51–60 of 440 posts
They banned them because the teachers hadn't been paying attention (and kids were hoarding the "good pieces"), and brought them back with three rules: 1. everyone can play with any structure but you can't change someone else's structure 2. play has to be together 3. all structures must be a standard size So, Minecraft claims.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indoctrination is when you're inculcated with a doctrine. That's not what happened with the children described in the article. But if you mean affecting children's values and social outlook, then indeed, teachers do that. Sometimes they do it unconsciously, in which case it's typically the prevailing social values, explicit and implicit, which children are imbued with; sometimes it's more conscious.
how is this not what happened here? children were playing with legos, adults step in and mandate how play should occur based on their observations and the values they think the kids should develop. the way they describe how the kids play with legos—looking for the "cool pieces", feeling ownership over things they built—is the default way that all kids end up playing with legos in a group setting. somehow we all turne…
I feel visceral disgust reading this article. It seems like the kids were playing with each other in a healthy way and the teachers interposed themselves to change how the kids were playing for political and ideological reasons. This is disgusting to me because I think it's analogous to physical abuse. A teacher hitting a child is bad not just because it's a violent crime, but also because children are especially vul…
I feel absolutely livid thinking that these people are out there to inject, indoctrinate and infect innocent minds of children with their disugsting view of the society.
Children grow up wonderfully around the world, some 7 billion of us are here. There is no way this type of indoctrination has any proven benefit besides perpetuating their biases.
They banned them because the teachers hadn't been paying attention (and kids were hoarding the "good pieces"), and brought them back with three rules: 1. everyone can play with any structure but you can't change someone else's structure 2. play has to be together 3. all structures must be a standard size So, Minecraft claims.
The teachers are all trained socialists. They then spent months training the kids in collectivism.
Why not buy more Legos rather than remove them?
It wouldn't help, just change the number of pieces involved in the conflicts. Speaking from experience, you can never have so many Legos that you don't want more.
Of course, we weren't keeping builds around forever either. That's the real trick I think. Lego should be for ephemeral builds (for some reason, kids usually understand this better than adults.) At the end of the day/week/month, take whatever you built and drop it back into the bucket. If you have enough lego for X kids to build things that last Y days, you'll never run out.
If one child isn't having fun with the way resources are allocated, your structure is in jeopardy. Would create a strong incentive to compromise until everyone is having fun to avoid loss.
I know that posting articles behind a paywall is allowed but, frankly, I don't think it should be. A link to a page that just says "give us money" is just an advert. Here's a Wired article discussing the article: https://www.wired.com/2008/02/lego-building-a/