One Size Fits All?

07-14-2005

It is difficult to watch a child suffer needlessly. Human nature being what it is, it is almost impossible to watch our child suffer needlessly.

These test results state that our child's lowest competency level in math is the equivelent of 5th grade. Can anyone tell me why, in heaven's name, we haven't been able to convince anyone that--for her, with her abilities and skills--it was ridiculous to seriously contemplate forcing her to spend an extra year in third grade because she could not complete a math test in five minutes.

One school district employee, one that we like well enough not to name here, kept repeating that there was absolutely no leeway. The child had to pass the math facts test or be retained. She passed, finally, but she gave up too much to do so. Our child suffered for a policy that is well-intentioned, but applied by idiots. One size does not fit all. Until the district bosses admit this, other children will suffer a great deal more. Our child is developing in a way that is perfectly normal for her. She is lucky enough to be able to hide most of her deficiencies behind her giftedness.

She had difficulties during second grade. The teacher informed us, we discussed strategies for the teacher to use. The teacher was able to set aside her own beliefs, actually try something other than "one size fits all" and our child had a good year. She wrote, according to the second grade teacher's report to anyone who asked, "Some of the best stories I've ever seen from a second grader."

What was accomplished with a few conversations and an email or two in second grade required heated communication with the teacher, the principal and the superintendent of schools in third grade.

Some teachers (other professions also, but we're only discussing the teaching profession here) go to work each day and think about what they are doing. Such teachers realize that, in order for every child in a class to learn, the teacher must be flexible enough to see each child as an individual.

Other teachers are different. They know they are right, so they don't bother to think. They may even be right for the children in the middle of the bell curve. Unfortunately, not every child is in the middle. We're lucky enough that ours is on the high end and will, with some effort allow herself to accept that she is not "stupid", that she isn't lazy, disorganized or dumb about math. She will accept that, when a teacher can't teach a very intelligent child, it's because the teacher isn't very good at doing her job.

This web site came about because the third grade teacher felt that rearranging homework, exempting a child from homework in subjects she already knew, or passing out weekly homework packets on Friday so that daddy could rearrange the photocopied messes into some semblance of order were all too great a burden on her. This web site came about because the principal of the school said that he couldn't ask the teacher to do any of the above because she had total autonomy in her classroom. This web site came about because the superintendent of schools explained the whole lack of responsiveness on our failure to ask for what we want in writing.

To help our child in second grade, the school district experienced no additional cost.

I shudder to think of the expenses incurred once we were convinced, by the superintendent and the school board, that the only way we can be certain that the school even attempts to educate our child at all, is to rely on Federal rules and do everything in writing (Mr. Steinhauser told us it was perfectly acceptable that nothing happened when we just talked nicely to the teacher and principal, remember? The kid suffered, but since the parents didn't know the secret handshake, the kid's suffering didn't actually count!). One of the first things we put in writing was a request to have our child evaluated for a learning disability. Tests cost money and, because we don't agree with the test results, we may opt to exercise our right to get an outside evaluation at district expense.

We know that she suffers from asynchroneous development and this (insert link) discription of a child with dual exceptionalities could have been written with her in mind. Tell me, why is it that LBUSD, in the persons of the non-parent IEP members, can refuse to render any meaningful assistance to her?

Looking back at the meeting, I can render what was said over the course of an hour-long meeting into one sentence: Yes, she meets the criteria to get help, but other children need it more.

We felt a bit unreasonable. How could we be so selfish as to want our child--who is at her lowest, two years above her grade level--to get some benefit from attending school each day when we know that helping her will keep other children--who really need it--from getting help?

We admit it, we are unreasonable. Because we refuse to sit idly by and watch our children suffer, we may choose to home school them for a while. Because we absolutely refuse to sit idly by and watch ANY child suffer, we're going to continue to seek out the secret handshake that will get Long Beach Unified School District to realize that a secret handshake is a stupid way to allocate educational dollars. They may even realize that, when district parents are correct to believe that their children would get a better education at home, the district needs new management.

You can't blame the district because a teacher went through the motions when she should have been thinking. You can't blame them because she dismissed parental concerns and ignored parental advice.

You can blame a principal who does the same thing.

You can fire a superintendent who defends the principal and the teacher who go through the motions and refuse to think by saying the parents should have known to put their complaints in writing. You not only can, you probably should.

Home	One Size Fits All? 07-14-2005 It is difficult to watch a child suffer needlessly. Human nature being what it is, it is almost impossible to watch our child suffer needlessly. These test results state that our child's lowest competency level in math is the equivelent of 5th grade. Can anyone tell me why, in heaven's name, we haven't been able to convince anyone that--for her, with her abilities and skills--it was ridiculous to seriously contemplate forcing her to spend an extra year in third grade because she could not complete a math test in five minutes. One school district employee, one that we like well enough not to name here, kept repeating that there was absolutely no leeway. The child had to pass the math facts test or be retained. She passed, finally, but she gave up too much to do so. Our child suffered for a policy that is well-intentioned, but applied by idiots. One size does not fit all. Until the district bosses admit this, other children will suffer a great deal more. Our child is developing in a way that is perfectly normal for her. She is lucky enough to be able to hide most of her deficiencies behind her giftedness. She had difficulties during second grade. The teacher informed us, we discussed strategies for the teacher to use. The teacher was able to set aside her own beliefs, actually try something other than "one size fits all" and our child had a good year. She wrote, according to the second grade teacher's report to anyone who asked, "Some of the best stories I've ever seen from a second grader." What was accomplished with a few conversations and an email or two in second grade required heated communication with the teacher, the principal and the superintendent of schools in third grade. Some teachers (other professions also, but we're only discussing the teaching profession here) go to work each day and think about what they are doing. Such teachers realize that, in order for every child in a class to learn, the teacher must be flexible enough to see each child as an individual. Other teachers are different. They know they are right, so they don't bother to think. They may even be right for the children in the middle of the bell curve. Unfortunately, not every child is in the middle. We're lucky enough that ours is on the high end and will, with some effort allow herself to accept that she is not "stupid", that she isn't lazy, disorganized or dumb about math. She will accept that, when a teacher can't teach a very intelligent child, it's because the teacher isn't very good at doing her job. This web site came about because the third grade teacher felt that rearranging homework, exempting a child from homework in subjects she already knew, or passing out weekly homework packets on Friday so that daddy could rearrange the photocopied messes into some semblance of order were all too great a burden on her. This web site came about because the principal of the school said that he couldn't ask the teacher to do any of the above because she had total autonomy in her classroom. This web site came about because the superintendent of schools explained the whole lack of responsiveness on our failure to ask for what we want in writing. To help our child in second grade, the school district experienced no additional cost. I shudder to think of the expenses incurred once we were convinced, by the superintendent and the school board, that the only way we can be certain that the school even attempts to educate our child at all, is to rely on Federal rules and do everything in writing (Mr. Steinhauser told us it was perfectly acceptable that nothing happened when we just talked nicely to the teacher and principal, remember? The kid suffered, but since the parents didn't know the secret handshake, the kid's suffering didn't actually count!). One of the first things we put in writing was a request to have our child evaluated for a learning disability. Tests cost money and, because we don't agree with the test results, we may opt to exercise our right to get an outside evaluation at district expense. We know that she suffers from asynchroneous development and this (insert link) discription of a child with dual exceptionalities could have been written with her in mind. Tell me, why is it that LBUSD, in the persons of the non-parent IEP members, can refuse to render any meaningful assistance to her? Looking back at the meeting, I can render what was said over the course of an hour-long meeting into one sentence: Yes, she meets the criteria to get help, but other children need it more. We felt a bit unreasonable. How could we be so selfish as to want our child--who is at her lowest, two years above her grade level--to get some benefit from attending school each day when we know that helping her will keep other children--who really need it--from getting help? We admit it, we are unreasonable. Because we refuse to sit idly by and watch our children suffer, we may choose to home school them for a while. Because we absolutely refuse to sit idly by and watch ANY child suffer, we're going to continue to seek out the secret handshake that will get Long Beach Unified School District to realize that a secret handshake is a stupid way to allocate educational dollars. They may even realize that, when district parents are correct to believe that their children would get a better education at home, the district needs new management. You can't blame the district because a teacher went through the motions when she should have been thinking. You can't blame them because she dismissed parental concerns and ignored parental advice. You can blame a principal who does the same thing. You can fire a superintendent who defends the principal and the teacher who go through the motions and refuse to think by saying the parents should have known to put their complaints in writing. You not only can, you probably should.
Gabston-Howell.org
Good Neighbors
Madelynn
Mary
Phillip
Katie
Janette
Back to Articles Index