Do you have an ADHD or aspergers child in a mainstream private?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't understand why people try to bucket Aspergers and ADHD together. An Aspergers kid is going to be a lot more disruptive, high maintenance, than an ADHD child. I have a child with ADHD and he is no longer medicated, and is a straight A student in a private high school in DC. He does get some minimal accommodations like extended time for tests and preferential seating.

As for Aspergers, I know several children with this disorder, and I can tell you it is rare that they would do well in a mainstream environment. The two disorders are very different.

This is the unfortunate spread of ignorance regarding these children. Yes, some high functioning autistic children (Aspie is no longer a diagnostic category) will not do well in mainstream at young ages, but if the diagnosis is accurate most will do well in mainstream classrooms eventually so long as there is no comorbidity, such as ADD or it is also controlled. I have seen ADD kids be just as or far more disruptive as some not so high functioning Austistoc spectrum kids, and others well medicated whom you would not guess are ADD. And I know kids with HFA diagnosis who have brought up the level of discourse in later elementary year classes and beyond, and to the outside world appear to have essentially outgrown the diagnosis. An autistic child with severe sensory issues, a need for repetitive behaviors, resistance to changes and very concrete language will have trouble in a mainstream class. But plenty of HFA kids - especially as they get to mid-later elementary years deal well with issues. The biggest lingering issue for hen is unstructured social dynamics -- lunch, recess, and - depending on the school - gyms and specials if teachers provide minimal structure. The classroom for these kids is a safe haven - rules can be established more clearly and expectations. They can do well in mainstream eventually. Almost by definition, So called Aspie kids are often quite bright. The bottom line is that children are all developmentally different. Labels can be helpful to the well informed parent, educator or therapist as a heads up of what to look about for, but they can be very misleading when bantered about by those who who are less informed.

Unfortunately, many private school educators are not nearly as well informed about HFA as they should be. I have seen instances where they have accepted Kids not early as high functioning on the spectrum and don't know the kids are on the spectrum ( the same may be true for the parents), then turned away far higher functioning kids where the parents were really on top of the child's issues with therapies outside of school. It is ashame.

to the PP above : I can tell you why this is happening:

1) parents apply to many NW DC privates either in denial of their child's needs for extensive support or intentionally concealing that info from the schools they apply to

2) the pre-schools often, to a man, do NOT share with the applicant school in an informed way ( sorry, but it is a lie to say a child's social behavior is in " developing" stage when he self stims all day long and throws tantrums.

08:11 PP here. I'm sure there is truth in this, but there is another reason why it happens, too: laziness on the part of school admissions people, as in assuming that the child who has received support has a bigger problem and is thus less able to handle their school, while also assuming that the child who hasn't received it hasn't needed it. Often it's the case that the child who has received support is actually better prepared because of it.

When schools punish the parents who deal with their children's issues and reward those who don't, they create incentives for the parents accordingly. They are implicitly telling the parents -- don't get help for your kid, and if you do, don't tell us about it. If the schools want parents to be up front with them, they should reward rather than punish the interventions, but many of them do exactly the opposite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:for all of you recommending Field, am interested in where all the kids with Aspergers, etc are at Field-- there are not many. A few, but the classes are by no means filled with kids on the spectrum.

How do you know? I think the point of this thread is that kids on the spectrum don't look a certain, uniform way.

Are you seriously going to tell me that behavior-wise kids with Aspergers are hard to spot in a classroom or other social setting. Maybe some are, but I would bet most you can tell after some interaction.

Actually it looks like the parents of kids with Asperger's at least on this thread don't think Field is a good fit due to the academics specifically the not particularly challenging math curriculum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:for all of you recommending Field, am interested in where all the kids with Aspergers, etc are at Field-- there are not many. A few, but the classes are by no means filled with kids on the spectrum.

The admissions team at Field told us that Field may be Ok for kids with mild issues (presumably like ADD) but is not the place for kids with more serious LDs; Lab School may be more appropriate in that case. Call them and ask - they were very upfront about it when asked.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:for all of you recommending Field, am interested in where all the kids with Aspergers, etc are at Field-- there are not many. A few, but the classes are by no means filled with kids on the spectrum.

The admissions team at Field told us that Field may be Ok for kids with mild issues (presumably like ADD) but is not the place for kids with more serious LDs; Lab School may be more appropriate in that case. Call them and ask - they were very upfront about it when asked.

Lab does not take kids on the spectrum -- they are a great example of admissions offices/educators who should know better than to paint all diagnoses with a broad brush, yet make decisions based on stereotypes.

But, yes, for kids with more significant academic challenges, Lab would be more appropriate than Field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:for all of you recommending Field, am interested in where all the kids with Aspergers, etc are at Field-- there are not many. A few, but the classes are by no means filled with kids on the spectrum.

The admissions team at Field told us that Field may be Ok for kids with mild issues (presumably like ADD) but is not the place for kids with more serious LDs; Lab School may be more appropriate in that case. Call them and ask - they were very upfront about it when asked.

Lab does not take kids on the spectrum -- they are a great example of admissions offices/educators who should know better than to paint all diagnoses with a broad brush, yet make decisions based on stereotypes.

But, yes, for kids with more significant academic challenges, Lab would be more appropriate than Field.

Lab specializes in learning disabilities and not Asperger's where the primary issue is with social communication and pragmatics so it serves a specific niche. Not every SN school can serve every SN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:for all of you recommending Field, am interested in where all the kids with Aspergers, etc are at Field-- there are not many. A few, but the classes are by no means filled with kids on the spectrum.

The admissions team at Field told us that Field may be Ok for kids with mild issues (presumably like ADD) but is not the place for kids with more serious LDs; Lab School may be more appropriate in that case. Call them and ask - they were very upfront about it when asked.

Lab does not take kids on the spectrum -- they are a great example of admissions offices/educators who should know better than to paint all diagnoses with a broad brush, yet make decisions based on stereotypes.

But, yes, for kids with more significant academic challenges, Lab would be more appropriate than Field.

Lab specializes in learning disabilities and not Asperger's where the primary issue is with social communication and pragmatics so it serves a specific niche. Not every SN school can serve every SN.

Right, but some kids have both, and many kids with language-based learning disabilities (Lab's specialty) have pragmatic weaknesses. But Lab still has a blanket rule that doesn't take into account the specific needs of specific students. But this is a topic for another thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:for all of you recommending Field, am interested in where all the kids with Aspergers, etc are at Field-- there are not many. A few, but the classes are by no means filled with kids on the spectrum.

The admissions team at Field told us that Field may be Ok for kids with mild issues (presumably like ADD) but is not the place for kids with more serious LDs; Lab School may be more appropriate in that case. Call them and ask - they were very upfront about it when asked.

Lab does not take kids on the spectrum -- they are a great example of admissions offices/educators who should know better than to paint all diagnoses with a broad brush, yet make decisions based on stereotypes.

But, yes, for kids with more significant academic challenges, Lab would be more appropriate than Field.

Lab specializes in learning disabilities and not Asperger's where the primary issue is with social communication and pragmatics so it serves a specific niche. Not every SN school can serve every SN.

Right, but some kids have both, and many kids with language-based learning disabilities (Lab's specialty) have pragmatic weaknesses. But Lab still has a blanket rule that doesn't take into account the specific needs of specific students. But this is a topic for another thread.

And yet we know a child with a spectrum diagnosis who attends Lab. So who knows how these things work in practice.

[Anonymous]

This discussion reminds me of advice I often give to parents with kids who are exceptional for one reason or another, and that's to give a close look at some of the schools that aren't uber-competitive and swimming in surplus applications.

Someone might say, "well, duh, their admissions standards are lower," but that's not what I mean. Often it's the case that the top-tier schools aren't able to give as discerning a look at those in their applicant pool who might be a bit off the beaten path. This is a well-established phenomenon in behavioral science -- whether it's online dating, choosing food off a menu, or a school admissions office -- the more choices one has, the more one tends to filter down the choices according to superficial criteria, and consequently not make the best ones. We all do it, schools included.

So if you want your kid to go to a school that appreciates specifically what they can bring to it it's often a good play to go to a less selective one -- not because the admissions standards are lower but because they can take a closer look and enable you to find that optimal match.

I've seen this phenomenon at work in the professional world as well. I hired away two incredible talents who were angling for jobs at a longer-established, more historically prestigious shop than mine. They couldn't even get a look there because the other shop was much more focused on choosing from the big names that were applying and not looking as closely at future productivity. They didn't know what they had sitting on their doorstep. I did. My friends over there have since wondered how they let these two get away, but the fact is they weren't looking closely enough.

Schools do this, too. Often it's the uber-competitive schools that don't realize what kind of talent is coming in their door because they have to use sweeping, superficial criteria to narrow down the list of possible acceptances. This creates an opportunity for other institutions, and some of them use it to build some terrific classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

3) parents maybe use a hook for one school or look at cost when really what their kid needs is Field or Burke but they are in denial

Sorry, but why do folks think just because Field and Burke are known for having quirky kids, that kids with any issues should go there? I don't think these schools are filled with kids who are on the spectrum or who have LDs. I think the folks recommending this have no idea what they are talking about and just want to make sure their precious kids in the Top 5?? don't get brought into the discussion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This discussion reminds me of advice I often give to parents with kids who are exceptional for one reason or another, and that's to give a close look at some of the schools that aren't uber-competitive and swimming in surplus applications.

Someone might say, "well, duh, their admissions standards are lower," but that's not what I mean. Often it's the case that the top-tier schools aren't able to give as discerning a look at those in their applicant pool who might be a bit off the beaten path. This is a well-established phenomenon in behavioral science -- whether it's online dating, choosing food off a menu, or a school admissions office -- the more choices one has, the more one tends to filter down the choices according to superficial criteria, and consequently not make the best ones. We all do it, schools included.

So if you want your kid to go to a school that appreciates specifically what they can bring to it it's often a good play to go to a less selective one -- not because the admissions standards are lower but because they can take a closer look and enable you to find that optimal match.

I've seen this phenomenon at work in the professional world as well. I hired away two incredible talents who were angling for jobs at a longer-established, more historically prestigious shop than mine. They couldn't even get a look there because the other shop was much more focused on choosing from the big names that were applying and not looking as closely at future productivity. They didn't know what they had sitting on their doorstep. I did. My friends over there have since wondered how they let these two get away, but the fact is they weren't looking closely enough.

Schools do this, too. Often it's the uber-competitive schools that don't realize what kind of talent is coming in their door because they have to use sweeping, superficial criteria to narrow down the list of possible acceptances. This creates an opportunity for other institutions, and some of them use it to build some terrific classes.

Very well put, as illustrated my DC who is shining at an elite university but did not attend a Big X private.

[Anonymous]

We know lots of kids at top privates here in DC (Sidwell, STA, GDS, etc...) who have ADD and ADHD but they are, of course, medicated. You would never know they had a diagnosis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:for all of you recommending Field, am interested in where all the kids with Aspergers, etc are at Field-- there are not many. A few, but the classes are by no means filled with kids on the spectrum.

The admissions team at Field told us that Field may be Ok for kids with mild issues (presumably like ADD) but is not the place for kids with more serious LDs; Lab School may be more appropriate in that case. Call them and ask - they were very upfront about it when asked.

Lab does not take kids on the spectrum -- they are a great example of admissions offices/educators who should know better than to paint all diagnoses with a broad brush, yet make decisions based on stereotypes.

But, yes, for kids with more significant academic challenges, Lab would be more appropriate than Field.

Lab specializes in learning disabilities and not Asperger's where the primary issue is with social communication and pragmatics so it serves a specific niche. Not every SN school can serve every SN.

Right, but some kids have both, and many kids with language-based learning disabilities (Lab's specialty) have pragmatic weaknesses. But Lab still has a blanket rule that doesn't take into account the specific needs of specific students. But this is a topic for another thread.

And yet we know a child with a spectrum diagnosis who attends Lab. So who knows how these things work in practice.

And they are probably in an older grade. Lab use to take kids on the spectrum but then they changed their mission to focus on learning disabilities.

[Anonymous]

There are a lot of boys (but not really girls) at Norwood who seem to be medicated, and /or officially undiagnosed low-level Aspergers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:for all of you recommending Field, am interested in where all the kids with Aspergers, etc are at Field-- there are not many. A few, but the classes are by no means filled with kids on the spectrum.

The admissions team at Field told us that Field may be Ok for kids with mild issues (presumably like ADD) but is not the place for kids with more serious LDs; Lab School may be more appropriate in that case. Call them and ask - they were very upfront about it when asked.

Lab does not take kids on the spectrum -- they are a great example of admissions offices/educators who should know better than to paint all diagnoses with a broad brush, yet make decisions based on stereotypes.

But, yes, for kids with more significant academic challenges, Lab would be more appropriate than Field.

Lab specializes in learning disabilities and not Asperger's where the primary issue is with social communication and pragmatics so it serves a specific niche. Not every SN school can serve every SN.

Right, but some kids have both, and many kids with language-based learning disabilities (Lab's specialty) have pragmatic weaknesses. But Lab still has a blanket rule that doesn't take into account the specific needs of specific students. But this is a topic for another thread.

And yet we know a child with a spectrum diagnosis who attends Lab. So who knows how these things work in practice.

And they are probably in an older grade. Lab use to take kids on the spectrum but then they changed their mission to focus on learning disabilities.

That may be. They practically chased me away from their table at the Exceptional Schools Fair about 8 years ago, but there could be high school kids. Although I've heard that the policy wasn't hard and fast.

[Anonymous]

Ron Suskind in his book, Life Animated, wrote about Lab changing its mission.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1423180364?keywords=ron%20suskind%20life%20animated&qid=1455850841&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1