I was quite surprised at how astute the Stanley Clark students were. After an observational walk (to identify sounds and colors) I asked my group what color the sky was. One of the girls quickly responded with, "it's colorless, the blue is merely an illusion made by. . ." I completely didn't expect that reply. Another girl asked me if a particular insect in her hand was a male or a female, and said that she thought it was a female, "because it had an ovipositor."
I was also surprised at how objective they were compared with the first graders. Having just witnessed first graders awe and wonder at a snail, petting its shell with gentleness, a few students in this group seemed to be overly focused on collecting insects like they were stamps or baseball cards. I know that it was an assignment, but one particular girl had a large grasshopper in a tupperware container and would shake it vigorously whenever the grasshopper would try to escape (move). Another boy captured a firefly nymph (?) during the night hike and told me he was, "trying to choke it." Perhaps this was their way of communing with nature, but it was surprising how different it was compared with the children half their age.
These observations are consistent with Kellert's research that showed affection toward nature slowly being replaced with objectification as some children age and grow in knowledge.
All of this to say, I am learning a lot about children and nature simply by teaching them for a couple hours a few times a week. I never realized just how much changes between first, fourth, and seventh grade. Between reading about it in my research and seeing it first hand in the practicum, I'm astounded.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment