I have to admit that as I read through the first few
chapters of You Can’t Say You Can’t Play, I was a bit befuddled. I
thought to myself, Paley got a MacArthur Genius Grant for this? The Magpie story was nice, but not award-winning
children’s literature. The rule, You can’t say, “You can’t play,” seemed like a
classroom management technique that would be unexceptional in a classroom where
children were already taught and expected to share, be kind, and take care of
one another. It seemed that Paley was already the type of teacher who discussed
and persuaded students to include one another in their play. Wouldn’t this rule
just be a way for her to save time and debate.
Timmy: Ms.
Paley! Jimmy said I can’t play!
Ms. Paley: Jimmy. You can’t say, “You can’t play.”
Let Timmy play.
Jimmy: OK
As I read on, I began to better
discern the subtle genius of Paley’s approach. I was most impressed with
Paley’s practice of regularly recording children’s stories. This practice would
validate students who came from backgrounds that emphasized oral traditions and
story telling over print text (which we learned about in Literacy) and help
develop these important abilities in students who didn’t. I also began to
appreciate the Magpie story more as I watched Paley involve her students in the
story creation process. As they went from audience member to directors with the
ability to demand a script revision, the students’ voices were validated. They
were also witnessing the creative process firsthand, which I believe is critical
for the development of creative confidence and efficacy.
The true value of the Magpie story wasn’t as literature but
as a safe forum through which the children could witness and explore the
emotions and consequences associated with changing the rules of their
classroom. Without the Magpie story and Paley’s conversations with her students
about both their own feelings and the older children’s feedback, You can’t say,
You can’t play” would have just been another empty platitude. It was the
children’s exploration, sharing, and discussion of their own feelings about and
experiences with power, fairness, and rejection that gave the “rule” meaning. I thought it was interesting that the
rule’s eventual implementation did not necessarily reduce conflict in Paley’s
class. Kids still attempted to exclude one another. However when they did, the
rule served as an entry point to question and debate the exclusion. It’s the
process around implementing the rule not the rule itself that contributes to
children’s character and social/ emotional development.
That all being said, you all know
by now that I am, above all, a skeptic. Come on, doesn’t this all sound a
little too easy? A little too good to be true? Does it really have an
impact? Would you really feel
better about yourself if you knew kids were only playing with you because the
teacher was forcing them? Wouldn’t this seem like a perfect candidate for one
of those well-intentioned, seemingly great practices that ends up having the
complete opposite effect (like praise)? So I looked up research on the
effectiveness of implementing You Can’t Say, “You Can’t Play.” I found a few,
admittedly small, studies. In comparison with control classrooms, children in
classes where the rule was implemented reported liking each other significantly
more at the end of the year, yet reported higher levels of social
dissatisfaction.
It was a surprising, yet intriguing finding. The practice
was effective in one regard, but at a cost. What do you make of it?
Your mini scene made me laugh. As I was hearing the boy say "ok" in my head, I thought, "It's never that easy." But that's besides the point. Sherry, your talk of "script revision," "audience members," and "directors" got me thinking. It would have been a fun project for the kids to bring the Magpie story to life after Paley finished telling it to them. They would have to work together as a class to condense the story into a script, chose roles, makes costumes, scenery, props, etc. They would be working on communication skills and there are many ways Paley could work math and other lessons into the play-making process. I know that they are young, but performing the story could have a lasting effect on the students.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the latter portion of your post. I am still on the fence as to whether this is a rule I would implement in my classroom. I think further research is necessary to see what some of the long-term effects are. Kudos to you for starting the research process. : )
I kinda wondered the same thing Sherry. When I finished the book, my first thought was how did it go the next year when the rule was implemented at the beginning of the year? How did it go the next? How were these kids when they got to older grades? Where's YCSYCP II: The Wrath of Lisa?
ReplyDeleteJoe, your "The Wrath of Lisa" comment is not only hilarious, but a great conversation starter. Yes, I would be interested to know how things turned out for her the following school year. It seemed like she might return to rejecting students at will.
DeleteYes Joe! I really want to know more about the kids as they moved on to other grades, especially Lisa, as I wrote in another post since she was the most vocal opponent of the plan. Not only do I want to know about the original kids, but what happened in subsequent years?
DeleteSherry, as you know, I too am skeptical and cynical about a variety of issues, but one thing in which I believe firmly is the basic decency and kindness of humans. I think that the findings revealing that the children "liked each other more,"lends itself to the fact that, oftentimes, we don't give ourselves the opportunity to become acquainted with others, thereby losing out on the possibility of friendship. I feel that teachers have an obligation to obliterate the "cliques", as soon as possible, to ensure that everyone feels valued and wanted.
ReplyDeleteI question whether we need to eliminate the "cliques". Arent tight knit social circles healthy and supportive of a childs social development? Why are we saying that having a "BFF" is wrong? Perhaps we should be teaching our students that its okay to have our own groups and games and friends, but that there is a nice way to reject someone and a not so nice way. Perhaps the rule should be expanded to state that "You Cant SIMPLY say you at play". If the students are going to politely reject someone, than they must be able to justify why, and that justification must be valid. If someone in the class challenges the validity of a groups reasoning, then it will be put to a vote, in true democratic fashion. I think its important to teach children that they can have favorite people in the class, but also evoke that "basic human decency and kindness" Joanner reffered to in her post.
DeleteThank you Sherry, for voicing some of the same skepticism I've been throwing around in some of my other comments. The more I think about the book, the more I find myself getting closer to almost getting annoyed at how "easy" and "miraculous" Paley makes this rule appear to be. The idea that all classes in all situations will take to the rule with equal fervor and implement it with equal (or improving! the arrogance...) effectiveness goes against what we know about people: they're all different.
ReplyDeleteThe studies would be more useful if they were longitudinal in nature: what would a group of students look like who agreed upon the rule at an early age and continued to implement it every year? What would the texture of their interactions be? At what age would these students just be "playing nice" in front of teacher and bullying one another outside the school. Forcing acceptance inside the classroom doesn't change the impulses some students will have to control, exclude, and sever some members from the "in" crowd.
Sherry, as I was reading this book, I too kept wondering what was so "special" about this book and the phrase "You Can't Say, You Can't Play." I just kept asking myself, how do I incorporate this practice into a democratic classroom and if I do implement this rule, am I taking my students right to choose away.
ReplyDeleteAs I finished the book, I realized that the book was not just about the rule, but the disucssion that takes place as a result of the rule. The process Paley used of recording students stories appeared to be very beneficial and a great way to assess student learning. This technique is one I hope to incorporate in my classroom.
As a future educator, I believe that it is my role to make sure that all students are included and when there is a situation when students are not being included that as a classroom community we are developing a system that is fair and respects eveveryone's feelings.
I agree Keshia...the beauty of Paley's strategy was not in the rule itself, but the process that it stirred up in her classroom. Paley was able to get her students to ask (and answer!) some really tough questions, questions that we, as adults, often grapple with. By giving the students the floor to talk freely about what the benefits and disadvantages of the rule, she was creating a place where they could feel safe and comfortable discussing their feelings, as illustrated in several of the grade levels when the 'rejected' students were finally given a voice. She was ultimately making steps in the direction of creating a haven for the children, where they could have open discusiion about controversial topics. This is something that we have heard quite a bit over the past few months...the importance of making our classroom a "safe space" for our children.
DeleteThe Wrath of Lisa - nice Joe. Yes, the studies need to be larger, longer, and more longitudinal in nature, but I agree with Joe that the findings that the children "liked each other more,
ReplyDelete"lends itself to the fact that, oftentimes, we don't give ourselves the opportunity to become acquainted with others."
I think this came up in the book too with some of the older kids who wished they had that kind of rule. Who wanted to be nicer people and wished they had an authority to protect them from their baser impulses. Don't I wish I had one every time I enter a Starbucks. Hello double mocha frappachino.
Sherry, I wondered about what impact the rule, though successful, was having on the students. Many students were clearly against it, and felt it was unfair for the teacher to infringe on their right to choose who they wanted to play with. Isn't play time supposed to be enjoyable? How can it be when you may be forced to spend that time with a student who you might now get along with? It is believable that this time would be less enjoyable for students.
ReplyDelete