Homeschooled Teen Gets into Top Ivies, etc.

[marite]

Curm:

I think the teacher would have been willing to deal with just one student; but there were 4 advanced students. And there were some in the class who were definitely struggling. Guess whom he thought needed him more?
Sure the kids did not need to be supervised every day of the week. One kid had a tutor once a week, to assign problems, go over some concepts she had not quite understood and correct problems from the previous week. Even when a student understands the text, doing problems is crucial. My S is finding out the importance of this right now, this semester.
ETA: By guidance, I don't necessarily mean explanation. During the infamous heterogeneous era, S read several works of literature on his own. This was during the once-a-week enrichment period, during which the "teacher" graded homework for his other classes. But he needed feedback on the papers he wrote on these works. I was the one who provided it. Not every parent can do so.
And, as I said, not every teacher is willing to even let students work on their own in class. We have experience with such teachers, too.

[epiphany]

"They were allowed to sit separately from the rest of the class and to work from different books at their own pace without supervision from the teacher who focused on the rest of the class."

^That is the version of 'gifted mainstreaming' which occurred in my youth. Again to note, however, that our classrooms (in my region) were about 8x more homogeneous than those of today, with zero true 'resource' kids in any mainstreamed classroom. That allowed the teacher to divide his or her attention in a more manageable way, without jeopardizing the learning of anyone.

"I guess my kids just aren't on the far end of the IQ continuum as some of these on this thread appear to be."
^That's questionable. (And remember that gifted + h/schooling sometimes overlap, sometimes not; plenty of struggling, non-gifted students being h/schooled.)

I think one of the many reasons for the h-schooling movement, mammall, is the variability/inconsistency in both public & private schooling, within any given school, in many cases (not all). I survived some bad & some unhappy teachers in my youth, in a good public, as did my Ds, in a basically good private. But extreme changes in quality from one year to the next are difficult & disruptive; sounds as if your kids' experiences were more even. Alternatively, naturally, a consistently bad school will also drive parents to seek 'refuge.'

"Other schools buy EPGY programs for students to use in school."
^This is happening locally, as well. There was a news article about it recently. It's becoming more standard, & this is why I said long ago that h/schooling, unschooling, etc. has had an affect on institutional schooling & will continue to impact the evolution of formal education.

[curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by marite

Even when a student understands the text, doing problems is crucial. My S is finding out the importance of this right now, this semester.

LOL. Is he finding the peddling a little tough? My D had her "moment of clarity" last semester. "Da(ng). This is HARD." Well....it's supposed to be hard. It's COLLEGE, dear.

[FresnoMom]

At my son's small rural middle school, he was the only student taking Algebra in 7th grade and Geometry in 8th grade. They offered to bus him to the high school (which he refused) and then they suggested that he just not take math for a year.

I was the one that suggested Independent Study. My son sat in a regular math class and taught himself Algebra/Geometry. The teacher was always there if my son had questions, but my son was able to do most of it on his own. Both teachers were amazed at how well this arangement worked out, but I agree, not all kids can learn this way.

[Jolynne Smyth]

I wish I'd known/learned about these various types of accomodations for accelerated kids when my son was young. As it was, he just sat in the most advanced math class (never taking notes) & getting As effortlessly. Of course, as mentioned, when the work got harder he wasn't used to having to actually work ("memorize 100 items in honors bio!") he didn't want to 'pedal' that bike at all. :-) He's since learned to do it. :-)

I think a lot of parents might feel bad that they didn't provide as many amazing educational experiences for their kids as are possible (as demonstrated, e.g., by the orginal article). After reading this thread I said to 16 yo son w/chagrin: "I wish I'd given you more opportunities!" He patted my arm & said, "You did the best you could." Pretty good from a 16 yo cool dude.

[marite]

Curm:

Quit the snarkiness. It's concept vs. skills. Understanding a concept is not the same as truly mastering it. And a student needs independent verification that s/he has mastered it. Ergo, guidance. In college, that means the prof looks over your problem set and corrects it. Not you, the student. Is that so hard to understand?
If he had written peddling when he meant pedaling, I would have corrected his English.

[curmudgeon]

marite, no snarkiness. Read it with a smile. I was smiling when I wrote it.

And heck, I was agreeing with what I thought you were intimating (and laughing with you, or so I thought). My independent learning D had to change to meet the heavier peddling, too.

[marite]

Thanks, curm.

[Booklady]

I realize that most of the time this sort of acceleration occurs in math, because there is a defined sequence. But my D's private school allowed her to accelerate in Latin in 8th grade by doing Latin II concurrently with the second semester of Latin I. Her teacher met with her once a week (giving up his lunch hour to do so, bless him) to go over the assignments he had given her the previous week. In class she was allowed to read from a simple Latin reader if they were discussing something she already had a good grasp of. I'm very grateful that they were so willing to work with her (and she made all the arrangements for this on her own, BTW). She's now a Classics major in college.

[mammall]

epiphany - looking back at it more closely I think a big reason public gifted worked for many years for my kids was a really exceptional cohort of classmates (and their families) that they were with from grade to grade. They were not the brightest in their classes and not the most motivated. They were near the top always but there was always a good role model for them. And the other families were of one mind in terms of really valuing education. This all started to unravel as the kids approached high school. Many of these families simply moved away and others began opting for private high schools. So the critical mass of similar students started to dwindle for my girls. I think they might have connected to others in the larger high school arena, but the private option was a very good one - so no regrets.

Also, I am just really struck by the discussion underway on this thread regarding math acceleration. My girls always liked math well enough but it was not a huge passion for them. If I'd suggested self-paced supplemental math materials they would have protested strongly. That really seems to be a key determinant of the child's needs. If they are really verbal in their interests then it is much more practical (I think) to just set them loose in a good library. I hope I didn't short change them by not seeking out more math opportunities for them. Neither of my girls appears to be headed into engineering or computer science, and that makes me a little sad.

[epiphany]

Re Post 320:
I wish you wouldn't feel this way, and it's one of the 3 things that bothered me about the tone of the article. (And I seem not to be alone in my disapproval of the tone.) Glamorizing homeschooling in this way is artificial & not necessarily accurate. It may have been slightly more 'glamorous' for the family in question, because of their financial situation, which gave them freedom + opportunities not universally shared by h/schoolers, & because they had the other key elements I mentioned in a previous post. But the article made h-schooling appear frothily effortless, which is just flat-out deceptive.

[StickerShock]

And, as I said, not every teacher is willing to even let students work on their own in class.

Exactly. Marite brings up a situation that is, unfortunately, very common. Some schools allow NO accomodations. Even ones that require no effort from the teacher & in no way disrupt the class or distract from other students. Whether your disctrict is podunk or privleged, if the teacher doesn't have the right attitude, a kid needing more challenge is sunk.

In the Chelsea situation, she was in an expensive private school, yet the kindergarten teacher was absolutely cruel -- annoncing reading games but publicly excluding Chelsea. Now, it must be challenging to fit in a kid like Chelsea, who would no doubt get every single question correct & answer before any other classmates could get their hand up. But a kind, creative teacher who understood Chelsea's gifts could have found a way that served both Chelsea and her classmates.

[mammall]

Both my daughters read quite fluently when they started mainstream kindergarten. Both absolutely enjoyed the year. They did the alphabet work sheets along with the rest of the class and sounded out letter sounds, etc. It just didn't seem to bother them that they could read well and the other kids (except some) could not. Kindergarten was just a very brief part of their day. They enjoyed the socialization and recess, the snack, the parties, loved their teachers. Then they'd come home and do other things with the rest of their day. It did not make them feel strange to be ahead of the other kids in reading or math skills or knowledge base. They found other things to connect with the other kids on. I would have hated for them to miss their kindergarten years. Did they learn much in an academic sense? Not really. Were they nevertheless enriched. Absolutely.

[cottonwood513]

"Frothily effortless" ? Are we reading the same article?

[epiphany]

Again, & this time to mammall:

Please stop guilt-tripping yourselves. Homeschooling is not perfect (in the etymological sense of complete). It has, as I've mentioned, its drawbacks. It provides opportunities, and eliminates some opportunities. It can be a good solution for the intellectually charged, but even then there is some reduction in cognitive growth due to the absence of regular *academic* interaction with peers (as opposed to 'doing lots of things with others'). The human brain works not in a vacuum; we learn additionally from & with our peers whether we're 5 or 50, but sometimes that realization in us is delayed until well beyond college. The newest brain research clearly proves this.

Further, as I mentioned earlier, realistic self-concept is an important part of growing up & relating to others. GUARANTEED, no matter how 'gifted' & 'impressive' any individual homeschooled student is, there will be at least one student brighter, more capable, more talented, more accomplished in virtually every class in an *elite* college. (That's one reason they call them "elites.")

Bank on it.