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: 03-25-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 11:29am

Why don't you try explaining to your dd that children learn at all different levels.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 11:30am
Not to disagree with you, but socialization is not the primary learning skill of kinder anymore.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 11:42am

I don't know about CLW's area, but we don't place for advancement, gifted or whatever it is called until the 2nd grade in our district.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 12:58pm
Socialization is still a biggie in K. I realize that there is a *curriculum* and that specific outcomes are to be achieved. I have a copy of the K curriculum. In each of the academic goals and objectives, there is a social goal/objective as well.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 1:17pm
When dd1 was in K, in 1985 they did some testing on her, completely without my knowledge I might add. She was given the gifted label in G3, but had undergone several tests prior to that. Personally, I believe that *gifted* is a label to be attached to a select few - very few. Dd1 did attend a gifted school for 2 years b/c the public system didn't know what to do with her. They had her skip a grade level, but she was immature socially. I hated the gifted school. Talk about competition between parents! Those were some very unhappy kids. My dd was not gifted. She was an early reader and a child for whom most of the curriculum came easy. IMO, most of the kids at the gifted school were not truly gifted. Bright yes, gifted no.

My ds has been tested as well. Not to determine giftedness, but to determine ability in determining appropriate placement. I have made it clear that I do not want him tested for *giftedness* and will not allow them to put a label on him. Quite honestly, I don't know what the policies are in regard to testing for giftedness. Have I mentioned that I HATE THE TERM GIFTED? LOL. Both his K teacher and principal agree with me that gifted is a term used too lightly nowadays. I prefer to test regularly to determine what level he is at so that appropriate planning can be done.

I would love to put him in a private school where he would attend with various aged children and work on his individual program, but the principal assures me that just as they are integrating special needs kids into regular classes, they can accomodate accelerated learners in the regular classroom. The public system really sucks for kids who are on either end of average. Having learned what I did through dd1, I will not have ds skip grades. I have no problem with him working on the g1 curriculum after Xmas this year, but I do not want to move him ahead so that he is with older children. I will not place him in a gifted school either. I have and will continue to offer educational experience at home. School is where they go for socialization and recreation. That's just me.

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 1:59pm
You don't know that she didn't. All the parents saw the same chart. I find it hard to believe that I'm the only one who asked why the disparity. As for me, she was letting me know that what we're doing was working and that we had nothing to be concerned about with regard to dc. No, not unprofessional at all.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 2:00pm
She was letting me know that use of dc was not an issue.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 2:01pm
OIC the difference. Seeing the chart tells me a lot more information than telling me where my dd is in the class. For example, I wouldn't have realized there were two distinct groups in the class had I not seen the chart. I think I would have ASSumed a normal distribution but this wasn't normal.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 2:03pm
You continue to evade the question as to why the teacher would assume that you required reassurance pertaining to dc when your child was at the top of the chart. If your child was near the bottom, I could see her telling you that dc was not *causing* your child to lag, but when she was at the top - with a huge gap between her and the next kid - why would you require reassurance? Can you not see how that becomes gossip?
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-23-2003
Sat, 11-29-2003 - 2:04pm
Because my dd is a dc kid. She was just telling me I had nothing to worry about either on the home front or in dc. In a way it's kind of an insult for her to have said it to me because it could be taken as her saying that it's the result of my dd going to dc instead of what I'm doing at home. Kind of you're child is doing great, so are the other dc kids so it has nothing to do with you mom.


Edited 11/29/2003 2:05:42 PM ET by cyndiluwhoagain

Pages