long division; stifles their creativity

[JimG.]

I think what he was referring to was the fact that his daughter's reading and writing ability were severely hindered by this Whole Language approach introduced my the new first grade teacher. When my wife got her degree back in the mid 90's, the current method of teaching reading was Whole Language and Creative Spelling ("Johnny, how do you think that word is spelled?) The result has been a buttload of kids that can't read or write. Why do you think "Hooked on Phonics" is so successful these days? That business venture would have flopped 20 years ago when schools actually taught phonics themselves. Now that they don't, some corporation can make big bucks on your child's learning difficulties.

What's with all of the special needs programs these days? Are there that many kids with "special needs", or just a bunch of kids that would benefit from some creative motivation and small amounts of specialized tutoring. Is the fact that we're fumbling the ball with teaching methods like "Whole Language" the reason we have some many kids with "Learning disabilities"? I'm not making light of kids with real problems, as some genuinely need all of the help they can get. But it seems the more money we pump into special needs programs, the more special needs students we're treating/creating.

I shudder to think what would have become of me if I were going to school now. I probably would have been assigned my own special needs staff:
- 25 years ago my kindergarden teacher wanted to hold me back because I couldn't use scissors. She neglected to notice I was a lefty using righty scissors.
- My first grade reading teacher thought I was a slow learner until she realized I knew all the answers but was too shy to raise my hand. My parents worked with me after school for a few months to get me back up to speed with the higher level kids.
- My fourth grade teacher noticed me really disinterested in math early in the school year. I told her I knew most of what she was teaching and was just bored. I was moved up to a higher level.

How many students have the ablitly but are wrongly labeled "special needs"? I see students these days being classified as "haves" and "haves nots". You're either a genius, or you have a learning disability. Things need to change from top to bottom in our schools before anything gets better.

I'm proud to be associated in a small way with a group of folks who are intelligent and caring.

Smitty, I went through the same issues in elementary school. My 1st grade teacher told my parents she thought I was "retarded" because I wouldn't sit still and would go off on my own in the middle of her class and do what I wanted. I was simply bored to death.

After they figured out I was actually pretty bright, they started to sit me next to the less smart kids in the hopes my smarts "would rub off on the others". That was 4th grade and my last in public schools.

My son David is the splitting image of his Dad...has the same issues at school. Except in today's schools they wanted to give him drugs to "help" him. No way. Not happening. I had several very contentious meetings with school officials and finally convinced them that David was just bored to death.

So to "humor" me they tracked him into honors classes. Guess what? David has been a perfect student since. And he's still bored.

Bottom line is if your kid isn't meeting some standardized image of what the educational system thinks is a good student, there's going to be trouble. And parents have to be vigilant so their kids don't get lost in the system.

 

[ctenidae]

I was fortunate enough to go to Catholic school for grades 1-4. My 1st and 2nd grade teacher had a master's in learning disabilities, and decided I probably had ADD. I'm fortunate it was Catholic school, because the nun was completely against drugs as treatment. She taught me how to sit still and concentrate, and perhaps more importantly how to realize when I was wandering off. She then proceeded to teach me to read, and I haven't stopped since. of course, after that I got in trouble for reading 6th grade books in 2nd grade, and for trying to do book reports on John D McDonald novels in 4th grade. Life's tough in a Catholic school.

Probably didn't hurt that my Mom was interested, and went on to get her Master's in learning styles, National Teacher Certification, and such. When she's not teahing kids, she's teaching teachers how to teach. Works out pretty well.

 

[FridayHiker]

Bottom line is if your kid isn't meeting some standardized image of what the educational system thinks is a good student, there's going to be trouble. And parents have to be vigilant so their kids don't get lost in the system.

I think there's a flip side to it as well, though, as I see a lot of parents who WANT to get their kids "coded" (i.e. identified as Special Ed students), as once they ARE coded, they have a lot more leeway to demand that the school district do X, Y, and Z, because now their child is protected under the federal IDEA (Individual with Disabilites Education Act).

I've even heard this quite a bit lately (not in our school, but from friends elsewhere in the country) from parents of gifted children, who feel that with the lack of a gifted program in their schools, getting their kid coded as what amounts to basically "chronically bored" will allow them to demand stimulation for their kids. It doesn't often work, but parents still try. Pretty sad that that's what it has come down to, but in some places it has.

I guess I'm not with the majority on this thread, because as a parent, I generally don't object to mainstreaming as long as it isn't more than marginally disruptive to others in the class. I do think that it engenders a bit more of a sense of compassion and understanding toward children with differences and disabilities. I have far more issues with e.g. a child who is very bright but troubled, and causes MAJOR disruptions (e.g. throwing books and furniture and causing classroom evacuations ). If a child is e.g. autistic and has the assistance of an aide but perhaps only limited social or even academic interaction with others in the class, but it is deemed by his/her parents and counselor to be the best placement for him/her, then I won't argue with that.

That said, I do believe that math and reading should be tracked subjects in the early grades, with kids having mobility if appropriate.

But I do completely agree that the expenditures have gotten completely out of hand. We are very lucky that in our district, we have an older gentleman who did not raise his (now adult) children in our town, who EVERY SINGLE YEAR stands up at the annual school budget vote and says "How much are we spending per gifted student, and how much are we spending per Special Ed student?" We have NEVER had the gifted budget cut. I always appreciate that the question comes from someone with no children in the school, as everyone in the room knows that for him, the question is not self-serving.

 

[jack97]

We are very lucky that in our district, we have an older gentleman who did not raise his (now adult) children in our town, who EVERY SINGLE YEAR stands up at the annual school budget vote and says "How much are we spending per gifted student, and how much are we spending per Special Ed student?" We have NEVER had the gifted budget cut. I always appreciate that the question comes from someone with no children in the school, as everyone in the room knows that for him, the question is not self-serving.

I would say that it is self serving in a non direct way. The kids in the school system now is the country's future. Our (future) economy and standard of living is going to based on how they perform, especially against foreign competition (countries). Our tech edge has been slowly eroding for that past decade and other countries are producing kids who can outperform our kids in math and science.

Imagine being on a fix income or at lower income in a second rate economy because China and India has the best math and science people...IMO a scary thought.

 

[FridayHiker]

I would say that it is self serving in a non direct way. The kids in the school system is the countries future.

That is, in fact, exactly what he says every year.

Um, you don't have white hair and live in my town, do you?

 

[JimG.]

I guess I'm not with the majority on this thread, because as a parent, I generally don't object to mainstreaming as long as it isn't more than marginally disruptive to others in the class. I do think that it engenders a bit more of a sense of compassion and understanding toward children with differences and disabilities. I have far more issues with e.g. a child who is very bright but troubled, and causes MAJOR disruptions (e.g. throwing books and furniture and causing classroom evacuations ). If a child is e.g. autistic and has the assistance of an aide but perhaps only limited social or even academic interaction with others in the class, but it is deemed by his/her parents and counselor to be the best placement for him/her, then I won't argue with that.

My post did make it sound like I'm against it. To clarify, I'm not necessarily against it either, as long as it is only marginally disruptive as you have mentioned. My 2 oldest sons have both told us that they have been asked by their teachers to help these kids out, and I told them both it is part of their role as good fellow humans to help others less fortunate than them.

It is no coincidence that both boys have become better teammates in other areas of their lives; both have embraced that role as coach. I think it's good for them and it helps their self esteem and self image a great deal. A big part of life is allowing others to depend on you.

 

[jack97]

My post did make it sound like I'm against it. To clarify, I'm not necessarily against it either, as long as it is only marginally disruptive as you have mentioned. My 2 oldest sons have both told us that they have been asked by their teachers to help these kids out, and I told them both it is part of their role as good fellow humans to help others less fortunate than them.

It is no coincidence that both boys have become better teammates in other areas of their lives; both have embraced that role as coach. I think it's good for them and it helps their self esteem and self image a great deal. A big part of life is allowing others to depend on you.

Conceptually, I have nothing against mainstreaming and developing the social skills to interact with everyone in the classroom.

Here’s the but…... We are doing it at a sacrifice of academic excellence and achievement for the middle and top students. Other countries eight graders have consistently outperformed US in math and science. We just looked at the results of high school Olympiad, the best of the best in academics (mainly math and physics), US was not in the top group, the scores between the top teams to US was night and day, pathetic when see a lot foreign names in the US team. This means the school system doesn’t promote excellence in these disciplines for the middle and top students.

IMO, this a big social issue in the years to come. Think about how our life style right now. We are a strong country due to past innovations in medicine, industry, and technology. This was built on a strong of knowledge of math and science. Who is going to keep up this up when we get old…. looks like other countries; the Chinese and Koreans.

 

[ctenidae]

Mainstreaming should focus on bringing students up to the mainstream level, rather than bringing the mainstream down to the lower students. Unfortunately, it's easier, cheaper, and more "self esteem building" to make everyone dumber.

 

[JimG.]

Conceptually, I have nothing against mainstreaming and developing the social skills to interact with everyone in the classroom.

Here’s the but…... We are doing it at a sacrifice of academic excellence and achievement for the middle and top students. Other countries eight graders have consistently outperformed US in math and science. We just looked at the results of high school Olympiad, the best of the best in academics (mainly math and physics), US was not in the top group, the scores between the top teams to US was night and day, pathetic when see a lot foreign names in the US team. This means the school system doesn’t promote excellence in these disciplines for the middle and top students.

IMO, this a big social issue in the years to come. Think about how our life style right now. We are a strong country due to past innovations in medicine, industry, and technology. This was built on a strong of knowledge of math and science. Who is going to keep up this up when we get old…. looks like other countries; the Chinese and Koreans.

I can't argue with this...such a quandry. We've got some real problems in this country.

 

[skiNEwhere]

This is about as much BS as tag getting banned in one town. I think it depends on the teachers, some are better than others.

I hate to compare to other countries, but look at Japan. While there schools are very hard, as a result they have much more technology, and they have evolved very fast as a country

 

[ctenidae]

Who is going to keep up this up when we get old…. looks like other countries; the Chinese and Koreans.

And the Indians.