As with any issue, education has it’s own “schools of thought”.  Funny term, this one.  I have another word for it:  “dedication to indoctrination”.  It has been my own personal observation that once people subscribe to a “school of thought”, they become rigid and largely unwilling to consider either the presence or lack of evidence if it doesn’t fit that school of thought.

The Light Side of “The Force”:

As I have been making final corrections on a review that my office commissioned some university professors to write.  They did a wonderful job of looking for balance in this review, and with the revisions I send hopefully there will be even more of an effort to do this.  They have considered not only the needs that children have for freedom, but also their need for guidance.  With the inclusion of some more detailed practicality (where warranted and where the evidence supports such), this is going to be a wonderful document.

The Dark Side of “The Force”:

In policy making, part of the reason that we sometimes can’t get anything done is that there is just too much competing dogma.  Remember those schools of thought?  I will give you a hard example.  There are those who advocate for free play (I am one of those), and there are those who advocate for structured sporting activities (I am one of those too).  I see constant fighting between these two factions, especially with regard to physical education. The fact is, they both have a point!  It is essential for young ones to have freedom and feel the need to explore.  It is also essential for them to learn how to exist within a structure.  If a young one severely lacks meaningful experience in either of these departments, there will likely be significant problems in adulthood.  Yet, neither of the two competing factions can seem to let go of their own dogmas, and we have a stalemate.

Why are we like this?

To quote our President, “Well, I’ll tell you”.  The overriding reason, in my humble opinion, and just from my own observation is…drum roll please…fear combined with ego.  Once again, if I think that I am smarter than everyone else, and I also fear that my “place” will be taken, my livelihood will be taken if I abandon the issue that I staked my claim on, then I cling to dogma.  Bingo!

Bringing Balance to “The Force”:

I had a wonderful debate with a colleague last week about the inclusion of the word “play” in terminology that we use in the field.  Before I move on, for those of you that think these things are all about semantics, you would be wrong.  The entire reason we have language is to convey ideas.  Ideas have both healed and killed in our own lifetimes…but more on that later, I digress.

The whole debate was about the term MVPA (moderate to vigorous physical activity).  I prefer using the term “play” for children.  My colleague’s well made point was that a lot of people also consider play to be sitting on the floor playing with dolls, so the naked use of the term play can confuse the information we are trying to convey, and this doesn’t helpt to solve the problem of physical inactivity does it?  What a wonderful point!  Now, I could have argued with my colleague, for fear that since my point had not been complete I wouldn’t be seen as the dominant force in the conversation anymore.  Instead, I said:  “Well how about this – we call it moderate to vigorous physical play activity”.  That way both important points are made about what children need.   We both agreed that might be a good idea.  I am going to be trying to sneak this term into policy conversations over the next few years, let’s see if I can be successful.

Here is another example:

Some advocate abolishing organized sports, because there are so many problems, and many kids have been damaged.  “No adults” they say.  Well, what about the alternative: 

Training adults in the art of play (enter:  Head Start Body Start, IYCA, Exuberant Animal, Playworks, Spark, etc).

There is nothing wrong with sports that keep score.  Life certainly keeps score.  There is something wrong when we assume that it can’t mean fun, that it can’t mean inclusion.

There is nothing wrong with free play.  It gives kids a break, helps them be more creative, and become better problem solvers in the long run.

So, what have we all learned?  (Yes I am talking to us like children, deal with it).   WE have learned to share!  Ideas, evidence, hierarchy.  If we go with the idea that ideas, evidence, and hierarchy are in flux, then we can solve problems.  If not – we are doomed to dogma.

What Say You?