Live data from Hacker News

New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

news.nationalpost.com

51–60 of 86 posts

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#51

> “Of course a child is not allowed to kill another child,” Mr. McLachlan said. “One of the rules I said facetiously is kids aren’t allowed to hurt other people. But in fact they are. … If you hurt somebody in a game where you are playing hard, or a boxing match or a stone-throwing competition, for me it’s absolutely fine — as long as the other person was willing to get hurt.” This is a very interesting article but i…

Yeap, boxing means the same in Kiwi English as it does in American English.

The point is to get away from the cotton wool or 'Helicopter Parenting' model. If we don't allow kids to do the risky stuff then they don't until they reach adolescence. I am firmly of the opinion we have to get them doing it while they are young; while they still listen to us (parents, adults, etc) and while they are small and less strong.

When we wrap them in cotton wool they reach adolescence with no understanding of risk but plenty of testosterone. Then they start to experiment without years of experience in informal risk assessment.

I have also read of a school that is achieving higher academic results by encouraging Bullrush. Think rugby without a ball - tackling, running, dodging, actual physical contact (or American Football but without the stopping and without any pads, etc.)

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#52

I can't see how the the same thing won't happen though - one kid suffers some form of awful permanent damage (or death) and then the rules and safer equipment come back. It seems like the wager the west has generally accepted is that we aren't willing to accept the the gains from 'risky' play compared with the small chance of tragedy.

And one death is visible. A generation lacking risk analsis skills, physical activity and knowledge of how to be rough but not aggressive is harder to see. SO harder to sue to prevent.

I think the sue for visible problems approach is one of your bigger problems in the USA. And in your current society until someone can sue for making Playstation more acceptable than Playtime I don't see any easy solutions.

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#53
post #33
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, what was different in the '80s?

I think the cost of medical care was probably cheaper, the liabilities less. I was a kid then so I don't actually know.

As well as considering just health care costs also consider health care versus income. E.g. if a parent had to pay for a broken arm in the '80s US did they risk bankruptcy more or less then now?

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#54
I moved around a lot as a child, but one of the schools I went to for a couple of years when in primary school was a Steiner school.

The school had a large pond, with geese (that would chase and bite you if you got too near), and a school cow that would wander around keeping the grass trimmed.

Next to the school was an huge piece of land we used to call the quarry. It was an developed piece of land that had hills with trees and bushes growing all over. I'm sure there were snakes around, there were definitely plenty of large ant hills, and other small critters. Usually once a week our class would tramp over there, and play tag.

People would get scratched up running through a bush or fall over and skin a knee. But that was part and parcel of the experience. I think I recall someone breaking an arm or getting a knock to the head when they tripped over something - that was treated appropriately by the teacher.

I remember going on a week (or two?) school camping trip up to Queensland; at one spot we found a natural spring pool for swimming and a small waterfall (maybe 5-10 meters high? scarily high for me anyway) - everyone took turns jumping off the waterfall into the pool.

Nowdays I look at what schoolkids get to do, and it's none of that stuff. Climb a tree? no way, you might fall and hurt yourself. So what, it's part of living and learning.

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#55

A great book on this topic is How to Live Dangerously by Warwick Cairns. He tells the story of a school in Norway that conducted a similar playground experiment. In that study, they had two playgrounds -- a "safe one" with rubberized mats and chaperones keeping a watchful eye and a "dangerous" one with tall structures, concrete, piles of wood, metal poles and no adult supervision at all. Within a couple days, several…

I still think that if you live in a large city that it's unsafe to let your kid ride on the bus by themselves too early.

I might be totally wrong in using this analogy, but just because it's statistically unlikely that I will die in a fire doesn't mean I will tempt fate and use fire recklessly in my home.

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#56

A great book on this topic is How to Live Dangerously by Warwick Cairns. He tells the story of a school in Norway that conducted a similar playground experiment. In that study, they had two playgrounds -- a "safe one" with rubberized mats and chaperones keeping a watchful eye and a "dangerous" one with tall structures, concrete, piles of wood, metal poles and no adult supervision at all. Within a couple days, several…

> Humans are notoriously bad at risk assessment. We're more worried about child abductions than childhood obesity. Statistically speaking, only one of those is a real issue today.

Quit talking nonsense. A young boy got abducted mere blocks from where I live not more than 3 years ago. Those parents would give anything to have an obese kid right now.

Asking parents to make decisions based on the aggregate damage child obesity does to society rather than the acute damage an abduction does to their family is ridiculous.

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#57
post #37

This reminds me of something related. I don't force my children to wear helmets when they ride their bikes. When we are out, people yell at me "Where's their helmet dad?". These are the same type of people who force the removal of swing sets at the parks in my area.

While I am absolutely against the cotton-wool wrapping of kids we see I would disagree on this. I always make my kids wear helmets when riding bikes, whilst still allowing them to do jumps and race down the hill etc. The way I see it, the helmet reduces the risk of serious long term injury and doesn't take anything away from them pushing their safety boundaries when riding about.

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#58

A great book on this topic is How to Live Dangerously by Warwick Cairns. He tells the story of a school in Norway that conducted a similar playground experiment. In that study, they had two playgrounds -- a "safe one" with rubberized mats and chaperones keeping a watchful eye and a "dangerous" one with tall structures, concrete, piles of wood, metal poles and no adult supervision at all. Within a couple days, several…

> Humans are notoriously bad at risk assessment. We're more worried about child abductions than childhood obesity. Statistically speaking, only one of those is a real issue today. Quit talking nonsense. A young boy got abducted mere blocks from where I live not more than 3 years ago. Those parents would give anything to have an obese kid right now. Asking parents to make decisions based on the aggregate damage child…

According to the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, about 115 children / year are the victims of “stereotypical” kidnapping. These “stereotypical” kidnappings involved someone the child did not know or was an acquaintance. The child was held overnight, transported 50 miles or more, killed, ransomed or held with the intent to keep the child permanently.

115 children out of ~74 million in the US. I understand it's a highly emotional and tragic experience when it happens, but statistically speaking, the odds of your child being kidnapped are roughly the same as them being struck by lightning. Part of the problem is the amplification effect of modern media. Kidnappings are sensational stories and we have a very human and empathetic reaction to them. Public perception would indicate that the odds of an child abduction are way higher than they really are. The biggest risk to your kids being abducted is one you probably don't want to admit -- around 200,000 children/year are abducted by a family member. Another 58,000 by people they know. Restricting your child from playing outside probably won't do much to help those far larger threats to their safety. I know it's an emotionally charged subject, especially for people who have been directly effected by it, but when you look at it rationally, the numbers speak for themselves.

We're scared of the wrong things.

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#59

A great book on this topic is How to Live Dangerously by Warwick Cairns. He tells the story of a school in Norway that conducted a similar playground experiment. In that study, they had two playgrounds -- a "safe one" with rubberized mats and chaperones keeping a watchful eye and a "dangerous" one with tall structures, concrete, piles of wood, metal poles and no adult supervision at all. Within a couple days, several…

I read this article [1] just a few days ago about how kids are over protected now. It also includes the Swanson Primary School story too. An excerpt "...I’ve mostly met children who take it for granted that they are always being watched..." struck me, it definitely was not like that while I was growing up.

Besides, is there a time line for the Swanson Primary School story? The article I linked to mentions this as an experiment conducted in 2011. If this is true, I would love to know how it has progressed since.

[1] http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2014/03/hey-pare...

Re: New Zealand school tossed its playground rules

#60

A great book on this topic is How to Live Dangerously by Warwick Cairns. He tells the story of a school in Norway that conducted a similar playground experiment. In that study, they had two playgrounds -- a "safe one" with rubberized mats and chaperones keeping a watchful eye and a "dangerous" one with tall structures, concrete, piles of wood, metal poles and no adult supervision at all. Within a couple days, several…

I read this article [1] just a few days ago about how kids are over protected now. It also includes the Swanson Primary School story too. An excerpt "...I’ve mostly met children who take it for granted that they are always being watched..." struck me, it definitely was not like that while I was growing up. Besides, is there a time line for the Swanson Primary School story? The article I linked to mentions this as an…

Thanks for sharing that link. This paragraph in particular jumped out at me in regards to all the efforts that have been made to rubber surface everything:

We might accept a few more phobias in our children in exchange for fewer injuries. But the final irony is that our close attention to safety has not in fact made a tremendous difference in the number of accidents children have. According to the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System, which monitors hospital visits, the frequency of emergency-room visits related to playground equipment, including home equipment, in 1980 was 156,000, or one visit per 1,452 Americans. In 2012, it was 271,475, or one per 1,156 Americans.

Post reply on HN