Current obsession: This wonderful thunder and Lightening storm that’s happening.
Current weather: not raining for most of the day, except for now. Warm though.

Hostel occupants kept me up till 1:30am last night. Not cool. Was a mission to get out of bed. Luckily now that I have my travel pass, I can catch the tram 2 stops and be at the course on time.

We talked about a lot of things today.  Talk about brain overload.

Our first conversation of the day was about how to hold a child, especially a newborn.  Holding them in your arms in a horizontal position is best, because the child has no concept of what it is like to be in a horizontal position.  This is different if you are burping the child, because at that time you need the wind to come up. But when you are doing this, you support the whole body especially the head/neck which is difficult and very heavy for many children to control. When you carry a child that is not able to put him/herself into a vertical position it is best to keep them in horizontal.  There has been a correlation between those children who have problems sleeping, or feeding are because they are ‘used’ to being in a vertical position, and are not satisfied in a horizontal. In a vertical position, they are overstimulated, and cannot settle, therefore will not settle into sleeping or feeding.

An example given to us is one of the Dr’s had twin children, and one with a congenital heart problem.  One developed at a regular pace, the other developed slowly, and did not roll until 15 months.  She always carried her child horizontally.  When asked why by a stranger, she said that not only was the child not ready to be in that vertical postion, to do so would put a lot of stress on the heart, because it would have to pump harder to get the blood/oxygen to the correct places.

We then had a discussion about the best way to carry a child using a carrier (i.e. the baby carries you strap onto your body). The result was the best ones to use were the slings; the ones that go over the shoulder, but held the child close to the mothers body in a horizontal position, not the ones that held the child vertical and looking out.  The young child’s body simply cannot cope with holding the head in that vertical position for that amount of time, and also to face out overstimulates the child, and doesn’t have the mothers face and cues to help make sense of what they are seeing.  Simone, I want one of your baby slings

We then went on to talk about those people who try to replicate the ‘being in the womb’ feeling for the newborn.  It is a transition process for the child coming from the womb, then into their back, however we cannot try and ‘hold’ the child in that feeling of being in the womb for too long… that time is over, and now it is time for being able to move freely, with the parent’s support and care.

The child does not need to be with the mother or father all the time now. They can have time apart, or more, time in sight of each other, but the child does not need to be always stimulated by them. This again is a delicate dance of giving the child time and space to explore on their own and finding their own interest, as opposed to the parent wiggling items in front of the child’s face.  This creates an artificial need, and is more likely a desire from the parents for their child to want them, as opposed to the child’s (original) need to not want them.  What this teaches the child is that they always need somebody else to stimulate them, instead of following their own interest as they are ready.  Also, if the parent is always doing this for the child, the parent has no time to be by themselves, to take a break and to relax.  If they set about always entertaining the child, the child will always expect it, and they will not let the parent have some rest. They will always be demanding of the parents time.  Also, if the parent is always stimulating the child, what happens when the second or third child come? The parent will then have all their attention on the other child, and expect the first child to be able to play by themselves. However, the child does not know that the parents agenda has changed, and will be still wanting that same attention.  This creates more work for the parents, for now they have two children to constantly entertain.  This can be avoided right from the start by allowing the child time to be by themselves, and the child will still feel secure for they will know that the parent is there to help if they have any difficulties.  They are not ‘alone’ for they have an image of their parents in their mind. The child trusts that the parent will attend to their needs when they communicate this, but they do not need to have the parent their every second of the day.

It is learning for the parent to know how to read the children’s cues, and to know when they are interrupting the child’s agenda. Sometimes this is needed, for when the child needs a nappy change or a bath, we need to take the child away from what they are focusing on doing, whether this is discovering their hands and how they work, or an older child playing with blocks.  The key is how this is done.  Not in a rush, whipping them away to do the care quickly, but in a respectful, calm, and slow manner, giving the child time to build up an image of what this caregiving time means, and how they can participate in it. If a child is hurried through a nappy change, and the caregiver is protesting because the caregiver does not like changing a smelly nappy, overtime the child will learn that the natural bodily functions of a human are not pleasant and not accepted.  If the caregiver does not accept this function, how can the child? Often toileting and toilet training difficulties can be traced back to somebody the child trusts not valuing this 1-1 time with the child, and behaving negatively toward the process.

Another way that adults may interrupt the child’s learning is by way of talking to them when they are trying to master a difficult task. For example, a child may be trying to climb over an object and the adults says ‘Careful baby’, or ‘don’t do that, you’ll fall’.  First of all the adult talk to the child when they are concentrating will distract the child, so probably will fall.  Secondly, how can a child learn to trust themselves and their body when the adult is telling them that they’re going to fall?

Think of a time maybe when you are trying to study for an exam.  You are concentrating very hard, and doing your best to understand a complex problem.  What if somebody came in to you at this time and said ‘Oh that’s too hard, you won’t understand that’.  Two things happen, 1) they’ve made it difficult for you to understand because they’ve broken your concentration, and 2) they’ve made you doubt yourself, and therefore doubt whether you’re going to pass this exam. This leaves you feeling unsure and uneasy of your abilities.  This is exactly what happens with a child when adults say this to a child.  We want to give them confidence right? Well why are adults telling the child they can’t do it, when they perfectly well can.

The next discussion we had leading on from this point is ‘What image does an adult have of the child?’ Are they helpless? Are they empty vessels to be filled by an adults teachings? No way.  Children are born with an innate programme, a drive to move, and a drive to play.  There is a concept that children will not learn without an adult to teach them.  This is not so.  Children will do particular tasks along their development and learning journey, and more often than not, these tasks are interrupted by the adult, so they find their own time to do them, when an adults relinquishes their agenda for the child for the moment.

We were shown a video of two women looking after four or five babies. These children were not ready to be in a walking position (for they had not pulled themselves into and out of that position) but these women were making the children walk by holding their hands, and pushing the child like a ball between them. These children were not unhappy.  They had huge smiles on their faces.  Everybody in the room cringed at the video, and one even asked if we could turn it off.  It was breaking our hearts to see these children being treated in this way.  While the women themselves were doing what they thought was best for the child, they had their own agenda for the child.  They believed that without them making the children move, they would not learn to do so.  We also noticed that the quality of the movement in he child’s body was very still and uncertain.  It was jerky, and the child did not have control over their body (which as I mentioned before is very very heavy) and limbs. The muscle tone on the child was very weak, for it had not been given time to build up the strenght in their body to hold it properly.  Becuase the child did not have the ability to control it’s body, the child relied heavily on the adult to be there should he fall.  This lead to the adults running around after the child, because they were putting the child in positions he should be in, and that were too risky for the child’s body, so they had to make sure that the child was always safe, and not going to fall.

This child was being motivated by what the adults wanted, and the excitement from the child’s face was a reflection of what the adults were giving to the child.  But this was artificial. One of the group commented that this stimulation was not coming from within.  The child was being taught to lie to themselves, and not listen to their body.  They were being taught to ignore the pain, and the belief that this position does not feel right for them, because the adults are telling me that this is good for me.  Children are adaptive in this way; adaptability is the way that the child’s brain is wired.  Without adaptability, a child would not be able to learn about living in different cultures, using different languages etc. Children will adapt and accept the environment that they are born into. If they are used to being in this overstimulating environment, with adults who are not clued on or tuned into their needs, they will accept that this is the norm, and adapt to it with behaviours to match.

One important point to note too, is that there is an idea that this is learning and that the child carers are working because they need to be seen to be busy.  This is not the case, for in a Pikler/RIE influenced setting the child carer is working through providing the caregiving tasks that a child needs, and the deep and meaningful relationship that build emotional security, confidence in the carer, and themselves.

I brought up the point that I thought this behaviour of adults could be partly attributed to the misinterpretation of Vygotsky’s ZPD theory.  This is that the adult should be there to support the child to take the next step.  The misinterpretation comes when adults believe they should be making the child get to the next stage. ie, instead of allowing a child to learn to stand up on their own, being comfortable in that position, and becoming a master of that position before attempting to take the next step, but with a relationship with the child, guidance, glances and words from the adult (as in the Pikler/RIE way) the adult needs to be right there, supporting the child’s body, or walking them around to make them walk.  A child will do walk regardless of how the adult supports, but the quality of movement, the confidence in their body, and the security of the adult-child relationship are what is affected.

It is probably important to note here too, that in the 60 years the Pikler institute has been caring for children, there has only been one serious accident, and this was by a child who came to the institute later, and had not been allowed to learn to move their body in a natural way. This child wanted to climb as the other children were doing, but he did not have the same awareness of his body as the other children did.  He challenged himself with a risky task, but did not know the limitations of his body.  This, along with the other research the institute has done needs to be acknowledged.

In the afternoon, we were visited by a child psychologist who spoke with us of how children’s cognitive development grows. It is in conjunction and alongside the motor development. If you have ever seen a newborn that is awake and not in need of care (ie nappy/food etc) you will see that the child is vigilantly looking around the room.  Newborns have a focus area of about 30cms (approx the distance from breast to mothers face) but they also can see out of focus for a greater distance that this. They can notice shades, contrasts, and have a fascination with the edges of areas, e.g. where the wall meets the ceiling, or where the light fixtures hang in the room.  To an adult this may seem boring, therefore we hang mobiles and other sensory objects in the way for children to look at. But a child has not seen or studies a ceiling before.  What is this large object in the air?

On a side note, mobiles too are distracting and stimulating.  A human has a need to watch things that move. This comes back to our evolution where we needed to notice moving objects that may be of danger. Once upon a time it was a lion, now it is a car.  If a child is always being placed under a mobile, they will be distracted by it, watching it, but they cannot reach it to explore it, put it in their mouths, to make sense of it.  Having a mobile over a cot will hinder more than help a child to sleep, because they will be stimulated into watching it, instead of listening to their body tell them that it is time to rest.

Going back to the previous point, if a child is at newborn age, able to intently look and concentrate on something, a shape, an object, and understands about faces (which children do, as they are able to recognise familiar faces, and often use the hairline to help orient themselves to a face) would this not then be considered learning? Therefore considered playing? Or for a better word, is it not the child’s work? Therefore, does play start at birth?

Around 6 weeks, a child is learning to move their head very slowly.  These movements are often jerky because, the head is so so heavy. These children do not move their eyes.  To be able to look at something to the side of them, they need to move their whole head.  It is this in connection with the nervous system maturing that a child learns to move their head.  As the nervous system matures, a child learns to move their body from their head to their feet.  The important thing is that the child is given time to do this.  I don’t just mean time during the day, but weeks and weeks to perfect and master the stages before trying out something new.

Around 7-8 weeks, a child performs random movements with their hands and body.  Over time, these random movements become more intentional as the child realises the correlation between the feeling in their body and the action that is taken.  This is when they discover their hands.  The hands are the child’s first toy, as they discover, look and understand how they work and how to move them.  This is the beginnings of hand-eye coordination, and the less talked about hand-mouth coordination.  It has been discovered that those children who are not given sufficient quiet moments during the day to practice these movements often have difficulty with fine motor movements (e.g writing) later in life.  Advice given to parents with children having difficulty using their fingers and fine motor skills is that it is important for a child to get to know their own body, and forget about practising drawing.  Drawing will come later. Children continue to study their hand a lot, up until around the 7th month of life.  It is probably a good time to note that those children who have not had the physical experience of moving their body up, down, left, and right, will have difficulty understanding these concepts on paper when it comes to drawing letters and such.

We then talked about young children using computers.  I personally feel that it is not needed, and my beliefs were backed up by our discussion with the psychologist.  She said that the reason why the computers were being forced onto children through curriculum and such is because the generation of policy makers are usually not so good with technology.  It is though that if children are exposed to it at a younger age, they will be better at using it.  It is fear of children not being able to live in a technological world more than anything else.  However, if a child knows and understands their body, there will be no problem to translate this knowledge into using computers.  Also, keep in mind that technology is becoming far more user-friendly.  The Psychologist believed that children should not be around computers until at least 10 years old when their brain is developed enough to understand this virtual world.  She said that no amount of virtual experience will make up for experiencing the world with your own body.  The example of this that she used was, think of when you are driven somewhere in the car, and then you have to drive the route again another day in your own car. Can you remember? Most likely not. This is the same with computers.  My thoughts on this are that computers have their place, but children do not need to be sat in front of it for hours and hours. 10-15 minutes a few times a week is more than enough for the growing child, because there is far more beneficial experiences to be had with the mind and body.  The class was shocked to hear that ICT was apart of the UK early childhood curriculum. I was too when I first read it.

Another point made was that in the course of human history, a person showed they were intellegant by what they could do with their hands; what objects and tools they could make. We could not have come to the digital ages without having gone through the steps beforehand.  So to is the same with children.  They need time to develop their bodies and thinking before using the computer.

Talk then moved to the topic of pacifiers and finger sucking.  I hate pacifiers/dummies, whatever you want to call them for several reasons;
1) the child is at the mercy of the adult.  The adult decides when they put them in, then, a year or so later, when the child has learnt to be dependant on them, they adult decides to take them away.
2) if it falls out, the child usually doesn’t have the ability to understand where it went so becomes unsettled until the adult settles them by putting it back in their mouth
3) it stops a child from babbling, cooing, and making facial expressions, all key tasks to accomplish for the social world of humans.

When a child is allowed to suck their own fingers, the child decides when, how long for, and which ones they wish to suck.  If they are upset, they can comfort and settle themselves, and they usually take them out when they play because they need both hands for moving and manipulation.  With a pacifier, it doesn’t always come out when they’re playing.  We talked about what happens when a child is sucking their fingers for many years; we discussed why this would be.  Sucking fingers is used for comforting, then there must be something else going on for a child in another area of their life. There is something unsettling them.  We need to look at the whole child and what is going on for them in all of their life and what can we change to help the child feel more settled.

We talked a bit about how and why children first grab.  I won’t go into this, because it is late and I cannot concentrate anymore, however I will say that it is not sure if grabbing happens because a child is interested in the object, or because there is still the grabbing reflex from birth, and this reflex is initiated when the child makes a random movement at an object. However, through observation there is a time when you can clearly conclude that a child is intends to grab that object.

After course Alex the translator dropped three of us up to a look out point to see over the Buda side of Budapest.  We walked for what seemed like ages, then discovered the look out point; a castle style building which we could climb and see the whole city.  I won’t upload the video, but here are some photos.

Stairs up to the lookout.

Alex (one of the other students) and I nearly at the lookout tower

The lookout tower János hill 527m above sea level, and a mission of a hill to climb (as you could probably tell from those steps)

Climbing the stairs into the tower

Parliment buildings on the river Danube

Looking through the tower

Valley on the other side of the hill, this township is not Budapest, but a neighbouring village.

Me on top of the tower, overlooking Budapest

We talked a lot about the differences in the recognition of childcare in our different countries – one from Tampa Florida (Alex – whose a RIE associate), one from Germany/China (the one I was with last night).  They were amazed at how far ahead New Zealand is in terms of acknowledgement of early childhood as a profession, not just babysitters, and how we have diploma’s, degrees, and doctorate courses that reflect this.

Now it is late. There is a youth group acting up downstairs, so I’m not sure how long it will take me to get to sleep tonight. I hope not long, because I am awefully tired. Hopefully I’m tired enough that noise will not be a problem.

Current Mood: artistic

Tags: Budapest, Early Childhood, Pikler, RIE