Reply to Structured/traditional vs Progressive school for adhd/anxiety

Forum Index » Kids With Special Needs and Disabilities

Reply to "Structured/traditional vs Progressive school for adhd/anxiety"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]My child has anxiety but not the ADHD piece, so our experience isn't directly comparable but might still be useful. I'm going to incorporate experiences of some friends who do have ADHD kiddos into this, though.

We started at a progressive private that sounded GREAT on paper. And we were among the fortunate ones whose child did learn to read seeming through osmosis. Which is good, because the school proudly uses the Lucy Calkins curriculum, that doesn't explicitly teach reading or phonics, so for kids who need more than to just be handed a book, it's straight to tutors. So many kids end up with tutors in the early grades for reading, it's crazy looking back on it.

And child-led sounded great. But it turns out it wasn't so child led, there was a lot of explicit and implicit pressure from the teachers to choose a certain thing, but you kind of had to guess what that was (Ms Jenny wants you to choose a service project...no, let's not do one about nature...no, not about animals...Ms Jenny strongly wants you to suggest something about the homeless population but is just waiting for that answer to come up from someone so she can run with it), which was super stressful for my anxious kid. And it has been insanely stressful for friends with kids who don't read social cues easily or quickly and don't get what they're "supposed" to choose for their project until the teacher somewhat disapprovingly tells them their topic isn't approved.

And developmentally appropriate sounds great, until you realize that your fourth grader never learned long division or multiple digit multiplication, because they "wait for sixth grade" on that, even though it means they're two years behind public schools. And you realize that "we focus on a conceptual understanding rather than memorization" means your child learned five strategies for solving 7x6, but can't just quickly recall the answer, making long division extremely painful when you do get there. Or you have a kid with dyscalculia for whom memorization and formulas are a lifeline.

Also be aware that progressive private schools have a *lot* of group work - it's almost exclusive group work, in our experience. This is incredibly hard for kids who might prefer to work on their own sometimes, be it because of anxiety or ADHD or social difficulties or something else.

Finally, we found that just as the school didn't do much to differentiate instruction for kids who were struggling (hence the tutoring), they were also unwilling to differentiate for kids who needed more. There was no option to move ahead or do harder work. The school said they did great with highly gifted kids, but that wasn't true in practice.

In short, our progressive private, one of the top ranked in our state, does very well with kids who fit in the fairly small mold they want; kids outside that struggle or choose to leave for an environment that fits them better.

I'm still a believer in the educational philosophy they claim to follow. But I've also come to realize that to do it well requires your teachers be incredible across the board. Ours were probably mostly above average, but that wasn't enough. We moved our daughter for middle school and wish we had done it sooner. She's thriving with more structure and more differentiation and stronger core academics.

Parochial schools can be strict, cold, and inflexible, but they can also be warm and supportive and structured but flexible. If yours is the later I would absolutely go with that.[/quote]

All of this! I've never been able to understand why parents will voluntarily choose a private school that fails to meet their child's needs in something as fundamental as reading. To pay all that money and not get a core competency seems bonkers to me. And "child-led" is often more of an aspiration than a reality--it only works if the kids are smart, flexible, natural polymaths and the teachers are really talented.

Often times parents think they want "child-led" but really, they want their child to learn certain things (such as reading! and math!) and that's actually more important to them than "child-led" when push comes to shove. They think their child will learn those things in a child-led environment, but if the kid isn't into it, it takes a lot of social pressure from teachers to make it happen. Honestly some children (and adults) are a lot happier with straightforward explicit requirements rather than the indirect social pressure approach. [/quote]

oftentimes it's just basic snob appeal and not wanting to be around non-White kids. [/quote]

Very untrue, our "progressive" school that sounds pretty similar to what OP described went out of its way to put in racial justice and equity everywhere - my child was younger at the time, but basically we were told that Goldilocks is racist because the girl in it is blonde and it codifies a white standard of beauty, hence we need to change how we tell it to children. My kiddo is half brown and English is not his first language, but I thought it was just way too woke for me.  So if you had any exposure to "progressive" schools you would know it's not about eliminating interaction with a certain racial group.[/quote]

I don't agree.  What is the % of Brown and Black kids is progressive vs MCPS? There is your answer.  And yes, you do need to interrogate the way children's stories are told and how they uphold Western std of beauty. Unless you have internalized much of this yourself.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics