Gifts

The simplicity of Froebel's gifts is what catches my attention, especially in light of our reading about Connected Learning for this week.  While children are able to create, design, and reflect with the gifts, there is also sense about Froebel’s gifts  that they are harmonious and representative of nature and the unity of the world.  I like this.  The lessons to be learned are contained in a simple wooden box but invite children to explore the world outside in interesting ways.  In Inventing Kindergarten (1997), it states that the gift’s intended result was the creation of a sensitive, inquisitive child with an uninhibited curiosity and genuine respect for nature, family, and society: a reasoning and creative child who would later have few problems learning the three Rs or anything else…”  These gifts were somewhat controlled and prescriptive in nature which raises may raise tensions for people who are in the constructionist understanding of giving children opportunities to explore with tools and toys.   The stated goal  of raising  a child who "respects society" also conjures tensions around the notion of a child who doesn't question or critically examine society.  Hmmm. 

The reading for this week, Connected Learning (2013),  has brought into conflict some aspects of the Froebels gifts for me.  Connected learning in contrast to the rituals and routines of Froebel may seem like  unruly play.  Today’s child may play with the gifts for awhile but would eventually move into  other building worlds if that was their interest.   The “gifts” may represent the disconnected ways that many schools promote learning today (as controlled and routine). While programs like Minecraft represent  the way children choose to engage in learning out of school.  These two approaches are very different and they may account for what Ito et.al. (2013) says is the disconnect between classroom learning and the everyday lives and interests of many young people. The historical times are so very different and I wonder if that would affect how young children use and interact with the gifts in this historic time and place. 

My daughter, Fuji,  loves slime. She learns about different ways to make it by connecting with other slime makers who are on Instagram and Youtube.  They offer videos, chats, and tutorials, as well as products for sale.  My daughter spends hours trying different recipes and adding new ingredients, she consults online friends and even uploads video of her own creations to her accounts.  She has just started to create an online shop.  This process is messy and reaches far outside of the confines of our home, her school, or our community. What would she do with the wooden boxes?  How long might that hold her attention.   She is from a different time then we are from and things move fast.  

In comparison to Fuji's in home play, Froebel’s gifts could seem quiet, isolating, restrictive and limited.  If you had asked me to write about the gifts last week, before the connected learning piece, you may have gotten a completely different response.  I do see them as a way to promote exploration, design and creativity and I really appreciate the way that Froebel linked learning to forms of life, knowledge and beauty. But, I question how they may be received by today's digital natives. 

For me...when I opened the box and poured out the wooden blocks I was excited by the possibilities for building.  I began right away to construct a tower that soon fell.  I suppose I was learning about construction and design. Freobel had an emphasis on play and these gifts certainly worked toward that aim.  Brosterman (2013) wrote that play was fundamental to the success of kinderarten, and further cited Froebel as saying, "Play is the purest, the most spiritual, product of man at this stage, and is at once the prefiguration and imitation of the total human life. of the inner, secret, natural life in man and in all things." These gifts have the potential to assist the child to make the connections between their play and the natural world.

If I was still teaching kindergarten, I think that I would offer the gifts to my students.  They offer great opportunity to cycle through the kindergarten approach to learning as explained by Resnick, (n.d.) in which students should create, play, share, reflect and cycle back to imagine.  Unfortunately, time to play and explore in this cyclical way has been stripped from many kindergarten rooms.