Counseling Out

[Anonymous]

I can see getting counseled out in older grades because the schools have a longer track record to go on, but I think being counseled out in Pre-K or K might be a bit early. Don't most kids at those young ages have adjustment issues--especially those who have never been in a school setting before? Maybe they just need a bit more time...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can see getting counseled out in older grades because the schools have a longer track record to go on, but I think being counseled out in Pre-K or K might be a bit early. Don't most kids at those young ages have adjustment issues--especially those who have never been in a school setting before? Maybe they just need a bit more time...

I think it depends on the circumstances. I know of one kid counseled out of PK because he spent the entire year under a table, never talking or even making eye contact. I've known a few others who were truly aggressive or needed continual individual attention from the teacher. OTOH, there absolutely are schools who counsel really young kids out for relatively trivial reasons - doesn't sit and complete work sheets, and the like.

[Anonymous]

So unless a child is bipolar or on the autism spectrum and aggressive also, these children should probably not have been counseled out.

Regarding the youngest kids who are not given the opportunity to re-enroll for K or 1st grade ....

I really do think there are families who are not as forthcoming as is possible during the application season concerning their DC's neurological issues. It is possible to miss these on the playdate and not all 100% of the teacher reports are going to elaborate on them. Or, the issues are described one way and they manifest totally differently in a bigger K or 1st classroom.

Or, as is the case with my DS's school, the school could be completely apprised of the issues and think that it can handle them when in fact it really can't. There is a boy in my son's classroom who, I predict, will not be at School ABC after 4th grade. His behavior just gets more and more time consuming for the teacher and even one cursory visit to the classroom confirms this. The school has worked with him/his family for 2 years now, probably because it's the right thing to do and other reasons. But the situation is just getting worse and he seems to have all manner of neuro and maybe psych issues.

[Anonymous]

I posted earlier, and referred to this, but I wanted to reemphasize that the distinction I see between kids who are counseled out at a young age, and those that are not, is how seriously the parents take the issue. One parent told me that the school had raised concerns, and the parent was very dismissive -- that's just how my child is, he'll grow out of it, etc. That child is no longer at the school. Another parent I know has taken the issues very seriously, and has had the child tested, is working with a tutor, etc., and that child is still there. I also do see a distinction between learning issues and behavioral issues, with the school being much more willing to work on the former. Private schools just don't have to deal with kids whose parent's think they are perfect, and/or will just grow out of their problems.

[Anonymous]

I think the percentage of parents who are completely dismissive about their child's issues, perceived or not, when the consequence could result in being counseled out...is VERY SMALL. Most parents would never want to place themselves in a situation where their child is sure to be counseled out and will whatever it takes to keep him in school. Saying 'thats just how my child is' or 'he'll grow out of it' are not dismissive comments. Oftentimes comments like this are used to explain a child's behavior when a parent just does not know what else to say or do. And it may not be a lie either.
I think I represent the typical parent whose kindergartener is being counseled out and I have hardly been dismissive. In fact, we were told by their incompetent school psychologist that our child is developmentally delayed by a couple of years and that he has significant issues. Well, not according to the psychiatrist we saw and not according to a developmental pediatrician we saw. The school and particularly the teacher stressed him out so much he was at his worst. And it is strange that schools are more apt to work with learning issues but not beh issues as most learning issues are neurological based and harder to 'fix' or work with and require much more ongoing oversight whereas beh issues require coaching and beh therapy and are generally easier to fix.

[Anonymous]

I think you made a good point about parents being dismissive about bad behavior and saying, "That's just how little Johnny is--he'll grow out of it." Perhaps the parents are right. But you have to remember that no one will ever think your child is as cute as you do--especially when they are paying $30K a year in tuition. They will just find the bad behavior annoying and/or disturbing. You should also remember that "little Johnny" is not being privately tutored, he is in a classroom setting with several other kids who need attention too. And the teacher cannot disrupt the learning of the other 20 children just to focus on "little Johnny" all the time. It's not fair to the teacher, the other students, or the other parents.

I also agree that some--not all--parents are aware of their children's issues before they start school. And while some parents are up front with the school, others are selfish and do not inform the school during the application process.

Anonymous wrote:I posted earlier, and referred to this, but I wanted to reemphasize that the distinction I see between kids who are counseled out at a young age, and those that are not, is how seriously the parents take the issue. One parent told me that the school had raised concerns, and the parent was very dismissive -- that's just how my child is, he'll grow out of it, etc. That child is no longer at the school. Another parent I know has taken the issues very seriously, and has had the child tested, is working with a tutor, etc., and that child is still there. I also do see a distinction between learning issues and behavioral issues, with the school being much more willing to work on the former. Private schools just don't have to deal with kids whose parent's think they are perfect, and/or will just grow out of their problems.

[Anonymous]

I think the PP was saying some parents are dismissive AFTER being confronted with the school to do something about it (i.e. get testing, therapy, etc..). I can tell you most parents will get their child tested and put him in therapy and whatever is necessary in order to keep him in school.

But what you point out is that schools don't have to put up with annoying or disturbing behavior. That's a separate issue. And you're right, they don't. But one has to wonder if such an exclusionary policy is good for our society and especially for our children. I wonder what it teaches our children. I'm not talking about severely impacted children, I'm talking about the slightly impacted child that would be happy and do well with some minor accommodations and being around neurotyp kids. I'm wondering if it helps our society to be exclusionary or, instead, to be inclusionary.

[Anonymous]

For those who have had their DCs counseled out, did you tell your DC that the school did not invite them back? Or did you make up some sort of excuse and make it seem like it was your own family's decision (i.e. it just wan't a good fit, we needed a change of pace/scenery)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: But one has to wonder if such an exclusionary policy is good for our society and especially for our children. I wonder what it teaches our children. I'm not talking about severely impacted children, I'm talking about the slightly impacted child that would be happy and do well with some minor accommodations and being around neurotyp kids. I'm wondering if it helps our society to be exclusionary or, instead, to be inclusionary.

I think it depends on the school. For the ones that are highly selective (aka "big 3/5/10"), I think parents need to be realistic about the demands these school place on the child, and what kinds of children thrive under the pressure and scrutiny they provide, particularly in the later years. If your child has issues, do you want to put them in a situation where they are going to be constantly at the low end of the curve IN THAT ENVIRONMENT, when other, equally challenging, but less stressful situations exist?

[Anonymous]

Good point. The Big 3 schools are known as pressure cookers for DCs operating with no challenges whatsoever. They are tough academically and demand a lot from their students. That's been their reputation for decades and they are NOT going to change. They routinely reject 99% WPPSI kids and counsel out DCs in PK and K for goodness sake! There are plenty of other good schools in the DC area. So if my child had challenges, I would want her in an environment that was nurturing and accommodating to her particular needs, so she would feel good about herself. Would I love to say that she went to a Big 3 school? Sure, but I wouldn't risk brutalizing her self esteem, just so I could brag that she went to Sidwell, Beauvoir, GDS or Maret. Nor would I pretend that I'm putting her there to help schools to be more "inclusive". My child is a person with real feelings--not some martyr or sacrificial lamb.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: But one has to wonder if such an exclusionary policy is good for our society and especially for our children. I wonder what it teaches our children. I'm not talking about severely impacted children, I'm talking about the slightly impacted child that would be happy and do well with some minor accommodations and being around neurotyp kids. I'm wondering if it helps our society to be exclusionary or, instead, to be inclusionary.

I think it depends on the school. For the ones that are highly selective (aka "big 3/5/10"), I think parents need to be realistic about the demands these school place on the child, and what kinds of children thrive under the pressure and scrutiny they provide, particularly in the later years. If your child has issues, do you want to put them in a situation where they are going to be constantly at the low end of the curve IN THAT ENVIRONMENT, when other, equally challenging, but less stressful situations exist?

[Anonymous]

Has anyone heard of a school counseling out a child who was too far *ahead*? If so, what kind of school was it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good point. The Big 3 schools are known as pressure cookers for DCs operating with no challenges whatsoever. They are tough academically and demand a lot from their students. That's been their reputation for decades and they are NOT going to change. They routinely reject 99% WPPSI kids and counsel out DCs in PK and K for goodness sake! There are plenty of other good schools in the DC area.

I don't think GDS is counseling out kids after PreK or K. Are any of the other "big 3/pressure cooker" schools? I think the pressure is more at the middle and HS level. The lower schools have rich curricula and lots of opportunities for kids to do impressive work, but they aren't very demanding. Hell, at a behavioral level, they're probably less demanding than most public schools (e.g. there's more freedom of movement, more recess, fewer desks or times when kids are expected to sit and work in silence, etc. -- especially at PreK/K.
At this early stage, GDS teachers may notice issues (behavioral or learning), flag them to parents and administration, and start addressing them (the lower school has 3 learning specialists on staff), but I haven't seen them counsel kids out that early/young.

[Anonymous]

Beauvoir counseled someone out after Pre-K last year, don't know if this is a common practice for them or if this child had some obvious issue .......................

[Anonymous]

Independent School teacher here-- this sounds crazy to me. A child-centered school or program should support and nurture and develop children, unless they are in a special- needs category that the program is simply not designed to serve (ie the child truly would be better off elsewhere). I can't imagine counseling out a child with a reason for the behavior (ADD etc.) but rather working with the family and child to develop strategies and meet the needs. As for pure 'bad' behavior that affects other children, is it as common as this thread implies? I have seen it quite rarely in my career. I agree with counseling out the child whose family refuses to acknowledge a challenge that needs to be investigated or work with the school, since in that case, they are not thinking of the school OR their child (in the long-term sense). How do you move forward productively in that case?

[Anonymous]

I am the pp who mentioned "dismissive" parents.

This, from another pp, is what I was getting at: "I agree with counseling out the child whose family refuses to acknowledge a challenge that needs to be investigated or work with the school, since in that case, they are not thinking of the school OR their child (in the long-term sense). How do you move forward productively in that case?"

My mother was a teacher, and I heard many stories of parents who refused to believe THEIR child could have a problem, even when it was obvious to everyone else. I understand that everyone wants to believe the best of their child, and having had more than one parent/teacher conference myself, I certainly am aware the tolerances for behavior at private schools in this area are very narrow. However, rather than see this as purely negative criticism, I was impressed that the school had such high expectations for my child and cared enough to find ways that we could help dc grow. We have taken the issues seriously, and implemented a plan to address them, and we continue to have a great relationship with the school. Further, I can't believe how much my dc has grown and matured in the process. And, no, it has not diminished his "spirit" in any way. He's happier and has more confidence than ever.

This is from a pp -- try reading this from the school's point of view: "I think I represent the typical parent whose kindergartener is being counseled out and I have hardly been dismissive. In fact, we were told by their incompetent school psychologist that our child is developmentally delayed by a couple of years and that he has significant issues. Well, not according to the psychiatrist we saw and not according to a developmental pediatrician we saw. The school and particularly the teacher stressed him out so much he was at his worst."

Yes, there is an alternative to being dismissive, and that is to blame the school and its "incompetent" psychologist and bad teacher. Whoever is right in this case, this does not sound like a relationship that can be saved. Moving on is probably best for all concerned.