to speak the language correctly at home without spending an inordinate amount of time on correction.

Once someone has hit puberty, it's a whole different ballgame. The vast majority of adults simply do not have the sort of knack that a little kid has for language acquisition, although direct exposure (immersion) can generally increase the speed with which an adult can acquire a second language. Correction and repetition is just as necessary for language learning for an adult as it is in any other subject (physics, math, etc.).

[Flabby Chick]

b) The kids reach a point where they begin to recognize rules and the systematic aspects of the language to which they are exposed, and they can generalize the use of those rules to new situations. For instance, in this phase a kid would recognize that the general rule for creating the past tense in English is to tack on "-ed" to the present tense form (I fish, I fished, I wink, I winked, etc.). But of course, English has all of those hideous exceptions inherited from the Germanic branch of Indo-European from which linguists claim it developed. So in this phase the little beggars say things like "goed" ("He goed to the store.") or "writed" ("He writed the book."). So the kids make mistakes, but they do it in a systematic way, and they may even seem to regress compared to things they knew in the first phase since they start generalizing the new rules to everything.

This is very true. My three have english, spanish and hebrew. The mistakes are hillarious, they pick it up eventually though through corrective methods. How can they learn otherwise.

[Duper]

Dedman.. this isn't isolated. It's pretty mainstream. I heard on the radio the other day that some teachers are not to use red to correct papers because it may be too tramtizing to the child. They were to use green or purple. Just not red.

ya know.. this is the 21st century. We're supposed to be getting smarter.

[Dedman]

Thanks akula65. I don't know for sure because I wasn't there but it sounds like this is a general thing and not just related to language acquisition. I spoke with Mrs. Dedman last night about it in a little more detail. She said they praise the kids when they get somthing right but don't correct them when they get it wrong. Again, I'm not sure if that is applied to all situations or just language. I will check into that.

[woodchip]

The end result is the 15 yr old who shot and killed his principle in a WI school. Why? Because he was \"disciplined\" for carrying tobacco. So after a lifetime of \"It's not yourfault Johnny\", the kid finally finds out it is his fault and can't handle it.

[Testiculese]

teachers are not to use red to correct papers because it may be too tramtizing to the child.

I heard this too. Very, very sad. I'm SO GLAD I'm not a kid today.

[Dedman]

I hear you Woodchip, and I agree. I am a firm believer in setting reasonable but firm boundaries for children. I grew up with kids that had no discipline or structure and were allowed to do whatever they wanted. Their parents were trash and the kids were cut lose at a very young age. One of them will be working minimum wage all his life, and the other killed himself.

I think one of the greatest gifts you can give a child is the knowledge that every single decision they make and action they take has a consequence. Some are good and some are bad, but there will ALWAYS be a consequence. The sooner a child can learn that lesson and learn to take responsibility for their decisions and actions, the better off they will be.

[Genghis]

I have teacher friends (elementary) who say they're not allowed to fail students. So it's an A-D or 100%-65% scale. Yay! Everybody passes and graduates and no child is left behind!

[akula65]

Dedman, I think one other point to consider in your deliberations is what your expectation is from daycare as opposed to school. In my post, I made the same mistake a lot folks made in thinking that the institution you were referring to was a school, when you did in fact state that it was a daycare facility.

Do you have the exact same expectations for daycare that you would have for a public or private school? Is it the obligation of a daycare facility to provide instruction in any subject? Personally, I would not have that expectation, although I would expect the facility to insure the physical and emotional well-being of my kid. Providing instruction would be a factor which might cause me to choose one daycare provider over another, but I would not be surprised if it cost more to send a child to a provider who supplied instruction as opposed to one that did not.

Based on the information you gave in your first post, I don't think that the position taken by your provider is unreasonable with regard to behavior, but I would have a different view if we were talking about a public school.

[Dedman]

My expectation is that the facility provides some level of instruction. In fact we sat down with the administrator and her teacher and developed a lesson plan. She has homework that she turns in every week. One of the reasons we picked this particular facility was because they do provide some education. It’s not just a “park and play” where kids are warehoused during the day.

[TIGERassault]

Dedman, if the approach used by the school extends to all activities and subjects, then there may be cause for concern. But if you are talking strictly about language acquisition, then I wouldn't be too concerned.

I taught an introductory linguistics course to undergraduates for two years as a graduate student, and one of the topics we covered is child language acquisition and how it differs from the way adults (i.e. anyone who has hit puberty) acquire second languages. Briefly, the kids go through three phases:

a) Everything they learn about a language requires a separate rule. They learn the names of things and associate particular words with activities, but they don't have any sense of systems of rules to help them in general situations (they have no useful knowledge of syntax or phonology, etc.).

b) The kids reach a point where they begin to recognize rules and the systematic aspects of the language to which they are exposed, and they can generalize the use of those rules to new situations. For instance, in this phase a kid would recognize that the general rule for creating the past tense in English is to tack on "-ed" to the present tense form (I fish, I fished, I wink, I winked, etc.). But of course, English has all of those hideous exceptions inherited from the Germanic branch of Indo-European from which linguists claim it developed. So in this phase the little beggars say things like "goed" ("He goed to the store.") or "writed" ("He writed the book."). So the kids make mistakes, but they do it in a systematic way, and they may even seem to regress compared to things they knew in the first phase since they start generalizing the new rules to everything.

c) In the third phase, the kids learn the myriad of exceptions that exist in a given language and when the general rules don't apply.

The important thing to note is that the kids will make it through all three phases without formal instruction as long as they get sufficient input from their environment before they hit puberty. If the guttersnipes are exposed to multiple languages, they will mix and match rules from the different languages, and they will borrow lexical items (words) back and forth to their hearts content, and research has shown that there isn't a thing in the world adults can do about it, no matter how much correction is applied. You can try to bring things to the kids' attention, but you can't force them to adopt or learn specific language rules.

Since your wife (and perhaps you) speak Spanish, then the best way to make sure they get the right input is to speak the language correctly at home without spending an inordinate amount of time on correction.

Once someone has hit puberty, it's a whole different ballgame. The vast majority of adults simply do not have the sort of knack that a little kid has for language acquisition, although direct exposure (immersion) can generally increase the speed with which an adult can acquire a second language. Correction and repetition is just as necessary for language learning for an adult as it is in any other subject (physics, math, etc.).

One thing though:
How is a kid supposed to recognise a rule if it isn't being properly applied to anything?

[dissent]

I think one of the greatest gifts you can give a child is the knowledge that every single decision they make and action they take has a consequence. Some are good and some are bad, but there will ALWAYS be a consequence. The sooner a child can learn that lesson and learn to take responsibility for their decisions and actions, the better off they will be.

Amen!!!

Hallelujah!!!!!!

...The mistakes are hillarious...

No kidding. Occasionally, I am still reminded of some of the howlers I coughed up as I was just starting to learn Spanish. The native speakers in the family would, after recovering from peals of laughter, gently point out to me the mistake I made. Then I would chuckle along too. Laughter and then correction was a great learning tool.

[Palzon]

I have teacher friends (elementary) who say they're not allowed to fail students. So it's an A-D or 100%-65% scale. Yay! Everybody passes and graduates and no child is left behind!

Genghis, I see your point as being a whole different issue from the one Dedman has raised. I think the kind of schools to which you are referring are grading on such scales for the own political/financial reasons. Either way, there is a different mechanism driving peformance evaluation, and development at the preschool level.

Akula is providing an excellent response to Dedman. One thing I would emphasize is the age of the children involved, rather than focusing on the academic subject involved, the particular daycare involved, or political influences.

Even if the daycare has children of varying ages, chances are those in Dedman junior's class are probably all around 3 yo. At that age, academic correction in any area of study is not going to be productive. At 3 yo, general principles in the classroom take precedence over academic exactness. This is not a politically correct decision, but one that reflects the accepted principles of child psychology; the child's capacity to fully absorb a lesson and to process criticism at that particular age (let's say under 5 yo).

Here's a good list of categories used to evaluate a daycare child. If you are reading this list and thinking, preschool is soft on these kids, then you are totally unclear on the concept.

Motor development -- Does your child run, jump, climb easily and with coordination?

Small motor development -- Does your child have good control using a paintbrush, crayons, and puzzles?

Cognitive development -- Does your child understand the concepts of yesterday, today, and tomorrow?

Number correspondence -- This is different from counting. It occurs when a child understands "I have one block here. How many will I have if I add one?"

Pre-reading -- Can your child come up with a rhyme? "What sounds like block?" "Clock!"

Attention span -- Can your child sit still during story time? Does she concentrate for long periods of time when building with blocks (or another activity), or does she move quickly from one activity to another?

Relationships with others -- Does your child play well with other children? How does she respond to conflict? Can she take turns? Stand up for herself?

Relationship with the teacher -- Does she feel comfortable asking for help when she needs it?

Emotional development -- How does she handle transitions during the day? If she cries when mom leaves, does she bounce back quickly? Does she cry much during the day? Is she calm during lunch or snack time?

There are a lot of people here who do not seem to have a very good understanding of child development. Having realistic expectations for the child is critical to healthy development. Unrealistic expectations can cause real damage.

The end result is the 15 yr old who shot and killed his principle in a WI school. Why? Because he was "disciplined" for carrying tobacco. So after a lifetime of "It's not yourfault Johnny", the kid finally finds out it is his fault and can't handle it.

The above statement is silly and off topic.

[Dedman]

I'd want to know why they are teaching a 3 yr old spanish? Why not German or heavens forbid...French.

One good reason is that Spanish is going to be considerably more useful than German or French. Besides, my daughter is half Mexican so she really should learn Spanish anyway.

[Weyrman]

Some thoughts of mine:

This has been a very interesting read, but referring back to the original post, the children, irrespective of age, were being taught language, and the words are either right or wrong.

I have now 4 teenage children and all their life we (my wife and I) have gently corrected spelling, pronunciation and usage of words. How many times over the years have I conversationally said \"I think the word you want is...\" or \"It's actually pronounced...\" etc? All without the kids feeling unworthy, ridiculed or hopelessly stupid.

Children need to taught, guided, led by example and in some cases made to conform with a morality-belief system that allows them operate effectively in their world. If not, they will make up their own rules which in most cases will eventually bring them into conflict with the established ones.

Here in Australia, it was reported that someone was trying to even stop children being praised by saying \"Good Boy!\" or \"Good Girl\" as it was gender stereotyping and therefore possibly harmful to a developing mind!

Actually, I don't think Woodchip's comment is that far off topic. If we are not taught right and wrong, the consequences of our decisions and appropriate ways to handle \"being wrong\" and being able to cope with consequenses and suitable correction from an early age then the harder it is for this to be handled by an individual as the years go by and the more likely violence and anarchy are.

Thinks......No more thoughs!

[Palzon]

Weyrman,

the school setting and the home setting are totally different when you're talking about preschool children. If you want to correct your child at home there is nothing wrong with that. But when was the last time you spent time in a daycare? It's hard enough to keep the children from biting each other let alone from improper conjugation in a second language. daycare would spend the entire day \"gently\" correcting kids. my point is, correction is not nearly the most important thing at that age. socialization has far more to do with development later on than correcting academic errors. the daycares are busy teaching the kids not to smack each other in the face when they both want the same toy!

review the list of skills for preschoolers that i posted. now consider, preschool is the age where the ability to perform these general functions will reveal who is gifted, who has special needs, and who is right on target. the preschools probably do a better job of addressing children's needs than any other level of schooling. correcting the preschool child's every error is more the job of the parent than the preschool teacher.

Woodchip's example is absurd because it is a slippery slope that vastly oversimplifies the problem and draws a wild conclusion based on erroneous assumptions. if you wanna go down woodchip's path at all, then i would argue it is the children who are neglected in these general categories I have mentioned (not developed, and not assessed) who are at the greatest risk to develop the antisocial personality down the road.

[Dedman]

It's hard enough to keep the children from biting each other...

That is so true. The classes at our daycare are broken up by age group. The two year old class is by far (I mean light years) the most physically brutal. I don't know what happens to the kids when they turn two, but damn! Most of the parents call the two year old room the "destructo room". Kids that were mild mannered and well behaved start beating the crap out of each other. By the time they transition into the three year old room, they have pretty much sorted it out and are friends again. Toddler politics is fascinating to watch.

[Lothar]

I have training as a teacher in several contexts. I spent some time in 4th grade classrooms, some time teaching university-level (quiz, and my own lecture/lab course), and some time teaching at a museum. Each of these involved some prep work and some "on the job" training from colleagues.

At the university level, teaching math, I was expected to provide correct solutions, and tell people "no, that's not right" or "you made a mistake"... but at all other levels, I've been told REPEATEDLY that I'm not supposed to tell anyone they got something wrong or incorrect; I'm supposed to say things like "that's an interesting suggestion" and then provide the correct idea.

This is a favorite topic on Chicago Boyz:

our insistence on creating self-esteem in an eight-year-old boy comes with a high price tag — by refusing to encourage the boy’s dissatisfaction with himself as he is, we are inadvertently taking from him the primary human motivation to change oneself for the better. By pumping him full of self-esteem, we rob him of the will to set himself transformative projects and goals. Totally at peace with what he is, he ceases to have any reason to become something more — and certainly no reason at all to become what he could be.

See also:
Hovering Parents in the Workplace, about what happens when kids grow up without ever breaking out of the over-inflated self-esteem mentality.

[Palzon]

lothar,

i can completely acknowledge the validity of your points and the quote. However, two things:

1. I have asserted that the philosophy guiding the lack of correction at the preschool level is motivated by a sound understanding of child psychology. I would say that even if there is some element of PC motivation, this seems far secondary to the aforementioned motivation, which seems appropriate. Would you agree?

2. (and this speaks more to your point) Though again, I see your above points as valid, I submit that anti-intellectualism in general does more harm to critical thinking (especially in the USA), than does political correctness! Political correctness has vast opposition dispersed throughout the culture, whereas anti-intellectualism seems to be opposed almost exclusively in the halls of academia.

Here Hollywood and Washington have come together; two broad symbols easily interchangeable with any others you wish to insert, which I think well represent art and politics, respectively. Thinking is bad. Reading is bad. Admitting error is bad.

Both camps are fresh out of ideas and make their living off getting the public to fight over which bit of stunningly banal ideas they prefer. This is no product of political correctness, but of revolt against the intellect and the most crass commercialism imaginable; anything to make a buck or maintain status quo.

Thoughts?

[Lothar]

the philosophy guiding the lack of correction at the preschool level is motivated by a sound understanding of child psychology.

Pretty much agreed. Problem is, the process continues through high school and sometimes beyond. 4 year olds need a particular type of guidance, but "the system" assumes kids never become more mature, so it doesn't help them become more mature.

I submit that anti-intellectualism in general does more harm to critical thinking (especially in the USA), than does political correctness! Political correctness has vast opposition dispersed throughout the culture, whereas anti-intellectualism seems to be opposed almost exclusively in the halls of academia.

Anti-intellectualism is definitely a problem. I'd argue political correctness serves to strengthen anti-intellectualism -- because certain topics are "off limits" and people can't make others "feel bad" through intellectual arguments, we end up with people who aren't even willing to think about many topics.

AI is opposed in parts of academia (and by engineers and others who have to create real, working products), but it's also supported by parts of academia (especially those who "analyze" words and media -- literature departments, and so forth.) See, for example, the outrage over Larry Summers suggesting it might be possible women are actually different from men. Thinking, research, reasoned discussion? No, those are off limits! We must react with STRONG EMOTION at this outrage!

The two reinforce each other, because both stifle free inquiry and reasoned introspection.

[Shadowfury333]

Pretty much agreed. Problem is, the process continues through high school and sometimes beyond. 4 year olds need a particular type of guidance, but "the system" assumes kids never become more mature, so it doesn't help them become more mature.

Yep, that's basically what a nanny state is.

Thinking, research, reasoned discussion? No, those are off limits! We must react with STRONG EMOTION at this outrage!

Isn't this what most people accuse major religions of doing.

[Dedman]

Damn! We made it 35 whole posts with out religion being pulled in. That must be a E&C record.

[snoopy]

Thinking, research, reasoned discussion? No, those are off limits! We must react with STRONG EMOTION at this outrage!

Isn't this what most people accuse major religions of doing.

Yes.... see viewtopic.php?t=11094 if you want to get into the discussion. I know, you just couldn't let an opportunity like that pass by.

[Shadowfury333]

I know, you just couldn't let an opportunity like that pass by.

Well, what I was meaning was that secular people do it too.