I was in a parking garage this morning, preparing to go to a doctor's appointment, and I saw hundreds of other cars: old cars, new cars, big cars, little cars. However, one car caught my eye: it was an older-model beige sedan that had on its bumper a single sticker, with black letters on a yellow background. It read: "Those who oppose PRAYER in schools are ENEMIES of America!"
I scrunched my brow and gave this a moment of thought. It was a shocking message, almost Stephen Colbert-like in its extremism. I tried to imagine what would lead a person to proudly display a single sentiment like that on his or her car. The sticker didn't say that those who oppose prayer in schools were "wrong" or "misguided" - no, it called those people "ENEMIES" of our nation. Wow.
Did they mean enemies, like terrorists or seditionists? For following the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution? *scrunching brows again*
But first, what about the Constitution?
I first imagined that this person with the bumper sticker was probably a right-wing conservative, but frankly, most of my right-wing conservative friends are libertarians and defenders of the Constitution, and they would be quite happy to keep their government out of their religion.
In our First Amendment, as we all (should) know, it says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."
There are two facets to this: the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause. The former is, basically, freedom from an imposed government-established religion, and the latter is freedom of religion, to practice the religion of your choice. Both have their limitations in different circumstances - for example, I can believe in vampirism all I want, but I can't practice that as a religion if it involves hurting others - but both are explicitly protected in general circumstances.
The Constitution was meant to be a limit on government, while upholding the rights of the nation's people. We want a nation ruled by moral, but rational, law that honors the wishes of the majority while continuing to uphold the rights of the minority. Once the government sticks its proverbial nose in religious practice, all kinds of bad things can happen. What if the government decided that Scientology or Santeria was the way to go, or that those who weren't Christians were heretics who should be burned at the stake? (Didn't the "war on terrorism" begin as a fight against a violent theocracy in a faraway land? Or something similar, I am told? But I digress.)
It's true that having prayer in the public schools is not exactly the same as having a state-sponsored or state-mandated religion. However, it comes awfully close, which was why school-sponsored prayer time was taken away in the first place. When school prayer was first practiced, we lived in a more homogeneous society. Yet now, the United States of America is, more than ever, a pluralistic nation. Yes, we are filled with self-identified Christians, and our culture is overwhelmingly Christian in nature. But think of the many millions of people who do not identify as Christian, or as any other religious faith, for that matter. Think also of the many different kinds of Christianity there are. What kind of Christian prayer are we talking about here? A Protestant prayer? A Catholic prayer? Something that talks about God the Father, or Jesus alone? Who decides what kind of prayer to use - the majority of the community? But what if you lived in a school district that was predominantly populated by a religious group that was different than your own?
Very interesting map with unexpected results from religious institutions:
http://www.valpo.edu/geomet/pics/geo200/religion/adherents.gif
U.S. Census data on self-identified religious adherents: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0075.pdf
Second, does "prayer in schools" mean that prayer should be allowed in public schools?
Prayer is allowed in schools; in fact, the practice is protected under federal law. Any public school student is permitted to pray, read scripture, or engage in devotional time or religious study (et cetera) with fellow students in an unobtrusive manner during noninstructional time (such as lunchtime, recess, or after school). In other words, if your child wants to say grace before snack, read the Bible on the playground, hold hands and pray around the flagpole... all of that is allowed and protected, and is considered the right of the student to do so, as long as the student's practice does not interfere with the rights of other students.
Extracurricular groups/activities that involve religious content (Fellowship of Christian Athletes, Bible Club, Muslim Student Union, whatever) are also allowed in schools and are to be given equal access as nonreligious extracurricular groups as long as they follow the same guidelines as the other groups. Schools may disclaim sponsorship of these groups, and schools may not show favor towards a particular group.
However, as is to be expected, the teacher or administrative authority figure is not allowed to lead the students in prayer in public schools, to require particular religious adherence, and so forth. Interestingly, the teacher is allowed to lead studies in religious scripture for students (such as the historical significance of the Bible), as long as it is in a prescribed academic manner, rather than for devotional purposes.
Obviously, one of the controversies involves prayer led by sports coaches, principals, or graduation speakers while at public school-sponsored events. When is public prayer a matter of decorum, and when does it run afoul of civil rights? This is a question still being addressed.
More info: http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/prayer-in-school.htm
Third, prayer in what schools?
Only the public schools are affected by the "no (state-sponsored) prayer" laws, as public tax dollars pay for them to operate, and those schools are open to all. However, a private religious school of any faith or denomination is allowed to lead, promote, or mandate prayer in any way that it sees fit. In addition, any parent who wishes to homeschool his/her children in any of the fifty states is allowed to do the same, of course. As a parent, if you choose to educate your child(ren) or hire someone else to do it, then you can have your child pray and practice any religion of your choosing at any time of the school day.
So, really, there is absolutely nothing that would limit a student's right and prerogative to pray. For me, as an advocate of personal prayer and a student of the Bible, I like how there is no prayer in schools. We homeschool, but even if we were to send our children to public schools, we would still have family prayer and devotional time outside of school.
But I've heard this message before. More than one elderly relative has cried, "Since prayer was removed from the public schools, look what a mess they've become!" Er, what about social dislocation, family issues, lack of investment in education, and a whole slew of factors that have negatively affected schools? Or what about those things that have made some aspects of the schools much better in the last century?
I have a prayer for our nation: it's that we honor the rights of others to practice their faith (or no faith) how they see fit. We spread our religious faith not through state-sponsored mandates or through the rule of the authority of the majority, but by the good example of our actions.
Friday
How to Teach Your Preschooler to Write
A few things, right off the bat:
1. This post is for all parents, no matter what form of education they choose for their children, though homeschooling parents might take a more formal interest. I usually don't write homeschool tutorials because, frankly, there are oodles of fantastic blogs out there written by parents with lots of great, creative tips, and I think they've covered almost everything. It's like writing a cookbook: unless you have a special niche, your knowledge has probably already been shared before. Not that I shouldn't share this anyway, of course, but I don't feel qualified to reinvent the wheel.
2. This post doesn't mean that your preschooler will learn how to write all of the letters in a week or a month. Every child has his/her own pace and style of learning. This is just to give parents a few ideas if they want to encourage their child to learn to write, assuming that the child is ready.
3. I am not a professionally trained writing teacher. If you know of a better way, then by all means, use it! Share your thoughts! I also want to stress that I don't think that preschoolers *should* learn how to write at a very young age, but if they are ready and eager, they should be able to have the option to try.
Okay, all of that said, the first question: Is your preschooler ready to learn how to write? The following things should be in place before trying to write:
1. Child can easily recognize all of the letters of the alphabet.
2. Child has developed an array of fine motor skills, such as properly holding a fork or toothbrush, putting pegs in holes, and so forth.
3. Child shows an interest in writing, such as wanting to copy pictures or pretending to write.
As a mom/teacher, it's up to me to encourage the child's interest and frequency of practice, and if necessary, to alter my approach. For example, as I've written before, my older daughter seems to be more visual in her learning style. She needs to see (or now, read about) something to learn it. However, my younger daughter seems to be more kinesthetic in her learning style: she needs to touch it, feel it, experience it. The two styles are not mutually exclusive, but for me, it's easier to know my child's strengths in order to teach them in the best way.
1. This post is for all parents, no matter what form of education they choose for their children, though homeschooling parents might take a more formal interest. I usually don't write homeschool tutorials because, frankly, there are oodles of fantastic blogs out there written by parents with lots of great, creative tips, and I think they've covered almost everything. It's like writing a cookbook: unless you have a special niche, your knowledge has probably already been shared before. Not that I shouldn't share this anyway, of course, but I don't feel qualified to reinvent the wheel.
2. This post doesn't mean that your preschooler will learn how to write all of the letters in a week or a month. Every child has his/her own pace and style of learning. This is just to give parents a few ideas if they want to encourage their child to learn to write, assuming that the child is ready.
3. I am not a professionally trained writing teacher. If you know of a better way, then by all means, use it! Share your thoughts! I also want to stress that I don't think that preschoolers *should* learn how to write at a very young age, but if they are ready and eager, they should be able to have the option to try.
Okay, all of that said, the first question: Is your preschooler ready to learn how to write? The following things should be in place before trying to write:
1. Child can easily recognize all of the letters of the alphabet.
2. Child has developed an array of fine motor skills, such as properly holding a fork or toothbrush, putting pegs in holes, and so forth.
3. Child shows an interest in writing, such as wanting to copy pictures or pretending to write.
When my oldest child was three, she was in preschool full-time. The teachers were telling the children stories about why each letter had its unique shape. (A clever idea!) However, my daughter didn't want to sit down and learn how to write her name until the older girl whom I mentored had shown my daughter how she wrote her name. Seeing the example of another child was enough to make my daughter want to learn more... which is often how these things start, of course.
Writing is learned like most other things: by being interested in learning, and through practice. Just like my older daughter doesn't learn her piano songs until she wants to learn them and practices playing them, my younger daughter doesn't learn to write letters until she wants to learn them and then practices writing them. It's that simple. If one of those elements is not there, at any age, then the child is not ready. My 2.5-year-old (a lefty) can now write most of the letters of the alphabet, but that was because she showed an interest and wanted to be a big kid, like her sister. It takes me sitting down with her and practicing when we have some free moments... and patience from the both of us.
Okay, so how do we go about actually teaching the writing? If you're starting from the beginning, I would do the easiest stuff first. In a fun, stress-free environment, I would have the child start copying the basic shapes on a piece of paper: a circle and a straight line, and then a half-circle. If the child can easily write a circle and a straight line, the child can learn to write capital letters such as: I, L, O, and T, and then branch out to A, C, E, F, G, H, Q, V, and X. Once those are mastered, then try the more complex straight-line letters, like M, N, W, Y, and Z, and then save the "curvy" or combination letters for last: B, D, J, P, S, and U. I personally found that K and R were the most hard to get right, but that might not be the case for all kids! Writing diagonally takes practice and strong motor skills.
Once many of those have been mastered, then you can start on the lower-case letters. The child should easily be able to write o, l, i, and t, and then the "smaller versions" of the capital letters if they are similar. Pay special attention, of course, to the b, d, p, and q, as these are often confused.
You can begin by writing the letter a few times to show the child how you would write it, and then let the child try. The child might want to copy over your letter or just free-style the letters on the paper. Give a little bit of correction if needed ("The L has a straight back," "The G stays open," et cetera), but mostly, don't interfere. We're not looking for perfection, just practice.
 |
| This magnetic slate with examples of letters was a thrift shop find! |
To keep the child's interest, I would use a variety of different media to practice the shapes, including paper, chalk, paint, a magnetic slate (particularly useful tools for the visual learner), and even sand or flour (particularly useful for the kinesthetic learner). Tracing paper could also be a huge help for some children. Also trace letter puzzles, cookies, magnets, and so forth with fingers. For auditory learners, try making up stories about the letters ("B has a big belly!") or using sound effects ("Wee goes the C!") whenever appropriate. Invite your child to do the same. For those who watch videos, Sesame Street seems to be the gold standard when it comes to describing letter shapes. Verbally reinforce the unique letter shapes when you read a story or see an interesting sign.
In the meantime, strengthen those fine motor skills and hand-eye coordination with dot-to-dot puzzles, lacing cards, sign language, and all of those cool learning toys your child got last year. Then practice a little at a time. Before long, your child will probably start writing letters on his/her own time. Just don't push it. If your child starts to fidget and lose interest, put the lesson down and do something else. The last thing you'd want is for learning to be a chore for the child. Good luck!
 |
| Having big sister teach little sister how to write... |
 |
| ...makes little sister an eager learner! |
Wednesday
Beauty and Body Image (AKA Embrace the Dinosaur)
I hate having my picture taken. There, I've said it.
I went from being a camera-mugging child to an attention-seeking young adult cheesecake model to someone who hates having her picture taken. I mean, if I happen to be very well-rested and well-groomed and not pregnant, and looking from a certain angle with the right lighting, I can look halfway attractive. In a picture.
Now, now, I know what you are thinking. My polite friends will respond, "No, you look wonderful! What are you talking about? You glow!" My realistic friends will respond, "Well, you don't look perfect. But you're pregnant and tired right now. So what?"
While I love my friends to death, I am not looking for reassurances or flattery. I am looking for permission: I want to be told that I don't have to look "beautiful" (whatever that might mean) and still feel great about myself. Because I do feel great about myself. I am happy, reasonably healthy, extremely fortunate, and probably more confident now than I have ever been before in my life. The older I get, the less I feel that I have to prove to everyone, at least when it comes to outward appearances.
But what does my inner voice say about the "negatives" of how I look? I'll list a sample of complaints:
2. Put that on top of a body that was pasty and fleshy, with spider veins and cellulite before the pregnancies ever began. (A homeless man at a bus stop once stopped to tell me, "You need to get a tan!")
3. Almost constant acne blemishes that I've had since childhood. Plus, chicken pox scars, moles, wrinkles, and ever-so-lovely excess facial hair.
5. Tooth problems, including crooked front teeth that cause me an inordinate amount of embarrassment.
Things could be worse, but let's just say that I won't be winning any pageants anytime soon.
There was a time in my life when I did not feel this way. In my late teens and early twenties, I was eager to look desirable to everyone. I put a lot of money into making myself look good enough for auditions and any old classified ad modeling job, sketchy or not, that I could find. I wanted to look as sexy as I thought Marilyn Monroe looked, and so I put a lot of money into my looks to become - you guessed it - a Marilyn Monroe impersonator for hire. I thought that perhaps if I looked like her, then people would like me like they liked her. I was seriously insecure about myself... so much so that it wasn't even good enough to look like myself.
For a very brief time, I almost pulled it off. But I still didn't feel any better about myself, because obviously, I could only keep up the beauty charade for so long, and it wasn't me. (I bleached my hair every week for a year!) Plus, the concept of beauty is a fickle thing, isn't it? For everyone who thought that my version of "Marilyn" was great, there were others who didn't like her looks, or who thought I looked nothing like her and wondered why I was even trying. For every modeling gig I got, there were 100 girls who looked far better than I did, and I hated myself for stooping to try to get paid when it was all a joke. Same with pageants: the only pageants I ever won were those "achievement" pageants that had no score for beauty. I couldn't win on my looks. Call it genes or call it laziness. It was just reality.
But someday, age will catch up with all of us. We are either old, or we're dead. There is no shame in that.
I still don't like having my picture taken, but I am worth more than the sum of my pictures. I want people to know that I have a great laugh, complete with an unladylike snort. I want people to know that I dance with wild abandon when I am hugely pregnant, and I look like a crazy fool. I want people to know that when I get out of the bath, I am smiling.
I went from being a camera-mugging child to an attention-seeking young adult cheesecake model to someone who hates having her picture taken. I mean, if I happen to be very well-rested and well-groomed and not pregnant, and looking from a certain angle with the right lighting, I can look halfway attractive. In a picture.
Now, now, I know what you are thinking. My polite friends will respond, "No, you look wonderful! What are you talking about? You glow!" My realistic friends will respond, "Well, you don't look perfect. But you're pregnant and tired right now. So what?"
While I love my friends to death, I am not looking for reassurances or flattery. I am looking for permission: I want to be told that I don't have to look "beautiful" (whatever that might mean) and still feel great about myself. Because I do feel great about myself. I am happy, reasonably healthy, extremely fortunate, and probably more confident now than I have ever been before in my life. The older I get, the less I feel that I have to prove to everyone, at least when it comes to outward appearances.
 |
| I must admit, when my husband took me out for our anniversary, I felt beautiful that night. |
But what does my inner voice say about the "negatives" of how I look? I'll list a sample of complaints:
1. I have a belly, butt, and boobs that have now been pregnant five times in six years... with huge weight gain, weight loss, and breastfeeding. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what that would make my body look like. Copious stretch marks are one thing, but the flabby, toneless skin and wrinkly belly? I will never wear a bikini again.
2. Put that on top of a body that was pasty and fleshy, with spider veins and cellulite before the pregnancies ever began. (A homeless man at a bus stop once stopped to tell me, "You need to get a tan!")
3. Almost constant acne blemishes that I've had since childhood. Plus, chicken pox scars, moles, wrinkles, and ever-so-lovely excess facial hair.
4. Toenails that look ghastly. You will never see me in a pair of sandals, flip-flops, or open-toed heels. (Twice, dear friends have taken me to a salon to treat me to a pedicure, and I was so embarrassed that I refused and got a manicure.)
Things could be worse, but let's just say that I won't be winning any pageants anytime soon.
 |
| I want to feel like the dancer on the right. |
Sure, there are things that I could easily do to make myself look better, if I tried them. I could get more sleep, get more exercise, drink more water, eat better foods... and actually condition, cut, and style my hair one of these days! I could also wear stylish clothes that matched and fit me well. Heck, I could shave my legs, tone my skin, and wear makeup. I mean, even if I didn't personally care how I looked, everyone knows that people - even nice, nonmaterialistic people - judge appearances. It's just a fact of life. If I look less attractive, people might unconsciously perceive me as being older, poorer, less competent, less popular, and less desirable. (Plus, I am a woman. This counts more.)
But the truth is, I don't care. No, I am not depressed. No, I haven't "let myself go" like the stereotypical housewife label said would happen. (So don't go feeling sorry for my husband, who is satisfied with me, thankyouverymuch.) I've just weighed the alternatives, and I don't think that those things are worth spending time and money on right now, even at the risk of being perceived as less attractive. I mean, I have daughters and sons who will be looking up to me to find out about what women are like. Should my example be that I spent a lot of time on my appearance? As if it really counted?
But the truth is, I don't care. No, I am not depressed. No, I haven't "let myself go" like the stereotypical housewife label said would happen. (So don't go feeling sorry for my husband, who is satisfied with me, thankyouverymuch.) I've just weighed the alternatives, and I don't think that those things are worth spending time and money on right now, even at the risk of being perceived as less attractive. I mean, I have daughters and sons who will be looking up to me to find out about what women are like. Should my example be that I spent a lot of time on my appearance? As if it really counted?
 |
| Not a glam appearance, but a happy one. |
I also don't want to be lectured on how I should feel beautiful from the inside, or be told that there is womanly power in my stretch marks, or that gray hair and wrinkles are a sign of wisdom. No, I don't want this. Like I said, I don't need reassurance or flattery. I don't always feel beautiful, not to society or to myself. But that is okay. I don't get my self-esteem from that.
How do I want to feel? I want to feel respected (and liked, I'll admit) by others. I want to feel that I am kind, honest, generous, friendly, hardworking, and all of those good things. I want to feel smart and capable of doing things by myself. I want to feel like I am a good wife and a wonderful mother. Is there a kind of beauty in that? Okay.
I've had some friends who have had cosmetic procedures done (some surgically), and I must say, they do look great. They look beautiful - fresh and confident and sexy. That is great! If they feel better, then I am very happy for them. However, those procedures are not for me. I am what I am. If, in twenty years, that means turkey waddle on my neck, a head full of gray, frizzy hair, a bottom like the side of a semi, and teeth like a picket fence, then okay.
How do I want to feel? I want to feel respected (and liked, I'll admit) by others. I want to feel that I am kind, honest, generous, friendly, hardworking, and all of those good things. I want to feel smart and capable of doing things by myself. I want to feel like I am a good wife and a wonderful mother. Is there a kind of beauty in that? Okay.
I've had some friends who have had cosmetic procedures done (some surgically), and I must say, they do look great. They look beautiful - fresh and confident and sexy. That is great! If they feel better, then I am very happy for them. However, those procedures are not for me. I am what I am. If, in twenty years, that means turkey waddle on my neck, a head full of gray, frizzy hair, a bottom like the side of a semi, and teeth like a picket fence, then okay.
I still feel sexy. Frankly, a lot of that has to do with the maturity and love of my feminist husband, who wants a kind, responsible, intellectual equal, and not a gorgeous, lusty co-ed. (At least, this is true 99% of the time, and I don't fault him for the other 1%.) Who else should find me sexy besides myself and my husband, who is the only one who has to sleep with me? Why should I bother looking sexy for strangers, friends, men at large?
There was a time in my life when I did not feel this way. In my late teens and early twenties, I was eager to look desirable to everyone. I put a lot of money into making myself look good enough for auditions and any old classified ad modeling job, sketchy or not, that I could find. I wanted to look as sexy as I thought Marilyn Monroe looked, and so I put a lot of money into my looks to become - you guessed it - a Marilyn Monroe impersonator for hire. I thought that perhaps if I looked like her, then people would like me like they liked her. I was seriously insecure about myself... so much so that it wasn't even good enough to look like myself.
For a very brief time, I almost pulled it off. But I still didn't feel any better about myself, because obviously, I could only keep up the beauty charade for so long, and it wasn't me. (I bleached my hair every week for a year!) Plus, the concept of beauty is a fickle thing, isn't it? For everyone who thought that my version of "Marilyn" was great, there were others who didn't like her looks, or who thought I looked nothing like her and wondered why I was even trying. For every modeling gig I got, there were 100 girls who looked far better than I did, and I hated myself for stooping to try to get paid when it was all a joke. Same with pageants: the only pageants I ever won were those "achievement" pageants that had no score for beauty. I couldn't win on my looks. Call it genes or call it laziness. It was just reality.
But someday, age will catch up with all of us. We are either old, or we're dead. There is no shame in that.
 |
| If my butterfly thinks I am beautiful, I am cool with that. |
 |
| Let no one ever say that my smile is not big enough. It matches my joy. |
Tuesday
The Horrors of Child Abuse - and the System's Abuse
What I am writing now is one of the hardest things I've ever felt I had to write. It stems from circumstances from my childhood that have been reignited by the recent experiences of some of the very good, loving families that I know. A little background information is in order.
First, I think it's critical to say that I think that child abuse and intentional neglect of any kind is absolutely morally repugnant. Obviously. Few things are worse in the world than a child suffering, especially at the hands of someone who is supposed to be that child's caregiver. As an industrialized nation, we've done a lousy job of taking care of children in vulnerable situations. Way too many children have "slipped through the cracks" when a call for help to the authorities was issued. As a result of this derelict of duty, countless children have died - or have had lifelong scars, literally and figuratively. As a society, we have failed our children. We have turned a blind eye.
Incidentally, the BBC did a mini-documentary on child abuse in the United States (available to stream on their website). It is horrifying, but worth the watch to get some of the truth of what a bad job our nation is doing of taking care of its children in these circumstances. More general info: http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/10634876-bbc-americas-child-abuse-rates-worst-in-developed-world
Unfortunately, there is also the "flip side" of this horror, one that is the result of unmitigated, unwarranted vigilance that does not prevent children from being abused or neglected, but rather, tears loving families apart, ruins the reputation of good parents, and promotes instability and pain in the lives of children who should have never been involved in the first place. I am talking about the investigations of the Department of Children and Families (sometimes known in some states as Child Protective Services, or by a similar name). Why are they doing this? Well, after all, no state wants to be seen as "not doing enough" to prevent the epidemic of child abuse and neglect, so any investigation could easily be turned into a win for the prosecution with some exaggeration, hubris, and trick of the tail. The height of this was in the child abuse hysteria of the 1980s, which came almost as a backlash against all of the horrible denial of actual child abuse that happened prior to that time, when children's cries were not heard and the allegations were not believed.
A famous example of that hysteria, in case we've forgotten:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial
Now for my own personal history with this. When I was about my oldest daughter's age, a good friend of the family - a Jamaican immigrant who was an auto mechanic - was accused, by his estranged wife, of molesting their daughter. My grandparents, knowing what they did of their friend, could not believe that he was capable of doing such a horrible thing. What actually happened at their home, I frankly do not know. I wasn't there. However, there was strong reason to believe, based on other factors, that the friend's ex-wife was being vindictive. After all, if you hate your ex and don't want your ex to see your children, what better way to punish him than to accuse him of child abuse? Unfortunately, the family friend was only functionally literate, and did not understand the nature of the charges against him. He also could not afford a good lawyer who was willing to fight for him. My grandmother, who worked as a paralegal, did her best to file briefs, testify on his behalf, and so forth, but it was the friend's word against his ex-wife's. The friend went to prison and, to my knowledge, has not seen his children in over 25 years.
My grandparents discovered that there were parents everywhere who had endured very similar investigation and prosecutions by what was then called, in Florida, the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. My grandmother, ever the advocate, founded a nonprofit organization in the late 1980s called Citizens for Reform of Child Abuse Laws. (Very little online presence of this organization remains, but I did find this: http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume3/j3_4_7.htm.) It was designed as a support and advocacy group for adults who felt they had been falsely accused of child abuse or neglect, or who knew people who had been.
I went to these meetings as a child, and I remember some of the horror stories. One single mother of three had the authorities called because her youngest child - who was born premature, and remained very small for her age - had a "Failure to Thrive" diagnosis due to a slow growth pattern. This is supposed to implicate neglect, despite the fact that the little girl was well-fed and otherwise healthy. Other people were falsely accused of abuse or neglect because the child liked to play doctor, talked excessively about "caca" or other bodily functions, or fell down off a bike and broke an arm. Not a joke. You name it, and HRS had the reason to investigate and take your children away. An allegation was almost equal to the truth. What's worse, the abuse hotline was completely anonymous, even to the authorities. Thus, if you had a beef against someone for any reason (a gym teacher, a next-door neighbor, whomever) you could call the hotline, state a few suspicions, and have the authorities knocking at someone's door at any time. One of the bumper stickers they made read "HRS: Florida's Gestapo" - and that wasn't far from the truth. (Please understand: I recognize that most caseworkers are overworked and underpaid, and that they really want to help children. I don't mean everyone involved.)
I remember reading the brochures from HRS about the signs of abuse. One sign could be that the child was too dirty... or too clean. Or that the child was very quiet and withdrawn... or too outgoing and attention-seeking. Anything labeled "out of the ordinary" was supposed to arouse suspicion. Then when it came to the investigation stage - well, forget the edict that one is innocent until proven guilty. Instead, for most people accused of abuse, the process was adversarial and frightening. One got the impression that the authorities came like big game hunters, looking for a prize to take home, and it was up to you to act cool and play dead.
Some high-profile cases got the attention of the media and of lobbyists, and some of the more ridiculous laws were indeed changed. Now, it is a crime in Florida to falsely accuse someone of child abuse. It is hard to disprove good intentions, but at least the law is on the books. The abuse hotline (1-800-96-ABUSE) is also no longer anonymous to the authorities. The accused won't know who called, but the authorities are supposed to be able to trace the caller in case the allegation turns out to be patently false.
In addition, unfortunately, some of the vigilance died down simply because the budgets shrank. I say "unfortunately" because it meant that fewer caseworkers were assigned to cases that truly needed attention, and some of the genuinely abused and neglected kids did fall through the cracks in the system. Plus, the way that I understand it, at least, the federal government provides about half of the funding for child abuse prevention in most states. The federal government's position is to generally try to get help for families and keep the families together. On a practical level: if all of the children were removed from their homes for minor cases where the parents could clearly rehabilitate/rectify the situation, the number of children in foster care would skyrocket, and the country could not financially afford it. The awful result is that some kids stay in situations that are NOT good for them because there is no money to further investigate. However, there are exceptions. In states like Florida, there seems to be a continued effort to go after families, even when common sense says it's not warranted.
Several friends have been in these shoes. One person - who is an incredibly loving mom - was in the mall with her two young daughters. In a moment of defiance for not wanting to leave the play area, one of the daughters briefly ran off out of the mother's sight, so the panicked mother immediately sought the help of a security guard and police officer to find her daughter. The girl was found safe in a store just minutes later, and she was afraid that she was in trouble. This case was automatically deemed a "runaway" situation by the officer, and thus, the DCF authorities were called to investigate. The parents had to endure the scrutiny and indignity of having someone come over to ask them and their children all kinds of questions. (Parents, do you ever feel under pressure to get your house clean for guests? Multiply that by ten when the authorities come over.) The case was closed, of course, but it was enough to terrify the parents into thinking that their kids could have been removed from the home, even if only temporarily, for basically the mom trying to do the right thing. But this was very mild... the parents got to keep their kids.
I will not illustrate any further case beyond that one in order to protect people's privacy. Many cases have been worse, where the parents have temporarily (for weeks or months) lost custody of their children because of, basically, a house that wasn't clean. These are children who are obviously very happy, nurtured, and well-loved. It makes absolutely no sense to disrupt these children's lives and put them into a situation where they are confused, frightened, and cared for by strangers when nothing bad actually happened to them. Why is the state spending time and money on these cases when there are children who are actually being abused and neglected? Where is the state then?
With that, here are some of the ways that parents can prevent DCF from being called to investigate. Here we go:
1. Don't be labeled weird. (It helps to look like a politician's family, but if not, then just look like you're always going to a job interview or a Gap commercial. Conformity rules!)
2. Be an active part of a community organization, such as a church or a respected group. (Regrettably, live-action role playing groups are not deemed worthy enough for DCF's standards.)
3. Be good friends with people who can help testify on your behalf, including doctors, lawyers, clergy, law enforcement, and people who are DCF employees.
4. Keep your house clean at all times. (I don't care how many children or pets you have - that house needs to be immaculate. Now is the time to start worrying about dust bunnies, piles of laundry, and that junk mail stacked on the table.)
5. Keep your house full of food at all times. (I mean, look like you are stocking up for a Thanksgiving meal. God forbid you are caught out before grocery day.)
6. Don't have your young child run around naked or pantsless at any time. (After all, a child's desire to be free of clothing is akin to sexualization of a child. Of course, everyone knows that.)
7. Take your child to the doctor regularly. (Are you neglecting the regular checkups? After all, what do you have to hide?)
8. Don't take your child to the doctor too much. (After all, are you making your child sick or something?)
9. Make sure that your child is independent, skilled, confident, and well-educated.
10. Make sure that you hover over your child and make your child depend on your constant supervision (or else you are a bad parent).
If this makes sense, then you're safe.
First, I think it's critical to say that I think that child abuse and intentional neglect of any kind is absolutely morally repugnant. Obviously. Few things are worse in the world than a child suffering, especially at the hands of someone who is supposed to be that child's caregiver. As an industrialized nation, we've done a lousy job of taking care of children in vulnerable situations. Way too many children have "slipped through the cracks" when a call for help to the authorities was issued. As a result of this derelict of duty, countless children have died - or have had lifelong scars, literally and figuratively. As a society, we have failed our children. We have turned a blind eye.
Incidentally, the BBC did a mini-documentary on child abuse in the United States (available to stream on their website). It is horrifying, but worth the watch to get some of the truth of what a bad job our nation is doing of taking care of its children in these circumstances. More general info: http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/10634876-bbc-americas-child-abuse-rates-worst-in-developed-world
Unfortunately, there is also the "flip side" of this horror, one that is the result of unmitigated, unwarranted vigilance that does not prevent children from being abused or neglected, but rather, tears loving families apart, ruins the reputation of good parents, and promotes instability and pain in the lives of children who should have never been involved in the first place. I am talking about the investigations of the Department of Children and Families (sometimes known in some states as Child Protective Services, or by a similar name). Why are they doing this? Well, after all, no state wants to be seen as "not doing enough" to prevent the epidemic of child abuse and neglect, so any investigation could easily be turned into a win for the prosecution with some exaggeration, hubris, and trick of the tail. The height of this was in the child abuse hysteria of the 1980s, which came almost as a backlash against all of the horrible denial of actual child abuse that happened prior to that time, when children's cries were not heard and the allegations were not believed.
A famous example of that hysteria, in case we've forgotten:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial
Now for my own personal history with this. When I was about my oldest daughter's age, a good friend of the family - a Jamaican immigrant who was an auto mechanic - was accused, by his estranged wife, of molesting their daughter. My grandparents, knowing what they did of their friend, could not believe that he was capable of doing such a horrible thing. What actually happened at their home, I frankly do not know. I wasn't there. However, there was strong reason to believe, based on other factors, that the friend's ex-wife was being vindictive. After all, if you hate your ex and don't want your ex to see your children, what better way to punish him than to accuse him of child abuse? Unfortunately, the family friend was only functionally literate, and did not understand the nature of the charges against him. He also could not afford a good lawyer who was willing to fight for him. My grandmother, who worked as a paralegal, did her best to file briefs, testify on his behalf, and so forth, but it was the friend's word against his ex-wife's. The friend went to prison and, to my knowledge, has not seen his children in over 25 years.
My grandparents discovered that there were parents everywhere who had endured very similar investigation and prosecutions by what was then called, in Florida, the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services. My grandmother, ever the advocate, founded a nonprofit organization in the late 1980s called Citizens for Reform of Child Abuse Laws. (Very little online presence of this organization remains, but I did find this: http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume3/j3_4_7.htm.) It was designed as a support and advocacy group for adults who felt they had been falsely accused of child abuse or neglect, or who knew people who had been.
I went to these meetings as a child, and I remember some of the horror stories. One single mother of three had the authorities called because her youngest child - who was born premature, and remained very small for her age - had a "Failure to Thrive" diagnosis due to a slow growth pattern. This is supposed to implicate neglect, despite the fact that the little girl was well-fed and otherwise healthy. Other people were falsely accused of abuse or neglect because the child liked to play doctor, talked excessively about "caca" or other bodily functions, or fell down off a bike and broke an arm. Not a joke. You name it, and HRS had the reason to investigate and take your children away. An allegation was almost equal to the truth. What's worse, the abuse hotline was completely anonymous, even to the authorities. Thus, if you had a beef against someone for any reason (a gym teacher, a next-door neighbor, whomever) you could call the hotline, state a few suspicions, and have the authorities knocking at someone's door at any time. One of the bumper stickers they made read "HRS: Florida's Gestapo" - and that wasn't far from the truth. (Please understand: I recognize that most caseworkers are overworked and underpaid, and that they really want to help children. I don't mean everyone involved.)
I remember reading the brochures from HRS about the signs of abuse. One sign could be that the child was too dirty... or too clean. Or that the child was very quiet and withdrawn... or too outgoing and attention-seeking. Anything labeled "out of the ordinary" was supposed to arouse suspicion. Then when it came to the investigation stage - well, forget the edict that one is innocent until proven guilty. Instead, for most people accused of abuse, the process was adversarial and frightening. One got the impression that the authorities came like big game hunters, looking for a prize to take home, and it was up to you to act cool and play dead.
Some high-profile cases got the attention of the media and of lobbyists, and some of the more ridiculous laws were indeed changed. Now, it is a crime in Florida to falsely accuse someone of child abuse. It is hard to disprove good intentions, but at least the law is on the books. The abuse hotline (1-800-96-ABUSE) is also no longer anonymous to the authorities. The accused won't know who called, but the authorities are supposed to be able to trace the caller in case the allegation turns out to be patently false.
In addition, unfortunately, some of the vigilance died down simply because the budgets shrank. I say "unfortunately" because it meant that fewer caseworkers were assigned to cases that truly needed attention, and some of the genuinely abused and neglected kids did fall through the cracks in the system. Plus, the way that I understand it, at least, the federal government provides about half of the funding for child abuse prevention in most states. The federal government's position is to generally try to get help for families and keep the families together. On a practical level: if all of the children were removed from their homes for minor cases where the parents could clearly rehabilitate/rectify the situation, the number of children in foster care would skyrocket, and the country could not financially afford it. The awful result is that some kids stay in situations that are NOT good for them because there is no money to further investigate. However, there are exceptions. In states like Florida, there seems to be a continued effort to go after families, even when common sense says it's not warranted.
Several friends have been in these shoes. One person - who is an incredibly loving mom - was in the mall with her two young daughters. In a moment of defiance for not wanting to leave the play area, one of the daughters briefly ran off out of the mother's sight, so the panicked mother immediately sought the help of a security guard and police officer to find her daughter. The girl was found safe in a store just minutes later, and she was afraid that she was in trouble. This case was automatically deemed a "runaway" situation by the officer, and thus, the DCF authorities were called to investigate. The parents had to endure the scrutiny and indignity of having someone come over to ask them and their children all kinds of questions. (Parents, do you ever feel under pressure to get your house clean for guests? Multiply that by ten when the authorities come over.) The case was closed, of course, but it was enough to terrify the parents into thinking that their kids could have been removed from the home, even if only temporarily, for basically the mom trying to do the right thing. But this was very mild... the parents got to keep their kids.
I will not illustrate any further case beyond that one in order to protect people's privacy. Many cases have been worse, where the parents have temporarily (for weeks or months) lost custody of their children because of, basically, a house that wasn't clean. These are children who are obviously very happy, nurtured, and well-loved. It makes absolutely no sense to disrupt these children's lives and put them into a situation where they are confused, frightened, and cared for by strangers when nothing bad actually happened to them. Why is the state spending time and money on these cases when there are children who are actually being abused and neglected? Where is the state then?
With that, here are some of the ways that parents can prevent DCF from being called to investigate. Here we go:
1. Don't be labeled weird. (It helps to look like a politician's family, but if not, then just look like you're always going to a job interview or a Gap commercial. Conformity rules!)
2. Be an active part of a community organization, such as a church or a respected group. (Regrettably, live-action role playing groups are not deemed worthy enough for DCF's standards.)
3. Be good friends with people who can help testify on your behalf, including doctors, lawyers, clergy, law enforcement, and people who are DCF employees.
4. Keep your house clean at all times. (I don't care how many children or pets you have - that house needs to be immaculate. Now is the time to start worrying about dust bunnies, piles of laundry, and that junk mail stacked on the table.)
5. Keep your house full of food at all times. (I mean, look like you are stocking up for a Thanksgiving meal. God forbid you are caught out before grocery day.)
6. Don't have your young child run around naked or pantsless at any time. (After all, a child's desire to be free of clothing is akin to sexualization of a child. Of course, everyone knows that.)
7. Take your child to the doctor regularly. (Are you neglecting the regular checkups? After all, what do you have to hide?)
8. Don't take your child to the doctor too much. (After all, are you making your child sick or something?)
9. Make sure that your child is independent, skilled, confident, and well-educated.
10. Make sure that you hover over your child and make your child depend on your constant supervision (or else you are a bad parent).
If this makes sense, then you're safe.
Monday
Just What Makes a Child "Difficult"?
 |
| Not wanting to have her picture taken. |
Just what makes a child "difficult"?
I've been around kids all of my life, and I've pondered this question many times. Some kids would be labeled "difficult" by some people, like elementary schoolers who spent more time with the principal than at their own desks, or kids who were aggressive and hostile to the point of being criminal. There were also the so-called whiners, the spoiled brats, and the hopeless, and all of the other terrible labels that many children have endured over the years.
Then there was my little brother, twelve years younger than I. Some would have labeled him as difficult. He was also labeled "gifted" due to his high IQ score and "ADHD" due to lack of attention in the classroom. My brother was restless, active, impulsive, fearless, defiant, aggressive, and seemed to be born angry. He once threw his bottle from his crib so hard that he broke the window. He would run and jump into anything dangerous, with no account for the consequences. He would knock children down on the playground, and hit, bite, and kick adults - even strangers in the store. He would throw wild, screaming, fists-wailing tantrums with plenty of profanity if he didn't get his way. The cops were once called on him, at age nine, for pulling out a knife on another child. It didn't help that he was huge for his age, and could intimidate other children with his size alone.
It was like he had taken steroids and then was shot out of a cannon, or that he was a lion starving for prey. Then when he realized that he had hurt someone and was getting called on it, he would break down and cry, saying what a horrible person he was. He was incredibly sensitive, and yet it seemed challenging for him to be empathetic toward others. It was a hard thing for his family to watch, and obviously it was hard for him to endure this pattern, day after day.
Yet I noticed that he was actually attentive, thoughtful, and downright sweet when you just spent one-one-one time with him and listened to him. Paradoxically, he also seemed to appreciate firm boundaries. In other words, he would respect adults who were kind but who didn't put up with his bad behavior. It was sometimes hard for him, and you could tell when he was making an effort. We spent some really nice time together before I left home. I gradually began to see beyond the labels for him... the labels that extended into his adolescence... the behavioral traits that greatly intensified after puberty and got him into major trouble.
This label of "difficult" followed him around for years. I think that if we are assigned labels at a young age, we tend to live up - or down, as the case may be - to those labels.
It did not help matters that my little brother had me for an older sister. I was gentle, charming, cheerful, and people-pleasing. The most trouble I remember getting into as a child was when I was seven, and I absentmindedly walked away from my afterschool program with a friend, and we went down to the corner store for some candy without telling anyone. That got the cops called to the school, and a big spanking for me! But it must have been hard for my brother to live in my shadow, even years after I'd outgrown it. Even when adolescence was difficult for me, and I had my own pejorative labels assigned, it was still harder for my brother, a boy with a reputation for being difficult.
I was reminded of labels recently when my grandmother witnessed the behavior of my younger daughter (2 years old) and compared it against the behavior of my older daughter (6 years old). My younger daughter, scared of falling out of the tree that she'd managed to climb up, began crying for help. My grandmother called her a "crybaby" for doing this. I feel that part of my grandmother's reaction was because my younger daughter is admittedly more adventurous, demanding, independent, and outspoken than my older daughter, and thus has the reputation for being "difficult" in my grandmother's eyes. My older daughter, on the other hand, has been labeled as cautious, responsible, and "easy" by my grandmother. So, therefore, any behavior that would reinforce the image/label that my grandmother already had for each great-granddaughter would serve, in her mind, as further proof that she was right in her assumptions. My grandmother has even said, on other occasions, that my younger daughter was mischievous for doing something quite age-appropriate and normal, and that my older daughter (who is her favorite, apparently) would never do such a thing.
I don't believe it, obviously. All of my kids have their good days and bad days, just like I do... like anyone else does, for that matter. Some things are easier for them than others. I sometimes wish that my grandmother could see the nurturing, maturing, and incredibly sweet nature of my younger daughter, who is neither mischievous nor difficult for me, whatsoever. Truly.
 |
| My precious little elves! They are best friends. Just ask them! |
Is it because a child is different when compared to other children? Because the child can be heard? Because the child is misunderstood? Because the child doesn't learn as fast as we would like?
Is it because we, as parents, just want to be left alone to get some sleep or keep our plans, and this child announces, "Here I am! Pay attention to me!" Is it because we, as parents, feel guilty for not disciplining our children better, or for not spending more time with them?
Is it because we live with the labels from our own childhoods? Because we want to fit people, children and adults alike, into neat, convenient categories and stereotypes that reassure us about our assumptions? Because the child doesn't fit the mold that suits our desires?
I answer that parenting can be difficult, period. But children aren't.
My Crankiest Rant Ever.
I am usually far more "idealist" than "cranky" in my life. I try to be a uniter, not a divider. But sometimes, I get pent-up frustration (like we all do) and I feel the need to vent. So, here is my unofficial "cranky list" of what has annoyed me recently. (I hope that no one will unfriend me after this!)
Please note that I am not including any justified anger against injustice and cruelty, the kind of anger that spurs people into righteous action. These are just my pet peeves.
1. The folks who honk at me when I am trying to be a safe, prudent driver. Dude, I stopped in the road because there was a stop sign or a red light, or because someone was trying to turn in front of me, or because someone was pulling out in front of me, or because the traffic was going more slowly. Please don't honk at me or plow into the back of me. Just watch the road.
I see so many wannabe Nascar drivers on the road. Here's a little tip: if you want to get to your destination five seconds faster, why don't you leave five seconds earlier?
The next time someone honks at me for no reason, I will be tempted to get out of my car, look the person straight in the eyes, wave while grinning broadly, and say, "Hey, buddy! I thought I recognized you! Great to see you! Thanks for honking at me!"
2. The folks who play their music way too loudly, whether in traffic or down my street in the middle of the night. Newsflash: your music isn't so wonderful that everyone within a 500-yard radius wants to hear it. Granted, it's your right, I suppose, to damage your own hearing and to pay a whopping sum for huge speakers. However, the next time I am sitting in traffic with my children and I hear profanity blasting next to us to the point where we can't hold a conversation, I think I will get out of my car and start dirty dancing in my Mom Jeans right in front of you. Your music isn't so hip now, is it?
But if I am awoken from a sound sleep because you thought you'd impress your friends with a 3 AM party in the suburbs, I will call the cops. You'd better hope that there's no underage drinking there.
3. People who are grumpy toward and suspicious of friendliness. When I smile and wave at you as we walk by each other on a sunny day, I promise that I am not trying to rob you or preach to you. Yes, I realize that we are probably strangers, even in this very small town of ours, but I just want to say hello. I promise.
4. People who think that they know everything about parenting. I am not talking about well-meaning advice that comes from experience, or the parents who really do inspire us, but about the people who are like, "My baby never cries. Yours does? Hmmm. You must be doing something wrong."
While I am on the subject: parents who think that catering to their child's every whim (not need, but whim) is a good thing. Where does this come from? Are we teaching kids that they should get everything they want in life? No, children need to learn patience, gratitude, and generosity... and parents who spoil their kids are doing no one any favors. (*I was spoiled as a child, and I had very few friends. Even my stepsister wrote me a card that said, "I love you, even though you are selfish." Do not spoil your children! Trust me on this.)
You wouldn't "teenage" your baby, so don't "baby" your teenager. Give your kids everything they need... not necessarily everything they want. Helicopter parenting is bad. Lecture over.
But the worst would be the parents who think that their child(ren) are the only ones on the earth that matter. "I don't care that Mrs. Smith has 30 kids in her class. If she doesn't give my son 2 hours of one-on-one attention every day, I am going straight to the Superintendent! My son deserves this!" Yes, your child is special... and so is EVERY OTHER CHILD. That's right: other children exist, and their parents love them just as much as you love yours! Imagine that.
5. People who think that their choices aren't just the best for them, but that their choices are the only choices that reasonable folks could possibly make... and therefore, you are an idiot for making different life choices.
I know, this is a hard one... I know I certainly do it. This applies to everything from voting to vaccinations to vegetarianism, breastfeeding to big cars, circumcision to spanking. Strong opinions can make for some annoying self-righteousness. Everything should be prefaced with, "The right choice for me/my family was this, but..."
That's like when it comes to homeschooling, I think it's the best choice for our family right now, but is it the best choice for all families? No way! Parents should get all of the knowledge available, weigh the alternatives, and judge for themselves what is best for their families.
However, that said, sometimes I think we NEED a little more judgment and opinions from honest friends. It's not being judgmental in the pejorative sense if you criticize someone while having good intentions. Maybe we should listen to other people once in awhile. Just a thought.
6. People from a group who think that because some people from another group condone or encourage their viewpoint that they are justified in hurting people from that other group. (For example: "Some people from indigenous cultures don't mind being exploited for profit, so it must be okay to exploit all people from indigenous cultures for profit!" Or, "See, our group isn't racist because 5 people of color think it's terrific! They must speak for everyone! We are immune to criticism now.") As if.
7. When the mailman puts the "Sorry we missed you card" in the mailbox in front of my house for a package delivery when we've been home ALL DAY... that annoys me to the hilt. So now I have to make a special trip to the post office and wait in line, all because you were too lazy to ring my doorbell? Dude, I realize that you must have a rough job sometimes, but you get some sweet benefits. Please stop and ring my doorbell. That's all I ask.
8. Women and men who spend hours each day and thousands of dollars on their physical appearance. Are you a model or entertainer? No? Then why spend your time and money worrying about what you look like, and then sigh about how much you can't afford to give time or money to charitable causes? Sure, it's well within your right to be vain, but I've got a newsflash: we're all going to die someday. Our bodies will rot. It's true. So why not use the time and money that you've been given to actually do something positive? Dude, no one cares about your stretch marks or your crooked teeth. We're all human beings.
9. People who take themselves too seriously. Oh, and nationalism. No further comment needed.
10. The whole religion vs. non-religion debate. Let's all make this clear:
Whether you are a Christian, an atheist, a Muslim, a pagan, an agnostic, or whatever: we all are equally wonderful and we all equally suck. You complaining about someone's religion or lack thereof is not going to change the person! You know what will change their hearts? Your positive example, that's what. People follow happy people. If you want to bring someone to your "side" on this issue, show the person how happy your choice has made you. If you're miserable yourself, do you think that someone would want to join you?
We're human beings. Don't try to play the self-righteous card and talk about how The Other is horrible, how The Other is the cause of all of our problems, how The Other just needs to get enlightened to your version of the truth or how The Other should just go away. We all need each other, like it or not, and the best thing you can do with this little time on earth is to realize that someone else has it worse off than you, so A) appreciate what you have and B) try to help people. Otherwise, what's the point?
11. Bloggers who think they know all the answers, and who think that people actually care about their blogs. How annoying! Oh wait, that's me...
Cranky's rant is over, for now.
Please note that I am not including any justified anger against injustice and cruelty, the kind of anger that spurs people into righteous action. These are just my pet peeves.
1. The folks who honk at me when I am trying to be a safe, prudent driver. Dude, I stopped in the road because there was a stop sign or a red light, or because someone was trying to turn in front of me, or because someone was pulling out in front of me, or because the traffic was going more slowly. Please don't honk at me or plow into the back of me. Just watch the road.
I see so many wannabe Nascar drivers on the road. Here's a little tip: if you want to get to your destination five seconds faster, why don't you leave five seconds earlier?
The next time someone honks at me for no reason, I will be tempted to get out of my car, look the person straight in the eyes, wave while grinning broadly, and say, "Hey, buddy! I thought I recognized you! Great to see you! Thanks for honking at me!"
2. The folks who play their music way too loudly, whether in traffic or down my street in the middle of the night. Newsflash: your music isn't so wonderful that everyone within a 500-yard radius wants to hear it. Granted, it's your right, I suppose, to damage your own hearing and to pay a whopping sum for huge speakers. However, the next time I am sitting in traffic with my children and I hear profanity blasting next to us to the point where we can't hold a conversation, I think I will get out of my car and start dirty dancing in my Mom Jeans right in front of you. Your music isn't so hip now, is it?
But if I am awoken from a sound sleep because you thought you'd impress your friends with a 3 AM party in the suburbs, I will call the cops. You'd better hope that there's no underage drinking there.
3. People who are grumpy toward and suspicious of friendliness. When I smile and wave at you as we walk by each other on a sunny day, I promise that I am not trying to rob you or preach to you. Yes, I realize that we are probably strangers, even in this very small town of ours, but I just want to say hello. I promise.
4. People who think that they know everything about parenting. I am not talking about well-meaning advice that comes from experience, or the parents who really do inspire us, but about the people who are like, "My baby never cries. Yours does? Hmmm. You must be doing something wrong."
While I am on the subject: parents who think that catering to their child's every whim (not need, but whim) is a good thing. Where does this come from? Are we teaching kids that they should get everything they want in life? No, children need to learn patience, gratitude, and generosity... and parents who spoil their kids are doing no one any favors. (*I was spoiled as a child, and I had very few friends. Even my stepsister wrote me a card that said, "I love you, even though you are selfish." Do not spoil your children! Trust me on this.)
You wouldn't "teenage" your baby, so don't "baby" your teenager. Give your kids everything they need... not necessarily everything they want. Helicopter parenting is bad. Lecture over.
But the worst would be the parents who think that their child(ren) are the only ones on the earth that matter. "I don't care that Mrs. Smith has 30 kids in her class. If she doesn't give my son 2 hours of one-on-one attention every day, I am going straight to the Superintendent! My son deserves this!" Yes, your child is special... and so is EVERY OTHER CHILD. That's right: other children exist, and their parents love them just as much as you love yours! Imagine that.
5. People who think that their choices aren't just the best for them, but that their choices are the only choices that reasonable folks could possibly make... and therefore, you are an idiot for making different life choices.
I know, this is a hard one... I know I certainly do it. This applies to everything from voting to vaccinations to vegetarianism, breastfeeding to big cars, circumcision to spanking. Strong opinions can make for some annoying self-righteousness. Everything should be prefaced with, "The right choice for me/my family was this, but..."
That's like when it comes to homeschooling, I think it's the best choice for our family right now, but is it the best choice for all families? No way! Parents should get all of the knowledge available, weigh the alternatives, and judge for themselves what is best for their families.
However, that said, sometimes I think we NEED a little more judgment and opinions from honest friends. It's not being judgmental in the pejorative sense if you criticize someone while having good intentions. Maybe we should listen to other people once in awhile. Just a thought.
6. People from a group who think that because some people from another group condone or encourage their viewpoint that they are justified in hurting people from that other group. (For example: "Some people from indigenous cultures don't mind being exploited for profit, so it must be okay to exploit all people from indigenous cultures for profit!" Or, "See, our group isn't racist because 5 people of color think it's terrific! They must speak for everyone! We are immune to criticism now.") As if.
7. When the mailman puts the "Sorry we missed you card" in the mailbox in front of my house for a package delivery when we've been home ALL DAY... that annoys me to the hilt. So now I have to make a special trip to the post office and wait in line, all because you were too lazy to ring my doorbell? Dude, I realize that you must have a rough job sometimes, but you get some sweet benefits. Please stop and ring my doorbell. That's all I ask.
8. Women and men who spend hours each day and thousands of dollars on their physical appearance. Are you a model or entertainer? No? Then why spend your time and money worrying about what you look like, and then sigh about how much you can't afford to give time or money to charitable causes? Sure, it's well within your right to be vain, but I've got a newsflash: we're all going to die someday. Our bodies will rot. It's true. So why not use the time and money that you've been given to actually do something positive? Dude, no one cares about your stretch marks or your crooked teeth. We're all human beings.
9. People who take themselves too seriously. Oh, and nationalism. No further comment needed.
10. The whole religion vs. non-religion debate. Let's all make this clear:
Whether you are a Christian, an atheist, a Muslim, a pagan, an agnostic, or whatever: we all are equally wonderful and we all equally suck. You complaining about someone's religion or lack thereof is not going to change the person! You know what will change their hearts? Your positive example, that's what. People follow happy people. If you want to bring someone to your "side" on this issue, show the person how happy your choice has made you. If you're miserable yourself, do you think that someone would want to join you?
We're human beings. Don't try to play the self-righteous card and talk about how The Other is horrible, how The Other is the cause of all of our problems, how The Other just needs to get enlightened to your version of the truth or how The Other should just go away. We all need each other, like it or not, and the best thing you can do with this little time on earth is to realize that someone else has it worse off than you, so A) appreciate what you have and B) try to help people. Otherwise, what's the point?
11. Bloggers who think they know all the answers, and who think that people actually care about their blogs. How annoying! Oh wait, that's me...
Cranky's rant is over, for now.
Sunday
Back to (Home)school
This week, a familiar story happened to us: our computer crashed, and we hadn't backed up our data in years. (Let this be a lesson!) We were very fortunate that we were able to salvage the personal files that mean so much to us, as a family: the photographs and videos of the kids from the last couple of years. (I can't imagine losing most of my youngest children's baby pictures! Total heartbreak!)
I breathed a great sigh of relief and believed it might have been a blessing. We happened to have a computer (this one) in the closet that had been given to us for free by a friend of my aunt's who had upgraded his computer and wanted to pass the old one along. Well, this computer is newer and faster and comes with more gadgets than our old computer! This one had just been sitting in the closet for the longest time, primarily because I was too busy (read: lazy) to take the time to transfer all of the files. Meanwhile, our old computer (the dead one) was so noisy that it sounded like an airplane was flying in our dining room. I should have changed it then. (Let this be a lesson!) But we transferred the special files and didn't even have to buy a new computer. How often does that happen?
But with challenge comes opportunity. I have decided to use this time to rethink our homeschooling for Lolly (officially a first-grader) this year. We have different "obstacles" (we'll use that word) this year than we did last year. For example, last year, Ola was a tiny newborn who slept most of the time or who was content to be held or rocked in a swing. Now I have a one-year-old and a two-year-old who get into everything, and they have to be watched all the time. The collateral damage has been everything from jewelry in the toilet to scribbled library books. Plus, they are being homeschooled, too, so I can't just keep them in a room with some toys while I tend to more "important" matters with my oldest child. I have to find a way to incorporate them into the homeschooling routine.
We are neither an "unschooling" family (in the way that many of our friends are) where unstructured learning is the norm, nor are we a "traditional homeschooling" family where there are formal, scheduled lessons. We fall somewhere in the middle, I suppose. Typical daily "lesson":
I breathed a great sigh of relief and believed it might have been a blessing. We happened to have a computer (this one) in the closet that had been given to us for free by a friend of my aunt's who had upgraded his computer and wanted to pass the old one along. Well, this computer is newer and faster and comes with more gadgets than our old computer! This one had just been sitting in the closet for the longest time, primarily because I was too busy (read: lazy) to take the time to transfer all of the files. Meanwhile, our old computer (the dead one) was so noisy that it sounded like an airplane was flying in our dining room. I should have changed it then. (Let this be a lesson!) But we transferred the special files and didn't even have to buy a new computer. How often does that happen?
Everything was fine, except that I cannot find any of Lolly's homeschool records. None. A whole year of records went poof. (To be fair, her paper workbooks and lapbooks and computer tutorial records are all in the closet, and we have videos of some experiments on YouTube.) Part of the problem is that I had the records stored on a desktop application, rather than online or even in a file on my hard drive. Whoops! I guess I thought that airplane-computer was going to last forever.
But with challenge comes opportunity. I have decided to use this time to rethink our homeschooling for Lolly (officially a first-grader) this year. We have different "obstacles" (we'll use that word) this year than we did last year. For example, last year, Ola was a tiny newborn who slept most of the time or who was content to be held or rocked in a swing. Now I have a one-year-old and a two-year-old who get into everything, and they have to be watched all the time. The collateral damage has been everything from jewelry in the toilet to scribbled library books. Plus, they are being homeschooled, too, so I can't just keep them in a room with some toys while I tend to more "important" matters with my oldest child. I have to find a way to incorporate them into the homeschooling routine.
 |
| "We had no intention of staying inside today. Are you kidding?" |
Another obstacle is that I need time to myself. No, I don't mean time to sit with a cup of cocoa and chat with a friend on the phone, though I might pencil that in next year. I mean time to do work (I edit reports from home), time to do church work (my other unpaid job), time to clean the house (got to fix that collateral damage), and time to play on social networking sites. (Did I just write that last one? Whoops!) How do I do that when my oldest child needs time to learn?
 |
| Baking a Father's Day cake from scratch: Home Economics. |
We are neither an "unschooling" family (in the way that many of our friends are) where unstructured learning is the norm, nor are we a "traditional homeschooling" family where there are formal, scheduled lessons. We fall somewhere in the middle, I suppose. Typical daily "lesson":
Me: "You need to learn your XYZ this week. How about you do some pages in your workbooks, play an educational computer game, read the books we checked out from the library, play the board games that tie in those skills, and do research to make an XYZ lapbook?"
Lolly: "Okay! Can I also watch that documentary we've been talking about, and can we print out those worksheets? How about I write a story about it?"
Me: "Sure, that sounds great! I'll help get the materials. In the meantime, you can get started, and let me know if you have any questions."
Lolly: "Okay! Can I also watch that documentary we've been talking about, and can we print out those worksheets? How about I write a story about it?"
Me: "Sure, that sounds great! I'll help get the materials. In the meantime, you can get started, and let me know if you have any questions."
 |
| The schoolroom is anywhere, and amongst everyone, by necessity. |
 |
| Dress-up counts as Dramatic Cooperative Play. |
With a few exceptions, that is how a "typical" homeschool day goes. Lolly goes off to do her work with some pit stops - like playgroups and silent reading - along the way. I record the work afterwards, and those records are what got lost when the computer crashed. (Typical entry: "Used blocks to perform examples of subtraction with regrouping," or "Discussed important dates for Civil War. Made timeline of events.") Some days, we accomplish a week's worth of work in a few hours. Other days, I feel like a slacker.
 |
| Time at the library with some of her selections... |
It helps that Lolly is very motivated and wants to learn, wants to be assessed, and wants to succeed. (Last week, for example, I heard: "Please give me a spelling test!" She did it with words she'd never studied; I made it up on the spot.) She's also very independent. I never need to tell her that it's "Reading" time; instead, I find her on the couch, curled up with a book. She's been reading 12 chapter books on average, per week. I can hardly keep up with her.
I love to be spontaneous, but sometimes, spontaneity is another word for disorganized. I need to make this my priority because, well, it's my priority! So I looked for another method.
I love to be spontaneous, but sometimes, spontaneity is another word for disorganized. I need to make this my priority because, well, it's my priority! So I looked for another method.
I thought that I knew all of the homeschool methods (Unschooling, Traditional, Unit Studies, Classical, Charlotte Mason, Waldorf, Montessori, Literature-Based, Eclectic, et cetera) that there were to learn. I loved a lot about each of them, but I didn't want to commit to any of them. Then I heard of the "Workbox" curriculum. http://heartofthematteronline.com/thinking-inside-the-box/
It refers to a specialized, independent, customizable, flexible curriculum. Lolly could do her work, written or otherwise, based on prompts and materials in workboxes. Obviously, I would still do many projects with her, but the advantage of this is that she wouldn't have to wait on me while I tended to the needs of the babies, a work project, or anything else. She could work ahead as far as she could, and then stop when she had a question. This sounds like a more organized way to do what we've already been doing.
I really like this approach, and I think I am going to try it, starting this week. With backed-up files.
Saturday
My prayer tonight.
If I curse diapers and late nights and the inconveniences of parenthood, remind me that there are those whose arms ache to hold a baby. If I curse the coming of an empty nest, remind me that there are those would would give everything to see their children grow up healthy and independent.
If I curse the work that sustains our family, remind me that there are those who would love to have any profitable work, much more that which would be safe and secure.
If I curse the compromises of marriage, remind me that there are those who will never be able to marry or even spend time with the person they love the most.
If I curse the marks on my walls or the noise of my appliances or the state of my furniture, remind me that there are those who do not have any of those things to call their very own. If I curse the mess on the floor, remind me that it's because my home is occupied by people who love me.
If my definition of "hungry" means that there is nothing in my kitchen that meets my cravings of the moment... if my definition of "lonely" means that my friend didn't call me back... if my definition of "tired" means that my eyes ache from reading my favorite books... if my definition of "injustice" means that I had to pay extra for my insurance... if my definition of "underprivileged" means that we don't get a vacation this year... remind me, Lord, remind me.
And Lord, if I ever complain about being bored, please give me some work to do, as there is so much that the world needs.
If I curse the work that sustains our family, remind me that there are those who would love to have any profitable work, much more that which would be safe and secure.
If I curse the compromises of marriage, remind me that there are those who will never be able to marry or even spend time with the person they love the most.
If I curse the marks on my walls or the noise of my appliances or the state of my furniture, remind me that there are those who do not have any of those things to call their very own. If I curse the mess on the floor, remind me that it's because my home is occupied by people who love me.
If my definition of "hungry" means that there is nothing in my kitchen that meets my cravings of the moment... if my definition of "lonely" means that my friend didn't call me back... if my definition of "tired" means that my eyes ache from reading my favorite books... if my definition of "injustice" means that I had to pay extra for my insurance... if my definition of "underprivileged" means that we don't get a vacation this year... remind me, Lord, remind me.
And Lord, if I ever complain about being bored, please give me some work to do, as there is so much that the world needs.
Friday
Setting Goals and Accelerated Learning
When I was younger and I heard my teachers (or coaches, adult friends, guidance counselors) talk about setting goals, I would tune out. It sounded so unnecessary. I would think, why not just go out and do it? Why bother setting goals? It was such a cliche to me.
If there is anything that I have learned in my adult life (read: not much), it's that if you set your goals high, you just might achieve them. If you set your goals low, or have none at all - well, you might just achieve that. It's been true for all of my life choices, especially when it comes to school or career. Goal-setting is important! I now hope to apply it to my homeschool life with my kids.
I want my kids to learn joyfully, deeply, and efficiently. It's the last quality that really requires some work; the joy and depth should come as part of the experience, and of course, should never be forgotten or sacrificed for the sake of efficiency. The flexibility of homeschooling allows for efficiency to be part of the equation, and I want to take advantage of that, or at least experiment with it.
I've consulted with guides - including everything from our state standards to homeschool books - to see what my kids should be learning, more or less, by certain grade levels. I want to make sure that all benchmarks are hit, and that I don't gloss over anything. For example, my 5-year-old is strong in reading and social studies, but I need to make sure that she learns how to tie her shoes this year! I also need to make sure that she understands number theory before she masters arithmetic.
[What could be the problem with missing some information? I'll put it to you this way: I never learned subtraction with regrouping. Yes, I am serious. Yes, I still have trouble with this. Yes, it's embarrassing. As a kid, I memorized everything from the Greek alphabet to the Preamble to the state capitals, and I won my school spelling bee in eighth grade. I had enough trivial knowledge to whip some butt in a Trivial Pursuit game. But I still had to discreetly whip out the calculator when doing a problem such as 1123-789, for example. I missed one key piece of information somewhere, and the absence of that messed up the processes that came after it. I guess you could say that my learning goal this year includes learning subtraction with regrouping!]
Last year, Lolly moved through all of her second-grade level work. This year, I hope that Lolly will get through second-to-fourth-grade-level work. It's a goal that might not be achieved, but with me being disciplined, and Lolly being motivated already, I am setting the bar high. As for Toot-Toot, who is solidly in her so-called Terrible Twos, my goals are to make sure that she uses her manners (fingers crossed), to start her on basic addition and subtraction, to teach her some beginning sight words, and to teach her how to write all of her letters, assuming that her fine motor control will make her feel comfortable with that. (So far, she legibly writes about a half-dozen letters.) We'll also do music, art, and the extras. I think we can do it.
Before you think that I am a crazy homeschooling mom, or just another bragging Tiger Mom, let me say this: if learning is enjoyable - and I think it should be - kids can and will want to learn. Kids are like sponges when it comes to new information, as we all know. Years ago, kids often didn't learn their alphabet until ages 5 or 6, when they started school. Now, most kids learn their alphabet by ages 3 or 4, at preschool age. Yet most kids have the potential to learn even earlier, by age 2, if given personal attention and the time to learn it. How many times have you known kids to be curious about what adults do, and want to copy them? It's practically their way of life. If kids see adults reading (a special privilege, they might think), most kids will be interested in learning how. Further, in homeschooling, we're able to work without the distractions that most teachers face in their daily classroom routines.
So why the push to teach kids to read so young? Why not just wait? Partly, it's because I want my kids to share my love of reading as soon as possible. Partly, it's because once kids have unlocked the key to reading, everything else in learning becomes easier, both for children and for parents. They've unlocked a world! (An added bonus is a safety issue: wouldn't you want your preschool-aged child to be able to read and thoughtfully comprehend a sign that says "Danger" or "Exit"? Or even "Push the button if you need help" or "Be careful if you come into contact with this"?) Lolly is able to be more independent and to do more in-depth lessons because her reading skills are strong. Without that, she would be limited by the time that I had, which she must share with her younger siblings. Writing is another big skill. Wouldn't we want our kids to have another way to articulate their feelings (or have privacy in a diary, or express gratitude in a note, or connect with friends from far away)? Writing does that, of course, and what a gift to give to a young child!
So this year, I am setting the goals high, and I am forcing myself to become more disciplined and organized in my planning. In homeschooling, the success of my kids, in part, rests on my ability to get my act together. I need to get to work.
If there is anything that I have learned in my adult life (read: not much), it's that if you set your goals high, you just might achieve them. If you set your goals low, or have none at all - well, you might just achieve that. It's been true for all of my life choices, especially when it comes to school or career. Goal-setting is important! I now hope to apply it to my homeschool life with my kids.
I want my kids to learn joyfully, deeply, and efficiently. It's the last quality that really requires some work; the joy and depth should come as part of the experience, and of course, should never be forgotten or sacrificed for the sake of efficiency. The flexibility of homeschooling allows for efficiency to be part of the equation, and I want to take advantage of that, or at least experiment with it.
I've consulted with guides - including everything from our state standards to homeschool books - to see what my kids should be learning, more or less, by certain grade levels. I want to make sure that all benchmarks are hit, and that I don't gloss over anything. For example, my 5-year-old is strong in reading and social studies, but I need to make sure that she learns how to tie her shoes this year! I also need to make sure that she understands number theory before she masters arithmetic.
[What could be the problem with missing some information? I'll put it to you this way: I never learned subtraction with regrouping. Yes, I am serious. Yes, I still have trouble with this. Yes, it's embarrassing. As a kid, I memorized everything from the Greek alphabet to the Preamble to the state capitals, and I won my school spelling bee in eighth grade. I had enough trivial knowledge to whip some butt in a Trivial Pursuit game. But I still had to discreetly whip out the calculator when doing a problem such as 1123-789, for example. I missed one key piece of information somewhere, and the absence of that messed up the processes that came after it. I guess you could say that my learning goal this year includes learning subtraction with regrouping!]
Last year, Lolly moved through all of her second-grade level work. This year, I hope that Lolly will get through second-to-fourth-grade-level work. It's a goal that might not be achieved, but with me being disciplined, and Lolly being motivated already, I am setting the bar high. As for Toot-Toot, who is solidly in her so-called Terrible Twos, my goals are to make sure that she uses her manners (fingers crossed), to start her on basic addition and subtraction, to teach her some beginning sight words, and to teach her how to write all of her letters, assuming that her fine motor control will make her feel comfortable with that. (So far, she legibly writes about a half-dozen letters.) We'll also do music, art, and the extras. I think we can do it.
Before you think that I am a crazy homeschooling mom, or just another bragging Tiger Mom, let me say this: if learning is enjoyable - and I think it should be - kids can and will want to learn. Kids are like sponges when it comes to new information, as we all know. Years ago, kids often didn't learn their alphabet until ages 5 or 6, when they started school. Now, most kids learn their alphabet by ages 3 or 4, at preschool age. Yet most kids have the potential to learn even earlier, by age 2, if given personal attention and the time to learn it. How many times have you known kids to be curious about what adults do, and want to copy them? It's practically their way of life. If kids see adults reading (a special privilege, they might think), most kids will be interested in learning how. Further, in homeschooling, we're able to work without the distractions that most teachers face in their daily classroom routines.
So why the push to teach kids to read so young? Why not just wait? Partly, it's because I want my kids to share my love of reading as soon as possible. Partly, it's because once kids have unlocked the key to reading, everything else in learning becomes easier, both for children and for parents. They've unlocked a world! (An added bonus is a safety issue: wouldn't you want your preschool-aged child to be able to read and thoughtfully comprehend a sign that says "Danger" or "Exit"? Or even "Push the button if you need help" or "Be careful if you come into contact with this"?) Lolly is able to be more independent and to do more in-depth lessons because her reading skills are strong. Without that, she would be limited by the time that I had, which she must share with her younger siblings. Writing is another big skill. Wouldn't we want our kids to have another way to articulate their feelings (or have privacy in a diary, or express gratitude in a note, or connect with friends from far away)? Writing does that, of course, and what a gift to give to a young child!
So this year, I am setting the goals high, and I am forcing myself to become more disciplined and organized in my planning. In homeschooling, the success of my kids, in part, rests on my ability to get my act together. I need to get to work.
Curriculum Review: Time4Learning.com
As you all know, as a homeschooling mom, I am always looking for innovative ways to educate my kids, especially my soon-to-be-first-grader. Sometime late last fall, as I was searching for homeschool tips in the many homeschooling blogs that I read, I saw an advertisement for a company called Time4learning. It purported to teach lessons (for Pre-K through 8th grade) in Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Social Studies, entirely online. The program is used for homeschooling families, as well as non-homeschooling families in the form of afterschool or summer enrichment.
At the time, if you'll recall, I had a young baby, a toddler, and a 5-year-old, and I was desperate to find a way to supplement our at-home learning, which largely consisted of workbooks, library books, videos, board games, and of course, homemade projects. In addition, Lolly has really excelled at using online computer games to enhance her learning, so I decided to give Time4Learning a try, at no risk.
I had two particular objectives in mind. First, I wanted a way for Lolly to be able to move through her lessons more independently, as I have her younger brother and sister at home, and I can't always guide her lesson every step of the way. Another objective was for me to be able to assess where Lolly was, grade-wise, in her learning. I knew she was advanced in some subjects, especially reading, but I didn't know how to judge her grade level in all subjects. Time4Learning prides itself on meeting grade-level standards for the states, so I took it as a fairly accurate measure of Lolly's progress.
We ended up sticking with the Time4Learning program for three straight months, and then we took a three-month break to do other things, and now we're back. During our absence from Time4Learning, Lolly missed being able to do the games and activities, so I decided that it was worth it to go back, even though we're in summer mode. We originally asked for First Grade as our primary focus, and months later, I have Lolly doing Third Grade work, at my prerogative. She completed all of First Grade math, some of First Grade Language Arts, and Social Studies and Science activities for First and Second Grades. She has now completed some Third Grade math, as well. Here are the advantages and disadvantages that we've found with the program, in no particular order.
*Maximum flexibility. Students are free to go at their own pace and do as many or as few activities as they would like. Time4Learning recommends a sample schedule of one activity per day, per subject. Lolly would sometimes do 5-10 in a day, if she were so inclined. This is great if you have a student who gets excited about a subject and who doesn't want to be limited by the parameters of the schedule. A student can also switch from subject to subject and to different available themes.
Further, while parents choose the student's grade level, Time4Learning allows students to move through three different grade levels without even officially requesting to change grades. This means that if a student finds the material too hard or too easy, the student is not "locked in" to a specific grade level. A student can also do different grade levels with the material. For example, Lolly is at Second Grade in math, and Fourth Grade in reading, and Time4Learning allows for her to switch between those levels as much as she wishes.
*Entertaining activities. Most of Time4Learning's activities are presented in a fun way by animated characters - who are, surprisingly, not annoying or distracting to the learning process. It's that whole "learning while having fun" component. Lolly enjoyed seeing what the characters would do; they were a big draw for her, no pun intended. As much as I believe that learning shouldn't have to involve animated characters in order to work, I must admit that it helped Lolly during the more mundane lessons.
*Recordkeeping function. This is one of Time4Learning's biggest strengths, in my opinion. For every activity that the student does, Time4Learning records how much time the student spends on the activity, how the student scores on the practice, the quiz, and the test, and so much more, including the time/date that the activities are completed. This makes recordkeeping so easy for parents! Parents can view or print the records at their own convenience, and look at patterns and progress in the student's learning. This is especially a big help for homeschooling families who live in states where certain hourly attendance is required, and needs to be part of the recordkeeping. Most importantly, it shows me where we need to review.
*Good value for the money. Time4Learning includes everything for $19.95/month for the first child, and $14.95 for each subsequent child. While that's not free (everyone's favorite price, of course), it's a bargain compared to the hundreds of dollars that some parents spend on textbooks and complete curricula. In addition, when I wanted to cancel a few months back, I received good customer service, and no surprise costs. Many of the activities also included printable worksheets to drive home the concept just learned.
Time4Learning offers more than just the online student activities, should parents choose to do more with their membership. It also offers extensive message boards (so parents can talk with other parents) and lesson breakdowns (so parents can find out what their kids are learning, exactly), as well as reading lists, local homeschool group contacts, and opportunities for further learning. The website is more substantial than one might expect, and it's all included, making this a good value for the money.
*Strong math component. Lolly needed special help in math, compared to the other subjects. Time4Learning did more than I think I could have done to teach her about math on my own. For example, I know that one needs to teach addition, subtraction, fractions, et cetera, but I did not realize how important it was for students to master other principles of mathematics first, such as pattern-making and place value. I had completely overlooked some basic, essential building blocks, taking them for granted.
For months afterward, whenever Lolly would clearly understand a math concept and I would ask her where she learned that, she would answer that she got it from Time4Learning. That speaks volumes.
*Independent learning. Lolly could do nearly all of the lessons on her own, which gave her a sense of confidence and saved me time. Time4Learning is designed for the "accidental" homeschooling family, so it really caters to what is convenient for families. That's a plus, in my book!
Now for some disadvantages:
*Not comprehensive in scope. If one used this as a complete homeschool curriculum, several components would be lacking, obviously, such as art, music, physical education, foreign language, laboratory science, and the like. Plus, I think it's important to include a wide variety of learning tools, including books, field trips, and so forth. This is not a blight against the program, but just a caution that Time4Learning should be used in conjunction with real-world learning, of course.
*Too much computer time. Some parents, especially those with nature-based schooling styles such as Waldorf, might not like the program's obvious emphasis on computer-based learning. As inferred in the previous point, it's all about finding a balance and using the curriculum alongside other tools. If using Time4Learning, be sure to take breaks and get lots of outdoor time, as with any child's computer use.
*Problems with the curriculum. This is my biggest beef with the program. I'll give you an example: in one printable worksheet from the Science portion of the curriculum, snakes and reptiles were discussed. The worksheet clearly said that snakes did not have a backbone, among other erroneous statements. That's like saying that all birds fly, or that all fish have fins; that is patently untrue. In fact, all reptiles have backbones, and there was no excuse for this clearly incorrect information. It then made me nervous, wondering what other mistakes were hidden in the curriculum that I hadn't yet caught? To be fair, I can't recall finding other errors.
In summary, I would definitely recommend Time4Learning to help teach children about reading and mathematics, but I am still on the fence when it comes to their science and social studies components. (Too much gray area there, and after the snake worksheet, I am not sure whether I can trust it.) It is particularly useful as a learning supplement, rather than as a primary curriculum. It met my objectives, and I will continue to use it.
At the time, if you'll recall, I had a young baby, a toddler, and a 5-year-old, and I was desperate to find a way to supplement our at-home learning, which largely consisted of workbooks, library books, videos, board games, and of course, homemade projects. In addition, Lolly has really excelled at using online computer games to enhance her learning, so I decided to give Time4Learning a try, at no risk.
I had two particular objectives in mind. First, I wanted a way for Lolly to be able to move through her lessons more independently, as I have her younger brother and sister at home, and I can't always guide her lesson every step of the way. Another objective was for me to be able to assess where Lolly was, grade-wise, in her learning. I knew she was advanced in some subjects, especially reading, but I didn't know how to judge her grade level in all subjects. Time4Learning prides itself on meeting grade-level standards for the states, so I took it as a fairly accurate measure of Lolly's progress.
We ended up sticking with the Time4Learning program for three straight months, and then we took a three-month break to do other things, and now we're back. During our absence from Time4Learning, Lolly missed being able to do the games and activities, so I decided that it was worth it to go back, even though we're in summer mode. We originally asked for First Grade as our primary focus, and months later, I have Lolly doing Third Grade work, at my prerogative. She completed all of First Grade math, some of First Grade Language Arts, and Social Studies and Science activities for First and Second Grades. She has now completed some Third Grade math, as well. Here are the advantages and disadvantages that we've found with the program, in no particular order.
*Maximum flexibility. Students are free to go at their own pace and do as many or as few activities as they would like. Time4Learning recommends a sample schedule of one activity per day, per subject. Lolly would sometimes do 5-10 in a day, if she were so inclined. This is great if you have a student who gets excited about a subject and who doesn't want to be limited by the parameters of the schedule. A student can also switch from subject to subject and to different available themes.
Further, while parents choose the student's grade level, Time4Learning allows students to move through three different grade levels without even officially requesting to change grades. This means that if a student finds the material too hard or too easy, the student is not "locked in" to a specific grade level. A student can also do different grade levels with the material. For example, Lolly is at Second Grade in math, and Fourth Grade in reading, and Time4Learning allows for her to switch between those levels as much as she wishes.
*Entertaining activities. Most of Time4Learning's activities are presented in a fun way by animated characters - who are, surprisingly, not annoying or distracting to the learning process. It's that whole "learning while having fun" component. Lolly enjoyed seeing what the characters would do; they were a big draw for her, no pun intended. As much as I believe that learning shouldn't have to involve animated characters in order to work, I must admit that it helped Lolly during the more mundane lessons.
*Recordkeeping function. This is one of Time4Learning's biggest strengths, in my opinion. For every activity that the student does, Time4Learning records how much time the student spends on the activity, how the student scores on the practice, the quiz, and the test, and so much more, including the time/date that the activities are completed. This makes recordkeeping so easy for parents! Parents can view or print the records at their own convenience, and look at patterns and progress in the student's learning. This is especially a big help for homeschooling families who live in states where certain hourly attendance is required, and needs to be part of the recordkeeping. Most importantly, it shows me where we need to review.
*Good value for the money. Time4Learning includes everything for $19.95/month for the first child, and $14.95 for each subsequent child. While that's not free (everyone's favorite price, of course), it's a bargain compared to the hundreds of dollars that some parents spend on textbooks and complete curricula. In addition, when I wanted to cancel a few months back, I received good customer service, and no surprise costs. Many of the activities also included printable worksheets to drive home the concept just learned.
Time4Learning offers more than just the online student activities, should parents choose to do more with their membership. It also offers extensive message boards (so parents can talk with other parents) and lesson breakdowns (so parents can find out what their kids are learning, exactly), as well as reading lists, local homeschool group contacts, and opportunities for further learning. The website is more substantial than one might expect, and it's all included, making this a good value for the money.
*Strong math component. Lolly needed special help in math, compared to the other subjects. Time4Learning did more than I think I could have done to teach her about math on my own. For example, I know that one needs to teach addition, subtraction, fractions, et cetera, but I did not realize how important it was for students to master other principles of mathematics first, such as pattern-making and place value. I had completely overlooked some basic, essential building blocks, taking them for granted.
For months afterward, whenever Lolly would clearly understand a math concept and I would ask her where she learned that, she would answer that she got it from Time4Learning. That speaks volumes.
*Independent learning. Lolly could do nearly all of the lessons on her own, which gave her a sense of confidence and saved me time. Time4Learning is designed for the "accidental" homeschooling family, so it really caters to what is convenient for families. That's a plus, in my book!
Now for some disadvantages:
*Not comprehensive in scope. If one used this as a complete homeschool curriculum, several components would be lacking, obviously, such as art, music, physical education, foreign language, laboratory science, and the like. Plus, I think it's important to include a wide variety of learning tools, including books, field trips, and so forth. This is not a blight against the program, but just a caution that Time4Learning should be used in conjunction with real-world learning, of course.
*Too much computer time. Some parents, especially those with nature-based schooling styles such as Waldorf, might not like the program's obvious emphasis on computer-based learning. As inferred in the previous point, it's all about finding a balance and using the curriculum alongside other tools. If using Time4Learning, be sure to take breaks and get lots of outdoor time, as with any child's computer use.
*Problems with the curriculum. This is my biggest beef with the program. I'll give you an example: in one printable worksheet from the Science portion of the curriculum, snakes and reptiles were discussed. The worksheet clearly said that snakes did not have a backbone, among other erroneous statements. That's like saying that all birds fly, or that all fish have fins; that is patently untrue. In fact, all reptiles have backbones, and there was no excuse for this clearly incorrect information. It then made me nervous, wondering what other mistakes were hidden in the curriculum that I hadn't yet caught? To be fair, I can't recall finding other errors.
In summary, I would definitely recommend Time4Learning to help teach children about reading and mathematics, but I am still on the fence when it comes to their science and social studies components. (Too much gray area there, and after the snake worksheet, I am not sure whether I can trust it.) It is particularly useful as a learning supplement, rather than as a primary curriculum. It met my objectives, and I will continue to use it.
Time4Learning is an online education program that can be used as a homeschooling curriculum, an afterschool tutorial or for summer learning. As a member, I've been given the opportunity to share my experiences. The content in this review was not written by Time4Learning. While I was compensated, the opinion is entirely my own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)