"As parents, our task is ..."

"As parents, our task is to discover who our child is 

and help the child find his own profession."

pg. 81, Misdiagnosis and Dual Diagnosis of Gifted Children and Adults, 

James T. Webb, et al

Admitting your child might be different, be it learning disabled or gifted, is difficult.  With programs like "No Child Left Behind," however, it has become much more acceptable to have a learning disabled child, and those who are intellectually or creatively gifted are seen as "weird" or "freaks."  Oftentimes parents are blamed for making their children the way they are by allowing them access to knowledge and learning at a young age.  A parent can no more make their child gifted by beginning to teach them at an early age than another parent can make their child disabled by not teaching them young.  In fact, it may be hard to believe, but most parents do not wish any differences upon their children at all, because our society sees differences of any kind (other than talent in sports) as a disadvantage.  There may be pressure, on both the child and the parents, to make the child conform to what society sees as "normal," be it through discipline, therapy or medication.  Webb, et al. states that "the attempt to give gifted children a 'normal' life and a 'normal' upbringing is like trying to make a giraffe act more like a horse -- an experience that is painful for all involved" (pg. 64).  Yet it is these differences, an integral part of who your child is, that may make up some of the more unique aspects of his or her personality.  If your child is not different in the same way that mine is, no offense is meant if/when I make generalizations or comments about groups of children.  If you have a child who is different from "normal," however he or she may be different, know that there are others out there who understand.  I hope my speaking out about the struggles we have parenting SC gives you confidence to do the same.

After one horrific piano lesson in early December 2012, I called SC's pediatrician in tears and made an appointment for an "11:30 consultation."  SC had just spent the entire lesson rolling around on the floor under the piano, jumping unrhythmically on purpose off the beats, answering questions about letters incorrectly (also on purpose), and just generally refusing to follow any of the teacher's instructions.  It may seem that she was just acting like a typical four-year-old, but the problem was she was capable of playing the piece the teacher had asked her to play.  In fact, when she finally played it (for the first time ever, after seeing the teacher play it only once, at the end of the lesson), she played it perfectly, with no mistakes.  

See, we had just moved her to private lessons, at the request of her former teacher, due to her impatience at waiting for the other children in her group lesson to catch up.  She caught on to everything her teacher had been doing so quickly, she was bored while the other kids tried to learn, and her previous teacher thought it might be a good idea if the entire lesson was focused on her.  In fact, this was a pattern that was becoming all too apparent, with piano lessons being the latest request to move SC from group lessons to private, because she understood things very quickly, and then would become bored (and inattentive, disobedient, destructive, out-of-control) while she waited for the other kids to "catch up" to where she was.

So, we made this appointment with her pediatrician, and he asked a series of questions.  We tried to give our observations, but it is hard to fit four and a half years of life with SC into a thirty minute consultation.  He said she sounded bright, but he also said he thought she had ADHD.  He then gave us  a checklist to fill out and one for each of her teachers, as well as a pamphlet about ADHD, and he said that the AAP recommends both occupational therapy/intervention plans as well as medication, and that doing both showed the best results with many patients.  

After making a follow-up for one month hence, we left the appointment dumbstruck.  ADHD was something that we had heard about, but we were not expecting him to say was SC's problem.  In fact, what we were hoping was that he would say she is not that different from all other kids her age, and maybe she is just more easily bored than others, and here is the solution to this problem.  In fact, I know I was looking for a magic answer.  A book of twelve steps to follow or a list of if...then statements that we matched up to her behaviors that made her more manageable   Instead, we left with the idea that our child might need to be medicated for the rest of her life in order to "fit in" to the acceptable social norms.  Now, I am not against all medication, and I believe that there are truly children that need to be on medication for their differences, but I also believe that parents should not swap one set of problems (the ADHD-like symptoms) for another set of problems (the side effects) that just so happen to be socially acceptable just because things are hard.  So, I did what I always do when I am faced with a problem - I started reading.

In August, I listed some books that I wanted to read as we attempt to decide which path would be the best educational path for SC, some of them about gifted children because it had been mentioned to us that SC seems to do things developmentally quicker than other children.  I thought it would be a good idea to include them, to see if they had any hints that might make our decision easier.  While  I have read some of these books in part, life tends to get in the way of our plans, and I have yet to completely finish any but the first two on the list, which are really long essays rather than books.  

However, as I attempted these past weeks to get back on track to learning about SC, I found a book called Misdiagnosis and Dual Diagnoses of Gifted Children and Adults by the author of of one of the gifted books already on my list.  This caught my eye because I had just spent over an hour with SC's preschool teacher, discussing her behavior in class, and that her teacher feels she does not have ADHD (she has been trained to recognize it, as well as gifted students through her teaching degree program and years in the public school system) but that she is even more highly advanced/gifted than we all initially thought.  She said that she believes the behavior problems are a combination of boredom and SC's emotional development still being at four years old, right where her peers are.

The authors of Misdiagnosis suggest that "as many as half of gifted children with the diagnosis of ADD/ADHD do not have the significant impairments due to attention or hyperactivity that are required ... to make an ADD/ADHD diagnosis" (pg. 37).  The problem is that many of the characteristics of children with ADHD actually can also be seen in gifted children, but the difference in the symptoms is only evident when someone asks the question "why" - why are they behaving the way they are.  For example, both a child with ADHD and a gifted child may not follow directions well, but a child with ADHD actually has trouble following them (and all rules/directions), while a gifted child is choosing not to follow certain ones after questioning their legitimacy.  Both children with ADHD and gifted children may seem unable to concentrate on tasks, but a child with ADHD has trouble focusing on all tasks that do not have immediate consequences, while a gifted child chooses not to focus on tasks they deem irrelevant or uninteresting.  It is very important to ask why a child is doing (or not doing) they thing that is causing the problem.  With SC, we already knew that the why of the behaviors was a convoluted explanation and a conscious choice on her part.  However, Misdiagnosis (and the resources I found at SENG) has opened up the possibility that this is because she is gifted rather than something needs to be "fixed."  Apparently, this is normal (for her).  

One of the solutions that the book offers to behavior problems is that "changing the environment can effectively treat many conditions" (pg. xxxiii).  The theory is that "many of these disorders [as diagnosed in gifted children] are the result of the interaction between temperament and environment" (pg. xxxiii), which is very much what SC's preschool teacher suggested.  In the preschool classroom, she has started pulling SC out for higher level work, like beginning addition, more advanced reading/phonics work.  She suggested that when we are working on homeschooling, that instead of seeing SC's desire to turn her handwriting letters into aliens or bugs as not following directions, to view them as her being creative because she is bored.  So, we cut down the handwriting to a more manageable "if you do this one line well, you can skip the next two," and it has really worked.  I get a focused, well written line of letters and she moves through it without feeling overwhelmed and bored.  We got a timer that we set for twenty minutes (that she loves to set and look at) before we start each new activity, and that has motivated her to work quickly.  If she isn't done by that time, we move on to something else and either come back to the first activity or, if her work so far was exceptional and it was clear she was bored, we don't.  We replaced her chair with an exercise ball that has kept her from bouncing all over the place (pun intended) as she tried to work on activities that require writing, be it phonics, math or handwriting.  

We have also headed in a more "unschooling" direction that is SC focused and led by her interests because, at the moment, we can do that.  She is still only four and a half years old, and she deserves play time.  I completely cut out science and French (other than videos or iPad games) and we will just wait until next year, and I am okay with that.  We took a trip to see mummies even though it cut out half of a week.  Some days we only do math, and some days we do everything.  Some days she wants to do art four times and that is okay, because then when we do get to things like phonics or handwriting, she is more interested in it and it does not feel like I am forcing her into it.

Misdiagnosis has opened up my eyes to the idea that SC is in the profoundly gifted category of children, and while that is nice to hear, it is also quite scary.  I like to joke that she is smarter than both AC and I, but it looks like it is true.  So the question becomes, what now?  Well, we went back to our pediatrician, armed with copies of resources, documentation from her preschool teacher, and ready to hear the worst - that we were "wishing" our child was gifted, but that he still felt we should try to put her on medication "just to see."  In reality, he diligently listened to our information, agreed that it is possible she fits into the profoundly gifted category of students, though she may have ADHD too.  However, his response this time was that "time will tell," and I am okay with that.  Through this brief, yet intense process, I have learned that time is the only thing that will give me an answer.  We will have to see if SC's emotional maturity levels out, or if she continues to struggle.  We talked about having her IQ tested, but he said at this point, it would just be for our own, personal reference, and to wait to spend the money if we need it for a school in the future.  Right now, we are comfortable with our decision for next year, to continue with the Mothers' Day Out's kindergarten program two days a week and do supplemental homeschooling the other three days.  We are lucky that the State of Texas does not require kindergarten and we will get another trial year before the decision seems real.  AC and I are still unsure about our long-term plans, but we may never be able to make a long-term decision with SC.  It may always be trial and error, see what will be best for her "now," and as much as I like to plan, I am okay with that.

*For anyone else who has a child who seems "ADHD" but also is displaying signs of giftedness, whether it is intellectual or talents, I would highly suggest reading the book Misdiagnosis and Dual Diagnoses of Gifted Children and Adults by James T. Webb, Ph.D., et al., as well as checking out SENG (Supporting the Emotional Needs of the Gifted), which also has quite a few resources specifically about the ADHD vs. gifted child dilemma. 

**This post contains affiliate links.  Please read my disclosure statement. 

"Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing."

"Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing."

Helen Keller, The Open Door

Some of you might have noticed that I have not posted in a little over a week, including that I missed What 2 Read Wednesday for November, and that when I did get a post up in the past month, it was either a Top Ten Tuesday list or a Thankful Thursday blurb.  Well, this past month has been fairly hectic for us as a family, and though I love blogging and am thankful that I have this outlet to publish my thoughts, ideas, photos and the like, the blog had to take a backseat to the rest of life.

Over the past month we have had the opportunity to tag along on two trips with AC, one planned and one not-so planned, as well as been able to spend time just enjoying AC being in town with family and friends for Thanksgiving.  Unfortunately, it took almost a week before leaving to get organized enough to get us all out the door on time and with all of our stuff, and took almost a week for us to recover for being gone and get everything back to normal; and then we did it all over again.  We also put in a small backsplash over Thanksgiving weekend, which I hope to post about on Tuesday with steps and pictures! 

We have NOT kept up with our homeschooling, even though I had planned for us to be able to work right up to leaving and then pick things up right away when we got back from said trips.  So, we have done maybe two days of WEEK 2, and we should be on WEEK 7ish.  AC is out of the country again, so we may be able to catch up a little, finishing WEEK 2 and WEEK 3 this week, but I am not stressing about it.  We have had a blast this last month, traveling to two new places, and with the way AC's job is, I hope there will be tag-along trips for us in the future, and the great thing about homeschooling is that it is adaptable.  I do need to figure out how to bring some of the things along with us (like math and handwriting, which really need to be done daily), but I am still figuring it out.

AC and I have made an important decision, however, about what we will do next fall when SC is officially eligible for kindergarten.  I had a long talk with her pre-k teacher about how she felt SC might do in pubic school, and we hashed out all the possible options.  She summed up her recommendations by saying "kids like [SC] just do not thrive in public school."  Well, thrive is exactly what I want for her.  After hearing that, and relaying everything she told me back to AC, we decided that for next year we will enroll her in the two-day-a-week kindergarten program that is offered by the mother's day out program that is doing her preschool, and to continue the homeschooling we have been doing (hah!) here at home.  This will also make it much easier if we get another opportunity to tag along with AC (like we are hoping to) as the amount of travel in the next year will be fairly similar to what it has been recently.  So, here we go, on our daring adventure!

"The aim of education is wisdom ..."

"The aim of education is wisdom,

and each must have the chance

to become as wise as he can."

-Robert M. Hutchins

I finally finished reading "The Great Conversation" by Robert Hutchins, even though it took me a couple of weeks, cramming in a few pages here and there while I waited on SC at dance, gymnastics and piano lessons.  Unfortunately, by the end of the day my brain is only capable of comprehending "light" reading (like romance novels), where there is nothing to think about, argue with, and there is always a happy ending.

That being said, there is quite a bit of Hutchins' argument I agree with, and some I do not.  Some of what I disagree with I think has to do with my looking in hindsight from where we are now in history (especially with the massive development of technology to what it is today) versus what Hutchins could only guess at when he first wrote in the early 1950s.

Many of Hutchins' predictions, in fact, have not turned out as he would have hoped.  One of the main arguments he makes is that an education through the liberal arts (a "liberal" education) was initially only received by those of the elite classes - people whom had both political power and leisure time.  Now, the masses have political power in that there is universal suffrage.  He also assumes that with the development of technology, more people will have more leisure time, since it will take less time to do his/her work.  Hutchins is nothing if not an optimist, striving for an ideal, and he failed to see what would become (and honestly, probably already was) the driving factor in American society: money.  Those with the most money are now able to buy the political power they need, rendering those without to be voters with no power.  When looking at the private sector, the people in charge are driven to acquire more wealth, which means that instead of more leisure time with which to acquire a liberal education, workers now work longer hours for less pay, or require multiple jobs in order to pay for necessities for their families.  Hutchins mentions that "whatever work there is should have as much meaning as possible" and that all "workmen should be artists," but a worker who goes from one minimum-wage job with no hope for advancement to another minimum-wage job with no hope for advancement, all to provide meager rations of food, clothes and a roof over his or her family is as far from an artist working a job filled with meaning as one could get.  Hutchins makes the assumption that this happens in other countries, and demands that the "statesman" should see to raising the standard of living, but it is happening here, and the "statesmen" are all to happy to turn a blind eye in return for a coin in their own pocket.  America has regressed in this area, and must find a way to get back on track.

 The advancement of technology has even gone so far (as Hutchins' correctly predicted) as making the world a much smaller place, but instead of creating a world society (as Hutchins thought might happen), American companies now are sending more and more jobs around the world, creating mass unemployment and sparking protests and riots from "educated" college graduates who have no place to work, artistically or otherwise.  Now, the "dream" every parent had for their child to get a college education seems worthless, and society is running full speed toward Hutchins' conclusion that the people's "uneducated political power is dangerous, and their uneducated leisure is degrading and will be dangerous."  Hutchins argues that society should constantly strive for the ideal, "that everybody should have the chance to have that education which will fit him for responsible democratic citizenship and which will develop his human powers to the fullest degree."  However, the society we live in now shuns education.  School (K-12) is a place where children are dumped, to keep them busy while the parents attempt to earn a living, or even to simply indulge in their own interests.  Curriculum is developed to teach to the most average student, and focuses on data, facts or skills, which can be tested through the use of a bubble-in answer form.  College is a place students go to "have experiences," including parties, sporting events, and making new friends, and eventually they must choose a major, but education in general does not interest them so they choose what they think will be the simplest path, with the least amount of work required.  Obviously this is a huge generalization, and there are many students in the upper-echelons of each and every college or university that strive toward educational excellence and wisdom, but most colleges in general are only interested in what brings them money, so their focus is also on the most average of students.  Hutchins points out that "one of the most remarkable features of American society is that the difference between the 'uneducated' and the 'educated' is so slight."  This is even more true today.  How do we reconcile what Hutchins says our society needs to be successful with where we are now?

I do agree with Hutchins' assessment that in order for democracy to work, the people need to be educated.  However, unlike Dorothy Sayers in "The Lost Tools of Learning," who specifically focuses on classical education for youth, Hutchins largely states that this education must be done after adulthood has begun, because a younger set of readers lacks the real experience required to comprehend what the great writers are saying.  He uses the example of Macbeth, by William Shakespeare, stating that a reading of the work in high school would only amount to mediocre comprehension, but a reading of the work as an adult, after having experienced marriage, would result in a much higher comprehension.  I have honestly found this to be true myself and cautioned an unmarried friend against reading Kate Chopin's The Awakening, because I felt that without the experience of marriage, much of the work would be lost to her.  However, as true as I believe this argument of Hutchins' to be, I am struggling to reconcile his belief that "every man and woman, from childhood to the grave" should receive a liberal education since he spent so much of his time arguing that young people would not understand what they are reading.  Add this to the fact that how America is now educating its young people has created adults that do not  "read great books and look at great pictures knowing very little of Plato or Cézanne, or of the influences which moulded the thought or art of these men, quite aware of their own ignorance, but in spite of it getting a lot out of what they read or see," but rather adults who relish simplistic books, simplistic or distasteful pictures, crude and lowbrow humor, music created by corporations rather than true artists, and visual media that combines the worst of these.  One of the things I loved about the Hunger Games series by Suzanne Collins was how well it mimicked American society in this respect.  How do we educate in a way that leads young people to become adults who ARE "sensible," understand "the tradition in which we live," and are able to "communicate with others who live in the same tradition and to interpret our tradition to those who do not live in it?"  Hutchins concludes that "an educational system that aims at vocational training, or social adjustment, or technological advance is not likely to lead to the kind of maturity that the present crisis demands of the most powerful nation in the world."  Remember, this is sixty years ago, and if anything, the crisis has gotten worse.  But how do we actually create and implement said system, from where we are now?

Finally, the first chunk of the essay felt to me like an infomercial on these specific books rather than a treatise on a classical education and how to create "an education [system] that draws out our common humanity rather than our individuality."  In fact, he states that to leave these books unread means to remain purposely in ignorance, an "undeveloped" human being.  He constantly refers to "these books" or "this set of books," reminding the reader that it actually is an introduction to a set of books rather than a call to arms, the arms in question being "great books" in general.  He hopes that adults reading the introduction will then read the set of books, and though he makes some great points about the state of education in American society, he provides no relief for those who agree with him.  He also assumes that if only people could read his arguments for reading the set, people would see the error of the way they have been doing things - if only it were that easy.  

If anyone has any suggestions, advice or opinions about anything I have posted here, please comment!


**This post contains affiliate links.  Please read my disclosure statement.

"We dole out lip-service to the importance of education ..."

"We dole out lip-service to the importance of education--

lip- service and, just occasionally, a little grant of money; 

we postpone the school-leaving age, and plan to build bigger and better schools; 

the teachers slave conscientiously in and out of school hours; 

and yet, as I believe, all this devoted effort is largely frustrated, 

because we have lost the tools of learning, 

and in their absence can only make a botched and piecemeal job of it."

-Dorothy Sayers, "The Lost Tools of Learning"

So far this week I have made only a little progress on my large list of books that I want to read in order to better understand my choices when it comes to educational styles.  The first article I read was Dorothy Sayers "The Lost Tools of Learning," presented by her at Oxford in 1947.

What struck me initially was that her understanding of what education had become sixty-five years ago is true today, if not more so.  She questions whether it is natural that "when the proportion of literacy ... is higher than it has ever been, people should have become susceptible to the influence of advertisement and mass propaganda to an extent hitherto unheard of and unimagined."  I wonder what she would think now think, with the technology boom of the 2000s allowing every child to have access to said "mass propaganda" at his or her whim?  She also states that this problem, coupled with modern educational methods, produces a graduate who "is less good than he or she might be at disentangling fact from opinion and the proven from the plausible."  

She speaks specifically that schools no longer teach children to think, but rather "subjects," and because of this, "intellectual skills bestowed upon us by our education are not readily transferable to subjects other than those in which we acquired them."  She goes further by stating that because of the advancement in technology (remember, this is 1947), because of this lack in their education, when students are constantly battered by words, "they do not know what the words mean; they do not know how to ward them off or blunt their edge or fling them back; they are a prey to words in their emotions instead of being the masters of them in their intellects." Our current culture has found a way to combat this, though it is a poor one -- society has drastically reduced the level of education needed to both communicate and understand the media, so far that many people not only use poor grammar and "text-speak" in their written communications, but actually supplement their spoken communication as well.  I am not ROTFL; I am horrified.

So far in the article, I agree wholeheartedly with Sayers' judgements.  One of the reasons I am second-guessing public school for SC is because my recent experiences (and those of our friends) has left me to wonder whether SC will develop into her "best" self if left to the devices of the Texas school system.  In fact, as I began to look back on my own educational career, much of the problems Sayers points out that have occurred under the modern educational system I, myself, avoided because my parents pushed me to ask questions, and when the answers were not found at school, I continued to look for them on my own by reading.  However, I am very much aware that SC is not me, and I do not really want to just take my chances that she does well for herself.

The remainder of the article Sayers breaks down her ideas for classical education, what she calls the Trivium.  While modern education is subject-focused, Sayers states that "medieval education concentrated on first forging and learning to handle the tools of learning."  It consists of three stages: Grammar, Dialectic, and Rhetoric.  The Grammar stage is based around learning language; the Dialectic stage around how to use the language, defining terms and making accurate statements; the Rhetoric stage around expressing himself through language.  For ease of quick-reading, I will summarize each stage through a bulleted list.

GRAMMAR (approx. age 9-11)

• the best grounding for education is the Latin grammar, which should be begun as early as possible
• observation and memory are most active, so anything and everything which can be committed to memory should be memorized, specifically through recitation
• students should learn a contemporary foreign language (French or German)
• focus on reading classical stories (myths, legends, etc) in poetic and narrative forms
• learn the dates, events and personalities of history and geography
• come to identify and name scientific specimens of "natural philosophy" 
• memorize the facts of math, like multiplication tables, and recognize geometrical shapes, which will lead naturally to addition and subtraction
• become acquainted with the story of God and Man in outline

DIALECTIC (approx. age 12-14)

• introduce formal logic, the art of arguing correctly
• concentrate language lessons on syntax and analysis, as well as the history of language
• focus on reading essays, arguments and criticisms, as well as attempting to write the same
• lessons should take the form of debates, and include dramatic performances rather than recitation
• advanced forms of arithmetic, algebra and geometry should be introduced as a sub-department of logic
• history should be discussion based, focusing on constitutional history and ethics
• focus to include events from student's daily life as subject of discussion and argument

RHETORIC (approx. age 14-16)

• student needs the freedom to learn what they feel they can "specialize" in
• literature should be focused on appreciation rather than criticism
• writing should be focused on self-expression rather than argument
• "subjects" will be difficult to separate
• Latin grammar may be dropped; focus can be turned to more modern languages
• each student should learn to do one or two things very well, but continue other subjects so as to continue understanding the inter-relation of all knowledge

Sayers sums up her arguments for the Trivium by mentioning that parts of this medieval method can still be seen in modern education, but states that "however firmly a tradition is rooted, if it is never watered, though it dies hard, yet in the end it dies."  She believes in order to restore our civilization to its high point, education must return to these medieval roots.

While I definitely agree with Sayers' assessment of modern education as "an educational structure that is built upon sand," at this point I do not necessarily agree with the menu she puts forth specifically to fix the problem.  I personally understand that much of classic writing cannot be translated perfectly into English, but I do not at this point see a need for the study of Latin.  I think a student of the Rhetoric stage can be taught the mechanics of building a good argument based on the styles of the classical writers/orators without him or her actually reading the works in the original Latin.  I agree that young children are memorization sponges and should be introduced to as many facts and stories from history, science, literature and the like, as well as mathematical facts, as early as possible, but I think that this plan needs to be tweaked for each individual child.  I wonder how my probably-gifted child fits into this plan, especially since we are starting semi-formal schooling at age four.  

I also think that children of all stages should be familiar with all forms of writing, and that well-written modern works have as much to offer as many of the classics.  However, the onus is on the parent to read and decide which works those may be, and if a parent lacks understanding in this area, it may be difficult.   I also disagree in that I think formal logic can be introduced as early as the grammar stage, as long as the parent/teacher has a sound understanding of formal logic.  How do you talk to your child, especially when explaining to him "why?"  Do you use logical arguments to model, or do you say "because I am the mom/dad" and vague things of that nature? 

I do like that the Rhetoric stage allows for much personal choice by the student, because if a student has a solid background in the basics of every subject, he should be able to choose what interests him and excel rather than continue to sit through "survey style" courses that offer only remedial knowledge to fill in the gaps.  I think the only reason schools in Texas continue to do it the latter way is because students have so many gaps from missing information during the learning years when "subjects" were poorly taught, due, honestly, to the required standardized testing being much of the focus at those ages. There will be students who simply test poorly and should be helped with "tricks" and whatnot, but to turn every classroom into a test-review center, eschewing actual knowledge in lieu of only what is on the test, has created an educational farce, one that I am loathe to participate in.


To further my study of educational styles, I should either be reading "The Great Conversation" by Robert Hutchins or The Paideia Proposal: an educational manifesto by Mortimer Adler next, depending which looks more enticing at the moment.  Depending on how strongly I feel about each, I may post a review of each of the works, or simply a general review of my understanding of classical education.


If anyone has any suggestions, advice or opinions about anything I have posted here, please comment!


**This post contains affiliate links.  Please read my disclosure statement.