Dealing with "Flat out No!"s...

[Mom2all]

I just came in from work, so I'll try and address a few. One, I still stand behind when I speak, they need to listen. If I say no, there is no argument. I have a reason. They know better than to confront my decision at that time. Some where in one of my earlier posts I talked about an appropriate time to discuss or offer compromise. For instance, at dinner, it is a open conversation. If they want to bring up to me something they'd like further explanation for, I'm open. Not to an argument, but to voice their feelings. Sometimes I do change my mind with respect to what they said.
Your being in a classroom setting perhaps doesn't give you the same issues I have as Mom. For instance, my 12 year old asks in front of her friend if she can spend the night with friend. I know that the mother of this child drinks in excess and allows her daughter freedoms that I would not allow. I say, not tonight. There will be no argument. Later, I might explain why, but I will not have my child call me out and put me in a predicament that would embarrass the friend. If I allowed an argument, I'd be bound to explain why. If I ask my son to go and help his Dad move something, he may think to ask me why when his Dad said he didn't need help. I will not be forced to explain that his father, who is proud, has metal rods in his back and can't get through the day without medicating himself and moving that box will hurt him. Later, away from Dad, I would probably thank them and explain why its important to help him lift things, but my child will not force me into hurting Dad's pride. No means no here. And funny, the children just accept it. They will however use their powers of persuasion on a regular basis with things like bedtimes. My youngest just approached me with a very thought out speech on how his older siblings had their bedtime lifted at certain ages. Although he is younger, his grades are good and he is in the same grade they were when theirs lifted. He addressed his chores being done and they fact he was taking on more responsibility. That.. I will listen to. He approached me not at said bedtime when he was told it was lights out but during the afternoon one day. And my oldest daughter knew that I did not want her walking down the street where we lived at the time. She was 16 and tiny and beautiful. I was worried about her safty. When she asked me again about walking to the store, she approched me with her friend in tow, a walking stick, the dog on a leash, phone on her hip and my mace in her hand. She promised to run to the nearest neighbor if she needed help. At that point, I couldn't refuse. She thought, she planned, and she approched my concerns with a solution.
Children have voices. Its my job to show them when and how to use them. It would probably really amaze you to know all the times that this particular rule has saved hurt feelings or irritation or flat out disrespect. My particular view is that arguing gets you no where. People always think that they are right and can not hear what someone else is saying in the heat of it. A plan of action, a well thought out speech, timing.. all of that make your words and feelings heard. My rules are well thought out. They are aware of them. They have been warned ahead of time. They hear them. They understand.

And for the record here, I have to tell you that all of my children take up their issues with a incredible amount of thought. It almost seems fun to them to research and come to me with great points to draw me to their conclusion. (even to include in the past drawing boards and schedules to make their points) I think that teaches them more than defiance.

 

[PianoLover]

I live in a very liberal town and I interact with parents who espouse such "free range" children beliefs and I'll tell you what I witness. I withess kids being ignored in the name of exploration, I witness kids being allowed to wander into harms way. I witness kids who learn that their parents words mean nothing, and they can do as they wish and when their parents attempt to give any direction they have learned to lie and cheat and manipulate their way into getting what they want.

Hello again IADad I would just like to say I don't think that the philosophies we espouse should be conflated with "free range" parenting Both of these avoid engaging the child with reason. [/COLOR]

Not punishing certainly does not mean there are no consequences for wrong behaviour but we want the children to change their behaviour not out of fear of punishment but out of a deep understanding of what the consequences of their behaviour are. In other words, we want to help children to learn to behave well not only because of the consequences of behaving badly to them but because they are aware of the negative consequences to others. I hope this distinction is understood.

To take a real world example if I leave my phone on a table at a party I would like to think the reason it does not get stolen is because the other guests know they wouldn't like to have their phone stolen, not because they are afraid of going to prison for theft. We would doubt the morality of the second person.

best wishes

 

[PianoLover]

And funny, the children just accept it./QUOTE]Hi mum too all if you wish I will give more detailed feedback on your post but for the mo just let me say that the above shows that above all you have built up credability with your children, I'm certain it's not because they fear repercussions for disagreeing otherwise they would likely show some passive aggression about complying, so well done for that!

Can I ask a question, in the situation where your child asks to stay over at the house of this alcoholic and you say "not tonight" what would you do in the situation where they said "why not?" would you say "we'll talk about it later" ? or "because I said so" ? or another response? this is merely out of interest

 

[Mom2all]

Can I ask a question, in the situation where your child asks to stay over at the house of this alcoholic and you say "not tonight" what would you do in the situation where they said "why not?" would you say "we'll talk about it later" ? or "because I said so" ? or another response? this is merely out of interest.

My response would be one of two things.

Seriously?
or
Excuse me?

Which is the clue words that they need to rethink what they have just said. My children know me enough already to know that most likely an explanation is coming.. but not if they are rude enough question me in front of others.

There are other rules like this one. For instance, they were taught when they were very little that when we go to town shopping, they can tell me the items they like and that they would like to have them one day, but to ask for me to buy it was the surest way to never get it. I never wanted the horrible trend of a child laying on the floor screaming for some small thing they wanted. I see parents everyday trying to negotiate with children on this in public. My son did it once for a ball when he was 3. That was enough for me. I spare you his lesson that day but needless to say at 20, he'll still say, "Mom, that candy bar sure looks good" instead of asking me to buy him one. Or better yet, he often surprises me with treats now.

Life is about consequences. Its hard for me me to grasp the philosophy that one would believe that we shouldn't teach that particular lesson. If my son speeds, he will surely get a ticket. If my daughter cheats, she'll get suspended. If they steal, they will go to jail. Consequences are as real as a lesson as how to eat properly, how to introduce yourself, or how to apply for that first job. Why is it that that lesson is the one that we take away? They'll certainly feel the consequences later for mistakes. My hope is that by teaching them that now, it'll save them from those lessons later.

It also makes me question exactly where we are headed. At 16, my child has the legal right to get into a vehicle and drive down a highway and her actions can cause someone to die if she is not careful. Including herself. At 13 they can have sex and choose to bring another child in the world that they are not capable of supporting financially or mentally. At 18, straight off the school bus, they can go to a recruiters office and sign a paper offering up their life for our country. If they are able to make such life altering decisions... why then would anyone think that they are not mentally able to follow rules in which consequences to their own actions are an end result? I seriously think that they are not given enough credit. Through trial and error and failing we learn from our mistakes. It has to hurt a little not to want to repeat it.

One more for instance

My son at 7 wanted a BB gun. I bought him one and we went over the rules numerous times. No pointing at people and such, but one of my own was that when it was not being used, he had to take the BBs out. He had to treat it like a real gun and un-arm it. The first time he didn't, I took it away for some time. The second time I threw it in the dumpster. He sobbed and begged for it. It didn't matter to me. The following year, when he was allowed to try again, I never found it loaded. Not once. If that taught him a little about gun safety, it was worth his tears. I'd welcome tears of disappointment over a issue later on with a real weapon that accidental discharges and leaves me at his graveside.

 

[IADad]

Both of these avoid engaging the child with reason. [/COLOR]

Not punishing certainly does not mean there are no consequences for wrong behaviour but we want the children to change their behaviour not out of fear of punishment but out of a deep understanding of what the consequences of their behaviour are. In other words, we want to help children to learn to behave well not only because of the consequences of behaving badly to them but because they are aware of the negative consequences to others. I hope this distinction is understood.

To take a real world example if I leave my phone on a table at a party I would like to think the reason it does not get stolen is because the other guests know they wouldn't like to have their phone stolen, not because they are afraid of going to prison for theft. We would doubt the morality of the second person.

best wishes[/QUOTE]
I can only say what I see, I see an awful lot of people who sound like they are doing an awful lot of things the same way and I see an awful lot of lousy consequences. So, I don't want to be guilty of conflating, inflating, hyperflating, nonflating, coflating or reflating, so I'll just say I hope you are doing what you espouse to effectively. Just as you believe I'm unfair in characterizing your parenting as "free-range parenting," I take issue with the notion that discipline and punishment precludes engagement. I make sure my efforts teach, and I may not always do it the right way from the beginning, but I think we come out in a pretty darned good place.

I don't think there's a need for us to be polar opposites here. I certainly extend plenty of effort getting my children to understand the consequences of their actions, and maje the right decisions on their own and I'll presume you're guiding more than it may seem you've conveyed and we each have something to learn from one another.

 

[Mom2all]

I certainly extend plenty of effort getting my children to understand the consequences of their actions, and make the right decisions on their own

I believe that most people in favor of free will with no consequences believe that parents who do serve their children with rules and discipline are doing so without thought or having the child reflect on the behavior. I can't imagine that anyone on the forum who came in for ideas and to offer advise don't give due consideration to actually trying to teach the child to think about the bad choice they've made.

Do we not all talk about it with the child before and after a punishment? "What could you have done differently? Was that really the best choice? Everyone makes mistakes, lets not do this one again".. and those type of things. I think the only difference for me is that I'm not under the illusion that without a consequence my particular teens would walk away from doing wrong and feel guilty and then correct it on their own.

I feel guilty every time I eat a donut.. and yet I still keep going back to Duncan Donuts. :err:

 

[PianoLover]

<r><QUOTE author="IADad;130830"><s>

</s>I can only say what I see, I see an awful lot of people who sound like they are doing an awful lot of things the same way and I see an awful lot of lousy consequences. So, I don't want to be guilty of conflating, inflating, hyperflating, nonflating, coflating or reflating, so I'll just say I hope you are doing what you espouse to effectively. Just as you believe I'm unfair in characterizing your parenting as "free-range parenting," I take issue with the notion that discipline and punishment precludes engagement. <e>

</e></QUOTE>

I consider that completely fair and I'm sorry if characterised your position wrongly. I'm very glad that you engage with your children to try and help them develop positive values and would naturally consider that better, I trust that you are doing what you believe is right, otherwise you wouldn't be on a board like this! <br/>

<QUOTE author="IADad;130830"><s>

</s>I make sure my efforts teach, and I may not always do it the right way from the beginning, but I think we come out in a pretty darned good place.<br/>
<br/>
I don't think there's a need for us to be polar opposites here. I certainly extend plenty of effort getting my children to understand the consequences of their actions, and maje the right decisions on their own and I'll presume you're guiding more than it may seem you've conveyed and we each have something to learn from one another.<e>

</e></QUOTE>

I assume that all of us on this board have the same interest: that is how to teach children positive values. We are on the same side, we just happen to differ on the best way to achieve this.<br/>
<br/>
For that reason, I would like to take some time to explain why pedagogues from the school of though of parentastic and I believe that the next logical step from punishing and engaging, is doing the engaging without the use of punishments. In a following post I'll talk about the history of parenting as well because it's a bit scary and might help my point be understood because parenting has come on A LOT, probably before 1700 you couldn't find a single example of a parent that wouldn't have been considered severely abusive today. We believe that the humanising process can and should continue. I hope this lengthy post is worthwhile <br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
First of all I should define what I mean when I say punishment so it can be differentiated from other consequences. Punishment is some consequence which is chosen to be deliberately unpleasant, such as forcing someone to do something they won’t like or miss out on something they do like with the intention of changing their behaviour. “A punishment makes someone suffer in order to learn a lesson.” <br/>
<br/>
While we punish children to manage their behaviour and make it acceptable our school of thought does not believe it helps them come away with any understanding or concern about how their actions may affect others, but it does demonstrate that when you have power (as the parent or teacher does) you can use it to get other people to do what you want. <br/>
<br/>
Most of us were raised and taught in environments where the use of punishment to deter certain behaviours were the norm, and since punishment or threats of punishment can gain immediate compliance it may seem the sensible thing to do.<br/>
<br/>
Does it work?<br/>
<br/>
Well quite possibly. If I was wanted everyone on the board to pay attention to this post and I had the power to enfore $100 fine on any board member who didn't read it I think everyone would read, but that only proves that punishment works to get immediate compliance.<br/>
<br/>
At it’s most effective punishment can only change someones behaviour, it can’t really have a positive effect on their values to behave in whatever way we find unacceptable because we have not addressed their motives. It even demonstrates that it's acceptable to force people to do things they don't like to change their behaviour. <br/>
<br/>
Punishment also loses effectiveness over time. As kids get older it becomes harder and harder to find things to do to them that are sufficiently unpleasant to alter their behaviour. <br/>
<br/>
Thomas Gordon said, “The inevitable result of consistently using power to control kids… is never learning how to influence them.” and we take that to heart.<br/>
<br/>
Researchers have found that children who are severely punished at home are more likely than their peers to act out when they are away from home.<br/>
<br/>
So let me sumarise by saying the reasons why we don't believe in using punishment:<br/>
<br/>
1) Teaches that powerful party wins <br/>
2) Ignores underlying motives for action and does not help develop positive values <br/>
3) Relies on having a punisher around <br/>
4) Is less effective over time. <br/>
<br/>
It seems that if punishment really worked we wouldn’t find “the same children need to be punished time after time,” one would think as soon as the punishment was applied the anti-social behaviour would stop. <br/>
<br/>
But those are not all<br/>
<br/>
5) Being punished makes people mad. It’s very unlikely that the made party is going to turn around and say “I really deserved that,” they are more likely to resent the punisher, this can have a damaging effect on the relationship. <br/>
6) Psychology teaches that those who perceive themselves as victims more likely to become victimisers, so it’s possible that the more you punish, the more they act out, the more they need punished.<br/>
7) It shifts emphasis from the behaviour which is perceived as wrong to the punishment itself, at least in the mind of the child. It comes at the expense of reasoning the child out of this way of acting.<br/>
8) Adults become seen as enforcers of rules and negative consequences and the mutual care and respect between adult and child stands to suffer which may not make the child feel safe in explaining how things look from their point of view so we can understand their motives and help them become more responsible.<br/>
9) It teaches kids to lie in order to avoid punishments.<br/>
<br/>
To explore lying, the children were told that a toy was being hidden behind them. The experimenter left the room for a moment and said that the child should not turn around and peek at the toy while she was gone. <br/>
Most children were tempted enough to end up turning around and looking at the toy. When the experimenter returns, she asks the children whether they peeked.<br/>
At the school where the childrn are punished often, about 90 percent of them lied to the experimenter and said that they did not look at the toy. In the school that did not use harsh punishments, only about half of the children lied.<br/>
<br/>
<br/>
I hope that at least some of what I say is thought by other users to stand to reason.<br/>
<br/>
In my next post I want to talk a bit about the history of parenting because it reveals some scary facts. I hope that is also seen as worthwhile.<br/>
<br/>
Best wishes all and thanks for reading this far!</r>

 

[PianoLover]

My son at 7 wanted a BB gun. I bought him one and we went over the rules numerous times. No pointing at people and such, but one of my own was that when it was not being used, he had to take the BBs out. He had to treat it like a real gun and un-arm it. The first time he didn't, I took it away for some time. The second time I threw it in the dumpster. He sobbed and begged for it. It didn't matter to me. The following year, when he was allowed to try again, I never found it loaded. Not once. If that taught him a little about gun safety, it was worth his tears. I'd welcome tears of disappointment over a issue later on with a real weapon that accidental discharges and leaves me at his graveside.

I should say I don't consider this to be an example of punishment because the gun wasn't taken away in order to cause displeasure, it was removed as a natural consequence of it's irresponsible use.

I really enjoyed your post and may have more to say on it later you seem to have some good approaches.

 

[IADad]

I think part of the problem in the communication here is that you assume those of us who "punish" fail to teach and intend to rely on punishment as a lifelong pursuit.

Just like you who want to allow a child to discover the logical consequences of their decisions, you point is t foster those at an early age, guide them so they are capable of making appropriate decisions as teens and adults.

Same with us. I don't intend to have to keep punishing because hopefully somewhere along the line, I've taught the lesson. So, really it comes down to different approaches of how to teach those skills. It also opens the door for failure of either approach, those who punish without engaging are forcesd to escalate punishment and risk having never taught anything. Those who intend to engage without punishment, but fail to engage, have abandonned their teaching all-together (these are those free- range children I've written about.)

I disagree, that punishment gains immediate compliance, that's not the point, punishment is meant to teach the lesson and in as applicable and analgous to real life/adult life as we can. We live in an ordered society , and right or wrong, power does win, much of the time. Why should I set up my child to not be aware of that and find ways to work within that framework?

I acknwoledge there are challenges to taking my approach, and believe me, we put significant effort into guiding and teaching to try to avoid needing to punish, so I hope you can see why I believe my methods are viable as well.

 

[PianoLover]

I think part of the problem in the communication here is that you assume those of us who "punish" fail to teach and intend to rely on punishment as a lifelong pursuit.

Just like you who want to allow a child to discover the logical consequences of their decisions, you point is t foster those at an early age, guide them so they are capable of making appropriate decisions as teens and adults.

Same with us. I don't intend to have to keep punishing because hopefully somewhere along the line, I've taught the lesson. So, really it comes down to different approaches of how to teach those skills. It also opens the door for failure of either approach, those who punish without engaging are forcesd to escalate punishment and risk having never taught anything. Those who intend to engage without punishment, but fail to engage, have abandonned their teaching all-together (these are those free- range children I've written about.)

I disagree, that punishment gains immediate compliance, that's not the point, punishment is meant to teach the lesson and in as applicable and analgous to real life/adult life as we can. We live in an ordered society , and right or wrong, power does win, much of the time. Why should I set up my child to not be aware of that and find ways to work within that framework?

I acknwoledge there are challenges to taking my approach, and believe me, we put significant effort into guiding and teaching to try to avoid needing to punish, so I hope you can see why I believe my methods are viable as well.

Thankyou for taking the time to read, it seems that "teaching to try to avoid needing to punish" is a positive approach and I'm glad to read that. I will post the history of parenting as promised.

 

[PianoLover]

The (dark) history of parenting.

The first thing to realise is that for most of human history, parents were completely infanticidal. Child sacrifice and infanticide among tribal societies was common, and the Romans and Greeks exposed their children, and paedophilia was considered normal in those societies. (The same does not apply to hunter-gatherer societies.)


It was not until in the 400s AD when early Christians considered children as having souls at birth that this was stopped but there was still a belief that children had evil tendencies that had to be beaten out of them. Routine pederasty of boys continued in monasteries and elsewhere, and the rape of girls was commonplace. Children were often abandoned by their parents into fosterage.


The 12th century saw the first child instruction manuals and rudimentary child protection laws, although most mothers still emotionally rejected their children, although sometimes the loss of a child would now be mourned which was a precursor to the empathy that would later develop. Children were still often treated as erotic objects by adults.


During the 16th century, particularly in England, parents shifted from trying to stop children's growth to trying to control them and make them obedient. Parents were prepared to give them attention as long as they could control their minds, their insides, their anger and the lives they led. This advance in parenting styles led to the possibility of scientific advances that were not previously possible as human grew up more healthy psychologically.


According to Lloyd deMauses book “the origins of war in child abuse” no single example of a parent who would not have been considered to be guilty of severe child abuse has been historically documented before around 1700AD


At the beginning of the 18th century, mothers began to actually enjoy child care, and fathers began to participate in younger children's development. The aim remained instilling parental goals rather than encouraging individuality. Psychological manipulation and spanking were used to make children obedient rather than previous methods which were more inhumane. These advances led directly to the Enlightenment, it is only when changes in childhood occur that societies begin to progress. The only reason why Watt could invent the steam engine was that his parents taught him to read and write at a young age and let him tinker about with their kettle, this was alien in history.


While the above “socialising” method of child rearing is still the most common today, beginning in the mid-20th century, some parents adopted the role of helping children reach their own goals in life, rather than trying to "socialize" them into fulfilling their own wishes. Less psychological manipulation, more unconditional love. This maybe seems clear, it wasn’t that long ago that most parents were telling their children what careers they should go into but that seems much less common now, there is a greater inclination to encouraging children in whatever they want to do in life, even if it’s be a musician or artist. This “helping” mode of childrearing, which I am certain each of us here strive for, creates children who are more empathic towards others in society than earlier generations.






Lloyd DeMause believes the abolition of corporal punishment and verbal abuse in the home will bring the end of war as the language of violence is not passed on. Indeed the countries who have banned corporal punishment in Europe have become less violent as a consequence.

 

[Mom2all]

Although I do respect the fact that I think the both of us are looking for the best way to raise our children to be the best they can, I still would disagree with most of the methods you would have as you do mine. Perhaps I shouldn't say disagree with your methods. You encourage them to think about the behavior with conversation. I would do that also with additional reasons for them to think about it.

I was thinking while reading your last about our school systems. Here in North Carolina USA, corporal punishment was used in our public schools on a regular basis when I went to school.
That being said, during my school years I had 1 swat to the hand for not doing my work. It only took once. 3rd grade, Mrs. Anotinoris class. We were learning about sea life. Miquel was sitting beside me at a table for 6, and it was show and tell day. I had taken my doll, Beth for it. As you can see, it made an impression. I don't remember it hurting. The 1 swat to my palm. But I remember not wanting it again.

I'm not voicing my belief in corporal punishment in schools here. I have mixed emotions. But what I know is since the rights has been taken away for most schools here to punish most children, ( Parents have to agree to it for their child) the school system has went down hill. When I was there, the worst that happened to us was in high school a girl passed out from drug use once, there was a few fist fights along the way, and someone hid the vise principals car between two buildings. Someone skipping school made them part of the "bad crowd".

My children go to county schools I did. Drug use, fights,weapons are common, kids hit teachers, vandalism and other crimes quite the norm.

Would it have anything to do with the way we have changed our methods of handling children in schools? I'm not sure. But I fear that by the time the experts figure out that the new way of teaching morals and responsibilities doesn't work, it will be to late to change anything.

 

[Bottlelover]

I agree! Let your kids have say in family activities etc. but make sure they have respect for you too!

 

[PianoLover]

But what I know is since the rights has been taken away for most schools here to punish most children, ( Parents have to agree to it for their child) the school system has went down hill.

That could be something to do with the fact that it's been almost impossible to fire teachers in pubic schools since the 60s and since then the standard of teaching has unsurprisingly been getting worse rather thanthe abolition of punishment.

If kids don't want to learn in school it has more to do with the quality of education than the kids. Everyone can remember those teachers in school that inspired a love of learning their subject
I love learning, I read all the time, listen to podcasts, go to lectures, etc.
As an adult if I go to a lecture and I'm bored I know it's because the speaker is boring, I don't get punished for not paying attention and if I distract other people who are inerested it is reasonable for me to be excluded from the lecture where I can engage in some other activity
seems a reasoned approach

 

[Mom2all]

As an adult if I go to a lecture and I'm bored I know it's because the speaker is boring, I don't get punished for not paying attention and if I distract other people who are inerested it is reasonable for me to be excluded from the lecture where I can engage in some other activity
seems a reasoned approach

Perhaps for an adult.. it does sound reasonable to be excluded. For a child.. I don't think so. My ADHD child would have spent his entire school life in the hallway and been quite satisfied... I, however, would not have been.

Not all teachers of distracted children can be blamed. I'd venture that most are not.

 

[cybele]

It is more than a little different for a full grown adult to be excused from education in comparison to a school aged child.

I had some real shockers of teachers when I was a kid. You know who was beyond dull? Sister Bridgetta. She taught needlework in the junior years of high school. I was good at needlework, in fact, before I became a florist, I was a seamstress, but oh golly could Sister Bridgetta take something fun like making your own dress for the school dance and turn it into the worlds most dull task.

I played up in her classes and I got a ruler to my knuckles. Eventually, I got it through my thick skull (and trust me, when I was a teenager I was pretty thick) that if I sat down, shut up and sewed then I wouldn't have the chronic swollen knuckle problem.

There has always been boring teachers, but there was not always the issues with behaviour that we have nowadays. No I do not believe that every school should have nuns with rulers, but I do think that we need to up the punishment.

On the topic of firing teachers, I know we have a huge teacher shortage here, I am sure it is not the complete opposite in other countries. Wonderful teachers are leaving the profession because they cannot cope with students with no discipline, no way to discipline them and over zealous parents. If you fired every teacher that a child found dull (which is a matter of perception, really, someone you may find dull may be fascinating to me, and vice versa) then we wouldn't have any where near as many functioning schools as we have at the moment.

Also, I might add, learning to adapt to things we don't find utterly riveting is a good life skill. Sometimes I get clients who want things that I find dull. Trust me, I sigh whenever I sit down with a bride to be and she goes "BOUQUET OF WHITE ROSES!" bor-ing.
Now if I was 'excused' from every bride who wanted floral arrangements that don't excite me, we would be unable to pay our bills.

 

[PianoLover]

My ADHD child would have spent his entire school life in the hallway and been quite satisfied... I, however, would not have been.

Perhaps more active forms of education could be developed that were more engagind and appealed more to children who, in some circumstances, have short attention spans. Education is not One-size-fits-all and that's one of the areas that could be improved in schools.

Children <I>do</I> want to learn, that's why they ask a thousand questions, and exclusion from a class does not mean exclusion from learning, they can read, they can learn from video podcasts in our modern age, or interactive mediums of multimedia, they can engage in projects with peers... there's something that can be developed for everyone, sadly at present there is a presumption that if students are engaged it's because they're not interested but perhaps their calses are less than engaging more often then we might like to admit.

In Summerhill School where all classes were optional they found that students never truanted for long, sooner or later they would start turning up to classes eager to engage their active brains. The children who rebelled against classes for the longest were the ones who had been expelled from other schools and had already built so many negative associations with learning as something which was being "forced". Sooner or later they saw that it was for their own benefit not anone elses. I think that tends to be true of human nature with children as well as adults, no one likes to be forced we like to believe we are initiators with some hand in our fate, there are responsibilities and things we are obliged to do but even then we like to think we have chosen to do them for a reason and can at least choose <I>how</I> we do them. That always leads us to engage more and therefore learn more also.

 

[PianoLover]

Here is a video that went up recently which I think may offer some useful principles even though talking about a younger age group:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtDjrOxvGbI

 

[bssage]

Were yanking away your umbilical cord if you keep posting the same link on different threads.

 

[PianoLover]

Were yanking away your umbilical cord if you keep posting the same link on different threads.

No please! No please! No please!