Auckland School Abandons Playground Rulebook In Controversial Experiment

Ripping up the playground rulebook is having incredible effects on children at an Auckland school.

Chaos may reign at Swanson Primary School with children climbing trees, riding skateboards and playing bullrush during playtime, but surprisingly the students don't cause bedlam, the principal says.

The school is actually seeing a drop in bullying, serious injuries and vandalism, while concentration levels in class are increasing.

Principal Bruce McLachlan rid the school of playtime rules as part of a successful university experiment.

"We want kids to be safe and to look after them, but we end up wrapping them in cotton wool when in fact they should be able to fall over."

www.stuff.co.nz...

I have a lot of respect for any school that has the courage required to conduct an experiment like this. And although I would have guessed an experiment like this would have positive benefits, I wouldn't have expected it to be quite as successful as this. It seems that as the years go by our school leaders are enforcing more and more rules for no logical reason, for example last year a UK School Banned Triangular Flapjacks. There are countless examples like that which show how delusional and controlling our school leaders have become. I think this experiment is brilliant and it really highlights the psychology of rules and authority imo. People are always more tempted to do something when they are told they are not allowed to do it. It's the same when the government thinks it knows what it best for us and tries to protect us from ourselves with failed programs like the war on drugs.

"The great paradox of cotton-woolling children is it's more dangerous in the long-run."

Society's obsession with protecting children ignores the benefits of risk-taking, he said.

Children develop the frontal lobe of their brain when taking risks, meaning they work out consequences. "You can't teach them that. They have to learn risk on their own terms. It doesn't develop by watching TV, they have to get out there."

Kudos to them for not buying into the ever so trendy "Structured Playtime" fad. Kids just need to be kids when they are playing. I can't believe we actually need a study to show that this works. It worked for hundreds of years until someone decided that children should never get a skinned knee, picked last, etc. Kids are far from stupid and can usually handle more situations than they are given credit for. I fear having a society of children who have never lost a game, never been told no, never rolled in the grass, and never had to decide how to handle certain situations because other adults always did it for them. That is a pretty scary concept IMO. I hope more schools take note of this and see the light.

Children learn a lot by playing. Not allowing them to do so, stunts their growth in many different areas.

Excellent!, I've been minding my own business since trying to explain to friends with kids not to overprotect them, I'm made out to be an A-hole, because since I don't have children of my own yet I apparently have no right to an opinion on raising kids (even though I took part in the raising of my nieces and nephews). I tell people "if you coddle them you're only hurting them more in another way"

One kid in particular effectively ruined his own birthday. In the many games set up for all the kids, when he failed he cried and threw a tantrum because he was so used to getting his way and having his mommy and aunts do everything for him, none of the kids had fun as each game was cut short. I may not have all the answers but I know I'm going to teach my kids that you win some you lose some, you make it through without a scratch sometimes and sometimes you get banged up.

thank you for posting this!

reply to post by Kangaruex4Ewe

It worked for hundreds of years until someone decided that children should never get a skinned knee, picked last, etc.

The problem is that it happens slowly over time, the rules build up and up until it's impossible to keep track of all the laws. The majority of people don't even know 1% of the laws that they must live by, but it's not their fault, because it would take a life time just to read through all the laws in countries like the US and the UK. And then there's a law which says that ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse for breaking the law.

And then there's also the rare horror events where a child gets blinded by a triangular flap jack so they think it's ok to totally ban triangular flap jacks. If all school started throwing away their playground rulebooks we'd eventually see a child fall out of a tree or a kid fall off his skateboard and hit his head on the cement ground, and as soon as that happened you'd have a landslide of control freaks rush in to say "see I told you this was a terrible idea". It's always the one off events which pave the way for new laws and rules.

Yes I am not a fan at all of the current self esteem at all costs in education we have.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


I think everyone should be informed in writing of each new law (federal/state) that is passed. That should cut down on a lot of this "slip it by" nonsense we see today. They like it that way because then nobody gets enough information to complain until it's too late for it to do any good.

I can only imagine the "helicopter parents" at this school going nuts right now. I can't even look back and see when times changed from "kids being kids and sometimes they get hurt" to "I dropped my son off at school this morning and he came home with a paper cut... how dare you not watch him closely enough". I was only out of school for 2 years before I had my daughter, so I assume it was in that time things got ridiculous.

We are raising a nation of wussies if one is to be perfectly honest about it.

I pretty much let my boys go and rarely have to step between them. They are rough too.

Most often they are creating scenarios in which they act out. Often wartime scenarios, or superhero/supervillian play. When my mother was over for the holiday's she was blown away. She asked me why I wasn't doing anything to stop them from rough housing. I told her to leave them alone, their playing. I'll never forget the look on her face - priceless.

She argued and said, that's not playing, they are beating each other up.

My eldest son who is 6, promptly informed his Nana, "No, we are playing Avengers. I'm Iron Man and he's Hulk. The hulk got angry at Iron man because I won't let him practice the choke hold on me." :O

All the while my youngest 4 year old is stomping around the living room grumbling... "Hulk don't choke, Hulk Smash!"

They've never given one another any broken bones or even bloody noses that I can recall (knock on wood). They've accidentally head butted each other before and come to me for kisses and empathy. But after they get their fill of hugs and kisses and you'll be alright - they're right back at it again! They no longer run to me, "Mom, he did this, mom he won't share that". They work it out themselves. And they are inseparable and very protective of one another. "Don't mess with my brother," was my eldest warning to anyone who messes with his little brother. Including his much older sisters!

My favorite moment - was the Christmas Air Guitar Ode to Santa in front of the tree this past Christmas Eve.They were down on their knees strumming their pretend guitars singing - Santa please visit our tree, we've been good, please, please, please. Those are the moments, that make things just a little bit better for me. Just watching them be free.

CdT

LOL - Future ALL BLACKS in the making.

Broken bones, stubbed toes, black eyes, BMX stacks, chipped teeth, skinned alive coming off the skateboard.......God bless my childhood.

I'd send my kids there in a flash.

Go the KIWI's

reply to post by CirqueDeTruth


That's pretty much the same thing my parents did. Only my brother and I did really, really, go after each other almost nonstop. He is 4 years older than I am and while we fought a lot he would never let anyone else treat (me) his sister with any kind of violence or disrespect if he was around.

Both of my parents were only children and my mom always tells me that she wanted to have 2 children so they would always have each other, unlike her and my dad. She also said that having a sibling helps children learn how to stand up for themselves and learn how to resolve conflict. In my experience she is dead on the money. My daughter is an only child and she does have a harder time taking up for herself than I ever did.

You don't need my approval or anyone else's... but I do think you are doing it right.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder

It doesn't develop by watching TV, they have to get out there.

I had to comment on this one. Not that I disagree that TV is generally an evil device but the statement on the context it was made is plainly wrong, hte best he could have said is that TV does not smack you down or praise you actions, but people DO learn from experience and by observing others in that TV (if clear distinction between reality and fantasy is made) can teach stuff, even behavioral stuff... It is just not the best source for it.


The problem with statements like this or being to aggressive toward something is that it risk the credibility or the rest of your argumentation...

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


Nice find Order,

This is especially true for boys. They are not programmed/wired to sit at a desk all day reciting and memorizing. The current global education system is designed for girls. And they tend to excel at it.

Once you start taking recess away and changing "play" time to non-physical....the boys pay the price yet again.

They need that release....they need the tom-foolery.

I am personally blessed to have a true feminist wife who chose to stay home and raise and teach our kids.....three boys....they need their outdoor time....on their recess...they ride motorcycles, shoot bows, climb trees, build forts, go swimming...and on and on and on....

and when they come back in....they are quiet and ready to do the "boring" stuff again......

Panic2k11
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

 

It doesn't develop by watching TV, they have to get out there.

I had to comment on this one. Not that I disagree that TV is generally an evil device but the statement on the context it was made is plainly wrong, hte best he could have said is that TV does not smack you down or praise you actions, but people DO learn from experience and by observing others in that TV (if clear distinction between reality and fantasy is made) can teach stuff, even behavioral stuff... It is just not the best source for it.


The problem with statements like this or being to aggressive toward something is that it risk the credibility or the rest of your argumentation...

What about the flicker rate that basically puts people into sleep mode....shutting the brain down and making it susceptible to whatever influence "they" choose to shoot at you?

ALL t.v. is bad....even if the program isn't

reply to post by UxoriousMagnus

What about the flicker rate that basically puts people into sleep mode....shutting the brain down and making it susceptible to whatever influence "they" choose to shoot at you?

Well I have done my own experiences in hypnosis and things just do not work like that, yes it can increase susceptibility but it is not just a matter of frame frequency (that today is a moot point due to advances in TV technology, in regards to image, note also that there was already low credibility to it since NTSC and PAL and other systems have different frequencies), the main problem is in light flickering (not real a frequency issue) and sound frequencies (long exposition to brain entraining, that can't really work out in short bursts, it has to be at least of several minutes and most people would notice it if outside of a sound experience, for example music videos use the both methods to entice and arouse the viewer).

TV is a programming tool but more in the basis of subliminal queues and the distortion of information and perception it imparts. In any case few people watch TV anymore and the choice is vast the biggest problem is simply one of distraction and escapism, on one side of it can even be of prevention of events like the one we are commenting as not becoming much more common.

We can extrapolate that under an oppressive and unexceptionable regime people tend to become more aggressive and volatile especially toward the perceived weaker and acceptable targets as an outlet for their own frustrations.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


They have been doing the same at Onewhero Area School (Franklin County, south of Auckland) for some time now. Seems to be good for them.

They grow 'em tough in country NZ!

UxoriousMagnus

Panic2k11
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

 

It doesn't develop by watching TV, they have to get out there.

I had to comment on this one. Not that I disagree that TV is generally an evil device but the statement on the context it was made is plainly wrong, hte best he could have said is that TV does not smack you down or praise you actions, but people DO learn from experience and by observing others in that TV (if clear distinction between reality and fantasy is made) can teach stuff, even behavioral stuff... It is just not the best source for it.


The problem with statements like this or being to aggressive toward something is that it risk the credibility or the rest of your argumentation...

What about the flicker rate that basically puts people into sleep mode....shutting the brain down and making it susceptible to whatever influence "they" choose to shoot at you?

ALL t.v. is bad....even if the program isn't

Most flat panel modern TV's don't flicker. Even less so with digital source.

It's such a sad, sad commentary on society and where we are when it takes a revolutionary experiment to re-discover that kids need to play.

I mean who could forget that?

This is excellent. It's not just about children needing to play and let off steam it's about rules and if they are of any real value. It was Tacitus that said 'the more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws' and I think the outcome of this study shows how people, even children, do not need rules, just a basic caring framework within which to happily co-exist.

reply to post by teapot


Oh, but it's more than that. My takeaway is that they're discovering that no-holds-barred play generates its own set of boundaries and rules among the kids. They aren't formal or anything, but they're there. It's an important exercise for the kids in learning their own limits and in social functioning. I'll bet these kids grow up better adjusted and with a healthier respect for others than they would have if the rules had attempted to keep them "safe" and "hermetically sealed" off from all harm and all risks.

I wonder how many mass shooters would develop from this lot?

Another way to look at it is to study what happens to young puppies or kittens who aren't raised with their litter or natural mother. My sister wound up with one. It wasn't being mean, but it had no sense of boundaries with its claws or teeth. Kittens learn those while playing with mom and siblings. They learn what hurts, so they learn control. In the end, my sister had to adopt another kitten to teach hers self-control, and it only took two days for it to learn.

reply to post by ChaoticOrder


I dont know.