I have to take a moment here to boast about Fisher. He has been attracted to putting picture puzzles together lately, and is now able to put a 24-piece puzzle (usually intended for ages three and up) together without too much fuss. I’ll admit things weren’t when he first showed interest in puzzles. He wanted so badly to get the pieces together, jamming them into each other as best he could, and often breaking down in screaming-and-crying fits when the going got tough. He would often implore me to help him, and when things got really ugly I showed him how puzzles generally work. As he figured the process out through trial and error, I didn’t have to sit on the floor with him as much, and could call out advice such as, “turn the piece around until it fits,” or, “try a new piece,” when he got confused. Now he hardly experiences the frustration he felt before, and still keeps at it because he really enjoys putting these puzzles together.
The big motivator to his learning process is the actual interest he has in doing puzzles. Without that interest, he wouldn’t have come out the other end of that frustration period with as much skill as he now has. I’ve been trying, for instance, to get him to learn how to pedal a bicycle, but he hasn’t been too keen on learning this particular skill and is therefore resisting my attempts at teaching him anything about it. And there really is no point in pushing something that he clearly isn’t ready to learn yet. In fact, I might end up discouraging any appreciation for bike-riding he might come to have, and actually complicate and lengthen the learning process more than necessary.
And watching Fisher put together yet another puzzle this afternoon reminded me how illogical the learning mind appears to be to an outside observer. I mean, I can show Fisher how puzzles work and how I would put a puzzle together, but his way of accomplishing the same thing is naturally going to be unique to his particular pattern of reasoning and adapting. For example, I saw him pick up a piece and try to fit it somewhere, and when it didn’t fit, he dropped it and picked up another piece for another spot. And sometimes he would need to get one piece in the right place at one end of the puzzle before he could make sense of a completely separate piece at the other end. It was instructive to me to watch the seemingly random steps he took to get the right pieces in the right places, and yet he managed to accomplish what he wanted to in the time he needed to take. He was free from the pressures of “teaching” and of the clock, and that kind of freedom shouldn’t be a gift to a child; it should childhood protocol.
Witnessing my dad’s “supervision” of Fisher while he was putting a puzzle together yesterday drove this point home for me. My dad sat there pointing out the obvious, such as “no, that won’t fit there,” and “yeah, that’s the one,” with every move Fisher made. Talk about a display of the teacher’s ego! He was merely flexing his intellectual muscles (you know, showing a two-year-old how smart he himself is in being able to call out the right and wrong pieces of a 24-piece puzzle!), and didn’t once stop to consider how little, if anything, Fisher was getting from this experience. He didn’t stop to think that maybe Fisher needed to make the connections freely by and for himself without comments from the peanut gallery ignorantly pushing him to achieve some irrelevant goal. My dad was essentially telling Fisher, through his outwardly benign play-by-play commentary, that Fisher couldn’t be trusted to figure things out for himself. And THAT, my friends, is the biggest mistake that mainstream “teaching” makes, to the detriment of our children. Not trusting the pervasive talent and desire for understanding that children come into this world possessing is nothing short of a mortal sin against humankind in general, and our most vulnerable charges in particular.
More to that effect, I would be so bold as to declare that most teachers teach to make themselves feel useful because they don’t know how to be useful to their proteges. I would also argue that most don’t know the difference, though that doesn’t lessen the offence. School systems as a whole do little to encourage improvements on teaching approaches, which only aggravates an encumbered and often counter-productive practice.
So it’s up to us, we who love and obsess over and honour our little learners most of all, to decide what is the best way to serve our children. And I mean this proposition sincerely and with a spirit absolutely open to diversity; that as unique as learning patterns are to each human mind, so must our choices be with regard to educating the children in each of our families. What works for you may not work for me, but as long as we take a selfless and radical view toward modern education reform, and more importantly, simply choose to put the needs of our children above all else, progress is imminent. We must trust that our children innately know what they need, and trust ourselves enough, hand in guiding hand, to leave them to their own magnificent devices.