Rock and a Hard Place

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-12-2003
Rock and a Hard Place
1524
Thu, 11-20-2003 - 10:45am

There's something on this board that has been bothering me, and I hope I can articulate it.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2002
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 4:11pm
"By that age, children SHOULD already have socialization and be able to play well with others."

I find that a very interesting statement to make (really! I am not being sarcastic). Given all of the problems with bullying in schools in the U.S. (no to mention the U.K. and Germany), I have a suspicion that children are not always being socialised in dc/preschool/school to the degree that they could be...certainly not to the point that they always or even often play well with others. But this, I think, is very culturally based. The idea of socialisation in German and Swiss schools tends to be that kids should learn early on where they fit in the pecking-order and deal with that without resorting to calling in the teachers when they are being harrassed or bullied. The idea of socialisation in Swedish schools is that children should learn exactly how to function in groups, make decisions as a group and be able to compromise and problem-solve within a group setting. These are survival techniques for the work-place since the lone wolf (however brilliant) is far less appreciated within the working enviroment than the team player who helps to achieve solutions through dialog without conflict. It is a culture, btw, that drives an awful lot of foreigners nuts since they always have to be careful to include everyone in a group in the decision making (even the cleaning staff at times) and can't be bluntly honesty if there is any risk of stopping compromise or hurting someone's feelings. Decision-making is not always straight-forward :-). But the result for children is that socialisation as a skill is placed high on the list of priorities at schools and active work on those skills continues through high school.

Laura

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 4:11pm
I took it to mean we had done no harm in putting her in dc.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 4:14pm
LOL. Just because she's at the top of her class doesn't mean she's at the level she shoudl be at. It IS possible for a child to be performing at a higher level than other students but still not getting what they need. The fact that she saw the dc kids as not being the ones with issues meant, to me, that dc was not an issue and might even be part of the reason she's so far ahead. The point is, we did no harm in placing her in dc.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-17-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 5:15pm
But that is a very narrow picture. As many others have pointed out, doing well in a class where over half of the kids couldn't identify a book before K is much different than doing well in a class where all of the children were reading in K. By only looking at the class comparisons, it's possible to get the idea that you're doing everything right and your child is far above average, when compared to those from a more literate environment, she may be average or below.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 6:42pm
Without testing? Now there's a mistake. Sometimes kids are just fast out of the gate but not gifted at all. 1st grade is way to early to declare a child gifted based on academic achievement alone. My dd has 15 out of 19 characteristics of a gifted child and they date back to birth but her doctor has held off on recommending testing until now because fast out of the gate sometimes just means fast out of the gate. Her teacher won't, and shouldn't, speculate as to whether or not she is gifted. At this point that determination needs to be made by a psychiatrist. In fact, my dd can't get into any of the gifted schools in the area without a psychiatrist determining that she is indeed gifted. While I suspect my dd may very well be gifted, neither I or her teacher are qualified to state that she is and I would hope that no school would act on either of our recommendations at this stage of the game as it's too soon to tell based on current performance. All we can say right now is that she's quite a bit ahead of her peers. WE can't say if that will continue to be the case. Someone far more qualified than us needs to do that.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 6:43pm
Um, let's see. The teacher accepts one child writing the letter B for bear, one writing the word bear and my dd is expected to write a few sentances about bears. I think she's bright enough to figure out the teacher is expecting more of her but it's because she can deliver. That is just something she's going to have to deal with for the time being. If she is gifted, she can go to a school for gifted kids and there won't be an issue.


Edited 11/29/2003 8:22:16 PM ET by cyndiluwhoagain
Avatar for outside_the_box_mom
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 6:58pm
Don't laugh. One of the boys in DS' class was reading at age three. He could read cursive last year. He *can* read HP on his own. But socially and emotionally, he is about age five, even though he's in first grade.

What gets my goat are parents who insist their children *should* be reading at that level at age 4 or 5. One woman pulled her daughter out of the preschool because the school's curriculum doesn't include reading at the preschool level (they learn their letters, how to write their names, etc.).

DS can read just fine now even though by this woman's opinion he was "held back." I don't push him to do anything. He is already reading Hebrew -- something that has just amazed his Hebrew instructor. He started reading the prayers Friday night without any prompting from us. DH and I just about died.

outside_the_box_mom

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 7:44pm
That isn't what you said before. You said the teacher told you that "it isn't the dc kids" at the bottom of the chart, which you did not NEED to know since you knew your child was at the top. The teacher was not reassuring you because clearly you did not need reassurance. The teacher was gossiping and she has made it clear that she is biased against SAHPs. She KNOWS that those kids have never been read to - based on her years of experience, not on any confirmation from children or parents. She is a fool and you are foolish not to see it.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 7:47pm
Significant changes would mean nothing! Especially when she is placed in a class where at least half the kids don't have that huge benefit of dc! She is in an exceptionally low functioning K class. Those at the bottom SHOULD progress significantly now that they are being exposed to the material. Your dd will not likely progress as fast as the others. This comparison is even more useless in this class.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 7:53pm
THAT is very concerning! Children at 5 years of age are expected to be well socialized? Wow, that would be quite a feat given that they have only had two years since they were developmentally ready to work in a group. At the age of 3 children start to play cooperatively. START. They struggle with groups. Socialization is about much much more than how to play. I wonder if that is the cause of the bullying and kids killing kids problems in the U.S. Not that it isn't a problem in Canada, but the school systems here place a huge importance on socialization. It is no where near well developed by 5 years of age!

Pages