Whatever happened to "tug of war"? Oh no, no. We can't play that, because "war" is too stressful for kids. We now must play "tug of peace", apparently. God forbid that children should be put in a competitive atmosphere, God forbid that they actually would LOVE to compete. No no no. Competition is bad. Cooperation is good. Therefore: Tug of Peace.
Lunacy. I have no desire to play Tug of Peace, thank you very much. But I loves me some Tug of War. Bring it on!!
My daily book excerpt today is from In Defense of Elitism.
And just now I came across this great Op-Ed column called Enough already with kid gloves, which proves William Henry's point five thousand fold.
One excerpt to whet your whistle:
In May 2002, for example, the principal of Franklin Elementary School in Santa Monica, Calif., sent a newsletter to parents informing them that children could no longer play tag during the lunch recess. As she explained, "In this game, there is a 'victim' or 'It,' which creates a self-esteem issue."Is anything OK?
Which games are deemed safe and self-affirming? The National PTA recommends a cooperative alternative to the fiercely competitive "tug of war" called "tug of peace." Some professionals in physical education advocate activities in which children compete only with themselves, such as juggling, unicycling, pogo sticking, and even "learning to ... manipulate wheelchairs with ease."
But juggling, too, poses risks.
A former member of The President's Council on Physical Fitness and Sports suggests using silken scarves rather than, say, uncooperative tennis balls that lead to frustration and anxiety. "Scarves," he points out, "are soft, non-threatening, and float down slowly."
"Scarves are soft, non-threatening ..."
WHAT? This is INSANE. If a kid is so fragile that his entire ego and self-esteem shatters because he drops a couple of tennis balls when juggling - then I suggest that there are deeper issues at work and maybe the little bugger needs some counseling.
I remember playing dodge-ball, and as far as I know I came out of the experience unscathed. I remember being "It" when we played tag. Did that make me feel anxious? Uhm ... sure it did. Being "It" is a big responsibility, and the whole point of being "It" is to WIN as soon as possible, so that you can stop being "It". Was I victimized by that experience without knowing it? Am I deeply scarred? Uhm. Let me think about that ... hmmm .... Short answer: No.
I took a juggling class in college. (You know. The ridiculous requirements one has to go through to get an Acting degree.) I dropped many tennis balls. Of course. You don't become a good juggler in one try. You have to ... uhm ... FAIL a bunch of times, so that you can LEARN, and then GET BETTER. But oh, boy, when I saw those tennis balls drop, when I fumbled them, when I lost track of them, when I lost control ... I thought I would have a nervous breakdown because of the stress. I felt so helpless and threatened, and I wished I had scarves to juggle instead so that I wouldn't have such a self-esteem-shattering experience. What??? Gimme a break. This is LUNACY.
Children are not delicate little flowers. They can handle being "It", they can handle losing at kickball, they can handle failing ... so that they can then become BETTER at whatever it is they are trying to achieve.
I was horrible at double-dutch jump rope. It terrified me. I never could tell when was the right time to just leap in, and I was so amazed at the girls on the playground who were really good at it. I would stand on the sidelines and watch them, leaping around, jumping out, jumping back in ... never tripping up ... and I thought: Man. I cannot do that. The second I jump in, my legs get tangled up in the ropes ...
Uhm, was my "self-esteem" destroyed by this? Short answer again: NO. You know why? Because I was really good at other things, I was "the best" at other things that other kids couldn't do. And so it evened out. I didn't need to be told I was the best at EVERYTHING, because it was obvious to me that I wasn't. But give me a creative writing essay? I was always one of the best in the class. Everyone knew it. Andrew knew it. You put me on a stage, and give me a role, and give me songs to sing and lines to say? I SHONE. I was one of the best. I always had the lead, I always was involved, and other kids couldn't do what I did. The double-dutch jump-rope champs couldn't do what I did up on stage. I watched double-jump-rope girls and wished I could do it. And I'm not saying I consciously stood there, thinking: "Okay, I really have to practice at jump rope to get that good" ... but I knew that that was the case. It is common sense. We are not all created equal. We all should have equal RIGHTS, and we all have dignity and beauty as members of the human race ... but that's a different issue. Not everybody is created with the same agility, flexibility, hand-eye coordination, singing voice, writing ability ... You know those kids in grade school who are just natural born athletes? Or, even earlier than that: the kids who, even when they are very little, just know how to throw the ball, they can run really fast ... Not everybody is born with exactly the same stuff to work with.
Kids know this instinctively. And for the most part, they are unbothered by it.
Why protect them from the savagery of dodge ball? What? That's insanity. Judging from that article, playground games are now geared to what you can do BY YOURSELF, because then you are spared the HORRORS of competition.
Huh? Kids LOVE to compete. Or ... not all kids love it ... but many kids do. I LOVED kickball. I loved trying my best. I loved to climb trees, I loved to try to go higher and higher. I loved baseball. I knew I wasn't the best in the outfield (right, Dad?) but I was a BADASS when it came to being at bat. I have great hand-eye coordination, or something. I ALWAYS got a hit when I was up there. But I wasn't the best at throwing. I couldn't throw very far. Now ... I didn't need to be shielded from that knowledge. Because ... I KNEW IT ALREADY. You look around a Little League baseball field, and you're 10 years old, and you know who can throw, who can run fast, who can hit it out of the park. It's obvious. It's right in front of you. Oh, and by the way - I was in Little League before they even had a girl's league. Which amazes me, in retrospect. I loved baseball and there was no Girls League. grrrr. Glad THAT nonsense has changed. But because there was nowhere for me to go (gender-wise) to play a sport that I absolutely loved - I joined the boys Little League. I was the only girl on my team. Even now, I look back on that, and think: GO SHEILA. Good for you!! No discrimination or exclusionary rules could stand in between baseball and me. No girls? Who the hell says so? I'm playin'!! And I was good, too. Except for that whole throwing thing. I always threw the ball to 2nd base. Always. Because ... not sure why. Maybe that was where I could most easily reach, with my weak throw? I think, too, my dad had said, "When in doubt ... throw to second base." I somehow interpreted that to mean: 'ALWAYS throw to second base." Basically, as a center fielder? I sucked.
I couldn't throw. So what then happened? My dad and I would play catch in the backyard before dinner. (Yes. I had that Field of Dreams thing going on with my father.) And I would practice throwing farther. My dad would back up. And I would try to make the ball reach him.
And so ... duh ... I got better. I didn't become "the best". No. But my throwing ability improved.
Kids are not delicate. Kids do not need to be protected from disappointment. This only creates fragile cranky little kids who then, years later in college, FREAK OUT on their professor when they get a well-deserved C. This coddling serves no one.
I remember the Lord-of-the-Flies nature of the playground, of recess. Sometimes recess could be really stressful. Dodge ball stressed me out. But ... I enjoyed the stress. Recess was fierce, fun, and competitive. It helped prepare me for other things in life. Not only that - but it was RELAXING. I got to let off steam. I wasn't protected from competition. I wasn't forced to juggle COLORED SCARVES, for God's sake, because tennis balls bouncing away from me would be just TOO UPSETTING.
I wasn't treated like a fragile easily-crushed person, who needed, above all else, to have her self-esteem raised at every conceivable moment. There's such ANXIETY in all of this. Let kids be kids, please. They'll be fine. They're stronger and more resilient than you think.
Posted by sheilaIsn't there something charming about people who think that children need to be protected from all sorts of slights to their self-esteem? It reminds me of Peter Quince's acting troupe rewriting "Pyramus and Thisbe" to remove all the elements that the "ladies cannot abide."
Posted by: Bryan at June 2, 2005 9:03 AMAlso, let us not forget: a lot of complete ASSHOLES have high self-esteem.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 9:17 AMWhy is the first thing that pops into my mind when hearing the term "Tug-o-Peace" is "Pushing a Rope"?
Posted by: JFH at June 2, 2005 9:24 AMJust remember: if you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball. ;-)
Posted by: Dave J at June 2, 2005 9:53 AMWhen Alex played "instructional league" baseball (formerly known as Tee Ball), the rules were that there was no score kept. Each team batted their full side each inning, and each child got six pitches to hit the ball.
The VERY FIRST game, as we were leaving, Alex asked, "Did we win?" I said, in my best 21st Century Parent Voice, "Oh, sweetie, you're just here to learn how to play baseball. They don't keep score, so no one 'won'." Then he said, "Then why are we playing?"
He was FIVE, and he already had it figured out.
Posted by: Lisa at June 2, 2005 9:54 AMNice to see we're raising a generation of wimps.
'Cept 'wimps' wasn't the first word that came to mind.
Posted by: Dan at June 2, 2005 10:34 AMLisa - hahaha! Exactly!!
"Scarves," he points out, "are soft, non-threatening, and float down slowly."Is anyone else reminded of the starship in Hitchhikers filled with telephone sanitizers and the like? Is it even possible to juggle scarves? You can't throw them very high.
When I was a wee lad we played a rougher version of tag called Smear the Queer. (We were too young to understand the connotations of the name). Instead of "it" being the pursuer he was the quarry. "It" stopped being "it" once he was tackled and all the guys piled on him. Then the old "it" would choose a new "it". For some reason that I can't seem to fathom now, being "it" was a very prestigious and desirable thing.
Posted by: Scott Janssens at June 2, 2005 10:54 AMWhen I was a wee lad if someone had said "Let's play tug of peace," the response would have been "Let's not and say we did."
Posted by: Scott Janssens at June 2, 2005 11:00 AMI remember that game Scott. We referred to it as "Kill-the-Man-with-the-Ball" or just "Kill-the-Man."
But that was when little boys were allowed to be little boys (i.e. agressive little hooligans) and dope up instead.
Posted by: Dan at June 2, 2005 11:03 AMYes, Dan. Our version was "Kill the Man" as well, and it was fun. Not half as fun as "Who's Got the Toad?" though.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 11:04 AMWhen did self-esteem start being something that everyone automatically deserved and not a worth that was hard earned?
Posted by: Emily at June 2, 2005 11:09 AMThere's hope though, people. I coach a youth lacrosse team in Maryland for 11-12 year olds, and there's no doubt that THEY are competitive, that THEY know who the best players are, and most importantly, that they want to win...
Posted by: timmac at June 2, 2005 11:17 AM"Kill the Man" must be the New England desgination. There is probably some sort of disertation lurking there, on the anthropology of playground games by region and time period. Or something like that.
"Who's got the Toad" was my own proud invention, along with other classics such as "there may or may not be a S in youe bed."
Yup, little hooligans...
Posted by: Dan at June 2, 2005 11:28 AMWe too played Smear the Queer. A Southern anomaly per chance?
Having been a pretty good athlete growing up, I was always proud of my ribbons and trophies - I EARNED them. I hate that kids are being denied that chance nowdays.
Posted by: syd at June 2, 2005 11:40 AMI work with kids every day. The stage of development between 6-13 is all about peer interactions. Kids love, and need, to compete. Kids need to play with one another to figure themselves out. Just as you, Sheila, knew you couldnt throw, but you could bat. Playing is kids jobs...they need to do it with others to figure out what they are good at and what they aren't so good at. If you just force everyone to sit around juggle scarves, who's gonna figure out that they are the most agile or quickest when it comes to tag? Its just silly. Its parents' (and teachers') job to provide the reassurance to kids when they figure out they dont as well at a certain thing. Like you said, everyone has unique abilities. Not everyone is going to be athletic, but some are. And those who arent, will find something else to do and be just fine.
Posted by: LB at June 2, 2005 11:43 AMWe played "Smear the Queer" in Illinois. Or, as the only girl on my street, "Smear Lisa".
Posted by: Lisa at June 2, 2005 11:50 AMJesus Christ. Paging Diana Moon Gompers.
And people wonder why I want to cede from the human race.
Posted by: Mark at June 2, 2005 11:54 AMhahaha
I think we should ban "Red Rover", too ... because it obviously demonizes the one who is chosen.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 12:02 PMLB ... I suddenly have this image of a present-day playground as opposed to my old playground.
On my old playground: Kids run around with dirt on their knees. Some kids play dodge ball and scream like lunatics. Some kids swing perilously high on the swings. Some kids sit in the shade, quietly, playing jacks. Some kids pick teams and play a raging game of kickball.
On today's playground? The children all stand in a neat little row, juggling colored scarves simultaneously.
WHAT??? It's all so surreal.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 12:05 PMI read an article recently...and darn if I can remember where...about how all this focus on positive self esteem actually cultivates a group of employees who cannot function properly in a normal work environment because they are so oriented to receiving praise for every little thing they do, etc. It was fascinating.
I can't imagine having grown up without playing competitive games, etc. I wasn't the biggest or strongest, but I was pretty fast and it was an opportunity as a young person to gain some self esteem, as it were, from actually accomplishing something!
There was a great King of the Hill episode that ties in to this where many of the kids were temporarily lured away from football to play soccer since it was an "everyone plays, everyone wins" league. It sucked so much that the kids begged to come back and play football. It was fun.
If I had a young child whose only option was to play scarf games by themselves I would probably teach them to pick fights with kids just to get some healthy competition!
Posted by: Carl V. at June 2, 2005 12:37 PMI get concerned, too, about the kids who really ARE excellent at certain things - and suffer because they aren't singled out. Like everyone on the Little League team getting a trophy. That's all very well and good, but what about the mini Manny Ramirez on the team ... what is the harm in singling him out for how good he is?We don't want to praise him, because it might make the OTHER kids feel bad. I just don't think that's right. If someone does a stupendous job, I think they should be praised. If someone achieves excellence, I think THAT should be rewarded.
Not everyone is equal, and a "level playing field" is a complete myth. The kids get this, because they can look around and see it in their classmates: they know who's the best runner, who can write, who has trouble with math, who can play the piano ... They can see the obvious differences between each other ... and if someone is really GOOD at something, they should definitely be singled out.
I didn't get a puffed-up head because teachers singled out my poems and stories to be read to the class. Or, who knows, maybe I did. But you know what I also got? I got the feeling of: Wow. I'm PROUD of that. I am GOOD at that.
Very important. It might have felt unfair to the other kids in 4th grade to ALWAYS have Mrs. Kahn read my stories ... but that's the breaks. She singled out my writing, and she singled out another kids genius with the multiplication tables.
You know? Kids are different, they know it. Equality is a total myth. Don't punish the kids who achieve excellence by ignoring it, and under-praising them. That is FAR more damaging.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 12:48 PMExactly! When I was a kid, I remember telling me mom how some girl was calling me names. My mom didnt call her mom and tell her to stop that behavior. She gave me a good insult to hurl back the next time. (no wonder Im such smart ass now). Anyway, yes, kids need to fight and learn about themselves. Parents need to protect their kids, clean up the scrapes and bruises, give them kisses when they're upset. But we cant stop kids from being kids!
Posted by: LB at June 2, 2005 12:48 PM"Kids do not need to be protected from disappointment. This only creates fragile cranky little kids who then, years later in college, FREAK OUT on their professor when they get a well-deserved C"...except that increasingly the self-esteem movement is moving to the colleges, too. Thus, the first experience with reality will be when a manager gives them a "Unsatisfactory" or even a "Needs Improvement" on their performance appraisal. By then, they won't know how to deal with it, and it will be too late to recover.
Posted by: David Foster at June 2, 2005 12:57 PMThe great Russian general Suvorov was known for his aphorism "Hard training--easy combat. Easy training--hard combat."
Veterans will probably object, fairly, to the idea that there is any such thing as *easy* combat...but Suvorov's saying is applicable not just to war but to life in general. Those parents and teachers who unduly protect kids from stress and difficulty are ensuring that they will have very stressful lives.
Posted by: David Foster at June 2, 2005 1:00 PMLife IS stress. You cannot protect anyone from it. Life sucks sometimes and we all need to be able to deal with the ups and downs. Teach kids skills on how to deal with life. I went to college with kids who at 20 had their first jobs and freakd out trying balance out their studies with working 10 hours a week. I didnt get it because I had been doing that since i was 13. Anyway, my point is the more you shelter and protect your kids, the more of a disservice you are doing to them.
Posted by: LB at June 2, 2005 1:19 PMThese comments have pretty well covered the topic. I thought about, but wasn't going to bring up "smear the queer", as being too politically incorrect for the internet. It sure tought self reliance, however. It was banned even when I was in school, but we played every day anyway. Today all the little boys would get indefinite suspensions, Ritalin prescriptions, and two years mandatory political retraining for playing it.
I've written elsewhere that I'm starting to see the "self esteem generation" appear in the workplace. Many of them are very intelligent, and very well accomplished, but completely lacking in initiative or audacity. We appear to be breeding those traits responsible for the success of human civilization out of the species.
Posted by: CW at June 2, 2005 1:52 PMOkay, I was a fat kid and my experiences with dodge ball and other "attack" games wasn't so fun, but my self-esteem wasn't shattered; hell, an hour before being boinked on the head with a rubber ball, I probably received a perfect score on the spelling test. Oh, and being a fat kid made me quite the success at Red Rover.
When I discovered a natural affinity for Four Square in third grade, I was the damned champ of the playground, thank you. Only the principal would beat me. And the respect I got from the other kids for this was REALLY wonderful. Everyone expected me to ace the tests, to turn in the most stunningly illustrated map of Kansas, but to be good at a physical game? I distinctly remember the wide-eyed looks of the kids as they realized I wasn't to be completely dismissed in that area. Maybe it gave them insight that they could be more than the king of the playground.
I had lots of these "meetings of the titans" experiences all through school, where the big jock acknowledged my smarts and I acknowledged their achievements. We were different, we had different skills, but we all found places where we could achieve.
Yes, there were those kids who seemed to find no place to bloom. I would say, about one or two in each class, tops. One out of 30. Yes, they probably had self-esteem issues. They probably had mental health issues. Seems to me, some of them were well on their way to schizophrenia. I bet some of them were secret comic book illustrators or wanchuck experts or could speak flawless Latvian or whatever; they had areas of achievement that weren't on display in school. Instead of making them juggle scarves on the off chance they were good at it, why not ask them about what they do, find out their aptitudes? There was this one kid in fourth grade, a real quiet, stooped over kid who was picked on for having torn, too-small clothes and weird ears. One day he did a show-and-tell about turtles that was awesome. He knew everything about them, had raised them since he was three. The whole class was riveted.
Posted by: Stevie at June 2, 2005 2:12 PMStevie...
FOUR SQUARE!!!! I swear to God, I have not thought of that awesome activity for ... 25 years. And now it all came rushing back! Also: "only the principal could beat me" - hahaha. I love that!
I love your comments, Stevie. Your memory for detail, and how you tell stuff. It's beautiful.
Yup - sometimes it is when we FAIL that we actually can learn to grow in another area. It's weird how that actually does happen organically, if you sit back and let it. Yup. Kid might have been a geek, but in his heart he knew everything about turtles ... and when it came time to share that knowledge, he could shine. Beautiful.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 2:16 PMThanks, Sheila :)
"When we FAIL we grow" - exactly, Sheila. A kid can fail at something and still maintain self-esteem. No adult has to rush over and say, "Hey, you poor little fat kid, you just got boinked with the rubber ball - you must feel like a total loser. Here: juggle these scarves."
If we stop labeling people as victims, they just might rise to the occasion, or they will rise to a different occasion, but they will rise. Like you said, just sit back and let it happen.
Posted by: Stevie at June 2, 2005 2:50 PM
"Here. Juggle these scarves."
hahahaha I mean, God, it's so bizarre, isn't it??
If I were 6, and someone said that to me, I'd be like: "Uhm ... can I go play kickball instead?"
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 2:59 PMWhat has happened to childhood? I had a blast playing various "recess games" like SPUD, four square, kickball, red light green light, Simon says, etc. I loved the competitiveness, it was what drove me to do well in those games. And if I didn't, that was my incentive to try harder. I spent countless hours outside shooting hoops with my brother playing "Horse" or the two of us playing catch with our Dad. To this day when I play with my 6 year old cousin, I won't follow the "oh just let her win" rule. I'll help her do well, or suggest ways for her to do well..but I won't let her win. Winning is to be earned and she loves to compete for it.
And regarding the turtle kid, that sounds like this kid we had in our school, Joe. Joe was a nerdy, awkward kid. Sucked at sports, wasn't very personable, but when we had a science fair, he built a damn robot. We were all in awe of it and his talents. I was proud of my plaster volcano that spewed pink lava (I couldn't get it to look red), but damn...a robot? That was so cool.
Posted by: Laura at June 2, 2005 5:05 PMOne other thought. The beliefs that someone has about how *other people* think often reflect a good deal about how *that individual* thinks. I wonder if the public education system in the United States attracts a disproportionate number of emotionally-fragile individuals, both as teachers and especially as administrators--and they are projecting that fragility onto the students.
Posted by: David Foster at June 2, 2005 5:28 PMPressuring from parental groups, too, David. I don't know - my sister is a teacher, and a bunch of my friends are teachers - and they're common sense, strong people - who aren't into all this stuff.
The stories they tell, as teachers, about run-ins wiht the PARENTS are unbelievable.
"My son is special! Why do you ostracize him?"
"Uhm ... cause he told me to fuck off? So I sent him to the principal's office."
"But ... he's sensitive. He needs special help, you need to try to understand ..."
blah blah blah.
A lot of their good and strong impuluses as teachers are thwarted by overly sensitive parents who are over-compensating with their kids because of - oh, who knows - what they missed out in their childhoods, or whatever.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 5:31 PMI hesitate to post this but what's Four Square?
I hesitate because i fear the explaination will be too long for a comment and after all, it's just a playground game. Do I really need to know? Yes, yes I do. I have this burning need to know what is this playground game I've never heard of and probably will never play.
Posted by: Scott Janssens at June 2, 2005 5:42 PMI actually can't remember the rules, but I remember playing it in a fiercely competitive way.
I am sure Stevie can describe it, since he was the champ.
It's kind of like hopscotch but on a MUCH bigger scale.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 5:44 PMI thought about, but wasn't going to bring up "smear the queer", as being too politically incorrect for the internet.
I was being politically correct when I left out what the pile-on was called. Those in the Midwest and South probably know what I'm talking about.
Posted by: Scott Janssens at June 2, 2005 5:48 PMAbout 4 years ago, our friend held a gathering for a bunch of us. We were playing all kinds of such games (not four square though). We skipped Red Rover, because we felt it could lead to injury, but we did play tag, redlight greenlight, simon says, and some other dodgeball type game. I never fully understood just how agile kids are. I was hurting for days after. I don't recall ever as a child, after playing a recess game thinking "shit, I need a beer now"
Posted by: Laura at June 2, 2005 5:52 PMScott, go to Games Kids Play to learn all about Four Square. It's an awesome little site.
Posted by: Mark at June 2, 2005 6:07 PMMark, you amaze me. Consistently.
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 6:07 PMAnd of course!! You bounce a red kickball from square to square ... it's all coming back to me now!!
Posted by: red at June 2, 2005 6:08 PMOh that website is a hoot, I'm seeing games I totally forgot about!
Posted by: Laura at June 2, 2005 6:13 PMCool. Thanks Mark.
Posted by: Scott Janssens at June 2, 2005 6:16 PMummmm...while you were the best actor for the most part, there is that Peppermint Patty thing...
Posted by: Betsy at June 2, 2005 7:58 PMTo see Four Square described in words on a website - I'm feklempt.......
Posted by: Stevie at June 2, 2005 11:24 PMComing to this a little late, but:
First of all, red, your description of the little kids juggling the scarves all in unison was eerily reminiscent of the kids on Camazotz. Intentional, or subconscious?
1. Grew up in Ohio, played "Smear the Queer." Didn't know the meaning of the name until years later. (Incidentally, the game is most fun close to dusk, when it's just getting dark - a little harder to catch and pile on the person).
2. Kids are naturally competitive. If you try to force them not to be, you will have chaos. Actually, sometimes I wish kids were a little LESS competitive...if I had a dime for every time I had to deal with hurt feelings, or people gloating because they won, or claims of "cheating" that I didn't see, in the youth group I direct, I'd be pretty rich. Every attempt I've made to try to tone down the "poor winner" behavior (or for that matter, the "pouty loser" behavior) has totally failed, so I've decided to just let the kids go with it - if you want to go and sulk in a corner for a half-hour because you lost at ping-pong, fine with me.
3. Amen to the "Kids will freak out when they get their first C in college" comment. I'm getting royally tired of dealing with people who are afraid of doing anything "hard" - or anything they might not succeed at the first time - because they've been so coddled all their lives. I wanna tell them (but don't) "You know what? I failed out of grad school the first time. You know what else? I went back to another school and got my degree. Nobody there gave a flip that I blew it the first time." Maybe I should.
4. I think the person who brought up the idea of "projecting" - that teaching maybe attracts emotionally insecure individuals who think kids' self-esteem is more easily damaged than it actually is - is spot on.
5. I wish we could just drop the concept of self-esteem anyway. It's become way too muddied. I think people need to have a sense of self WORTH - that they have a right to exist simply because of their humanity, but that it stops there. There's nothing magical about showing up for class, there's nothing all that wonderful and special about doing what you're supposed to. I've seen a lot of instances of people who have these giant, monumental senses of entitlement - that they deserve some kind of special perk just for showing up, or just for doing what everyone else is expected to do - and it's monumentally annoying. (They also often tend to be the first people to run down the extra-mile efforts that others make, I've seen).
I dunno. Maybe I'm losing my enthusiasm or my idealism or becoming a cynic, but with every year I teach college I feel like I see more and more people with an inflated sense of what they deserve. (And I agree: some of people who exhibit the most jerk-like behavior are also the ones with the highest self-esteem).
Posted by: ricki at June 5, 2005 4:23 PM