Stuff I Learned In Kindergarten That I Really Need to Unlearn

I recently posted these questions on social media: What’s your recollection of your early education? What are you still trying to unlearn? I received plenty of poignant responses to my query and - no surprise - they fell into the established norms of dominant White culture. In this post I’ll outline a few of them and connect them to the workplace. It turns out some of these early lessons have grown into the norms and trip-ups we often encounter as we work toward a more inclusive and welcoming culture.

First, let’s unpack the function of norms. This fresh definition from Stanford d.school captures the way they exert unnoticed control but also produce palpable environments: “Norms are shared but unspoken rules about how people should behave in a group. They shape which ideas are welcome, who speaks, and the texture of how people work together.” For many children, preschool and Kindergarten present the first social situations in which they must learn to work together. It’s not a new notion that many of our basic ways of being, learned in Kindergarten, continue to inform us as adults - you may recall the best-selling book, All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten, by Robert Fulghum. In it, he highlights positives including “the Golden Rule and love and basic sanitation” in such topics as “When you hurt someone say you’re sorry,” and “Wash your hands.” These are important norms for living, working and learning together to be sure.

But norms have values attached to them that solidify over time and can move from instructions for behaviors to perceptions of personal character - from “This is how we do it” to “This is the best way to do it” to “This is the only right way to be.” In practice they dictate not just what ideas and behaviors are expected, but who belongs in a group. And having a sense of belonging is key to developing our gifts and doing our best work. It’s key to retaining employees, members and clients alike.

Here are the top three clusters of Kindergarten norming that I heard the most about, arranged as a sentence: Boys & Girls, Control Yourself and Listen Up!

Control Yourself (or, Sit Still and Don’t Be a Crybaby!)

Sit Still! 

Sitting still is a huge part of what’s thought of as “Kindergarten readiness.” It's steeped in the norming and valuing of Analytical Knowledge or “head knowledge” over Integrative Knowing that encompasses learning from emotions, actions and gut feelings. As a dance teacher I can agree that managing a large group of children, all of whom are moving, is a skill in itself. But therein lies the rub: “managing” children. If we believe that children are empty vessels in which to pour knowledge, then we need them to sit still. We manage their movement in short, prescribed bursts at recess, physical education, and transition times. These are deemed appropriate times to “let off steam” or “get the wiggles out.” As children age up through the system, there is less and less tolerance for wiggles or steam. As one person recalled about her own Kindergarten learning, “The kids who lost recess were ‘bad kids’ who needed more discipline. Turns out they were probably neurodiverse and couldn't handle sitting in a desk or carpet square for multiple hours at a time . . . and they REALLY needed that recess to reset/regulate their nervous system.” Some teachers still take recess away from children who can’t sit still during class time, as if more sitting would solve anything.  In order to cope with sitting still for long periods of time, we must learn to tune out signals from our bodies that are asking us for movement, food, water, and other basic needs. Is it any wonder that as adults, many of us have trouble discerning when we are actually hungry or tired?

Of course we know that children learn with their entire bodies. Anyone who has watched a toddler repeatedly try to take steps, fall, stand up, and try again can attest to this. Ditto for observing children building a tower, exerting concerted focus for long periods of time as they test the balance of their materials over and over again. Or shooting a basket. Or executing a pirouette. Physical tasks are a template for experimentation.

Even beyond learning physical skills like these, body movement can get us past mental blocks and into creative thinking. When my son was small, one day I found him running laps around the living room where he had been drawing a comic book. I asked what he was doing, and he replied. “I’m just running (pant) to get myself (pant) some ideas.” As an educator I was vaguely aware that movement could facilitate thinking, but my 8-year old had just laid it out for me.

Transient Hypofrontality

Neuroscientist and creativity researcher Rex Jung has studied this phenomenon using brain imaging, and calls it “Transient Hypofrontality.” Hypofrontality is a big word for reducing the activity of our frontal lobes, those areas of our brains that provide analysis, classification, and if-then logic. Although these logical traits are important for self-control, time management, and task completion, they can be the death of creative ideas. When we engage in movement, doodling, daydreaming or other non-purposeful activity, we are able to put seemingly unrelated ideas out on the table of our mind and play around to see what combinations can happen. Of course if this were our permanent condition, we wouldn’t be able to put our creative ideas into action. Instead, we need to make this a “transient” state and restart our frontal lobe activity.

When we engage in movement, doodling, daydreaming or other non-purposeful activity, we are able to put seemingly unrelated ideas out on the table of our mind and play around to see what combinations can happen.

I heard Dr. Jung at the Teaching Through the Prism  Arts Integration conference at Washington, D.C.’s Phillips Collection. During the Q&A period, a Kindergarten teacher raised her hand to tell her sad story and ask advice: apparently, all teachers in her school were now required to post the minute-by-minute daily schedule of class activities. She had been able to comply with this until a recent dictum that they were not allowed to use the word “play.” As an experienced early childhood educator, she had seen firsthand the importance of play for young children - but she needed some theory to legitimize it. Dr. Jung affirmed that Transient Hypofrontality was the term she was looking for, and further explained that during times of play, movement or other unregulated activity, the brain not only comes up with creative ideas, but also consolidates learning and forms connections. 

And this doesn't stop in childhood, but happens throughout our lifetimes. It would do all of us well to unlearn “Sit Still!”

Kindergarten Learning: to tune out body sensations and minimize movement in order to focus on “more important” cognitive tasks.

Consequence: I eat, drink and sleep out of habit or time schedule;  I also have trouble connecting ideas I’ve learned and coming up with inventive new ideas.

Unlearning Tip: When your thinking feels blocked, get up and move around. While you’re at it, check in with your body. What do you need? Food, water, movement, a bathroom break? Once you have an answer, take care of that need.

Don’t be a Crybaby!

So many of us heard some form of this. A “crybaby” was one of the worst things we could be called! The implication here is that crying is something that only babies do, and that we necessarily leave behind as we grow up. The problem is that this is the start of shutting down our awareness of sensations and emotions. One respondent was told “There’s no place for your anger here.” Another was told not to be so sensitive. As she put it, “This shut off access to my vagus nerve and natural intuition.” It is indeed how we learn to disregard our emotional intelligence and value our thinking, rational brains over our sensing, feeling bodies.

In addition to exemplifying the norm of Analytical Knowledge, not being a “crybaby” illustrates the norm of Detached Interactions - in most workplaces or schools it is acceptable to stay cool and calm while interacting with others. Cool detachment is contrasted with passionately Attached Interactions. Attached, passionate expression is typically deemed “unprofessional” in school or the workplace - or in public spaces in general.  In the US, Black and Latin American subcultures lean more toward passionate communication. Those of us from many European and Asian cultures, among others, often misinterpret this passion for anger or upset. I once was facilitating a workshop in which people read aloud statements of purpose they had just written. One young Chicano educator read his with great passion, outlining ways that he wanted to protect children from the forces that had made his own youth so difficult. In the debrief conversation, a White woman characterized his speech as “angry.” It was a teachable moment about the sound of passionate statements, and about how the trope of the “Angry Black/Brown Man” gets traction. As an alternative, we can make room in our cultural framework for possibilities outside our own norms and habits. This allows us to check in with genuine curiosity: “I hear a lot of emotion in your voice, can you say more about what you’re feeling?”  

Kindergarten Learning: to anesthetize ourselves from our sensations in order not to feel or express our emotions. 

Consequence: If I can’t feel my emotions, how am I going to understand yours?

Unlearning tips: Start by periodically noticing your body sensations - where is there tension, relaxation, warmth, excitement? You’ll eventually get to what emotion those feelings are letting you know about. And then you can inquire about the thing that brought that emotion up.

Listen Up!

By Listen Up, I mean both the act of listening, and the focus on listening to people above you in the school hierarchy. One retired educator said she had learned that, “You can only learn when the teacher is talking and the children are silent.” This is the corollary to the “Sit Still” idea that children are empty vessels. In this version, adults are the fonts of wisdom to be poured into those empty heads, and therefore deserve respect and deference. Another person’s response took it further, saying “You need to listen to and obey adults. They’re always right.” To this she added, “As an adult, this one is honestly quite terrifying.”

In the US notion of hierarchy, the cultural norm of Power and Status Ascription maintains that the top spots are conferred to “experts,” who are people with positions, titles and degrees. In some circumstances people with wealth or business acumen can also be considered experts. Because of the historical power and status of White English speakers, they also rank as experts over racialized people or English language learners. One woman whose mother had emigrated from Korea said that in Kindergarten she had learned that, "English/whiteness/males are superior and to be followed.” Consider how this insidiously erodes the authority of a non-English speaking parent with their own child.

Cultures that lean away from conferring power and status to experts tend to demonstrate respect for life experience. This translates to Grandma having status in her community because of her long life, the adversities she has overcome, and the wisdom she has accumulated - regardless of how many grades of school she completed. In an effort to motivate students toward higher education, many schools start communicating deference toward those with more education as early as Kindergarten. This again is confusing to children when it conflicts with what they learn at home. I even recall as a young child asking my mom why my grandma said “he don’t” instead of “he doesn’t.” My mom clearly staked out our family norm: “She is your grandmother, she is your elder, and you need to respect her. She didn’t go as far in school as your dad and I, so sometimes she says those things, but that doesn’t mean she is any less wise.”

The overall picture of the hierarchy is that White folks have more status and respect. Notice that this is a systemic pattern that plays out even when each individual hire is scrutinized for racial equity.

Now let’s add the historical racial frame of our country to the school context. If the school is norming expertise via titles and degrees as a status marker, its internal hierarchy is immediately clear. The administrators, sometimes with a “Dr.” in front of their name, are on top. The teachers, who all have professional degrees, come next. The clerks and maintenance people whose jobs don’t require college degrees are on the bottom. And, given the history of who has had access to college, it’s not unusual for more of the white-collar staff to be white, and most of the Black, Indigenous and racialized staff to be in the blue-collar jobs. The overall picture of the hierarchy is that White folks have more status and respect. Notice that this is a systemic pattern that plays out even when each individual hire is scrutinized for racial equity.

Kindergarten Learning: There is a hierarchy with professional people on top and most of those people are White, native English speakers. 

Consequence: Discounting the experience of those who are lower on the hierarchy, including blue collar staff, family members with less formal education, and the children themselves. 

Unlearning Tip: Solicit and listen to the stories of someone with less formal education than you have. Consider areas where they have expertise that you don’t. 

Boys & Girls!

Many, many people mentioned gender messaging they received as young children, all of it framed in the “boys and girls” binary. In general, people remembered it being OK for boys to be loud, aggressive, and physically rough in their play, while girls were expected to be compliant, quiet, nice and polite. Of course there is a dimension of intersectionality here that overlays racial expectations to amplify them into deeper stereotypes: the Black or Latino boy who is expected to be even more rough, the Asian or Indigenous girl who is expected to be even more quiet and compliant. One person characterized girl expectations as “people-pleasing, being a good girl and ladylike.” This then translates into what careers kids of different genders can imagine themselves in. Can a girl be a firefighter if fighting isn’t a girl thing? A woman who is a firefighter added, “We were supposed to only want to be mommies, teachers, or nurses. Anything else was viewed with skepticism.”

Can a girl be a firefighter if fighting isn’t a girl thing? . . . Can a boy be a caregiver if boys aren't supposed to care?

A man who is a well-respected preschool teacher added that the gendered career expectations cut both ways. He had received the message that boys aren’t supposed to be nurturing, collaborative or empathetic. Can a boy be a caregiver if boys aren't supposed to care? This meant that envisioning his current life as a parent and early childhood teacher was unthinkable until his mid-thirties.

These expectations then reinforce choices that children make during imaginative play. Who gravitates to building toys? Who tends to act out family stories? Who plays in groups and who individually? Who investigates technology? Who finds expression in painting or singing? Who finds challenge in sitting down to write or draw and who in running and jumping? Since play is the work of children, these choices help them develop comfort and skill in some areas while maintaining awkward distance from others.

All of this falls into the societal norm called Gender Egalitarianism (originally referred to as Masculinity). Cultures with high Gender Egalitarianism have more overlap between expectations for males and females; and in addition, tend to favor collaboration, nurturing and process-orientation. Both traditionally masculine and feminine traits are seen as a range of ways of being that each of us can embody. High Gender Egalitarianism cultures are informally referred to as "tender."

By contrast, "tough" societies with low Gender Egalitarianism maintain strict boundaries around expectations for males and females; and in these cultures, patriarchally masculine traits like competitiveness, decisiveness and aggressive action are favored. Of course, when strict gender expectations are enforced, recognition of a fluid spectrum of gender is out of the question. This norm was described by social scientist Geert Hofstede, whose National Culture model puts the USA at 38 out of 100 for Gender Egalitarianism - less egalitarian and more masculine, but not extremely so. Put another way, patriarchal values are baked into our cultural norms, but substantially less so than, say, Japan or Hungary (whose scores are 5 and 12 respectively). For a deeper dive into this and the other dimensions of Hofstede’s model, the Freakonomics podcast has a brilliant two-part series.

Although various waves of feminism have allowed some women and men into careers that were previously off limits, the financial incentive is for everyone to fit into the patriarchally masculine mode.

Let’s add this context to the Kindergarten environment. We’ve established that it’s common for traditional male and female gender roles to be enforced, including erasure of gender-fluid children’s experience. Yet, these children will grow into a world where competitiveness, decisiveness and aggressive action confer status - and collaboration, nurturing and process-orientation do not. This status gap extends to careers and their compensation levels as well - traditionally female occupations such as early childhood teacher or nurse are low status/low pay compared to their traditionally male counterparts, professor or doctor. Although various waves of feminism have allowed some women and men into careers that were previously off limits, the financial incentive is for everyone to fit into the patriarchally masculine mode.

Kindergarten Learning: All male and female children have distinct ways of being (“boys will be boys”); and the boy way of being is more valuable. 

Consequence: Girls not developing their active, competitive or decisive sides; Boys not developing their collaborative, nurturing or process-oriented sides; and gender-nonconforming children not being recognized at all. 

Unlearning Tip: Consider when you value traits such as nurturing, empathy, collaboration, competition, aggressive or assertive action and decisiveness. When is each needed? Then notice how you value them in yourself. 

What is tugging at your memory from an early age?

Clearly, much of our societal norming begins in and around Kindergarten. When I posted my queries, I had a sense that people would have vivid memories of things they’re now uncomfortable with. What surprised me was the emotion that still came up for people as they recalled these experiences. I’m wondering now whether mining our memories for these Kindergarten moments that now seem uncomfortable or unfair is a way to begin to notice and unpack our cultural programming. This may be a discipline we should all engage in.

As you consider where you were taught your cultural norms, let me know what comes up for you! I’ve connected the dots to researched cultural norms for the top three clusters of responses, but I know there’s more out there. What do you still need to unlearn - maybe about fairness, or the value of the arts, or what it means to be smart? Comment below, I’d love to incorporate it into a future piece.

And, if you’re interested in implementing these “unlearnings” for a more inclusive school or work environment, schedule a free consultation or message me.