Scudenstein

Yep, we're facing school issues again. Yes, once again it's Scud.

Among other things, his teacher feels VERY strongly that he needs to be moved ahead to the next grade. (Didn't we do this last year?) I pretty much agree.

But, I'm also very concerned about some obsessive-compulsive behaviors and extreme anxiety issues he has been showing. He's always had them and I keep thinking he will grow out of them. But they're not getting better. If anything they're getting worse.

He is hating school right now. "Miserable" is the word he used. I hate to hear that from my sweet guy. His anxiety issues are keeping him unhappy at school, at home, pretty much all of the time.

So, we're looking into solutions, trying to figure out where to turn to evaluate things. I want to make decisions based on the whole picture.

Mainly it's questions right now.

Are the obsessive-compulsive behaviors and anxiety stemming from the fact that is mind is terribly under stimulated?

Or do they exist on their own?

Will changing grades mean a reprieve from current symptoms? Short-term? Long-term? Could it possibly make it worse?

Does he have obsessive compulsive disorder or another mental illness? Or is the fact that he is very intelligent and not being stimulated causing his brain to look for other things to do? Or is it both?

I want so very much to take care of this tender little guy. I want what's best for him. And I don't want to go with quick fixes and not look at the whole picture, really figure out what he needs.

We are also looking into a Montessori school, the idea of homeschooling him. There are many possible options and many questions with each option.

Wish us luck.

Updates

I realized a while ago that I've left a few loose threads hanging out around here. So, I guess it's a good time to wrap them up.

-I'll start with the most recent: Mashuga and the carseat debacle. I don't have a permanent solution, yet. But we're working on it. My sweet friend, Kristin's, comment woke me up to a very important truth. I've been spending so much time talking, cajoling, begging, pleading and yelling at Mashuga about the issue that I've completely forgotten to listen. I haven't been listening to him and to what he needs and wants. I haven't been listening to my own mother-heart and the still small voice that never leads me in the wrong direction.

So, here's what we're doing. For now, Mashuga's carseat is buckled in the passenger seat next to me. This serves many purposes. First of all, it puts him in arms reach so that I can prevent him from unbuckling at inopportune times. It also puts him more firmly into my realm of consciousness, so that I know when he's getting restless or unhappy and I can meet those immediate needs before they progress to the ultimate, desperate attempt at freedom. It also gives us the opportunity to talk, to enjoy one another. He's already given me plenty of ideas on how to help him. He'd love a more comfortable carseat. Actually, he'd like to have a booster seat, but he is still only 33 pounds dripping wet and only barely tall enough for a booster. I feel much safer with him in a carseat right for a bit longer. He'd love to have a little bag with books and toys to play with in the car. He is a wise little teacher and a wonderful boy.

Sometimes I forget what I have learned over and over as a parent. Usually my children's "bad" behaviors are just an expression of an inner need. If I take the time to listen carefully and look more closely, we can usually find the best solutions together.

-Scud's school situation has improved drastically. It's been like night and day and he is LOVING school now. What changed? His former teacher resigned because of family needs. I imagine this may have been part of the problem -- that she was simply stretched too thin. So, though I am compassionate enough to wish her well and hope she has success in her future, I admit that I did a little jig in my kitchen when I learned that Scud would be getting a new teacher.

And she has been EVERYTHING I had hoped for. First of all, she adores Scud and makes him feel so good about himself. And she is one of those teachers who is in it because she loves the children. It is more than just a job for her. Her classroom management skills are fantastic. She is challenging Scud, teaching the curriculum and working with the other 1st grade teachers to divide the children into skill-set groups for math, reading and spelling. To say I am pleased would be putting it mildly. I just want to kiss this woman every time I see her.

Now I am curious about the rest of the first grade classes at our school. Are they improving? Rynell, I'm especially curious about what you're seeing with your son's class. If there's still a problem with the rest of first grade I still want to help.

-Another Scud update, though I'm not sure I've mentioned this here before. When Scud was 2 1/2 he was diagnosed with an articulation disorder. They suspected he might have developmental apraxia of speech, which meant that he knew the words he was trying to say but his brain and mouth were not coordinating well enough for him to make the sounds he needed to make. He was basically unintelligible until he was about 3 1/2 to 4 years old and even then other people had a hard time understanding him. It was an interesting journey. He acquired language rapidly and talked A LOT. We just couldn't understand him most of the time. It was very frustrating for him. People were always asking him to repeat himself and I always had to translate for him (when I actually understood him).

But, after 2 years of speech therapy he tested at an age-appropriate level and we were told he didn't need speech therapy anymore. I walked away with a bit of trepidation, but reminded myself that even my precocious Kaitybean still pronounced her r and sh and th wrong at 4 1/2.

Well, it's been nearly 3 years and he hasn't made much, if any, progress in his speech. He still can't pronounce r, th, sh, ch and mutates a few vowel sounds. Over the last couple of years I've listened to him and his speech just sounded a little off, still. A few weeks ago I finally decided that this wasn't going to resolve on its own and called the special ed director at our school. The speech therapist evaluated him and sure enough, he has moderate articulation delays. He will be attending speech therapy once a week again and I am so, so glad. After a few years of being on the borderline of normal, people have begun asking him to repeat himself again and his speech abilities are again recognizable as delayed. I have always felt strongly that I wanted to do everything possible for him while he is young and other children are more forgiving of differences so that this does not negatively impact his self-image. So, I'm very happy about this. And sometimes it is nice to have my intuition validated by something as official-sounding as the Arizona Articulation Proficiency Scale.

One funny story that illustrates my point about Scud's speech beginning to get in his way again. In class a few weeks ago Scud's teacher asked the class what they would take with them on a long car trip. Scud told her he would take a book about sharks, to which she responded "Scud, that is not appropriate for this class." Now it is impossible to fully explain this in type (or in person really) but try to imagine the way Scud says sharks. Because it contains both an sh and an r sound it gets really mixed up and sounds just like the word "sharks" and the word "sex" perfectly morphed together so that it is VERY difficult to tell, out of context, which word he is trying to say. Scud, being the cool kid that he is, simply said "What's so inappropriate about a book about sea animals?" And his teacher said "Oh! Sharks! A book about sharks! Yes, that's a great idea." Scud later deduced that she had thought he'd said "A book about sex." and related the story to me with great glee later that afternoon. He found it very humorous, as did I. But it also clued me in to the fact that I was probably right and it was time to revisit the speech therapy idea.

-One last update -- JDub's work. I have mentioned here several times that JDub is in an interesting work situation. The last few years have been veeeeerrrry interesting. As of two months ago, we were certain that he would need to change careers by the end of this year. He was getting paid far too little for too much work, he was being kept from doing his job properly and was not allowed to hire enough help to keep his end of the business prospering. We were ready to go elsewhere, across the country if necessary. One day he felt prompted to mention this to his employer, that he was looking for work elsewhere. Oh boy! It has been like night and day since then. They bumped his income up considerably, changed him from hourly wages to salary, renegotiated his commission ratios for both websites and gave him the go-ahead to hire two more employees. Yippee! We feel so very blessed. Best of all, he is now being given the respect he deserves at his work. He is consulted on purchasing decisions and now has the authority to make all of the important decisions he needs to make to keep their profits high and their productivity at a decent level. He mentioned to me the other day that he is getting a bit "wigged out" by the lack of complaints he's had to deal with lately. They're getting everything shipped out on time. Orders are being handled in a timely manner and are done correctly. So, he is no longer running around crazy trying to put out fires and has the time to actually improve the websites, add more products, tweak systems to make things run better and sharpen the saw. Very nice. I'd say that's a good kind of "wigged out."

So, all in all, things are going well around here. Hope you don't mind reading through the long list of updates. I did go on, didn't I? Ah, well. It's a curse I have. Just let me know if there's anything else I've forgotten to update you on and I'll be happy to write another novel.

Referendum 1 Q&A

My wonderful BIL just sent me an email asking me about vouchers. I will write a lot about vouchers and Referendum 1 until it goes to a vote.

I refuse to simply tell my friends and neighbors to "Vote For 1 because you like me and I'm cool and it's the best, just trust me!" I can't stand that kind of politics.

I want you to get all of the information you need, make your own decision and feel 1000% satisfied that you're making a good decision in voting for Referendum 1.

But, I understand that you may or may not have time to research it for yourself.

Since I'm sort of nerdy like this and actually ENJOY researching this stuff, I'm inviting anyone to ask me a question about Referendum 1 and vouchers. If I don't know the answer, I'll find it. I'll find sources to back it up and I'll post your question and my answer here.

Really, ask me anything about Referendum 1 or voucher/scholarship programs and I'll find the information you want.

You can ask in the comments or email me.

I'll begin with my (sorry, somewhat lengthy) answer to Jonathan's concern/question.

---

Q. However, what I can't wrap my mind around is why we need yet another law just so that we can get our public schools to do what we want them to do. It seems like we have a broken system when we have to make law after law to act as bandaids to a problem that needs surgery.

A. I agree. Bandaid laws for a broken system are no good. Referendum 1 is one of the first measures the Utah Legislature has taken that will actually begin to create a new, better system for Utah education. Rather than throwing money or regulations or unfunded No-Child-Left-Behind-like mandates at an outdated system, it opens up an opportunity for direct accountability and for choice.

As parents have the ability to choose which school their children will attend, schools become directly accountable to the parents and children they serve, not to a bureaucratic system that may or may not have time to watch every single child.

And here's the best part. The legislature set this voucher system up in a way that, as parents begin to choose to take their children elsewhere, the public school system will have increased funding, smaller classes and Utah taxpayers will actually SAVE MONEY! (USU has projected a savings of $1 billion over thirteen years, all while increasing per student funding in public schools AND helping parents whose children need a different choice for their education.)

I believe that as this system gets going, public schools will begin to improve to meet parents' and children's needs. (Research shows that voucher systems have this effect.) Private schools and charter schools will flourish and improve. (Referendum 1 requires private schools to test, prove financial stability, hire well-educated teachers, and publicly disclose all of this information to parents for review. Charter schools are already subject to the same standards as traditional public schools.) Schools will have more local control over budget and curriculum and will respond directly to parents. (In WI, since they began a scholarship program, principals answer directly to parents and now control 95 percent of their school budgets, which enables them to meet the needs of their students better than when state school boards and school districts controlled all of the money.)

This change is the beginning of an overhaul of Utah's education system. It's FAR from just a bandaid solution. Imagine a system where your taxpayer dollars fund public schools, charter schools and scholarships for students to attend private schools -- and all of these schools work hard to compete and meet the needs of students. AND they have the resources and local control to be able to do so. That's the intention of this law.

I think it's pretty impressive.

Here's Why I'm Voting FOR Referendum 1

In Utah we are facing an interesting challenge regarding the education of our children. In November we will have a unique opportunity to vote for a measure that will affect our education system in a very positive way.

I am overwhelmingly and passionately in favor of the voucher system that our Utah State Legislature passed last session. They have done a marvelous job of setting it up in a way that everybody wins -- Utah's children, Utah's parents, Utah's teachers, Utah's public schools and Utah's taxpayers.

There has been a great deal of misinformation circulated regarding this measure, urging voters to vote against Referendum 1 and for public schools. What many people do not understand is that one of the main motivations behind a voucher system is to BENEFIT Utah's education system.

I will be writing a few articles over the next couple of weeks about why Referendum 1 and vouchers are a win-win-win system for all involved.

But, you don't have to take my word for it.

Visit Votefor1.org and see what you think about the information there. They have links to a tremendous number of research studies done by universities throughout the country that show how the type of voucher system Referendum 1 would set up greatly benefits schools, taxpayers and students. I also really liked their "Myths vs. Facts" flyer. It really dispels alot of the myths and misinformation currently circulating about the issue.

Also, watch this video. I think this makes the issue very, very clear.



Won't you join me in securing the future for Utah's families, Utah's public schools and all Utahns?

Cara De Palo

I tend to make a lot of trouble for myself by trying so hard not to make waves or hurt anyone's feelings. So, I am often not as direct as I should be or I stew for a long time about how to "approach" an issue, rather than simply approaching it.

Last night I was telling JDub that not only am I concerned about the way first grade is being taught at my children's charter school, but that several mothers have stopped me over the last week to express concerns.

It usually goes something like this:

Heather, you were in charge of the parent curriculum committee last year right? What curriculum are they supposed to be using in first grade? My child is bringing home really weird stuff that doesn't seem to have anything to do with the curriculum. Also, is the chosen math curriculum supposed to be the bulk of the math curriculum or just a supplement?

I told him that I really want to know what they are teaching and why. Especially I want to know why they are not using the program that I specifically feel is important as a good math foundation for the early grades. I have tried to champion its use in all the grades because I think its so phenomenal and they have moved it into 2nd grade as well as K and 1st.

I'm getting carried away.

So, after hearing me complain and try to decide whether to talk to the school's director or Scud's teacher or how to approach the issue I told JDub:

I just want to talk to Scud's teacher and tell her, specifically, that I am concerned that the math curriculum set forth in the charter is not being used for the bulk of math instruction as intended. I want to ask her why she isn't using it and whether or not she needs additional training and support to be able to do that.

Well, why don't you just do that? He said. Cara de palo. Just tell her what you think.

So, that's just what I did.

Here's the text of the email I sent:

Dear Teacher,

I'm writing you about a concern I have. I have been surprised at the homework and math sheets that Scud has been bringing home. At first I didn't actually know they were homework because they seemed so far beneath the level of work I thought the students should be doing in first grade. But I figured you were just starting slow and doing some fun things with them. I have noticed, though, that you are doing very little Right Start Math and that he's not bringing any of that type work home with him.

I worked as the parent curriculum committee chair last year and it is my understanding that Right Start Math is supposed to be used as the bulk of the math curriculum, with other materials supplementing it where it did not meet either Core Knowledge or Utah state objectives. It seems that things are being done the other way around, with other materials being the bulk of instruction and Right Start being used only as a supplement. This is a huge concern for me, as I am sending my children to Noah Webster in large part because I feel Right Start is such a fantastic foundation for math instruction in the early grades.

I will be meeting with the curriculum director within the next few weeks to talk to her about how I can continue to help with curriculum implementation, teacher support and parent training. Before I did that I wanted to open up a conversation with you and get a better feel for how things are going in your classroom and in first grade in general as far as curriculum implementation goes. I would love to do what I can to help in any way I can, if nothing else I'm happy to be a squeaky wheel and help you get any support you need from the school. Also, last year I worked with one of the first grade teachers (who actually ended up going to another school before school started) to map Right Start's lessons and objectives to the Core Knowledge math objectives for first grade. If it would be useful, I would be glad to send that to you.

But, I'm getting ahead of myself. What I'm most interested in knowing is what your plan is, what you're working on and how you're planning on using Right Start and teaching math for the rest of the year. I don't want to make any assumptions and would love to hear what your plans are for curriculum, specifically math.

I'd love to talk to you, either through email or I'd be happy to come in and have a face to face meeting sometime. Let me know what will work best for you.

-Heather

I'm eager to get a reply and get the ball rolling. If what I'm hearing is true (And I'm not assuming it is.), none of the first grade teachers are sticking to the curriculum as well as they should. For a school where many parents have come to this school specifically for the curriculum, that is completely unacceptable. And I want to do what I can to help.

Oh yes, I forgot. "Caro de palo" is one of my new favorite Spanish idioms. The direct translation is something lik "face to the stick" but it has the same general meaning as "get the the point" and "face it" kind of linked together. Doesn't translate exactly. You know how idioms are. But I love the saying.

Big Fat YES To Vouchers

I don't think I've made a big secret of my utter contempt for public school politics and the "one-size-fits-all," "us or them" attitude toward education in our society. My attitudes toward education tend toward the radical and reformist.

So, I think the idea of educational vouchers is a TEENSY, TINY and very rational step in the right direction toward improving the state of education in our country.

So, you can probably imagine my pulse rising and my cheeks turning a deep crimson when I heard about the recent efforts of an evil labor union (the UEA).

Let me catch you up.

The Utah State Legislature, a body elected by Utah citizens, recently passed a bill that would reimburse parents for a portion of the money they spend in private schools if they decide that a private education would better suit the needs of their children.

The UEA, through what I feel are deceptive and less-than-appropriate means (read: manipulation, lies, lies and propaganda), have gathered enough signatures to put the voucher law on the ballot. That is, it will go to a public vote. If the public votes "no," then there will be no educational vouchers in Utah.

But, to me, the whole point of a voucher law is that one parent can do something to help his or her one student get an appropriate education regardless of whether or not all the other parents think that public education is "good enough."

And you want to know something? The legislature was cool enough to make it so that the state will pay almost nothing extra to support the voucher program. And guess what's even better? A student who leaves the public school system can take only a maximum of 50% of their per-student funding with them in voucher spending. If that student belongs to a high-income family they will take even less.

I went to public elementary school, a pretty good one I think, and I believe I have a good grasp on basic arithmetic.

$6,000 per-student funding minus $3,000 maximum per-student voucher spending equals $3,000. Right?

And one minus one equals zero. I'm sure of that math. I can do it on my fingers.

So, $3,000 left-over and no student to spend it on means $3,000 EXTRA for the public school system.

Tell me, because I just can't get it. How is this bad for education?

Child gets the education he deserves. Parent gets help paying for that education. The public school system has one less student to educate and $3,000 more to help improve the education of other students. In the end, the state government pays less than half a percent more on education. Sounds like win, win, win all around.

But the bureaucrats at the UEA would have teachers and others believe that vouchers are a bad thing. This leaves me with only a few conclusions. Their math and logic skills are lacking. Or they haven't actually read the legislation. Or they don't thoroughly understand the idea. Or they are lying.

I've been wanting to write something about the specific merits and logic of educational vouchers (or really any experiment in improving the quality of education for individual children). But I am highly opinionated on the matter and (as you can see from the above) my ravings on the subject are far from impartial.

I'm afraid I couldn't do it justice.

So, this morning I read an editorial (it's a bit old) on the whole deal. I think it's spot on. And I think they've said it better (and much more rationally) than I could have.

So, I'll pull a Lavar Burton here and treat you to an editorial from the staff at the Daily Herald. You don't have to take my word for it.

Take it away, Daily Herald folks.

The moral case for vouchers

Daily Herald

Opponents of the recently passed school voucher system now say they've got enough signatures to place the measure on a ballot. A vote, they hope, will override the Legislature and kill vouchers in Utah.

Their overreaction is surprising. What are they afraid of? Why would a modest experiment in Utah education engender such weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth?

The answer is, sadly, an old one: Voucher opponents consist primarily of members of a major labor union (teachers) and a corps of professional school administrators, both with a vested interest in the outcome. They fear a loss of power.

This may not surprise anyone, but it's still wrong.

In truth, Utah's voucher experiment should be welcomed. It offers a practical answer to some entrenched problems in the public schools, and it doesn't cost any more than we're spending already. The ongoing dollar commitment for administration -- $100,000 per year -- is a drop in a massive bucket. Utah's commitment to education is about $3 billion a year.

And yet vouchers get violent opposition. The rhetoric includes a full dose of fear, hyperbole and skewed information. You would think vouchers were somehow hastening Armageddon.

They are not.

Opponents would have you believe that it is wrong for the state to pay to accomplish a valid public purpose -- universal education -- if is not accomplished in the particular way they want. They would have you believe that the public purpose is not to educate every child, but to educate every child exclusively in a public school system.

There is a big difference. And the latter distorts the argument.

Look at it this way: The state long ago endorsed universal education because an educated population is more productive. Education was deemed so important, in fact, that the state even made it compulsory by law. In making education compulsory, the state properly accepted the burden of paying for it -- today at a level roughly $5,000 to $7,500 per student per year.

That money is committed whether the public purpose is accomplished by public or private means. The only thing that should matter to taxpayers is that the purpose is accomplished.

Voucher opponents, though, would have you believe that the state has no obligation to fund anything but a public system. We disagree. There is no case, for example, that private schools have failed to accomplish the public purpose of educating students. If anything, they have proved themselves superior to the public system.

The whole issue turns on a single question:
Whose money is it? Or, put another way, do tax dollars properly adhere to the individual student for whom education is compulsory, or does it "belong" to the public school bureaucracy?

Fairness requires that government money follow a student to any institution that can deliver an education at least as good as what the state provides. The logic is simple: Education is a public purpose, and it is compulsory. The state is committed to a dollar value for every child of student age to accomplish that public purpose. If the public purpose that compels compliance can be accomplished through a legal alternative, then refusing to pay for that alternative is inherently unfair. It constitutes a form of theft.

In short, if the state pays for the education of one student, it must pay for all.

The public schools are supposed to provide for individual needs, which include things like substantial one-on-one attention from teachers. They are supposed to address varying levels of student aptitude. They are not supposed to become a melting pot in which "good enough is good enough," where everyone turns out to be the same gray shade of oatmeal.

While Utah's public schools deserve credit for the good work they do, it remains a painful truth that some of our best and brightest students are slowed by large classes, limited resources and government mandates.

Vouchers to support education in private schools are a philosophically sound answer for them.

Do not be taken in by opponents: Paying a private entity to accomplish a public purpose is not a bad idea. In fact, it is done all the time. Highways, for example, are built by private contractors; trash is collected by others; state-funded mental health services are provided by others. The list could go on. Private concerns often do the job better than the state can.

Such is the case with education -- not always, but enough to justify a state-funded alternative to public schools.

Voucher opponents miss the mark when they claim that private education is the sole financial responsibility of parents. The argument is especially unconvincing because the state is currently paying on a per-student basis to accomplish precisely the same purpose in public schools. The argument might hold water if public education were proved generally superior to private, but that is not the case.

Of course, more is at stake than money. Parents have a moral obligation to see that their children rise to their full potential. The state should help them do it -- at least up to the fraction of actual cost that was enacted by the Legislature ($500 to $3,000, depending on income).

If the current misguided effort succeeds in getting vouchers on the ballot, we urge voters to stand behind parental choice. Stand behind education as a public good. Reject public school politics. Cast your vote for human potential.

This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page A5.

Begin Disclaimer.
Don't get me wrong. I love teachers. I think teachers are great. Well, I think great teachers are great. I think incompetent or apathetic teachers should find a new line of work. Anyone who looks into it deeply enough will find that powerful teacher's unions damage public education as much or more than they serve and help teachers. The member teachers are fantastic people. Even the big guys at the top of the union are probably well-intentioned. But, when it really comes down to it, I don't think teacher's unions are the good guys. But, again, I must state clearly. TEACHERS ARE GOOD. THEY DESERVE GOOD PAY. ALL CHILDREN DESERVE AN EDUCATION. ALL CHILDREN DESERVE THE BEST POSSIBLE EDUCATION. ANYONE WHO SAYS THAT THE CURRENT PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM IS THE ONLY WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS IS EITHER LYING TO YOU, LYING TO HIMSELF OR BENEFITING GREATLY FROM THE STATUS QUO. End Disclaimer.

In Praise of Sassy Girls, Smart Children and a Great School

Last night Kaitybean was playing Scrabble with JDub and my brother and his wife. Somehow they got on the subject of nouns and someone asked her what a noun was.

"Person, place or thing," Kaitybean said. "Like, in the sentence 'The frightened girl ran away quickly.' the noun is 'girl'."

So, they all quizzed her on which word in that sentence was an adjective, which was the verb. I asked her about adverbs and whether or not she knew what they were.

"Adverbs are the how, where and when of the verb," she answered, "Like quickly. That's how the girl ran. Quickly is the adverb."

Then, my sister asked, "So what is the preposition in that sentence?"

Kaitybean came back with, "Well, it would be 'away', but there is no object of the preposition, so 'away' is actually another adverb."

We all laughed and were terribly impressed.

I didn't know that kind of stuff until I was in college and teaching others how to write.

I love Kaitybean. And I love her school. And I love Shurley English.

In other news, we're moving Scud to 1st grade this week. I've really struggled with the decision and almost put him in first grade this year to begin with, but felt that Kindergarten would be best. But, a couple of weeks ago he told me, "Mom, I'm too old and too smart for kindergarten. I think you need to think about putting me in first grade." How do you argue with that? After talking to his teacher and principal, some testing and a trial period in first grade math it turns out he was right.

I've been agonizing over the decision -- thinking about cause and effect, everything from when he gets his license to when he'll go on a mission. Finally, I just decided that it's foolishness on my part to make decisions based on "what ifs" and "mights". I do know that this is the right decision for right now. I can worry about tomorrow's decisions tomorrow.

UPDATE: We (Scud's principal, kindrgarten teacher, 1st grade teacher and I) had a meeting this morning. We determined that it would be best to have Scud do one more trial week -- this time for a full day of first grade. We will evaluate next Tuesday. My main concern is that don't want him to go from beimg way ahead of his classmates to a point where he's struggling to keep up.