A "normal stage" and "normal interval".
Does the development of children really grow as smoothly as kindergartens and schools? I don't think so.
Generally speaking, every child has to go through the stages of thinking development from senses to appearances, from concrete to abstract, from simple to complex, from absolute to relative emotions, self and sociality. This rule depends on the maturity of brain and body, and it is very rigid. No child can exceed this rule. From this perspective, all children have a background of normal development, and no child can "learn ahead".
However, the maturity speed of each child's brain and body is different, and the development speed of each system or part of a single child's psychology is also different. In addition, social and environmental factors also have their own characteristics, which actually causes the phenomenon of children's psychological development-it seems that a hundred flowers bloom, each child is different, and a single child also has its own characteristics of change. From this perspective, every child has a personalized "normal development interval", and no two children's "normal development interval" will be exactly the same (even identical twins). Only when you exceed your "normal range" can you count as "advanced learning". Beyond the normal development range of any other child, it is not "ahead of schedule", but at most it is a relative "ahead of schedule", and this relative "ahead of schedule" may lose its meaning because it falls within its own "normal development range".
2. What to learn and how to learn.
From the perspective of coherence, children's development is continuous from the beginning, even after birth, and there is no isolated "learning". Every kind of "learning" must be based on a pre-development background. (Because learning at birth is reflective and comes from the evolutionary background, in a sense, it is the "advanced development background" of larger human beings. Therefore, what children want to learn has been stipulated to some extent, and the only freedom is when and where other forms or other nature of learning will happen. Of course, it may or may not happen. From this point of view, every child is "learning ahead of time" because everything he learns is related to some kind of later learning, which may be different in form, degree or nature. Classics, such as the study of mathematics, it is no exaggeration to say that we have been studying mathematics since birth, and we will study it all our lives. The early experience becomes the later prospect, and the later experience becomes the later prospect.
Of course, what we are talking about here is a kind of "learning" in a broad sense. School homework is just one of many studies.
3. If it is a school assignment, what are the advantages and disadvantages if you study in advance?
Prerequisite: How old is the child? What is the child's "learning"? Is it smooth, stressful or familiar? How about children's "learning" in various fields? Under what circumstances will children learn in advance? Is it early or a little early? Is it your own initiative and free exploration or something else? What is the field of study? Is there a systematic and regular study? Or more personality, more personality? Wait a minute.
The advantages and disadvantages analysis under the above different conditions are different.
But on the whole, the author thinks that in fact, every child will "learn in advance" and it will be a relatively common phenomenon. Because "learning in advance" means adventure, novelty and fun. Although a lot of "profound knowledge" is only known by children themselves (even they sometimes don't realize it).
However, improper "advanced learning" lacks meaningful echo and connection between experiences and value foundation, so it is very difficult to establish it. Or there's no need to let it stand. Children themselves will have an unconscious push to push it and make it untenable. Only "advanced learning" that meets children's subjective expectations can establish the value of "advanced".
Therefore, in general, the author thinks that "learning in advance" is necessary. After all, every child has the right to choose. Moreover, it is difficult for a child to define "super-life" and "non-super-life". And improper "advanced learning" is naturally meaningless.