Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Internet Search
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Interesting and possibly Controversial
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Marguerite" data-source="post: 320969" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>When I was a kid, there was the beginnings of gifted education but it was almost apologetic, there was little formal. The attitude was very much one of, "They cna manage on their own."</p><p></p><p>We now have much better G & T education in Australia, but it's not always as accessible as it should be. There is still an attitude prevailing in some schools, that the bright kids can be used to teach the slow learners and that this addresses the needs of both groups. While you can do this, it shouldn't be the management solution for both groups in entirety, nor even significantly.</p><p></p><p>The groups still missing out are the gifted but learning disabled. Our state-based education system still tends to average out the test scores (even when this is actively recommended against by the test designers) and uses this noew, lower but still acceptable overall score to say, "there is no problem - the child is neither gifted nor learning disabled."</p><p></p><p>In the recent TV interview that difficult child 3 & I were part of (last Sunday night) the reporter made the point that in Australia our Federal government is giving massive rebates on housing insulation, many times more than the amount spent on early intervention in autism, even though one child in 150 have a diagnosis of autism.</p><p></p><p>The problem with statements like this, is that you can't equate housing insulation with medical or educational research. Of course there should be more funding, but the government isn't going to pull the plug on housing insulation to pour it into autism supports. The activists need to find a better angle, to get what they want from the government.</p><p></p><p>A better angle would be to compare the cost to the community of an autistic child who does not get the help needed when younger, with the cost to provide that early intervention. And of course, it's way cheaper to put the help in place when the children are young, rather than the vast amounts they will cost us in disability pensions if we cannot support them to become productive taxpayers.</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 320969, member: 1991"] When I was a kid, there was the beginnings of gifted education but it was almost apologetic, there was little formal. The attitude was very much one of, "They cna manage on their own." We now have much better G & T education in Australia, but it's not always as accessible as it should be. There is still an attitude prevailing in some schools, that the bright kids can be used to teach the slow learners and that this addresses the needs of both groups. While you can do this, it shouldn't be the management solution for both groups in entirety, nor even significantly. The groups still missing out are the gifted but learning disabled. Our state-based education system still tends to average out the test scores (even when this is actively recommended against by the test designers) and uses this noew, lower but still acceptable overall score to say, "there is no problem - the child is neither gifted nor learning disabled." In the recent TV interview that difficult child 3 & I were part of (last Sunday night) the reporter made the point that in Australia our Federal government is giving massive rebates on housing insulation, many times more than the amount spent on early intervention in autism, even though one child in 150 have a diagnosis of autism. The problem with statements like this, is that you can't equate housing insulation with medical or educational research. Of course there should be more funding, but the government isn't going to pull the plug on housing insulation to pour it into autism supports. The activists need to find a better angle, to get what they want from the government. A better angle would be to compare the cost to the community of an autistic child who does not get the help needed when younger, with the cost to provide that early intervention. And of course, it's way cheaper to put the help in place when the children are young, rather than the vast amounts they will cost us in disability pensions if we cannot support them to become productive taxpayers. Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Interesting and possibly Controversial
Top