Why We Banned Legos

Chapter Summary

A group of eight out of the 25 students in an afterschool program began a project called Legotown. Students wanted to build a large city, which meant space and materials became scarce. The eight students began excluding other students from building with them. Students who took part in the Legotown project began negotiating ideas on what they would build and who owns what pieces. Students began engaging in conflict. Students were portraying the ideas of how power and social status work in their building experiences and how they ran Legotown.

One day, a group of students knocked over Legotown, which brought about lots of emotion such as shock. The teachers decided to talk to the students about what happened, and the topic of ownership and power came to light. The staff later decided they were going to ban Legos in the afterschool program. They wanted to promote collectivity, collaboration, resource sharing, and full participation.

When students found out about the news, students had a lot of ideas to share. One student pointed out how two students held power over others. The students became very defensive, denying their power. This brought to light the topics of fairness and equity.

A few days later, the staff focused on the meaning of power. Staff asked students to draw pictures of power, and collected them so that at their meeting they could discuss. A student provided an explanation that encompassed “raw truth”. He explained that he likes to be in power because he feels free, and that most people like to do it and that it feels good to tell people what to do.

From there, staff decided to create a skewed point system for using Legos. The system was meant to make it difficult for students to gain a lot of points. The one rule was that students had to get as many points as possible, and the person with the most points would create the rules for the rest of the game. The goal here was for students to receive power through luck. Staff hoped that the game could help them look at the major Legotown issues from a clean perspective.

During this game, students experienced frustration, anger, and hopelessness when they were not in a position of power. These reactions and feelings helped staff realize that the issues were related to power, privilege, and authority.

Staff decided to look at ownership through a variety of lenses. Students came up with different ideas on how ownership is defined. One student said if her name is on it, she must own it. Another student explained that the pillow she made is hers because she did not buy it at the store.

Staff eventually allowed students to use Legos again. Students worked in small teams and collaborated to build. Throughout this project, students began to leave notes for each other explaining their work and coming up with potential next steps.

Finally, staff met with students after the project and drew conclusions from conversations. Staff found that children thought collectivity and working together was a positive. They also found that being able to express themselves through the Lego characters was important. They realized that each student should have their own Lego character. Another conclusion related to shared power. Students found it important to have the same amount of power when working as a collaborative team. Finally, the children proved it is crucial to aim for moderation and equal recourse access. 

Finally, students narrowed down their beliefs into three agreements. They believed that all structures are public structures. Students said that everyone is allowed to use the structures, but the builder and people who have permission are allowed to change the structure. The next agreement they created was that Lego people can be saved by a group, not by an individual. The last agreement the students made stated that students will not build structures that are a lot bigger than standard size.

ChatGPT concluded for me by adjusting my wording:

As an adult, I often see “power” portrayed in workplace settings, such as who holds leadership roles or makes decisions. I view ownership in terms of who owns tangible items like a house or a car. This chapter helped me see power, ownership, and collaboration from a new perspective. Observing how young children experience these concepts through play gave me insight into the social dynamics of my students. It reminded me that even at a young age, children are learning about fairness, control, and teamwork. This understanding will help me better support my students and guide them as they navigate these important topics.

References

ChatGPT, personal communication, July 7, 2025

Pelo, A. (Ed.). (2008). Rethinking early childhood education. Rethinking Schools.