Unless school was very different in your area, what you say about never interacting with people who aren't the exact same age is completely untrue. In high school I played on a few sports teams, joined a few clubs, and was on student government, so I was regularly interacting and befriending students who were older/younger than I was. In elementary school we had a "buddies" system so that the older kids could mentor/read to/etc. kids that were 4ish years younger than they were about once a week. Yes, we were in classes with students with the same birth year, but I think it's very unusual to not interact with people outside of your age group in a public/private school setting.
I mean yes true but in the grand scheme of things four years is nothing. I would consider anyone within five to seven years of me my age. Im talking about being socialized with people of different generations than yourself. In ancestral times whole communities would be socializing. Older people teaching the younger and so on. Most people I know who've had a broader spectrum of people to socialize with of all different ages tend to mature faster and start contributing to society earlier. It's definitely something that should be further studied
@ellianna.keller Okay, you mentioned how you wouldn't have interacted with your now-husband because he's 3 years older than you and you kept using the phrase "exactly the same age", so it really sounded like you were talking about socialization outside of your birth year. That's why I clarified - you and your husband could have interacted a lot if you were interested in the same clubs or played on the same sports team. But re: other generations, who do you think is coaching the kids ar sports, or facilitating student council, or running clubs? I had to coordinate schedules, plan events, and otherwise communicate effectively with adults who were 15-45 years older than I was all the time.
I'm not saying it's impossible. I personally know people who did interact with people of all different ages but I think as a general rule it's not as common as it should be. If we had gone to the same elementary school we wouldn't have interacted (likely the same tho less so with middle school). In high school there maybe a broader sense of socializing with various ages like you said, however even then you're in a club for a hour a day or so and maybe on weekends? That's not necessarily the majority of your social experience. (Maybe they are more often idk). I think from your perspective you perhaps were set up better for success interacting with various ages (not everyone that goes to school has that same experience as you). My guess would be that a lot of the immaturity of teens would be avoided (though not completely) if from a very young age children were around people of all ages and their primary social experience was with a variety of people.
As far as my husband and I (even if we were in the same clubs or same sports teams) I think very rarely is a ninth grader and a twelfth grader becoming super close friends. I mean I knew of people who would run track and did have friends who were seniors, but that wasn't necessarily their closest friends or the circles that they would run in most often. That's not to say people of those ages can't interact it's just not as likely
True about other people's experiences. I also agree that daycare ar a really young age isn't ideal, although I'm a big fan of public/private schooling. I'm curious about what kind of socialization you get through homeschooling. I am biased because I knew a few young adults who were homeschooled K-12 and the majority of their socialization was with family and a few close family friends, which left them really ill-equipped to handle communicating with other people, and they struggled massively in early adulthood. What was your experience? How do you get a diverse social circle if you're learning at home. (Genuinely curious, not trying to be rude ❤)
Depends on the daycare. Some daycares are fabulous. The good ones are well staffed and provide an innovative, challenging and stimulating environment for the kids through a range of activities that even most homes do not provide. They learn a plethora of social skills as well as introduction to academic skills. A woman with 5,6 or more kids can actually be more stressed because she has to be all things to them all the time. She is also trying to do the laundry, cook, run errands, etc. The day care has to ONLY focus on the kids 99% of the time. Mom gets no assistance from another person to give breaks or offer a different perspective. What I am emphasizing is that even without the interaction with variable age groups, the kid will be OK and whatever skills they learn among their age peers are transferrable to the larger society with ease.
I actually worked at a very good daycare. But many of the kids just don't have that one on one experience of teaching how to socialize in a daycare setting. Part of learning how to properly socialize is having someone guide your conversation (please thank you, mutual respect, etc.) I would also say the chores around the house that need done are important in helping children learn how to contribute to society and should be allocated out to children to benefit the whole family
@@ellianna.keller Actually children pick up a lot of what they learn through just living around other people and by observation REGARDLESS of who they are with or where they are. In fact, other kids are great teachers and incentivizes to their peers. There is no need for momma to be the sole focus for all their learning, emotional security, and problem solving. Without being around me all day, my daughter was much easier to train at home because she saw other kids putting their things away in certain places, doing certain activities at certain times and places, sharing skills in organizing, learning about the need to cooperate, share, negotiate, sacrifice, etc. She learned that she was not the center of the universe. She learned to learn independently. She became calmer about me leaving the house because she now understood that people leaving the house didn't mean she was being deserted, because she now had a lived point of reference for what going to work or going to school, or shopping meant. She knew that "out" had a finite, definitive, tangible existence. It was no longer a mysterious void. We need to end the moral flagellation of telling moms that their children will perish without being with mom 25/8. A little stress from time to time helps grow new neurons in the brain. All this is to say, children can be strong, healthy, well balanced and productive humans without being limited to a single source of input. There needs to be some balance in telling (actually guilt-tripping) mothers that their children are being short-changed because they are not there for them 25/8. The kid will be OK.
Because they do pick up on a lot of things that's actually why daycare children in general struggle more. NOT ALWAYS, but in most cases children who are primarily taught or picking up behaviors from other children are not going to be as well set up for successful behavior. I'm not saying there aren't situations for daycare being needed but that it isn't an ideal *socialization* habitat. Young children need to learn proper socialization from people who know how to kindly socialize and interact with others. That's not to say kids have to be around mom all the time but that's why (if you have a good one) extended family can be so beneficial to little ones. Mom doesn't have to be the sole focus but family should be the primary focus for learning skills. I totally agree kids should not be the center of the universe, which is why bringing kids into various environments is helpful. But having mom or another family member around to help guide those social encounters (for very young children) is so beneficial! Also there's this thought that very young babies need socialization, Erica Komisar speaks to this a bit, but babies aren't at that stage where they need other babies to socialize with. They do need a primary and consistent caregiver though as much as possible. Obviously if this isn't possible that's a whole other conversation, but I'm speaking in the ideals. I'll try to find some of those articles I've learned from that speak to this as well.
Note: I'm not speaking to people who choose to send their kids to daycare because they have a job or career. I'm specifically talking to people who send their kids to daycare solely for the purpose of socialization. I'm not saying kids aren't resilient and can't still thrive socially even with daycare rather I'm giving a case for the ideal situation.
Unless school was very different in your area, what you say about never interacting with people who aren't the exact same age is completely untrue.
In high school I played on a few sports teams, joined a few clubs, and was on student government, so I was regularly interacting and befriending students who were older/younger than I was. In elementary school we had a "buddies" system so that the older kids could mentor/read to/etc. kids that were 4ish years younger than they were about once a week. Yes, we were in classes with students with the same birth year, but I think it's very unusual to not interact with people outside of your age group in a public/private school setting.
I mean yes true but in the grand scheme of things four years is nothing. I would consider anyone within five to seven years of me my age. Im talking about being socialized with people of different generations than yourself. In ancestral times whole communities would be socializing. Older people teaching the younger and so on. Most people I know who've had a broader spectrum of people to socialize with of all different ages tend to mature faster and start contributing to society earlier. It's definitely something that should be further studied
@ellianna.keller Okay, you mentioned how you wouldn't have interacted with your now-husband because he's 3 years older than you and you kept using the phrase "exactly the same age", so it really sounded like you were talking about socialization outside of your birth year. That's why I clarified - you and your husband could have interacted a lot if you were interested in the same clubs or played on the same sports team.
But re: other generations, who do you think is coaching the kids ar sports, or facilitating student council, or running clubs? I had to coordinate schedules, plan events, and otherwise communicate effectively with adults who were 15-45 years older than I was all the time.
I'm not saying it's impossible. I personally know people who did interact with people of all different ages but I think as a general rule it's not as common as it should be. If we had gone to the same elementary school we wouldn't have interacted (likely the same tho less so with middle school). In high school there maybe a broader sense of socializing with various ages like you said, however even then you're in a club for a hour a day or so and maybe on weekends? That's not necessarily the majority of your social experience. (Maybe they are more often idk). I think from your perspective you perhaps were set up better for success interacting with various ages (not everyone that goes to school has that same experience as you). My guess would be that a lot of the immaturity of teens would be avoided (though not completely) if from a very young age children were around people of all ages and their primary social experience was with a variety of people.
As far as my husband and I (even if we were in the same clubs or same sports teams) I think very rarely is a ninth grader and a twelfth grader becoming super close friends. I mean I knew of people who would run track and did have friends who were seniors, but that wasn't necessarily their closest friends or the circles that they would run in most often. That's not to say people of those ages can't interact it's just not as likely
True about other people's experiences. I also agree that daycare ar a really young age isn't ideal, although I'm a big fan of public/private schooling. I'm curious about what kind of socialization you get through homeschooling. I am biased because I knew a few young adults who were homeschooled K-12 and the majority of their socialization was with family and a few close family friends, which left them really ill-equipped to handle communicating with other people, and they struggled massively in early adulthood. What was your experience? How do you get a diverse social circle if you're learning at home. (Genuinely curious, not trying to be rude ❤)
Depends on the daycare. Some daycares are fabulous. The good ones are well staffed and provide an innovative, challenging and stimulating environment for the kids through a range of activities that even most homes do not provide. They learn a plethora of social skills as well as introduction to academic skills. A woman with 5,6 or more kids can actually be more stressed because she has to be all things to them all the time. She is also trying to do the laundry, cook, run errands, etc. The day care has to ONLY focus on the kids 99% of the time. Mom gets no assistance from another person to give breaks or offer a different perspective. What I am emphasizing is that even without the interaction with variable age groups, the kid will be OK and whatever skills they learn among their age peers are transferrable to the larger society with ease.
I actually worked at a very good daycare. But many of the kids just don't have that one on one experience of teaching how to socialize in a daycare setting. Part of learning how to properly socialize is having someone guide your conversation (please thank you, mutual respect, etc.) I would also say the chores around the house that need done are important in helping children learn how to contribute to society and should be allocated out to children to benefit the whole family
@@ellianna.keller Actually children pick up a lot of what they learn through just living around other people and by observation REGARDLESS of who they are with or where they are. In fact, other kids are great teachers and incentivizes to their peers. There is no need for momma to be the sole focus for all their learning, emotional security, and problem solving. Without being around me all day, my daughter was much easier to train at home because she saw other kids putting their things away in certain places, doing certain activities at certain times and places, sharing skills in organizing, learning about the need to cooperate, share, negotiate, sacrifice, etc. She learned that she was not the center of the universe. She learned to learn independently. She became calmer about me leaving the house because she now understood that people leaving the house didn't mean she was being deserted, because she now had a lived point of reference for what going to work or going to school, or shopping meant. She knew that "out" had a finite, definitive, tangible existence. It was no longer a mysterious void. We need to end the moral flagellation of telling moms that their children will perish without being with mom 25/8. A little stress from time to time helps grow new neurons in the brain. All this is to say, children can be strong, healthy, well balanced and productive humans without being limited to a single source of input. There needs to be some balance in telling (actually guilt-tripping) mothers that their children are being short-changed because they are not there for them 25/8. The kid will be OK.
Because they do pick up on a lot of things that's actually why daycare children in general struggle more. NOT ALWAYS, but in most cases children who are primarily taught or picking up behaviors from other children are not going to be as well set up for successful behavior. I'm not saying there aren't situations for daycare being needed but that it isn't an ideal *socialization* habitat. Young children need to learn proper socialization from people who know how to kindly socialize and interact with others. That's not to say kids have to be around mom all the time but that's why (if you have a good one) extended family can be so beneficial to little ones. Mom doesn't have to be the sole focus but family should be the primary focus for learning skills. I totally agree kids should not be the center of the universe, which is why bringing kids into various environments is helpful. But having mom or another family member around to help guide those social encounters (for very young children) is so beneficial! Also there's this thought that very young babies need socialization, Erica Komisar speaks to this a bit, but babies aren't at that stage where they need other babies to socialize with. They do need a primary and consistent caregiver though as much as possible. Obviously if this isn't possible that's a whole other conversation, but I'm speaking in the ideals. I'll try to find some of those articles I've learned from that speak to this as well.
ifstudies.org/blog/measuring-the-long-term-effects-of-early-extensive-day-care
Note: I'm not speaking to people who choose to send their kids to daycare because they have a job or career. I'm specifically talking to people who send their kids to daycare solely for the purpose of socialization. I'm not saying kids aren't resilient and can't still thrive socially even with daycare rather I'm giving a case for the ideal situation.