Per your article -

http://www.bellaonline.com/articles/art36791.asp

You asked for comments in your article, here are mine:

LOL. Candyland sure looks simple to those who already can match like to like, in this case color to color.

And it seems natural to move along following a pathway. But that has to be learned before basic writing on a line. And then reading on a line.

Just saying move to the next square of the same color teaches the square shape.

Since it is moving while learning I'd call it fun kinesthetic learning!

Susan
My kinesthetic lessons here at BellaOnline - http://www.bellaonline.com/subjects/5285.asp

Well put! I remember this as a favorite from young childhood. As you pointed out, what's actually happening is sequencing skills and learning to follow a line, an neccesary skill in reading.

As for the candy aspect....I'm reminded of the new Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie and Willy Wonka's father. His father was obsessed with not allowing his child to eat candy. In turn Willy Wonka became obsessed with candy!

The key is in moderation in all things.

I agree with you both.

Playing a game about candy isn't the same as eating too much of it.

Candyland is designed to be a first game for young children - not only teaching the vital skills mentioned above, but also the basic gaming skills of taking turns and following directions.

Also, a game is as educational as you make it... as my youngest (now 4) mastered the above skills, he added his own twist - like naming the colors and counting them as he moved forward.

One final note - there is too much emphasis today on things being "educational". Play is educational by nature and doesn't need to have stuff added to it.

These are all really good points! Thanks for sharing! Another editor emailed me and told me that she upped the educational ante of Candyland by writing the names of the colors on the cards. You could also write random words and have your child sound them out before they can take their turns. Any other ideas? Also, anyone from the opposition have anything to say?

Being the mother of two, I have never thought about the game being bad. My son(4) and I played the game, so we could practice his colors. I added the "What color is this" part to the game. He had to help follow the road and find the next color. It was more of an attention practice for us. But my kids would rather eat apples and cheese than candy, so this might be why I had no concerns about the candy part.

Why can't children just have fun? We over structure our kid's lives. No one just plays ball in a vacant lot. Everything either has to be a major competition or educational. Let children be children!

Well, some would argue that playing ball in a lot has a lot more benefits than playing Candyland... the kid is outdoors, being active, being forced to come up with creative ways to play with the ball, developing large and small motor skills. Candyland clearly has its advantages (as all these great comments have shown), but is it really the best choice? There are so many other "spin and move", "roll and move", "pick a card and move" games out there.

Would anyone argue that a huge part the popularity of Candyland is that kids like candy and therefore, kids like things that are associated with Candy?

I say think that this game is just a "primer" to get kids used to the rules of taking turns, following lines, etc. when playing games.

You can't start a child off on a game like Trouble, it's too complicated. You have to introduce one or two simple rules at a time.

I think the "candy" concept came up at a time when there wasn't such a glut of sweets like there is now. Plus it's just so colorful, it catches a child's attention.

I say anything that gets a family together to do things is good!

So does this mean that if you play "war" with cards you advocate actual war? Or if you play cops and robbers (does anyone do that anymore?) that you advocate theft?

Candy Land was one of my son's first board games. He's 7 years old and has never had a piece of candy in his life. Cookies and cake, yes. But not candy. And he doesn't ask for candy before, after, or during play.

To be honest, in light of all the things that often go on in homes--parents arguing, kids being abused, neglect, etc.--extolling which games are "best" or "more educational" seems silly to me. The public school systems already tries to make little scholars out of kids, robbing them of valuable play time and the true love of learning.

Other posters mentioned what can be learned from playing Candy Land. (And Chutes and Ladders is way too complicated for a first game.)

Better or worse is all relative. Different activities can teach a variety of lessons and skills. Learning is happening all the time, and happens more readily when kids don't KNOW it's educational (and when they're enjoying themselves).

The most important thing, IMO, is parents actually spending TIME with their children.

what i like best about candyland is that you can use the board for so many other homemade games <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

We've used it with flashcards and dice to learn math facts, phonics, how to tell time, even signs.

meg

never in my almost 10 yrs of playing candyland as a parent, until now, have I ever associated candyland with eating candy or becoming obese, LOL. I guess it's kind of like how when I was a kid all pictures of Santa had him smoking a pipe, you don't see that much anymore...

Meg

ok, one more comment.

Candyland is a board game. Football in an empty lot is an outdoor game of physicality. Some kids like board games, some kids like outdoor games, some kids like both. There is a time for quiet indoor play and there is a time for loud outdoor play. One isn't better than the other, it's apples and oranges (or apples and candy bars, LOL)

Let's face it, once a kid gets the hang of Candyland kin it's original form it's more about winning than education. It's a gentle way for kids to learn that they have to share, take turns, win once in a while, and NOT win once in a while.

Yes, it's competition but it's gentle, as compared to playing dodgeball in a school gym class.

Meg

Too true, Janet! I mean, in Kindergarten kids used to go half a day, now they go all day. And they weren't expected to already know how to read and know their, ABCs & 123s because that's what they were going to lear in Kindergarten. But now they are supposed to go to pre-K (if not more years of pre-school) so they can learn all this stuff to be ready for kindergarten!

My son is already looking at Trigonometry in the 9th grade, it wasn't even introduced to us until the 11th (and I was in the advanced course!) We are rushing these kids along. Why? To keep up with Japan? So they can all have ulcers by the time they're 23?

Look at how many of us are on anti-depressants or some kind of stomach medication because of all the stress we're under. Is this really what we want to pass down to our kids?

First off, I think maybe if everyone want to discuss the quality of the American public school system, the discussion should be moved to one of the education forums.

Secondly, I'm happy to see some lively discussion here and everyone's points are completely valid and well-taken!

Meg has given me the most convincing argument FOR the game so far, in that she uses the game board itself to play other games. Brilliant! Meg, did you modify any other games? If so, how?

I still have to stand my ground on my side of the issue, though. I think maybe part of it is that I didn't have Candyland (or candy, or cake or cookies) in my house as a kid. I believe that's the reason I've never developed a sweet tooth (I do adore European chocolate, but in small quantities).

The first game I remember playing is Concentration/Memory. My mother would make our own sets with shapes, numbers, colors, etc. on the back of index cards.

I remember some early encounters with Candyland. All of my little girlfriends would always want to play it (I think because they liked that fairy princess) and I hated it, because I was insulted by the fact that it took no skills for me to win, and I could lose for no reason at all. Maybe that's a good thing for kids who need to learn the lesson of losing, but I've always preferred losing knowing I've tried my best. Naturally, when I first played Candyland I was well past the stage of needing to learn my colors or how to take turns. Clearly it's a game to be played at the most basic levels of game-playing.

By the way, our family didn't play "War", either. We played (drumroll, please): PEACE. Make fun of us as you will, we're well aware that we've earned it.

I agree Michelle. *nodding* And individuals in the U.S. take less vacation time, too! I read a surprising statistic the other day and can't find it... While Europeans take 6 weeks of paid vacations a week, most Americans are lucky if they take a whole week off at some point!

It seems to me, Megan, that if you're going to talk about games and whether they're "educational", the public school system (where most kids are) is quite relevant.

Why does "play" need any argument? Why the need to convince *anyone* of anything? That was exactly my point: instead of it being a lighthearted game that can teach a myriad of principles (depending on how the parent helps guide the child, as well as the imagination of the child), playtime becomes a rigid, militaristic, "intellectually stimulating" endeavor. Nothing wrong with that for those who show that aptitude, but one size certainly doesn't fit all...

Personally, I always loved Candy Land simply because it was so colorful and fanciful. Does it really need a "convincing argument?"

And life? There are plenty of reasons why individuals "lose for no reason at all", including natural disasters like hurricanes and the choices of other individuals. Being the smartest, fastest, and best doesn't guarantee "success", self esteem, fulfillment, or happiness IMO. (And isn't that what we all want for our children, in the end?)

Sorry Megan, <img src="/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" />, it just kind of seemed like a natural flow.

But I think you sort of touched on a point, kids do need to learn how to lose. Because (especially once they get involved in team sports) its not always based on whether or not they did their personal best.

But Anyway, my original point was, this game was made so long ago, that I don't think candy had the predominance in the households that it does today. It was a "treat" to get candy. I doubt the makers could have ever imagined the "Augustus Gloop" mentality that has taken over America today!

That is SO true, Michelle! I'm not sure when or where we hit the tipping point with overconsumption of processed foods or processed sugar. No one in the world has a problem with that like America does (not even Canada). I'm not sure why that is, but it's really too bad.

As far as losing, I didn't mean what I said to be taken how you took it. I said that I don't mind losing as long as I know I did my best. If I tried my darndest and still came up short, that's okay! I just think games that are based even on a teeny tiny bit of skill at least allow the child the pride of having known they tried hard enough.

I also don't think many games that could be considered "educational" are somehow rigid or strict. Concentration/Memory, for example, is a game whose rules are easy (no harder than those for Candyland). Many of the Concentration cards available on the market are fun and colorful and whimsical.

Look, I'm not advocating "Brussels Sprouts Land" or "Granola Land", but does anyone think the game would really lose anything by just being about a magical fairytale land with elves and talking animals and whatnot instead of sugar-spun creatures?

Memory is a great game. My son has a Blue's Clue's version that has many cards--but it can made more or less challenging by the amount of cards used.

I just don't think that Candy Land is harmful in any way. *shrug*

And that's pretty much what it all boils down to... we're all just trying to do right by our kids, and only the parent can assess what's good/bad, right/wrong, etc. for their own child. When you get down to brass tacks about it, it comes full-circle to "doing your personal best", and that's all any of us can ask ourselves for!

We play the Finding Nemo memory cards.

There is a new Candyland I saw on TV today. It has a DVD and has the kids up and moving aroung the room. It looks like a kind of follow the leader Candyland. Should be interesting!

See this article on USAToday - Candyland made it to the Toy Hall of Fame!!!

http://www.usatoday.com/news/offbeat/2005-11-12-cardboard-box_x.htm