Skip to main content

A Comment Conundrum

While we were walking downtown recently looking for signs of fall and useful print, a man on the street made a comment that caught me off guard.

"Those are some well-disciplined children!"

Now, if you had asked me, I would have said they are disciplined. I also would have said they know what to do and we work well together. They know how to be safe in the road, we went out at a time when they weren't yet hungry or tired so they had the brainpower to follow street safety rules and staying to the sides of the road.

Undoubtedly the man was commenting on the children between me and my assistant (I was up front holding hands with the two youngest walkers, then there was a preschooler sandwich of four children paired up holding hands, then my assistant pushing the stroller with four infants and toddlers) who were walking carefully and safely.

I have argued before that we should be using the term "discipline" rather than guidance, because of it's stress on the internal work on the child (or adult) who is disciplined enough to act in a manner that might be contrary to impulses or immediate rewards. But somehow the phrase "well-disciplined" got under my skin.

Did this man think I had trained them like sled-dogs to get them to walk in their lines? Did we look like task masters, ready to act on a child running or heading too close to the road? Did he have the same idea that I do, and he just happened to fit an age demographic that made me assume he was equating punishment and discipline?

I'm going to keep thinking on this. Please give me any insight you may have!

Comments

  1. UnknownNovember 5, 2016 at 3:30 PM

    You make an interesting point in differentiating between "disciplined" and "well-disciplined", and I think you are correct in that the former is internal and the latter is external. I would tend to think that the man is older, again agreeing with you that his generation equates discipline with punishment. (I myself was raised with the philosophy that "children should be seen and not heard", along with other tactics of the time to enforce submission and obedience.) Ultimately, he paid a compliment to you and not the children. Your methodology, of which he is oblivious, deserves the compliment, and the children deserve acknowledgement as well for their (self) discipline.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Feelings

I saw an interaction this morning that stopped me in my tracks. A child, newly three, was crying because he had lost a toy in the car. Then he began yelling. Then kicking. The upset kept intensifying as his caregiver watched, not wanting to stop him from getting through his feelings (as she told another adult who asked if she could assist). She's surely been told somewhere along the line that accepting children's feelings means not stopping them. Yay!...But she's missing some follow -up. Children need to know that it's okay to be angry or sad or excited or whatever else they feel. But they also sometimes need help getting through to the calm after. An adult standing by, mute, communicates a lack of interest, not acceptance. The child intensifies, needing guidance and reassurance. The adult, so good - heartedly eager to accept the child as they are, remains unphased. The child cries out more for the centering that occurs when an adult they're attached to can initia...
Post a Comment
Read more

Well, Duh.

 Friday afternoon, I walked back into my classroom to a scene that is not unusual in any group of young children. One child had just hit another (both three years old), attempting to get a coveted toy. I walked over to the two, and as I always do, I looked at the crying child who had been hit and said, "Wow, it looks like Y is really hurting." Then, I recognized that wasn't the whole picture, and looked at the child who had hit (this time), who was already averting their eyes, and said, "It looks like A is hurting too." A turned around, stunned at my ability to perceive what was obvious to them. This time, at least. "Yeah!" They exclaimed. Y stopped crying and looked at A. I offered hugs to both, and attempted to sportscast what I saw. "A wanted that toy, and Y had it! Y didn't want to be hit." A looked at Y, and said, "Yeah, and I really wanted the truck, but I didn't want to hurt you." Both children found a spot i...
Post a Comment
Read more

STEMpede

If our nation's interest in early childhood STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) education were a genuine push for scientific thinking and literacy, it would probably look a lot less like this:                                                                 And a lot more like this: If we want to teach and encourage scientific thinking, we need to start with the classic: this scientific method. For those of us who haven't been in a science class for a while, this is the scientific method: 1. Observe or describe a phenomenon/Ask a question. 2. Do your research. 3. Create a hypothesis. 4. Test that hypothesis. 5. Did it work? If it did, go to step 6. If not, return to steps 2-4. 6. Draw your conclusions. For those of us who haven't been around infants for a while, people are bor...
Post a Comment
Read more