Education, Parenting and Respect (1)

We are letting down so many children with our poor education system, just as Barak Obama asserted about the US educational system. There is a warped sense of correctness, that is in fact...wrongness. See below, for an example**
Our children's intelligence is actually being eroded, by lack of discipline, low expectation, and poor attention to important basics in our own language, never mind the general educational "culture" - at least in too many government schools.

Many, many foreigners can speak English much better than too many of us. But then to learn a foreign language you have to be proficient in your own, and understand grammar especially. Grammar is just not being given enough attention.

Grammar provides the "buiding blocks" of sentences. And vocabulary provides the expressing of thought.
In fact, it is, apparently, built (hard-wired) into our brains in foetal development. But if it's not made use of (exercised), it atrophies (as does the brain itself, or our muscles), and then the intelligence atrophies, along with comprehension.

How can building blocks be ignored with young children?!

I expect that if there were more foreign languages spoken by more people in this country, then we wouldn't be so poorly spoken as a whole.

And why are they being patronised to try to keep them interested, rather than inspiring them with real knowlege, and good literature, which is instructive (especially about the human condition) rather than merely entertaining.

One big problem lies from a very early age with reading. Phonics is the only fast and easy way to learn to read-all else is a shambles and surely leads to confusion. This is certainly the case if more than one "METHOD" is being used! What are these people thinking, if these "methods" are still being used?

The fact is that reading is just decoding the different letters and how they may change in sound when adjacent to other ones, which is the essence of any language.
Exponents of other methods would seem to be in denial about this.

There are some cases of "dyslexia" where tinted sheets of acetate of different colours help, as black on white can create visual disturbance.
Now his really does make sense to me. However, it is certainly not "dyslexia" ( poor reading), it is a visual disorder - and therefore calls for the services of an occulist or opthalmologist !!

It is the meaning behind the words that count, and the letters just spell it out.
They need to be decoded**.
Our words are not pictograms that should be read as a "whole" unit, at least not when learning to read!
How is a child supposed to cope with a long and difficult word?!

It's just like reading music. You have to learn to read the individual notes, not a whole bar at a time (a bar (several notes), might equate to a word).

OUR LANGUAGE ACTUALLY DEFINES OUR THINKING. It is the very boundary of our thinking, and appreciation of the richness of human civilisation.
It defines us and the complexity with which we are able to communicate with others.

When you speak a foreign language you take on the character of that race, or nation, as their language is their thinking, the way they express themselves, the way they view life itself!
As an example, the Eskimos have many ways to describe snow, as is often pointed out. This is because of the importance it has for them-how it's differing qualities affect their lives, either when traveling or building their igloos. It defines their world and lives to such an extent.

And as they leave those old nomadic hunting/fishing lifestyles in their igloos (as they are more and more), they will surely loose these many words for snow, and their importance (but then what do they need them for any more-better learn more important ones for their future in the modern world,

We ourselves are losing the sophistication of our rich and descriptive language. Dumbing down to "street"- level talk.

How dumb is all that?

Say no more, Squire!
QED.

The general "culture" in our education system seems to have everything absolutely cock-eyed.
Not all government schools are bad, of course. There are (some) excellent schools out there.
My son went to a Church School, which are usually considerably better than the "Bog Standard", as we all know full well.

I have found that it is the quality of the head teacher that counts, rather like the captain of a ship, or the CEO/managing director of a company, or indeed any manager!
Don't blame the Teachers, there seems to be a general acceptance that it is the "culture" that the teachers are inculcated with in the first place, that is the primary culprit.
And of course this way of thinking is then passed onto the children, and so it is perpetuated !

This must stop!!

**
There was a television program recently (in Febraury '09), showing a school in which one young teeenager was being followed around the school (hounded might be a better description), by no less than 3 women, trying to reason with him and get him back to his class and do his work.
This went on for a very, very long time.

Maybe you saw this? If you did, what was your reaction when you saw it?

3 WOMEN !!! chasing ONE perfectly capable and not even particularly "recalcitrant" lad!!

This is obviously this school's policy and these women are employed to do just this.
These people's salaries are (presumably) being paid for by the tax-payer!

Have we lost our marbles, or is it just me?? This sort of "teaching" has been going on for decades, and though things have got better than they were in the 70's when "progressive" education first took over.
I am personally not against some of the ideas behind it, but once again as so often, when a new idea takes over, "the Baby is thrown out with the Bath Water".
And boy, was the baby lost when this idea took over!

Again, the Middle Way, taking the best of both, is the best way!

back to where you were

Now, for a bit of controversy..

Dyslexia, formerly known as "poor spelling":

I've never been convinced that "Dyslexia" is anything but poor teaching of reading.
Of course there will be children who have greater difficulty than others, with the most inherently difficult thing they have yet to learn in their young lives.
These children just need more time and attention, maybe by the parent's as they read to them (if the teaching at school is no good)?
Of course if the parents or parent are also "dyslexic" (poor spellers), (and therefore make it seem as though it has a genetic origin?) then this won't help, so best we get the teaching of it right in our schools!

A letter surely is no different from any other visual "element", like any symbol, or number... or indeed any thing at all. When a baby is born, his vision is pretty well totally "uneducated", except for what he could see in the womb, and only time and experience allows recognition (a mapping) of these visual "elements" that are in the baby's field of vision.

Our acquisition of our 6 senses from before birth: vision, sound, smell, touch, taste and "common", is all about education and experience- learning to use all the senses.

Now, if there has been confusion during the giving of the reading lessons, for example:

• with an unclear and complex method eg. putting all the letters together to form a "whole" word-the "whole word method".
  (instead of allowing each letter to be "read" at a time, in order to "spell" it out, as it is being read, which will surely lead to both better spelling and reading, at the same time!)
• or worse... more than one method!!

then confusion will surely reign.

If you don't get to the source of the problem, then you can never find the cure. You'll just be treating the symptoms.

Is calling a child "dyslexic" or "ADHD/add" any different in nature from telling him or her that he or she cannot sing, dance, play sports, swim, anything at all? If you tell them that, then that is what they will become, you will be disabling them in that endeavour!! (of course there will be differig levels of ability, but so what, why not let them enjoy and learn!

These children are being disabled, to a greater or lesser extent, for the rest of their lives!!

How can we still be doing this to them-there have been plenty of "deniers" and yet still it goes on!

Is it because of:

• "political correctness"?
• or fear of standing against:
  • the "educational establishment"
  • or (imagined) "superior knowledge"?
    

Even if I'm wrong about this, and I'm pretty well convinced I'm not, I feel very strongly also that labelling any child in this way (as being "handicapped") IS IN ITSELF DISABLING, and a practice that I abhor.

If the adult or teacher needs to label them, well, OK, if you really have to, but then keep it between yourself and the parents, forever, but never disable the child!

If you call a child (or indeed an adult) stupid, enough times he/she will start to feel stupid. The same goes with any "label" you care to give.
"Good" labels work in exactly the same way, as "bad" labels.

Insert "bad" for "good" below"...

You're a "good" boy/girl.

You're "good" at football

These labels give confidence.

"Bad" labels produce either

• lack of confidence, which is of course one of the "symptoms of "Dyslexia", along with the difficulty in spelling and reading!!
• create the very attribute that the child is being called, a bad boy/girl, etc..

Do I need to continue with this, or have you been convinced already?

...I will, in fact, continue:

Apart from being disabled by the label, it makes the child stand out from the crowd and feel different (and we know how young children just hate being different, don't we?!!) and we all know how cruel (many) children can be, don't we?!!

LABELS DISABLE, ALL ON THEIR OWN !!

Interestingly, the therapeutic systems that seem to help "Dyslexics" the most are physical, confidence-boosting exercises.
This would appear to support my hypothesis. They've lost confidence in their abilities, in lots of ways!!

What a curse for them, to be so labelled!!

If you look at the Wikipedia "Theories of developmental dyslexia", you'll see there are quite a lot! What a muddle...confusing, wouldn't you say?

When you read the section called "Subtypes of developmental dyslexia", it sounds worryingly like knowns and unknowns, unknown knowns, etc.!

It's funny how we have managed to exlain to a great extent how the actual brain works, and yet we cannot explain something as simple as a difficulty in learning to read?
Vision also has, let's face it, been pretty well explained by our scientists.

If someone, anyone, can prove me wrong, on this, or indeed on any other "issue" mentioned on this website, then I really would like to know.
I always want to know the truth, and will always be persuaded to change my mind by superior knowledge/new (true) information, if I am in the wrong.

So, just press the "contact" button (but note well that I can be a "difficult customer"), and write to me in a clear and simple way, with no OBFUSCATORY JARGON, or LACK of CLARITY, please!

I thank you sincerely in advance, if you can (prove me wrong).

Personally, I'm beginning to question the whole business of "experts". Put it this way- with information so quickly to hand on the internet, they're going to be kept on their toes!
The thing about most fields in which there are experts - one can always find another "expert" who'll disagree, or have an opposing theory/assertion.

Which to believe in?
Who can you trust??

Trust your own intelligence, I say, unless you don't trust it, of course!

Personally, I'm learning to trust my own intelligence more and more, as I think about it all, which of course makes sense..the more you learn, and the more facts at your fingertips, (rather in your brain) the more intelligent you become-it's the "sysnthesis" of all the information that produces the "creativity" and evolution of our ideas, knowledge, science, art and music.

Subsequent to my writing this "denial" of "Dyslexia", a TV program has been broadcast showing the latest research. It turns out to be an aural problem, and not a visual one.

The child in fact has difficulty in differentiating between certain vowel sounds/syllables

**
You may have heard about this explorer/ethnologist, who came across some Pygmies in the African Jungle. He happened to lead some out onto a very large unforested area, which they had never experienced. There were some buffalo in the distance, and although the Pygmies were very familiar with buffalo in the forest, even though of a slightly different build and size, they thought that what they were seeing were ants, little black things on legs.

This proves that we see things as we learn them.

Restricted learning equals restricted seeing.


Education, Parenting and Respect (2) >

Please realise that this website has been rushed, in order to get it "out there" asap...

...some (OK, quite a lot of), editing is still needed