Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Parenting and Advocacy "best" is NOT a good goal-- explaining

That's a really good point, actually. When I broached this subject with him, he defended the practice under the guise of "teaching good college skills" and "shaping her thinking the way a HISTORIAN does it..."

I'm not sure that I'm really buying either explanation.

I think that the ideology piece may be more important than I've given it credit for, actually. He's coming at things from a "It's simple! X, Y, and Z," standpoint (which is complemented by his own ideology which supports that). She, on the other hand, is coming at this from a more kind of thoughtful (?) perspective which is more like, "While it may at first appear simple, it soon becomes apparent that if X, then A, which often means that Y and Z are only possible together or not at all, in which case B instead, not that there's anything wrong with that." It's more narrative than procedural, if that makes sense.

HER ideology supports that kind of approach, fundamentally. Her beliefs personally tend to lead her to be VERY mulish about the kind of oversimplification he's looking for in value judgments. She really does interpret this as him punishing how she thinks on some level.

Our current strategy is that DD is going to do the next couple of lessons, and then she's going to take off a few weeks from the class to avoid having any MORE salt poured in her wounds...

while she studies American Government by following the national election, and writing an NaNoWriMo novel that she's been cooking up plot for the past few weeks-- a political thriller. I told her that was fine with me as long as she does some research to support the plot with authentic procedural details.

(I think she's thinking about using either cloture, or maybe using the VP's voting powers somehow. She wants to venture off the beaten track a bit. Everyone writes about the executive powers. )

She's also going to apply to be a page at our state legislature by contacting our local state rep (who knows us).

Could you possibly convince her that being successful, in this particular situation, might not be about getting an A or being "perfect" but about staying true to herself and keeping her own voice in the face of unrealistic criticism by an authority figure? Sort of reframe the situation for her? From what you've written, it seems that there is very little value in "achieving" what he is looking for so why even try? What is the benefit to her other than the grade? It actually sounds like achieving this goal would actually be a loss.

I realize it undermines his authority as a teacher, but I sort of think he deserves it. In a situation like this, I would argue that keeping your own voice and perspective is actually much more valuable than the A. The A is arbitrary and unimportant in the larger scheme of things. Try to convince her that being "perfect" in this situation means taking a B, but knowing that she stayed "perfectly" true to who she is and what she knows to be true.

Because at this point, it sounds like there is very little likelihood of significantly changing his perspective, so perhaps you can focus on helping her survive the situation with her nerves and psyche intact.

Thank you so much to everyone for helping me to think this through. I still find the situation very perplexing, but at least I feel that I have some options to consider at this point.

a) My DH thinks that he can help DD to "edit" her responses to be in line with what Mr. Fantastic is seeking-- his suggestion, therefore, is to have DD run EVERY bit of additional writing for the class through him. Pro: may work, since DH has a much more 'flat/technical' style than DD does innately, and he works in an engineering environment with similar communication barriers. :ahem: Also doesn't force DD to alter her voice as a writer, or her principles as a person. Con: sends the message to my DD that she isn't 'capable' of earning her own grade in the class, and she objects based on ethics, feeling that this MIGHT violate the honor code.

b) Let her take the B that she's likely to earn without any additional intervention. Pro: no more angst necessary, no more potential ruffling of teacher feathers. Con: it's wrong. Oh, and potentially damages DD's class rank, which is one thing if it's deserved (say, if she were 'choosing' not to work very hard at physics or something and earned a B rather than an A), but quite another when it's a personality conflict at work. I hadn't mentally framed this as an integrity issue for DD, though-- and that has been a helpful perspective for me. Recall that DD's sole goal for now, academically, involves class rank. It's about the only 'realistic' and tangible goal that she has in this particular setting. She wants number one, and a B in this class jeopardizes that larger goal.

c) drop the "honors" course in favor of another teacher, or investigate the possibility of converting to the AP course (it's almost nine weeks in, though... ay yi yi... she'd have to double time it to make up the time that she's missed) Pro: AP comes with greater depth/difficulty, and also with a better GPA weighting. Con: OMG, the sheer VOLUME to make up, though... As for dropping to the non-honors course, that comes with a GPA weight penalty. Obvious 'con' there.

d) take a break, attempt further remediation involving people higher up the food chain. I've not ruled this out, but I fear burning bridges at this point. I'm probably GOING to call the counselor next week either way-- even if only to figure out what the other options are under c). Pro: better data, possibly better communication with teacher, Con: irritating the teacher further at both of us may make him even MORE intractible. It might even get him "in trouble" and that's really not my goal here, since as noted, he seems to be an EXCELLENT teacher for at least some students, and probably for the students who are more typical in this model.

e) Have DD take a break and hope for a better future after she's calmed down some (and maybe, quite honestly, after the TEACHER has calmed down some). Pro: hey, less emotional thinking is always better for communication. Con: the fundamental problems remain unchanged in the situation on all sides.

f) Have DD attempt to earn perfect scores in the class, keep her head down, and try to write the way he wants. Our advice to her thus far has been:
Don't use ANYTHING that you've learned elsewhere in ANY of your writing unless you're specifically directed to it. Stick with the textbook definitions and explanations. Verbatim where possible.
Write simply-- and aim at a kinda slow middle-schooler.
Write 'persuasively' as if you were debating.

Pro: lowest activation energy, and seems least confrontational to teacher (who is a real nut about authority/respect issues), also teaches DD how to deal efectively with someone like this-- if it works, that is. Con: means allowing DD to give perfectionism full reign, at least in this class. May serve as an unwelcome distraction to her when she needs to focus on AP Lit and Physics since those are academically appropriate. Compromises her principles, since she tends to regard this kind of over-simplified, cherry-picked writing as inherently biased and disingenuous if you're doing it ON PURPOSE and pretending that it represents "truth." (Debate or formal legal defense is different because everyone KNOWS that it is what is taking place.) That said, I think that maybe she CAN write the way he wants. Probably, anyway-- it will just feel horribly "icky" to her.

Much to consider.

I'm an extremely conservative pacifist, so the two are certainly not exclusive.

But you also are not active duty military, I'm guessing.

No, but I did get into a nice dispute at church several months ago.

Generally, I try to keep my mouth shut because there is somewhere near a 0% chance that anyone in my vicinity will agree with my positions. Normally it just confuses them.

Which again makes you very much like my DD, generally speaking-- if ironically so, in this instance. We present as "probably conservative" at a casual glance; we home-educate, we are very strict about 'age-appropriate' dress, conduct, and behavior, and we encourage respect for rules and authority figures. We also love politics and love to debate and think about complexity.
She comes as a COMPLETE shock to most of her friends; but only if they ever get her to open up about her actual socio-economic or policy opinions. Mostly she just smiles and makes non-committal statements while they espouse THEIR opinions to her, and recalls them later with no small amount of amusement while they continue to assume that she agrees with them.

She definitely feels a bit threatened in a school setting like this one, because it leans decidedly conservative (both social and economic) and free-market Libertarian. Her views on religion, economics, sociology, and politics are all at odds with 99% of her classmates, at least a fourth of the relevent curriculum, and even with many teachers.

On the one hand, we usually feel that this is a good thing-- because it lends her better listening skills, better PEOPLE skills in navigating that kind of environment, and more compassion for those who hold minority perspectives. She also doesn't hold opinions that she doesn't have internal reasons for, and NEVER takes a stand firmly without thinking it through analytically. On the other, it's isolating as an adolescent to feel that you're a freak or that your views lend you a sort of martyrdom.

It's generally had the opposite effect on me, because I'm not trying to navigate the environment as much as I am trying to force to environment to match my internal feelings on how things must be.

I tend to not have compassion in conversation for those who hold incorrect perspectives, because, after all, error has no rights.

So, I keep my mouth shut as opposed to engaging because that way I stay calm don't project anger outward.

It's a problem of generating a priori moral absolutes and then using rigid mathematical calculation to determine the outcome with no respect for either the cultural or human element.

Mouth shut = harmony!

Happiness!

Butterflies!

Just goes to show that the same behavior can have vastly different underpinnings in two different PG persons, doesn't it?? I find that absolutely amazing to think about, personally. It's a great example of what I was referring to above, though, with a need for active listening in order to genuinely gain an understanding of causation with anyone who isn't NT.

-----------------------------------------

I think that I've covered all of the major considerations in my lengthy point-by-point pro/con analysis above. Time to confer with my DD and have her identify most/least-worst risks and most/least-best outcomes. Printing that for my DD and DH. Family conference time! (This will very definitely NOT involve happiness or butterflies. :sigh: Three type A people all with fine brains and their own opinions on everything. Watch the fur fly! Wheeee.)



Then at least I'll know what to discuss with the counselor/principal on Monday.