我觉得没有所谓纯粹的快乐。就吃冰激凌，父母可能会说“洗手才能吃”，或者“吃了要漱口”，“不能吃到地上”等等。即使出门疯玩，也会有要好好排队，不能阻碍别人等等社会次序。除了父母的爱不是必须交换之外，其他的，都有相应交换规定。sogno wrote:晕死，好象讲的真不是同样的事。我说的纯粹的快乐，打个比方小丫头想吃冰激凌，我就不会说，你若写完这篇字才能给你。写完字她也得到冰激凌，但这是必须交换才能得到的快乐，所以不是纯粹的快乐。当然家长要求她写字有家长的道理，我只是觉得条条道路通罗马，世间不只一条路可走。
老虎妈妈
Re: 老虎妈妈
Re: 老虎妈妈
+1.wuliaotou wrote:我觉得没有所谓纯粹的快乐。就吃冰激凌，父母可能会说“洗手才能吃”，或者“吃了要漱口”，“不能吃到地上”等等。即使出门疯玩，也会有要好好排队，不能阻碍别人等等社会次序。除了父母的爱不是必须交换之外，其他的，都有相应交换规定。sogno wrote:晕死，好象讲的真不是同样的事。我说的纯粹的快乐，打个比方小丫头想吃冰激凌，我就不会说，你若写完这篇字才能给你。写完字她也得到冰激凌，但这是必须交换才能得到的快乐，所以不是纯粹的快乐。当然家长要求她写字有家长的道理，我只是觉得条条道路通罗马，世间不只一条路可走。
我们根本不必STEROTYPE. 陪孩子练钢琴和陪孩子踢球我看不出来有啥区别. 要是推的话, 推纲琴数学也是推, 推儿子运动女儿做啦啦队长也是推. 当代父母的焦虑土生和移民也是一样的. 每天陪孩子踢三个小时的球根本不能叫做放养.那是多高强度的劳动啊. 我们父母不必亲力亲为是因为我们有老人, 大院, 每天8个小时的学校, 学校里有自习课, 兴趣班.
我今天才看了行为专家回来. 建议每天要求小朋友做枯燥乏味他不喜欢的练习若干分钟, 做到有奖励. 非常心虚地想这个好象和最时髦的快乐和无忧无虑的童年, 和不用奖惩制度, 完全背道而驰. 不过这都是度和平衡的问题. 如果学校里面不推, 家长就得自己推. 学校推的太厉害了, 家长就得平衡一下. 孩子太自觉了, 家长就可以放养. 孩子太不自觉了, 家长就得多费心.
谁道闲情抛掷久？每到春来，惆怅还依旧。
Re: 老虎妈妈
最近有关教育孩子的新闻怎么这么多！看下面这个，倒是跟之前与JUN的讨论有点联系---如果社会经济状况中等、靠谱、变化不大，遗传作用较显著，如果社会经济情况有大改变，那么后天环境情势的作用超过遗传因素？
Why Rich Parents Don't Matterby Jonah Lehrer
Monday, January 24, 2011
provided by WSJ
http://finance.yahoo.com/family-home/ar ... ds_parents
How much do the decisions of parents matter? Most parents believe that even the most mundane acts of parenting—from their choice of day care to their policy on videogames—can profoundly influence the success of their children. Kids are like wet clay, in this view, and we are the sculptors.
Yet in tests measuring many traits, from intelligence to self-control, the power of the home environment pales in comparison to the power of genes and peer groups. We may think we're sculptors, but the clay is mostly set.
A new paper suggests that both metaphors can be true. Which one is relevant depends, it turns out, on the economic status of families.
For a paper in Psychological Science, researchers at the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Virginia looked at 750 pairs of American twins who were given a test of mental ability at the age of 10 months and then again at the age of 2. By studying the performance of identical versus fraternal twins, the scientists could tease out the relative importance of factors such as genetics and the home environment. Because the infants came from households across the socioeconomic spectrum, it also was possible to see how wealth influenced test scores.
When it came to the mental ability of 10-month-olds, the home environment was the key variable, across every socioeconomic class. But results for the 2-year-olds were dramatically different. In children from poorer households, the choices of parents still mattered. In fact, the researchers estimated that the home environment accounted for approximately 80% of the individual variance in mental ability among poor 2-year-olds. The effect of genetics was negligible.
The opposite pattern appeared in 2-year-olds from wealthy households. For these kids, genetics primarily determined performance, accounting for nearly 50% of all variation in mental ability. (The scientists made this conclusion based on the fact that identical twins performed much more similarly than fraternal twins.) The home environment was a distant second. For parents, the correlation appears to be clear: As wealth increases, the choices of adults play a much smaller role in determining the mental ability of their children.
Children from wealthy households get all the advantages that money can buy, from music lessons to SAT tutors. Although parents might fret over the details of such advantages—is it better to play the piano or the violin?—these details are mostly insignificant, subject to the law of diminishing returns. As the science blogger Razib Kahn notes, "When you remove the environmental variance, the genetic variance remains."
These results capture the stunning developmental inequalities that set in almost immediately, so that even the mental ability of 2-year-olds can be profoundly affected by the socio-economic status of their parents. As a result, their genetic potential is held back.
Though this latest study doesn't speculate about the causes of these class differences, previous research has focused on a panoply of factors, such as the variety of words directed toward the child (more variety leads to higher test scores), the number of books in the home and even the ratio of encouraging remarks to discouraging warnings. By the age of 3, children from wealthier households hear, on average, about 500,000 encouragements and 80,000 discouragements. The ratio is reversed in households on welfare.
Such statistics have led many researchers to highlight the importance of improving the early-childhood environments of poor children. Economists such as James Heckman, a Nobel laureate at the University of Chicago, have long advocated for increased investments in preschool education, but this latest study suggests that interventions need to begin even earlier. One possible model is the "Baby College" administered by the Harlem Children's Zone, which seeks to equip brand-new parents with better parenting skills.
Eliminating such inequalities in the early years of life would simply create a new kind of inequality, driven by genetics. But such a world would at least let more children come closer to their mental potential, unconstrained by the mistakes or impoverishment of their parents. The greatest luxury we can give our children, it turns out, is the luxury of being the type of parent that doesn't matter at all.
Re: 老虎妈妈
我原先一向是坚决的不推妈， 倒不是因为我是无忧无虑童年派的，而是我实在太懒。现在看来一点不推也是不行的。我们家老大五六岁的小伙，到了周末一早就开始哼哼“ mommy, what should I do?" 我们列举了一系列我们认为健康又适合少年儿童的户内外活动后（打各种球，骑车，游泳，滑冰，lego，拼图，读书，等等，甚至散步，抓萤火虫这么休闲的事情）他就是一句“ I don't feel like it" 接着提出看电视和打游戏的要求。我感觉我们如果真的不管的话，他可从早看电视和打游戏到晚。我们问他想学点什么的时候， 比如篮球啦，滑冰，游泳，跆拳道，乐器啦什么的，他一概说不。他爹问他，“你什么都不学，长打后做什么呢？” 他说“看电视”。豪情 wrote: 我今天才看了行为专家回来. 建议每天要求小朋友做枯燥乏味他不喜欢的练习若干分钟, 做到有奖励. 非常心虚地想这个好象和最时髦的快乐和无忧无虑的童年, 和不用奖惩制度, 完全背道而驰. 不过这都是度和平衡的问题. 如果学校里面不推, 家长就得自己推. 学校推的太厉害了, 家长就得平衡一下. 孩子太自觉了, 家长就可以放养. 孩子太不自觉了, 家长就得多费心.
Re: 老虎妈妈
跟我一样嘛！我也希望在家看电视打游戏就是一天！stareye wrote:我原先一向是坚决的不推妈， 倒不是因为我是无忧无虑童年派的，而是我实在太懒。现在看来一点不推也是不行的。我们家老大五六岁的小伙，到了周末一早就开始哼哼“ mommy, what should I do?" 我们列举了一系列我们认为健康又适合少年儿童的户内外活动后（打各种球，骑车，游泳，滑冰，lego，拼图，读书，等等，甚至散步，抓萤火虫这么休闲的事情）他就是一句“ I don't feel like it" 接着提出看电视和打游戏的要求。我感觉我们如果真的不管的话，他可从早看电视和打游戏到晚。我们问他想学点什么的时候， 比如篮球啦，滑冰，游泳，跆拳道，乐器啦什么的，他一概说不。他爹问他，“你什么都不学，长打后做什么呢？” 他说“看电视”。豪情 wrote: 我今天才看了行为专家回来. 建议每天要求小朋友做枯燥乏味他不喜欢的练习若干分钟, 做到有奖励. 非常心虚地想这个好象和最时髦的快乐和无忧无虑的童年, 和不用奖惩制度, 完全背道而驰. 不过这都是度和平衡的问题. 如果学校里面不推, 家长就得自己推. 学校推的太厉害了, 家长就得平衡一下. 孩子太自觉了, 家长就可以放养. 孩子太不自觉了, 家长就得多费心.
云浆未饮结成冰
Re: 老虎妈妈
但你还不是成为了一名自食其力的软件工程师， 而没有放任自己在电视和游戏中虚度光阴！笑嘻嘻 wrote:跟我一样嘛！我也希望在家看电视打游戏就是一天！stareye wrote:我原先一向是坚决的不推妈， 倒不是因为我是无忧无虑童年派的，而是我实在太懒。现在看来一点不推也是不行的。我们家老大五六岁的小伙，到了周末一早就开始哼哼“ mommy, what should I do?" 我们列举了一系列我们认为健康又适合少年儿童的户内外活动后（打各种球，骑车，游泳，滑冰，lego，拼图，读书，等等，甚至散步，抓萤火虫这么休闲的事情）他就是一句“ I don't feel like it" 接着提出看电视和打游戏的要求。我感觉我们如果真的不管的话，他可从早看电视和打游戏到晚。我们问他想学点什么的时候， 比如篮球啦，滑冰，游泳，跆拳道，乐器啦什么的，他一概说不。他爹问他，“你什么都不学，长打后做什么呢？” 他说“看电视”。豪情 wrote: 我今天才看了行为专家回来. 建议每天要求小朋友做枯燥乏味他不喜欢的练习若干分钟, 做到有奖励. 非常心虚地想这个好象和最时髦的快乐和无忧无虑的童年, 和不用奖惩制度, 完全背道而驰. 不过这都是度和平衡的问题. 如果学校里面不推, 家长就得自己推. 学校推的太厉害了, 家长就得平衡一下. 孩子太自觉了, 家长就可以放养. 孩子太不自觉了, 家长就得多费心.
Re: 老虎妈妈
我也有个例子，我公司的CTO印度人，创立过两家公司（有一家就在南湾237边上），卖了公司收了现钱，到我们这里来发挥余热，他大儿子进了Univ.of Washington数学系。他有天和我闲聊起，就很困惑地说，他儿子不知道自己要干嘛，我们年轻时可是目标很明确的啊。豪情 wrote:我们家小朋友的同学, 到了年龄也不能上学, 因为他没准备好. 他父母是德国移民, 非常困惑. 他们这么大的时候已经很自律了.
我也同困惑，要说是富不过三代理论呢，也不对，这CTO本人家里是印度贵族，也是有钱人，他什么就那么有上进心呢？
Re: 老虎妈妈
那是因为你有个省心的宝宝啊.
说到推迟入学的问题, 看到一篇文章:http://www.devminds.com/pdfs/Mmagazine% ... ug2009.pdf
大意说以前在富裕的家庭比较多, 因为工薪阶层父母都要工作, 多付一年托儿费是个压力. 但是现在比较流行, 以便孩子入学后有优势.(我猜是OUTLIERS的影响). 学校也喜欢施压要家长推迟入学. 但是这个做法没有什么科学依据和数据支持. 年龄略大开始有点优势, 后来也就差不多了. 到了青春期, 年龄大的孩子会有开车冒险(向比自己小的同学炫耀)和TEENAGER SEX的问题. 我觉得特熟悉, 中国以前盛行一个观点, 女生要早读书, 否则中学里会早恋分心BLAH BLAH.
育儿理论真是风水轮流转啊.
说到推迟入学的问题, 看到一篇文章:http://www.devminds.com/pdfs/Mmagazine% ... ug2009.pdf
大意说以前在富裕的家庭比较多, 因为工薪阶层父母都要工作, 多付一年托儿费是个压力. 但是现在比较流行, 以便孩子入学后有优势.(我猜是OUTLIERS的影响). 学校也喜欢施压要家长推迟入学. 但是这个做法没有什么科学依据和数据支持. 年龄略大开始有点优势, 后来也就差不多了. 到了青春期, 年龄大的孩子会有开车冒险(向比自己小的同学炫耀)和TEENAGER SEX的问题. 我觉得特熟悉, 中国以前盛行一个观点, 女生要早读书, 否则中学里会早恋分心BLAH BLAH.
育儿理论真是风水轮流转啊.
谁道闲情抛掷久？每到春来，惆怅还依旧。
Re: 老虎妈妈
我晕，我老好不容易才下决心让老大推迟一年入学。豪情 wrote:那是因为你有个省心的宝宝啊.
说到推迟入学的问题, 看到一篇文章:http://www.devminds.com/pdfs/Mmagazine% ... ug2009.pdf
大意说以前在富裕的家庭比较多, 因为工薪阶层父母都要工作, 多付一年托儿费是个压力. 但是现在比较流行, 以便孩子入学后有优势.(我猜是OUTLIERS的影响). 学校也喜欢施压要家长推迟入学. 但是这个做法没有什么科学依据和数据支持. 年龄略大开始有点优势, 后来也就差不多了. 到了青春期, 年龄大的孩子会有开车冒险(向比自己小的同学炫耀)和TEENAGER SEX的问题. 我觉得特熟悉, 中国以前盛行一个观点, 女生要早读书, 否则中学里会早恋分心BLAH BLAH.
育儿理论真是风水轮流转啊.
