"But there isn't enough money here, at least in our school district, so it isn't going to happen in our school without parent involvement."
I think you'd be surprised at how little money most schools actually get in Sweden. Per pupil spending in 2006, for example, was on average about $8500 in k-9. All schools are also required to provide hot meals free of charge to all students on that budget. On the other hand, many Americans are surprised out how few "bells and whistles" many schools have here.
My kids' school also happens to be one of the top schools in the city, despite the lack of parental involvement in teaching the curriculum.
"And no, I wasn't trying to suggest that kids who can barely speak English can't be GT! In fact, our district uses a GT screening test that is supposed to better identify GT low-income kids."
I figured that was just a slip, but it's one that people often make. I'm not sure, however, how a GT screening test designed for low-income kids would necessarily help in the case of a kid who can barely speak English.
to me, it seems that (aside from a considerable amount of on-gong mis-reading of pka’s position), the main issue here is how and when different districts make the necessary transition to more independent work. you are comfortable with your district’s decision to encourage parents to be heavily involved until they are apparently suddenly cut off at middle school. pka and i are comfortable with our districts’ decisions to ease into that transition in middle- and upper-el (you know, to, say, *ramp* the kids into working independently).
You'd rather take on 100% of the teaching burden than to provide supplementary teaching support? That seems a bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
I'm starting to wonder whether all of this could have been avoided if we had been using the expression "involved with homework" rather than "helping with homework". Involvement implies a broader range of proactive activities, and I can see how "help" makes it seems as though we are talking about doing the work for the children.
Not really. If the idea is that my kid, when in school, will be largely ignored in order for the teacher to focus on kids who are behind, then I fail to see what value the school adds. In that situation, we could accomplish the same teaching without having the kid waste several hours at school every day, and we would be able to teach at her level and in the way we decided was most beneficial. it would not be my first choice to homeschool, for sure, but under the conditions described it would be preferable from my POV.
Yes and no. When dd was in grades 1-3, I was involved with the homework, although I did not sit with her or check it. My involvement consisted of insisting that she do the homework, and trying to get her to do it without her crying, screaming, dawdling and complaining and preferably in less than 3 hours.
Pages
LoL...
PumpkinAngel
In our school the parent volunteers
"....
"But there isn't enough money here, at least in our school district, so it isn't going to happen in our school without parent involvement."
I think you'd be surprised at how little money most schools actually get in Sweden. Per pupil spending in 2006, for example, was on average about $8500 in k-9. All schools are also required to provide hot meals free of charge to all students on that budget. On the other hand, many Americans are surprised out how few "bells and whistles" many schools have here.
My kids' school also happens to be one of the top schools in the city, despite the lack of parental involvement in teaching the curriculum.
"And no, I wasn't trying to suggest that kids who can barely speak English can't be GT! In fact, our district uses a GT screening test that is supposed to better identify GT low-income kids."
I figured that was just a slip, but it's one that people often make. I'm not sure, however, how a GT screening test designed for low-income kids would necessarily help in the case of a kid who can barely speak English.
to me, it seems that (aside from a considerable amount of on-gong mis-reading of pka’s position), the main issue here is how and when different districts make the necessary transition to more independent work. you are comfortable with your district’s decision to encourage parents to be heavily involved until they are apparently suddenly cut off at middle school. pka and i are comfortable with our districts’ decisions to ease into that transition in middle- and upper-el (you know, to, say, *ramp* the kids into working independently).
<>
You'd rather take on 100% of the teaching burden than to provide supplementary teaching support? That seems a bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Pages