Okay, as much as I hate doing this, I feel compelled to comment on the whole Bean Dad imbroglio from a 3rd grade teacher's point of view, since it really touches on a number concepts that are extremely and frustratingly relevant to my practice at the moment (thread)

some fun: if we pretend that the dad is in fact a teacher, he's commended for identifying the elusive "teachable moment" (a real and mostly agreed upon concept) with his student/daughter, though he was aided by her overt inquiry. Intuition suggested, not yet proven.

I am still teaching virtually. I receive *countless* questions every day about how to perform tasks. 3rd graders (7-9 year-olds) are cognitively diverse, though the majority are still concrete in their thinking.

Third graders need substantial scaffolding with abstract concepts, and they need language to be broken down as much as possible. This is basic teaching stuff. You start abstract and incrementally provide concrete scaffolding to help them understand and make connections

Back to Bean Dad -- BD's suggestion that his daughter try to understand the tool without assistance is a fine pedogeological starting point, especially for a student with who has demonstrated higher level thinking in the past.

This is what teachers sometimes call an "exploration," and it *can be* very effective. Especially for kids who like tactile and learn well on their own. But an exploration without supervision, intermediation, and follow-up is counter-productive.

BD also demonstrates poor understanding of cognitive development and curriculum. He makes a mistake many new teachers do and projects his own understanding of the concept onto his student. This prevents him from developing the concrete scaffolding necessary to help her learn.

One productive pedogeological trick BD employs is the use of deeper level questioning -- he tries to engage her metacognition, encouraging her to think more deeply about the mechanics of the can-opener.

Here's where the whole thing is completely fucked, however, and where BD works as a perfect stand-in for systemic problems underlying our educational system:

as soon as his daughter begins to telegraph emotional distress (which seems, like, right out of the gate), in order to salvage the "teachable moment," BD needed to demonstrate *his* engagement to establish connection and nurture his daughters growth

Now, he can modify this as he sees fit in the moment, and even step away once it seems like she's getting the hang of it, but the kid is not going to learn anything unless she feels a sense of security and trust.

Without this, all she's going to take away from the experience is educational trauma (or in this case, parental trauma), which, in time, completely frays a sense of community and makes actual learning impossible.

During this COVID teaching period, I wish the educational system would work harder towards accommodating the emotional needs of traumatized and confused students rather than subjecting them to standardized tests and unmodified curriculums.

I think this BD thing resonates because we are all concerned about the emotional well-being of our youth, and hate to see someone so recklessly unsympathetic and condescending, especially when they're visibly upset. Maslow before Bloom, fuck standardized testing, fuck Bean Dad.