Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Please, don’t you get it? Everyone has the best math and reading kid. That’s evident.
Yeah, but a few kids actually are the best at math or reading. People on this forum don’t seem to want to acknowledge that.
Anonymous wrote:Please, don’t you get it? Everyone has the best math and reading kid. That’s evident.
Anonymous wrote:Former teacher: in all of your years of teaching, you’ve never encountered an academic outlier?
My kid likewise doesn’t have an academic peer group in math. I know this because my child’s teacher and the math specialist directly told me. The solution for my child was to take math class with a higher grade level. Theoretically, the same should be possible for PP’s kid. At the very least, higher level materials could be used for language arts instruction. There’s no point at all in instructing a kid at a level the kid has already mastered.
Anonymous wrote:Glad you don’t teach anymore!
Anonymous wrote:Former teacher: in all of your years of teaching, you’ve never encountered an academic outlier?
My kid likewise doesn’t have an academic peer group in math. I know this because my child’s teacher and the math specialist directly told me. The solution for my child was to take math class with a higher grade level. Theoretically, the same should be possible for PP’s kid. At the very least, higher level materials could be used for language arts instruction. There’s no point at all in instructing a kid at a level the kid has already mastered.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You said, “yes, exactly” to “iPP’s kid most likely does not have a peer group.” That’s what is insane. My highly gifted son (where the psychologist who administered the wisc said he is probably the brightest child in the whole school, statistically, did just fine with the dra results when he was your kid’s age. Since Iready wasn’t administered then, it didn’t apply to him before this year (which was already older than your child.) A really, really bright kid, in general, challenges himself.
What do you know about my child? He doesn't have a peer group and there isn't anything "insane" about that. My child will be "fine" as well as doesn't need a DRA score to challenge himself - all that I'm saying is that it would be nice to test for actual level or ability rather than stop at 28. I really don't understand why this makes you so angry.
Anonymous wrote:You said, “yes, exactly” to “iPP’s kid most likely does not have a peer group.” That’s what is insane. My highly gifted son (where the psychologist who administered the wisc said he is probably the brightest child in the whole school, statistically, did just fine with the dra results when he was your kid’s age. Since Iready wasn’t administered then, it didn’t apply to him before this year (which was already older than your child.) A really, really bright kid, in general, challenges himself.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Lots of kids make DRA 28 at the end of first. Some of those kids would have cleared DRA 38, 40, or even 50 if given the chance. There’s nothing wrong with wanting appropriate instruction if your child is more than 1 year above grade level. Very few first graders score level 4 on iready, so PP’s kid most likely does not have a peer group.
Yes, exactly, thank you. Hitting 28 doesn't tell me anything.
Translation= I agree with everyone who thinks my child doesn’t have a peer group in intelligence.![]()