I was a little coldish today. Nothing serious, but we stayed home for the morning instead of going to preschool. My daughter played in the garden, blowing bubbles, looking for snowdrops, and trying out her kid-sized skateboard. She was delighted. It was a beautiful day, and later on she went out into our front yard and picked a couple of primulas, excited about the smell.
Am I doing wrong by letting her play in the garden instead of going to preschool? According to all of my common sense, no. She’s getting fresh air, free play time, and physical activity. According to a recent article in The Atlantic, though, gardening is no replacement for school. The author rejects the notion that school gardens in particular are good for children. Why?
She says that gardening takes time away from reading and math, skills that some children struggle to learn. Gardening is one of those hands-on activities that many people have worked for years to remove themselves from. Getting food from the land? Forget it. It doesn’t play well on standardized tests.
I disagree. In fact, I disagree rather vehemently, in the polite but very firm way that only a gardener can. Children need to go outside. Going outside calms the minds of children with learning challenges like ADHD. We are creatures who must go outside, and we are biophilic by nature. School gardens give us places to play and to fuse science, math, and as many other subjects as you can think about. The options are only limited by the creativity of the children and the teacher.
While tending to a garden may not yield pat answers on standardized tests, it prepares our children for life. In our lives, we will make things and grow things. Creating food for another human being is an honorable task, not one that is demeaning and detracts from academics. I remember the pressure I felt when I was honored to be the only food source for one human, my daughter. Feeding even more would be a greater honor.
Do you think that school gardens are a useful place to be?