We're letting our children get off too easy

[Student of Trinity]

Originally Posted By: Darth Ernie

am i the only one that started to read this, saw the length of the posts and just left?

ts,dr

[Trenton.]

Ok, Googleing and wikipedia probobly wont work...I give, what does ts,dr mean?

[Mistb0rn]

Edit: Hmm, google actually seems to know. You might want to try it before making assumptions.

[Slawbug]

I'm guessing you didn't actually try them, Trenton... sigh.

[Harehunter]

Frozen Feet, I find your poll difficult to answer. To almost all of your questions I can respond both in the positive and in the negative aspect. In the U.S. there is such a wide diversity of environments, that to use a single brush to paint the picture is inadequate. In fact the remarks I am about to make do an injustice to each region as I woefully use a single brush to paint them. Just as there is a wide diversity between the regions, there is a wide diversity within them.

 

In rural areas, courtesy and respect is strongly evident in my exposure to them. They also show attributes of self-discipline, self-respect, and understand they are responsible for their actions.

 

In urban areas, there appears to be a higher incidence of 'kids behaving badly'. By 'kids', I really mean young adults. I don't interact with them personally, but that is the impression I get from the plot of criminal activities posted by the local law enforcement agencies from time to time. Could parenting have been a factor? I think so.

 

In the suburbs, where I live, it is more like a patchwork quilt. Just from observing people, say at a supermarket, or a shopping mall, I see all kinds of behavior, some better, some worse. I do want to emphasize that ethnicity is not a factor in either of these types of behavior. I observe courtesy and respect from all of them, and I observe lack of respect across the spectrum. When in the suburbs it is easy to be color-blind.

 

Bottom line: todays kids are both better and worse than they were when I was growing up.

[Slawbug]

If you're evaluating kids based on police blotters, obviously they will seem worse in urban areas -- there are vastly more of them there, so even if they misbehave in the same frequency, you will see vastly more police reports.

 

What is your exposure to kids in rural areas? Since you said you don't live in one, I'm curious whether or not your exposure provides a representative sampling or not.

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: HOUSE of S

If you're evaluating kids based on police blotters, obviously they will seem worse in urban areas -- there are vastly more of them there, so even if they misbehave in the same frequency, you will see vastly more police reports.

and vastly more police, as well

[Harehunter]

I grew up in both rural, and urban environments. That is my basis of how things were. I don't fly when traveling, I drive, and in so doing I have personal interactions with the people in these areas. I did disclaimer that my impressions on urban areas are incomplete, and that using a single brush to paint that environment does not do it justice.

[Trenton.]

Hey! how am I sussposed to know that google knows EVERY GOSH DARN THING IN THE WORLD?

[Harehunter]

Goggling at Google can be addictive.

[Dikiyoba]

Originally Posted By: Trenton

Hey! how am I sussposed to know that google knows EVERY GOSH DARN THING IN THE WORLD?

Originally Posted By: Trenton's signature

The first two word you should teach a child. 1.google, 2.It
Problem solved!

Dikiyoba will leave it at that.

[Slawbug]

Originally Posted By: Harehunter

I grew up in both rural, and urban environments. That is my basis of how things were. I don't fly when traveling, I drive, and in so doing I have personal interactions with the people in these areas. I did disclaimer that my impressions on urban areas are incomplete, and that using a single brush to paint that environment does not do it justice.

So your only contemporary exposure to kids in rural areas comes from driving through those areas when you travel?

And your only contemporary exposure to kids in urban areas comes from a police blotter.

...

It never occured to you that those two sources of information might provide drastically different data, regardless of the urban/rural/suburban setting?

[Harehunter]

I thought my disclaimer sufficient to explain that the sources of information re urban areas are not first hand and therefore incomplete. I don't use crime statistics as my only reference, but it is one of the few quantifiable aspects I can refer to. The rest of my impression is subjective, and therefore not a good measure of accuracy.

 

As for personal interaction with people I meet, where ever that may be, I simply report my observations.

 

The main point of this thread as I understand it is about peoples opinion re teaching responsibility and social grace. I stated my opinion with the distinct statement that I could be wrong. I can offer no further defense than that.

[Slawbug]

Originally Posted By: Harehunter

I stated my opinion with the distinct statement that I could be wrong. I can offer no further defense than that.

In that case, you are defenseless, since you made no such distinct statement.

:-D

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: HOUSE of S

Originally Posted By: Harehunter

I stated my opinion with the distinct statement that I could be wrong. I can offer no further defense than that.

In that case, you are defenseless, since you made no such distinct statement.

:-D

Originally Posted By: Harehunter

In the U.S. there is such a wide diversity of environments, that to use a single brush to paint the picture is inadequate. In fact the remarks I am about to make do an injustice to each region as I woefully use a single brush to paint them. Just as there is a wide diversity between the regions, there is a wide diversity within them.

Didn't you mention that it was common courtesy to read someone's post in it's entirety before responding in another thread?

[Sudanna]

No, that was Sy.

[Metatron]

The only reasons I check this forum are for BoA and long lectures on physics, discrete math, and advanced scientific research.

 

I mostly skip posts by newer members because they don't contain any useful information.

[Sarachim]

Originally Posted By: Metatron

I mostly skip posts by newer members because they don't contain any useful information.

Look guys, it's an ironic self-reference!

[Callie]

I currently live in Reno, Nevada and I live at my house in a small town when I'm not at college. The town I'm from is small, and although Reno isn't necessarily big (It styles itself "The Biggest Little City in the World"), it still qualifies as urban. Point in case, I don't see much difference between the kids.

 

Of course, that's a terrible example because it's only two distinct areas, but there's my two bits.

[Trenton.]

I consider people not newer once they reach 50 posts.

 

I mean what do you think it is? Im 680 some

[Frozen Feet]

Originally Posted By: Sarachim

Originally Posted By: Enraged Slith

Honestly, if you aren't interested in reading what he has to say, then you don't have to participate in the discussion.

I might be interested in what he has to say, but believe it could have been said more succinctly. Respecting the time of the people who read what you write is both good sense and good manners.

The reason why it is so long is that I find the topic to be deceptively complex, and thought it important to explain my observations thoroughly lest my arguments come to look like strawman versions of themselves.

Originally Posted By: Brocktree

But you can't create and sustain any meaningful changes in a child, if you don't first change adults. Given that adults have agency over their behaviour, I only think that it is reasonable that *they* change, before expecting children to do likewise.

But the problem with this kind of thinking is, it easily leads to waiting till everyone are adults, which is part of the issue I've observed: Naturally, adults need to change, since they're the ones teaching children, but since the time of learning for many of the children is now as well, they need to be involved in the process too from the get-go.

Again, I have to stress that some things are learned better at early age. Let's consider an unrelated example: language. The natural formation of basic vocabulary and linguistic skill takes place during 4 and 7 years of age. Kids absorb language through observation, even multiple languages, much better than older people. Adults have significantly more trouble to become native speakers in a new language than children.

Sometimes, it really pays better to start straight with the kids, rather than their parents.

Originally Posted By: Metatron

The only reasons I check this forum are for BoA and long lectures on physics, discrete math, and advanced scientific research.

I mostly skip posts by newer members because they don't contain any useful information.

Such a good thing I'm not a new member, then.

Also, where are all the sociologists when you need them?

[Harehunter]

Simply put,

"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it."

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Harehunter

Simply put,
"Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it."

which sounds great until somebody has completely the wrong idea of the way their children should go

it's safer to correct for your own biases by making sure your children have access to a variety of ideas, even ones you disagree with. if the world is made up mostly of rational, intelligent individuals, the chance that you're right about something that they're all wrong about is pretty slim. and if the world isn't made up mostly of rational, intelligent individuals, why are you bringing children into it?

[Harehunter]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

and if the world isn't made up mostly of rational, intelligent individuals, why are you bringing children into it?

A very good question. Sounds like nihilism has taken a firm grasp.

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

it's safer to correct for your own biases by making sure your children have access to a variety of ideas, even ones you disagree with. if the world is made up mostly of rational, intelligent individuals, the chance that you're right about something that they're all wrong about is pretty slim. and if the world isn't made up mostly of rational, intelligent individuals, why are you bringing children into it?

It's also possible to make the argument that by having children, you are by definition not a rational, intelligent individual, since by doing so, you are making a decision that is contrary to your best interests.

So it's probably wrong to accuse people of being irrational and unintelligent based on their actions when they are already such a priori.

[Kelandon]

Originally Posted By: Dantius

It's also possible to make the argument that by having children, you are by definition not a rational, intelligent individual, since by doing so, you are making a decision that is contrary to your best interests.

It's also possible to make exactly the opposite argument, that by doing so, you are making a decision that is perfectly aligned with your best interests (perhaps more perfectly aligned than any other possible decision). Depends on what you mean by "your best interests," of course.

As to the original issue in this topic, there is a general sense in a lot of literature on education that children today pay attention (or don't) in completely different ways than they did a few decades ago, partly because of the incredible spread of technology that creates a vast generation gap. The world is changing.

What no one can really agree on, in education literature or elsewhere, is how large the change is, either in absolute or relative terms. Does the rise of smartphones with Internet access and complex game stimulation availability everywhere (or the rise of personal computers some years earlier, or...) represent the largest change in everyday experience in the history of the world? Is it just a moderately large change? Or is it just a small change, having only a slight impact on our actual functioning as human beings? I don't think anyone really has a definitive answer.

For that matter, what about changes in discipline? Once upon a time, "getting sent to the principal's office" was a big deal because the principal was the one to whom it was given to administer significant physical discipline. (Nuns with rulers who smacked hands were available in Catholic schools, but less so in public schools.) Now, if you simply raise your voice to a student, you might be charged with assault, and the charges alone might lose you your job. What impact does this have? What about similar changes in parenting? Again, we don't really know. There's a lot of disagreement.

[Alorael at Large]

Or you are making an investment. If you raise a successful, productive child on a reasonable budget, and you raise that child to care for you in your old age, you come out ahead.

 

—Alorael, who thinks this is especially true when your personal income isn't going to be enough for a comfortable retirement. Your best shot is a doting child or three whose careers are more lucrative than yours.

[Trenton.]

With all the new technology out there, who can blame us? I mean, if we are listaning to Ipods, or playing on laptops or on DS's, you cant us to pay our full attention 100% of the time.

 

 

And then the princi"Pals" now a days dont even give dicipline, they leave that to the assistant principles

[Karoka]

I don't have an iPod, or a laptop, or a DS.

 

Originally Posted By: Trenton Uchiha, rebel servile

And then the princi"Pals" now a days dont even give dicipline, they leave that to the assistant principles

The principal to my middle school would get eeeverybody into the auditorium and say, "I am disappointed in you guys! "

[Trenton.]

He/She would take you out of class to lecture you? Freaking sweet! we arnt that lucky.

[keira]

Originally Posted By: Trenton Uchiha, rebel servile.

He/She would take you out of class to lecture you? Freaking sweet! we arnt that lucky.

Not sweet. Our principal did that last year because apparently everyone was involved in the dastardly chalk-penis-drawing scheme. It was awkward.

Originally Posted By: Trenton Uchiha, rebel servile.

And then the princi"Pals" now a days dont even give dicipline, they leave that to the assistant principles

Not true in all places. Here, our principal (there's one for the little kids and one for the high school) has no problem handing out discipline. Trust me, I know

[Trenton.]

How can everyone in the school be in on one prank? I mean there must have been a couple of kids he didnt punish.

[keira]

Originally Posted By: Trenton Uchiha, rebel servile.

How can everyone in the school be in on one prank? I mean there must have been a couple of kids he didnt punish.

It was a blanket threat because pretty much all of the jocks were in on it. Sadly, said jocks compose about half the class, so...

[Trenton.]

So...no one got punished...?

[keira]

Originally Posted By: Sylae

And suspending half of the class would not fare well with people like parents or the school board

[Trenton.]

Allright, I didnt understand for a moment! you could just give a straight "No"

[Goldengirl]

Lee Edelman wrote a book, called No Future, in which he condemns the concept of futurism, which he represents as the Child.

 

We're always hearing how we need to think of the children, how we need to guard our actions so that we don't give children the wrong impressions to learn from, etc. Edelman says that this necessitates a perpetually worse present, as we are always restricting our own actions as a society such that the children will come out better for it. Furthermore, it's this futurism that stands at the psychological root of people who oppose things like abortion and homosexuality. To them, children are needed for the future, the ever better future of our dreams with robots and flying cars, and thus to not have children is completely irrational and undesirable.

 

When considering policies concerning children, I believe it to be desirable to try to strike a middle course between the futurism that Edelman describes, and the equally radical sinthomosexuality (everyone who goes against procreation in one way or another) that he advocates. We need to stop worrying about the kids as much as we do, sheltering and nurturing them to excess, but at the same time raising children isn't a bad idea either, and has benefits that we need to maximize by raising them in a more realistic fashion.

 

Well, Malthus says it's a bad idea to raise children, but that's another story.

[Dintiradan]

The whole "everyone sits in a classroom until someone confesses" idea is pretty dumb. You're assuming that whoever is guilty also cares about the fates of their fellow classmates, which isn't often the case. Also, the punishment you give to someone who confesses can't be more than "sit around in a classroom", otherwise there's no incentive to confess. The system is designed to get classmates to 'tattle' on each other, and there's a strong incentive for students not to do so, especially when someone has to 'tattle' in full view of their peers.

 

I remember one time, either Grade Five or Six, when every boy in my class but myself covered the gym wall in dirt. They were pulling up these weeds and throwing them against the wall, and the muddy roots ended up painting the entire wall black. I didn't take part, but in retrospect I wish I did. For the remainder of the year, they had to clean around the school instead of being in gym class. As the only boy left in the class, I wished I was with them.

 

As with the "everyone in a room" example, sometimes you have to sit back and ask yourself if the punishment really makes sense. I remember writing lines in Grade One was fun. You were unsupervised while the teacher and everyone else was in gym class (treating gym as an extra recess rather than an actual class was a running theme in my school), and you got to goof off as much as you wanted so long as the lines were done. We started with the vertical one-letter-at-a-time technique, but once we found out that the teacher didn't really read our 'work', we started holding fistfuls of pencils and wrote up to four lines at a time.

[Tirien]

Originally Posted By: Trenton Uchiha, rebel servile.

With all the new technology out there, who can blame us? I mean, if we are listaning to Ipods, or playing on laptops or on DS's, you cant us to pay our full attention 100% of the time.

I had a science teacher that would use scissors to clip the wire on your headphones if you were listening to your Ipod or whatever in class. He then hung it from the ceiling as a trophy.

I think he had around 30 of them hanging from the ceiling before people learned to not listen to your Ipod in class.

[Sudanna]

Quote:

You're assuming that whoever is guilty also cares about the fates of their fellow classmates, which isn't often the case.

I've always thought that the idea was more if somebody else knows who did it, they would provide some incentive for that person to confess, while they wouldn't care otherwise.

[Student of Trinity]

Children are entertainment. They're kind of like Sims, except with much better graphics and a lousy player interface.

[Slawbug]

Also, the AI is really lousy.

[Tirien]

Plus, unlike the Sims, you can't turn the volume down.

[ĐªгŦĦ Єяŋϊε]

or delete them

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: Darth Ernie

or delete them

You actually can do this. Society frowns upon it though, to say the very least.

[Sullust]

Originally Posted By: Space Between

Quote:

You're assuming that whoever is guilty also cares about the fates of their fellow classmates, which isn't often the case.

I've always thought that the idea was more if somebody else knows who did it, they would provide some incentive for that person to confess, while they wouldn't care otherwise.

I suspect being the 'snitch' is much worse than any punishment the teacher would come up with.