| ▲ | PeterWhittaker a day ago |
| If lifestyles support it, and parents are so inclined, I'd worry less about teaching the first few years and more about reading to them and with them, esp. with some silliness and improvisation, hiking, camping, and shopping as a family, especially at local markets. Spend meaningful, loving time together, and out in the world, as much of the small scale natural world as you can. Listen to their questions, answer when you can, learn the answers together when you can't. If they are accustomed to hiking and camping, especially wild camping, they will learn much from you and will ask for more. If you shop together at markets, they will start to develop a more complete relationship with their food supply and with the people working it. Empathy and kindness and resilience will develop in those experiences. Later, when they are closer to school age, be as honest with them as you can about the different personalities they will encounter, the conformist teachers and students, the rebels, the do gooders, the no goods, etc., and comfort them that their people may be there right away or may not be there for decades. |
|
| ▲ | sivanmz a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| Some kids love learning at an early age. If not, it’s easy to find out. Don’t worry about teaching too soon. |
| |
| ▲ | jrumbut a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Something I have learned as a new parent is your ability to force much of anything is kinda limited. You can steer within their inclinations, but at some point kids are who they are. | | |
| ▲ | paufernandez 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | I see it like growing a plant. You can prune here and there, change the soil, but the plant does what it wants. |
| |
| ▲ | adamhartenz a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Play is learning. Very important learning. Adults forget that. Not playing is a great way to become a boring adult |
|
|
| ▲ | geoffreyiy1 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Thank you for sharing this, reading it was very inspirational for me, as a young guy whose looking forward to starting a family in the near future. Cheers! |
|
| ▲ | awesome_dude a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Spend meaningful, loving time together, and out in the world, as much of the small scale natural world as you can. Listen to their questions, answer when you can, learn the answers together when you can't. Learn to tell them that you don't have all the answers, and there's a chance that the pair of you can work together to find it out, but there will always be some things that nobody knows yet. But, most of all, I cam here to say - the foundation you're suggesting building is the strongest one we know of - safety in their emotions, having someone they can talk to, share their feelings with without ridicule or fear. Start there and children always have someone they can talk to |
| |
| ▲ | werrett a day ago | parent [-] | | I agree with sentiment but have you had small children? The main problem with having a 5yo is more generally sanding down their ego. “no bud you can’t swim. not well. yet” and “I think you probably have some more to learn about chess. no I don’t think you can beat me.” | | |
| ▲ | ozim a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Funny how 5yo needs sanding down, 15yo you need power tools like grinder, 30yo needs explosives to take ego down like major life event, death of close one or their own close call. | |
| ▲ | Aeolun a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I feel like the solution here is to say 'Try'? | |
| ▲ | awesome_dude a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | > but have you had small children? I have indeed. > The main problem with having a 5yo is more generally sanding down their ego. “no bud you can’t swim. not well. yet” and “I think you probably have some more to learn about chess. no I don’t think you can beat me.” I don't think you've understood my post at all. If, as you say, you have to spend that amount of time adjusting expectations, which I too have had to do with children, adults, and managers alike, then, if you understand my post, you would do that in a way that teaches them that adjustments don't have to come with ridicule, or cause for fear. The suggestion that you don't steer the children toward understanding that there are limitations to the world (including their own abilities) is the complete reverse of my post - the opposite is what I am saying, I even explicitly mention telling your child that "there will always be some things that nobody knows yet" In fact, I would go further, teaching your child that there will be times that they fail, but can come to you with their head held high because they learnt from that experience, is what safety is all about. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | 11101010010001 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| yes, there are personalities, but, please do not teach them to stereotype. |
| |
| ▲ | emmelaich a day ago | parent | next [-] | | You're reading too much into this, I think. Bad kids do exist. Be compassionate, but do not encourage involvement with them. I have really really profound regrets about not doing this myself, with my kids. | | |
| ▲ | gobeavs a day ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm curious to hear more if you're willing to share. I have two young kids and think about how to approach the tension between open to everyone, not seeing people as "bad" or enemies, versus the reality that some people can be mean, heartless, etc., and it's ok to avoid them. | | |
| ▲ | tasuki 18 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > the tension between open to everyone, not seeing people as "bad" or enemies, versus the reality that some people can be mean, heartless, etc., and it's ok to avoid them. I don't think there's tension in what you're saying: Yes it's very much ok to avoid people when they're being mean, heartless, etc. At the same time that doesn't mean they're "bad" or enemies. | |
| ▲ | emmelaich 19 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | check my profile for proton mail address. |
| |
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | 11101010010001 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | For philosophical consistency, one should therefore not hang out with your own child if they are bad. |
| |
| ▲ | luqtas a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | exactly. unconscious bias is an observed psychologic phenomena and i have my doubts if an adult can opinate agnostically about all of them. sure you don't want your kids getting together with bullies but that's basic compassion. let them tie/explore with people freely |
|
|
| ▲ | copperx a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Shopping as a family activity? That sounds very odd. |
| |
| ▲ | Steltek a day ago | parent [-] | | Not really. I took both kids shopping with me. One preschool age, one first grade. They got little quests to find things through the store. Sadly COVID kinda of ended the tradition. | | |
| ▲ | MisterMower a day ago | parent [-] | | COVID ended a lot of good things. | | |
| ▲ | Steltek 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | Activities and homework would have ended it in a couple of years anyway and that's really why it hasn't come back - lack of time. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| All well and good until they’re 5 or 6 and you find out all school admissions are gated by tests and performance. Oh unless you’re old money. Then your kids get in. |
| |
| ▲ | mi_lk a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Not me teaching my kids this loser mentality that you’ll win/lose in life if you get/don’t get into certain private schools at the age fking five | | |
| ▲ | kakacik 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | Broken people being pushed like that in childhood often never know better and feel this shitty approach is normalized path for some better life, which it is on paper/instagram feed, not so much in real life |
| |
| ▲ | Retric a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Elite early education minimal little long term benefit, people tend to revert to the mean over time. The education system has plenty of slack for intelligent individuals to excel, so play the long game. Health and wellbeing pay the best dividends as you can maximize the nurture aspect of intelligence early and build resilience against unexpected hardships. | | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent [-] | | False. It massively increases access to good teachers and ultimately university. Of course you can always go to a no name CSU. I’ve been on both sides of the divide. The education at a cal state is like elite high school or lower. | | |
| ▲ | Retric a day ago | parent [-] | | > massively increases The data doesn’t support that assertion. Elite collages do favor elite high schools, and elite high schools do favor elite middle schools etc but each link in the chain dilutes the impact of the steps further up the chain. Kids have many opportunities to jump up the chain before college and many to fail to keep up with the elite track. Which is why statistically elite preschools have such a minimal impact. Of course that’s adjusting for the role of the parents which impacts attendance at elite schools but is obviously not impacted by their kids attendance. | | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent [-] | | I don’t know why humans even bother talking to each other anymore. Go ask AI why your argument is wrong. I already did it for you: the numbers I gave you are already conditioned on all that. You’re making the false assumption that moving from each tier is a low probability event. It is not. The retention from elite elementary to elite high school is very high. It’s not some hyper improbable funnel. | | |
| ▲ | Retric 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | > the numbers I gave you You didn’t give any numbers, just stated things very confidently without actually reviewing any of the relevant literature. > the false assumption that moving from each tier is a low probability event Doesn’t need to be a low probability events, multiply probabilities and the result becomes less likely every single time. And that’s of course ignoring the underlying reasons why the probability at each stage isn’t low in the first place. A smart kid at 6 is unlikely to turn into a dumb kid at 16 etc. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Avicebron a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > All well and good until they’re 5 or 6 and you find out all school admissions are gated by tests and performance. Do you mean all private schools? I'm not sure public schools have admissions tests when they are 5 or 6, except maybe tests on what is being taught in school. University is a different story obviously.. | | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent | next [-] | | You can ask AI. Access to elite colleges is super conditioned on going to private elementary schools. North of 2x. To simplify:
C = elite colleges P(C| private high school) = 2 P(C| affluent public high school) P(C | private elementary) = 5P(C | affluent public schools) = 35 P(C) | | |
| ▲ | Avicebron a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Sure, but Chetty et al were measuring based on the top-1% of income, the private elementary schools are acting like filters based on income. Yes, they can buy more access to things that will weigh heavily on an admissions acceptance, but that's a filter by parental income which is well known... I suppose the argument is that a hard working kid from a lower income family can test into a private elementary school on a scholarship? | | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent [-] | | No. Spar this with AI. The 2X multiplier is AFTER controlling income. What you’re saying is just a comfortable lie to make people feel better about public schooling. | | |
| ▲ | sarchertech a day ago | parent | next [-] | | It didn’t control for wealth though just income. It also didn’t control for parental education or familiarity with elite colleges. It didn’t control for parental expectations (seems likely that a parent who spends money on private school will be more likely to expect their child to attend an elite college). It didn’t control for the value parents put on education in general. It didn’t control for children’s expectations (seems likely that a high school student who wants to attend an elite college will be more likely to push to attend private school). It didn’t control for extracurricular activities (it seems likely that private school parents will be more likely to encourage their kids to participate in extracurriculars that look good on an elite college application). It did control for SAT scores through, so the one thing this study is definitely not doing is examining the effectiveness of public vs private schools at effectively educating children. | | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent [-] | | Look, I’m not going to rebut each of your points one by one. Ask AI to steelman both sides and learn the facts for yourself. Then you can decide. But that last point about SAT is just too much for me. Just because the study controlled for SAT score doesn’t mean private education does not impact SAT score. In fact there is a correlation. And even causation. You can dig into the data yourself. | | |
| ▲ | clove 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Behold the new "Google it." | |
| ▲ | sarchertech 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > It did control for SAT scores through, so the one thing this study is definitely not doing is examining the effectiveness of public vs private schools at effectively educating children Run that statement through AI and ask it if it says that private education can’t impact SAT score. > Look, I’m not going to rebut each of your points one by one. Ask AI Why are you even here? I think you’d be happier just going back and forth with AI all day. | |
| ▲ | kakacik 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Man, you just keep repeating about AI, do you actually have your own opinions? I have more fruitful conversations with angry teenagers than this empty broken record track |
|
| |
| ▲ | what a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | >spar this with AI Lmfao. Okay, buddy. |
|
| |
| ▲ | sarchertech a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | >P(C | private elementary) = 5P(C | affluent public schools) = 35 P(C) That can’t be true. A group’s probability cannot exceed the overall probability by more than the reciprocal of its population share. A 35× ratio therefore requires the group to represent at most 2.86% of the relevant population. For comparison, NCES reported that 9.3% of students in grades 1–5 attended private schools in 2016. | | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent [-] | | For sake of conciseness I didn’t explicitly say elite non-religious private school. Please check your rebuttals against AI before you post it. | | |
| ▲ | sarchertech a day ago | parent [-] | | The study you’re referencing didn’t examine elite schools just non-religious. And if you’re only counting elite schools there are so many uncontrolled confounders that this is a patently stupid argument. Elite schools are selective, a large part of what they are selecting for is kids who are likely to get into elite colleges to keep their success rates up. Of course kids who are screened for being likely to get into an elite college are more likely to get into an elite college. The only realistic way to control for this is to look at kids who got into elite schools but decided not to go. >check with AI Kick rocks. I’m not normalizing this shit. Why didn’t you check with AI. It would have told you that omitting key information to save a few keystrokes was a bad move. | | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent [-] | | You’re just saying that because you think you’re clever, making your little mathematical quip rather than looking into the actual data and argument. People clearly have preconceived conclusions and they don’t have an interest in learning any facts. | | |
| ▲ | sarchertech 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | Look at this guy over here with his math and his statistical literacy you guys. He doesn’t even spend all day talking to AI. |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
| |
| ▲ | dennis_jeeves2 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Good point. Money helps. It beats being a loser in the corporate world. | |
| ▲ | lrvick a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I do not know what country you are in, but in the US school is free until college. | | |
| ▲ | drivebyhooting a day ago | parent [-] | | Yeah the public school that serves reheated fast food and bowls of cereal for lunch. I’m not making it up. That is the district wide menu. | | |
| ▲ | lrvick 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | IMO it is best to keep kids as far away from entitled rich kids as possible which probably means keeping them away from private schools. If that means packing lunches, so be it. The education in both public and private schools is so garbage, I would also rather kids be in public school since it will be way easier to get good grades and take up less of their time, as the purpose is mostly just social. Any real education will happen at home for kids with STEM employed parents. |
|
|
|
