Child Rearing

The Writers and Their Perspectives

The writers and speaker discuss child-rearing, schooling, and child growth from various perspectives and disciplines. They also, however, highlighted the same idea of an unbounded way for children to learn and grow as mature contributors to a world that is much better than the present and egalitarian one. Indeed, there have been many critiques and studies of the existing societal processes and how they form people’s minds today. I’m hoping that these critiques shed light on where to begin or where to go if one were to change anything. The three pieces of literature presented various views from various disciplines. Anderson and Cavajo’s paper are entirely different while Robinson’s critique takes the previous authors’ concepts in dichotomy.

The Backgrounds of the Authors

The two authors, Anderson and Cajete, have backgrounds different from each other. On one hand, Anderson, a non-indigenous academic, studied the different ways in the life stage of a child belonging from an indigenous group. While Cajete is one indigenous group and has presented a perspective that of an insider than an outsider looking in. And Robinson’s talk about the education system and how restrictive and self-serving it is comes from a perspective of a social academic who is able to put the other authors’ arguments side by side. Anderson sees that there are other ways for which the world we live in can start to benefit the great number of individuals who are excluded in this current system of the society that is lead on by capitalistic interests and propelled by the existing education system. Thus, the authors’ social positions and expertise provide them both the benefit of getting as close to objectivity as possible; however, at the same time, their positions and expertise limit them to what others who have not the same background as theirs can see or view on the same situation. In a way, their backgrounds and expertise select what they can see (But, in fairness to the authors, or anyone else for this matter, it is a difficult mental task to be able to see from all perspectives). Thus, with these limitations of the author, the reader and the audience can only work on what they are presented with, and deduce, from his or her own point of view, what can be learned there. Assumptions that are influenced by the author’s background are always present in the academic ordeals of finding out answers about certain subjects, especially on matters that involve the culture of peoples.

The Sociological Study by Anderson and Cajete

The Anderson’s work is sociological in discipline as he has studied, in sociological terms, the dynamics of an indigenous group and tries to associate or compare it with the aspects in the western society’s cultures. While Cajete’s is an indigenous one. He presented the concepts, certain aspects of the culture from which he came from that cannot be readily understood-or even felt-by an outsider from that culture. Having these personal backgrounds as individuals they can only choose one perspective as neither of them can recreate their birth to be in each others’ ethnic group.

Key Ideas in Anderson’s Study

The key ideas in Anderson’s study are the child-rearing of a certain indigenous group which, as opposed to the European style of child-rearing and upbringing, is giving the child more freedom and far less austere. The underlying concept he found from the group, which the author has built-up from separate studies of academics, is that the indigenous group’s non-interference in a child’s development or the honing of one’s own individualism at the young stage of life is one cornerstone of the group’s survival as a collective. And that it has a connection to their spirituality, their concept of community, and the overall aspects of their culture. During the child or that person’s coming of age in this particular indigenous group, however, they have a different approach. Such an approach of imposing more restrictions and discipline is also of the same utmost value to their society’s well-being. Ultimately, the concept of the development of one’s individualism to realize that one is part of a collective, and that the coming of age is a phase where this is introduced to and practiced by the individual after he or she has acquired the right amount of honing by their gods and the community, as it takes a community, not just one family to raise a child.

Cajete’s Perspective on Indigenous Education

Cajete’s study is more of a storytelling by a person who belongs to a particular culture showing the concepts from a first-hand source. His foundations of indigenous education which are community, technical environmental knowledge, vision, mythic foundation, and spiritual ecology make up an individual who is able to survive as part of the society and successfully lead his life in a sustainable, life-nourishing way. Every individual is born into a community, a society, and a culture. It is intrinsic to humans to have to live within a collective since no man can survive alone. This very concept is imbibed among indigenous peoples all around the world. The sense of community is evident in their concept of technical knowledge whose application complements the environment in which they live and is essential to the community’s well-being, especially in the long-term. In this light, the vision or the dream of an individual as a contributor to the society is realized at the right age where he or she will be able to realize their purpose in their society or community. And the spiritual ecology is the spirituality of indigenous peoples who acknowledge this concept in every part of the world, and where everyone’s identity is centered on it.

Robinson’s Critique of the Education System

Robinson’s educational paradigms are a presentation of how dysfunctional and under-serving the traditional education system is and how it is modeled for the interests of the dominant, industrial-driven economy, one which is far-fetched from the paradigm that is existing within the systems of indigenous peoples. And how it subjugates the aesthetic forms of intellectual expression as something that has no value because it does not benefit such an existing system at all. He presented how those in the system of the dominating economy-the people-are boxed intellectually and forcefully molded to be a functioning tool for the continuum of the working of the current dominating society. He presented how the children in this current education system are made to perform in a model that is likened to an actual factory, and that age, grades, and numbers are what are important to take note of, being rational and rewarded as they should maintain.

Contrasting Indigenous and Traditional Systems

In contrast to the indigenous systems of learning, child development is not a system but, in fact, a part of the cycle with which the society and individuals are just mere part-takers and spectators in one individual’s learning journey or development. The individual is honed to have a perspective of being one with nature, that nature is life as it is the one that gives him/her his/her very life. Thus, for the indigenous society, child-rearing is one that is led by nature and the natural human tendency to have its own form while the community members just serve as stewards to the children, “without interfering in their development”, as they have been stewards of nature. Their cultures - the set of beliefs, systems, traditions - are patterned after this, and they thrive within it as a collective.

Different Paradigms and Similarities

Child-rearing in indigenous communities has sets of norms to adhere to, but it is different from the European style. The indigenous understanding of the child is that it is an individual who is an essential part of the continuum of the clan, the group, or their society, and he or she also serves as a depository of the indigenous knowledge systems and beliefs. On the other hand, the dominating society’s concept of the child is that he or she is to be nurtured, a young individual who should be educated to excel to eventually be able to fulfill one’s own dreams and aspirations. In these two paradigms of systems, we see the difference of instilling in the child an individualistic mindset versus one that lets a child acknowledge collectivism as an essential part of survival and life of an individual. However, it is fair to say that they are similar in ways that children are made to be thought of as functioning individuals for the society, regardless of for whom they are doing it for. And that it is also fair to say that each society can be critiqued by anyone who looks for it.

The Indigenous Philosophy and Vision for Education

The philosophical tenets of indigenous vision for education are as simple as living in a world that is given to him or her. It does not seek an “actual truth” or compare different truths or realities, but takes in life as it is, in all its glory and presence in nature, the environment, the ecology. And such ecology is narrowed into a society’s culture that contains its norms, belief systems, and knowledge. The indigenous philosophy is one that is anchored on their spirituality, the natural tendency to seek out a higher being, as it is made evident in nature itself, and of being one with them.

A Message of Appreciating Indigenous Systems of Learning

What I like best about the articles is that all speak from a certain point of view but give the same message of appreciating the system of learning that is indigenous in nature. I realized that I am able to see from these different points of view, with as much eagerness and uncolored lens as possible, even if I am part of or am being honed by the dominating education system. In a way, it is ironic, but it is just fair to say that still, with all its restrictions and boxing, our system has allowed us to look beyond its limitation. And that the human mind, most especially that of a child, is limitless and unbounded even by the very system that tries to hone it in a box. As a student and person who is continuously seeking learning, I basically just want to learn about life and see from the different specs from time to time.

The Path Towards a Better System of Education

Thus, my question is, what are the most important aspect(s) of well-being that both systems of education or child learning should focus on to hone generations who are better versions of the previous systems? And what are the aspects of both education systems that should be stopped? Ultimately, what makes a better society at its very basic level? How can man make systems that allow society to be more inclusive and less individualistic?