Independent thought and parenting

[devonin]

Re: Independent thought and parenting

When it comes to adolescants, I, speaking from a first person perspective, do not believe any child above the age of 13 should be forced into schooling, weather it be public, private, home, etc. Now don't misinterpret that, I love school and fully support it. However, children at 13+ tend to be rebellious and do what the opposite of they are told is. Because of this most children detest school and education. But if they were given a choice then it would be their decision and they would be supporting it themselves rather than being forced into it at their most rebellious stage of life.

Since you've said yourself that at this age they tend to behave a certain way, the way that makes them resent having to go to school, I don't see a way that the VAST majority of these kids aren't going to say "Well then I'm not going to school"

In addition to this being a HORRIBLE idea from the standpoint of their future development (The consistant educating of children from 5-16 is pretty much solely responsible for ensuring that they have, among other things, the skills to be self-sufficient in the world, something they would then lack if from 13+ they could just decide to not go to school) what the hell are you going to do with a huge pile of 13-16 year olds that have opted out of education?

The mandatory schooling system as it stands today was first put into effect in Britain after child labour laws changed, so that you couldn't make a 10 year old work 14 hour days for terrible wages in dangerous jobs. By making it illegals to put children to adult labour, they generated a whole age category of kids who suddenly had nothing to do. They weren't able to work at unskilled labour anymore, their parents were all still working full time and overtime and thus couldn't really take care of them either, so the arguably very very smart idea to simply offer education for all of them during the working day was developed.

None of our countries (Except for maybe Liechtenstein) has a 0% unemployment rate. All over the world, there are people who are old enough and skilled enough to get jobs who don't have jobs. This suggests that there are more people than jobs. So generating even MORE people with nothing to do would make the problem worse. They can't work at 13 years old, but their parents still have to support them and thus must work, so what are you going to do from 13-16 with no school, and no work? Build treeforts? For three years?

There's a line between "Forcing a child to do something they don't want to do" (Eating Lima Beans) and "Forcing a child to do something they don't want to do, which is clearly and obviously in their best interests" (Educating them)

I completely agree that there needs to be some change in the way the education system works, but I don't think that simply letting kids (Who aren't necessarily able to make a -proper- judgement on whether this is the right thing to do [They are very much still caught up in wants instead of needs, and not really getting that sometimes you just have to do things you don't like because they need doing]) pick whether they want to go to school or not is a good idea.

[Ruritsu]

Re: Independent thought and parenting

I understand that a child needs substantial knowledge to begin to think independently, but answering their question with one's absolute perspective will not produce results and does not promote independence.
Thus, in my opinion, both the "Because thats the way it is" and "because see, this is how you do things(in my perspective)" are not in any way valid to be told to a child, unless universal concepts and factual answers, not one's perception of a topic.

Which is why I was downing that kind of child care not promoting it. I totally agree with you...

[DDRXTIIDX]

Re: Independent thought and parenting

Like DDRXTIIDX's reminiscence, many parents and a great deal of them, love to, consciously or subliminally, flatter themselves with their authority.

Ehehehe, I guess by reminiscence you're talking about the day before yesterday.
It happens constantly but I'm starting to get used to it.

On devonin's quote on education, perhaps the educational system should be modified to suit the aspirations of the youth. Maybe then tweens/teens wouldn't be too rebellious. For example (actually, I really do), I want to become a world famous musician or perhaps a computer programmer as a backup job. Then I should have my studies concentrated on Music, English, Math, Science and Basic Computer education, and a little of everything else, but not forced upon us. Like, I shouldn't study what is considered to be a regular high-school (or before my graduation's case, elementary) level of Chinese or maybe History, but a slightly lower level. For example, I study Math at High School 2 level, I should study 5th or 6th grade History. But that's just my opinion. It'll help greatly.

[Rad3n]

Re: Independent thought and parenting

At the 2020 summit (In Australia Devonin ^_^), one of the things that stood out as being wanted by the younger participants (I think that was about 15-24 years of age) was the right to vote at 16.

The very idea that young people aged 15-24 want the right to vote at the age of 16 suggests that young people want to be "indipendant thinkers" (but i'm not sure that's what you meant, I think you mean "Free From Parental Influence").

edit: and the actions of older people.

[devonin]

Re: Independent thought and parenting

Well the issues sort of go hand in hand. If you're going to argue that kids younger than 16/18 ought to be considered old enough, intelligent enough, and mature enough to have a greater freedom to decide things for themselves, it isn't much of a stretch to suggest that voting ought to be one of the ways that freedom expresses itself.

I mean, all age limits on everything are arbitrary, and there are people under the limits who would be perfectly capable of engaging in whichever activity (voting, driving, etc) and plenty of people over those limits who still aren't properly capable of engaging in those activities. The arbitray age is just assigned at a point in which it is decided the largest majority with the smallest minority are assumed to be capable. And I'm not entirely sure from my knowledge of dealing with 15-17 year olds (And in addition to having been one, and done co-op in schools around them and so on, I've got plenty of exposure to the way the average 15-17 year old thinks and works from a soild decade of online gaming) that you could say the -majority- let alone the -clear- majority of 16 and 17 year olds are either especially interested in, or espeically interested in putting in the time and effort to investigate the issues of an election sufficiently to vote.

I mean, I would have argued for my right to vote at 16. I might even be able to claim that by 16 I was politically aware enough and mature/intelligent enough to make a resonable decision come election time. But I acknowledge that a) everyone always thinks they specifically are above averagely smart/mature for their age, especially when they want something and b) that these age limits weren't just made up for no reason and that there's probably a reasonable explanation for why it is 18 and not 16.

[Note: Being Canadian, when I talk about the education system, "university" means "college"; and "college" means something between "community college" and "trade school" Our system makes more sense to me, but that's because I live in it. University here is where you go to get 4-year bachelor degrees in all the various fields; College is where you go to get 2-4 year certifications and degrees in usually technical sorts of fields]

As for the changes to the education system, the best and easiest way to change it would be to make highschool and perhaps even elementary school function like university. Each subject stream has its own prerequisites inside the subject stream (IE. 2nd year math requies 1st year math, but doesn't require first year english/history etc) there are multiple ways to meet graduation requirements (Math majors don't need to take any history, though they do have to take -some- social sciences or arts courses) and you can register for anywhere from 1-6 courses per semester.

If highschool functioned like that, you could take only the subjects you preferred, working towards a certain goal, and if you wanted to only take 1 or 2 classes and also have a part time job, or you wanted to overload to 6 classes to get highschool done sooner, you should be able to. You get the benefit of being able to offer things like certificates in certain fields, which could be used to either get entry-level jobs more easily or become new entry requirements for college and trade-school level schooling. (IE. You could get into a college computer hardware program with your highschool certificate in technology [Maybe you had to take computers all through, some science/physics, a couple years of math, and whichever ___shop classes your school offered)

Obviously there would still be emphasis on getting the "full" highschool program, especially if you intended to go on to University, but giving alternate avenues to still get educated, especially for certain types of jobs where the background in say, history and geography is largely irellevant, that option exists also.

[DDRXTIIDX]

Re: Independent thought and parenting

As for the changes to the education system, the best and easiest way to change it would be to make highschool and perhaps even elementary school function like university. Each subject stream has its own prerequisites inside the subject stream (IE. 2nd year math requies 1st year math, but doesn't require first year english/history etc) there are multiple ways to meet graduation requirements (Math majors don't need to take any history, though they do have to take -some- social sciences or arts courses) and you can register for anywhere from 1-6 courses per semester.

If highschool functioned like that, you could take only the subjects you preferred, working towards a certain goal, and if you wanted to only take 1 or 2 classes and also have a part time job, or you wanted to overload to 6 classes to get highschool done sooner, you should be able to. You get the benefit of being able to offer things like certificates in certain fields, which could be used to either get entry-level jobs more easily or become new entry requirements for college and trade-school level schooling. (IE. You could get into a college computer hardware program with your highschool certificate in technology [Maybe you had to take computers all through, some science/physics, a couple years of math, and whichever ___shop classes your school offered)

Obviously there would still be emphasis on getting the "full" highschool program, especially if you intended to go on to University, but giving alternate avenues to still get educated, especially for certain types of jobs where the background in say, history and geography is largely irellevant, that option exists also.

I'm guessing that's a yes. But we're dealing with the DepEd here. Do you suppose such a program could ever be implemented in the near future? Especially when I'm moving to NY next year, wherein the odds of experiencing such an unstable program are probably just as slim, should they implement it here in the Philippines? I pretty damn hope so.

[Muzau]

Re: Independent thought and parenting

You are never "granted the right" to be an independant thinker. That's a contradiction in terms. You think independantly as soon as you assert your independant thoughts. Parents can attempt to indoctrinate their children with a certain belief set, in fact this happens all the time. Whether it's as simple as the particular moral code for right and wrong that you are taught, or something as deep and important as cultural or religious identity, parents, educators etc can and do try to teach children a certain predesigned value set and thought process system.

I strongly agree with Devonin's point made here, and I will go on to expand on my own opinion. It is an extremely valid point to say that you cannot be granted the right to think for yourself, however, a child's mind opening to independant thought must be granted by some source. We are born intelligent beings, but not born with such a mindset in full. I personally can say that I have let myself open up to such a thought process, though I am young in age. Personally, my English teacher showed this to me, along with my parents, and many other sources. Amidst all the conformity of a parent's teaching, they themselves think independantly to a large degree, which is a child's first encounter with such. As they grow older, and more logical, they start to see the way that there parent's minds have strewn away from main-stream society, and take it to heart, point being, the foundation is always there. Once they begin to build on it from other sources, whether it be community, media, or other such breeding grounds of diversity of thought, it becomes their own interpritation of independant though. They see the way that others think, and start to make their own table of what is wrong or right, what is true, and what is false. While you take to this mindset at your own pace, independantly, you are subliminally taught this throughout your life. In a nutshell, you are born with the foundation to think for yourself. But it is up to you to unlock it.

[rising crescent]

Re: Independent thought and parenting

Well the issues sort of go hand in hand. If you're going to argue that kids younger than 16/18 ought to be considered old enough, intelligent enough, and mature enough to have a greater freedom to decide things for themselves, it isn't much of a stretch to suggest that voting ought to be one of the ways that freedom expresses itself.

i have my first rough thinking in 21 years old, it still change everyday and awareness of selves is rising drop by drop. It is said it continue and reach it puberty in 40 years old.

You are never "granted the right" to be an independant thinker. That's a contradiction in terms. You think independantly as soon as you assert your independant thoughts. Parents can attempt to indoctrinate their children with a certain belief set, in fact this happens all the time. Whether it's as simple as the particular moral code for right and wrong that you are taught, or something as deep and important as cultural or religious identity, parents, educators etc can and do try to teach children a certain predesigned value set and thought process system.

not all parent are like that.

they know there are children follow their parents way, but also other children who make their own way.

I understand that a child needs substantial knowledge to begin to think independently, but answering their question with one's absolute perspective will not produce results and does not promote independence.
Thus, in my opinion, both the "Because thats the way it is" and "because see, this is how you do things(in my perspective)" are not in any way valid to be told to a child, unless universal concepts and factual answers, not one's perception of a topic.

parents give right the free will to their children to shape whatever they choose. but parents also must make give warnings to teir children if they make wrtong paths