The great ‘6,7’ panic:

The viral “6,7” trend began when rapper Skrilla penned the following lyrics ‘He way that switch brrt, I know he dyin’ 6-7, I just bipped right on the highway (bip bip) Skrrt, uh (Big big bip)’. Following this, Lamello Ball- an NBA player was the subject of a viral TikTok, where his height “six-seven” was added to this lore. Fast forward to Mason on Youtube shouting 6,7 at a basketball game... and the horse had officially bolted. Tiktok creators latched onto the hand actions and numbers, remixing and reusing it thousands of times. For reasons no one can quite explain, it became hilarious... Especially to children. 

It’s worth acknowledging that, like many pop culture trends, while the origins of “6,7” are tangled and not always clear,what’s important to remember is that children’s use of trends is rarely about the trend’s origin and more about their needs for connection, fun, and belonging.  

That said, it’s helpful for educators to stay aware of where trends come from, how they’re being used, and how their meanings can shift over time. Context matters, the cultural lens around us can change the connotations of a word, gesture, or meme. These moments provide rich opportunities for reflection and social learning, as children explore how language, humour, and shared meaning evolve within their world. These learning moments arise when adults respond to children with curiosity or connection over blind rules, bans and behavioural corrections.  

When “we don’t say that at Kinder” misses the mark 

In early learning settings, educators sometimes respond to children’s endless  “siiixxx, seeevvvvveennn” 

repetitions with the same phrase they’d use for genuinely hurtful language: 

“We don’t say that at Kinder.” 

But let’s pause and ask... What assumption are we making when we say this? 

When used in this context, is“6,7” bad? Is it disrespectful? Does it mean something inappropriate? 

When we equate harmless silliness with inappropriate or unsafe language, we risk confusing children about what truly matters. The National Quality Framework (NQF) reminds us that our work with children should be guided by principles of respect, agency, and the view that children are competent and capable learners (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA], 2025). 

By treating every “6,7” as a behaviour to be managed rather than a moment of social play, we risk creating unnecessary power struggles and emptying children’s Connection and Fun Cups (Phoenix & Phoenix, 2020). These needs, along with our needs for Safety, Mastery and Freedom are essential to a positive state of wellbeing. So when something as simple and silly as “6,7” helps meet children’s needs for Connection and Fun so very well, who are we to put a stop to that? 

Our instinct to correct or control is deeply human. Behaviourism, the old paradigm that shaped much of 20th-century education, trained us to see all behaviour as something to be managed through reinforcement, rewards, or punishment (Phoenix, 2024). But as Phoenix Support for Educators often reminds us, this approach overlooks what behaviour represents: an attempt to meet a need, given the skills and capacities we have at the time (Phoenix, 2024). 

In the case of “6,7,” the underlying need isn’t for defiance. It is for connection, fun, humour, and belonging. It’s about shared joy. 

Children, tweens, and teens use trends like this to strengthen peer bonds and carve out their own cultural territory, separate from adult understanding. In other words, the very fact that we don’t get it is part of the fun. 

When adults attempt to suppress these moments, we risk missing opportunities for relationship-based teaching, the very foundation of Quality Area 5 in the NQF (ACECQA, 2025). 

Let’s imagine three responses to the “6,7” phenomenon: 

1. Directive Response “We don’t say that here. If you say 6,7 again you’ll need to move away.” 
2. Reflective, Supportive Response “That’s a funny sound everyone’s saying lately! What do you like about it?” 
3. Inclusive and Joyful Response “.....eight?”  

The first reinforces compliance and control. The second reinforces connection and curiosity. The third will result in some big eye rolling and possibly lots of laughter, whilst also creating safety for the other children who might be panicking about not ‘getting it’.  

Responding to harmless trends with openness rather than correction supports children’s needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000). It shows children that their social worlds are valid, that they have the competence to play with language and culture, and that their relationships with adults can handle a bit of silliness. 

Is it “annoying” or is it connection-seeking? 

Yes, “6,7” can be repetitive. Annoying, even. But so was “Baby Shark.” So were fidget spinners, “Let it go” and the “Floss” dance. 

When we look beyond our irritation, we can see these trends as the social glue of childhood. It is a safe, developmentally appropriate way for children to explore identity, inclusion, and play. 

Let’s not make mountains out of numbers 

Before we rush to correct the next viral phrase or playground meme, let’s check in with ourselves. Are we reacting because something truly harms others or because it disrupts our adult sense of order and understanding? 

In a world where children face growing pressures around academic performance, digital exposure, and mental health; moments of shared laughter, even over something as trivial as two numbers, are precious. They remind us that joy, connection, and belonging are still at the heart of childhood. 

So next time you hear a chorus of “Siiixxx, Seevvvennnn,” take a breath. Smile. Maybe even say it back. 

Because sometimes, supporting children’s social and emotional learning means stepping out of our adult seriousness and letting them lead us in laughter.