PPP
Kasey Frazier
I am having a dilemma, My boys want to go to a Parent Partnership Program/ Co-op next year which is part of the local public school. They have a friend whom is doing Mondays there for a 3 hour block and they want to go to. But I am not so sure about it. I am not a big Public school fan(long story) and I would prefer to not do it.. Any ideas? We are pretty radical on the unschooled side, should they do it since they are asking for it or should I go with my better judgment and not do it.
Thanks for listening any advice would be great!!!
Kasey
Thanks for listening any advice would be great!!!
Kasey
Sandra Dodd
-=-My boys want to go to a Parent Partnership Program/ Co-op next year
which is part of the local public school. -=-
What is it? that's what you left out. :-)
Is it like a parent auxiliary for the school? Then it wouldn't make
sense.
Is it something that parents and kids do together?
Is it for projects parents do that are of interest to kids. Like
parental show-and-tell? That sounds fun.
My answer: It depends.
My recommendation: You could go to one session and let them see it
and then you'd have better reason to accept it and go with it, or to
dissuade them.
If it turns to "no," find something cool to do on Monday nights for a
while in those days. Really cool. Outside the house.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
which is part of the local public school. -=-
What is it? that's what you left out. :-)
Is it like a parent auxiliary for the school? Then it wouldn't make
sense.
Is it something that parents and kids do together?
Is it for projects parents do that are of interest to kids. Like
parental show-and-tell? That sounds fun.
My answer: It depends.
My recommendation: You could go to one session and let them see it
and then you'd have better reason to accept it and go with it, or to
dissuade them.
If it turns to "no," find something cool to do on Monday nights for a
while in those days. Really cool. Outside the house.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pam Sorooshian
I'd try it out and let the boys decide if they want to keep going, or not.
-pam
-pam
On 7/20/2009 9:10 PM, Kasey Frazier wrote:
> I am having a dilemma, My boys want to go to a Parent Partnership Program/ Co-op next year which is part of the local public school. They have a friend whom is doing Mondays there for a 3 hour block and they want to go to. But I am not so sure about it. I am not a big Public school fan(long story) and I would prefer to not do it.. Any ideas? We are pretty radical on the unschooled side, should they do it since they are asking for it or should I go with my better judgment and not do it.
> Thanks for listening any advice would be great!!!
>
> Kasey
>
>
>
Joyce Fetteroll
On Jul 21, 2009, at 12:10 AM, Kasey Frazier wrote:
of the theater or motocross or meat or Pizza Hut, but their kids were
increasingly curious? Wouldn't you want to say try it out, support
their interests?
From a fear point of view, it makes as much sense to keep them away
from the school as it does for parents to keep their kids away from
sugar and commercial TV. From a supporting their interests point of
view, your fear is your deal not theirs and is getting in the way.
Why do you fear that this is likely to be more drawing than what you
do at home? (If that's not your fear, think about what your fears and
what's the worst that could happen.) By not allowing them to go, are
you may doing as some teachers have done: covered the windows with
paper so the teacher is the least boring thing in the room. If you
fear home isn't as exciting as the program, then it's time to jazz
things up!
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> I am not a big Public school fan(long story) and I would prefer toWhat if another unschooler wrote in and said they weren't a big fan
> not do it.
of the theater or motocross or meat or Pizza Hut, but their kids were
increasingly curious? Wouldn't you want to say try it out, support
their interests?
From a fear point of view, it makes as much sense to keep them away
from the school as it does for parents to keep their kids away from
sugar and commercial TV. From a supporting their interests point of
view, your fear is your deal not theirs and is getting in the way.
Why do you fear that this is likely to be more drawing than what you
do at home? (If that's not your fear, think about what your fears and
what's the worst that could happen.) By not allowing them to go, are
you may doing as some teachers have done: covered the windows with
paper so the teacher is the least boring thing in the room. If you
fear home isn't as exciting as the program, then it's time to jazz
things up!
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Adesa
Denying them an activity when they're curious about it will only fuel their curiosuty. I'd let them at least check it out, keeping your own hangups to yourself (or at least on the down-low). But stay involved and aware of what happens there, and always make it clear they can drop it any time they want.
But it sounds to me like they just want to do a fun activity with their friend. Does their friend attend the school? If so, he's probably stoked about the PPP thing; I'm sure the school talks it up a lot. Can you maybe get them involved in something *else* together on another night? Around here, there's a tactical laser tag night every week that all the boys want to join, schooled or not. Maybe finding something really awesome for them to do together will wipe the PPP out of their minds. :o)
Adesa
But it sounds to me like they just want to do a fun activity with their friend. Does their friend attend the school? If so, he's probably stoked about the PPP thing; I'm sure the school talks it up a lot. Can you maybe get them involved in something *else* together on another night? Around here, there's a tactical laser tag night every week that all the boys want to join, schooled or not. Maybe finding something really awesome for them to do together will wipe the PPP out of their minds. :o)
Adesa
--- In [email protected], "Kasey Frazier" <Fraziermk@...> wrote:
>
> I am having a dilemma, My boys want to go to a Parent Partnership Program/ Co-op next year which is part of the local public school. They have a friend whom is doing Mondays there for a 3 hour block and they want to go to. But I am not so sure about it. I am not a big Public school fan(long story) and I would prefer to not do it.. Any ideas? We are pretty radical on the unschooled side, should they do it since they are asking for it or should I go with my better judgment and not do it.
> Thanks for listening any advice would be great!!!
>
> Kasey
>
Vicki Dennis
Is the PPP actually a public school program that is a "co-op" with parent
teachers? Something that is available in some states and districts whereby
students attend specified daytime hours while doing the majority of their
"schooling" at home.
Students are enrolled in the school district and district funds can be used
for certain expenses.
I bring this up because most of the responses seem to treat it as an
"after-school program" rather than enrolling in public school. If it were
me (and it clearly is not!), I would verify what commitments are made by
enrollment and how difficult it is to withdraw your child if he tries it out
and it is not satisfactory.
vicki
teachers? Something that is available in some states and districts whereby
students attend specified daytime hours while doing the majority of their
"schooling" at home.
Students are enrolled in the school district and district funds can be used
for certain expenses.
I bring this up because most of the responses seem to treat it as an
"after-school program" rather than enrolling in public school. If it were
me (and it clearly is not!), I would verify what commitments are made by
enrollment and how difficult it is to withdraw your child if he tries it out
and it is not satisfactory.
vicki
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Adesa <2homeboys@...> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> But it sounds to me like they just want to do a fun activity with their
> friend. Does their friend attend the school? If so, he's probably stoked
> about the PPP thing; I'm sure the school talks it up a lot. Can you maybe
> get them involved in something *else* together on another night? Around
> here, there's a tactical laser tag night every week that all the boys want
> to join, schooled or not. Maybe finding something really awesome for them to
> do together will wipe the PPP out of their minds. :o)
>
> Adesa
>
>
> --- In [email protected] <AlwaysLearning%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Kasey Frazier" <Fraziermk@...> wrote:
> >
> > I am having a dilemma, My boys want to go to a Parent Partnership
> Program/ Co-op next year which is part of the local public school. They have
> a friend whom is doing Mondays there for a 3 hour block and they want to go
> to. But I am not so sure about it. I am not a big Public school fan(long
> story) and I would prefer to not do it.. Any ideas? We are pretty radical on
> the unschooled side, should they do it since they are asking for it or
> should I go with my better judgment and not do it.
> > Thanks for listening any advice would be great!!!
> >
> > Kasey
> >
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Is the PPP actually a public school program that is a "co-op" with
parent
teachers? Something that is available in some states and districts
whereby
students attend specified daytime hours while doing the majority of
their
"schooling" at home.-=-
Ah. I hadn't thought about that. Like The Family School, in
Albuquerque, maybe--half day at school, half day doing school at home
to school's specifications. Mandatory meeting once a week for
parents. It's not the way it started off, but it's what it had
settled out to, last I knew.
That wouldn't be something I'd want to do. If that's what it is, I
withdraw my recommendation to try it and see. <bwg>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
parent
teachers? Something that is available in some states and districts
whereby
students attend specified daytime hours while doing the majority of
their
"schooling" at home.-=-
Ah. I hadn't thought about that. Like The Family School, in
Albuquerque, maybe--half day at school, half day doing school at home
to school's specifications. Mandatory meeting once a week for
parents. It's not the way it started off, but it's what it had
settled out to, last I knew.
That wouldn't be something I'd want to do. If that's what it is, I
withdraw my recommendation to try it and see. <bwg>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
John and Amanda Slater
In my case I have an 8 1/2 and almost 7 yo who are not reading. This would make me very reluctant to put them in any situation in the public school. Since the boys passed 5, I have been careful to keep them out of any situation where they would be expected to read without me there. I don't want any attention from the school, or anyone to make the boys feel bad about their abilities.
Amanda
Eli 8, Samuel 6
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Amanda
Eli 8, Samuel 6
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-In my case I have an 8 1/2 and almost 7 yo who are not reading. -=-
The schools have LOTS of those, but they like to blame and shame them,
and keep them back, and label and drug them. Sometimes.
Millions of times, but percentagewise, just sometimes.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The schools have LOTS of those, but they like to blame and shame them,
and keep them back, and label and drug them. Sometimes.
Millions of times, but percentagewise, just sometimes.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pam Sorooshian
The OP said 3 hours, once a week. Parent participation/coop.
Depending on the state, public schools can offer all kinds of things
that are available to kids who don't go to the public school.
Our local school district has instrumental music, for example, that is
open to all kids - not just public school kids. It is offered at the
public schools, but doesn't make you a public school student to
participate in it.
-pam
Depending on the state, public schools can offer all kinds of things
that are available to kids who don't go to the public school.
Our local school district has instrumental music, for example, that is
open to all kids - not just public school kids. It is offered at the
public schools, but doesn't make you a public school student to
participate in it.
-pam
On 7/21/2009 12:46 PM, Sandra Dodd wrote:
> Ah. I hadn't thought about that. Like The Family School, in
> Albuquerque, maybe--half day at school, half day doing school at home
> to school's specifications. Mandatory meeting once a week for
> parents. It's not the way it started off, but it's what it had
> settled out to, last I knew.
>
> That wouldn't be something I'd want to do. If that's what it is, I
> withdraw my recommendation to try it and see.<bwg>
>
Pam Sorooshian
Amanda,
Just so you know - there are LOTS of public schooled kids not reading at
7 and 8 - lots not reading at 9. My neighbor is currently teaching 3rd
grade and she told me the other day that more than half the boys in her
class were not reading at the end of the school year. I asked her how
they take the standardized tests and she grimaced and said she figures
they just fill in the answer sheet randomly. She is new in my
neighborhood and stopped to talk to me when she saw some homeschooling
bumper stickers on my car - the bumper stickers are not unschooling,
just state homeschool association logo. So, she was chatting with me and
then, kind of shyly, she said, "I've heard of something called
unschooling and I, well, I really like the idea. Have you ever heard of
it?" Her kids are 4 and 2.
Anyway - just wanted to let you know you don't have to be fearful of
people finding out they aren't yet reading. Just be matter-of-fact about
it and confident that they are on the road to reading.
-pam
Just so you know - there are LOTS of public schooled kids not reading at
7 and 8 - lots not reading at 9. My neighbor is currently teaching 3rd
grade and she told me the other day that more than half the boys in her
class were not reading at the end of the school year. I asked her how
they take the standardized tests and she grimaced and said she figures
they just fill in the answer sheet randomly. She is new in my
neighborhood and stopped to talk to me when she saw some homeschooling
bumper stickers on my car - the bumper stickers are not unschooling,
just state homeschool association logo. So, she was chatting with me and
then, kind of shyly, she said, "I've heard of something called
unschooling and I, well, I really like the idea. Have you ever heard of
it?" Her kids are 4 and 2.
Anyway - just wanted to let you know you don't have to be fearful of
people finding out they aren't yet reading. Just be matter-of-fact about
it and confident that they are on the road to reading.
-pam
On 7/21/2009 12:53 PM, John and Amanda Slater wrote:
> In my case I have an 8 1/2 and almost 7 yo who are not reading. This
> would make me very reluctant to put them in any situation in the
> public school. Since the boys passed 5, I have been careful to keep
> them out of any situation where they would be expected to read
> without me there. I don't want any attention from the school, or
> anyone to make the boys feel bad about their abilities.
>
> Amanda Eli 8, Samuel 6
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
John and Amanda Slater
Just so you know - there are LOTS of public schooled kids not reading at
7 and 8 - lots not reading at 9.
Anyway - just wanted to let you know you don't have to be fearful of
people finding out they aren't yet reading. Just be matter-of-fact about
it and confident that they are on the road to reading.
********
Thanks Pam,
Until you wrote, I had not considered how much their individual personalities also play into the decision not to put them in situations which would point out their non-reading. Eli is VERY easily frustrated, and VERY loud about it. Samuel on the other hand, gets very quiet and withdrawn when upset or confused or frustrated. He would sit quietly and hide his head while getting more and more upset.
I guess not leaving them without myself or dh has a lot of reasons behind it. Much like our decision to homeschool and unschool!!
Amanda
Eli 8, Samuel 6
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
7 and 8 - lots not reading at 9.
Anyway - just wanted to let you know you don't have to be fearful of
people finding out they aren't yet reading. Just be matter-of-fact about
it and confident that they are on the road to reading.
********
Thanks Pam,
Until you wrote, I had not considered how much their individual personalities also play into the decision not to put them in situations which would point out their non-reading. Eli is VERY easily frustrated, and VERY loud about it. Samuel on the other hand, gets very quiet and withdrawn when upset or confused or frustrated. He would sit quietly and hide his head while getting more and more upset.
I guess not leaving them without myself or dh has a lot of reasons behind it. Much like our decision to homeschool and unschool!!
Amanda
Eli 8, Samuel 6
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pam Sorooshian
On 7/21/2009 1:53 PM, John and Amanda Slater wrote:
her Girl Scout Leader, for example. And there were times I told adults
in authority - "Remember you have kids here who aren't reading yet;
please don't embarrass them."
I'm just saying you probably don't have to worry about the school
officials thinking it is unusual for kids not to be reading by 9 years
old - because they know it is common. For them, it would be easy to just
say, "We're working on it." It is other adults and some kids who can be
thoughtlessly mean about it.
-pam
> Until you wrote, I had not considered how much their individual personalities also play into the decision not to put them in situations which would point out their non-reading. Eli is VERY easily frustrated, and VERY loud about it. Samuel on the other hand, gets very quiet and withdrawn when upset or confused or frustrated. He would sit quietly and hide his head while getting more and more upset.I also protected my later reading child - by being there, mostly. I was
>
> I guess not leaving them without myself or dh has a lot of reasons behind it. Much like our decision to homeschool and unschool!!
>
>
her Girl Scout Leader, for example. And there were times I told adults
in authority - "Remember you have kids here who aren't reading yet;
please don't embarrass them."
I'm just saying you probably don't have to worry about the school
officials thinking it is unusual for kids not to be reading by 9 years
old - because they know it is common. For them, it would be easy to just
say, "We're working on it." It is other adults and some kids who can be
thoughtlessly mean about it.
-pam
Kasey Frazier
Here is the link to the co op I am talking about at to answer some of your questions,,
http://www.monroe.wednet.edu/PAGES/svec.html
Kasey
http://www.monroe.wednet.edu/PAGES/svec.html
Kasey
Sandra Dodd
-=-Here is the link to the co op I am talking about at to answer some
of your questions,,-=-
I did let that through, though I was tempted to return it. And I'm
not going to read it, because it's not in my area.
The questions were about what YOUR question really was.
My son, Kirby, is a good counsellor. A friend of his was depressed
once and wanted Kirby to help him. He asked him to help him. So
Kirby asked him what was going on, and the friend told Kirby "It's all
in my livejournal."
So before Kirby could voluntarily help someone, he was expected to go
and read who knows how much on a livejournal!?
Not good.
If people are helping you freely, make it easy for them. And the
first step of making it easy is to think carefully about what help you
want and why. Phrase your question clearly and carefully. Just the
act of thinking as clearly as you can will be helpful, and then the
ideas you get will be more to the point, and the time people spend
will be less wasted.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
of your questions,,-=-
I did let that through, though I was tempted to return it. And I'm
not going to read it, because it's not in my area.
The questions were about what YOUR question really was.
My son, Kirby, is a good counsellor. A friend of his was depressed
once and wanted Kirby to help him. He asked him to help him. So
Kirby asked him what was going on, and the friend told Kirby "It's all
in my livejournal."
So before Kirby could voluntarily help someone, he was expected to go
and read who knows how much on a livejournal!?
Not good.
If people are helping you freely, make it easy for them. And the
first step of making it easy is to think carefully about what help you
want and why. Phrase your question clearly and carefully. Just the
act of thinking as clearly as you can will be helpful, and then the
ideas you get will be more to the point, and the time people spend
will be less wasted.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
carenkh
Even with the link, I can't tell what's expected of you and your son.
So it's the one-day program? What does it mean about the twenty hours additional? How much will that cut into what you do at home? What's required? Is it a "do what you want from what we offer" program, or a "you must do everything we require" program?
Caren
So it's the one-day program? What does it mean about the twenty hours additional? How much will that cut into what you do at home? What's required? Is it a "do what you want from what we offer" program, or a "you must do everything we require" program?
Caren
Robin Bentley
Perhaps you could ask your boys what they want out of this program? Is
it to be with their friend? Is it to do specific things that the
friend is doing?
Finding out their motivation for wanting to go would be a first step.
If they still want to go, do they know the requirements the program
has for all of you? (It is the Co-op, not the PPP, right?) If so, then
do it with them. Because it is a public-school program, you can leave
any time. Maybe not without a big hassle (schools never want to lose
funding), but you can do it.
Focus on what they want to experience and go from there.
Robin B.
it to be with their friend? Is it to do specific things that the
friend is doing?
Finding out their motivation for wanting to go would be a first step.
If they still want to go, do they know the requirements the program
has for all of you? (It is the Co-op, not the PPP, right?) If so, then
do it with them. Because it is a public-school program, you can leave
any time. Maybe not without a big hassle (schools never want to lose
funding), but you can do it.
Focus on what they want to experience and go from there.
Robin B.
Kasey Frazier
=What is it? that's what you left out. :-)
Is it like a parent auxiliary for the school? Then it wouldn't make
sense.
Is it something that parents and kids do together?
Is it for projects parents do that are of interest to kids. Like
parental show-and-tell? That sounds fun.=
From what I found out the Monday classes that they want to take is a 3 hour block of classes that they get to choose from a list and a teacher is teaching them.. So it is kind of like public school... I go and hang out til the classes are done. I can attend the classes with him but it is taught by an independent teacher that is hired.
Is it like a parent auxiliary for the school? Then it wouldn't make
sense.
Is it something that parents and kids do together?
Is it for projects parents do that are of interest to kids. Like
parental show-and-tell? That sounds fun.=
From what I found out the Monday classes that they want to take is a 3 hour block of classes that they get to choose from a list and a teacher is teaching them.. So it is kind of like public school... I go and hang out til the classes are done. I can attend the classes with him but it is taught by an independent teacher that is hired.
Kasey Frazier
I also thought that I mentioned in my earlier post that my older son has Autism. So I am a bit leary of any public school like things that may want to keep tabs on him. He was in the system for pre-k and 2 mo. of Kindergarten (before I knew about homeschooling. I am afraid of judgment and being watched by the system because of his Autism.
Sandra Dodd
-=-I go and hang out til the classes are done. I can attend the
classes with him but it is taught by an independent teacher that is
hired.
-=-
Do you have to commit to a series just to attend once? If each
evening is a self-contained activity (if the classes are one session
long), it seems pretty risk free.
If your son's autism would be disruptive, then it's a bad idea. If
it's minor and he really wants to do this and if homeschooling is
legal where you are, I don't see a problem.
If he would be disruptive, then it's not a good idea.
Rather than saying "My son has autism," as though it's a communicable
disease, it might help to think of it as "is autistic."
A child who's blind isn't said to "have blindness."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
classes with him but it is taught by an independent teacher that is
hired.
-=-
Do you have to commit to a series just to attend once? If each
evening is a self-contained activity (if the classes are one session
long), it seems pretty risk free.
If your son's autism would be disruptive, then it's a bad idea. If
it's minor and he really wants to do this and if homeschooling is
legal where you are, I don't see a problem.
If he would be disruptive, then it's not a good idea.
Rather than saying "My son has autism," as though it's a communicable
disease, it might help to think of it as "is autistic."
A child who's blind isn't said to "have blindness."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
carenkh
-=-I am afraid of judgment and being watched by the system because of his Autism.-=-
I'm curious to know what you mean by "being watched by the system". If you're homeschooling legally, there is not much "the system" can do. And do you really think they "watch"? It's helpful, when there's a fear, to pull it out into the light and see if it survives scrutiny. That will bring you a much higher level of peace and security than feeling like you need to "hide" anything from anyone!
Caren
I'm curious to know what you mean by "being watched by the system". If you're homeschooling legally, there is not much "the system" can do. And do you really think they "watch"? It's helpful, when there's a fear, to pull it out into the light and see if it survives scrutiny. That will bring you a much higher level of peace and security than feeling like you need to "hide" anything from anyone!
Caren
Nancy Wooton
On Jul 23, 2009, at 12:55 AM, Sandra Dodd wrote:
we give riding lessons to people with all kinds of problems, and
receive instruction about the currently acceptable terms. It's now
preferred to say "has autism," rather than applying a label that
defines the person solely by their disability. FYI, "NARHA" is now
the name of the organization, where it used to be an acronym for the
North American Riding for the Handicapped Association.
Nancy
> -=-I go and hang out til the classes are done. I can attend theNo, they're "visually impaired." I volunteer at a NARHA center, where
> classes with him but it is taught by an independent teacher that is
> hired.
> -=-
>
>
>
> Do you have to commit to a series just to attend once? If each
> evening is a self-contained activity (if the classes are one session
> long), it seems pretty risk free.
>
> If your son's autism would be disruptive, then it's a bad idea. If
> it's minor and he really wants to do this and if homeschooling is
> legal where you are, I don't see a problem.
>
> If he would be disruptive, then it's not a good idea.
>
>
>
> Rather than saying "My son has autism," as though it's a communicable
> disease, it might help to think of it as "is autistic."
>
> A child who's blind isn't said to "have blindness."
>
> Sandra
we give riding lessons to people with all kinds of problems, and
receive instruction about the currently acceptable terms. It's now
preferred to say "has autism," rather than applying a label that
defines the person solely by their disability. FYI, "NARHA" is now
the name of the organization, where it used to be an acronym for the
North American Riding for the Handicapped Association.
Nancy
Sandra Dodd
-=- It's now
preferred to say "has autism," rather than applying a label that
defines the person solely by their disability.-=-
OH! Okay, then. I didn't know there were professionals being paid to
decide that it was preferable to treat a condition as a disease,
grammatically speaking, rather than to to do the more complicated but
more useful task of helping people not define a person by one single
attribute.
I am getting grey haired, but even if I get to the point of BEING grey
haired, it won't define me solely. There are grey haired dancing
lunatics and grey haired catatonics, and the grey hair has little to
do with it their similarities or differences, except their relatives
are less likely as time goes on to be able to come and get them if
their hospitalization works wonders. There are grey haired murderers
and grey haired angels of mercy. There are grey haired truck drivers
and grey haired bicyclists. Some are the same guy. My dad started
getting greyhaired before he was twenty-one years old and many "grey-
haired people" are bald, I think. So there's no sense saying my dad
had greyhairedness, or that I have it now, nor in thinking it defines
anyone.
So.
For the purposes of unschooling, for the reason of seeing a child more
clearly, I think, personally (and it's just me, just my unprofessional
opinion) that being unclear about what is trait and what is permanent
and what is being and what is temporary, communicable disease is a
problem when considering whether a child might be a good fit for a
program in which said child might do well to be attentive and quiet
and still for some length of time, especially if the parent is
concerned about the opinion of outsiders concerning the child's
particular not-solely-defining attribute(s) and her treatment thereof.
SONuvabitch, people piss me off sometimes.
Nancy, how do the horses feel about these strict changes of terminology?
Here's something funny about English, in English, by Hugh Laurie and
Stephen Fry that I found this morning while trying to use the internet
as a stimulant before falling asleep again. (I had sleepiness.)
http://vodpod.com/watch/166508-stephen-fry-hugh-laurie-the-subject-of-language
Frillions of new ideas. "A unique child delivered of a unique mother."
In case yahoo chops that off,
http://tinyurl.com/c8h7po
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
preferred to say "has autism," rather than applying a label that
defines the person solely by their disability.-=-
OH! Okay, then. I didn't know there were professionals being paid to
decide that it was preferable to treat a condition as a disease,
grammatically speaking, rather than to to do the more complicated but
more useful task of helping people not define a person by one single
attribute.
I am getting grey haired, but even if I get to the point of BEING grey
haired, it won't define me solely. There are grey haired dancing
lunatics and grey haired catatonics, and the grey hair has little to
do with it their similarities or differences, except their relatives
are less likely as time goes on to be able to come and get them if
their hospitalization works wonders. There are grey haired murderers
and grey haired angels of mercy. There are grey haired truck drivers
and grey haired bicyclists. Some are the same guy. My dad started
getting greyhaired before he was twenty-one years old and many "grey-
haired people" are bald, I think. So there's no sense saying my dad
had greyhairedness, or that I have it now, nor in thinking it defines
anyone.
So.
For the purposes of unschooling, for the reason of seeing a child more
clearly, I think, personally (and it's just me, just my unprofessional
opinion) that being unclear about what is trait and what is permanent
and what is being and what is temporary, communicable disease is a
problem when considering whether a child might be a good fit for a
program in which said child might do well to be attentive and quiet
and still for some length of time, especially if the parent is
concerned about the opinion of outsiders concerning the child's
particular not-solely-defining attribute(s) and her treatment thereof.
SONuvabitch, people piss me off sometimes.
Nancy, how do the horses feel about these strict changes of terminology?
Here's something funny about English, in English, by Hugh Laurie and
Stephen Fry that I found this morning while trying to use the internet
as a stimulant before falling asleep again. (I had sleepiness.)
http://vodpod.com/watch/166508-stephen-fry-hugh-laurie-the-subject-of-language
Frillions of new ideas. "A unique child delivered of a unique mother."
In case yahoo chops that off,
http://tinyurl.com/c8h7po
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Kasey Frazier
The reason I said "has autism" is because he is not Autistic. There are different levels of autism, and most people in the Autism world term Autistic as an individual with SEVERE Autism and he does not have severe symptoms.
Thanks anyways everyone for the criticism, this list can be a bit to harsh for me. I do not think I fit in here.
Take care.
Thanks anyways everyone for the criticism, this list can be a bit to harsh for me. I do not think I fit in here.
Take care.
Bonnie B
I'm new to this list, so I'm trying to lurk a bit, but I feel the need to jump in here. It's proper to call minority groups by what they prefer to call themselves. Autistic people generally prefer the term "autistic". Mothers who want to feel more hopeful that their kids might "get better" have pushed for use of "has autism". Autistic people themselves (whose opinions are rarely asked for) generally see autism as something that is part of them and cannot be cured or removed, and thus prefer "autistic". It's a descriptive term, not a definitive one. It's just like you wouldn't say someone "has gayness" or "participates in Christianity" when you could just say they are gay or Christian. Those terms don't imply someone is "defined" by being gay or Christian or [trait], but it does imply that trait is an integrated part of who the person is. Saying "has [trait]" implies a hope that the trait can be removed from the person, which is unrealistic at best and offensive at worst.
Similarly deaf people usually prefer "Deaf" (with a capital D) to "hearing-impaired". Different groups call themselves different things, but if you say "has autism" or "is hearing-impaired" to people who belong to those groups you might not get a friendly response.
White people in this country have spent years arguing over what to call Indians, whether they should be "Native Americans" or "American Indians" or whatever. Eventually people got the bright idea to actually ask them what they call themselves. Turns out it's "Indian", which they've been called for as long as English has been part of their reality, or simply whatever specific tribe they belong to. Big surprise there? Not to me.
Bonnie
To: [email protected]
From: Sandra@...
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 15:53:11 +0100
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Re: PPP
-=- It's now
preferred to say "has autism," rather than applying a label that
defines the person solely by their disability.-=-
OH! Okay, then. I didn't know there were professionals being paid to
decide that it was preferable to treat a condition as a disease,
grammatically speaking, rather than to to do the more complicated but
more useful task of helping people not define a person by one single
attribute.
I am getting grey haired, but even if I get to the point of BEING grey
haired, it won't define me solely. There are grey haired dancing
lunatics and grey haired catatonics, and the grey hair has little to
do with it their similarities or differences, except their relatives
are less likely as time goes on to be able to come and get them if
their hospitalization works wonders. There are grey haired murderers
and grey haired angels of mercy. There are grey haired truck drivers
and grey haired bicyclists. Some are the same guy. My dad started
getting greyhaired before he was twenty-one years old and many "grey-
haired people" are bald, I think. So there's no sense saying my dad
had greyhairedness, or that I have it now, nor in thinking it defines
anyone.
So.
For the purposes of unschooling, for the reason of seeing a child more
clearly, I think, personally (and it's just me, just my unprofessional
opinion) that being unclear about what is trait and what is permanent
and what is being and what is temporary, communicable disease is a
problem when considering whether a child might be a good fit for a
program in which said child might do well to be attentive and quiet
and still for some length of time, especially if the parent is
concerned about the opinion of outsiders concerning the child's
particular not-solely-defining attribute(s) and her treatment thereof.
SONuvabitch, people piss me off sometimes.
Nancy, how do the horses feel about these strict changes of terminology?
Here's something funny about English, in English, by Hugh Laurie and
Stephen Fry that I found this morning while trying to use the internet
as a stimulant before falling asleep again. (I had sleepiness.)
http://vodpod.com/watch/166508-stephen-fry-hugh-laurie-the-subject-of-language
Frillions of new ideas. "A unique child delivered of a unique mother."
In case yahoo chops that off,
http://tinyurl.com/c8h7po
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live� Hotmail�: Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports pics. Check it out.
http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Similarly deaf people usually prefer "Deaf" (with a capital D) to "hearing-impaired". Different groups call themselves different things, but if you say "has autism" or "is hearing-impaired" to people who belong to those groups you might not get a friendly response.
White people in this country have spent years arguing over what to call Indians, whether they should be "Native Americans" or "American Indians" or whatever. Eventually people got the bright idea to actually ask them what they call themselves. Turns out it's "Indian", which they've been called for as long as English has been part of their reality, or simply whatever specific tribe they belong to. Big surprise there? Not to me.
Bonnie
To: [email protected]
From: Sandra@...
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 15:53:11 +0100
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Re: PPP
-=- It's now
preferred to say "has autism," rather than applying a label that
defines the person solely by their disability.-=-
OH! Okay, then. I didn't know there were professionals being paid to
decide that it was preferable to treat a condition as a disease,
grammatically speaking, rather than to to do the more complicated but
more useful task of helping people not define a person by one single
attribute.
I am getting grey haired, but even if I get to the point of BEING grey
haired, it won't define me solely. There are grey haired dancing
lunatics and grey haired catatonics, and the grey hair has little to
do with it their similarities or differences, except their relatives
are less likely as time goes on to be able to come and get them if
their hospitalization works wonders. There are grey haired murderers
and grey haired angels of mercy. There are grey haired truck drivers
and grey haired bicyclists. Some are the same guy. My dad started
getting greyhaired before he was twenty-one years old and many "grey-
haired people" are bald, I think. So there's no sense saying my dad
had greyhairedness, or that I have it now, nor in thinking it defines
anyone.
So.
For the purposes of unschooling, for the reason of seeing a child more
clearly, I think, personally (and it's just me, just my unprofessional
opinion) that being unclear about what is trait and what is permanent
and what is being and what is temporary, communicable disease is a
problem when considering whether a child might be a good fit for a
program in which said child might do well to be attentive and quiet
and still for some length of time, especially if the parent is
concerned about the opinion of outsiders concerning the child's
particular not-solely-defining attribute(s) and her treatment thereof.
SONuvabitch, people piss me off sometimes.
Nancy, how do the horses feel about these strict changes of terminology?
Here's something funny about English, in English, by Hugh Laurie and
Stephen Fry that I found this morning while trying to use the internet
as a stimulant before falling asleep again. (I had sleepiness.)
http://vodpod.com/watch/166508-stephen-fry-hugh-laurie-the-subject-of-language
Frillions of new ideas. "A unique child delivered of a unique mother."
In case yahoo chops that off,
http://tinyurl.com/c8h7po
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live� Hotmail�: Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports pics. Check it out.
http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Linda Knauff
Many parents, like myself, who wish for the world to see their children "with autism" as whole and unique have given the use of these two terms a lot of thought. Disclosure is one issue, and how to disclose is another. When sharing such personal (and sometimes loaded) information, your hope is always that the one with whom you are sharing will view your child as a unique individual with the autism being just a part of who he/she is. Saying "she's autistic" can feel like you're giving the impression that it affects everything and all that she is--which is untrue and can make the autism seem more pervasive than it is. Saying "she has autism" can, in a positive way, feel like you're saying it's just a part of who she is. On the other hand, Sandra, you're right in that "she has autism" can come across as though it's a disease that can or should be cured--that can be negative, as well.
It's a hard call for parents to make. Some are more comfortable with one or the other. And there are, of course, "experts" backing each phrase as what should be considered politically correct.
I have been in many circumstances where I've had to make a choice between the two phrases--in my mind, and in conversation--and I can tell you I don't take either choice lightly. Often I am at a loss for which one will be the most respectful of my child and the most accurate and positive for the situation in which we are participating. Most of the time, in the past, I have said "she has autism" because my gut has told me that will be less off-putting to the other party.
But I do continue to struggle with which of the two phrases is best on the whole.
Linda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
It's a hard call for parents to make. Some are more comfortable with one or the other. And there are, of course, "experts" backing each phrase as what should be considered politically correct.
I have been in many circumstances where I've had to make a choice between the two phrases--in my mind, and in conversation--and I can tell you I don't take either choice lightly. Often I am at a loss for which one will be the most respectful of my child and the most accurate and positive for the situation in which we are participating. Most of the time, in the past, I have said "she has autism" because my gut has told me that will be less off-putting to the other party.
But I do continue to struggle with which of the two phrases is best on the whole.
Linda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bonnie B
-Saying "she's autistic" can feel like you're giving the impression that it affects everything and all that she is--which is untrue and can make the autism seem more pervasive than it is.-
Autism is classified as a Pervasive Developmental Disorder. It's pervasive by definition.
I've had many friends who've been diagnosed with Asperger's (who generally refer to themselves as "Aspies") and have read many autobiographies of people on the autism spectrum. Most of them have argued that autism *does* affect everything and all that they are. They see it as a part of their personality, a part of who they are. (I feel the need to emphasize that they're also PROUD of it!) I don't understand how the way a person's brain operates and the way they process sensory input could NOT affect everything about them. That doesn't mean they don't have an identity or a personality. It's just that autism is a part of that. It's woven into who they are like threads in a blanket.
I am, from all that I've read, most likely an Aspie myself. I am also a woman, a brunette, a Unitarian, an unschooler, a 23-year-old, a Southerner, a musician, a Trekkie, and a Beatles fan. None of those things by itself IS who I am, but each of those things is part of who I am, and each thing affects the other things. Remove any one of those threads and you'd have a different blanket. They all affect everything and all that I am. Everything counts!
Bonnie
To: [email protected]
From: linda@...
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:00:13 -0400
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Re: PPP
Many parents, like myself, who wish for the world to see their children "with autism" as whole and unique have given the use of these two terms a lot of thought. Disclosure is one issue, and how to disclose is another. When sharing such personal (and sometimes loaded) information, your hope is always that the one with whom you are sharing will view your child as a unique individual with the autism being just a part of who he/she is. Saying "she's autistic" can feel like you're giving the impression that it affects everything and all that she is--which is untrue and can make the autism seem more pervasive than it is. Saying "she has autism" can, in a positive way, feel like you're saying it's just a part of who she is. On the other hand, Sandra, you're right in that "she has autism" can come across as though it's a disease that can or should be cured--that can be negative, as well.
It's a hard call for parents to make. Some are more comfortable with one or the other. And there are, of course, "experts" backing each phrase as what should be considered politically correct.
I have been in many circumstances where I've had to make a choice between the two phrases--in my mind, and in conversation--and I can tell you I don't take either choice lightly. Often I am at a loss for which one will be the most respectful of my child and the most accurate and positive for the situation in which we are participating. Most of the time, in the past, I have said "she has autism" because my gut has told me that will be less off-putting to the other party.
But I do continue to struggle with which of the two phrases is best on the whole.
Linda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live� Hotmail�: Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports pics. Check it out.
http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Autism is classified as a Pervasive Developmental Disorder. It's pervasive by definition.
I've had many friends who've been diagnosed with Asperger's (who generally refer to themselves as "Aspies") and have read many autobiographies of people on the autism spectrum. Most of them have argued that autism *does* affect everything and all that they are. They see it as a part of their personality, a part of who they are. (I feel the need to emphasize that they're also PROUD of it!) I don't understand how the way a person's brain operates and the way they process sensory input could NOT affect everything about them. That doesn't mean they don't have an identity or a personality. It's just that autism is a part of that. It's woven into who they are like threads in a blanket.
I am, from all that I've read, most likely an Aspie myself. I am also a woman, a brunette, a Unitarian, an unschooler, a 23-year-old, a Southerner, a musician, a Trekkie, and a Beatles fan. None of those things by itself IS who I am, but each of those things is part of who I am, and each thing affects the other things. Remove any one of those threads and you'd have a different blanket. They all affect everything and all that I am. Everything counts!
Bonnie
To: [email protected]
From: linda@...
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 12:00:13 -0400
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Re: PPP
Many parents, like myself, who wish for the world to see their children "with autism" as whole and unique have given the use of these two terms a lot of thought. Disclosure is one issue, and how to disclose is another. When sharing such personal (and sometimes loaded) information, your hope is always that the one with whom you are sharing will view your child as a unique individual with the autism being just a part of who he/she is. Saying "she's autistic" can feel like you're giving the impression that it affects everything and all that she is--which is untrue and can make the autism seem more pervasive than it is. Saying "she has autism" can, in a positive way, feel like you're saying it's just a part of who she is. On the other hand, Sandra, you're right in that "she has autism" can come across as though it's a disease that can or should be cured--that can be negative, as well.
It's a hard call for parents to make. Some are more comfortable with one or the other. And there are, of course, "experts" backing each phrase as what should be considered politically correct.
I have been in many circumstances where I've had to make a choice between the two phrases--in my mind, and in conversation--and I can tell you I don't take either choice lightly. Often I am at a loss for which one will be the most respectful of my child and the most accurate and positive for the situation in which we are participating. Most of the time, in the past, I have said "she has autism" because my gut has told me that will be less off-putting to the other party.
But I do continue to struggle with which of the two phrases is best on the whole.
Linda
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live� Hotmail�: Celebrate the moment with your favorite sports pics. Check it out.
http://www.windowslive.com/Online/Hotmail/Campaign/QuickAdd?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_QA_HM_sports_photos_072009&cat=sports
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Most of the time, in the past, I have said "she has autism" because
my gut has told me that will be less off-putting to the other party.
But I do continue to struggle with which of the two phrases is best on
the whole.-=-
Are we talking Asperger's Syndrome here?
Is it possible not to say autism at all, nor "Asperger's," but to say
"She takes a while to warm up to people," or "He's not very social,"
or "He's easily offended, so I'll probably stay near by"?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
my gut has told me that will be less off-putting to the other party.
But I do continue to struggle with which of the two phrases is best on
the whole.-=-
Are we talking Asperger's Syndrome here?
Is it possible not to say autism at all, nor "Asperger's," but to say
"She takes a while to warm up to people," or "He's not very social,"
or "He's easily offended, so I'll probably stay near by"?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=- It's proper to call minority groups by what they prefer to call
themselves. Autistic people generally prefer the term "autistic". -=-
"Proper" according to which rulebook? I ask, because if autistic
people "generally prefer" anything, who decided that and persuaded
most but not all of them? And if a minority of the minority group
prefers a different designation, is it proper to respect that? What
if one person in a family prefers Black over African American? What
if some Indians (generally within a tribe) prefer "Native American"
over "Indian," while another group doesn't even use "tribe" because
it's not the way they consider themselves? Santa Clara Pueblo isn't
part of "the same tribe" as San Ildefonso Pueblo. They're a pueblo,
not a tribe. Perhaps in dealing with federal bureaucracy they fill
out "tribal" paperwork, it's not the term they use.
In New Mexico, the designations for the major ethnic groups are
Hispanic, Anglo and Indian. If people outside of that area tell us
condescendingly that those terms aren't right, those outsiders are
wrong. The Hispanic people of northern New Mexico are not "Latino."
Some aren't "Spanish surnamed," though most are. (Some of the Anglos
and a lot of the Indians are, as well.) The Anglos are not "white,"
though sometimes when filling out a "check one box" form that's my
only choice. And on forms created and maintained by the state of New
Mexico, sometimes I check "Anglo."
So please don't think that I haven't considered the realities of
teminology and expectations.
For purposes of people getting good information from this list, and
advice that will help them move toward unschooling and confidently
stay there, labels should be examined within each user, and looked at
from every angle, but *mostly* from the point of view of whether it
helps natural learning and mindful parenting.
I don't care what people call their kids, really. I care how people
seem to be thinking about their children in the context of discussions
about unschooling.
It is proper for me to use terminology on this list that will help
people understand unschooling.
Sandra
themselves. Autistic people generally prefer the term "autistic". -=-
"Proper" according to which rulebook? I ask, because if autistic
people "generally prefer" anything, who decided that and persuaded
most but not all of them? And if a minority of the minority group
prefers a different designation, is it proper to respect that? What
if one person in a family prefers Black over African American? What
if some Indians (generally within a tribe) prefer "Native American"
over "Indian," while another group doesn't even use "tribe" because
it's not the way they consider themselves? Santa Clara Pueblo isn't
part of "the same tribe" as San Ildefonso Pueblo. They're a pueblo,
not a tribe. Perhaps in dealing with federal bureaucracy they fill
out "tribal" paperwork, it's not the term they use.
In New Mexico, the designations for the major ethnic groups are
Hispanic, Anglo and Indian. If people outside of that area tell us
condescendingly that those terms aren't right, those outsiders are
wrong. The Hispanic people of northern New Mexico are not "Latino."
Some aren't "Spanish surnamed," though most are. (Some of the Anglos
and a lot of the Indians are, as well.) The Anglos are not "white,"
though sometimes when filling out a "check one box" form that's my
only choice. And on forms created and maintained by the state of New
Mexico, sometimes I check "Anglo."
So please don't think that I haven't considered the realities of
teminology and expectations.
For purposes of people getting good information from this list, and
advice that will help them move toward unschooling and confidently
stay there, labels should be examined within each user, and looked at
from every angle, but *mostly* from the point of view of whether it
helps natural learning and mindful parenting.
I don't care what people call their kids, really. I care how people
seem to be thinking about their children in the context of discussions
about unschooling.
It is proper for me to use terminology on this list that will help
people understand unschooling.
Sandra
Sandra Dodd
-=-Autism is classified as a Pervasive Developmental Disorder. It's
pervasive by definition.-=-
So the question was whether someone with PDD should participate in a
PPP?
It's pervasive by that particular definition.
A name or a term or a label is not the thing itself.
And I figure it's possible that whichever government or medical entity
"classified" autism is not international.
I meant to say in the other post that "Native American" doesn't begin
to cover the First Nations people of Canada, or the I-don't-know-whats
of Mexico (los Indios, I think they say).
I saw a preview for Bruno in which "Bruno" was explaining that he had
been to Africa and it was full of African Americans. :-)
Sandra
pervasive by definition.-=-
So the question was whether someone with PDD should participate in a
PPP?
It's pervasive by that particular definition.
A name or a term or a label is not the thing itself.
And I figure it's possible that whichever government or medical entity
"classified" autism is not international.
I meant to say in the other post that "Native American" doesn't begin
to cover the First Nations people of Canada, or the I-don't-know-whats
of Mexico (los Indios, I think they say).
I saw a preview for Bruno in which "Bruno" was explaining that he had
been to Africa and it was full of African Americans. :-)
Sandra