Many parents do not know what their children are suitable for learning and what abilities they lack, so they refuse to enroll their children in specialty classes. I don’t know if they have heard of it. The famous psychologist and pediatrician Dr. Arnold Gesell The "maturity power theory" proposed by the author believes that children's development is determined by innate genetic factors, and maturity is the main driving force for development.
Before figuring out this problem, you'd better know a famous experiment - the "Twins Climbing the Ladder Experiment". Gesell selected a pair of identical twin brothers under 12 months old as experimental subjects and asked them to learn to climb ladders.
Gesell first asked his brother to start learning to climb ladders in the 48th week after birth. At that time, the child had just learned to stand and could hardly walk. Training for 15 minutes every day, my brother experienced the process of falling, crying, and getting up many times, and it was very difficult to learn. The younger brother only started learning in the 52nd week after birth. At this time, the younger brother's walking posture is relatively stable and the strength of his leg muscles is stronger. And he watched his brother train every day, and he was always eager to try.
The result of the experiment is: the elder brother practiced for 6 weeks starting from the 48th week after birth, and did not learn it until the 54th week after birth. My younger brother practiced for 2 weeks starting from the 52nd week after birth, and also learned to climb the same ladder at the 54th week after birth. And the most important thing is that my younger brother not only takes less time to study and has good learning results, but also has a stronger willingness to continue learning.
Then, why didn’t the brother who received the training show an advantage in climbing the ladder? Gesell pointed out that children's learning depends on physiological maturity. Without sufficient physiological maturity, there is no real psychological and ability development, and learning only plays a promoting role in this.
As for the various training courses that cost tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands and carry the expectations of parents for their children to succeed, in fact, according to Gesell’s experimental research, those so-called can improve children’s IQ and cognitive ability so that children will not lose at the starting line. The training is basically useless.
The point is that those courses that exceed children's cognitive abilities may also greatly dampen children's enthusiasm for learning, kill children's motivation to learn, and even damage children's self-esteem and self-confidence.
So in the book "Don't Challenge Human Nature", the author asked: Should we reflect on whether spending so much money to let children learn content beyond their abilities is for the good of the children, or is it to relieve our own anxiety? Or to satisfy the past shortcomings in your heart?
Of course you can refute me immediately. It is the general trend that drives parents to be anxious. But if you go and read the book, the next chapter will tell you that many studies show that whether a child can go to college depends on whether the parents have money. It doesn't matter whether you attach great importance to education or not. Perhaps it is doomed when the child is still a fertilized egg.
Therefore, instead of worrying about future people and making future people very anxious, it is better to think about yourself first. If you want to play the long-term game of life, is the cultivation of mental toughness better than blind cramming education? How much more important?
(The picture comes from "Little Shede", which makes you choke just by looking at the screenshots)
