agreed with much of what you wrote.
Snipped the following . . . .
> . First, I think that their
> popularity among kids is, like television, somewhat due to the poverty
> of the environment available for kids today. Kids are so dependent on
> their parents to chauffeur them around to activities and friends'
> houses. The neighborhoods full of kids playing outside all day are
> few and far between.
Yes, we help decimate their environment in many ways. Over helping
is a common and under-recognised problem both at home and at
Lack of discussion is another.
> Second, I think of television and computer games as being
> like sugar. Sugar is very delicious and I find I have to be aware of
> how much of it I am eating or I would have way more than my teeth and
> blood sugar think I need
The "sugar" in computer games, and indeed in computing, is, I believe
-control-. We need to be in control of our lives, and we enjoy controling
things. I'll wager, the less control people have of their own personal
lives, the more they need to control others, or things (such as CGs).
Perhaps it can be seen as theopy? Oh, some are enjoable too, but,
that control that is being enjoyed, isn't it?
> Anyway, for us the violence is not the issue and neither is the lack
> of understanding of play. Rather it is just plain prejudice as to the
> nutritional value of sugar, I mean computer games and their
> opportunity cost.
Where violence is concerned, I part with you. This depends on the
child's age and temprement.
I have only games specifically designed for young kids (mine are 5 and
2) + Lemming and Sim City (for those I teach).
Message to fellow teachers
Children learn inspite of us, not because of us!
If you wish to be removed from this mailing list, please send an email TO
firstname.lastname@example.org with the following phrase in the BODY (not the
subject) of the message:
unsubscribe discuss-sudbury-model [the-subscribed-email]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Nov 05 2001 - 20:24:28 EST