What Should We Teach our Children?

[michel]

I notice that there is some argument going on in the 'Teaching the young about money' thread about whose responsability it is to teach the young about money. Some say it is the parent's place, others have obviously been taught a little at school.

As a parent, I have always tried to supplement what was taught in school with what I consider the other 'essentials' needed for adulthood are; I'm not daying I did a good job, but I did try.

It seems there are some very 'grey' areas where no one is quite sure who should be teaching - perhaps parents 'assume' that their children will have a subject covered at school, whereas the school in fact consider that 'Niche' to be the parent's responsability.

So, what are the parents responsible for educating, that the school leaves out of the curriculum ? Should the schools infact teach more ? What do you think ?

 

[Malus 12:9]

One thing school attempts teaching, but may not always succed, is both hate and love, and the difference between. Schools encourage participation,

If we're not careful, it is easy to teach our children to hate and never to forgive when others harm them. Look at the situation in the former Yugoslavia: it is a good example of how, both in the family and in the schools, adults taught children to hate. When those children grew up, they taught their children to hate.

We must teach our children to respect others, live with others, and most importantly, love others.

But it doesn't stop there. This is a silly example, but one nontheless: Who teaches children to go potty? Certainly not school teachers. By aged 5 or 6, most school "beginners" are learnt how to use a toilet facility. I do not think I know of any incidents where a school kid has had to use a potty lol.

Who teaches the kids how to eat? How to sleep? Ride a bike? Hmm...parents. There are many
that the parents teach their child, more so than the numbers and letters we learn at school.

 

[Tawn]

A good upbringing should have a little of both.

Too many parents rely on the school system to teach their child, yet I think the kind of education you do (and can) recieve is limited. Likewise, homeschooling is also limited. There must be a mixture.

School is important because I think it allows a child to develop team building skills with other children.. as well as make additional friends. The range of tutors as a child moves into higher levels of education also allows them to learn from different viewpoints and to a certain level from 'experts' (I say that lightly) in various fields. A child can learn independance from their parents and because there should be no favouritism from the teachers also learns fairness to an extent.

Learning from parents is still important though. Nothing can really replace the love and caring that can be gained from parental teaching. Parents are far more capable of solving a childs inner problems and dealing with emotions - simply because there is a more personal connection between the parent and child than the teacher and child.
Parents can teach moral values which fall outside a teachers juristiction. Additionally extra learning in the home can back up the learning done at school. A different mental attitude and approach can be taken to learning skills or knowledge when love and compassion is involved, instead of the more emotionally disconnected teaching a child recieves at school. Some children might perform better under these circumstances and enjoy the personal praise from their parents more - thus encouraging them to learn and thus helping with schoolwork. The limitations are of course upon what the parents know - their sum knowledge is unlikely to compare with the sum knowledge that can be drawn upon in a high school.

Ill stop now..

 

[Original Freak]

Well, it's a complicated issue isn't it. A parent must be involved with a child's life, encourage learning and participate as much as possible. The limitations being what excatly do parents know, are they teaching the right things correctly and is it contradictory to what they are learning in school?

As an example, when I was 15 my father stopped me and told me it was about time we talked about sex. I said "Sure Dad, what do you want to know?" Sex Ed in school had taught me more, and much better than a conversation with my father ever could have, and we both knew it. But the schools didn't teach me about waiting for the right time, attitudes to have towards sex and respect for other people, that was the stuff my parents taught me from birth, whether they realise it or not (and as I sit here typing, I'm realising it as well).

It has to be a balance. Schools give you the 'book learning and social interaction' while at home teaching can back up that book learning, and give you the fundamentals for social interaction as well as encourage learning on their own.

There are limits to schooling of course, there is a certian cariculm of basics that must be met and a certian time to do it in, the rest must be the parents. I've noticed lately a big trend of parents distancing themselves from their kids, and I hate that. In fact I blame a lot of problems with kids on that. For my kids, whether they like it or not, Daddy's going to be there, but don't think my kids are sheltered, they are very independant.

 

[EnhancedSpirit]

School was designed to teach our children reading, writing, and arithmatic. However, children actually learn more about socialization, than anything else. As it stands, what our children are learning about socialization is not a structured lesson, but a chaotic one.

I think the schools should change their curiculum to include classes like: Generosity, Patience, Tolerance, and Natural Science(herbology, animal husbandry, for example). The old three R's could be taught within these classes. I also think the children would benefit more if they had the same teacher from kindergarden through high school. Each teacher could follow their class all the way to graduation, then start again with another young class. There is a school in New York who does it this way.

Home is where children learn about family dynamics. This is were children learn how to deal with stress. This is were children learn about Love.

 

[fromthe heart]

I notice that there is some argument going on in the 'Teaching the young about money' thread about whose responsability it is to teach the young about money. Some say it is the parent's place, others have obviously been taught a little at school.

As a parent, I have always tried to supplement what was taught in school with what I consider the other 'essentials' needed for adulthood are; I'm not daying I did a good job, but I did try.

It seems there are some very 'grey' areas where no one is quite sure who should be teaching - perhaps parents 'assume' that their children will have a subject covered at school, whereas the school in fact consider that 'Niche' to be the parent's responsability.

So, what are the parents responsible for educating, that the school leaves out of the curriculum ? Should the schools infact teach more ? What do you think ?

Personally I think if we want our children to know something we SHOULD NOT assume it will be taken care of by someone else! It is the responsibility of a parent to give the child what they will need to go out into todays society and make a life for themselves. I never once thought what I wanted my kids to know should be left to chance(school system) in what I felt would give them the leg up in life they would need. I even took what academically was being taught and applied it all to life in a daily setting...my grandchildren now are being given the same...my grandson was learning about money so we started to let him tell us the prices of things,pay for things,listen to budget discussions. He is going into 1st grade at a 3rd grade level in money now...no confussion about how money works as he gets older he'll learn to do a checkbook properly,etc...when they were learning to tell time on the hour I made a clock by the minute to help him see how the time went to the 5 after and half hour...etc...he can look at any clock and tell time...he's 6...this has been applied with all his little steps into learning...Parents have to realize before they bring a child into this world they have a responsibitliy to teach/spend time with/share/grow/ and love this child to thrie full ability and make their own life bend around the child and not make the child bend around the parents hectic schedual...children have been let too long for the schools or babysitters to raise...it is time the parents see what they should do and do it themselves...kids grow up remembering how time with them was spent and not what the label of their clothes were, what kind of car perents had,or what type of social circle their parents were in. To bring a child into todays world is an awsome responsibility...and it should be done with forthought! MPO!!

 

[Unedited]

I don't think parents are responsible for educating their child necessarily, but making sure he or she is getting a proper education. I think it'd be more beneficial to get them into a better school if possible.

I think the schools should change their curiculum to include classes like: Generosity, Patience, Tolerance, and Natural Science(herbology, animal husbandry, for example). The old three R's could be taught within these classes. I also think the children would benefit more if they had the same teacher from kindergarden through high school. Each teacher could follow their class all the way to graduation, then start again with another young class. There is a school in New York who does it this way.

When I read that, I could feel the hairs on the back of my neck raise. No! I completely disagree with you on that. Schools need to go back to basics; they need to stick with maths and English, not values!

But I probably have no right getting mad after getting my education at an expensive public school.

 

[Crystallas]

What Should We Teach our Children?

We? I didnt know I had any children with anyone here. To each their own. I am not one to say who can do what to their children. People have to stop believing that if others raise their children other than a certain way, that its going to be negative.

 

[Fat Old Sun]

I think the schools should change their curiculum to include classes like: Generosity, Patience, Tolerance, and Natural Science(herbology, animal husbandry, for example).

That would be great, but I think we have more pressing issues at hand. Once we figure out how a child goes through thirteen years of education and receives a diploma, but still cannot read, it will be time to address a broader curriculum.

 

[kreeden]

As for who does the teaching , I don't think that it much matters .

As for " whose responsability it is to teach the young ". it is the parent's . Plain and simple . We usually allow schools to do the teaching , but it is the parent's responsability to see that is being done . And it is the rest of our responsabilities to back the parents if it isn't being done . After all , it is our taxes paying for it , and our future that is on the line .

 

[Sunstone]

As long as we teach our children to be hysterical about their own sexuality, I feel we have fulfilled our obligation and duty to them.

 

[EnhancedSpirit]

That would be great, but I think we have more pressing issues at hand. Once we figure out how a child goes through thirteen years of education and receives a diploma, but still cannot read, it will be time to address a broader curriculum.

Jessica Simpson (bless her soul) is dumb as a box of rocks. No amount of school is going to be able to change the fact that she is not good at scholastics. However, she has a beautiful voice, and is herself beautiful. She was allowed the opportunity to do what she did best. I doubt she would have been successfull if she had allowed the school system to 'knock her down' for being academicly challanged.

There are some children who are not good in math, and never will be. There are some who can't grasp the concepts of science. There are others who never conquer the complexity of the English language. But that does not mean that they cannot be something great in this life. This should not be used against them.

However, no matter what you are good at, or not good at. You are going to have to interact with other people. You are going to have to learn about giving and taking, and keeping a balance physically and emotionally. Every body gets mad, jealous, angry. And very little emphasis is drawn on teaching children how to react to stressfull situations. Schools would do more to benefit children by teaching them how to control themselves. And the satisfaction that comes from giving and helping others, instead of constant competition between students.

 

[michel]

As long as we teach our children to be hysterical about their own sexuality, I feel we have fulfilled our obligation and duty to them.

Sunstone, I must be going ga-ga; what do you mean by that ?

 

[Original Freak]

There are some children who are not good in math, and never will be. There are some who can't grasp the concepts of science. There are others who never conquer the complexity of the English language. But that does not mean that they cannot be something great in this life. This should not be used against them.

So basically we find what each kid is good at let them excell at that and all the other aspects of eductation be damned.

Learning the basics of math is different from having the child spend there life dedicated to math.

 

[EnhancedSpirit]

So basically we find what each kid is good at let them excell at that and all the other aspects of eductation be damned.

Learning the basics of math is different from having the child spend there life dedicated to math.

I don't know what you mean by let all other aspects of education be damned. I know of many people who flunked out of school because they could not understand math. They were good at other things, but because of that one thing that they could not comprehend, they were kicked out, labeled a 'loser'. What did the school do for those people.

 

[Fat Old Sun]

There are some children who are not good in math, and never will be. There are some who can't grasp the concepts of science. There are others who never conquer the complexity of the English language. But that does not mean that they cannot be something great in this life. This should not be used against them.

How do we know that they cannot grasp the concepts of science or the complexities of the English language if they cannot read? That is not really giving them a fair shot at it.

It is a wonderful thing when someone posesses enough talent and drive to succeed as a professional musician or athlete, and those with the talent and drive should be encouraged, but how many of them get screwed over because they can't read or understand their own contract?

We are talking about a bare minimum level of skills here. There is no excuse for someone receiving a diploma that he or she cannot read. That does not mean that they are stupid. It means that at every step along the way, somebody who knew better let them slip through the cracks. Now they are they are thrown into the real world without the most basic of fundamental skills needed to survive. Social skills, whether positive or negative, are taught every day. They are acquired through life experience.

 

[iaminterface]

If i have children, i will teach them to be kind and loving . . i suppose thats enough.

 

[ayani]

i'd like to teach my kids to appreciate artistic expression and reading. i'd like my kids to be inquisitive and excited about new things, and i'd do my best to show them as many weird, beautiful things as we could find. as to what you can teach a kid, alot of it depends on the kid's personality, too. you can set an example for them, but often they'll have their own ideas and own ways of relating to the world.

 

[almifkhar]

we parents need to teach our children how to play the game of life. to think for themselves. the importants of family and community. how ones actions lead to good or bad consequences.

if you want to teach them about how to handle money, take them with you to pay bills, grocery shop. let them see for themselves how much is left over. maybe then johnny will understand why he cant get that ps2 game he wanted.
if you want to teach them about how say a life of crime is no life at all, take them to the ghettos. the point is parents must interact with their kids and show them the reality of life for them to understand where you are comming from.

 

[Original Freak]

I don't know what you mean by let all other aspects of education be damned. I know of many people who flunked out of school because they could not understand math. They were good at other things, but because of that one thing that they could not comprehend, they were kicked out, labeled a 'loser'. What did the school do for those people.

Basically you said that certian people arn't good with various subjects and they shouldn't be (for a lack of a bette word) punished for it. I'm (with my ususal sarcasm) taking it a bit farther. There is a certian amount of math, reading, logical thinking, problem solving skills and more that are needed to get by in today's society. Even if you not good at a certian topic you should be able to put in the time and dedication, with help, and learn these skills. I played hockey for 15 years, and I had no natural talent. I had size, with good relfexes and hand-eye coordination but no 'natural hockey talent'. Every year I worked my *** off and about 1/2 way through the year I would go from the average player to one of the #1 defensive players on my team...almost every year.

I don't think because you aren't naturally good at something is an excuse for not being able to to the basic fundamentals of an education.