How to Convert an Aruba AP-305 CAP into an Almost-IAP for a Controller-Free Home Lab

If you’ve picked up a cheap Aruba AP-305 on the second-hand market, you quickly discover a small problem:
most AP-305 units are Campus APs (CAP), which expect an Aruba controller. For a simple home lab Wi-Fi setup, buying a full Aruba Mobility Controller feels like overkill.

This guide walks through how to:

• Understand the differences between Aruba AP-305 vs IAP-305
• Understand what CAP and IAP (Instant AP) actually mean in Aruba’s ecosystem
• See the typical AP-305 limitations without a controller
• Use the bootloader (apboot) + TFTP approach to make an AP-305 CAP behave like an IAP-305, so you can run it without any controller in a home lab

⚠️ Disclaimer
This is a home lab / learning guide. The steps here are based on personal experiments and public information, not official Aruba support documentation. Always follow your local wireless regulations and Aruba’s official guidance for any production use.

Aruba AP-305 vs IAP-305: Quick Overview

1.1 What Is the Aruba AP-305?

The Aruba AP-305 is an enterprise-grade 802.11ac Wave 2 access point from the Aruba 300-series, designed for medium-density deployments in offices and campuses.

Key specs (high level):

• Dual-band concurrent radios: 2.4 GHz + 5 GHz
• 5 GHz: 3×3 MIMO, up to ~1.3 Gbps PHY
• 2.4 GHz: 2×2 MIMO, up to ~300–400 Mbps PHY
• Aggregate peak throughput around 1.7 Gbps
• Built-in dual-band omnidirectional antennas (ceiling mount friendly)
• 1 × Gigabit Ethernet port (PoE/PoE+), 1 × USB port
• Supports 802.11a/b/g/n/ac, with features like MU-MIMO and beamforming

In Aruba’s product positioning, the AP-305 is a Campus AP (CAP):

• It assumes you have an Aruba Mobility Controller
• You connect the AP-305 to the controller
• Configuration, RF tuning, firmware upgrades, user policies, etc. are all centrally managed

1.2 What Is the IAP-305? The AP-305 with an “Instant” Brain

The IAP-305 (often written Aruba Instant IAP-305) uses almost the same hardware as the AP-305:

• Same radios and antenna design
• Same 3×3 MIMO, same Ethernet/USB ports
• Same physical form factor

The big difference is the firmware and operating mode:

• IAP-305 ships with Aruba Instant firmware

  • It acts as a small built-in controller for itself and a small group of other IAPs
  • Multiple IAP-305 units on the same L2 network automatically form a Virtual Controller cluster
  • You configure SSIDs, VLANs, security, RF, etc. from a single web UI

• No standalone controller required

  • Plug into PoE and a normal switch
  • Open the Instant web interface
  • Configure your Wi-Fi directly

In one sentence:

IAP-305 is designed to “work out of the box with no controller”.
AP-305 is designed to “rely on a controller to be truly useful”.

1.3 AP-305 vs IAP-305: Key Differences That Matter in a Home Lab

From a home-lab or small-office point of view, the main differences are:

1. System model and dependencies

   • AP-305 (Campus AP / CAP)

     • Runs controller-based firmware
     • After boot it expects an ArubaOS Controller
     • Without a controller, it is mostly a “dumb” AP waiting for instructions

   • IAP-305 (Instant AP / IAP)

     • Runs Aruba Instant firmware
     • Has its own Virtual Controller
     • Can be fully configured via a built-in web UI with no controller

2. Regulatory domain / Country Code

   • Instant models typically have a regulatory domain (US / RW / JP / IL, etc.) burned in at the factory
   • Some Campus APs are not officially supported for direct conversion to Instant firmware, especially if they were sold with a different regulatory model

3. Second-hand market confusion

   • Many listings just say “Aruba 305 AP”
   • You only find out it’s a CAP when:
     • It powers on
     • It never broadcasts a usable SSID
     • And it keeps trying to find a controller…

That is exactly why so many people search for:

• “convert Aruba AP-305 CAP to IAP-305”
• “AP-305 Instant firmware without controller”
• “Aruba AP-305 home lab WiFi”

CAP vs IAP: How Aruba Campus APs and Instant APs Differ

To understand what we’re actually doing when we “convert AP-305 to IAP-style”, we need to clarify two core concepts:

• What is a Campus AP (CAP)?
• What is an Instant AP (IAP)?

2.1 What Is a Campus AP (CAP) in Aruba Networks?

In Aruba terminology, a Campus AP (CAP) is a controller-based AP:

• The AP itself is relatively “thin”
• Most of the intelligence lives on the Mobility Controller
• The AP mainly handles basic RF and some local logic
• All the “brains” — configuration, policies, authentication, roaming — live centrally

Typical traits of a CAP deployment:

• Requires an Aruba Mobility Controller to function properly
• Cannot be fully configured or used standalone in a normal way
• Ideal for large, centralized campus/enterprise networks

2.2 What Is an Instant AP (IAP)?

An Instant AP (IAP) is essentially a “fat AP with a built-in mini controller”.

Key points:

• Runs Aruba Instant firmware
• Has a Virtual Controller built into the AP
• Several IAPs in the same L2 network auto-discover and form a cluster
• Configuration happens through a local web interface on the Virtual Controller

Typical characteristics:

• No dedicated controller hardware required
• Plug into PoE, connect to a regular switch, open the web UI
• Multiple IAPs share config and provide controller-like features in a small network

In simple terms:

An IAP is an AP with a brain — it can live independently without a controller.

IAP-305 is exactly that:
the AP-305 hardware running Instant instead of Campus firmware.

2.3 CAP vs IAP from a “Just Let Me Use It” Point of View

If you just want a reliable home lab Wi-Fi AP:

1. Controller dependency

   • CAP (AP-305)

     • Without a controller, it’s heavily crippled
     • Most SSID/VLAN/RF/security settings must be pushed from the controller

   • IAP (IAP-305)

     • You can log in to the AP directly
     • You manage everything from the Instant web UI

2. Scale and management style

   • CAP

     • Great when you already run Aruba controllers
     • Perfect for large deployments and advanced features

   • IAP

     • Great when you don’t own a controller
     • Perfect for small offices, branches, and home labs

AP-305 Limitations Without a Controller (and How to Think About Unlocking It)

This part covers:

1. What limitations you see when the AP-305 is stuck in CAP mode
2. What “weird behavior” happens without a controller
3. The high-level approaches to unlock CAP → IAP-style usage

Later, in the step-by-step section, we focus on the bootloader + TFTP method.

3.1 Typical AP-305 Limitations in CAP Mode

Most of the frustration comes from this combination:

AP-305 (Campus AP) + no Aruba controller

① Strong Dependence on the Aruba Controller

Because the AP-305 is sold as a Campus AP, it is designed to be managed by an ArubaOS controller:

• Without a controller, the AP-305 will not behave like a home router where Wi-Fi just appears after boot
• Key functions (SSIDs, VLANs, RF profiles, auth methods) are all expected to be controller-driven
• Practically this means:
  no controller = you can’t use most of what the AP-305 can do

② Regulatory Domain / Country Code Issues

For Instant APs (IAPs), the regulatory domain is:

• Set (and locked) at the factory
• Used to enforce local channel and power regulations

Some Campus APs:

• Ship without a Country Code written to flash
• If you flash Instant firmware directly, you may see:
  • Radios never come up
  • Errors like AP not allowed, turn off master election
  • Web UI reachable but no usable Wi-Fi

In practice:

Without a valid Country Code / regulatory domain, the radio might stay shut down even after you put Instant on the AP.

3.2 Three Main Approaches to “Unlocking” an AP-305 CAP

Path 1: Use an Aruba Controller (Official Route)

If you already have a Mobility Controller or don’t mind buying one, the official route is:

• Let the AP-305 join the controller as a Campus AP
• Use official tools (e.g. ap convert, if your software version supports it)
• Convert Campus AP → Instant AP through supported methods

Pros:

• Officially supported and documented
• Full enterprise feature set

Cons:

• You need to run a controller, which adds:
  • Cost
  • Complexity
  • Power consumption and rack space

Path 2: Temporarily Borrow a Controller

Idea:

“Borrow” a controller once, convert CAP → IAP, then run the AP-305 as an Instant AP in your home lab.

Rough flow:

• Get temporary access to a controller in a lab/friend’s environment
• Let the AP-305 join as CAP
• Use supported tools to convert to IAP-305
• Take the converted IAP-305 back to your home lab

Pros:

• After conversion, you enjoy controller-free Instant usage
• No need to keep a controller running 24/7 at home

Cons:

• You still need some controller access
• Firmware/feature support must line up

Path 3: No Controller at All — Bootloader + TFTP “Hacker Route”

This guide mainly focuses on this route:

Use the apboot bootloader and TFTP to flash Aruba Instant firmware and turn an AP-305 CAP into an Instant-style AP.

High-level steps:

1. Connect to the AP-305 console and interrupt boot to get a apboot> prompt
2. If required, set a valid Country Code / regulatory domain
3. Configure IP and TFTP settings in apboot
4. Download an Aruba Instant firmware image via TFTP
5. Write the image to the correct partition and boot from it

Pros:

• No controller needed at any point
• Perfect for a pure home-lab experiment

Step-by-Step: Convert an Aruba AP-305 CAP to an Instant-Style AP Without a Controller

This is the hands-on part:

How to make a used Aruba AP-305 Campus AP behave as much like an IAP-305 as possible, without any controller.

Again, this is unofficial, and different hardware/firmware/revision combos may behave differently.

4.1 High-Level Conversion Plan

We essentially do three things:

1. Enter the bootloader (apboot)
2. Ensure a valid Country Code / regulatory domain exists
3. Flash an Aruba Instant firmware image via TFTP and boot it

If this succeeds, your AP-305 will:

• Boot into Aruba Instant instead of Campus firmware
• Present a Virtual Controller web UI
• Work as a controller-free AP in a small Wi-Fi network or home lab

4.2 Tools and Home-Lab Setup

You’ll need:

• A PC or laptop (Windows / macOS / Linux)
• A console cable / USB-TTL serial cable to reach the AP-305 console port
• A PoE switch or PoE injector (802.3af/at)
• A simple TFTP server on the same subnet (e.g. Tftpd64 on Windows)
• An Aruba Instant firmware image compatible with AP-305
  • Get this from official channels and ensure you comply with licensing and local laws

4.3 Entering apboot: Catching the Boot Window

Most Aruba APs let you interrupt boot and drop into apboot>.

Typical sequence:

1. Connect the console cable and open a serial terminal (PuTTY, SecureCRT, screen, etc.)
2. Power on the AP-305 and watch the output

3. When you see a message like:

   1	Hit <Enter> to stop autoboot

   press Enter quickly.

4. If successful, you’ll land at:

   1

   apboot>

Notes:

• If you cannot get into apboot, you cannot proceed with this method
• The window is short (often 2–3 seconds), so timing is important

If you need to fully factory reset from apboot, you can use:

1

apboot> factory_reset;

4.4 Setting a Legal Country Code / Regulatory Domain (If Needed)

Some second-hand Campus APs have no Country Code in flash. If you put Instant firmware on them without fixing that, the radios may remain disabled.

A common approach is:

Write a valid Country Code in apboot first, then flash Aruba Instant.

1. Check if your AP-305 already has a Country Code

   Use:

   1	apboot> mfginfo

   Example output:

   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

   Inventory: Card 0: System Wired MAC : 91:4c:81:c7:63:1a Wired MAC Count : 2 Date Code : 070318 Serial : CNG6JSS21P Assembly : 2010249A Card 1: CPU Serial : R.BUX86T0844 Assembly : 2010249A Date Code : 070318 Major Rev : 07 Minor Rev/Variant : 01

   If you see no Country field, it likely has no regulatory domain set.

2. Program a Country Code

   To set the Country Code for AP-305, generate a SHA-1 hash using the format RW- (without spaces).

Example:
• Serial Number: JP6G732S
• Input String: RW-JP6G732S
• SHA-1 Hash Result: ac3d3ca27e75e82e984b80250ed71eb9aae4b30d

and then running something similar to:

1
2
3

apboot> proginv system ccode CCODE-RW-ac3d3ca27e75e82e984b80250ed71eb9aae4b30d
apboot> invent -w
apboot> saveen

This is only an example.
You must verify the correct and legal Country Code settings and procedure for your region and model.

3. Verify the Country Code

   Run mfginfo again and confirm that a Country field appears with the correct code.

⚠️ Legal note
Country Code / regulatory domain changes are regulated.
Only do this in a lab, and always follow local laws and official Aruba documentation.

4.5 Flashing Aruba Instant Firmware via TFTP

Now we give the AP-305 a new “soul”: Aruba Instant.

1. Configure your TFTP server

   • Place the Instant firmware file in the TFTP root directory
   • Assume for example:
     • TFTP server IP: 192.168.1.10
     • Firmware file: ArubaInstant_Ursa_8.10.0.19_93302

2. Set IP settings in apboot

   From the apboot> prompt:

   1 2 3 4

   apboot> setenv ipaddr 192.168.1.11 apboot> setenv netmask 255.255.255.0 apboot> setenv gatewayip 192.168.1.1 apboot> setenv serverip 192.168.1.10

   Where:

   • ipaddr is the IP for the AP during flashing
   • serverip is your TFTP server IP
   • netmask and gatewayip match your lab network

3. Download and write the Aruba Instant image

   Commands differ by model/bootloader, but a common pattern is:

   1 2 3

   apboot> upgrade os 1 ArubaInstant_Ursa_8.10.0.19_93302 apboot> purgeenv apboot> boot

   Conceptually this:

   • Tells the AP where to pull the firmware from (TFTP)
   • Writes the Instant image into the correct OS partition
   • Clears old environment variables if needed
   • Boots the AP into the new Aruba Instant firmware

Again, treat this as a template, not a one-size-fits-all script.
Always double-check with model-specific guides and official documentation.

Jeff Bezos’s Favorite Job Interview Question Is Weird. Psychology Says It’s Also Brilliant

Back in his days at Amazon, Jeff Bezos always asked this odd job interview question. Psychology says it’s surprisingly revealing.

EXPERT OPINION BY JESSICA STILLMAN, CONTRIBUTOR, INC.COM @ENTRYLEVELREBEL

These days, Jeff Bezos might spend more time planning his lavish Venetian wedding than hiring frontline engineers and executives. But back in the day when he was actively leading Amazon, Bezos always asked job candidates the same unusual question.

“When I worked at Amazon 1999-2006, Jeff Bezos’ favorite interview question was ‘are you a lucky person?’” former Amazon executive-turned-investor Dan Rose reported on X.

Was Bezos a believer in rabbits’ feet and four-leaf clovers? Did he want to borrow the magic dust of good luck from new hires to sprinkle over his young company? Not likely.

Instead, a variety of Bezos watchers and psychologists insist the question is an unusual but effective way to screen for some of the most important qualities for business success, including humility, initiative, and optimism.

Luck as a sign of humility

Bezos is famously a huge fan of humility in his hires. He also reportedly asks job candidates about their previous mistakes, believing that the ability to admit and learn from errors is one of the best signs of true intelligence.

Asking if a potential hire is lucky seems to have nothing to do with the search for the intellectually humble. But according to venture investor Patrick Mayr, asking about luck is actually a great way to gauge humility.

“For someone to acknowledge that they have benefitted from luck is a sign of modesty,” he wrote in a blog post endorsing Bezos’s luck question.

To admit to luck shows you understand your good fortune is not just about your limitless smarts and astounding work ethic. It’s also about being in the right place and the right time. This is what self-described lucky guy Warren Buffett memorably calls “winning the ovarian lottery.” You aren’t a lone hero. There is space for gratitude and self-improvement.

This is a truth that Bezos’s fellow billionaire Mark Cuban also understands. “The reality is in order to become a billionaire, the one thing you have to have is luck,” he has declared.

Luck as a sign of initiative

People who refuse to admit the role of luck in their lives are likely to be spotlight-hungry ego maniacs. But there are other reasons you might want to hire self-described lucky people. For one, science shows luck isn’t actually totally random (though plenty is). Lucky people manufacture much of their good fortune through their outlook and behavior.

One classic psychology experiment illustrates this point nicely. Researchers gave study subjects a newspaper and asked them to count the numbers of pictures within it as fast as possible. Some took many minutes to answer. Others had an answer in seconds. Was the difference luck?

Nope, the researchers had sneakily inserted a box on page two that read, “This paper has 43 images. You can stop reading now.” People who considered themselves lucky were much more likely to notice this box and spare themselves a lot of page flipping.

What people label luck is often only keen observation and alertness to opportunity. Those are definitely attributes Bezos might want to a new hire to have.

Luck as a sign of optimism

Finally, saying you’re a lucky person doesn’t just reflect past good fortune. It also likely indicates you expect good fortune in the future too. In other words, those who describe themselves as lucky tend to be optimists. As a rule, psychology suggests optimism helps you do better in business.

There is of course such a thing as too much optimism. Anxiety helps you foresee and avoid negative outcomes. Those whose lenses are too rose tinted sometimes walk smack into walls. But science shows a focus on abundance and opportunity tends to make people more creative and cognitively sharper (probably because stress takes up a lot of brain real estate).

Optimists also tend to end up richer. Recent research out of the University of Pennsylvania found that, “after controlling for wealth, income, skills, and other demographics to level the playing field, the data clearly showed that optimists were significantly more likely to experience better financial health than pessimists, and engage in healthier habits with their money.”

Bezos’s favorite job interview question is weirdly brilliant
All of which suggests that while Bezos’s favorite interview question might strike some as odd, there is method to the madness. People might not be lucky in the old-fashioned sense of having the random blessing of fate. But the self-perception of being a lucky person is a good indicator that someone is humble, observant, action oriented, and willing to bet on themselves, their ideas, and a better future.

Who wouldn’t want to hire someone like that?

The opinions expressed here by Inc.com columnists are their own, not those of Inc.com.

Why Children Need Risk, Fear, and Excitement in Play
And why adults’ fears put them at risk

MARIANA BRUSSONI
FEB 28, 2024
[Preface from Jon Haidt:]

In April 2023 I was invited to give a lecture at the University of British Columbia. As long as I was flying out to Vancouver, I wanted to meet Professor Mariana Brussoni, who had been writing important work on the value of outdoor risky play. Our hour-long meeting expanded my thinking about risk and play, and helped me write Chapters 2 and 3 of The Anxious Generation. Mariana quickly joined my pantheon(ˈpanTHēˌän) of experts on play, along with Lenore Skenazy and Peter Gray. With articles such as Play Worth Remembering: Are Playgrounds Too Safe? and Risky Play and Children’s Safety: Balancing Priorities for Optimal(ˈäptəməl) Child Development, Mariana makes the case that we harm children’s social, physical, and even immune(iˈmyo͞on) development when we remove all risk from their lives. I liked Mariana and her work so much that I gave her an open-ended invitation to write whatever she wanted at After Babel. Here is her essay(ˈesā), laying out her findings in a format that parents and schools can use. A concise(kənˈsīs) summary of her work is this simple sentence, which she said to me during our meeting: “Children should be kept as safe as necessary, not as safe as possible.”

— Jon

We parents are caught in a paradox(ˈperəˌdäks). We desperately(desperately) want to keep our children safe and ensure their success. We are also often terrified(ˈterəˌfī) that they will get hurt and that they will fail—so we do everything we can to prevent that from happening. Yet many of those very efforts to manage our fears have paradoxically reduced our children’s safety and their odds(ädz) of success.

For over two decades, I have researched children’s development, injury prevention, and outdoor risky play. I have learned that when we prioritize children’s play (especially the kind of play that involves some risk and lack of supervision(ˌso͞opərˈviZH(ə)n)) and the freedom to play how they choose, we help create environments where children and youth thrive(THrīv).1 When we don’t, the consequences(ˈkänsikwəns) can be dire(ˈkänsikwəns).

Think back to your favorite childhood play memory. Where were you? What were you doing? Was there an adult supervising you?

Adults in many Western nations, particularly those born before the 1990s, recall playing with friends in their neighborhoods, local parks, and abandoned places, making up the rules as they went along, without adult supervision. They often recall a sense of joy, fun, and freedom as they would run, jump, and move their bodies in ways that weren’t allowed indoors. They felt independent, taking risks and figuring things out for themselves. And this is the kind of childhood that has been common for nearly all of human history. Children, like all young mammals(ˈmaməl), play.

Today, this kind of childhood is rare. Every successive generation of children since the 1970s has seen their outdoor play and freedom shrink(SHriNGk). Time use data show that children’s leisure(ˈlēZHər) time has gone down, particularly time spent in unstructured outdoor play, while time spent in academic and screen-based activities has increased. Between 1975 and 2015, outdoor play among UK children decreased by 29.4%, while screen-based activities increased by 22.4%. In the U.S., only 16% of children in 1997 played outdoors every day. By 2003—just six years later—that dropped even further to 10%.

Figure 1. Changes in UK children’s daily time use, based on Mullan (2019). Thanks to Nick Desbarats for making this figure.

Just ask a young person (born after 1990) about their favorite childhood play memories. Then ask their parents the same question and you will see how this generational shift has played out. The parents will likely tell you stories of neighborhood adventures with friends. The child will likely talk about structured activities, such as sports—as they were under the watchful eyes of adults.

What Is Risky Play and Why Does It Matter?

When children have the time, space, and freedom to play the way they choose, it’s not long before they start taking risks in their play, such as climbing higher than they usually do, building secret dens, or racing on their bikes. This is no accident. Children are wired for risky play, in which they take physical risks, seek excitement, and satisfy curiosity.

Boy swinging on rope
Photo by Mariana Brussoni

Examples of risky play will be familiar to most of us: playing with heights (e.g., climbing), with speed (e.g., sledding(ˈslediNG)), using tools (e.g., hammers, knives), playing near elements such as fire or bodies of water, rough(rəf)-and-tumble(ˈtəmbəl) play, play where children can wander(ˈwändər) independently (e.g., playing in their neighborhood with no adult supervision), and play with impact (e.g., jumping into a lake). This kind of play involves children pushing themselves beyond their previous limits and not knowing how things will turn out. As a result, they simultaneously(ˌsīməlˈtānēəslē) experience thrill(THril) and fright. All children need risky play, but it may look different depending on the child.

Girl jumping into a lake
Photo by Mariana Brussoni

Risky play, as the name implies, means that kids can get hurt, and that their chances of getting hurt are higher than if they’re more sedentary(ˈsednˌterē) and playing quietly. On the surface, it’s not clear why a need for risky play would evolve(ēˈvälv) across species(ˈspēsēz), if it increases the chances that something bad will happen to those who partake(pärˈtāk) in it. But when we dig a little deeper, its benefits become obvious. Risky play provides children with low-cost opportunities to develop the physical and cognitive(ˈkäɡnədiv) skills to master the challenges that they will face as they grow older. So, those who engaged in it had a major evolutionary(evolutionary) advantage over those who did not. Physically, risky play allows children to explore more diverse(dəˈvərs) movements and gain physical movement skills. Cognitively, it helps them overcome their fears, build their critical thinking skills, and become accustomed(əˈkəstəmd) to coping independently with difficult situations.

Risky play can even help children overcome anxiety disorders and the cognitive distortions(dəˈstôrSH(ə)n) that go along with them. Anxious children have difficulty tolerating(ˈtäləˌrāt) uncertainty, tend to interpret(inˈtərprət) ambiguity(ˌambəˈɡyo͞owədē) negatively(ˈneɡədivlē) and underestimate(ˌəndərˈestəˌmāt) their ability to cope(kōp) in uncertain situations. Through risky play, children practice dealing with strong ambiguous(amˈbiɡyo͞oəs) emotions (thrill and excitement could also be interpreted as fear and terror(ˈterər)) and situations that abound with uncertainty. It can also show them that they are resilient(rəˈzilyənt) and capable of coping when things go wrong. Research shows that children with more opportunities for risky play have lower internalizing symptoms(ˈsim(p)təm) that are characteristic of anxiety disorders.

In fact, the Canadian Paediatric(ˌpēdēˈatrik) Society sees risky play as so important, and as a way to address many of the challenges that their patients face, that they recently released a statement encouraging pediatricians to support it in patients’ lives.

With all of these benefits… and the evolutionary impulse(ˈimˌpəls) for it… why has risky play been disappearing so rapidly?

Why is risky play disappearing from children’s lives?

Among the most important factors driving the loss of risky play and childhood freedom is the move toward intensive parenting that began in the 1980s.2 Parents, particularly mothers, have been encouraged to micro-manage their children’s lives, curate(ˈkyo͝orət) their experiences, remove any barriers, and enroll them in diverse structured activities with the intention of enhancing their development and giving them an edge in the race to succeed. This approach to parenting has become like the air we breathe—widely accepted in North America—with parents of all backgrounds held to its unrealistic standard regardless of whether they can afford the necessary time, money, and energy.

This costly parenting strategy has negligible(ˈneɡləjəb(ə)l) benefits at best, and can even be harmful. Research shows that enrollment in structured activities is not associated with improved developmental outcomes, and the loss of free time can be detrimental(ˌdetrəˈmen(t)l) to developing basic executive function skills. When positive effects of intensive parenting have been shown, they’ve been modest(ˈmädəst) and insufficient(ˌinsəˈfiSH(ə)nt) to offset the substantial(səbˈstan(t)SHəl) costs to parents.3

So why does this parenting approach persist even though it is exhausting(iɡˈzôstiNG), parents wouldn’t have wanted it for themselves, and the research does not show benefits?

The answer lies in expectations. Parents today receive constant messaging that in order to be “good parents”, they must always keep their children safe. And it is widely believed that the world is no longer a safe place for children to play in. Yet statistics show that it has never been a safer time to be a child. Injury-related deaths are at an all-time low in most Western nations. In the US, deaths from unintentional injuries fell by 73% for boys and 85% for girls between 1973 and 2010. This misperception(ˌmispərˈsepSH(ə)n) of risk creates the parental paradox.

What kids are dying from today are mainly car crashes and suicides(ˈso͞oəˌsīd), not playing outside unsupervised with friends. Parents are worrying about the wrong causes of injuries and harm. In fact, the very strategies that parents use to try to keep their children safe – driving them around, maximizing supervision, and minimizing freedom – are unintentionally increasing the likelihood(ˈlīklēˌho͝od) of injuries and even death.

Three ingredients(inˈɡrēdēənt) to bring back risky play and childhood freedom

The problem lies not with our intentions. We all want children to thrive. The problem is in the decisions we’ve made to support this noble(ˈnōbəl) goal. We’ve prioritized safety over freedom, achievement over play, and screen time over outdoor time. The results are predictable: compromised(ˈkämprəˌmīz) mental and physical health, cognitive development, and emotional competence(ˈkämpədəns).

The solutions are both simple and hard. We know what children need to thrive. The three key ingredients necessary for thriving play environments are Time, Space, and Freedom.

Time: Make daily outdoor playtime a priority. That can mean adding it to the schedule, much like we already do for sports or other extra-curricular(kəˈrikyələr) activities. But schools should also take steps to prioritize outdoor instruction and recess(ˈrēˌses). This can be particularly important for children from disadvantaged families without ready access to safe and stimulating(ˈstimyəˌlādiNG) outdoor environments. Parents and educators can use the U.S. Play Coalition’s(ˌkōəˈliSH(ə)n) position paper on recess to advocate(ˈadvəkət) for more recess in schools. My research lab also developed a free teacher tool to help encourage outdoor learning, which includes short how-to videos to help overcome common barriers that teachers face.

Space: Children need easy access to stimulating spaces for play; flexible spaces where they can use their imagination and explore risks, rather than spaces dominated by boring play structures and strict rules. Unfortunately, these kinds of spaces are harder and harder to come by as more parking lots and highways are built to accommodate a growing number of cars. At a legislative level, we need to move away from municipal planning that prioritizes cars over people–an important step that a number of North American cities have already taken. Outside of legislation, there is much that individuals can do, even with the little space that is available. For example, “loose parts” (e.g., sticks, lumber, rocks, boxes, and tarps) can turn boring and barren play spaces into places of joy and wonder.While these may look like junk to adults, children love them. Scotland developed a loose parts toolkit for anyone who wants to get started. Some cities also have adventure playgrounds—child-centered, child-directed play spaces that are rich in loose parts. (Such playgrounds always have adult staff on hand, but the staff stays in the background unless serious safety risks arise.). See New York’s play:groundnyc as one example.

Adventure playground in NYC
Image. Adventure Playground in New York City. Credit: Jon Haidt.
Freedom: Children need freedom to be able to play the way they choose. The biggest barrier to children’s freedom is us—the adults in their lives—and our need to manage our own fears. Getting over these fears can be difficult, but it is much easier when you work together with other parents. Peter Gray suggests that building tighter relationships with neighbors can help parents feel more confident about letting their kids out to play. The U.S. organization Let Grow works with parents and schools to help support an independent childhood. For parents working to manage their fears and change their approach to play, our lab developed the OutsidePlay.org parent tool to help them work through their challenges, figure out what works best for them and develop a plan for change. We’ve tested it rigorously and it works.

Creating environments for children to thrive doesn’t have to feel overwhelming or unattainable. Every change begins with one small and manageable step. We each have to choose what this looks like for us. We owe it to our children to prioritize play and freedom in their lives and everyday realities. We’ve already seen what happens when we don’t. Let’s break out of the paradox, and give children the freedom they need to thrive.

To find more tools to help bring back risky play and to learn more about Mariana’s research, head to OutsidePlay.org.

[1] Children of all ages, backgrounds and abilities need play. We often neglect the play needs of older children and youth, and while they are different from those of younger children, they are no less important.

[2] Any conversation about the decline in outdoor play must also look at the impact of screens. In 2000, UK kids spent 3 hours per day on screens, and this was before the proliferation of smartphones. By 2015, this rose to 4 hours 45 minutes. Other estimates range upwards of 480 minutes per day (8hrs). Some kids spend more time on their devices than they do at school. All of this time spent on screens must come from somewhere, and it has mostly been displacing sleep and outdoor play time.

[3] A longitudinal study in the UK found modest positive effects on children’s physical health, but detrimental impacts on their mental health. Other studies show negative effects on mental health as children grow into young adulthood, including increased rates of anxiety and depression and impaired independence.

https://www.afterbabel.com/p/why-children-need-risk-fear-and-excitement

Academic Reading sample task – Multiple choice

[Note: This is an extract from an Academic Reading passage on the subject of government subsidies(ˈsəbsədē) to farmers. The text preceding this extract explained how subsidies can lead to activities which cause uneconomical(ˌənˌekəˈnämik(ə)l) and irreversible(ˌi(r)rəˈvərsəb(ə)l) changes to the environment.]

All these activities may have damaging environmental impacts. For example, land clearing for agriculture(ˈaɡrəˌkəlCHər) is the largest single cause of deforestation(dēˌfôrəˈstāSHən); chemical(ˈkemək(ə)l) fertilisers(ˈfərdlˌīzər) and pesticides(ˈpestəˌsīd) may contaminate(kənˈtaməˌnāt) water supplies; more intensive(inˈtensiv) farming and the abandonment of fallow(ˈfalō) periods tend to exacerbate(iɡˈzasərˌbāt) soil erosion(əˈrōZHən); and the spread(spred) of monoculture(ˈmänəˌkəlCHər) and use of highyielding(ˈyēldiNG) varieties of crops have been accompanied by the disappearance of old varieties of food plants which might have provided some insurance against pests(pest) or diseases(dəˈzēz) in future. Soil erosion threatens the productivity of land in both rich and poor countries. The United States, where the most careful measurements have been done, discovered in 1982 that about one-fifth of its farmland was losing topsoil at a rate likely to diminish(dəˈminiSH) the soil’s productivity. The country subsequently(ˈsəbsəkwəntlē) embarked(əmˈbärk) upon a program to convert 11 per cent of its cropped land to meadow(ˈmedō) or forest. Topsoil in India and China is vanishing(ˈvaniSH) much faster than in America.

Government policies have frequently compounded(ˈkämˌpound) the environmental damage that farming can cause. In the rich countries, subsidies for growing crops and price supports for farm output drive up the price of land. The annual value of these subsidies is immense(iˈmens): about $250 billion, or more than all World Bank lending in the 1980s. To increase the output of crops per acre(ˈākər), a farmer’s easiest option is to use more of the most readily(ˈredəlē) available inputs: fertilisers and pesticides. Fertiliser use doubled in Denmark in the period 1960-1985 and increased in The Netherlands by 150 per cent. The quantity(ˈkwän(t)ədē) of pesticides applied has risen too: by 69 per cent in 1975-1984 in Denmark, for example, with a rise of 115 per cent in the frequency(ˈfrēkwənsē) of application in the three years from 1981.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s some efforts were made to reduce farm subsidies. The most dramatic(drəˈmadik) example was that of New Zealand, which scrapped(skrap) most farm support in 1984. A study of the environmental effects, conducted in 1993, found that the end of fertiliser subsidies had been followed by a fall in fertiliser use (a fall compounded by the decline in world commodity(kəˈmädədē) prices, which cut farm incomes). The removal(rəˈmo͞ovəl) of subsidies also stopped land-clearing and over-stocking, which in the past had been the principal causes of erosion. Farms began to diversify(dəˈvərsəˌfī, dīˈvərsəˌfī). The one kind of subsidy whose removal appeared to have been bad for the environment was the subsidy to manage soil erosion.

In less enlightened(inˈlītnd) countries, and in the European Union, the trend has been to reduce rather than eliminate(əˈliməˌnāt) subsidies, and to introduce new payments to encourage farmers to treat their land in environmentally friendlier ways, or to leave it fallow. It may sound strange but such payments need to be higher than the existing incentives(inˈsen(t)iv) for farmers to grow food crops. Farmers, however, dislike being paid to do nothing. In several countries they have become interested in the possibility of using fuel(ˈfyo͞o(ə)l) produced from crop residues either as a replacement for petrol(ˈpetrəl) (as ethanol(ˈeTHənōl)) or as fuel for power stations (as biomass(ˈbīōˌmas)). Such fuels produce far less carbon dioxide(dīˈäkˌsīd) than coal(kōl) or oil, and absorb(əbˈzôrb) carbon dioxide as they grow.

They are therefore less likely to contribute to the greenhouse effect. But they are rarely competitive(kəmˈpedədiv) with fossil(ˈfäsəl) fuels unless subsidised - and growing them does no less environmental harm than other crops.

https://www.chinaielts.org/sites/all/themes/newyasi/images/txjs/%E5%AD%A6%E6%9C%AF%E7%B1%BB%E9%98%85%E8%AF%BB%E9%A2%98%E5%9E%8B%E4%B8%80-%E9%80%89%E6%8B%A9%E9%A2%98.pdf

Academic Reading sample task – Table completion

[Note: This is an extract from an Academic Reading passage on the subject of dung(dəNG) beetles(ˈbēdl). The text preceding this extract gave some background facts about dung beetles, and went on to describe a decision to introduce non-native varieties(vəˈrīədē) to Australia.]

Introducing dung beetles into a pasture(ˈpasCHər) is a simple process: approximately(əˈpräksəmətlē) 1,500 beetles are released, a handful at a time, into fresh cow pats(pat) in the cow pasture. The beetles immediately disappear beneath(bəˈnēTH) the pats digging and tunnelling(ˈtənl) and, if they successfully adapt to their new environment, soon become a permanent(ˈpərmənənt), self-sustaining(səˈstān) part of the local ecology(ēˈkäləjē). In time they multiply and within three or four years the benefits to the pasture are obvious.

Dung beetles work from the inside of the pat so they are sheltered(ˈSHeltərd) from predators(ˈpredədər) such as birds and foxes. Most species(ˈspēsēz) burrow(ˈbərō) into the soil(soil) and bury(ˈberē) dung in tunnels directly underneath the pats, which are hollowed(ˈhälō) out from within. Some large species originating(əˈrijəˌnāt) from France excavate(ˈekskəˌvāt) tunnels to a depth of approximately 30 cm below the dung pat.
These beetles make sausage(ˈsôsij)-shaped brood(bro͞od) chambers(ˈCHāmbər) along the tunnels. The shallowest(ˈSHalō) tunnels belong to a much smaller Spanish species that buries dung in chambers that hang like fruit from the branches of a pear tree. South African beetles dig narrow tunnels of approximately 20 cm below the surface of the pat. Some surface-dwelling(ˈdweliNG) beetles, including a South African species, cut perfectly-shaped balls from the pat, which are rolled away and attached to the bases(ˈbāsēz) of plants.

For maximum dung burial(ˈberēəl) in spring, summer and autumn, farmers require a variety of species with overlapping periods of activity. In the cooler environments of the state of Victoria, the large French species (2.5 cms long), is matched with smaller (half this size), temperate(ˈtemp(ə)rət)-climate(ˈklīmit) Spanish species. The former are slow to recover from the winter cold and produce only one or two generations of offspring from late spring until autumn. The latter, which multiply rapidly(ˈrapədlē) in early spring, produce two to five generations annually.
The South African ball-rolling species, being a sub-tropical(tropical) beetle, prefers the climate of northern and coastal(ˈkōstəl) New South Wales where it commonly works with the South African tunneling species. In warmer climates, many species are active for longer periods of the year.

https://www.chinaielts.org/sites/all/themes/newyasi/images/txjs/%E5%AD%A6%E6%9C%AF%E7%B1%BB%E9%98%85%E8%AF%BB%E9%A2%98%E5%9E%8B%E5%9B%9B-%E5%AE%8C%E6%88%90%E7%AC%94%E8%AE%B0%E3%80%81%E6%80%BB%E7%BB%93%E3%80%81%E8%A1%A8%E6%A0%BC%E6%88%96%E6%B5%81%E7%A8%8B%E5%9B%BE.pdf

Cow & Chick

Chick: Hello, cow, where’s your tail?

Chick: My tail is orange.

Chick: I am a little chicken, I love to eat insects and millet. My voice jijiji.

Cow: It’s wiggling behind me, chick.

Cow: Hello, Chick! What color is your tail?

Cow: I am a cute cow. My milk is for children.

Cow: Lola the cow.

The Lola cow, the Lola cow,
She has a head and has a tail.
And she goes “moo.”

Pig & Lamp

Pig: Hello, lamp, where’s your tail?

Pig: My tail is very short and pink.

Pig: Walk humming(həm), love to sleep late, chubby(ˈCHəbē) body, eat the happiest.

Pig: Three little pigs

s

Jungly Tails

Parrot(ˈperət)
Elephant(ˈeləfənt)
Raccoon(raˈko͞on)
Tiger(ˈtīɡər)
Monkey(ˈməNGkē)
Giraffe(jəˈraf)
Zebra(ˈzēbrə)
Crocodile(ˈkräkəˌdīl)

Remember

By Christina Rossetti(rəˈzedē)

Remember me when I am gone away,
Gone far away into the silent land;
When you can no more hold me by the hand,
Nor I half turn to go yet turning stay.
Remember me when no more day by day
You tell me of our future that you planned:
Only remember me; you understand
It will be late to counsel(ˈkounsəl) then or pray(prā).
Yet if you should forget me for a while
And afterwards remember, do not grieve(ɡrēv):
For if the darkness and corruption(kəˈrəpSH(ə)n) leave
A vestige(ˈvestij) of the thoughts that once I had,
Better by far you should forget and smile
Than that you should remember and be sad.

https://poets.org/poem/remember

The 4-Hour Workweek

By Tim Ferriss

…

If you’ve picked up this book, chances are that you don’t want to sit behind a desk until you are 62. Whether your dream is escaping the rat(rat) race(rās), real-life fantasy travel, long-term wandering, setting world records, or simply a dramatic(drəˈmadik) career(kəˈrir) change, this book will give you all the tools you need to make it a reality in the here-and-now instead of in the often elusive(ēˈlo͞osiv) “retirement(rəˈtī(ə)rmənt).” There is a way to get the rewards for a life of hard work without waiting until the end.

How? It begins with a simple distinction most people miss—one I missed for 25 years.

People don’t want to be millionaires(ˌmilyəˈner)—they want to experience what they believe only millions can buy. Ski(skē) chalets(SHaˈlā), butlers(ˈbətlər), and exotic(iɡˈzädik) travel often enter the picture. Perhaps rubbing(ˈrəbiNG) cocoa(ˈkōkō) butter on your belly(ˈbelē) in a hammock(ˈhamək) while you listen to waves rhythmically(ˈriT͟Hmik(ə)lē) lapping against the deck of your thatched(THaCHt)-roof bungalow(ˈbəNGɡəˌlō)? Sounds nice.

$1,000,000 in the bank isn’t the fantasy. The fantasy is the lifestyle of complete freedom it supposedly(səˈpōzədlē) allows. The question is then, How can one achieve the millionaire(ˌmilyəˈner) lifestyle of complete freedom without first having $1,000,000?

In the last five years, I have answered this question for myself, and this book will answer it for you. I will show you exactly how I have separated income from time and created my ideal lifestyle in the process, traveling the world and enjoying the best this planet(ˈplanət) has to offer. How on earth did I go from 14-hour days and $40,000 per year to 4-hour weeks and $40,000-plus per month?

…
https://www.amazon.cn/dp/B002WE46UW

The perfect number of hours to work every day? Five

Research shows that five work hours a day can improve productivity and bolster(ˈbōlstər) wellbeing. There’s only one thing holding companies back

By Margaret Taylor

As employers grapple(ˈɡrapəl) with how to manage the return to the workplace in the wake of Covid-19, the concept of compressed(kəmˈprest) working is making a comeback. As left-of-centre politicians(ˌpäləˈtiSHən) continue to make the case for four-day weeks, they are often forgetting evidence(ˈevədəns) that shows five-hour days may be the better option.

“Research indicates that five hours is about the maximum that most of us can concentrate(ˈkänsənˌtrāt) hard on something,” says Alex Pang, founder of Silicon(ˈsilikən, ˈsiləˌkän) Valley consultancy(kənˈsəltnsē) Strategy and Rest and author of several books examining the links between shorter working hours and productivity. “There are periods when you can push past that, but the reality is that most of us have about that good work time in us every day.”

The eight-hour working day is a relatively(ˈrelədivlē) new concept, widely(ˈwīdlē) accepted to have been cemented(səˈment) by Ford(fôrd) Motor(ˈmōdər) Company a century ago as a means of keeping production going 24 hours a day without putting undue(ˌənˈd(y)o͞o) demands on individual members of staff. Ford’s experiment led to an increase in overall productivity; but proponents(prəˈpōnənt) of five-hour days, including Californian(ˌkaləˈfôrnyən) ecommerce(ēˈkämərs) business Tower Paddle Boards(bôrd) and German digital consultancy Rheingans, say they experienced a similar phenomenon(fəˈnäməˌnän) when they moved to compressed-hour models.

…

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/working-day-time-five-hours