Originally Posted by Grinity
I call this the 'Goldilocks Problem' - when a child is seriously underplaced for a long long time, then everything is 'too easy' or 'too hard' - finding the just right level to learn is very difficult indeed. It takes slow careful 'supported pushes' to get a child out of this

I love that--although I'm sure DS wouldn't appreciate being called Goldilocks wink

Originally Posted by Sydness
I actually DO think my little one has a LD of some sort and talked to the Spec Ed teacher about it and was told "A child reading at DD5's level, doesn't have a LD)! So, I never thought to go there with DD9!

That's just plain ridiculous. Of course a child can read early and still have a learning disability. The sticking point in terms of services is that criteria varies from state to state. In my area, for instance, a child could be found to have a disability but not in need of special education because they are able to access the regular education curriculum.

Originally Posted by Sydness
She thinks everything is easy, and tells me it is too easy, yet gets answers wrong!

If she is underachieving, I fear it may be too late for her to recover.

If she really needs the extra practice, how can I knock her down a notch without hurting her self-esteem so she will take her time and open her mind and allow others to teach her.

Does your DD get more accurate/careful as the difficulty of a task increases? When my DD is doing work that she doesn't have to use any concentration to complete, she underperforms and makes tons of careless mistakes. She is significantly more successful when the work is difficult for her. HOWEVER, she has to be part of a group in which others are also doing this type of work (even if the group is via an internet based class)in order to buy into it. She was always very uncomfortable with doing work that was different than what everyone else was doing. Is there anyone else in her class/grade (since the school nixed accelerating her to the next grade) that could be involved in an appropriate instructional group? Was the nix on acceleration a philisophical, we-don't-do-that-here decision, or was it due to the errors in her work?