Interesting New Book: The Art of Roughhousing
http://theartofroughhousing.com/
Above is a link to the website promoting a new book called The Art of Rough Housing. I have not yet read the book, as I am cheap and waiting in line behind a couple of other people at the library.
As some of you who have to deal with me at work know, I am pro letting kids play rough and thus am posting this link to a new book that finds cognitive, social, and emotional benefits to allowing kids to engage in rough house style of play with wrestling and tackling and such.
My personal definition of rough housing would be physical play where there is no malice intent in any of the participants. (Think of a nature video where you might see Monkeys or some other young mammal wrestling around, but the animals areobviously not trying to hurt each other) I will give 2 concrete examples of what I mean from observations of children recently observed interacting. I had music on and two girls (age 5) were holding hands dancing together but as they were dancing they repeatedly lost their balance (this appeared to be on purpose) and fell to the ground or onto each other. Another case involved a group of 5 boys (again age 5) . One boy was standing on one side of the playground, and he would throw a tennis ball to the other side of the play ground where the 4 other boys would run and try to see who could get it first and throw it back. As the boys ran to the ball, they would often dive to the ground to get it, sometimes they bumped into each other, and in other cases there were times when 2 boys reached the ball simultaneously which usually resulted in a quick physical struggle of who had the ball. It should be noted, in both of these cases, the play was organized by the children without any adult help and in both cases, there was some chance of physical injury. In both cases, I choose to observe the play without intervening because it appeared the children were having fun and they were managing to play the game while recognizing their physical limits which resulted in no one actually getting hurt. In addition, in the latter game that was more competitive for the ball, there were no cases or any major arguments or disagreements. That being said, I have witnessed children playing a variation of that ball game that did result in almost fights and aggressiveness regarding the ball; in those cases I stepped in gave the children the option of either playing a different game or augmenting the game in some way so it would result in less fights and possibility of injury. One way, that the game has been augmented is that instead of all the children running to get the ball simultaneously, the children will turns throwing it to each other in a way where each child gets an equal number of times to get and throw the ball. (often a conflict will result of one child repeatedly reaches the ball first) I acknowledge the argument that playing the version of the game that is more like catch where everyone gets an equal amount of throws, is a more egalitarian way to play that does not involve rough housing or any sort of Darwinism aspect.
If the children discuss the game and choose to play the more egalitarian way, that is great. However, I if the children do choose to play the other way, I don’t feel they should automatically stopped just because it is competitive and or there is a greater potential for injury. I think the more competitive version of the game has some benefits. For one, the children because of the competition aspect are exerting themselves and their bodies more. There have also been studies indicating that this type of play that involves tacking, wrestling, or other forms of physical contact is beneficial to both the motor cortex and the sensory cortex of the brain. In addition, I they do seem to learn very subtle negotiation and fair play skills even while playing the competitive version of the game. For example, let’s say there is one child who is a little bit bigger or faster who is getting the ball the most often. Sometimes, that child will realize that if only they get the ball, that will piss the other children off, so they subtly ease up at times and let other children get the ball. Or after two children have crashed into each other with one being knocked down, I have observed another child spontaneously helping the other up.
Overall, I think the adult role whether it be parent or teacher role in this type of play is to monitor it to make sure that in never devolves into actual fights or heated disagreements that the children are not capable of resolving themselves
If the children discuss the game and choose to play the more egalitarian way, that is great. However, I if the children do choose to play the other way, I don’t feel they should automatically stopped just because it is competitive and or there is a greater potential for injury. I think the more competitive version of the game has some benefits. For one, the children because of the competition aspect are exerting themselves and their bodies more. There have also been studies indicating that this type of play that involves tacking, wrestling, or other forms of physical contact is beneficial to both the motor cortex and the sensory cortex of the brain. In addition, I they do seem to learn very subtle negotiation and fair play skills even while playing the competitive version of the game. For example, let’s say there is one child who is a little bit bigger or faster who is getting the ball the most often. Sometimes, that child will realize that if only they get the ball, that will piss the other children off, so they subtly ease up at times and let other children get the ball. Or after two children have crashed into each other with one being knocked down, I have observed another child spontaneously helping the other up.
Overall, I think the adult role whether it be parent or teacher role in this type of play is to monitor it to make sure that in never devolves into actual fights or heated disagreements that the children are not capable of resolving themselves
Comments