Daniel makes stuff, and, in his spare time, writes about things like movies, kid culture, and geek stuff.
Are The Boy Scouts Still Relevant?

As the Boy Scouts of America celebrate their centennial of Scouting, Dave Banks of GeekDad asks the question: Is Scouting increasingly an irrelevant thing for today’s youth?

With rapidly decreasing membership numbers in the Boy Scouts of America, the question bears some consideration. Banks gives it a thorough, at-length look – weighing the arguments for and against Scouting in general and the BSA in particular, and ending with his own family’s scouting experiences.

It’s certainly a complex issue I think: for instance, many in the comments to the piece proclaim their love of the ‘Scouting’ concept, but cite how the BSA’s position on the ‘Three Gs’ – Gays, Girls & God – has alienated them from the organisation itself. There’s a lot we can learn about ourselves as a society, though, when we examine our own attitudes toward Scouting and the BSA (which, for the record, I consider separately).

To that end, I’m curious to hear your thoughts about it. If you’re so inclined, please email me at daniel@danielbigler.com with what you have to say – and I’ll feature the comments in an upcoming post.

Feb 08, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

Pushing Junk Food Out of Schools

The Obama administration plans a massive drive this week to change the foods that schools offer to children – banning candy and sugary beverages from school lunch rooms and vending machines, in exchange for more nutritious fare.

And while the story the Times shares of Mrs. Almond and her candy cart is touching (though I imagine she can just as easily fundraise with anything else), you truly don’t realise how awful the junk-food-in-schools situation is until you spend time in a school. To that end, don’t miss the ‘Fed Up with School Lunch’ project – one teacher’s attempt to eat (and blog) school lunch every day for an entire year.

Just a head’s up, though: It’s disturbing.

Feb 08, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

A Conversation About New Media and Education

Part one in a series from Henry Jenkins entitled “Learning in a Participatory Culture.” A must-read for anybody interested in education, technology or how children learn and why they choose to spend so much of their time in front of a computer or playing video games.

Here’s one particular lesson we could all stand to remember:

At the end of the day, it isn’t about the technology. It certainly isn’t about the screen per se. It is about the informational affordances and cultural practices which have taken shape around the computer and other interactive technologies. It isn’t about the computer replacing the book. It is about a world where students learn with a book in one hand and a mouse in the other, rather than one where they are taught that book culture is so fragile it needs to be protected from the computer.

‘Informational affordances’ is an important frame to view technology through – it emphasizes what’s good about technology, and is a refreshing break from the ‘Doom and Gloom’ rhetoric we’re used to. It urges us to think about what technology allows children (and the rest of us) to do that they couldn’t have done before, rather than focusing solely on its own detriments. In short: There’s something that attracts kids to technology, and we would be wise to find out what it is instead of immediately writing it off. We need to consider the sheer, unending wealth of possibilities an Internet-equipped computer has to offer – the unending knowledge of Wikipedia, the direct, global visual communication that YouTube offers, the vast meta-narratives and stories that video games put forth to indulge in – and then compare that to the increasingly restricted mobility kids are given outside, the shocking dearth of compelling outdoor environments and stimulating activities, and the social sanctions we implicitly place against children when they do decide to “hang out” in public spaces. When we think of it like that, it’s no wonder they retreat indoors – they simply get ‘more’ by sitting in front of a computer.

If we truly want kids to play outside more, then we’ll have to consider the obstacles in the way of enjoying the outdoors – and not only work to minimize them, but find ways to turn the outdoors into a space that also offers similar affordances to what children get from technology. Even more preferable than this, we have to think about how technology and the outdoors can complement, and their affordances can be enjoyed in a balanced, holistic way of living.

Henry Jenkins is the first guy I go to to better understand how to do this.

UPDATE: For another perspective, Morgan Leichter-Saxby urges us to consider our own technological habits, in a piece called “Do As I Say, Not As I Do.”

Feb 08, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

'Mr. Mom's World'

A Salon article from a full ten years ago that shares the stories and stereotypes of Stay at Home Dads. Interesting to see what’s changed, and what’s stayed the same.

(Via Playground Dad.)

Feb 08, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , , :: #

'Shared (Not Divided) Parenting'

Another great essay by Lisa Belkin, over at the New York Times.

Feb 04, 2010 :: Tagged under: , :: #

'Hyper Parents & Coddled Kids'

A documentary for you Canadians, premiering tonight on CBC Television. (And hey, it has Carl Honoré in it.)

(And here’s another take on the doc.)

Feb 04, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

"Strange Stuff in the Microwave"

Lordy, this is such a fun book. (Have you bought it yet?)

Feb 03, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

Exploring the Forest: Wild Places in Childhood (PDF)

Some really wonderful stuff in here.

Even if you’re familiar with much of the “children in nature” literature, preschool teacher Anna Golden brings it all together so very nicely with this narrative account of her class’s exploration of the nearby woods. A completely enjoyable read, all throughout.

Don’t forget to check out the references at the end – there’s some fantastic writing there, with Rich Louv, Robin Moore and Roger Hart’s works about children in nature; Louise Chawla, Elizabeth Goodenough and David Sobel’s explorations of the meaning of places in childhood; and lastly, writing about the Reggio Emilia philosophy of education. I’d recommend every one of them.

Feb 03, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

Play More, Get Bullied Less?

There’s a certain intuitive sense to it, really: studies found that one of the prime reasons kids get bullied or rejected socially is that they don’t have as good of social skills – more specifically, “factors involve a child’s inability to pick up on and respond to nonverbal cues from their pals.”

What’s one of the best ways for kids (and adults, for that matter) to learn to better read nonverbal cues? Play. Unstructured play, without an adult or authority-figure present, allows children to experience and experiment with the “relationship styles” they’ll later encounter in life.

I hope to comment more about the studies – in the current issue of the Journal of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology – soon, but wanted to put this out there.

Feb 02, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , , :: #

Study Linking Autism to Vaccine Retracted from Journal

Consider it the final nail in the coffin of the whole ‘Vaccinations Cause Autism’ paranoia:

The venerable British medical journal The Lancet has retracted a 1998 study suggesting a link between autism and childhood vaccination with the measles-mumps-rubella MMR vaccine.

The Lancet tells WebMD that it has retracted “10 or 15” studies in its 186-year history. The retraction follows the finding of the U.K. General Medical Council (GMC) that says study leader Andrew Wakefield, MD, and two colleagues acted “dishonestly” and “irresponsibly” in conducting their research.

Feb 02, 2010 :: Tagged under: , :: #

Teenagers Speak Up on Salinger

It’s pieces like this – when kids and youth themselves get a chance to offer their voices about issues – that make me indelibly happy. Here’s one teenager’s response to the adults’ debate last week about whether J.D. Salinger’s writings still resonate with youth today:

“Well, I am sixteen and find it shocking how cynical all of you adults are about our generation. We just read this book a few months ago and each and everyone of us loved it and felt a deep connection between ourselves and Holden. Times have not changed as much as you think. We are not as shallow as you think. Salinger’s novel is as universal as it is timeless. But I’m beginning to think that maybe Holden was right about all of you.” – maliabadi

You know what? The kids are alright today, I think. The kids are alright.

Feb 02, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

Banning "50 Dangerous Things" from Victoria, Australia?

That’s (roughly) what one Australian child psychologist wants to do to Gever Tulley’s new book, citing that it was a “massive over-reaction” to cotton-wool parenting.

Huh.

Not to particularly dwell on the controversy around books like “50 Dangerous Things” and “Free-Range Kids,” but if I were a kid and/or parent and saw that either book was being prevented from being sold in the area, I’d launch a counter-smuggling operation and sell the books out of my garage if I had to. Nothing vindicates a book quite like others wanting to ban it.

Feb 02, 2010 :: Tagged under: , :: #

"Our Future Depends on Children's Books"

An interesting independent TEDxOttawa Talk from Mark Blevis, who looks at how the future is shaped by children’s books:

Much of what we become is shaped by the ideas we’re exposed to and the relationships of which we’re a part. The stronger those foundations are from childhood, the better equipped we are to understand the people with whom we interact and the world around us. Children’s books are the tools that help us open the door to a child’s natural curiosity, creativity and desire to connect, and are one of our strongest hopes for a great future.

Feb 01, 2010 :: Tagged under: , :: #

The First Interview with Bill Watterson in Twenty Years

An unexpected, magical treat – Bill Watterson gives what’s believed to be the first public interview with the reclusive creator of “Calvin and Hobbes” in over 20 years. It’s well worth a read. Here’s the final parting exchange from the interview:

How do you want people to remember that 6-year-old and his tiger?

I vote for “Calvin and Hobbes, Eighth Wonder of the World.”

I vote for that, too.

Feb 01, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

The Town Where J.D. Salinger Lived

Perhaps it takes living in the same town as a man to really get to know him. Here’s just a brief excerpt, from an excellent reflection on the reclusive author’s unique relationship with Cornish, New Hampshire – the town where J.D. Salinger and his wife lived for more than fifty years:

To Emily Robbins, Jerry and Colleen Salinger’s house next door was a regular stop when she and her brother Nick were raising money for Cornish Elementary School projects or out trick or treating.

One year, the couple forgot to buy Halloween treats and instead handed out pencils.

“Well, this is lame,” Robbins said she and Nick decided, once out of earshot.

Their mother, however told them, “Save those pencils.”

Jan 30, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , , :: #

How Will the Apple Tablet Change Our Kids’ Lives?

GeekDad’s resident GeekMom, Jenny Williams – on Apple’s revolutionary new iPad, and what it means for our kids:

The possibilities are really endless, limited only by our imaginations. We shall see how the tablet really affects us, but children will instantly invite this technology into their lives. Watch how they use it, and you’ll learn new areas to develop. Inevitably, children invent new ways to use technology, so pay attention. You might learn something.

I can’t help but think that we’ve gotten one huge step closer to a glorious “Star Trek”-like future – and I’d be so excited to be a kid today, amid all of it. Sure, it can scare us all, and as adults and parents, we might not know how to react to new technologies like this. But as in “Star Trek,” humanity always adapts, and usually ends up the better for it. You just have have some trust in the future – and in our own and our kids’ limitless capacity to boldly meet that future.

Jan 27, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , , :: #

Parents Spying on Teens' Online Conversations?

A great perspective on the issue from Anastasia Goodstein and the ever-wonderful Henry Jenkins.

Jan 26, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

10 Best Things We'll Say to Our Grandkids

A bit of an old piece from Wired Magazine, but I can’t help but be attracted to #3 on this future list of “how things were in the old days”:

3. Televised contests gave cash prizes to whoever could store the most data in their head.

Hopefully in the near future the same thing will be said about education, tests and grades in general (in a past, no-longer-present tense). When our schools are about helping kids learn how to use data, how to aggregate and manipulate it meaningfully – instead of simply memorising it to regurgitate later on a test – that’s the day I’m looking forward to.

Jan 26, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

"Waiting For Superman"

The Hollywood Reporter interviews Bill Gates and David Guggenheim at Sundance, discussing with them their work in the new Guggenheim-directed documentary about education, called “Waiting For Superman”:

Gates, 54, sees [his participation in the documentary] as a way to teach Americans just how far the U.S. system has fallen and how to redeem it.

“There aren’t many movies about education, and it’s a complex problem to explain. So Davis, by taking some students and letting you get to them and their desire to go to a good high school, makes it really emotional, and that’s what only a great storyteller can do.”

Guggenheim focuses on everyday students who want a better education but can’t seem to get it. He talks to experts like Gates and Geoffrey Canada, chief executive of community organization Harlem Children’s Zone, and challenges the roles of administrators, teachers’ unions and others directly involved in U.S. education.

“This movie is a controversial movie because it deals with some uncomfortable truths about public schools. It doesn’t pull any punches … and it attacks even some of the progressive ideas,” Guggenheim told Reuters.

Can’t wait to watch it. It looks very much like it will be the U.S.-based sibling to Lord David Puttnam’s excellent U.K.-focused “We Are The People We’ve Been Waiting For” documentary.

Jan 24, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

Why the "Crap" in Your Kid's Life Can Be a Good Thing

I’d love to get more into this discussion, but here’s the short, Daniel’s-got-homework-to-do version: Lori Pickert homeschools her two boys, but in a very cool project-based, Reggio Emilia-inspired way. She was recently commenting on how we tend to dichotomise reading and video games – putting them in opposite corners and expecting them to duke it out for our kids’ attention and time – but when, in reality, they can be very complementary activities.

I thought this was a very solid way of looking at it, and so I said (in the comments) how stories that we find our kids interacting with often now take shape within trans-media universes – think of “Star Wars” as an example, which is now represented in two trilogies of films, a cartoon TV show, countless books for all reading levels, video games, toys, trading cards, the pair of underwear I’m wearing right now (ahem)… it just goes on. Overkill on the platforming and commodification? You might think so at first. But it’s all about the connections – kids can explore the same idea or story (even “Star Wars”) through countless varying iterations, platforms and approaches, in ways that cater to all learning styles. In short, taking a single concept and exploring it in these different ways is educationally, neurologically one of the best ways kids learn. This is the same idea behind the Project Approach, as well.

That idea – that connections are good, and connections between media (between reading, TV, video games, and other activities) are even better – led into this new post by Lori, entitled “Limits Can Be So… Limiting.” She uses the piece to emphasise that we tend as adults to prioritise or value children’s activities over others – for example, saying that “Reading is better than watching TV,” and “Playing outside is better than playing video games.” We tend to label a lot of the stuff and activities in our kids’ lives as “crap,” simply based on our own values – our own preconceived notions of what kids “should” be doing. But how are we really so sure that what we think is bad (or, at least, less good) for them really is all that bad? It’s something to think about, and certainly makes you question the notion of “crap.”

But all of that is now, actually, just a lead in for this – a follow-up comment to Lori’s piece, made by Patricia:

I recently read Michael Chabon’s book of essays “Manhood for Amateurs” (and am re-listening to the audiobook, it’s so good.) Again and again throughout the book, Chabon returns to the notion of the “crap” in kids’ lives, and how it’s not necessarily a bad thing. He writes of “making something new of what you have been given by your culture”. And really, Chabon is the poster boy for the idea of learning from “crap”: he spent his childhood immersed in the world of comics, which I’m sure might worry some parents. But what did he grow up to do? Win the Pulitzer Prize.

For a book based on comics.

All I have left to say: I absolutely love it.

Jan 24, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #




Pokemon for the Real World

As Jason Kottke describes The Phylomon Project:

Kids can remember hundreds of Pokémon characters but very few animals. The solution? The Phylomon Project is an open source initiative aiming to make Pokemon-type cards for actual animals.

Looks like fun, and a refreshing way to capitalise on children’s love of trading cards.

I have minor quibbles in the idea that we need to co-opt every popular meta-story or brand out there in the media world that kids enjoy, and somehow turn it into a “good-for-you” sort of thing, but there’s no doubt that there’s some solid reasoning behind using trading cards as a way for kids to engage in nature. There’s just something in them – perhaps epitomised in Pokémon – that makes cards a great outlet for children’s collection, categorisation and meta-labelling, and it seems a perfect way to explore the natural world as well. (Interestingly, Pokémon itself stemmed from its creator’s love of insect collecting as a child – so I suppose you could say the Phylomon project is only returning Pokémon back to its roots.)

Now they just need to come up with a catchy way for me to play and pit my “Vulpes vulpes” up against your “Procyon lotor.”

UPDATE: The Xeko website and “eco-adventure” game is already up and running, and basically utilises the same “Playing Cards for Animals” concept.

Jan 23, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #

‘Plastic Baby’ Goes to School

Boy takes a baby doll off to Kindergarten. Dad sweats bullets, wondering if Boy will face mass ridicule. Guess what? He doesn’t!

I love stories like this. They just poke so many great holes into our reliance/fear of gender stereotypes.

Jan 23, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

What Really is Dangerous?: 'Dangerism' and Risk

Gever Tulley, founder of the Tinkering School and author of the recently-released book “Fifty Dangerous Things (You Should Let Your Children Do)” discusses why he was led to coin a new word for the process of deciding what truly is and isn’t dangerous for kids:

I have had a lot of discussions with parents about which risky activities they will and won’t let their children participate in, and the differences are often striking. Just as there is no necessarily rational basis for choosing which animals are eaten, there appears to be no rational basis for deciding what activities are acceptable for children. […]

So, I propose the term “dangerism” to describe how a culture decides what is and isn’t dangerous. The sources of dangerism can be traced to both personal and social sources. Our individual perception of risk is based on a combination of personal experiences and family history. The cultural aspects of dangerism are probably best described by anthropologists, but the popular news media certainly plays a part in creating exaggerated portrayals of risk.

The point of it all is that ‘Risk’ is relative – and real risk, the kind that will actually, statistically stand a good chance of hurting you, is limited.

I’m reminded of Tim Gill’s work on risk aversion in society: as he finds, a little controlled, manageable risk is in fact a desirable thing in society. There’s nothing to be gained from completely avoiding risk, since not only can we never completely control or avoid risk, but we react far more dangerously to risky situations when we’ve not been exposed to milder forms of more “acceptable risk” and learned to handle it appropriately. For many cultures, this need for acceptable risk exposure is necessary for their very survival; for instance, in one of Gever’s examples, Inuit children begin to use knives at a very early age – a “risky” proposition by many modern mainstream American notions – but the same children also might later need to depend on using those knives knives skilfully if they come into actual dangerous circumstances, like confronting a wild animal in the woods alone.

So how can we really reconcile risk, and know what is acceptable risk? Gever concludes with this: “We must assess the risks, weigh the benefits, know the child, and know ourselves – then we just have to try to make the best decision we can.”

It’s a nice way of summarising the ‘Risk vs. Benefits’ weighing process, I think – even if it sounds deceptively simple. Here in the UK, playworkers – the adult staff present in our many Adventure Playgrounds – ask a similar question of themselves, as part of one of the guiding principles of their work:

Is the good this child or children will gain from this experience stronger than the likelihood of their coming to serious harm?

When it comes right down to it, if we hone our perspectives well enough, we can quite easily develop a pragmatic but respectful perspective on risk assessment. Consider this matrix from London Play, that is sometimes distributed to playworkers and providers. (Please bear in mind that, since Adventure Playgrounds in the UK are typically publicly funded services, playground management are legally required to do such risk assessment. The allowances within risk assessment would probably be different in more personal or family-based, non-public situations.) The matrix analyses activities seen as “potentially risky” for these criteria:

  • Possible Hazard or Problem
  • Possible Result or Outcome – worst case scenario
  • Likelihood – risk assess for different age/ability groups
  • Is Risk Apparent and Controllable to children participating?
  • Reasonable and Practical Steps available to avoid or reduce problem
  • Value of Allowing Activity

There are probably certainly other considerations you might take into account, such as modifications that can be made to negate some of the more dangerous aspects of an activity, while retaining most of that activity’s core value. All of this might be a bit too formal and impersonal an approach to risk-benefit analysis in everyday life, but I think there’s a lot we can still learn from there.

Further, if you’re interested in all of this, you might also appreciate Play Wales’s guide to risk and Play England’s brief on managing risk.

Jan 23, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , , :: #




Do Children Need Both a Mother and a Father?

The short answer: No.

The long answer, as reiterated in a new comprehensive meta-study of past research: Utterly not. As we’ve seen before, stability in relationships and parenting is the number one factor in the outcomes and wellbeing of children. The gender and even the number of parents have very little to do with it. As noted:

In their analysis, the researchers found no evidence of gender-based parenting abilities, with the “partial exception of lactation,” noting that very little about the gender of the parent has significance for children’s psychological adjustment and social success.

While this has important implications for opponents to same-sex marriages and adoption (basically deflating any argument against same-sex parenting on the basis that “children need a mother and a father”), it also backs up the Daddy Shift notion that mothers and fathers can share more egalitarian parenting and caregiving roles. With no distinct gender-based difference in parenting abilities, what’s left defining parenting roles is only cultural. The researcher says it best: “The gender of parents only matters in ways that don’t matter.”

Not to skim over another important conclusion from the study, though: The number of parents equally doesn’t have to matter. Single parents can often do as equally well as two-parents – although it is noted that, on average, two-parent households generally fare better. This one’s a bit tricky, since it really is down to the individual level of parenting – and practicalities play a part. Single parents have more up against them time-wise (having to juggle work and being a sole caregiver), whereas couples have an advantage practically, able to trade off caregiving and work. Still it’s important to remember that it’s about the quality of parenting, not how many people are providing it: “One really good parent is better than two not-so-good ones,” the researcher claims.

Jan 21, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

Texting Improves Kids' Read Ability

New studies out that again touch on how children’s texting actually helps – not hinders – their ability to read, write and spell regular English:

The proportions of textisms that kids used in their sentence translations was positively linked to verbal reasoning; the more textspeak kids used, the higher their test scores. Another study found a high correlation between spelling scores and the proportions of textisms. And the kids who used the most textisms consisting of abbreviated words (like nite instead of night) or youth-type slang (wanna, gonna, hafta, etc.) were also high scorers on spelling tests.

I mentioned before how I think technology-based communication should actually be thought of as an additional, “dual” language – say, akin to learning a secondary language like Spanish in elementary school, to go along with English. In fact, this study’s authors use similar framework: stating that children “could slip between standard school English when it was required in [standardized English] tests, and casual text language when that was appropriate.”

The best news, though, is that the increased exposure to written language – whatever the platform, including texting – has a greatly positive impact on literacy. So again: Don’t freak about your kid using technology or texting nonstop. It’s a good thing.

Jan 21, 2010 :: Tagged under: , , :: #

Older ::