Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

but for the grace of God go you? who are these people? the truth is tough to deal with sometimes...

I'm not that PP, but you really have no idea what the "truth" of anyone else's situation is so yeah, you do sound very smug. Does that hurt?

Uh, no?

Says a lot about you. I get it - it's easier to flame parents you don't know and insult their children than to engage in an intelligent conversation about the issues.

Sorry if you were offended. DCUM is a place where all perspectives are shared and people don't always agree to see eye to eye. Isn't it also flame behavior to be passive aggressive and harass people for being "exceptionally smug." Let's get back to the poster's original question.

Well, when your "perspective" is based on. . . .well, nothing, it's not worth much is it? How convenient that you now want to get back to the "original question" because you have been called out for essentially attacking a stranger's child on the internet, i.e. "the truth hurts." The truth of what? Your assumption that that poster's kid has "problems?" That was a lame move, you know it, and now you're being defensive. Sorry if I struck a nerve, honey.

I would actually like one intelligent person on here to address the substance of my arguments at 12:37 yesterday. Three pages later and all we have are people nit-picking the size of various programs (when really, the ratios are the same) and attacking children and their parents on the basis of absolutely nothing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

but for the grace of God go you? who are these people? the truth is tough to deal with sometimes...

I'm not that PP, but you really have no idea what the "truth" of anyone else's situation is so yeah, you do sound very smug. Does that hurt?

Uh, no?

Says a lot about you. I get it - it's easier to flame parents you don't know and insult their children than to engage in an intelligent conversation about the issues.

Sorry if you were offended. DCUM is a place where all perspectives are shared and people don't always agree to see eye to eye. Isn't it also flame behavior to be passive aggressive and harass people for being "exceptionally smug." Let's get back to the poster's original question.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

but for the grace of God go you? who are these people? the truth is tough to deal with sometimes...

I'm not that PP, but you really have no idea what the "truth" of anyone else's situation is so yeah, you do sound very smug. Does that hurt?

Uh, no?

Says a lot about you. I get it - it's easier to flame parents you don't know and insult their children than to engage in an intelligent conversation about the issues.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

Let me guess, you have one of those "GT" kids and these darn teachers and schools don't seem to grasp how smart and unstimulated he is. But for the grace of God go you, my dear.

You know, I find it astounding that you and the other nasties on here find it impossible to engage in the meat of the arguments that have been presented. All you can do is insult children you've never met on the basis of some offhand comments. Says a lot about why the systems don't work for many kids and why, despite "reform" so many schools continue to fail. I was educated in public schools and have watched their downfall for 25 years as results on standardized tests have trumped common sense. I've always been a staunch advocate for public education but I just have to give up, because the will is not there to focus on what is best for children versus what is best for the adults making policy. I don't have time to allow my child to be a guinea pig, so chances are strong that once we move home we will be going private or parochial so we can find the right school, with the right philosophy for our child, instead of some artificial flavor (i.e. charter X vs. charter Y vs. public Z) of the same tired model. Again, if you want to be a sheep engaged in binary thinking (good kids/bad kids, smart kids/dumb kids), and insist that if they aren't succeeding in the current system it is their fault or the fault of their parents, you go for it. But a growing number of us are rejecting the entire system based on the fact that its foundational premises are deeply flawed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

but for the grace of God go you? who are these people? the truth is tough to deal with sometimes...

I'm not that PP, but you really have no idea what the "truth" of anyone else's situation is so yeah, you do sound very smug. Does that hurt?

Uh, no?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

Let me guess, you have one of those "GT" kids and these darn teachers and schools don't seem to grasp how smart and unstimulated he is. But for the grace of God go you, my dear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

but for the grace of God go you? who are these people? the truth is tough to deal with sometimes...

I'm not that PP, but you really have no idea what the "truth" of anyone else's situation is so yeah, you do sound very smug. Does that hurt?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

but for the grace of God go you? who are these people? the truth is tough to deal with sometimes...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at Yu Ying that does not have prek3. For prek4, 19:3. For k, 17:3. Very happy.

That is great, but obviously the exception. And you are all getting hung up on the issue of ratios and ignoring completely the real basis of my original arguments. I'm the only one concerned about these issues? I don't think so, based on some of the earlier posts about kids being labeled as "problems" or "G&T" that I was responding to. This stuff goes on all the time - just go peruse the SN board to see all the parents whose preschoolers have IEPs. Preschoolers develop at wildly different rates, and I don't think the system is set up to allow for that.

If you stay around on the SN board, you'll find most people even in DC are pretty happy with Childfind and early intervention services. So much so that it all seems downhill from there once they have to rely on schools as the LEA. Preschoolers who have IEPs need them and free services and supports which an IEP provides are not given out willy-nilly or on a whim. IEPs are hard to get, costs the school system money and certainly the fact that "preschoolers develope at wildly different rates" are taken into account before an IEP is offered.

Well, in our case, I think the situation has been greatly overblown and that the school has been too inflexible in the classroom I.e. insisting on participation in every activity, free play that isn't free (the kids are assigned to centers in groups), etc. I used to work in a school and even at kindergarten, many kids have trouble staying on task, have off days where they don't want to participate and the like. I am of the opinion that none of this warrants "intervention.". It warrants teachers who can work with each child instead of enforcing rules, regulations, schedules, etc.

So the school suggested "interventions" but you think the issues are overblown. Well, good luck! Hopefully, a smaller class size with more flexible teachers and maturity/time will resolves all your kid's issues.

However, if your next school suggests "interventions", it's probably a good idea to take their advice rather than just changing to another school.

We did take their advice, so you can quit being a bitch now. I am my child's mother, I know him best, we've gotten all kinds of conflicting information, and my instincts tell me something is off. My child is largely no different from other children I know in different settings who are thriving with more attention and a chance to develop at their own pace, instead of according to some institutional guidelines that insist all kids fit the mold. If you want to be a sheep who goes through life entrusting your child's well being entirely to the opinions of others, knock yourself out. I'm not a sheep, and I will continue to think for myself, challenge things in that trouble me, and fight for what's best for my kid. You do it your way, I'll do it mine. I'm so sick of these debates with people like you.

Another smug poster. There but by the grace of God go you smug poster. Say your prayers that you don't find yourself in the same situation as PP. Until you experience the same situation, you are better of keeping quiet. You may eat your words one day.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:uh huh. sounds like your kid was a problem, not a solution

+1. It's easier to think that your kid is GT than admit there is a problem.

Behavioral problems / G&T are two totally separate things, and one has little to do with nor is explained away by the other.

Not really. See the other poster above who describes a child with a high iq who was bored and probably understimulated at school.
Also, that wasn't my point. The above poster is probably a legit issue, but I feel like some parents seem to explain away behavior problems by believing that their kid is gifted. That often isn't the case and the school get blamed because the parent is in denial. Am I off base here?

Yes. You are off base and exceptionally smug about it. But for by the grace of God go you...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at Yu Ying that does not have prek3. For prek4, 19:3. For k, 17:3. Very happy.

That is great, but obviously the exception. And you are all getting hung up on the issue of ratios and ignoring completely the real basis of my original arguments. I'm the only one concerned about these issues? I don't think so, based on some of the earlier posts about kids being labeled as "problems" or "G&T" that I was responding to. This stuff goes on all the time - just go peruse the SN board to see all the parents whose preschoolers have IEPs. Preschoolers develop at wildly different rates, and I don't think the system is set up to allow for that.

If you stay around on the SN board, you'll find most people even in DC are pretty happy with Childfind and early intervention services. So much so that it all seems downhill from there once they have to rely on schools as the LEA. Preschoolers who have IEPs need them and free services and supports which an IEP provides are not given out willy-nilly or on a whim. IEPs are hard to get, costs the school system money and certainly the fact that "preschoolers develope at wildly different rates" are taken into account before an IEP is offered.

Well, in our case, I think the situation has been greatly overblown and that the school has been too inflexible in the classroom I.e. insisting on participation in every activity, free play that isn't free (the kids are assigned to centers in groups), etc. I used to work in a school and even at kindergarten, many kids have trouble staying on task, have off days where they don't want to participate and the like. I am of the opinion that none of this warrants "intervention.". It warrants teachers who can work with each child instead of enforcing rules, regulations, schedules, etc.

So the school suggested "interventions" but you think the issues are overblown. Well, good luck! Hopefully, a smaller class size with more flexible teachers and maturity/time will resolves all your kid's issues.

However, if your next school suggests "interventions", it's probably a good idea to take their advice rather than just changing to another school.

We did take their advice, so you can quit being a bitch now. I am my child's mother, I know him best, we've gotten all kinds of conflicting information, and my instincts tell me something is off. My child is largely no different from other children I know in different settings who are thriving with more attention and a chance to develop at their own pace, instead of according to some institutional guidelines that insist all kids fit the mold. If you want to be a sheep who goes through life entrusting your child's well being entirely to the opinions of others, knock yourself out. I'm not a sheep, and I will continue to think for myself, challenge things in that trouble me, and fight for what's best for my kid. You do it your way, I'll do it mine. I'm so sick of these debates with people like you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Of course I do. Why on earth wouldn't it be healthy? The school is fine with it, and my child has met or exceeded all of the standards, such as they are, for PS-3. What's the problem?

I'm surprised your school allows you to do this. Absenteeism rules are pretty clear for DCPS, and I don't see anywhere that there is any exception for PS3. Since PS3 is not guaranteed, your child should have been expelled by now if the school were following the rules.

It's a charter school, not DCPS, and absences don't count against the school's rating until PK4, so the school doesn't care at all. And I can't for the life of me think why you or anyone else would care. As noted somewhere upthread, kids in PS-3 are out constantly. I still don't get why you think it's not healthy.

I am the 1st person that questioned your stance, the others have been new posters. I think this is wrong on so many levels. Please don't give me that "this is what my tax dollars pay for". No it's not. Free PS was started for kids that actually need it to be on even playing field with privileged kids at the K level. Your tax dollars are the same as somebody from CT (which pays more state per capita than us). You are getting a $20k private education for free (worth far more than your property taxes). The fact that you don't have the decency to consider your kid's classmates and and continuity astounds me. You are a privileged POS. If your kid is not ready for school then keep him/her home, don't use the system to satisfy your personal needs. I dare you to mention your charter's name. I promise you that the charter board would take great issue if this were true. At my highly regarded charter, the school stresses the importance of attendance for the PS kid. In fact, classmates have received special letters once they received 4 unexcused absences.

Wow, it doesn't take much to get you riled up! There were two posters who questioned me, one who said it wasn't healthy, and the other who got in a huff about absenteeism rules at DCPS. I am genuinely curious about why you would think it's not healthy to give your kid a mental health break now and then, with the full blessing of their teachers and the administration. I think it's funny that you think the PCSB would take issue with it, but I'll take my chances.

It's nice to think about the good old days when preschool was set up for low-income people in DC, but that ship has sailed if you hadn't noticed. Perhaps you didn't see the DCUM thread in which people were routinely reporting household incomes of 200-400K; I think it's fair to say that an awful lot of people are using the system to satisfy their personal needs. Obviously I'm not at your highly regarded charter; I'm sure that whatever the three-year-olds are doing there requires near-perfect attendance by all students in order for the program to be successful. That is not the case at our charter, needless to say. I did say in my original post that we would not want to pull our kid out if the program was more structured, which will be the case for us next year.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Of course I do. Why on earth wouldn't it be healthy? The school is fine with it, and my child has met or exceeded all of the standards, such as they are, for PS-3. What's the problem?

I'm surprised your school allows you to do this. Absenteeism rules are pretty clear for DCPS, and I don't see anywhere that there is any exception for PS3. Since PS3 is not guaranteed, your child should have been expelled by now if the school were following the rules.

It's a charter school, not DCPS, and absences don't count against the school's rating until PK4, so the school doesn't care at all. And I can't for the life of me think why you or anyone else would care. As noted somewhere upthread, kids in PS-3 are out constantly. I still don't get why you think it's not healthy.

I am the 1st person that questioned your stance, the others have been new posters. I think this is wrong on so many levels. Please don't give me that "this is what my tax dollars pay for". No it's not. Free PS was started for kids that actually need it to be on even playing field with privileged kids at the K level. Your tax dollars are the same as somebody from CT (which pays more state per capita than us). You are getting a $20k private education for free (worth far more than your property taxes). The fact that you don't have the decency to consider your kid's classmates and and continuity astounds me. You are a privileged POS. If your kid is not ready for school then keep him/her home, don't use the system to satisfy your personal needs. I dare you to mention your charter's name. I promise you that the charter board would take great issue if this were true. At my highly regarded charter, the school stresses the importance of attendance for the PS kid. In fact, classmates have received special letters once they received 4 unexcused absences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are at Yu Ying that does not have prek3. For prek4, 19:3. For k, 17:3. Very happy.

That is great, but obviously the exception. And you are all getting hung up on the issue of ratios and ignoring completely the real basis of my original arguments. I'm the only one concerned about these issues? I don't think so, based on some of the earlier posts about kids being labeled as "problems" or "G&T" that I was responding to. This stuff goes on all the time - just go peruse the SN board to see all the parents whose preschoolers have IEPs. Preschoolers develop at wildly different rates, and I don't think the system is set up to allow for that.

If you stay around on the SN board, you'll find most people even in DC are pretty happy with Childfind and early intervention services. So much so that it all seems downhill from there once they have to rely on schools as the LEA. Preschoolers who have IEPs need them and free services and supports which an IEP provides are not given out willy-nilly or on a whim. IEPs are hard to get, costs the school system money and certainly the fact that "preschoolers develope at wildly different rates" are taken into account before an IEP is offered.

Well, in our case, I think the situation has been greatly overblown and that the school has been too inflexible in the classroom I.e. insisting on participation in every activity, free play that isn't free (the kids are assigned to centers in groups), etc. I used to work in a school and even at kindergarten, many kids have trouble staying on task, have off days where they don't want to participate and the like. I am of the opinion that none of this warrants "intervention.". It warrants teachers who can work with each child instead of enforcing rules, regulations, schedules, etc.

So the school suggested "interventions" but you think the issues are overblown. Well, good luck! Hopefully, a smaller class size with more flexible teachers and maturity/time will resolves all your kid's issues.

However, if your next school suggests "interventions", it's probably a good idea to take their advice rather than just changing to another school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Of course I do. Why on earth wouldn't it be healthy? The school is fine with it, and my child has met or exceeded all of the standards, such as they are, for PS-3. What's the problem?

I'm surprised your school allows you to do this. Absenteeism rules are pretty clear for DCPS, and I don't see anywhere that there is any exception for PS3. Since PS3 is not guaranteed, your child should have been expelled by now if the school were following the rules.

It's a charter school, not DCPS, and absences don't count against the school's rating until PK4, so the school doesn't care at all. And I can't for the life of me think why you or anyone else would care. As noted somewhere upthread, kids in PS-3 are out constantly. I still don't get why you think it's not healthy.