Posted by Helen on: 11.27.2007 /
In recent weeks my children started having to observe a ‘moment of silent reflection’ at school each day because of this recently passed Illinois legislation:
In each public school classroom the teacher in charge shall observe a brief period of silence with the participation of all the pupils therein assembled at the opening of every school day. This period shall not be conducted as a religious exercise but shall be an opportunity for silent prayer or for silent reflection on the anticipated activities of the day.
Thanks to Hemant’s blog, Friendly Atheist, I knew about the legislation as soon as it was passed. I wasn’t surprised when the schools my children attend started observing it.
A local atheist has already sued his school district over this . Happily a federal judge took his side and said the state can’t force schools to comply. I hope this strange legislation will soon be overturned.
Comment by: joe
1 11/27/07 5:44 AM | Comment Link |OK, so what is the problem with encouraging people to have a moment of silence to reflect on the challenges of the day?
Comment by: Helen
2 11/27/07 6:21 AM | Comment Link |It’s not ‘encouraged’, it’s mandatory.
Comment by: kay
3 11/27/07 7:03 AM | Comment Link |I’m torn about this.
On the one hand I could see myself, if I was an atheist, using such a moment of silence to ponder the state of affairs today and how I might help fix the problems.
However, I’m an adult, not a kid. Is a child really going to do that?
A child might pray, but are those that don’t believe in God really going to “reflect silently?”
I dunno. Maybe I’m not giving children enough credit.
I could see the moment of silence causing those that don’t believe to start praying, just to fit in.
Comment by: joe
4 11/27/07 7:19 AM | Comment Link |I’m not bothered whether it is mandatory or not. You can’t force anyone to think about anything in a moment of silence.
As long as it is silence (ie not prayer led by someone else or an opportunity for a teacher to tell others what to think), I can’t see why anyone is bothered.
Comment by: Helen
5 11/27/07 7:29 AM | Comment Link |I agree with Dawn Turner Trice that the law ‘clearly has religious overtones’.
Comment by: Laura M.
6 11/27/07 10:54 AM | Comment Link |Teachers and school districts tend to be authoritarian focused in order to keep the machinary turning, so that everyone is where they’re supposed to be when they’re supposed to be and doing what they’re supposed to be doing.
I absolutely believe a ‘moment of silence’ benefits atheists far more than it does the religious. Teachers and school districts already can’t legitimately forbid prayer as that would be a violation of separation of church and state, but they can certainly prevent the secular from enjoying a moment of silence or reflection at the beginning of their school day.
I believe most students would benefit from some downtime at the start of their day so they can think about what’s important to them and not just about what matters to to all the ‘authorities’ in their life.
There are gazillions of ridiculous, utterly pointless, and even many downright harmful laws on the books to complain about. Why complain about a law that requires school districts to provide for non-religious students something they without a doubt would not provide if not forced to by law?
Comment by: Helen
7 11/27/07 12:58 PM | Comment Link |Laura wrote:
Actually Laura, neither of my childrens’ school districts did this until the law mandated it.
If someone could demonstrate that the children actually benefit from it I’d feel differently. To me it feels like everything else you described - teachers keeping people where they’re supposed to be, doing what they are supposed to do - this is one more example of it “Now you will be silent and reflect on your day (or pray)”.
I’d be happy to have all the harmful, ridiculous and pointless laws rescinded - that sounds good to me!
Comment by: Stephan
8 11/27/07 1:18 PM | Comment Link |This really strikes me as a no-harm-no-foul situation. If you can show me a child who has actually been harmed by a moment of silence at the beginning of the day, or someone whose rights have been infringed upon by this law, I would consider changing my opinion, but I get bothered by these law suits where no one is really hurt, they are just upset. Maybe the law is unnecessary, but is a law suit really the remedy?
Comment by: Laura M.
9 11/27/07 1:25 PM | Comment Link |Yes, that’s what I said:
Emphasis on the fact that districts don’t provide a moment of silence until forced too.
I won’t complain about a law that provides students time to think/ reflect/gather their own private thoughts or pray (their choice).
I’ll applaud it.
I agree with the law. If the government can legally force our children into schools even against our will or wishes, the first thing they should have to provide them when they enter the classroom is an opportunity to be still, be quiet, and just think (or pray to the deity of their choice).
Absolutely !
Comment by: Laura M.
10 11/27/07 1:38 PM | Comment Link |Teachers and school districts are generally about the business of forcing other peoples thoughts into childrens’ heads, not about allowing them time to their own thoughts.
You really need proof that it’s good to allow children time (in this case a pitiful fifteen seconds !) to think their own thoughts?
Where’s the proof that it benefits the average child at all to learn algebra?
Now that certainly never benefited me, and I had to study it for years in school (!) ;-)
Comment by: Helen
11 11/27/07 2:25 PM | Comment Link |Laura, sorry, I misread what you said…I missed the ‘not’.
I could agree that there’s value in schools encouraging children to think creatively - I don’t think way the moment of silent reflection is set up really achieves anything beyond being one more thing they are ‘told to do’. As you said it’s not long enough for them to have much meaningful thought - and more importantly, I don’t think it’s framed in a way which encourages valuable thought or particularly affirms the sort of thought I would like to see affirmed.
Stephan, I can’t comment on the appropriateness of law suits against school districts - maybe that’s the most effective way to get things changed. It seems to me that Christians sometimes sue schools if their rights are infringed upon - at least, I used to hear regular ads for the Center for Law and Justice saying what law suit they’d brought against a school lately on behalf of a Christian student’s rights. Just because someone sues it doesn’t mean they’re angry and being unreasonable.
Different people care about different things…I respect their right to put time and energy into upholding what matters to them. (Although I will probably feel frustrated with them if that seems to conflict with the beliefs they profess to hold)
Comment by: Benjamin ady
12 11/27/07 6:21 PM | Comment Link |Helen,
wow, you’re sort of getting hammered for disliking this, aren’t you?
I can see what you’re saying about it having religious overtones. Pretty clearly feels like an attempt by relgious people to slip in a moment of prayer in such a way that it can’t be struck down because it’s overtly religious.
On the other hand, It seems to me that most americans could benefit from more silence and personal reflection (kind of the opposite of loudness and rude internvention). The buddhist concept of mindfulness has been integrated into treatments for several pscyhological/medical problems and been found *really* effective. No doubt a lot of the legislators who passed this legislation would feel pretty uncomfortable if they thought they were encourage buddhist practices, rather than christian prayer. that strikes me as amusing.
But I noticed this quote in the Dawn Turner article you referenced.
I actually find the required pledge of allegiance ceremony about 20 times as freakzoid and offputting as a moment of silence. There’s no way in hell I want my kids pledge allegiance to this “republic” (actually an oligarchy now), or mouthing lies about justice and compassion for all 5 mornings a week. (and, by the way, they simply won’t be. won’t happen. fortunately my two little ones are in a school right now where no pledge is said. I’m going to see if I can arrange to keep things that way.)
do you find the moment of silence more offensive than the pledge? Or does the pledge not bother you?
Comment by: Stephan
13 11/27/07 7:05 PM | Comment Link |Benjamin, I certainly have a problem with the pledge, and not just because I have lost faith in our government. I don’t like the idea of coercing people to say, “One nation under God,” when many of those people don’t believe in God, or that this nation is under said God.
I don’t see the law having specific religious overtones. In fact, they specifically tried to avoid it:
Prayer is one option, but not the only option, and it is specifically not supposed to be a religious exercise. I just don’t see the harm here. If they were enforcing a specific prayer I could definitely see it, but that’s not what is happening. Challenging a law like this is a senseless waste of taxpayer time and money.
Of course, having the legislature spend time to write, debate and pass it was also a waste of taxpayer time and money, but wasting more time and money won’t fix that.
Comment by: Helen
14 11/27/07 7:21 PM | Comment Link |Benjamin, I just don’t see kids having any meaningful reflection in that context.
My daughter just told me they’ve stopped having the moment of silent reflection at her school.
Are there K-12 schools that don’t say the pledge? I didn’t realize that. I thought they all did. It seems very weird to me, not having grown up in a country where you have a pledge said at school.
Comment by: Benjamin ady
15 11/27/07 8:03 PM | Comment Link |Helen,
Great question. Answer–I don’t know. But my kids are in a really kewl preschool-K school that doesn’t say it. But it’s … pretty much private, I think. I mean it’s not a typical public school, even though it’s associated with a bit public university. It’s kind of wierd that I don’t know the details about this actually.
I think you may be right that there aren’t such *public* schools. Maybe I shall have to get the hell out of this country before they hit first grade. I have to check into this.
Okay–Stephen, I mean it has religious overtones like this. What if you were in a Muslim country, and the state mandated that every day at school whenever that music plays which indicates to everyone in town that it’s time for prayer, all the students must either observe a “moment of silence” and those who want to can pray, and others can just refect. Would you consider that having religious overtones?
I guess the way to find out if it has religious overtones is to ask the people who are part of the overwhelmingly majority religions. Like atheists. or almost atheists. I wonder what Eliza thinks? or Matt?
Or what about other minority religions. Muslims, Hindus, orthodox Jews? How do all these groups in Chicago feel? Of course something that’s right in line with the majority religion isn’t going to bother members of the majority religion in the same way.
Does that seem reasonable?
Comment by: Laura M.
16 11/27/07 10:14 PM | Comment Link |I mostly agree, but I still see value in the law, even if it’s only one teeny tiny baby step in the right direction, which I think it is.
I’m not exactly sure what you mean by ‘thinking creatively’. I don’t think the thoughts necessarily have to be creative, the point for me is that they are the child’s thoughts. I see personal prayer or reflection to be adequate forms of individual ‘free thought’.
In Texas students have a whole minute (WOW !!, read sarcasm) to enjoy their own thoughts before they start the day. At least 5 minutes a day seems much more appropriate to me.
I don’t know how students are expected to form a relationship with God in 15 seconds. I spent half my life trying to do that , with no success, and these kids are going to manage it in 15 seconds?
Yes, the pledge seems like it should be a problem for any freethinker or atheist. In Texas parents need only send a note to school to exempt their child from this requirement.
A few years ago my daughter went to Kinkos and printed up enough form letters for the entire student body of her highschool. The idea was that the students need only have their parents sign it so they could be exempt- no muss no fuss.
(Seems to me the district should be required to inform parents of their right to exempt their child by providing form letters itself).
This was completely my daughter’s idea by the way, which she planned, paid for and implemented totally of her own volition. The thoughts kids can have when you allow them the opportunity to think for themselves !
Comment by: joe
17 11/28/07 3:08 AM | Comment Link |The pledge sucks*. That is a completely different thing in my book.
*nothing about it being american. The whole idea of talking to a flag freaks me out.
Comment by: Stephan
18 11/28/07 7:22 AM | Comment Link |Benjamin, the only problem I have with this is that you’re going to people who appear to be looking for ways to be offended and asking them if they are offended. Atheists these days almost always appear to be angry about something. You could ask some of them if they were angry about soup and they could find a reason to be angry. This obviously isn’t true of everyone, but the vast majority of atheists I have met online always seem to be angry about nearly everything religious people do, and since religious people are the majority in this country, atheists are angry about almost everything. I don’t think it’s a reasonable barometer.
But I really don’t think being offended or having religious overtones are the issues. From a legal perspective I think they need to show real harm or discrimination in the law, and I just don’t see it. Maybe it’s stupid or unnecessary, but that doesn’t mean it is unconstitutional. It just bugs me that when people are offended they feel they need to run to court to fix it. In this case, a minute of sitting still and collecting your thoughts is not hurting anyone.
Comment by: Helen
19 11/28/07 8:20 AM | Comment Link |Stephan is that how Eliza and Matt and I (and Siamang and Karen and Laura)come across - as always angry about almost everything?
Does it bug you equally when Christians sue schools when they believe their rights are being infringed?
I agree with the principles and philosophy of those who are saying silent reflection is at worst harmless, at best, good - however I am convinced that this mandated ‘opportunity’ won’t bring about the benefits that silent reflection potentially can produce if done voluntarily in the right setting, at the right time, with enough time.
And I still don’t understand why the Illinois legislature felt the need to enact this. If I understood why then maybe it wouldn’t bug me so much. Or maybe it would ;-).
Comment by: benjamin ady
20 11/28/07 9:31 AM | Comment Link |Stephan,
Have you ever been part of a discriminated against minority? Atheists are more distrusted and discriminated against in this country than homosexuals, women, or black people. I wonder if you would be more or less angry than the average atheist if you had to put up with a constant, culture wide barrage of such noise?
Do you think that black people shouldn’t run to a court to fix discrimination? I think it’s admirable and good for the society when members of a discriminated against minority stick up for themselves and others like them.
Comment by: Stephan
21 11/28/07 9:35 AM | Comment Link |Helen, you are a notable exception, although I am not sure why this particular issue bugs you so much. I have to admit that Siamang and Karen (I am SO going to get reamed for this) often appear as though they are looking for things to bug them so they can pounce on those crazy Christians again. Not nearly as much as more notable atheists like Dawkins and Harris, but certainly more so than you.
I don’t support efforts to get Creationism or it mildly less religious cousin Intelligent Design into schools. Most lawsuits I have seen by Christians against schools have been issues of equal access, which ironically is starting to bite them in the butt in some cases, or about free speech (letting students pray or speak about their faith in front of a group or do a report about a religious topic). I think equal access is great, as long as it is really equal (Let the Wiccans in!). I think some of the free speech cases have merit, but again, they really have to be free for everyone, not just the people in the majority. I would not make a blanket statement that I don’t support any lawsuits brought by Christians against schools, but I probably would not support the majority of them.
Honestly I’m opposed to most lawsuits by most people about most issues. I’m just not that kind of person.
Comment by: Stephan
22 11/28/07 9:40 AM | Comment Link |Benjamin, I support Affirmative Action and equal rights. If people are really getting discriminated against I would support their lawsuit. In this case, with this law, I don’t see any harm.
Comment by: David H
23 11/28/07 11:21 AM | Comment Link |On the issue of filing suit, Mennonites believe that is strictly un-Christian. These days it is acceptable as a last resort in the Mennonite church, but in the old days it was simply forbidden. I don’t entirely know why, but I have seen biblical citations for that belief. However, I do see benefit in having a suit not be the first response.
Comment by: Karen
24 11/28/07 1:13 PM | Comment Link |Wow, maybe I should try writing one of those “angry atheist” polemics! I didn’t realize I was giving off so much anger.
Thanks for your honesty, Stephen. If I’m coming across as looking for things to ream ‘crazy Christians’ about, I’m grateful to know that.
I have no problem admitting that much of what certain kinds of Christians are doing in this country makes me mad. Particularly when it comes to trying to insert religion into our secular society that has worked so well for so long. I think that’s a recipe for disaster and it does make me angry when others try to undermine it.
In terms of looking for things to get mad about, however, I’ll have to plead innocent on that one. The things that are going on are so constantly around me in the news and online that I hardly have to go looking! ;-)
Frivolous lawsuits have given the court process a black eye, unfortunately. However, there are many, many serious issues in this society that can only be resolved through litigation. Just because a minority of greedy plaintiffs and their lawyers misuse the system should not make us immediately dismiss its validity or think of anyone who sues as a bad kind of person.
In the moment of silence case, I think the only way to stop it was through challenging its constitutionality in the courts. This is also true for most church and state cases.
Comment by: Stephan
25 11/28/07 1:27 PM | Comment Link |Karen, thanks for your honesty too. I have to point out this…
…and say that most Christians don’t see that they are inserting religion into secular society, but keeping religion in society where others are trying to remove it.
If you read writings from 100+ years ago (my daughters love Laura Ingalls Wilder) you see that prayer in schools, and even teaching the Bible in schools, was commonplace. In the last 50 years it was decided that this was unconstitutional.
There have been religious monuments in public parks almost as long as this country has been around, but it is only in the last 30 years or so that the minority has sought to have the courts remove them.
I’m not arguing that we should go back to the “good old days”, but I hope you can see that it’s not as simple as people “trying to insert religion into our secular society.” It has always been there, and it is only recently that some have been trying to remove it. Maybe in some cases it should be removed, but in places where it doesn’t hurt anyone it simply appears to be vindictive and petty to try to remove it.
This “moment of silence” is one such case. There is nothing inherently bad or even sectarian about a moment of silence, but it seems like if people are allowed time to pray in public, atheists will get upset and sue somebody.
Comment by: Helen
26 11/28/07 4:10 PM | Comment Link |Karen thanks for your gracious response to Stephan. You don’t strike me as looking for Christian things to be angry about, but perhaps I’m too biased to notice.
What fascinates me here is that there seems to be no neutral territory. Karen and Stephan’s (and my and other peoples’) comments show every scenario has people feeling they are being unreasonably expected to submit to the wishes of others.
Comment by: Laura M.
27 11/28/07 6:49 PM | Comment Link |Oh my…..
LOL !! ROTFLMAO !!!
Comment by: Laura M.
28 11/28/07 6:51 PM | Comment Link |I wonder why Stephan left me off his ‘list’ of angry atheists ?
Oh well…
Comment by: Laura M.
29 11/28/07 7:32 PM | Comment Link |Helen, you express yourself so well and you have such a talent for getting to the heart of an issue.
Comment by: Elaine
30 11/29/07 9:15 AM | Comment Link |What an interesting discussion.
Legislated moment of silence - that so goes against what I believe Jesus modeled as to be unChristian in my book.
Removing the onerous of “legislated silence” - What if we were all taught to pause before we begin the day, a project, a meeting, etc. and release whatever is keeping you from being fully present in this moment. (by the way, this practice was not something I learned from attending church)
A moment of silence has so many origins - Quaker, Buddist, and more…
I personally like to begin a gathering with a moment of silence. It helps me to be present (vs. thinking about the past or future), quiet my mind, be in the moment and more aware of those around me…and more. (in truth for me, all I have is this moment)
This practice changes me and how I am present for the gathering. This is not a time of prayer - it is a time for me to release whatever is keeping me from being fully present.
(The first time I experienced this “moment of silence” was at an M. Scott Peck - Foundation for Community Encouragement workshop. I found it so powerful, I try to incorporate the practice into my life on a regular basis..not there yet - but working on it)
My belief is that we are all spiritual beings - Christian, Jew, Atheist, Buddist, Muslim, Agnostics, and more…a moment of silence works and is not dependent on your “religious” beliefs.
I’m sad that someone thought they could legislate this. It would appear they do not understand the practice.
Comment by: Helen
31 11/29/07 10:26 AM | Comment Link |Thanks Laura :)
Elaine, I guess that’s how I feel too - it can’t be legislated in this way.
Benjamin very kindly sent me transcripts from the meetings where this bill was voted on each time.
After the governor vetoed it and it came up for vote again, someone said they were changing their vote from yes to no, having thought more about it, and there were more ‘nays’ than the first time. But of course most people still voted in favor of it.
There wasn’t a great deal of discussion about it. The comments in favor suggested that mandating a moment of silent reflection in schools would have the same benefit as the opening prayer in their sessions. One person said there was a need for consistency between schools, so this should be mandatory rather than only when the teacher decides to have one. (This was a revision of an act, changing ‘may’ to ’shall’)
I continue to think that while silent reflection may be very beneficial, this mandated moment of silent reflection will not be an effective way to avail most students of the benefits of it.
Comment by: Helen
32 11/29/07 10:46 AM | Comment Link |I just read that this legislation was backed by Concerned Christian Americans and the
Illinois Family Institute. Here are a couple of articles about the law on IFI’s site:
“Illinois ‘Moment of Silence’ — Putting Public School Prayer Back in Place”
Judge Puts a Stop to the Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act
Comment by: Eliza
33 12/1/07 3:42 PM | Comment Link |I peeked in on this discussion a few nights ago but didn’t have a chance to comment. Very interesting!
I like the idea that each of us, and all of us, could benefit from more moments of silence and reflection. However, a law stating that schoolchildren should have a specified period of silence on each weekday that school is in session doesn’t seem to be aimed at that universal goal, but instead intended to introduce a time for prayer in school. Can’t children pray, silently, almost any time they want during school (and outside school)?
The only other time this never-Christian has encountered group-moments-of-silence (or minutes-of-silence) is after someone has died. Examples: after the Challenger disaster, after 9-11, or after the death of someone prominent. Do Christians (& other theists) pray during these times? I know that I find those moments of silence touching, as a recognition of the loss of life or the momentous event which has occurred, but I don’t have any particular mantra I say/think at those times. I sort of think, “gosh, I hope that person, or those people, had a good life. It’s too bad he/she/they died.” (And, in moments of silence after 9-11 I added, “I hope more people don’t die because of this.”)
I’m not offended, I just think that introducing a moment of silence in school is actually an attempt by some Christians to introduce a time allotted for prayer, & we have a constitutional amendment which prohibits stuff like this.
Also, it seems pertinent to mention that I like soup. I think the only angry thought I’ve had about soup was when I forgot a pot on the stove once & ended up with vegetable crisp. (I was mad at myself then, not at the soup or God or whatever.)
Anyway, back to the moment of silence. If approached as a learning experience, it could indeed be appropriate in school. But shouldn’t be mandated, as most other specific topics taught & investigated in school are not mandated.
I think that if a school or a teacher wants to introduce the idea of a moment of silence, perhaps discussing in class some of the history of reflection & silence (meditation in Buddhism, mostly-silent meetings in Quaker congregations with people speaking as the spirit moves them, prayer in silence or at least in private as advised by Jesus, vows of silence taken by some monks & nuns, etc) and perhaps also reviewing whatever evidence there is of psychological & other benefits to focused time for silent reflection, in an age-appropriate manner, that would be fine. Then it would be natural for the teacher & kids to try out silence and reflection in class, perhaps focusing on different ways that different groups carry it out, & different experiences people have with it, & discuss these things.
Picture a school in a state which mandates a moment of silence, observing the law by having a Zen Buddhist teacher lead the children in non-religious meditation. How would that go over with conservative Christian parents who might otherwise favor a moment of silence for all kids in school?
Comment by: Benjamin ady
34 12/1/07 6:21 PM | Comment Link |eliza,
you nailed this better than I did. It’s mega clearly christian exercise, precisely *because* of cultural context. not that that is necesarily bad, but it’s pretty evil in my book to pretend that this is not the case.
Comment by: Laura M.
35 12/3/07 9:38 PM | Comment Link |Yes, which is why the law is far more beneficial to children who are not religious.
No one leads the children in anything during the moment of silence here in Texas. It’s their moment, not the adults’. I don’t see how this comment is pertinent in any way to the conversation, since it has no relation to how the moment of silence is carried out.
Sounds like the perfect way to corrupt a beautiful thing.
The law protects childrens’ right to some time to think their own thoughts. If they don’t even have that right, what rights do they have?
Laws that protect individual rights are a good thing, otherwise why have laws at all?
Comment by: Eliza
36 12/4/07 12:18 AM | Comment Link |Laura,
My take on it is: We’re talking about children in school. In that setting, I think it is crucial to ask: Is the activity in question being introduced as a learning experience (part of the educational curriculum), or is it an experience important in child development (like lunch, and physical activity)? Is there agreement among adults on this point? (I don’t see any need to introduce laws to protect the right of children to have their own thoughts during school; that already happens, but they learn over the years to censor what they say.)
I find the “tweak it a bit, change the people involved or the setting” approach a useful way to see the underlying assumptions that otherwise can go unnoticed. Hence the thought experiment about how having silent reflection “led” by a Zen Buddhist would go over among adults who favor the moment of silence in schools. It’s interesting to imagine who would be bothered by that substitution, and why. (Yes, I know I presented it in a manner that is not what happens under “moment of silence in school” laws. It was a thought experiment, to push & stretch the situation a little & see what popped out.)
I was intrigued by your comments in #6 above that more people, especially the non-religious, could benefit from silent reflection, but IMO this is not the way to do it. Christian children are taught how to pray, right? What have non-religious children been taught to do during moments of silence? (Look around & wonder why everyone’s quiet?) Those who are already inclined to internal dialogue reflecting on their day, life, etc, don’t need to be told they can have a minute to think and reflect. They do that already, in all sorts of settings. Who is going to ‘teach’ those not already inclined to reflection how to do it? Is having a few minutes a day of enforced silence, sitting in the classroom, between the pledge and Social Studies, going to magically make kids develop skills of reflection? I understand that you find the opportunity for a moment of daily silence in schools a beautiful thing, but it’s not clear to me that kids who aren’t already inclined to reflection gain as much from the opportunity as they might.
My suggestion that people might learn about reflection and the use of silence didn’t go over well, I see ;-) It was another example of “take this idea and run with it, see where it goes” - but I am serious in suggesting that having kids learn about the thing which is deemed so important by adults, and also learn some ways it can be and has been done, and learn why it could be a beneficial thing for them personally, are not unreasonable suggestions for an intervention being performed in schools and on a group including some non-religious people who do not already know why on earth one might have a moment of silence, & what to do with it.
Comment by: Doreen
37 12/4/07 3:24 PM | Comment Link |The entire issue of prayer in the schools makes me crazy. People in public schools can pray all day long every day if they want to. I just don’t want a mandatory period set aside to do so, or to sit and watch the grass grow in lieu of.
Comment by: Eliza
38 12/5/07 10:56 PM | Comment Link |Summarizing my too-long post #36:
If it’s important enough to mandate in schools, it’s important enough to teach to kids.
Examples:
Pledge of Allegiance mandated in many school districts. Related education: US government/civics is taught to kids (in US, of course).
Physical education is mandated in many school districts (though losing recognition over time, I hear) and more nutritious lunches/food is being mandated in many school districts. Related education: the importance of physical activity & good nutrition for health should be taught to kids.
Schools do background checks to prevent adults with histories of crimes against children, and people with certain prior criminal convictions aren’t allowed near schools (at least in some jurisdictions). Related education: we should be teaching our children to watch out for their own safety, & not to blindly trust all adults.
Comment by: Laura M.
39 12/6/07 3:50 AM | Comment Link |Totally disagree, Eliza, but I don’t really have time to post about it right now.
I’ll sum up my thoughts quickly for now by saying that I think kids can do a better job of teaching themselves than most adults (including teachers) do at teaching kids.
I don’t think it’s the job of adults to ‘teach’ kids by giving them knowledge, but rather by being available to kids when they have questions.
Think Montessori: adults aren’t teachers or directors in the classroom, they’re facilitators.
Think: Odyssey Of The Mind
These children are growing up in the age of the information age, the age of the internet. If they want to know something, they’re perfectly capable of looking it up for themselves. My kids were doing internet research/reports in first grade.
Also want to point out that the law doesn’t or shouldn’t ‘mandate’ that children pray, reflect or be silent. It mandates that adults provide the opportunity to children to do this. This is no small distinction, it is a HUGE distinction.
Again, I disagree. This has been the opposite of my experience as a mother of four children, and as someone who has experience and training in the field of education. I find that children are RARELY given the opportunity to think for themselves. How can they when nearly every minute of their day is planned with assignments and activities that others have decided they must do, and they must do NOW ?
That they have to spend so much time censoring what they say shows that they are learning that their own thoughts aren’t acceptable or good enough. They have to express themselves in terms of others thoughts, rather than their own.
Comment by: Helen
40 12/6/07 4:02 AM | Comment Link |Laura, I like your ideas about what teaching should be. I wonder if part of my objection to the moment of silent reflection is that, because teaching is NOT the way you describe except for those few specific exceptions, children will regard the moment of silent reflection as one more teacher imposed obligation. Because that’s what teachers do - make them do stuff rather than be available as resources to help them learn.
If the learning environment was more like you want, then a moment of silent reflection might seem more like a moment of freedom. But my guess is, in the world where kids are told to do things all day long, this comes across as one more thing they are told to do. And it sounds like they are being told to do it because they aren’t told - “Think whatever you like!” but rather “reflect on the upcoming activities of your day” - because that’s what the moment is supposedly for.
I think I would be more in favor of the moment of silent reflection if it was part of a learning environment in which kids would interpret it as further encouragement to think for themselves rather than one more activity imposed on them by adult authority figures.
Comment by: Laura M.
41 12/6/07 5:11 AM | Comment Link |I know I said I don’t have time to post right now, but I wanted to give an example of what I’m talking about.
I’ve been busier than usual lately because I’ve been ‘coaching’ my son’s 6th grade soccer team. I didn’t want to coach the team, but so many guys signed up this season they had to split the team in half, and there was no one available to coach the extra team.
To make it easier on me (I really know nothing about soccer) they kept most of the guys who had played previous seasons on ‘my’ team. These boys had lost almost every game they’d played before I began ‘coaching’ them.
All I did was show up to practices with the equipment. At every practice I asked the guys what did they want to do, what did they think they needed to work on most, what positions did they want to play and practice?
I let them make almost all the decisions for themselves. If they wanted to play a postion they would be allowed to practice it during scrimmages and play it during real games. As many or as few positions as they wanted. If they didn’t want to play a position, they wouldn’t have to.
They could come to practices or not, stay as late as they wanted (we had some practices that didn’t end until nearly 6pm, when there were kids who wanted to keep playing) or leave early. The choices were theirs to make, and they all knew they could voice their opinions or ideas about anything or everything, or nothing.
When they had specific questions about rules or technique my first response was to ask all the other guys if they knew anything about what was being asked and we all listened to each others ideas/suggestions. One thing we all started to get a good sense of was who were those who knew what they were talking about, and who were the ones just sort of guessing or making it up as they went along.
I also finished up those discussions by pointing out to them that they could always ask someone they thought would be a good source of info about soccer and reminded them that the internet was a good source, full of abundant info on any topic.
Before I knew it these kids were teaching each other stuff they had researched and directing each other to websites/Youtube videos on soccer etc.
When they were doing well at something I would say ‘Kewl!!’, and if not
‘Ouch, looks like that needs work’.
When I was really impressed I’d say ‘Wow, I’m impressed!’
After the first game I had a ‘formal’ talk with them about what I thought their individual strengths were, and was specific about the things I’d noticed them each doing well. Then I talked with them about the responsibilities of the Team Captain and Co-Captain. I asked them each to name someone who they thought would be up to the job and why. **(This is the only ‘formal’ talk I remember having with them all season)
I felt that we were all interested in each other’s opinions and impressed with the judgements and reasonings that we heard. We were able to settle on a consensus as to which guys we would be the most comfortable with leading our team. We ended up with a Team Captain who turned out to be a fifth grader (only 10 years old at the time!) who had never formally played on a team before.
And I have to say I’ve never been more impressed by an individual’s leadership skills than I have been by this kid’s. He never missed a single game or practice, even coming to an extra one when the entire rest of the team (6th graders) was out of town for the week at Camp Grady Spruce. We’re still having practices even though the season is over ’cause this guy never stops.
After Team Captain was chosen, the guys had to impress him and each other so they could negotiate with him to get the position rotations that they wanted. They did very well for themselves and finished the season with 5 wins, 1 tie, 2 losses.
The main thing I learned was that teaching themselves to play soccer helped them develop initiative, confidence, communication and teamwork.
The funniest thing was how much practice time they chose to spend:
playing football
wrestling
tag
keep-away (monkey in the middle)
flirtng with the girls team across the field
gossiping (so NOT kidding)
The most touching thing was how quickly they rushed to help each other when someone got hurt, and to apologize if they felt themself to be at fault somehow.
Comment by: Laura M.
42 12/6/07 5:20 AM | Comment Link |Hey Helen, I get what you’re saying I really do.
But to me, if school were really like what I think it should be like, the kids wouldn’t need a formal ‘moment of silence’ at all. It is precisely because school still is trapped in the traditional education mode, because it is still the way it is today, that I think kids need ‘a moment of silence’ laws.
Comment by: Helen
43 12/6/07 5:27 AM | Comment Link |Laura, if only more teachers taught like you’re coaching the soccer team…that’s awesome. Who knows if anyone else is being this affirming in the lives of those kids - it could make a huge difference to them now and in the future that you have let them lead and use their strengths/gifts.
I want to repost your comment as its own topic - but not ‘on top’ of Eliza’s post which just went up - I’ll do it soon at an ‘opportune time’.
Comment by: Laura M.
44 12/6/07 5:37 AM | Comment Link |I find this to be a striking underestimation of children. There’s no magic involved. Children learn by doing.
Over time
(do the math, a few minutes a day times 180 school days, times 13 or 14 years of school before college)
they’re bound to form coherent thoughts.
If the thoughts are coherent, and they’re the child’s, then they have value. I don’t feel as if kids’ thoughts only have value so long as they’re ‘reflecting’ properly.
Comment by: Helen
45 12/6/07 5:41 AM | Comment Link |Laura M wrote:
I agree - my concern is that the school will imply there IS a way to ‘reflect properly’. Btw the moment of silent reflection has tended to be 15 to 30 seconds long depending on the school. It’s seconds rather than minutes.
Comment by: Laura M.
46 12/6/07 5:43 AM | Comment Link |WOW, geesh, thanks Helen !
Comment by: Laura M.
47 12/6/07 5:55 AM | Comment Link |Helen, I don’t think the kids are getting that here, for the most part. That’s not what I’m hearing from my kids and that wasn’t my experience in school.
That is the way I read Eliza’s comments though, that there’s a way to do it ‘properly’ which children need to be taught.
In Texas they get a full minute, but I was referring to what they should be getting, imo, which is more along the lines of fifteen minutes rather than seconds. But how will they ever get fifteen minutes a day to think for themselves when folks object so strenuously to fifteen seconds?
There’s a lot more I’d like to say on this subject, so I’m definitley going to respond to Eliza’s post (when I have time) which asks some terrific questions.
Comment by: Eliza
48 12/6/07 3:40 PM | Comment Link |Laura M, what you’re doing guiding the boys soccer team sounds marvelous! It sounds like the ideal of teaching, to facilitate the kids figuring out what they need to know, how they figure that out, and how to find useful resources of all kinds. It also sounds like a kind of guidance/teaching which is very hard for many adults to do, since it involves letting go of an adult agenda, letting go of ower, sorry one of my keys is broken lmno qrs.
I sus ect, imagine the missing letter in the middle of that word, that our ex eriences of education have been quite different. I too would shudder to think of kids being told “how to” reflect silently; there is no “right” way. But to have some discussion about what it can be like, what others’ ex eriences of it is like, & why on earth it might be im ortant, es ecially if that learning is guided ex loration, guided ex eriental learning (as most teaching should be!, that sounds like a positive (oooh, the “p” key worked!) to me.
I had the very positive experience of going to schools which encouraged this type of learning, from elementary school through college and medical school. Small groups, students working to figure out what they needed to know to approach a problem, how to find that information, how to apply it. My son’s school also encourages exploration & discovery, which is great for him/us, but unfortunately doesn’t seem to be the case in many schools.
I picture the kids in my son’s class being told to observe 30 seconds of silence after the pledge (which they don’t say, so both would be new to them). I picture the girls dutifully closing their eyes or looking down, looking thoughtful and reflective. I picture the boys elbowing each other, catching each other’s eye, making faces, giggling. I’m making generalizations, of course, but also thinking that there could well be kids - like me, at that age as well as now - who don’t have a clue what they’re “supposed” to be doing while being purposefully silent in a group setting, who wouldn’t experience a positive benefit from silence because they don’t automatically go into “reflective” mode, or any mode other than “being silent because I’m supposed to”.
Comment by: Helen
49 12/11/07 5:00 AM | Comment Link |I reposted Laura’s comment about coaching here:
Letting children lead