May 2025

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829 3031

Page Summary

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Friday, May 14th, 2010 09:56 am
Reading this overall pretty cool article: Things We Like:What Happens When Children Build Their Own Three-Story Playgrounds?, I come across the line "A travesty? Wheelchair and crutch bound children everywhere?" and thought "That would be awesome!". And I got a mental image of happy disabled children having somewhere to play.

But of course that's not what I meant, and afaict that playground would be terrible for children with mobility problems.

Which is not to say the playground idea is overall terrible, but still. It's obviously a perspective the writers of the piece didn't think of.
hl: Drawing of Ada Lovelace as a young child, reading a Calculus book (Default)
[personal profile] hl
Saturday, May 15th, 2010 03:03 pm (UTC)
I thought it was like a public playground--i.e. that anyone could bring and drop off their kid.

The main problem with making it accessible is not intervening in what the children do/create (which seems to be part of the philosophy of the place). I would guess that to make it so, as Nix said, you would've to start with disabled children in the group.
hl: Drawing of Ada Lovelace as a young child, reading a Calculus book (Default)
[personal profile] hl
Tuesday, May 18th, 2010 05:44 am (UTC)
Right, not only 'could', but 'should'. I think that they work with a sort of loose supervision. They discourage/don't allow parents to be in the area, and the supervisors just look in on the kids every once in a while.