Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums Learning Environments Toxic Educational Practices-- a rogues gallery

Spiral Reviews for Mathematics

Wow.

SO many things wrong with that.

(Renzulli-- which is too-often shorthand for "bright not gifted" and enrichment using FLUFF, IMO; the notion that repetition is "necessary" for authentic learning; that learning is like the process of BURNING a track on a CD or something; multiple choice assessment as 50%-- or more-- of the 'assessment' associated... etc. etc.)

By the way, Connections Academy's new "Common Core" compliant mathematics program is using "spiral reviews" (as in the link) as a MANDATORY cornerstone of K-8 mathematics.

Revolting.

Please understand that I'm not objecting to this practice for typical students in mathematics-- but for those children who are clearly not working at their ability level within a classroom, either in level or rate. With a HG+ student, frankly, this entire thing sounds like the extraction of a pound of flesh.



Who else has examples of educational practices which may sound good in theory (or maybe not even then, LOL) but in pragmatic terms, seem to be operating in violation of everything that is known about educating HG students?

I'm only on the first page, but so far this does not inspire confidence:

"Practice doesn’t make perfect it makes permanent"

Go back to school, teach.

"Student’s pick-up their Spiral Review for the day when they
enter the classroom"

Of course, later ON, it appears as:

"Practice does not make perfect, it makes permenant"

I guess I should stop...

Grades, both kinds

the whole child.

it sounds so sensible, to think about the whole child! but it's funny how it gets used to avoid addressing specific concerns. "oh, but we must think of the Whole Child - what's the rush? she's such a little kid..."

Whole language reading.

Mathematics with no wrong answers.

This! In pre-k (4) he went in with math and reading at a 1st+ grade level, and in K (5) he was at a 2nd-3rd grade level in math (depending on topic) and reading at about 4th grade level (though he would much rather read picture books or encyclopedias not chapter books). I got sucked into the: the academics don't matter because he has them down pat, what really matters is balancing him out, the whole child must be developed and his behavior is horrible so we must focus on that for now, there is time later to teach him more math/science/reading.

In first grade I felt that I had made a mistake but we were at a new school and with a new teacher and she felt that we had to focus on behavior too, and I don't see that he made any progress last year at all, so how is that truly focusing on the whole child?

May I ask how that would work? Math is the one place I would think that pretty much everyone would realize there is only one (or more if appropriate) right answer and any other answer is wrong. To think I thought it was bad when they stopped keeping score in kids sports!

DH or I mis-spelled permanent in an email once, and our "permenant record" has since been filled with all sorts of examples of buffoonery in honour of the original misspelling. Every time we goof, the incident goes in the "permenant file" mentally while the permanent record remains spotless. Maybe those teachers are onto us! Maybe they use this trick, too, with their policies. If so, be verrrrry afraid.

On topic...
- Group work
- Peer mentoring/teaching

It's right about then that I would point out my role in my child's life is to worry about development of the whole child, particularly behavior, and their role is to teach academics.

and it's right about now that I need to point out how much i love you people. for realz, y'all are keeping me sane, and this thread is fantastic already.

Here's an example.




I'm very skeptical of programs like this one. They tend to be based on fluffy thinking and little evidence. I say this as someone who has reviewed way too many education grant applications.

"Mad Minutes" those dreadful timed tests to see how many addition, subtraction, multiplication problems you can answer correctly in 1 minute. Then (insert sarcastic tone here)if you are lucky the teacher will post your score on a big chart on the bulletin board for all to see.

We despise "Mad Minutes"!

Wow. *blink blink* Just wow. I am stunned by that. Those poor children!

I have a kindergartner who has the academics down pat AND is extremely well behaved AND socially aware, so it's going be interesting to see what they say he needs to work on. (Better hygiene? ...It's true that I'm bad about clipping his fingernails. Improved cafeteria skills?...He's slow at eating lunch.) I shall keep you posted.

Believe it or not, when my 2e ds had his first neuropsych eval, his 2nd grade teacher filled out a behavioral survey and was "very concerned" that his fingernails weren't clipped.

I can't tell you how many times in follow-up team meetings where she was present that I was tempted to ask for personal hygiene breaks as needed and an aide to trim his nails lol!

polarbear

Yes, Whole Language reading created a generation of semi-literate Americans, and math with no wrong answers is creating people who are mostly clueless about mathematics.

DD13 still recalls her classmates' humiliation by their third grade teacher using a similar approach. The teacher put stuffed animals with the kids' names on a bulletin board. When the kids reached a certain level of timed prociency on basic math facts, they could take home their animal. DD was one of the first kids to bring hers home in September or October. By the end of the year, it was a wall of shame for a few kids who never attained the goal. DD felt very bad for the kids who never earned their animals.

I actually do worry about things like this sometimes. We aren't very appearance-focused in our house (as in, the occasional rundown shoe, crazy hair day, and unclipped nail doth not offend too much) and sometimes I really have to focus hard on the children and make sure they look steretypically "well-kept," just so that doesn't count against them.

hahahahaha That is great, yes they will find something.... the other excuse they are good at is, if we teach him 1st grade math in Kindergarten what will he learn next year? I don't see why teachers/administrators think this way but they do.

Good luck!

Ultramarina, I have the exact same problem! DS isn't a problem for fingernails, because he chews his down to the bone, but DD sports some truly horrendous ones sometimes. And I have problems remembering to clip the dog's nails, too, because I've never really had inside dogs, and outside dogs keep their own nails worn down. For the kids (and me), appearance is an afterthought -- I'm lucky to get to the store and discover that DD actually has shoes on, and no peanut butter on her face.

Scarily enough, that program Val posted sounds very much like our school and Everyday Math -- although as far as I can tell, they do still value correct answers. The rest, all the "family game night" and spiraling and teaching fifteen different ways to do everything, that's quite familiar. I did notice that DS's 8th grade math syllabus mentions that some things will be graded on participation and completion, not answers, and other things will be graded on answers, so maybe we're sliding now. It also seemed a bit heavy on the "math takes practice to be good" and "you will get better at math". Well, yes, I'd like him to practice and also to get better, but those seem to me to imply that everyone is expected to be awful at math.

Great thread.

There are so many toxic examples, it's hard to choose.

How about:
"If you give a child with disabilities the help [he needs], he will become dependent on it, so it's better not to help him at all."

DeeDee

Everyday Math -- although as far as I can tell, they do still value correct answers.


Wellllllll.... "correct-correct?" Or "correct-according-to-this-lesson?"

Because I've seen some DOOZIES from Pearson Math curricula over the years. I'll let you know what my DD has to say about the redesigned "enVision" program which is ""Common Core-aligned."" Oh-- and the earlier grades, as noted, rely upon Spiral Reviews to Evoke Excellent Preparation.

I guess I can see where when there isn't any right/wrong it might take some getting used to. Still-- it makes me wonder what sort of "permanent" they intended, there. I can readily see how "perfect" is meaningless in that scheme, anyway. So that part makes sense.

LOL.

__________________________________________________

How about the entire notion that a child who has been grade accelerated must actually be at a much HIGHER standard of performance than his/her peers-- because otherwise, see, it's an example of a "maturity" problem.

Wait-- I have a better idea. How about teachers and administrators stop to consider the fact that grade accelerated students are frequently used to: a) performing under a HARSH white spotlight among peers, teachers, and pretty much every one but mom and dad; b) needing to prove that they belong-- over and over and OVER again; c) knowing that the majority of observers are just waiting to pounce on any mistakes as evidence that they don't belong there (or don't deserve the opportunity/placement/honor)? Oh, and let's add in all of the opportunities that they DO NOT have by virtue of being "too young" for those things that are accessed purely chronologically... so add in a highly compressed timeline for some opportunities which depend upon both maturity, intellectual readiness, and AGE... such as summer internships, jobs, etc.

Seems to me that "equal" achievement with peers several years older is actually no such thing-- it's really more like overcoming a serious handicap or three to achieve the same things. THAT ought to count for something. Seriously.


Maturity? BAH. My 14yo is far more mature than any number of 18yo college students I've personally encountered.

MAYBE people doing the gatekeeping ought to stop and think about their biases long enough to realize that when they've met one outlier-- they've met one.

Which brings me right back around to nasty educational practices:

Assuming that not being (mathy/creative/assertive) means that you can't REALLY be a gifted student.

oh! that made me think of a good one. when the people in charge of the learning environment run up against an obvious outlier they (figuratively) run screaming from the room yelling, "it's not developmentally possible!" which is, i guess, a really great strategy because it allows them to DO NOTHING.

and ha, we have some issues with our old nanny (who we now consider a friend) when i realized DD5 was drawing more mature conclusions about the nanny's life than the nanny herself was. i mean, she's 24 - and at 24 we all do dumb things... but it's a bit frightening when your five y/o just slices through all the BS, rolls her eyes and drops some truth right in her lap. good times!

Doubtfulguest, that must make for some interesting conversations!

privately, i'm very grateful for my kid starting to process parts of the adult world - it's less emotionally-charged for her to be thinking about these difficult subjects now than it will be when she's that age. i love literature for these reasons, too - it's a wonderful way to explore ethical and emotional issues safely.

but that said... DD's extreme maturity has wreaked some havoc in the nanny/kid relationship for sure. this pause in their friendship is a loss for both of them, but fortunately DD5 is pretty phlegmatic about it - as she says, "X has some things to work out right now and that's ok." i've consciously emphasized life's grey areas quite a bit with DD, so i think that has helped a lot?

Yes, Yes, please!!! Our district is jumping into Pearson Digital which will include enVision Math as well as Write to Learn and Reading Street, etc. I've browsed some of the instructional videos and I'm not overly impressed.

The Pearson rep. really played it up, explaining how kids that are above level can advance through the program, but I'm doubtful about how far the school will really let a kid go.

I might just need to start a new Pearson thread to see if anyone else has an opinion.

Most of the reps who sell these new math curricula have undergrad degrees in English or Communications... the ones I've met can answer specific questions neither about math nor about best practices in education.

Nevertheless, oh, the enthusiasm they inspire among administrators.



DeeDee

We forgot an important one:

Rigor = More Homework

Yes.

And extension is doing the too easy work then doing the next level which is also too easy. What 6 year old wouldn't jump at that!

Ugh-- I hated that with math and my DD.

Regular assignment: pp 204-206; #1-55 odd problems.


Enrichment for additional challenge:

pp 204-206; 1-55, 57, 60-72.

[bangs head]

So this meant that my daughter was expected to do TWICE the number of low-level, single-skill problems which were considered "adequate" to teach her nongifted classmates this material. Let's think about this for a moment, shall we...



Right. Because it's obvious that gifted learners need a lot more reinforcement of concepts than most students.

Another to add to the list:
Teachers from year to year using completely different standards to measure reading skills.

To have a kid come out of K with a Fountas & Pinnell of T, then having the 1st grade teacher report an L is dispiriting (not to mention suspicious when the letter moves in perfect progress through the year; p.s. what is the definition of sandbagging?)

A fresh example from Precalculus:


Right. For "enrichment" or "additional challenge" do twice as many of the EASIEST problems in the homework set.

Zen
Do they report the level on the report card? It would seem that an explanation would be in order - perhaps even a full battery of school paid for testing to explain how suddenly your kid dropped 8 reading levels over the summer!!!

DeHe

Does the book even have harder problems? My son's book (not Advanced Math by Richard Brown) doesn't.

Think I'll add this is a general one. NCLB or Title II or whatever defines a "highly qualified teacher" as someone who

1. Has a Bachelor's degree (doesn't have to be subject-specific)
2. Has certification from the state
3. Has passed a test in the area s/he teaches.

Personally, I would see these requirements as describing a bare minimum, not grounds for being labelled "highly qualified." But that is just me.

This was last year, and they did report it, but our relationship with the school is going great. DS skipped 2nd and is now in a full TD program. I'm writing that blip off as mixed styles between the K and 1st teacher, and it didn't restrict his access to material.

oh that's good - I would have been fuming if it had influenced access to material! On an aside, never understand the idea of restricting access anyhow.

DeHe

Not about gifted education, but not letting preschoolers nap is a bad educational practice:

http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sn-naps-preschoolers-20130924,0,3965670.story
Naps help preschoolers with memory, study says
By Mary MacVean
September 24, 2013
Los Angeles Times

Anyone who has ever spent much time around 2-5yo children KNOWS that depriving them of sleep is never a good idea. LOL.

So I'm thinking that midday rest periods also promote teacher sanity.

Val, our "Advanced Mathematical Concepts" textbook isn't Brown, either-- in fact, it's a Glencoe product which apparently generated so much pride in ownership that, er-- well, I haven't yet figured out WHO the author(s) is/are. LOL. Not listed on the cover.


So it may well be that the problem set only goes to 37, as you note.

I can't tell because the online textbook can't be opened. By either me or DD, using any one of four different internet browsers and/or three different reader applications. I can look at the cover, but that's as far as navigation works. LOL.



ETA: FINALLY! Yes, in looking at the pages where the exercises are located, Val gets the prize-- the set ends with number 37! I'm not sure what she wins, but anyway... as part of the bonus round, #37 is a SAT practice question! (yikes) Multiple choice!

37. Which of the following is NOT larger than 5 X 6^12?

The words "curriculum," "demands," and "pressure" appearing in a non-ironic sentence about pre-school are a canary in our societal coalmine, and it's an ex-canary. There are only cosmetic differences between this and when we used to send children into actual coalmines.

Underestimating the value of parents as children's primary teachers.

I was recently asked by an I-device parent when I will send DS23mo to preschool to "learn something." Funny, that assumption that preschool has exclusive licence for enabling learning.

Parents are merely big sacs of money and food, just glorified ATM-feed trough hybrids, really. Why, what marginal benefit might I provide over, say, a steel drum, a pile of potatoes, and a $20 bill? Or so the thinking goes.

My answer? "Isn't that your son licking the Lego display?"

Apt.

LOL... love the response.

Also, I'm going to steal your slang "I-device parent," shorten it to I-parent, and use it shamelessly.

Please do! Sometimes I'm tempted to bring a scrambler to our park so parents will actually have to *gasp!* interact with their children.

ETA: PM'd you with an iParent funny so as not to derail the thread. Sorry folks, mea culpa!

Another Rogue practice-- expecting that "rehashing" badly constructed or laughably inadequate curriculum will make things CLEARER to students.


So I had this surreal conversation with my child's German teacher about the fact that the CURRICULUM doesn't seem to actually, um... support the content that is evaluated by assessments?

Interesting things that I learned during this conversation:

a) well, "fluency" isn't really the goal of second year German

b) there are interactive quizzes/games in each of the 3-4 lessons on large topics (like negations in sentences, for example-- covering no/not/none, or do not/don't-- which are case-dependent declensions complicated by three genders, a plural, and FOUR separate cases, all of which change the form and placement of the proper term) The little interactive games often feature a single noun and two or three of the four cases, none of which are EXPLAINED anywhere-- so perhaps 20 examples total, after which students are expected to be able to apply this themselves to ANY case, ANY noun/sentence structure

c) 15 minutes of instruction per week is, apparently "not ideal" but still should be workable, in light of b

d) No, the teacher is NOT aware of any supporting materials which might offer a motivated student some additional practice with grammar skills-- just do the flashcard/games again. (Okay-- neglecting for a moment here the fact that my DD pretty much CANNOT do this and hope to "learn" anything that she, being PG, already got from them the first time around... this is simply awful-- as a teacher, isn't it your JOB to be able to help students to select appropriate supplemental material when they ask??)

This class is a nightmare. DD also cannot drop it without having another option which is better-- and we've looked. The only options that she DOES have are all about like this. I hate Pearson with an unfettered, overwhelming, throbbing PASSION right now. The notion that a few flashcards and embedded multimedia clips can "teach" all students what they need to know in a foreign language course, in order to speak, read, and WRITE fluently...

... is just so unbelievably stupid.

The best, and most fundamentally jaw-dropping thing of all?

The teacher admitted that she has "not yet" covered any of the unit 2 material in her limited "class time" with the students. "heehee-- well, I guess that will be corrected as of Friday, anyway." Seriously?? My kid's grade just tanked in this class because she was expected to complete a major assessment on this material BEFORE you "covered" it. She was scrambling to LEARN the material. Stupid of us, I realize... clearly, she should just be memorizing or cheating.

Doesn't that seem just a wee bit unfair and bizarre to this teacher??

Apparently not.

If I seem somewhat bitter over this, it's probably because students in this course are ALSO punished for using concepts beyond those 'taught' (I obviously use the term euphemistically). Thus my question about appropriate supplemental materials. I certainly don't want to teach my child any UNAUTHORIZED German and have her docked points for THAT, either...

So-- damned if you do, damned if you don't, basically? Alrighty then-- I guess we understand one another, at least. {sighhhh}

For a review of German grammar, try this site with cool photos.

This site might help too.

Thanks. I'm going to bookmark both of those, unauthorized or not. The second is FAR more extensive instruction than Pearson's idea of "language instruction" I'll just add.



The teacher basically just kept saying "Hmmm... sounds like {DD} would do much better in an immersion environment." Uhhh-- yeah, well maybe (but I seriously doubt it-- she's just trying to UNDERSTAND the rules, which are never explicitly explained), and I realize that isn't what we have here, but-- could you TRY just a little to help us out when we call?

Maybe not telling my daughter that she should view calling the teacher for assistance as a last resort?? (Yes, the teacher apparently really did indicate that. That she was ONLY to call if she "is still struggling after doing the games over and over in the lessons.")

Agreed. Some have suggested to the educational institution that they audit, review, and cross-reference their assessment questions, labeling each with where the material appears and is sourced from in the curriculum... likewise labeling the curriculum as to which assessment item(s) it feeds into. When the curriculum or assessment may change, the educational institution may easily follow through to synchronize the two.

Censoring knowledge accumulated outside the classroom, in a FREE society?! Chilling. Imagine a future where one must receive permission to know anything beyond that which is specified: ... permission to travel, to self-select books to read... as those may accumulate knowledge.

Here is a roundup of toxic educational practices regarding grading.

Requiring a child to choose between advanced work or social inclusion is another toxic educational practice. More at this post, which highlights a few points from an article on the Davidson Database called "Gifted Children: Youth Mental Health Update" (Julia Osborn, 1996).

Here's a post including reasons which some schools have given for not cluster-grouping children by similar level of ability and readiness. These are examples of working against the mental health of the gifted pupils.

Many of these experiences serve to undermine the growth of gifted pupils and/or invalidate the academic needs and/or social inclusion needs of gifted pupils, causing the gifted to become collateral damage of an educational system which is focused on closing gaps and achieving equal outcomes.

= - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - = - =
NOTE: The article "Gifted children: Youth mental health update" by Julia Osborn, 1996, published by Division of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Schneider Children's Hospital, is backed up on WayBack Machine, Internet archive.
Links:
1) article -
https://web.archive.org/web/20200112034938/http://www.davidsongifted.org/search-database/entry/a10170
2) list of archive dates/times -
https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.davidsongifted.org/search-database/entry/a10170

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!! :rofl:

Such a suggestion is, unfortunately, going to fall on deaf ears, just as it has for the past ten years.

(I only WISH that I were kidding about that)

While education may not have been monolithic in the past, mark my words-- y'all are REALLY going to regret having turned curriculum/assessment over to Pearson.

Dig a little and find out what they now enjoy as "market share" here in educational markets if you are wondering what I'm referring to here. They are the future of assessment.

They don't have a CLUE what they are doing, and they are most emphatically not "educators" there-- they are businesspeople and profit IS the bottom line, regardless of validation or pedagogically sound practices. There is no connection between those writing assessments, those with content expertise, and those 'writing' curriculum (mostly 'Smurfing' open-access and free content from various places around the web, by the way).

Be afraid. Be very afraid.


Common Core standards are an awesome idea. Pearson's implementation is a nightmare. But there is good news, because they are going to make a LOT of money. Then they'll get to make more to fix it all.

Okay-- you really know that your child's school is so not set up for gifted children when there is an entry on a form that reads:





Wouldn't graduating "off cohort" (a year or two early) be... um...

okay?

And one wonders exactly what sort of "actions" would be taken to put a stop to it, actually...

I'd Love to Teach, But...


I think I see where some of the problems associated with educational settings for our HG+ learners are coming from, actually...

the sequelae of this particular Op-Ed (with which I concur about 110%, if that were possible) is that:

a. Our kids can't POSSIBLY be granted actual challenging learning environments, because those would result in too many of their "gifted" classmates not earning A's, so it's best to just teach material that EVERYONE can earn A's on, and keep our kids quiet. There aren't as many of us and our kids to complain, after all, so this is a win if you're on the other side of things.

b. Who WOULD stay in this profession?? Seriously. People who are either so devoted to it that they can't fathom doing anything else... or... people who are so desperate that they can't DO anything else. I've known both types, and I can tell you which make up the majority of the 'gems' in the profession.

c. Good luck getting your child opportunities to "distinguish" him/herself from all of the other "gifted" children in his/her classroom. They're ALL 4.0 students now. See a. for why. No wonder there is a crazy arms race for spots in prestigious colleges. And no wonder there is starting to be pressure to "fix" grades in higher ed, too, as this cohort of kids gets there and expects to "do over" every assignment, to be able to turn things in late or not at all, and still earn the A's they've always gotten. Super-scoring is an abomination. And it's all of a piece, in my opinion. My DD didn't need super-scoring, and neither do any other genuinely high-ability kids. Sure, anyone can have a bad day. So have a good one some other time.

We're in big, big trouble when we refuse to even ADMIT that some people are actually smarter or more capable than others, or that some people's efforts just aren't good enough to be considered "adequate" much less "exemplary."

How many of us here have had the experience of a shocked classroom teacher giving our child's half-baked work an "A" and having one of us say (to the child or to the teacher, or both) "Um-- well, I certainly wouldn't have given that an 'A'. More like a 'D.' Here's why."

When I have that conversation with teachers, I can tell you-- they LOVE me for saying it. And they are super-surprised. They *think* that a kid like mine *must* be the result of careful hothousing/grooming/Sikorsky management, and are delighted and enchanted to discover that she's the real deal. Well, the good ones are. The bad ones not so much-- they continue poking to figure out just HOW the trick is done. {sigh} But I can see WHY they do that, given the reality that they live with.

We forgot another one. Not allowing kids to go to the bathroom when they have to go.

DS13 had a teacher who gave the kids one bathroom pass per semester a couple years ago. If you didn't use it, you got 5 extra credit points on the final.

DS11's math teacher has new policy for 2014. She takes away recess if a student has to go to the bathroom during her class.

When they were little, DS13 and 11 could only use the bathroom during recess.



When I was a kid, this was never an issue. If you had to go, you raised your hand, asked, and off you went. Later (as in, 11th grade), I changed schools and the new school was more restrictive: you had to get the hall pass from the teacher before you left the classroom. I don't remember a lot of abuse of this quasi-freedom.

What are other people's experiences in this regard?

Good lord! DS11 has enough intestinal issues without being restricted from being able to go to the bathroom if he needs to! He restricted himself for quite a few years because he didn't want to go anywhere but at home, and that was more trouble -- I think he's finally gotten over that (I hope, anyway), but if I heard about a teacher refusing him, I'd go down and raise the roof!

We, of course, could get it put into his ALP or reinstate his IEP if necessary to fix it, but what about everybody else?

Yeah, a teacher really wants a bunch of kids sitting there and thinking about nothing other than how badly they need to go to the bathroom. That should help those test scores.

I just can't even imagine "restrictions" like those Val reports. I mean, sure-- if it's a problem with a particular group of students, I suppose that placing bounds on it might be in order... such as "you'll have to wait until the hall pass comes back with another student" or "please restrict your restroom visits to times when the class is doing centers/individual seat work" and such. KWIM?

I had a meeting with the principal of my child's elementary school last month because the teacher refused to allow DS (6 years old) to use the bathroom. DS is so used to going when he wants that he almost had an accident "holding it in". He was highly upset, crying and distressed and had to be taken to the front office from where I got the phone call about how this crying child had to be handled. I was told that children need to learn "self control" and they expect kids to control their urge to go to the bathroom - I do agree that there are a lot of kids who use bathroom breaks as a way to avoid seatwork. I gave them a piece of my mind and also told them that this was America and they were violating my child's rights and freedom if they restricted his right to go to the bathroom. They had the gall to ask me if DS had any medical problems and if they were not informed of it.
Long story short - the principal "allowed" DS to go to the bathroom at any time he wants to "as a special case" - because I had become one of those "noisy, problem parents". But, the teacher still uses "a mean voice" to give DS permission if he wants to go to the bathroom at class time according to him.
And the end effect is that DS got a remark on his report card that said that he "lacks self control" - this about a kid who is mature beyond his years, so well adjusted and loves going to school and follows rules.
The good thing is that they are building an "attached bathroom" to his classroom now - previously, they had to cross the playground to get to the bathroom - which was bad for little kids in a hurry to go to the bathroom. Something good came out of this, atleast.

It is mind boggling to me that apparently what makes DS's k-8 an awesome school is not all the wonderful gifted accelerated things they do, it's that students can just raise their hands with a signal for the bathroom and for the water fountain - apparently, gasp, they can have water needs too!!!

I feel so bad that your kids have to deal with this crap!

DeHe

I attended a session led by the head of a social innovation fund earlier this week and watched her proudly endorse a man who argues that there is no such thing as innate math ability. He was her organization's golden calf. They needed to step back two feet to be able to register the irony of an organization whose mandate it is to pick winners claiming that ability is uniformly distributed. Yikes.

"This human characteristic is uniformly distributed in the population..."

...said no one ever.

Though he denied it I am pretty sure ds7's teacher prevented going to the toilet at least once - not much in most case but the kid has encopresis and started holding on with predictable consequences.

The one I came to report is this years effort. The school has decided instead of streaming for maths everyone will work at the same level but they will offer extension classes (just one offs I think) in various things. The problem is rather than the teachers selecting the children who will benefit the kids are given the option of applying then a certain number are selected from each class. My son has developed strong risk averse tendencies (he always had them but I used to make him do new stuff when he was preschool age - I dropped the ball thinking the school would try to challenge him), he has spent two years being completely unchallenged and is now scared to fail. He is not going to put himself forward for something he may not be chosen for especially if he has to write a letter saying why he should be chosen for the science course. The teacher brought up his perfectionism in out interveiw but still doesn't see that vague "you can do this if you want to" is a bad approach.

And why is it my just turned 7 year old son gets to decide what schooling he does. The parents weren't even told about the change and I only heard about the extension classes through third parties

Neither of you should be surprised by unwillingness to acknowledge differences in cognitive abilities, because the instruments that measure individual differences in those abilities also reveal substantial group differences in those abilities. A society that does not want to admit that there may be group differences will not be able to think clearly about individual differences, unless by a happy coincidence all groups do about the same on the tests used to measure those differences. They do not.

+1. This seems to be one of the root problems in US in particular.

I give the same argument -1 for straw man, so I guess we're back to zero. US society clearly acknowledges group differences, there's just a divide as to why they occur.

Wait... doesn't that also mean that special ed isn't special ed anymore??



WOW. I'm guessing that high-achieving and high-ability students aren't the only ones getting stiffed the education our society promised them.