I have in the past read on various forums of children 'owning' their education. I have always dismissed this as the sort of irritating, New Age psychobabble in which some parents seem to delight. (Often the same ones who are against vaccinations, in favour of homeopathy, opposed to teaching and claim to be spiritual rather than religious). A couple of days ago, somebody here explained what is meant by this phrase. It apparently refers to children for whom 'their mind and what they do with it belongs to them as much as their body does.'
This is pretty baffling. Obviously a child's body belongs to her, but does this mean that she can do with it as she will? Are we to deduce from this that if a child wishes to pick her nose at the dinner table, play with matches or torture the cat, we must simply shrug and say, 'Ah, her body and what she does with it belongs to her'? Most parents would not agree with this proposition. They would argue that we have a duty to guide our children in the appropriate use of their bodies; not abdicate responsibility by claiming that she owns her actions. What on earth can this mean, anyway? If we have a duty to encourage some physical actions of our children and teach them to avoid others, then surely we owe them the same duty with mental habits? So we might discourage our children from drinking bleach or running in the road, even though we are not claiming to own their bodies. So too, we try to get them to do certain things with their minds and encourage them to avoid doing other things. This seems quite clear. Of course, what we encourage and discourage will vary from family to family. Some parents insist that their children hold their knives and forks properly, others are more concerned with being kind to animals. These are physical activities. On the mental front, some parents expect their children to work hard academically; for others it is more important that their children adopt a non-judgemental approach to the lives of other people. These are mental activities. Is it being argued that we should not try and influence at all what our children think or believe? This would mean not discouraging cruelty or prejudice, nor encouraging kindness and compassion. A strange sort of education indeed!
I confess myself just as perplexed by this business of a child 'owning her education' as I was before the explanation was posted! Was the person who provided this explanation really saying, as she seemed to be, that whatever a child does with her body and mind should be permitted and not hindered in any way because we do not own a child's body or mind? I wonder what the reaction of this parent would be if her four year-old child attempted to leave the house by herself in the evening. Would she really say to herself, ' the child owns her body and what she does with it'? Or should she prevent the child from leaving, thus effectively imprisoning her? Perhaps the case is altered as the child grows older and that one allows the older child or teenager more freedom as to what she does with her body as she approaches adulthood? This is quite a sensible idea and most parents would agree with it. Obviously, I have no control over what my seventeen year-old daughter does with her body now, whereas when she was little, my control was absolute. It has gradually lessened over the years. Of course, if that is what we believe about the body, then we can apply the same principle to the mind. When she was little, I had a lot of say in how she used her mind for much of the time, whereas now I have no control at all.
If anybody can expand upon this whole idea of a child 'owning her own education', I would be genuinely grateful. As things stand, the whole concept sounds like a nonsense.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In workplaces, managers talk about people 'owing' a problem, meaning 'take responsibility' for the problem, instead of shifting that responsibility to someone else. Once the problem is 'owned' it can be solved. I suspect that this usage has been adopted by some educationalists.
ReplyDeleteIf a student 'owns' his or her education, I presume it means 'takes responsibility for'.
Some may believe that unless the student takes responsibility for their own education early on, then they never will? I don't agree with this because, like you, I took most of the responsibility for my children's education early on, gradually relinquishing that responsibility as my children grew up and took over.
Like you, I no longer need to be involved as I have independent learners who enjoy learning and know what they want to learn next and take the responibility to do that. At what age children are ready to do that would probably vary.
I don't agree that children who are taught in a 'parent-led' structured way in the HE context are in danger of not being excited, independent learners later on. I've never seen that happen. The only place that is likely to happen is in schools, where a love of learning has often been all but lost by the end of primary school.
Margaret
'The only place that is likely to happen is in schools, where a love of learning has often been all but lost by the end of primary school.'
ReplyDeleteIsn't that the truth! No, I have not seen any sign of my daughter's love of learning for its own sake being extinguished by my meddling in her education. Quite the opposite really. Perhaps people need to spend a little less time reading Karl Popper and a bit more time observing real children.
I suspect I am someone who has used this 'owning' word. Let me give an example of what I meant by it (at the risk of sounding like Humpty Dumpty!) in relation to my children's education.
ReplyDeleteWhen my son was learning to read and write he directed the process. I felt that the absence of any sort of external scheme or manufactured exercises was a good thing because it encouraged his sense of ownership. Along with the skills, he was learning that reading and writing were there as tool for him as a human being. He used them to expand his interests and express his thoughts. Compare this to a child who reads and writes because s/he is told to do so and whose experiences of those things is largely that of a task completed to please someone else. I saw this happen in my daughter's primary school and I think that the result was often that the child felt that reading and writing were things that somehow belonged to school and to the teacher. When the child had choice they did not choose to read and write - they chose things that they felt belonged to them, such as lego.
Does this help your understanding?
It is an interesting concept actually.
ReplyDeleteFor me 'owning' my education is being responsible and in charge of what I learn. The example I would give for this is that as an adult I study with the OU, I choose what interests me, what I study and how I study it.
I was at school and followed a prescribed curriculum until I was home educated at 13.From then on, I only learnt what interested me and I took no qualifications until I was 25 - I dont think it has been detrimental to my life to do this. But I did have a very good grasp of English and Maths, and am quick to pick up other things so feel I was already at an advantage.
I want my kids to have a say in their education and to choose their interests like I did. But I also feel that certain things are essential to be learnt too. If they are not naturally inclined to learn and 'own' their learning in those areas then I have to step in and encourage that.
Thats my take on it anyway.
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"Isn't that the truth! No, I have not seen any sign of my daughter's love of learning for its own sake being extinguished by my meddling in her education. Quite the opposite really. "
But that's just anecdotal evidence. I can equally say that my autonomously educated children love learning for its own sake, are very good at knowing what they want out of life, and go out and get it. I could also claim that my allowing them to control their education has caused this. But you and I could both be wrong to claim these results as evidence that our methods are better. They may be doing so well in spite of the methods we chose.
Simon wrote,
"Perhaps people need to spend a little less time reading Karl Popper and a bit more time observing real children.."
It's very condescending to assume that I just read a theory and ignored my experiences with my children. Again, I could just as easily suggest the same of you and could be just as wrong. Of course I observed my children. In fact, I began with a structured, parent-led approach and it was the result of observing my 'real' children and seeing that this approach didn't work for them that led me to look for an alternative. Maybe you were just lucky that the first approach you tried worked for your child?
Simon said,
ReplyDelete"A couple of days ago, somebody here explained what is meant by this phrase. It apparently refers to children for whom 'their mind and what they do with it belongs to them as much as their body does.'"
Can you provide further details of this quote because I can't find it? I'd like to read it to gain more idea of context. The blog article, date and time of the comment would be useful.
"If anybody can expand upon this whole idea of a child 'owning her own education', I would be genuinely grateful. As things stand, the whole concept sounds like a nonsense."
ReplyDeleteI think I use it as shorthand for the theory that intrinsically motivated learning is superior to extrinsically motivated learning so allowing all their learning to be intrinsically motivated will improve their education. Research seems to suggest this is the case, for example:
Academic Intrinsic Motivation in Young Elementary School Children
Journal of Educational Psychology
Volume 82, Issue 3, September 1990, Pages 525-538
Abstract
Two studies, 1 longitudinal and 1 cross-sectional, demonstrate that for young elementary school children, academic intrinsic motivation is a reliable, valid, and significant construct. It was positively related to achievement, IQ, and perception of competence, and inversely related to anxiety. Academic intrinsic motivation at age 9 was significantly predicted by motivation measured 1 and 2 years earlier, above and beyond the contribution of IQ and achievement. Children with higher academic intrinsic motivation at ages 7 and 8 were more likely to show higher motivation at age 9.
'The blog article, date and time of the comment would be useful.'
ReplyDeleteThe real threat to home education, 24/11/10, 00.56
'It was positively related to achievement, IQ, and perception of competence, and inversely related to anxiety. Academic intrinsic motivation at age 9 was significantly predicted by motivation measured 1 and 2 years earlier, above and beyond the contribution of IQ and achievement. Children with higher academic intrinsic motivation at ages 7 and 8 were more likely to show higher motivation at age 9.'
ReplyDeleteAll that this study really demonstrates is that children who enjoy learning for the sake of it at seven or eight, are likely to feel the same way about it when they are nine. I don't doubt this for a moment, but what is the connection between this and types of education? I'm a bit slow this morning, due to the cold!
'I was at school and followed a prescribed curriculum until I was home educated at 13.'
ReplyDeleteAre we to understand from this C, that you were yourself home educated and now are home educating your own children? I did not know this, but wouldn't mind hearing more.
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"All that this study really demonstrates is that children who enjoy learning for the sake of it at seven or eight, are likely to feel the same way about it when they are nine. I don't doubt this for a moment, but what is the connection between this and types of education? I'm a bit slow this morning, due to the cold!"
Yes, sorry, it wasn't a very good example - I was a bit rushed. However, I'm sure you are familiar with the research into the benefits of intrinsic over extrinsic motivation (see below for examples, if not).
If a parent believes that intrinsic motivation results in a better education (more in-depth, improved understanding and recall) than extrinsic motivation, and also that extrinsic motivation sometimes damages intrinsic motivation, they would attempt to provide an education based on intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation. It's obviously much easier to encourage intrinsic motivation in a child-led rather than parent-led education approach because the child provides the push rather than the parent. That's the connection between intrinsic motivation and types of education.
Some (hopefully) more relevant research:
ReplyDeleteA meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation.
Deci, Edward L.; Koestner, Richard; Ryan, Richard M.
Psychological Bulletin, Vol 125(6), Nov 1999, 627-668.
"A meta-analysis of 128 studies examined the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. As predicted, engagement-contingent, completion-contingent, and performance-contingent rewards significantly undermined free-choice intrinsic motivation (d = –0.40, –0.36, and –0.28, respectively), as did all rewards, all tangible rewards, and all expected rewards. Engagement-contingent and completion-contingent rewards also significantly undermined self-reported interest (d = –0.15, and –0.17), as did all tangible rewards and all expected rewards. "
Modeling the Effects of Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, Amount of Reading, and Past Reading Achievement on Text Comprehension Between U.S. and Chinese Students
Judy Huei-yu Wang
John T. Guthrie
Reading Research Quarterly, 39(2), 162–186. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.39.2.2
"A final model fit the data well, showing that intrinsic motivation predicted text comprehension for both student groups after controlling for all other variables. Extrinsic motivation negatively predicted text comprehension except when associated with intrinsic motivation. Reading amount did not predict text comprehension after controlling for motivational variables."
"I wonder what the reaction of this parent would be if her four year-old child attempted to leave the house by herself in the evening. Would she really say to herself, ' the child owns her body and what she does with it'? Or should she prevent the child from leaving, thus effectively imprisoning her?"
ReplyDeleteOr go out with the child and offer appropriate advice along the way?
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"They would argue that we have a duty to guide our children in the appropriate use of their bodies; not abdicate responsibility by claiming that she owns her actions."
Who said anything about abdicating responsibility for the child's actions and, by extension, their education? There is a difference between deserting the child to make decisions on their own and allowing them to make their own decisions with lots of input, help, support and guidance from caring parents. Why would you assume I meant the former? You've been told often enough by autonomous educators that it involves lots of support, information giving and advice - that children are not just left to their own devices. Again you seem to be confusing laissez faire parenting with AE.
You seem always to put the worst possible interpretation onto things people say. The idea behind the child's mind and body belonging to them is similar to the belief that people should have the right to do anything they wish as long as they do not impinge on the rights of other. So, taking your examples, a child picking their nose at the table only really impinges on the right of others to look at them without feeling disgust but obviously playing with matches or torturing cats have more potential to reduce the freedoms of others. The parents would obviously mention to the child that they will not 'make friends and influence people' by doing things that disgust others, like picking their nose. This is something that is more likely to harm the child than others. Playing with matches is surmountable, it can be done quite easily with parental support and our children had plenty of fun doing this. Cat torture doesn't really need explanation, surely?
The rest of your article seem based on the misunderstanding that the only alternative to the parent controlling the child's actions and education is for the child to be left completely to their own devices with no input, help or advice from their parents - a straw man argument.
Simon said,
ReplyDelete"All that this study really demonstrates is that children who enjoy learning for the sake of it at seven or eight, are likely to feel the same way about it when they are nine."
Not at all, you obviously didn't read it properly. It also states:
"It [academic intrinsic motivation] was positively related to achievement, IQ, and perception of competence, and inversely related to anxiety."
Jane
Simon wrote,
ReplyDelete"couple of days ago, somebody here explained what is meant by this phrase. It apparently refers to children for whom 'their mind and what they do with it belongs to them as much as their body does.'"
Just had a quick look back and this was in answer to a suggestion that you didn't understand the idea that parent-led education might damage intrinsic motivation (an education 'owned' by the child because they have control of it). Why you felt the need to denigrate the suggestion by bringing up New Age psychobabble, being anti-vaccination, in favour of homeopathy, opposed to teaching and claiming to be spiritual rather than religious I've no idea. I made the original comment and none of these apply to me.
My ideas about intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are based on academic research such as that cited above. Your response (under the previous thread) to the theory that extrinsic motivation can damage intrinsic motivation was to suggest that all education is for the benefit of the child. How is this at all relevant to the issue even if it's true?
'to suggest that all education is for the benefit of the child. How is this at all relevant to the issue even if it's true?'
ReplyDeleteBecause somebody suggested that a child might try to do well academically in order to please an adult. In other words, her work would be for the adult's benefit and not her own. I pointed out that this was untrue and if we could show the child that the work was actually for her and not a parent or teacher, then it would provide an intrinsic motivation to undertake it.
Are we to understand from this C, that you were yourself home educated and now are home educating your own children? I did not know this, but wouldn't mind hearing more.
ReplyDeleteI am sorry for only just picking up on this, I forgot to subscribe to this thread. Yes, indeed I was home educated from 13. What is it you are particularly interested in knowing? I will answer as best I can.
'What is it you are particularly interested in knowing? I will answer as best I can.'
ReplyDeleteI would be interested to know what sort of home education you received and whether you provide your children with the same type. I am also curious about the effect that home education had upon your ideas of parenting. I suppose that you must have enjoyed it and felt that it was a good thing to do with your own children. Were there any down sides to the process that you can see in retrospect and that you are trying to avoid with your own children?
Ok, I'll do my best with this- apologies in advance, I wrote rather a lot.
ReplyDeleteTo set the scene, let me give a brief reason for my being homeschooled. I was the rebellious difficult teen who caused a lot of grief to my family. Truanting was fairly common practice for me and I didn't have friends in school. You could say I am exactly the person our current(and previous) Government doesn't think should be home educated. The type for which HE seems like a knee-jerk reaction, but in reality the type who needs HE so badly. Anyway, I had home educated friends so I found out all the information, presented my case to my parents and had them agree to HE me. Their only conditions were; they weren't going to teach me- Id have to do it myself, and they weren't paying for anything in the way of books, exams etc.
So to answer your first question, the education I received was purely self-directed. To start with I chose to do technical English (grammar, punctuation, spelling), Math, Binary math( I was bored), environmental science, RE, child development and technical drawing. I didn't follow prescribed curriculum for any subject but did get textbooks from the library for both types of Maths, English and Environmental Science. Each morning I would do 2-3 hours work, then I would go to the library. Two afternoons a week I looked after four kids for a lady I knew. Through time I learnt to read to approximately GCSE level French, learnt some Spanish, learnt to sew and knit, took a couple of art classes. I read heaps and heaps of books about lots of different subjects as well as reading classic literature. My parents, as I mentioned, had no input whatsoever. I chose to return to college/OU etc at 25 to take various courses.
Do I think that I am the product of some miracle of autonomous education, child-led education? No, I just happened to be fairly bright, easily bored and keen to learn new things. I was motivated to learn 'something' as long as it was what interested me at the time. Yes I did enjoy being in charge of my own learning, which answers another question.
Continued....
ReplyDeleteWhat effect did it have on my parenting? I guess it let me know that kids can and do learn things all by themselves when they want to. I have always been pretty keen on the importance of life skills, of learning how to learn, how to discern what is valid, and of knowing how to acquire knowledge as some of the most important things a child can know. This reasoning has been at the heart of my parenting from the beginning. It is in my nature to question, disagree, debate and argue, to not follow the norm, to be different and go against the flow. I have a real need to 'know' even as an adult and I think this would be the case whether I was HE'd or not as I am just of that personality. Despite this, I still took the mainstream route until my children struggled at school. Why, is hard to say. I always wanted to HE but decided to 'try' school and did so until my eldest three children were 9,8 and 4 respectively. We began HE due to crisis rather than choice but it is through time that it has affected my lifestyle and parenting. I have to add my oldest boy chose to return to school and I now have another child whom I teach at home.
I do not provide my children with the same type of HE experience as I received. The why is complicated. Mainly it is because my children aren't particularly motivated to learn anything other than their one obsession. All four have a different obsession which they know an amazing amount about but if I let them do it indefinitely they would happily do only that. I however feel it is important to learn different things and that is why I direct their learning to a degree. I wasn't/am not particularly pushy during the early years and only expect about 1/2 hr 'seat' work from my 5.5yr old. My girls, 10 & 14 have done about year of NC workbook type work, a year of Waldorf, a year of Sonlight, and year of TEACH and a year of lapbooks/practical HE. I am not strict with working every day, or set hours. We regularly throw off school and do fun things. I do return to work in the end though and we just keep ploughing. Often they chose things that might be of interest, but I elaborate with lessons e.g.: piano and French lessons, animal- care at college, art lessons, etc.
It's a hugely different experience than I had and I am keen for that to be the case. There were down sides to the process I went through; lack of access to exams being one but I have to be honest and say I don't know if I would have taken them anyway. I am giving my 14 yr old the opportunity to achieve Math and English though. I didn't attend social groups other than church whereas my children are exposed to a huge variety of social settings so that is another difference. And I am interested, whereas my parents were not - my story may have been wildly different if I were not so motivated as I was. I hope this answers your questions, I have done my best to stick to what you asked so hope I haven't missed anything.