“No matter how bright you think your child is, until the age of seven, children are no brainier than the birds. Researchers at the University of Cambridge during simple experiments found out that birds did just as well as children up until the age of seven…”
This is from Richard James in his essay, Chess Thinking Skills in Children in the excellent book, The Chess Instructor 2009, edited by Jeroen Bosch and Steve Giddins:
“Chess is essentially a game of logic, which, according to Piaget, children only start to develop at the age of seven. My experience is that children in Infant Schools have difficulty in grasping abstract concepts such as checkmate.”
From my experience I will say that most children younger than seven have a very difficult time in grasping the concept of en passant.
Having worked quite a bit with first- and second-graders, and even some kindergarteners, over the past year, it’s been my observation that many of these kids are not developmentally ready to learn to play chess. By “developmentally ready,” I mean that they haven’t yet developed the cognitive ability to draw logical conclusions through process of elimination, to expand their vision beyond a small area of the board, to adhere to the rules when they produce an undesired result, or even, in some cases, to keep track of whose turn it is. Some first- and second-graders, particularly gifted children, are capable of these things, but these capabilities only seem to appear consistently around age 8. I’m not sure that instructors who pitch chess indiscriminately to the parents of primary-age kids are doing anyone any favors.
When my girls were that age, we played the pawns game that we learned from the Pelts and Alburt book.
Not so much to learn and understand, but they still got to practice taking turns and learned how the pawns move and capture. They especialy liked playing with the clock (even though they couldn’t tell time.)
Children under the age of six have a great difficulty seeing more than 4 to 9 squares, or chunks of squares, at a time. Their vision and focus is very narrow. That is why they will chase a ball into the street and not pay attention to dangers. They do not see long moves by bishops or rooks very well either. The powers of the queen to go to a number of squares is often quite beyond their grasp. Through repetition they may gain an understanding of how to checkmate with K and Q vs. K, but the concept of driving the king into a smaller box and using both pieces to complete the task does not come to youngsters easily at first. Their “intuition”, such as it is, is to give multiple checks and chase the king all over the board.
Just as their physical coordination improves after age 6, so does their ability to use multiple pieces in a positive way. Kids who are 7 and 8 can do simple tactical puzzles and find checkmates in two or three moves. Their sight of more of the board improves. They begin looking for forks, pins, and other tactics. Straight line calculation is difficult for them, but the more precocious have the ability to string together long lines of forced moves. My experience with this type of player is that images of positions do not fade as quickly as they do with adults. In effect, young players operate in HD when they are playing. However, impulse control is not yet developed very well. They tend to make the first move that pops into their heads. The very idea of looking for a number of “candidate moves” is foreign to their way of thinking, and maybe rightly so. Slowly but surely, they begin to group chunks of ideas, tactics, and threats together.
On a couple of occasions, I was asked to teach children under age three. Truly amazing and funny experiences. One young girl quickly learned the names of the pieces and how to place them on the board. She even learned how to move each piece, which took an enormous amount of repetition. Beyond that she was stumped as she was unable to grasp how the pieces were to work together. When we played a game, I moved a piece to capture one of hers. She said, “No! Mine!” and put her hands protectively in front of her pieces. A future Petrosian. At another time, I showed another little girl (2 years, 9 months) a little. She also named all of the pieces, but insisted that the knight was a “zebra”. Even with repetition, she stubbornly held on to the idea that the knight was a zebra. Both children were very tactile, like most youngsters are, and loved to hold the pieces and place them on the squares of the board. I told the parents that they were not ready to learn chess, but to try them out in a year or so on various other board and race games to get them accustomed to playing a game between two players. Pressuring children to play chess is not very productive IMHO, and they should learn to play when they want to.
I guess I have a different point of view than most of the posters so far. I think thought is natural, that kids grow in thought daily, and that directing that growth, while sometimes challenging and requiring more time, is not an issue. If a child can manage the more abstract tasks of reading, of catching a ball, etc. they can learn chess.
Yes, there is a natural tendency toward “beehive soccer”. This to me reflects a lack of experience in being able to recognize and define a goal. Working with the child to clarify the goal and how the goal can be achieved makes the experience more concrete and easier to manage.
I believe that children 6 and up can learn from and about chess. It’s more difficult below the age of 10, even more so below the age of 8, and even more so below the age of 6. We’ve had kids do well starting at the ages of 4-5, but that is not so common and typically involves an exceptional child. I know of some people who have taught children younger than 4, but I’ve seen no particular advantage to attempting to do that - albeit the sample size is small.
That this can impact kids differently is indicated by the fact that there are a range of ratings for kids below the age of 8.
Some kids who are 7 and 8 can do these things, and none of them happens automatically. These concepts need to be taught directly, and not all kids will grasp them, and many who do grasp them nevertheless won’t apply them without close coaching. You may as well say, “Kids who are 7 and 8 can do multiplication and division.” Sure, some can, but it’s nowhere near a universal capability.
It’s not just chess. Today, on the side of a bus, I saw an advertisement for a “complete preschool tennis program.” All across the spectrum, there’s this crazy competitive rush to try to get kids into activities at younger and younger ages, as if waiting until they’re, you know, developmentally ready for an activity will inevitably mean they’ll lose their edge. Kids shouldn’t need an “edge.” Kids should be allowed and encouraged to be kids.
I learned chess in 4th grade. I was anything but a natural. But in 5th grade, for some reason, I asked a freind of mine if he wanted to play a game of chess… which he easily won. So I got “Bobby Fischer Teaches Chess” and it helped my game a lot.
After that, my friend would study and win, so I’d get another book and start winning again, and that happened on and off for years until we graduated. (We didn’t play chess on a regular basis, but maybe a few weeks, then a few months later, play for another few weeks, etc.)
Then in the Army, I joined the local chess club and found out about the USCF and my joy from playing chess was solidified when I started getting a rating. My first rating was 1140 if I recall. Not bad for someone that never had any formal training in chess.
In 1996 we had a 5 year old in our club who was in the 600’s and stayed in that range consistently for much of a year before climbing up. Within 2 years was about 800 - 900.
In 1999 we had a 4 year old who was just shy of 800, stayed there for awhile and started improving after that. By age 6 was 1200, by age 8 was 1500.
I suspect that out paced a bird.
BTW - some tests I am aware of show that birds can’t count past 7. I think most 5 year olds can. Of course, cats can generally only count to 4.
Actually, it’s impossible to know how high cats can count, since they purposely try to keep humans ignorant of how much they know. For example, most cats pretend that they don’t understand English because it gives them an excuse for ignoring any commands that humans may give to them.
