Ideas sought...

In article ,
Ericka Kammerer wrote:

wrote:
If a child is not old enough to separate from his mom for a lesson then
a child is not old enough to take the lesson. Period.

Huh? There are *lots* of classes out there that are
*designed* for parent and child to do together. What's wrong
with that? Chookie isn't in the class because her child
can't separate. She's in the class with him because it's
a class designed for parent-child interaction.

I generally find that businesses promote "Mommy and me" activities as
"lessons" and they simply are not. They are fun.

So? What's wrong with that? She seems quite
clear on what he's learning in this class, and she and
he are fine with it and like the class. Is that not
enough? Yes, she's got a challenge dealing with the
toddler, and if she can't find another solution it might
be the case that it's too hard for her to do a mommy-and-me
class at this stage, but that doesn't mean that there's no
value in those classes.

Best wishes,
Ericka

I had few opportunities to do "mommy and me" classes with my kids. (I
worked full time when my oldest was born, and by the time I wasn't
working full time she was three and had infant twin siblings. I didn't
have child care -- and wasn't willing to take the classes in the
evenings when DH was home -- so didn't do them with her. Then, with the
twins, I tried onr or two, but found that they were not set up well to
deal with one mom/two toddlers. All three of us got more aggravated
than anything.)

But I did watch several, to get ideas. It isn't true that NO learning
takes place -- it IS true that they are different from classes designed
just for kids. Some of the learning is for the parents: how to teach
your kids things, for example. Some is for the kids. And even if they
were JUST for fun, I don't see that as a problem. Some of life ought to
be just for fun!

--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

wrote:
If a child is not old enough to separate from his mom for a lesson then
a child is not old enough to take the lesson. Period. If your child is
old enough to take a lesson without you present I would find a place
that is set up so that he can do that.

That's your opinion but many people like mommy and me classes and find
them effective for many activities (e.g., music, swimming, even
ice-skating!)

I generally find that businesses promote "Mommy and me" activities as
"lessons" and they simply are not. They are fun.

And the problem is?

If your older child can't separate from you for a lesson, I would
simply wait until he is old enough to do that. I deal with this a lot
as a skating teacher. A teacher who is really trying to teach cannot
compete with the presence of parents and siblings. I

That's absurd. Even for ice-skating. DD and I took a modified mommy
and me skating class when she was about 3 years old. I was in the adult
class and she was in the child class but on the ice at the same time.
It *was* fun and she learned how to skate. She definitely felt more
comfortable seeing me on the ice and not sitting in the stands, behind
the plexiglass.


Jeanne

"Jeanne" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
If a child is not old enough to separate from his mom for a lesson then
a child is not old enough to take the lesson. Period. If your child is
old enough to take a lesson without you present I would find a place
that is set up so that he can do that.

That's your opinion but many people like mommy and me classes and find
them effective for many activities (e.g., music, swimming, even
ice-skating!)

Actually, for music, a parent-involvement format is one of the most
effective methods of instruction for young children, especially in
instrumental instruction. Posture, hand position, etc is extremely
important, and while older children can often self-correct between lessons,
young children can't. Even for older children it makes a big difference if
the parent takes an active vs passive role in encouraging good practice
habits (which does not mean forcing or bribing a child to practice).

Usually, parent participation moves from active participation to more
passive participation where the parent is expected to assist if needed,
watch, and take over the monitoring role at home as the child progresses,
but usually the child won't come to a lesson without the parent expected to
be actively present and learning until 8-9 yrs old. If anything, classes for
preschool/early elementary children without parents present are more likely
to be fun playtime and less likely to involve focused instruction. You will
not have children learning piano or violin in a kindergarten music class
without parents present, for example.



I generally find that businesses promote "Mommy and me" activities as
"lessons" and they simply are not. They are fun.

And the problem is?

A lot of learning takes place through fun for children 0-7. In fact, I would
argue that if it's not fun for the child, the child isn't learning-and if
it's not fun for the parent, normally the child won't get a chance to learn.

If your older child can't separate from you for a lesson, I would
simply wait until he is old enough to do that. I deal with this a lot
as a skating teacher. A teacher who is really trying to teach cannot
compete with the presence of parents and siblings. I

If a class is designed as a parent-child class, the teacher is not competing
with the parent-rather, the parent is a valued, vital part of the class. I
do agree that it is difficult to compete with siblings who aren't active
participants in a class, which only occurs if the siblings are in the same
age group or if it's a multi-age class.

If a class is not designed as a parent-child class, then yes, a parent can
be a distraction. However, that isn't the case for the OP, nor is it the
case for most music classes for children below the age of 8 or so outside a
school setting.

That's absurd. Even for ice-skating. DD and I took a modified mommy
and me skating class when she was about 3 years old. I was in the adult
class and she was in the child class but on the ice at the same time.
It *was* fun and she learned how to skate. She definitely felt more
comfortable seeing me on the ice and not sitting in the stands, behind
the plexiglass.


Jeanne

Ericka Kammerer ) writes:
Catherine Woodgold wrote:
Ericka Kammerer ) writes:
There's a world of difference between
saying, "I'm so sorry Johnny has become a distraction.
It's a challenge for us to find another caretaker at
this time. Would you be able to recommend another
class that can accommodate both children, or a facility
that offers childcare?" and saying, "Well, I don't see
how I can manage Johnny in the hallway and I can't get
a sitter. If you want to keep clients, I think it would
be in your best interests to offer some kind of reasonable
solution for parents like me who have younger kids."
And anyway, requests for different course offerings are
typically best discussed with the director/manager of
the school than the teachers.

Good point about talking to the director/manager.
I don't think anyone suggested using the wording
in your second example. I think someone would only
say that if they were angry and lost their cool
and forgot to talk diplomatically.

But you know, people are smart. You can
gussy up the phrasing all you like, but if that's
what you *mean*, that's what they'll hear, and
they'll be just as offended as if you'd said it
baldly. You only have the credibility to start
talking about what others can do for you after
you've fulfilled your own responsibilities.

It's possible to ask the teacher for help without
either saying *or meaning* what you say in
your second suggestion.

" ) writes:
If a child is not old enough to separate from his mom for a lesson then
a child is not old enough to take the lesson. Period.


I disagree, in general -- though rules to that effect
may be in place for some particular lessons.

wrote:
I generally find that businesses promote "Mommy and me" activities as
"lessons" and they simply are not. They are fun.

I disagree with this, too. Some things are actually
learned by the child during "Parent and me" classes.
Also, the parent learns how to teach the child the material and
can continue outside the structured lesson. They're fun
*and* (sometimes at least) educational.