MICHAEL JACKSON NOT GUILTY

Edwin Pawlowski said:

"pennyaline" <[email hidden]> wrote
in message

Quoted message said:

If you guys knew half as much about kids as you claim to, you would
realize that projecting negative images of people who are prominent
in their lives is confusing to children and engenders problems with trust.

Or is that what you want to do?

I only know about the kids we raised. They turned out OK. I don't know if
they meet your requirements though as you seem to know more than I about
raising children. .

I think we're supposed to be raising lemmings instead of thinking human
beings. Whatever.

Carol

--
Coming at you live, from beautiful Lake Woebegon

On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 20:09:42 GMT, "Edwin Pawlowski" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"pennyaline" <[email hidden]> wrote
in message

Quoted message said:

If you guys knew half as much about kids as you claim to, you would
realize
that projecting negative images of people who are prominent in their lives
is confusing to children and engenders problems with trust.

Or is that what you want to do?

So you are under the impression that feeding a kid a positive spin
regardless of the truth is somehow better for them? You're wrong. What
you suggest amounts to telling the kid a lie and that engenders far
more "confusion" and "problems with trust" than having parents who
tell them the truth, even when it's not PC or all that pleasant. Not
everyone who is in a position of prominence is trustworthy or well
intentioned and for her own good as well as that of the society we
live in, I want my daughter to be able to tell the difference. I'm not
raising a little automaton who assumes that all authority is good. I
want her to think for herself and make her own decisions regarding who
and what she values.

Regards,
Tracy R.

ravinwulf said:

So you are under the impression that feeding a kid a positive spin
regardless of the truth is somehow better for them? You're wrong. What
you suggest amounts to telling the kid a lie and that engenders far
more "confusion" and "problems with trust" than having parents who
tell them the truth, even when it's not PC or all that pleasant.

Pay attention, now. What I said was that if the parent thought the school
she had chosen to send her child to was inadequate, she should have taken
the child out and found another method. THAT would have sent a better
message than leaving the child in the situation the parent found
unsatisfactory for three years while pounding her thoughts about what morons
her teachers are into the kid's brain.

Quoted message said:

Not
everyone who is in a position of prominence is trustworthy or well
intentioned and for her own good as well as that of the society we
live in, I want my daughter to be able to tell the difference. I'm not
raising a little automaton who assumes that all authority is good. I
want her to think for herself and make her own decisions regarding who
and what she values.

Who says there's anything wrong with that? You are so reflexively defensive,
you overlook that there is no need to defend yourself.

Here is the point you're missing, again: If that parent found the
environment and potential influence so noxious that the shortcomings of the
school and teachers had to be discussed constantly with a very young child,
why did she leave that same child in that same school for three years? That
is the seat of the mixed message.

"pennyaline"

Quoted message said:

Pay attention, now. What I said was that if the parent thought the school
she had chosen to send her child to was inadequate, she should have taken
the child out and found another method. THAT would have sent a better
message than leaving the child in the situation the parent found
unsatisfactory for three years while pounding her thoughts about what
morons
her teachers are into the kid's brain.

Quite an assumption. Perhaps she had no other school available. Perhaps if
there was one, it was even worse.

I was fortunate and went to a large school. When I had problems with a
teacher (old nun that was later retired) my mother had me put into the other
5th grade class. Not all schools can do that. When my daughter had a
problem with a teacher in 3rd grade, we bought it to the attention of the
principal. That teacher was fired. Other parents thought it was a good
thing, but not one raised any questions until we did.

As in every occupation, there are great ones, there are terrible ones.
Parents must be active in the schooling of their children and [censored] when
they get the few terrible teachers.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

In article <[email hidden]>,

Gabby said:

Tell that to the university that has just awarded a big scholarship to Max,
my 15 year old acquaintance who was home schooled. His parents being
military, they decided that home schooling was the only way to ensure that
their two kids received a consistent education. He started university at
the age of 14, taking entry level courses at the local college on a half
time basis and working part time. In September he's off to University for
full-time study.

He's a well-socialized, well-travelled young man.

When Rich and I were first discussing how we would educate our
children, one of the pluses on the side of homeschooling was that we
could travel to teach them about the places we learned about. Rich is a
pilot, and at the time his goal was to work in the airlines, which would
have reduced the cost to us considerably for travel as well. Rather
than taking them out of school to go learn about Ephesus and Rome, we
could go to Rome and Ephesus as part of their schooling.

It has worked better for our family, with my abilities and the kids'
needs to send them to a private religious school. It isn't a school in
our religious tradition, there aren't any of those near us, but they do
not teach our kids anything wrong, and although their are certain things
they teach which we do not teach our children, it is a relatively simple
thing to remind the kids that that is not how we believe, but that it is
alright for this school/church to believe it. We have also, by nature
of the school's desire for parental input, been able to help them
understand where we are coming from and they have been quite polite and
accomodating where there are differences.

We probably would have preferred to have them in a school whose
theology was in line with ours more closely, but this is good practice
for them when they are out in the world on their own and their beliefs
are different from those of many of their contemporaries.

Regards,
Ranee

Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/

In article <[email hidden]>,

Rhonda Anderson said:

Do any public schools have programs for gifted/talented children? If I
remember correctly from previous threads, schools in the US are run on a
fairly local level, rather than a state level. Is that right? Do some
education administrations cater for brighter than average kids? I'm not
sure about all the states here, but I do know that NSW public schools
have programs for gifted children. My 11 year old nephew, who is in 5th
class, is currently in what's called an Opportunity Class. These are
classes for academically gifted children
(http://www.schools.nsw.edu.au/learning/k-6assessments/ocplacement.php).
He was recommended by his primary school, and sat and passed the test,
but it was then his decision as to whether he wanted to try it or not -
these classes are not in every school and it meant a change of schools
for him. He seems to be enjoying it, and I think is making friends a
little more easily than he did previously.

We had these when I was in school, but sadly, they were still largely
dumbed down, although I suppose it was still more challenging work than
we were getting in the main part of school. My high school was more
geared toward the advanced track and the college directed children, but
it was also quite agenda based education, and with the exception of one
instructor was also graded on a curve, and fairly easily navigated.
There was nothing available for those children who weren't headed to
college at our school, no shop, no drafting courses, but the advanced
work is what used to be considered standard work for western education.

Regards,
Ranee

Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/

pennyaline said:

I don't think anything should be accepted blindly. But I also don't think
that we should choose the school we send our children to, and then attack
the very system we choose to teach them. Remember, she said this happened in
the K-2 years. During those years, the child was taught that what her
teachers said was wrong. This has a negative impact on a child's opinion of
teachers and what they teach.

If Damsel felt what was being taught was wrong, she should have shut her
mouth and taken the kid out of the school, period. Instead, she ragged on
her own choice of school for three years and inculcated that negative
message about schooling into the child.

I've been seeing this [censored] despite my killfilter, so I may as well
respond to it. The kidlette received an superb academic education
while in private school. The problems with whacked out religious
teaching occured only in the final year. We didn't have constant
battles with the instructor's religious teaching during that year,
either. Once in awhile, the kidlette would come home and repeat
something outlandish.

At this point, we dragged out a Bible and together, read the verse in
context. She learned from the Bible what was really said, and could
generally see that her teacher had put meanings to the verses that
simply weren't there. Sometimes she disagreed with my assessment.
That was her choice to make.

And I strongly object to your characterization of my daughter's early
language skills as "aping." I had taught her to look at a letter of
the alphabet (capitals and smalls) and to know both the name of the
letter and the sound it made. With this foundation, I could grab any
book in the house, and she could sound out some of the short (3-4
letters) words.

Look at enigma's story. Maybe Miche will chime in about her daughter,
who is amazingly gifted. What's wrong with my daughter's achievements,
which are lesser than enigma's and the girl child's? Purely rhetorical
question.

You're a vicious individual, and this is the last I'll have to say to
you. Ever.

Carol

Damsel said:

I've been seeing this [censored] despite my killfilter, so I may as well
respond to it. The kidlette received an superb academic education
while in private school. The problems with whacked out religious
teaching occured only in the final year. We didn't have constant
battles with the instructor's religious teaching during that year,
either. Once in awhile, the kidlette would come home and repeat
something outlandish.

Then I misunderstood that part of your post.

Quoted message said:

At this point, we dragged out a Bible and together, read the verse in
context. She learned from the Bible what was really said, and could
generally see that her teacher had put meanings to the verses that
simply weren't there. Sometimes she disagreed with my assessment.
That was her choice to make.

Good girl.

Quoted message said:

And I strongly object to your characterization of my daughter's early
language skills as "aping." I had taught her to look at a letter of
the alphabet (capitals and smalls) and to know both the name of the
letter and the sound it made. With this foundation, I could grab any
book in the house, and she could sound out some of the short (3-4
letters) words.

Sorry, but reading and language at such a young age are largely mimicry.

Quoted message said:

Look at enigma's story. Maybe Miche will chime in about her daughter,
who is amazingly gifted. What's wrong with my daughter's achievements,
which are lesser than enigma's and the girl child's? Purely rhetorical
question.

Correct. In the same light, there is nothing wrong with my child's
achievements, or mine.

BTW, proclaiming something as "rhetorical" does not automatically preclude a
response.

Quoted message said:

You're a vicious individual, and this is the last I'll have to say to
you. Ever.

Your loss.

pennyaline said:

Ranee said:

Absolutely, I think perhaps we do not see some things as parental
influence in the same way. I think turning your child over to a daycare
at 6 weeks, where she doesn't have the attention of a parent, nor the
protection from illness is saying a lot about parental influence. So is
using the television as a babysitter, and allowing that ill behavior is
simply a part of childhood rather than training it away. The ratio of
"teacher" to child in a daycare is abysmal, even in the best of
circumstances, 7 infants to an adult was acceptable in our area last I
checked, 14 toddlers to an adult. This is an environment that fosters
ill behavior, if for no other reason than that the adult cannot be on
top of all the children all the time to correct them. It is also an
environment in which the children cannot receive the individual
attention and care, and yes, love of a parent, no matter how much the
care giver cares for the children.

Oh! My goodness! You know, your'e right, the ratio of teacher to child
is abysmal! Obviously, the need is for more kids and fewer adults. After
all, if it works in Japan...

Lena

Ranee Mueller said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
"pennyaline" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Ranee Mueller wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As to your point about enforced early schooling, I wouldn't be as
concerned about it from the right wing as the left, public schooling
isn't exactly trying to indoctrinate kids into little conservatives.

I had meant that to be a joke, but after reading your reply I gave it some
more thought and I'm now convinced that, yes damn it!! That's exactly what
public education is doing, and always has done.

Please find me some of these public school made conservatives. I can
assure you that our schools did not produce any, and the few that
remained conservative, or became so later, did so in spite of our
teachers and administration.

Maybe you're not from the part of the country where every teacher keeps a
bible on their desk?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Right. And give them a greater chance to be mouthy, unruly, violent,

That depends largely on the child. Some things are "nature," you realize.

Some things are nature, indeed, and some circumstances tend to foster
those natural things, or create them. Statistically, children who spend
much time in daycare, and early preschool, are far more violent, unruly
and disrespectful.

You're gonna back this up. Right now. And then you're gonna show me
where they accounted for socio-economic status, and race, and many other
things that contribute to society's assessment of a person as "violent,
unruly and disrespectful".

Quoted message said:

Anecdotally, every teacher I have met concurs with
this, and can pick out the daycare kids in their classroom. I have also
been able to figure out which kids in Alexander's class were daycare
kids without knowing their parents, or their past, until after coming to
that conclusion, and was not wrong about one of them. There is
something about the ratio of adult to children in those situations that
creates kids, or allows them to continue unchecked in their natural
state, who are pushier, ruder and more rebellious.

Funny, the Japanese would say the exact opposite. And their kids are
better behaved than american kids.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I may be the only one who feels this way, but as I see it your adamant
defense as stated above indicates some real intolerance and lack of desire
to extend beyond yourselves.

I think you are the only one who feels that way. My children come
into contact with all sorts of people, from different races,
ethnicities, social strata, religions, etc. Of course we ground them in
our values, but that does not mean that we keep them from all other
people.

thank god. I _never_ want someone to tell me that I can't eat meat
because it's friday, again. (kept on insisting that I couldn't, even
after I told her I was Jewish...).

Quoted message said:

Here is where you and I diverge: I believe that it is not only the
parents' right, but obligation to protect their children from harmful
influences while they are still too young to understand them, rather
than to expose them to it while they are still so young, and hope that
they figure out on their own (with little input from us) that they
shouldn't be rude, pushy, disrespectful, etc.

Whereas it is the opinion of the Japanese that kids should be allowed to
teach each other morality, and that kids will learn not to be mean,
because being mean loses them friends.

lena

"pennyaline" <[email hidden]> wrote
in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

If you guys knew half as much about kids as you claim to, you would

realize

Quoted message said:

that projecting negative images of people who are prominent in their lives
is confusing to children and engenders problems with trust.

Or is that what you want to do?

Some teachers are just, well, [censored] teachers - fact. Others are absolutely
superb - another fact. I had my awful maths teacher tell my parents I was a
bit dumb at maths and, well, couldn't really do maths, just months before I
passed my Physics O level (OK I got a B, not an A) - more than half of that
paper was formula and transposition of formula. You figure it out. The guy
was of a foul and grumpy disposition, did not like kids, obviously despised
teaching. He would scrawl the questions on the board, hurl the text books
out, the leave the room to go for a smoke, come back in - rinse and repeat.
His reply to questions asked was always - 'It's all in the bloody book you
idiot!' - he would never help a kid 1 to 1 with a problem. Whether or not he
liked his chosen subject I could not begin to tell you.

My Chemistry teacher was superb - he love the subject, love to teach, and
loved kids - those are the kinds of attributes we need in our teachers but
they are mostly sorely lacking.

Why should a parent not point such out, should they see it and the child
not?!?

When it comes to kids that are somewhat brighter than the majority, it may
or may not be the teachers that end up holding them back, but the bottom
line is the system itself that does not allow these students to be catered
for adequately, or at all - too often the school's and the teacher's hands
are tied, and such a damned shame that is too.

Shaun aRe