Monday, March 24, 2014

Building the character of the child.

For anyone reading this blog, I am going to make an analogy here that some might react to, but it is one that elicits reactions in pretty much all of us, which is why I am going to use it.

We understand that children have a natural learning ability, a divergent thinking ability that is weakened by the third grade. And we know that children with a large vocabulary tend to be able to process knowledge and information to a greater degree in comparison to others. Thus we know that vocabulary is the tool.

We also know that children that lack vocabulary, have a harder time, naturally, processing information, and that very often this is synonymous with economic means. Of course, there are exceptions. One exception has been openly stated in a Common Core paper sent to me by my local school district. This exception is delineated through a value judgement. When a child enjoys a subject, they can read beyond their measured reading ability. This has me asking a question. Does the child have the interest because a back ground of understanding and the words of measure needed to enjoy the subject exists? This being a developed ability to process the information in a conceptual way already built? Which means that having a structure as the words and the exposure being enough to give the child a divergent skill and that it is this that enables the child? Would the child enjoy other subjects if the understanding and structure were of equal measure as that “ favorite” subject?

Having said this, there is also a tendency for each to naturally gravitate towards some subjects more than others. But, how can one really know if a basic understanding of each is not built to allow an informed decision? So, can it be judged as something the child prefers, or something the child enjoys simply because they understand enough to actively process and participate, which is in itself enjoyable and as such elicits ease in the child?

Within this, we can understand that attitudes can be built about something that are not based on ability, but on a judgement about capacity before any background building is strong enough to even understand whether a subject is to one’s liking or not.  This is an idea by default, and not one made in awareness. And such a judgement can remain, without resolution, unless by chance, someone takes the time to clear this up. And such, can be costly because it takes quality time over a period of time, and in our present system, time is money.

To understand how we begin to impulse values more than give detail, and as such structure, let us look at the beginning of a child’s life.

You, a parent are changing your child’s diaper. You make a face, you scrunch your nose, and pull back. The child takes in this measure, their whole body imitating your movement, as your reaction, that is a value judgement, towards the changing of the diaper. The child learns a value, an emotional value.

Now, imagine if the feces in the diaper were looked at in common sense. It is composed of, more than likely, the waste from breast milk, which means it is dead red blood cells etc. etc. If your reaction were an explanation of this - and even here, an understanding of what the “ proper/healthy waste of a child would be to measure the physical processing of the child’s body” -  verbally, using a variety of words of description of reality, then the child would not learn the value judgement measure - the emotion as reaction - of this excretory process, but the words of this process and the awareness in practicality of this process and build an understanding of the measure of the world, thus producing a child that not only had a larger vocabulary, but also an awareness that is not moved by value judgements and as the words learned an inner structure to speak about this and once able to read the words as the symbols that represent the sounds, would be able to read up on this subject.

Now, that natural learning ability of the child, in the emotionally reactive response in this situation above, learns a value judgement that in no way builds a description of reality or an ability to use words, or have exposure to words as a common sense measure of here, and yet, this natural learning ability can learn over time what is presented to it, and if what is presented is not a value judgement, and instead a unconditional measure of reality, then that child learns to stand equal to the measure of reality. I mean, children that do well in school, simply have had more exposure to an equal and practical measure of reality, evident in the words that they know. All of this begs the question as to how much are we emotionally moving and how much are we moving in common sense. Thus, does an accumulated impulse of  value judgements, as emotions, determine the effective use of the natural learning ability by the third grade? Obviously, one impedes and the other expands.

And, obviously, from the day a child enters the world, even within the smallest of exposure of normal every day events,  either emotional value judgements are built as the measure of here, or practical awareness in detail as the words used to convey that detail. Because the expressive nature of the body in imitating the adults, every single value judgement is visible in the very muscular movement of every human being, of which we call character. Thus, the very character of the child, reveals the amount of value judgements learned and the amount of direct seeing in common sense resplendent in the very words the child uses to explain and balance themselves an as such, to direct themselves with confidence in this world. So, we can see, that even with children that have a broader vocabulary, many value judgements exist within each of us, and these value judgements are often not an equal measure of reality. Were they, then the world would not be in the state that it is at present. 

Adults, every one, are really responsible for what is the building of the child’s character, as the children reflect in great detail, what is the world around them. And since this has not been understood in detail, as the natural learning ability is not understood, and “ value judgements are deemed “ real,”” and this has been going on for generations, there is no one person to blame, thus, the only choice is to clean all of this up and direct the natural learning ability of the child into having the building blocks that are an equal measure of practical reality.

Do you have the ability to stand outside of a value judgement? And how many are automated that you have not even realized and corrected? How many children are judged and labeled through value judgements and left there, where no time is taken to clear these measures up?

No comments :

Post a Comment