If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#181
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
Jenrose wrote:
I was ready for more challenging work. It took until 7th grade to really get it--I felt like I spun my wheels from 4th through 6th grades because there was so darn much repetition. Three wasted years. I would have loved to go into advanced math really young... algebra was fun for me and I adored calculus--but could not get the school to let me go ahead. It takes me about 1/4 the repetition it takes most people to "get" a math concept--I finally quit doing homework until the night before a test because it drove me nuts going over the same things day after day. So I read science fiction books in class, crammed for the test, and aced it, then promptly forgot what I learned. I "played the system" and ended up with great grades and *no* academic discipline. Sure. I felt the same way as you and also went to college with absolutely no academic discipline. I knitted during 5th grade math (with the teacher's permission). That said, I'm probably the *least* math-capable of my siblings - my sister and brother were and are much brighter in mathematics. But they went to college with strong study habits so I'm not sure that the lack of challenging work can be said the cause of weak study habits. Jeanne |
#182
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
"Banty" wrote in message
... In article f_Xnb.46659$hp5.28348@fed1read04, Circe says... "Donna Metler" wrote in message .. . And if more than 5% of the parents take this option, every year for the next three years, the school faces state takeover. Not a good thing. To the contrary, if more than 5% of parents in most schools begin to *refuse* to allow their children to be subjected to these absurd tests that foolishly waste classroom time and resources (both human and financial), that rarely reflect the curriculum accurately, and that wind up producing results that are consistently both misinterpreted and misrepresented, I strongly suspect that the testing mania will come to an end. I hear what you're saying (and loathe the tests too - I won't even let teachers bring up tests as a reason why my son should do x or y, other than being rested and breakfasted on the day of the tests). I don't loathe *all* tests; I loathe tests that are poorly designed, don't follow the curriculum, and are scored in misleading ways. I *won't* allow my children to take tests that don't fairly and accurately measure their progress. But of course, on the way to this test-free Nirvana, this nationwide surge of High Stakes Civil Disobedience you propose would be disruptive and painful in ways that really woudln't help to convince schools to relax their policies concerning attendance. (Not that something like that shouldn't happen, but it doesn't make a reason to take little Johnny to Hawaii). And I didn't say it was. I don't believe, however, that taking Johnny to Hawaii is going to have much of an effect on his test scores. Because of the way the tests are designed (or misdesigned), a week out of school here or there isn't going to change most kids' score by more than a few points. The schools bang the stuff that's on these tests into kids over and over all year long. If the *reason* it's so bad to take Johnny to Hawaii is that it will affect his test scores, then you'd have to show a real effect. But I don't think there's any evidence that a week out of school here or there has a measurable effect. And if Johnny can stay home for a week with the chicken pox (he'd be *required* to, I suspect), I don't think being out of school to go to Hawaii is demonstrably *worse*. Of course, if Johnny spends a week in Hawaii, a week in Mexico, a week in Europe, and two weeks home with the flu, then yeah, I don't doubt you'd see an effect. But I just believe the schools flog and reflog the test material so much that missing even a couple of weeks of school--whether for illness or for discretionary family vacations--isn't likely to cause measurable changes in test scores. -- Be well, Barbara (Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [19mo] mom) This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop: "Use repeatedly for severe damage." -- Directions on shampoo bottle Daddy: You're up with the chickens this morning. Aurora: No, I'm up with my dolls! All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful. Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman |
#183
|
|||
|
|||
NCLB, was Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
"LFortier" wrote in message
... cynicism alert Isn't that the point of NCLB? To have shown all public schools to be failing, so that there will be a massive outpouring of support for vouchers and The End Of Public Schools? Oh yes, I'm sure it is. I just don't believe that the public will stand for or believe that it's true. Despite the hue and cry that public schools in America are horrible, the vast majority of parents are happy with their public school, even those that are considered under the standards to be "failing" now. Parents *rarely* move their kids from neighborhood schools, even when they have the option to do so, because they pay more attention to their individual child's progress than to the school's rating and because getting a child to a school outside the neighborhood is often difficult or even impossible. NCLB isn't likely to survive in its present form if either a Democratic President or a Democratic Congress is elected. And regardless of who is in power, once failing schools are being closed by the federal government and all of the other schools are either on the verge of being shut down or overcrowded and unable to accept children transferring from the closed schools, or both, the uproar from the public will be impossible to ignore that the fallacy of NCLB quickly recognize. I actually rather hope the Republicans who think proving that public education is a disaster are left holding the bag when it backfires. -- Be well, Barbara (Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [19mo] mom) This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop: "Use repeatedly for severe damage." -- Directions on shampoo bottle Daddy: You're up with the chickens this morning. Aurora: No, I'm up with my dolls! All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful. Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman -- Be well, Barbara (Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [19mo] mom) This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop: "Use repeatedly for severe damage." -- Directions on shampoo bottle Daddy: You're up with the chickens this morning. Aurora: No, I'm up with my dolls! All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful. Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman |
#184
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
"Nikki" wrote in message
... Jenrose wrote: our school is listed on the "bad" list for *one* issue--that our well-educated and involved parents tend to be very political and flat out refuse to allow their kids to do the testing. Heh, good for them! So we get less than 90% testing compliance and therefore dinged. It's kind of refreshing, actually. I've been following the thread but don't have school age kids so I've just been taking it all in. I'm curious though...how do you guys plan on handling this long term? My understanding is that if you go x amount of time without showing improvement then someone comes in and takes over. It sounds like you have a nice program and I'd want to protect it by not having anyone force their way in to mess things up. Well, I believe that the federal government can't come in and close down a school if the school doesn't receive federal funds. That would be a big chunk of change for many schools/districts, but some schools (like mine) get so little in the way of Title I and other targeted federal funds that they probably *could* figure out a way to eschew federal dollars altogether if they were facing being closed down, although it would basically require going to the parents/community and asking for/getting major donations. -- Be well, Barbara (Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [19mo] mom) This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop: "Use repeatedly for severe damage." -- Directions on shampoo bottle Daddy: You're up with the chickens this morning. Aurora: No, I'm up with my dolls! All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful. Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman |
#185
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
On 29 Oct 2003 13:41:10 -0800, Banty wrote:
In article , Barbara Bomberger says... On 29 Oct 2003 07:45:10 -0800, Banty wrote: In article , Donna Metler says... If you want that much flexibility, homeschool. Or find a private school which caters to parents. Don't ask a public school to do the work of homeschooling for you so you can take your child anywhere you want to take them. Hear-tell private schools get a lot less of that. Once a parent has paid dearly for the specific setting and paid the teacher for his or her curriculum and teaching work out of pocket, the whole vacation/family/play vs. mean-ol'-inflexible-school outlook changes considerably! Amazing what use can be made of summer and spring and holiday and other breaks. Say - Thanksgiving break is coming right up in a scant few weeks! What a wonderful time to visit a family member who may not be with the world much Im a little ambivilant about this. We use a department of defense school. They dont allow unexcused absences. They do however, consider the opportunity to travel the continent in which we live (Europe) a valuable education in and of itself. Therefore, we can take children out with prearrangement, and I have done so. Yes, one can travel in the summer and school facations, but that doesnt always work with our parent schedules, or with the crowds. So I would say I have taken my son out about two weeks in the past year. It has been well worth it. We do the planned assignments in advance, and it has never been a probleem. Having been in schools with only military kids myself (but stateside), I'd wager that the privelege of pulling kids out for truely imporant reasons hasn't been abused as much. I don't' take the position that it's *never* appropriate to take kids out of school. When I was a kid :utting on my bifocals:: , I remember kids getting off for an opporunity to see a Saturn V launch, or for truly once-in-a-lifetime travel. There has to be some flexibility anyway since lots of kids are always transerring in and out. (One thing, though, families would fit travel around the transfers often, taking some time off before having to depart or after having to arrive.) I dno't recall hardly any of this "hey here's a package for Disney the week before Thanksgiving let's go" stuff. Or "we have a time-share in Vail for the last week of January we're gonna do this every year". Yeah yeah I know I'll get the 'but how can *you* say the skiing isn't as important as a SaturnV launch!". But hey, this is what you get if willingness to be flexible is strained by demands of too many folks having no concept of what is appropriate and what it not. So *everyone* gets cracked down on. Well ya know what. If the kid fails, then its the parental problem. BUT, if a kid is doing well, I see no problem. I also let my children take mental health days at will, because they maintain good averages and can keep up. I see no reason to stress out my kids. If they need a break, or a sleep in day, know what, I give it to them. And im with the other Barbara. I have been in school systems all over the world, and ya know what? They all had the curriculum planned and the lessons planned plenty ahead, so that giving my child(ren) their lessons ahead were never a problem. I already know that my son will be out the three weeks before the Thanksgiving weekend. HIs sister (who lives in the cayman islands) is coming for one week, this is the only time she can get off. I have told the teachers this already, and he will make up his work (probably ahead of time) I really do not see the problem here. Life is about life, and school may be part of my kids growing up, but it is not the only valuable thing. And yes, I will be the first to take advantage of off season travel and family time when I think it is valuable. And yes, I think skiing can be enriching and rewarding as well. Im the parent, and I plan to remain the one in control. Barb |
#186
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 16:50:19 -0600, "Vicki"
wrote: .. "Give us complete control over your children. If you don't like it you can homeschool" Wow. Exactly Barb |
#187
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
"Barbara Bomberger" wrote in message
... If the kid fails, then its the parental problem. BUT, if a kid is doing well, I see no problem. snip Life is about life, and school may be part of my kids growing up, but it is not the only valuable thing. And yes, I will be the first to take advantage of off season travel and family time when I think it is valuable. And yes, I think skiing can be enriching and rewarding as well. Im the parent, and I plan to remain the one in control. I agree wholeheartedly. The bizarre dichotomy I am seeing played out in this thread (and, interestingly, in the discussion about early dismissal days) is that there seems to be a strong undercurrent suggesting that *parents* should make accommodations to the schools on all matters but that schools should not be expected to make any accommodations for parents. So, parents who have a job that effectively prevents them from taking vacations while their kids are out of school during the summer are enjoined vigorously from suggesting that the school accommodate their *schedules* while at the same time, parents for whom early dismissal days (particularly irregular ones) are a hardship are expected to accept the school's scheduling. When did we reach the point that parents and kids exist to serve to the school instead of the other way around? -- Be well, Barbara (Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [19mo] mom) This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop: "Use repeatedly for severe damage." -- Directions on shampoo bottle Daddy: You're up with the chickens this morning. Aurora: No, I'm up with my dolls! All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful. Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman |
#188
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
In article Hqeob.46826$hp5.12953@fed1read04, Circe says...
"Barbara Bomberger" wrote in message .. . If the kid fails, then its the parental problem. BUT, if a kid is doing well, I see no problem. snip Life is about life, and school may be part of my kids growing up, but it is not the only valuable thing. And yes, I will be the first to take advantage of off season travel and family time when I think it is valuable. And yes, I think skiing can be enriching and rewarding as well. Im the parent, and I plan to remain the one in control. I agree wholeheartedly. The bizarre dichotomy I am seeing played out in this thread (and, interestingly, in the discussion about early dismissal days) is that there seems to be a strong undercurrent suggesting that *parents* should make accommodations to the schools on all matters but that schools should not be expected to make any accommodations for parents. So, parents who have a job that effectively prevents them from taking vacations while their kids are out of school during the summer are enjoined vigorously from suggesting that the school accommodate their *schedules* while at the same time, parents for whom early dismissal days (particularly irregular ones) are a hardship are expected to accept the school's scheduling. When did we reach the point that parents and kids exist to serve to the school instead of the other way around? So - you're saying it's not fair - schools are like neighbors or something such that it's a tit for tat situation with parents? Or, rather, it should be manifesty unfair in the *other* direction, as you expect that they as *one* institution should accomodate the childcare needs and vacation dreams for perhaps hundreds of families?? That's how you view it? Rewire your synapses around this: The schools do not exist to 'serve the parents and kids'. The schools do not exist to 'serve the parents and kids'. The schools do not exist to 'serve the parents and kids'. They exist to _educate_ _the_ _kids_ They're not there to be handy-dandy childcare centers. They're not drop-in drop-out at-your-own pace learning centers. They have a program. The teachers have curricula. They need to execute with a lot of efficiency. If you partake of their expert services, you need to cooperate with their program and curricula. This is a real-world concept here - the first time most kids are exposed to expectations from the outside world. And, there are alternatives. To other silliness in this thread - no they are not a fascist institution. The only state requirement is that you educate your kids. No one will drag you to a gulag for homeschooling or using an alternative school. Banty (and no - I didn't say there should be *no* flexibility - no, I didn't say a parent *never* has a valid concern - no, I didnt' say schools can lord over every detail - what I'm saying is -- what the fundamental situation is) |
#189
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
"Banty" wrote in message
... When did we reach the point that parents and kids exist to serve to the school instead of the other way around? So - you're saying it's not fair - schools are like neighbors or something such that it's a tit for tat situation with parents? Or, rather, it should be manifesty unfair in the *other* direction, as you expect that they as *one* institution should accomodate the childcare needs and vacation dreams for perhaps hundreds of families?? That's how you view it? Nope. Just saying that accommodations and flexibility need to exist in BOTH directions. Just because I choose to send my child to the school does not mean I have suddenly transferred all my parental authority to the school. And if the school cannot avoid creating complications in my life by instituting things like unpredictable half-day schedules or changes in the school hours that mean I have to make four trips to drop and pick-up my kids from school/preschool instead of the two I used to make, I am certainly willing to be accommodating and even understanding. I merely expect it to be a two-way street. And, FWIW, I have not had any problems getting MY school to be reasonably accommodating and flexible. I don't *try* to take my son out of school without a good reason or any time I feel like it. For example, my husband has to take a business trip to Chicago next week. I went to grad school there, and I would *love* to take my kids there, show them where Mommy used to live, and take them to the Art Institute, the Field Museum, and the Museum of Science and Industry. It would be a fantastically educational trip for them and the fact that our hotel room would be covered by the company would make it considerably cheaper than we could do it otherwise. But we're NOT going because I don't feel Julian should miss school, especially since we've been out one whole week due to the fires already and they'll just be trying to get back into the groove next week with a bunch of kids who've basically been on an unplanned vacation and probably won't be too thrilled about getting back to work. So it's not like I'm in the position of pulling my kids out of school whenever the spirit moves me and I'm peeved that I can't. My concern is that current education reform policy, contrary to its sales pitch, is taking more and more control away from parents and treating children as though they exist for the betterment and improvement of the school itself rather than the *school* treating the children as though they are there to be educated. IOW, when I'm told that I should let my children take a test to which I object because the school will be punished if I don't, I'm basically being told that my children exist to serve the school rather than the school existing to *educate* my children. And yes, that ruffles my feathers. Rewire your synapses around this: The schools do not exist to 'serve the parents and kids'. The schools do not exist to 'serve the parents and kids'. The schools do not exist to 'serve the parents and kids'. They exist to _educate_ _the_ _kids_ And educating kids is a service provided to the kids and, by extension, to their parents. They're not there to be handy-dandy childcare centers. They're not drop-in drop-out at-your-own pace learning centers. Agreed on both points. But they are also not prisons wherein children are sentenced to do time. And since there is a legal requirement in most states for children to attend school (or else homeschool), it seems entirely reasonable to me to expect the schools to have predictable hours so that parents who work (and therefore obviously don't have the option of homeschooling anyway and are thereby *legally* obligated to send their children to school) don't have to scramble to make arrangements for childcare when a minimum day is suddenly announced. If it's fair for the school to expect parents to ensure that their children are in school at the required times, it's fair for parents to expect the required times to be predictable and rarely changed. Again, a two-way street is all I'm suggesting. To other silliness in this thread - no they are not a fascist institution. Not yet. But when state or federal law effectively takes flexibility away from an individual teacher of school by mandating that children cannot miss more than X number of days during the year and the school/teacher does not have the discretion to permit an absence for a child who is clearly exceeding academic standards, I think it's getting pretty close. The only state requirement is that you educate your kids. No one will drag you to a gulag for homeschooling or using an alternative school. And for most parents, neither homeschooling nor alternative schools (i.e., private schools requiring $$$) are realistic options. The fact that there really *are* so few realistic options for most families is part of why *some* flexibility is necessary. Banty (and no - I didn't say there should be *no* flexibility - no, I didn't say a parent *never* has a valid concern - no, I didnt' say schools can lord over every detail - what I'm saying is -- what the fundamental situation is) As I said, my school has been reasonably flexible and accommodating. Nor am I saying that parents should feel justified at removing kids from school at each and every whim. By the same token, however, I get a *little* concerned when a parent's judgment of what's best for her child and family are dismissed as frivolous and selfish because the school somehow knows better. I'm also troubled by the assumption that what motivates less flexibility is that large numbers of people abuse it if it's there. I'm put in mind of Ronald Reagan's welfare queen, whose high-on-the-hog, taxpayer-funded lifestyle was supposedly representative of a large proportion of the welfare population and who later turned out to be fictional. IOW, I don't get the impression that the number of parents taking their kids out of school for family trips and the like is significantly greater than in the past; what's *different* is the degree to which federal and state mandates are wagging the dog. -- Be well, Barbara (Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [19mo] mom) This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop: "Rejuvinate your skin." -- Botox ad Daddy: You're up with the chickens this morning. Aurora: No, I'm up with my dolls! All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful. Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman |
#190
|
|||
|
|||
Bright 2nd grader & school truancy / part-time home-school?
In article c%gob.46853$hp5.4729@fed1read04, Circe says...
"Banty" wrote in message ... When did we reach the point that parents and kids exist to serve to the school instead of the other way around? So - you're saying it's not fair - schools are like neighbors or something such that it's a tit for tat situation with parents? Or, rather, it should be manifesty unfair in the *other* direction, as you expect that they as *one* institution should accomodate the childcare needs and vacation dreams for perhaps hundreds of families?? That's how you view it? Nope. Just saying that accommodations and flexibility need to exist in BOTH directions. Just because I choose to send my child to the school does not mean I have suddenly transferred all my parental authority to the school. And if the school cannot avoid creating complications in my life by instituting things like unpredictable half-day schedules or changes in the school hours that mean I have to make four trips to drop and pick-up my kids from school/preschool instead of the two I used to make, I am certainly willing to be accommodating and even understanding. I merely expect it to be a two-way street. It can't run the same traffic both ways, though. The school schedules are pretty much known or unavoidable (like snow days). Individual parents have more opportunity for flexbility than a school. My main point here, though, is that the *mission* of the school is rather straightforward - educating kids. Not facilitating family life - it's educating kids. Some of the stuff here is about escalating expectations - school happens to keep kids safe and occupied for x days and y hours a day, so I can work, but now school should do that for x+a days and Y+b hours a day, so that I can really work. Those expectations can't be what drives the school - that's not what they're *for*. Now, there's opportunities for accomodation, like when our early October extra "supervisor" day off was finally moved to combine with the Columbus day weekend to make a four day weekend. That's goodness. But there may be reasons why they can't do that, and why there needs to be an extra day off like that. And, FWIW, I have not had any problems getting MY school to be reasonably accommodating and flexible. I don't *try* to take my son out of school without a good reason or any time I feel like it. For example, my husband has to take a business trip to Chicago next week. I went to grad school there, and I would *love* to take my kids there, show them where Mommy used to live, and take them to the Art Institute, the Field Museum, and the Museum of Science and Industry. It would be a fantastically educational trip for them and the fact that our hotel room would be covered by the company would make it considerably cheaper than we could do it otherwise. But we're NOT going because I don't feel Julian should miss school, especially since we've been out one whole week due to the fires already and they'll just be trying to get back into the groove next week with a bunch of kids who've basically been on an unplanned vacation and probably won't be too thrilled about getting back to work. So it's not like I'm in the position of pulling my kids out of school whenever the spirit moves me and I'm peeved that I can't. OK - so what limit do *you* see? *Should* a girl be able to attend four days out of five, AND take weeks off in January, AND take extra time off *before* Thanksgiving to see a relative? Exactly when do *you* start considering some parents' desires unreasonable? And for how many and which parents? Banty |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Teen faces expulsion and felony for loaning girlfriend medicine | Kane | General | 55 | October 22nd 03 03:04 AM |
PE/Recess time mandates | Donna Metler | General | 190 | October 2nd 03 01:26 PM |
DCF CT monitor finds kids *worsen* while in state custody | Kane | General | 8 | August 13th 03 07:43 AM |
Philly public schools go soda free! email to your school board | Maurice | General | 1 | July 14th 03 01:05 AM |
Virtual school seeks Iowa funding | [email protected] | General | 4 | June 29th 03 12:55 AM |