Recently, I have become interested in woodwork. I have whittled a few little things, planned a few projects, and started acquiring some tools. As an adult, I am coming to this new hobby with a wealth of experience. Some useful, some probably less so, but enough that I can create something tangible and pick up what I wish to learn quickly. Because I have chosen this activity, my motivation for learning is high. This is Self-Determination Theory, and the sense of "Autonomy" is what fuels deep engagement. This sense of choice is fueling the deep learning state. It is taking up so much space in my brain that I’m neglecting the housework and even our dog's dinner. Sorry, Bruno!
Now, if I had this hobby placed on me as a four-year-old, possibly in a school or by parents, things may be different. As anyone who has tried to get a young child to move away from what they are interested in will attest. First, I might not have been interested, and because I hadn't chosen it, it might have been a battle to get me to pay attention. For a child with a PDA (Pathological Demand Avoidance) profile, whom I predominantly work with, there is a neurological drive for autonomy where external demands can actually trigger a fight-or-flight response. Bribery or coaxing might get a result, but they often undermine intrinsic motivation in the long run. For these children, they often have adults around them, who care, but in their caring and wanting what is best often place demands on their children which is in conflict with the child's sense of autonomy.
When attention had been gained, if it had, my fine and gross motor skills might find the sawing and carving difficult (if I were allowed to use the tools, the most exciting part, at all). We often rush these things, but research into brain plasticity and readiness shows that children learn best when their neurological networks are developmentally prepared for the task. The patience and stillness needed to finish a project would be lacking because it hadn't started out as something I was interested in. Young children are incredibly capable of focusing on things that interest them, which often looks like a flow state, for as long as is needed for them to get what they wanted from the thing. But in this situation, without the autonomy, accessing this flow state might be tricky.
As a four-year-old, I would want to move, play, and improvise. Keeping me focused on this task would be a struggle for everyone involved. While caring adults might make the shared activity "pleasant," the actual woodworking skills would take years to develop. I have seen this over and over: a child is pushed into an activity before they are ready, leading to frustration or withdrawal. I have taught music to little ones where it takes years before they can make the guitar sound like they want it to (although we do do lots of exploring and playing in different ways while their motor skills are developing), yet the same sound can be made in minutes by a willing 12-year-old. The learning in these sessions might be a little different to the parents' initial objective of wanting their child to learn guitar.
If the question is "How do children learn best?", my answer is simple: when they are ready. Large-scale studies have shown that delaying formal academic instruction (like in Finland or through the "Gift of Time" research) in favor of play-based learning can dramatically reduce inattention and improve long-term mental health. The problem that most adults need to wrestle with is that every child will be ready for different things at different times and in different ways. Pushing children before they are ready in an environment where they are compared to others can have a significant impact on their self-worth and confidence. This might be when children start refusing activities that they have seen others do with ease or even wanting to go to school at all. And we must remember that sometimes children in the same year group can sometimes be nearly 12 months apart. This is massive for a four year old. It creates competition and comparison for the children and parents. Interestingly, for mixed aged groups, this need for comparison disappears. A four- and a twelve-year-old don't feel the need to compete (in the most part), so they then have a greater chance of collaborating or learning from each other. In my experience, when older children interact with younger ones, there are many benefits to both groups, and the adults who can observe from afar.
If this "readiness" philosophy was adopted on a large scale, it would free up space for children to participate in activities that are developmentally appropriate. They could play and move instead of learning to decode phonics before they understand the words. They would not have to repeat maths concepts out of context every year because, without a real-life use, they are forgotten. They could learn to communicate with humans in the real world rather than sitting in the same small room every day.
We often hear the argument that we need a "broad and balanced curriculum" because we don't know what the future holds. But anyone who observes children knows they already give themselves a broad curriculum when they have interesting things and places to explore. By controlling exactly what they learn, we are pretending we can predict the future. And we are making the experience of learning much less efficient for everyone.
Research Links
Self-Determination Theory (Autonomy & Motivation):
Research on how choice fuels persistence PDA and the Drive for Autonomy:
Understanding the neurological need for control The "Gift of Time" (Delaying Formal Schooling):
Stanford study on the benefits of waiting until age 7 Play-Based vs. Formal Learning:
UNICEF report on the efficiency of play for skill development (page 30 for conclusions)
Comments
Post a Comment