"Hardest Curriculum Available"

Parents Forum
341

<p>Nope, calmom. I was referring specifically to my school and my kids in response to one particular post. I also posted that when it actually cost nothing even in terms of time, my S was denied the chance of joining a group a few feet away. That was to show that not every denial of acceleration is due to scarce resources.
I have never claimed that acceleration in general never costs nothing. You put your own interpretation into my posts, but that’s your problem, not mine.</p>

<p>You need to re-read the sequence of posts. I do not make generalizations lightly, nor do I tell posters that they are naive when they happen to have had different experiences from mine.</p>

342

<p>Keil, I love and admire you, really I do.</p>

<p>Now go enjoy senior year. Life is too short.</p>

<p>We old farts come here as a break from the tension at work-- and it keeps us from the break room where someone has baked three dozen santa cookies and brought in a pumpkin pie cheesecake. But you should be getting on with your life.</p>

343

<p>I agree with blossom. Life is too short.</p>

344

<p>

I think that if a person goes through life worrying about whether some one else has gotten some sort of “unfair” advantage, they are in for a world of woe. </p>

<p>Because life isn’t “fair”. Ever. No matter what the situation, it will be set up in a way where some people are at an apparent advantage, and some aren’t. </p>

<p>

No, but the world isn’t a meritocracy based on IQ. Interpersonal skills are very important, and the kid who is “naturally shy” is at going to be at a disadvantage in most competitive settings, including elite college admissions. That is no more “unfair” than it is to handicap a student who happens to be “naturally” less “bright” than another kid. Obviously, the kid who is intuitively good at math isn’t going to have to study nearly as hard as the kid who has a harder time integrating new concepts - the “less bright” kid is required to work harder in all of his classes. So, some kids have to work harder to master the academic material, and some kids have to work harder to build up their interpersonal skills. </p>

<p>

How much are you willing to pay that one student who went to the effort of creating that opportunity for others? Seriously – what would be the point of anyone ever being a trailblazer if they were required to forfeit the fruits of their initiative? </p>

<p>And as far as the “less bright” comment you raised – in a sense, I think that the person who thinks outside the box, and sees potential opportunities that other’s don’t see, is indeed “more bright” than the ones who don’t think the ask the questions. Another anecdote: my son was always asking questions in class. His 8th grade teacher did an exercise where every student in the class was asked to write one good thing about every other student in the class. Then she compiled the list and gave each student their own list of all the good stuff that had been said about them. The most frequent comment others made about my son was that they liked having him in class, because he always thought to ask the questions that they had in mind, but didn’t know or were afraid to ask. </p>

<p>

Wow, you must know a lot of malnourished vegetarians. My kid was a vegetarian at age 12, and we ALWAYS asked. I became a compulsive dieter at age 50, and since that time I am ALWAYS asking questions such as, “do you have lowfat dressing”? or “can I substitute a side order of vegetables for the fries?”. </p>

<p>

Public educators are NOT legally required to cater to the “best-case” scenario for kids. They are required to offer the state-mandated curriculum, and they are required by law to offer students with disabilities a “free and appropriate education”, which does NOT mean “maximizing potential” or “best case scenario” – but merely trying to enable the disabled kids to reach the basic skill levels appropriate for that age and grade. </p>

<p>You seem to want a paternalistic system that does not exist in our country. I think in theory it may have existed in Soviet Russia, and perhaps it exists in China, though my examples seem to be more in the field of athletics than academics. I know, for example, that in China coaches still go around to pre-schools to find the best potential future gymnasts … whereas in the U.S. the only way to get into gymnastics is to have the parent sign the kid up for classes, and the olympic-level gymnasts pretty much have to finance their own way. And yet, despite the fact that there are more people in China, and thus more potential world class gymnasts… it seemed to me that at the last olympics the American girls did just fine.</p>

345

<p>Calmom:</p>

<p>Your mantra about self advocating kids is tiresome. You’ve woven it in to every argument on this thread. It’s not the “be all end all” attribute that defines all capable youth. For the most part, kids who speak up at a young age - your D in 1st grade, for example, are born that way - it’s an inherent personality trait. Perhaps it runs in your family. Other children may have other traits that are worthy of admiration.</p>

346

<p>Marite, re your post #341. My post #326 was in response to post #323 by Vicariousparent; that’s where I picked the quote up from. I don’t have time to go back and read the entire history of posts every time I respond to something. If I want to address a specific poster in my post, I’ll say so.</p>

347

<p>

Yes. The kid down the block turned out to have great talent pitching baseball. So great that he was recruited by Stanford to play on their team. My kids were probably as bright or brighter, but didn’t stand a chance of getting into Stanford. </p>

<p>You’ll notice that I am not on this board griping about how unfair it is that Stanford gives a leg up to strong athletes in its admission processes. I think its great that the kid’s natural talent at baseball opened up a world of opportunity for him that happened to be closed to my non-athletic kids.</p>

348

<p>You’re right. Life is too short–I’d rather read Terry Pratchett. And I think I’ve said enough for the lurkers.</p>

349

<p>I agree with calmom that speaking up is a useful trait, blazing trails is a good thing to do. But I also agree with Keil that there is no reason for us not to demand that our schools be as fair as possible. I don’t think it’s right that privileges should only be extend to pushy kids or to kids with pushy parents. When I asked for accomodations for my son, I always hoped that they would be given to other students as well, though I didn’t make sure that they were. (Partly because when he was younger he was by far the most precocious kid in his class - there were no other kids for whom the math acceleration he eventually got would have been appropriate.) There were however other kids who did get the same acceleration he did in middle school. I know of at least one who didn’t because his Dad refused to ask for it - though I urged him to. (And yes he was a first generation Asian immigrant who didn’t want to rock the boat and I couldn’t get him to understand that this was the American way.) I don’t think we are talking about a paternalistic system at all. I’m thinking more along the lines that someone at the middle schools should be thinking - “Every year we have a handful of kids who persuade us that they need more acceleration in math, maybe there are more of them. Maybe we should have a system for taking care of them, instead of inventing the wheel every year.”</p>

350

<p>

</p>

<p>I wasn’t referring to athletes. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>What evidence do you have that self-advocating students have a better chance at getting into elite colleges?</p>

351

<p>

</p>

<p>I think the question is not about being fair but is “whether or not it is possible to know before hand all possible paths to success”. The answer is never. </p>

<p>The system can never be fair. If school comes up with one listing there will be one child who will find a distinctive path and will be able to pursue the administrators to provide the option which was never thought of before.</p>

<p>I just don’t get the point anyone who takes the initiative should reap the benefit. There is no question about fairness here. The authorities should not prevent anyone else to do the same thing but should not be blamed to not advocate it as an offering.</p>

352

<p>

</p>

<p>Evidence speaks for itself as most of the top school admits students who try to distinguish them selves by pursuing passions, finding new paths. Run of the mill students are generally not selected.</p>

<p>Run of the mill student: If a student just do the prescribed high school curriculum with SAT1 and 2 SAT2 with no other activities.</p>

353

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with you, POIH, that only those who distinguish themselves (in a variety of ways) are typically selected at top schools, but what does that have to do with, as Calmom suggests, being “self advocating?” We’re back to the argument about bold, assertive kids having a leg-up. My feeling is that being assertive, especially at a young age, is a personality trait, not a skill.</p>

354

<p>^^^: It is not just being bold or assertive. Sometimes you don’t have to be assertive. If you have a skill and you take the initiative to show it to your teachers or school administrator you might get what you want without any assertion.</p>

<p>I’m not saying that assertive children does better. I was just trying to convey that children those who have skills and take the initiative to show it to teachers should get the benefit.</p>

355

<p>Self-advocating, assertive students are more likely to occupy leadership roles, and more likely to draw the attention of the adults who are in a position to make recommendations that lead to more opportunities. </p>

<p>I’d note that students who can advocate for themselves often stand out by advocating for OTHERS as well. Both my kids occasionally put themselves at risk or got into trouble because they stood up for others. For example, both have intervened when they saw a parent hitting their young child in public. They have circulated petitions or advocated for change in other ways for perceived unfairnesses impacting others. Both have chosen majors, internships and careers geared to advocacy. So self-advocacy does not equate with selfishness at all. </p>

<p>And trailblazers are often the ones who make it possible for subsequent students to have the benefits that they obtained by asking for it – that certainly is what happened in my sons case. (We were first told that he would not be able to go to the high school for algebra because it had been tried years before and it didn’t work out; then they did allow my son to go, things went well, and the next year there were 3 students rather than 1 who had that opportunity). </p>

<p>I’m not saying this is the only attribute that colleges look for, but the top colleges do want students who stand out in some way. High grades, class rank, AP courses, test scores, etc. are not stand-out qualities in an elite applicant pool, because just about every applicant comes with those attributes. So what separates the admitted students from the rest of the pack are special qualities – it could be athletic prowess, or a special talent, or a unique passion or interest – but even students who have those qualities do better for themselves if they know how to draw attention to those attributes. That is… there are probably many potentially excellent athletes who are passed over because they don’t get enough playing time, whereas some other kids on their team get more time in play because they are more adept at pestering the coach or drawing attention to their own talents.</p>

356

<p>My H coaches baseball and one of his rules is: “If you pester the coach, you sit the bench.” Many coaches do this, because it is disruptive for kids to nag about positions, playing time, etc. Sometimes, children should follow the rules and not look for an exception, special treatment, etc. </p>

<p>I’ve been a room parent for years and I always notice when it’s time to pass out the treats, those kids in the front of the line eager to take more than their share and those who waited until everyone else was served before they took only one helping. I actually taught my children to be respectful, follow directions and wait their turn - and yes, don’t take the last cupcake. To me, it’s about good manners.</p>

<p>Poise and self confidence are great. These are important traits which will help students’ present themselves in the best possible light. But don’t confuse self assurance with self-advocacy. Many self-advocates can easily come across as self centered, with a “me-first” attitude that we see too much of in the U.S. Every time one child get a little something extra, someone else usually goes without.</p>

357

<p>Calmom: </p>

<p>You did not respond to VP’s post but to the quotation with which VP’s opened the post and to which VP responded. It happened to be a quotation from a post of mine.
The first rule of quotations is to go back to the original. Any prof will tell students this. You used my quotation from VP’ s post then said that it was naive. You did not say that the response from VP was naive but that the statement VP quoted was naive.
Life’s too short to engage with someone who feels she knows it all but is too lazy to do the research, in this case, reading the original quotation in its context.</p>

358

<p>Olive:</p>

<p>My S learned a lesson that it’s taken years and years to undo. When he was in kindergarten, he always raised his hand when the teacher asked a question. At first he was called on to answer. Soon, however, he kept being passed over. And soon after, he stopped raising his hand. The teacher’s rationale, not a bad one, was that she knew he knew the stuff; she wanted to find out if the others did. For a six-year old, however, the lesson learned was that trying to catch the teacher’s attention could be seen as disruptive. He became a quiet, non-contributing student, even when he was accelerated several grades. Even in college, he had to be urged to speak up more. He’d learned too well “to let others have their say.”</p>

359

<p>I wonder if it was a particular teacher in kindergarten who affected your son’s behavior, or perhaps it was a general feeling he had that other kids weren’t raising their hand as often as he did. Some kids are very sensitive to those around them. They look for small cues about what is appropriate, how others respond, what happens next, etc. </p>

<p>My D, now a HS senior, was always very tuned in/sensitive to what was going on around her and I think that it prevented her from participating or shining as much as she could have. Over the years, she has developed more confidence and now she has much less trouble speaking up, but she is still very aware of the classroom dynamic between students/teachers and students/students. She’ll comment how some kids - usually those who are quite outspoken - seem to feel very comfortable dominating the discussion (say, in English class when discussing a novel), yet they have (from her perspective), relatively little insight or original thought. Some of them will even make completely off-topic comments. In the past, this type of atmosphere in the classroom has really turned her off - she has said that she has no interest in participating in these pointless discussions. Lately, she is starting to try to steer some of the discussions away from these types of individuals, but she does say that it is difficult - some of them really love to monopolize the floor!</p>

360

<p>Regarding 358 and 359: both situations were the fault of the teacher. I take it that marite already knows it about her son’s. Apparently Olive’s D’s teacher has not yet figured out a way to discourage domination or O/T direction. Once, during parent open house, I observed my D’s English teacher teach a different class. Her style was very non-intrusive; she allowed everyone to speak because she stayed so much in the background, but she spoke up pithily to bring in a word or two that she knew would provoke into deeper formulation of thought by the students. She never discouraged; always encouraged. Sorry for the diversion, just noting that it’s entirely up to the teacher to create an atmosphere where participation by all is rewarded and the best kind of participation is shaped.</p>