|
| PARENT ARTICLES |
Hurry! Hurried! Hurrumph!
Leisure and play are becoming archaic concepts as today's children are rushed from one activity to the next.
What do Albert Einstein, Bill Gates and Stephen Hawking have in common? Other than the obvious 'genius-level intelligence' they all probably had time as children to play, be bored and indulge their highly active imaginations. It's a cliche that's been doing the rounds for a couple of years now, but like most cliches buried within its banality is the seed of truth.
Twenty years ago, American psychologist David Elkind coined the phrase 'the hurried child' to describe a new phenomenon among parents of involving their children in dozens of adult-supervised, extra-curricula activities each week, each one aimed at 'improving' the academic, social, sporting, cultural or psychological skills of their children. Elkind's book was a warning - children were missing out on free time, unstructured play, daydreaming, being bored and discovering themselves and their environment.
It was, however, a warning that has gone unheeded and while the hothousing of child improvement may not be as intense in Australia, there are undeniably pressures on many childrens' time like never before.
Starting early
Growing up has never been so competitive. Honouring that old adage 'only in America' the Yankee parental desire to fast track their children to success can now begin in the womb - the Prenatal University in California promises to teach mothers how to make their babies smarter while they are in utero.
While this dedication to gaining a competitive edge borders on irrational, an increasingly common practice in the US is the tutoring of three year olds to aid their selection into elite private kindergartens. At an age where they can't tie their shoelaces or hold a knife and fork, these pre-programmed, high-achieving, post-toddlers are cramming for an exam and prepping to be judged by a panel of school officials. Professional tutors for these children are common - after all three year olds are unpredictable and may choose to not cooperate on such an important day in their very short lives. Unlike their parents, they don't realise that selection into Harvard, Princeton or Brown may very well be dependent on their entry into a particular kindergarten.
It seems laughable in an egalitarian society like Australia. But is it? While competitiveness may not be as extreme, there are pockets of suburbia with clans of seven year olds who spend every day of the week and weekend rushing from one activity to the next. The question is: who's it for and why?
"We are certainly seeing an increase in the number of adult-supervised activities among young children," says University of Western Sydney early childhood specialist Sue Dockett. "One reason is the nature of play has changed. When we were children, it was okay to play in the street or go to the park and not come home for an hour or so. Now there is a perception of danger and parents want to provide more direction and guidance."
Statistics show stranger danger is no more prevalent today than it was 20 or 50 years ago; it is the perception of such danger that is greater. This, in addition to the busyness of suburban streets, makes parents fearful of giving their children free rein to roam.
"The over-scheduling of children is motivated by this particular generation of parents wanting the best for their children. They are saying: wouldn't it have been nice if I had done dancing lessons or maybe if I had learnt to swim earlier I could have been a competitive swimmer, and so on," says Sue. "It's also motivated by a lack of time; parents have become much more discerning about where they want their children to be and how much they see them. They feel if they don't get their children involved when they are young, it will be too late."
Today's parents seem obsessed with opportunities for enrichment; if their child doesn't try all the activities available to them, will they miss that one thing they will excel at?
However, longitudinal studies disprove this theory. In fact, children who have been enrolled in early-childhood academic programs eventually lose whatever gains they made in relation to children who weren't hot-housed early. In a recent interview with CNN, David Elkind said: "All our research, all our training, all our teaching says that pushing the cognitive has no lasting effects and can have negative ones. Too often, if you push too early, too much, you may frustrate the child. You may tell the child that he or she is too dumb to understand what you're doing."
Stealing play time
"Parents see adult-supervised activities as a way of doing something valuable. Play isn't seen as valuable any more in its own right," says Sue Dockett, who points out that entrenched parental guilt about long working hours is another factor behind organising kids' lives for them: it's a form of compensation.
If Sue is right, and play isn't being seen as valuable any more, then what are the long-term consequences of that?
"The most creative people in the world play with ideas," she says. "Kids get a growing sense of independence out of play; a sense of valuing who they are. Spending time with yourself is a real art and kids who have time for reflection are often more comfortable with who they are."
Helen McGrath, from Deakin University's education faculty, goes further. A clinical psychologist who specialises in mental health in adolescents and young adults, she is particularly interested in the notion that young people are less resilient that they used to be.
"With a whole lot of exceptions, young people these days seem to have an inability to bounce back from the bad things that happen partially because they have been overprotected by their parents," she says. "This overprotection stems from misguided love; parents are too busy trying to make their children happy and not letting them have the experiences which help them get tougher."
According to Helen, US psychologist, Martin Seligman, has argued quite persuasively that the rise in depression among young people is a direct result of parents parenting for feeling good and making kids happy. Seligman says that, out of the best possible motives, modern parents are overprotecting their children, ensuring their children don't miss out on any opportunities, only involving their children in activities which bring out the children's strengths and are over-structuring non-school time.
"It means that those opportunities to learn and to fall flat on your face go missing," says Helen. "To a degree that's what unstructured play does; it lets kids start stuff, make mistakes and fall on their face." Helen says the ramifications of this are potentially profound. "When these children encounter difficult situations as adults - for example, they may try work projects that fail or have relationships that fail - they haven't had enough opportunity to sit with bad feelings to learn how to handle them."
"The inability to bounce back is part - certainly not all - of the explanation for youth suicide. If kids are given more opportunities to take the initiative when they are young, they are going to be able to deal with more difficult things as they get older."
Why parents feel the pressure
Stephen Juan, from Sydney University's education faculty, says the 'ambitiousness' and concern of modern parents is a response to the economy.
"In this era of globalisation and economic rationalism, security has been taken away from a lot of people," he says. "There may be more wealth [in certain pockets], but it is more difficult to get and you have to work harder to keep it. The promise of a leisure society that was made 40 years ago - automation was going to take care of all our problems and we'd retire early and be happy ever after - has never happened. Instead, we have to work harder and harder to reach and maintain a certain standard of living to buy all those DVDs, 4-wheel drives and consumer goods that weren't around 40 years ago and which now signify our success to the rest of the community."
"It's not just a middle-class phenomenon. Everyone is striving for more in response to the advertising pressures out there and the greater economic uncertainty."
"Because of all of this, parents have to be a lot tougher in the guidance they give their children. They emphasise the economic struggle that is ahead. The expectation used to be that you would get a job and keep it for life. That is very rare now. Both parents and schools are responding to this. Schools are very aware that time is at a premium, hence there is more organization and that extends to leisure time. Parents are wanting schools to not waste time, to train their children in useable skills, everything has to have an outcome, outcomes should be defined, evaluation should be in terms of outcomes and so on."
"This is almost a factory model that we are applying to human society. It's as if we have accepted the economic rationalist idea for everything in our lives and we are structuring our lives around that. We organise everything for kids now; it's a response to security considerations and a response to a lack of time."
Another reason may be that we are having fewer children and are older when we do. "David Elkind says that because people tend to be older when they have children, they have higher expectations. They also have fewer children and as a result have higher expectations of those children," says Sue Dockett. "There's this feeling that you are not being a good parent if your child isn't doing 101 activities, like all the other children," she says. "Publications like Sydney's Child are full of things you could - or should - be doing with your child. Are you a good parent if you don't do all, or some of that? People want to be judged by others to be good parents."
This is a world of conspicuous parenting; parents want to be seen doing 'all they can and more' for their children. They don't just want the newest model 4-wheel drive, they want to be seen driving their children from tennis to dancing to maths coaching to drama lessons in it. It's been dubbed 'affluenza' - the affliction of having too much in robust economic times.
Consequences for schools
Apart from the obvious - exhausted children falling asleep at their desks - there are a number consequences for schools with pockets of children who lead overscheduled lives in their non-school hours.
Phil Lambert, DET's Executive Director of Early Childhood, Primary & Rural Education says that while he is aware of the hurried child syndrome - indeed he was recently told of a primary school child with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome - it is not overly prevalent in NSW schools. And, in schools where it does exist, the responses of the children involved are not universal - some children, particularly those from busy, active families, will thrive on it, while others will wilt under the pressure.
"As educators, we need to challenge notions that have built up around what it means to succeed and what is a balanced childhood. We also need to remember that children perform at their highest levels when they play because there are no expectations. It's a risk that hurried children don't get a chance to test ideas, explore and experiment because they are always meeting adult time frames and expectations."
Sue Dockett points out that a number of schools in the US have banned recess because it is 'a waste of time'. "Parents want children to spend more time on tasks and on learning activities. Also schools are seen as unsafe - there is insufficient supervision." Sue says "a number of schools in Victoria are also heading in this direction."
It's not all bad
Sue Dockett points out that while the rhetoric against oversheduling children's lives might be ring loud and true, there are positive sides to the story. "Kids can enjoy being part of a group. They can make friends and cherish a sense of belonging to a group of people with common goals. They can feel the pride of their parents. There are a range of skills and abilities that can come through. So it's not so much the organised activities, as how much of it." "What there doesn't seem to be at the moment is a strong focus that it is ok to play."
A 1998 study from the University of Michigan found that since 1981 American children have lost, on average, 30 minutes a day, or nearly four hours a week in unstructured play and outdoor activities. Altogether free time - that left over after eating, sleeping, personal care and school - has decreased from 40 per cent to 25 per cent of a child's day. One quarter of that, or 13 hours a week, is spent watching TV.
|
|
|
