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
Nasty accusation
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: 367572" data-attributes="member: 1991"><p>I've had one of THOSE days today, I haven't had much chance to respond until now.</p><p></p><p>The grading of state-based work - besides state-based exams which are done in Year 10 and Year 12, we have other tests done annually on some grades, the Basic Skills tests. And yes, Kathy - those state-based exams are either done at the school under independent supervision (which I requested for difficult child 3) or at home with a supervisor travelling to the home to supervise there. He's already done exams like this, last year. I am on record as requesting the more public option for him. Why would I do this, if we were deceptive? This teacher should have realised this - it is a matter of record, it's on difficult child 3's files.</p><p>There are also other tests (new, not sure of the names) which are graded in batches by certain teachers who look at not only their school, but other schools in their district. Like the staffing issue, there would be strict guidelines on how the teachers respond to these written assessments and what they look for as evidence of capability or otherwise. With the Basic Skills tests, much of it is computer-graded. Multiple choice. But the written component especially the creative writing component, has to be individually assessed. It is set up so that each piece of writing is given thorough viewing. But they deal with that by keeping the word limit down to about 600 words max. I know from my own writing experience, it is actually quite challenging to write a good short story that is so very short; you can't really develop a good plot in so few words unless you're an expert. So automatically, this drops the standard. Now, the flaws in difficult child 3's creative writing are primarily his avoidance of conflict. A good story should always have conflict(or crisis) and then resolution of that conflict. And he can't emotionally handle that. But because he sees the world as a movie screen with subtitles, he's always been good with dialogue and vocabulary. I dug through old work of his and found some interesting examples. Again, he avoided conflict, but he wrote good dialogue and showed character through dialogue - one character as bossy, one was whiny, one was timid. I also found a piece he wrote at age 9 of a visit to a city restaurant (at the top of a skyscraper) in which he described things really well, but also said the floor number as well as the elevator number - typical autistic.</p><p></p><p>easy child 2/difficult child 2 also is a good writer, was acclaimed as such when she was 11. At that time she had the chance to work with a famous Aussie childrens' author who worked with her in my presence but without any involvement by me in any way, so it would have been obvious what easy child 2/difficult child 2 was capable of. I found a rough note from one of easy child 2/difficult child 2's stories at age 12 from her time working with the author - she describes the feeling of water hitting her head as if trying to see her brain and read her thoughts; then she includes the concept "teardrops from sad roses". It was to be a fantasy story about a little girl finding a secret garden doorway into fairyland.</p><p></p><p>I've always said, I am no better a writer these days than I was in my pre-teens. I value and admire children's writing because they are still in touch with their imagination; they have not yet been 'dumbed down' by self-consciousness, into producing the same pap as everyone else. When I judge a children's writing competition, I look for that spark of individuality and creativity and try to nurture it with encouragement. What I figure is happening here - difficult child 3, because of his autism, has not been socially programmed like his peers, into losing that direct observation touch, that individuality and originality that comes from simply choosing the words as they feel right, instead of using the cliches that kids tend to resort to when they become more 'ashamed' of using words creatively. difficult child 3 is already reported professionally as having a uni level vocabulary. He's simply used words effectively, coupled with a lousy plot with little to no conflict, but since all the other work lacks much i the way of plot (due to low word limit) then the usual deficits in difficult child 3's work have not shown up.</p><p></p><p>If I had written it for him, I would have done a better job. I also would have done SOME sort of job in the areas where difficult child 3 was unable to comply - such as a draft. If I wanted difficult child 3 to look convincing with this, I would have got him to copy out in his own handwriting from something I composed earlier. The lack of a handwritten draft from difficult child 3 (especially when I had previously got dispensation for this) is not evidence of deception in any way. Frankly, the whole project response shows clear splinter skills.</p><p></p><p>In our education system, the teachers who do the professional marking of state exams get extra pay. They also get time off from their regular school while they do this. At the correspondence school, this is actually easier to administer. The state-based exams happen at different times of the year and only involve one grade at a time, and only three or four grades at all across the 13. So it is manageable. However, the vast bulk of what the teacher would have seen, would be from "normal" kids. I think she's making the mistake here, of assuming that because difficult child 3 can't respond to complex questions on one of Shakespeare's plays, that he is equally incapable of writing creatively on something he feels comfortable with. With creative writing, difficult child 3 can multitask and therefore can handle holding the plot elements in his head as he writes (unlike difficult child 1). And if it's his story, it can change direction if he chooses to let it, and the reader would never know. Plus his choice of words is likely to be uninhibited and effective. But he does take a long time to do this.</p><p></p><p>That said - assessing such writing is still very subjective. I freely admit, I didn't think his work was that good because of the minimal plot. I was caught up in a furore last year in a competition I was judging (co-judging) when an anonymous entry clearly showed an amazing capability in the child, but due to lack of story development (it read more like the opening of a novel, there was no resolution) we had to down-rate the story. The author turned out to be a young friend of mine. But I still held by my decision. My problem happened when I divulged (after we found out) that I knew the child, and the (very bombastic but totally ignorant) competition organiser disqualified that entry (which the other judge and I had still placed) after the process was complete. Nothing inappropriate had taken place (I checked by asking other, more experienced competition judges of my acquaintance) and interestingly, the organisation I had judged for, has now folded due to lack of anyone to do the work, who has any knowledge of what they're doing. The insult to me led to a mass exodus of anyone capable.</p><p></p><p>But I digress. (although that experience last year has made me hypersensitive).</p><p></p><p>Kathy,on the subject of the whole employment issue, here is a website which might explain it more. I don't ant to go into too much detail because it could identify me.</p><p><a href="https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/employment/promotion/internalapps.htm" target="_blank">https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/employment/promotion/internalapps.htm</a></p><p>It is the information for applicants, but it could also lead you to information for panel members, including the rules concerning conflict of interest. It has been my experience that every single panel I've been on, has had someone have to declare conflict of interest for at least one candidate. In some cases, we all had to declare (for different reasons) on one of more candidate. It is unavoidable. But conflict is not just from a parent rep, it can be from a colleague or boss. You might want to promote a particular staff member; or you might want to block that staff member's promotion. The panel is designed to make it impossible for personal bias to bear such fruit. It also is designed to give all parts of the school community a voice. It actually is similar to scientific ethics committees which include community representation. I've had experience there, too. There are so many checks and balances that you couldn't very easily 'cheat' at it. However, if doubt is thrown onto a panel member's integrity after the event, it could make a panel decision open to challenge.</p><p></p><p>Until this incident, I would have praised tis teacher to the skies. However, little things are now percolating through my brain and I wonder if I've been a gullible idiot this year. I also strongly suspect that the accusation did not come merely from her own fertile imagination - I strongly believe colleagues were consulted and the issue was discussed with them. Where there is doubt, they have to respond. I get that. But I feel they should have given us more opportunity for dialogue and clarification, and not simply stalled until I now have to wait through the holidays for a satisfactory resolution. I do think that was badly (and deliberately) done. I can't remember exactly what she said, but what I recall leads me to believe that the accusation was made with the knowledge and approval of the head teacher. </p><p></p><p>I also now question this teacher's previously stated requirement, when she began working with these face to face lessons with difficult child 3, that I be absent from the room. Now, I would have preferred to be present so I could listen in and take mental note of what she told him, so I could reinforce her lesson at home and keep it consistent. Her stated concern was that he would work better in my absence, if he was refusing to work with me at home as I stated (he refuses to let me help him; not quite the same).</p><p></p><p>I now wonder if she believed, way back then, that I was telling difficult child 3 what to write in his class work. Yes, there have been times I've done that, but I have always been open about it and only done it when the teacher had previously given me permission to do so, when things were desperate and difficult child 3 needed to both catch up, and also discuss the work. I've had mixed messages on this for years but choose to err on the side of "do it yourself." And that was class work, not assessment, which is always strictly hands off.</p><p></p><p>It is vital that those who cheat learn not to. But it is also vital that kids who do well from their own efforts are not punished for success. I do feel that the special class they put on the week before, undoubtedly stimulated a number of students to excel. I hate to think how they are coping over their holidays.</p><p></p><p>I know I have enough backing form others at the school, to publicly be vindicated. But what I really need, more than that, is for this teacher (and those she has possibly convinced) to realise that I would never do this; and the corollary of this, is that difficult child 3 produced this work on his own and this means the help he needs, is subtly different. Or perhaps not so subtly different, but extremely different. </p><p></p><p>I don't want him to be given short shrift, because of someone's mistaken belief that he is not capable on any level.</p><p></p><p>They may verbally apologise, say, "oops." But if the mistaken belief continues privately, if I cannot be vindicated, our time working with them will be an utter waste.</p><p></p><p>I also have memories of past wrongs from teachers as well as others. As I mentioned - the most recent was just last year and I was devastated. I think I posted about it. Interestingly, I also confided in the school's principal about it while we were on a break during a staffing panel. Yes, it hurts. And it can greatly sap your confidence. It is not an accusation to ever be made lightly, I really feel it should have been raised face to face and with a great deal more caution and sensitivity. I will make this point when I get the opportunity in the meeting that I'm certain will happen. More time needing to be wasted... but then, if it changes a mindset which was previously hidden and has now been forced into the open, it won't be a waste. A positive outcome will be if we can have a clearer understanding of where difficult child 3 is highly capable, so we can better pinpoint where he needs support, and how best to equip him.</p><p></p><p>Marg</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Marguerite, post: 367572, member: 1991"] I've had one of THOSE days today, I haven't had much chance to respond until now. The grading of state-based work - besides state-based exams which are done in Year 10 and Year 12, we have other tests done annually on some grades, the Basic Skills tests. And yes, Kathy - those state-based exams are either done at the school under independent supervision (which I requested for difficult child 3) or at home with a supervisor travelling to the home to supervise there. He's already done exams like this, last year. I am on record as requesting the more public option for him. Why would I do this, if we were deceptive? This teacher should have realised this - it is a matter of record, it's on difficult child 3's files. There are also other tests (new, not sure of the names) which are graded in batches by certain teachers who look at not only their school, but other schools in their district. Like the staffing issue, there would be strict guidelines on how the teachers respond to these written assessments and what they look for as evidence of capability or otherwise. With the Basic Skills tests, much of it is computer-graded. Multiple choice. But the written component especially the creative writing component, has to be individually assessed. It is set up so that each piece of writing is given thorough viewing. But they deal with that by keeping the word limit down to about 600 words max. I know from my own writing experience, it is actually quite challenging to write a good short story that is so very short; you can't really develop a good plot in so few words unless you're an expert. So automatically, this drops the standard. Now, the flaws in difficult child 3's creative writing are primarily his avoidance of conflict. A good story should always have conflict(or crisis) and then resolution of that conflict. And he can't emotionally handle that. But because he sees the world as a movie screen with subtitles, he's always been good with dialogue and vocabulary. I dug through old work of his and found some interesting examples. Again, he avoided conflict, but he wrote good dialogue and showed character through dialogue - one character as bossy, one was whiny, one was timid. I also found a piece he wrote at age 9 of a visit to a city restaurant (at the top of a skyscraper) in which he described things really well, but also said the floor number as well as the elevator number - typical autistic. easy child 2/difficult child 2 also is a good writer, was acclaimed as such when she was 11. At that time she had the chance to work with a famous Aussie childrens' author who worked with her in my presence but without any involvement by me in any way, so it would have been obvious what easy child 2/difficult child 2 was capable of. I found a rough note from one of easy child 2/difficult child 2's stories at age 12 from her time working with the author - she describes the feeling of water hitting her head as if trying to see her brain and read her thoughts; then she includes the concept "teardrops from sad roses". It was to be a fantasy story about a little girl finding a secret garden doorway into fairyland. I've always said, I am no better a writer these days than I was in my pre-teens. I value and admire children's writing because they are still in touch with their imagination; they have not yet been 'dumbed down' by self-consciousness, into producing the same pap as everyone else. When I judge a children's writing competition, I look for that spark of individuality and creativity and try to nurture it with encouragement. What I figure is happening here - difficult child 3, because of his autism, has not been socially programmed like his peers, into losing that direct observation touch, that individuality and originality that comes from simply choosing the words as they feel right, instead of using the cliches that kids tend to resort to when they become more 'ashamed' of using words creatively. difficult child 3 is already reported professionally as having a uni level vocabulary. He's simply used words effectively, coupled with a lousy plot with little to no conflict, but since all the other work lacks much i the way of plot (due to low word limit) then the usual deficits in difficult child 3's work have not shown up. If I had written it for him, I would have done a better job. I also would have done SOME sort of job in the areas where difficult child 3 was unable to comply - such as a draft. If I wanted difficult child 3 to look convincing with this, I would have got him to copy out in his own handwriting from something I composed earlier. The lack of a handwritten draft from difficult child 3 (especially when I had previously got dispensation for this) is not evidence of deception in any way. Frankly, the whole project response shows clear splinter skills. In our education system, the teachers who do the professional marking of state exams get extra pay. They also get time off from their regular school while they do this. At the correspondence school, this is actually easier to administer. The state-based exams happen at different times of the year and only involve one grade at a time, and only three or four grades at all across the 13. So it is manageable. However, the vast bulk of what the teacher would have seen, would be from "normal" kids. I think she's making the mistake here, of assuming that because difficult child 3 can't respond to complex questions on one of Shakespeare's plays, that he is equally incapable of writing creatively on something he feels comfortable with. With creative writing, difficult child 3 can multitask and therefore can handle holding the plot elements in his head as he writes (unlike difficult child 1). And if it's his story, it can change direction if he chooses to let it, and the reader would never know. Plus his choice of words is likely to be uninhibited and effective. But he does take a long time to do this. That said - assessing such writing is still very subjective. I freely admit, I didn't think his work was that good because of the minimal plot. I was caught up in a furore last year in a competition I was judging (co-judging) when an anonymous entry clearly showed an amazing capability in the child, but due to lack of story development (it read more like the opening of a novel, there was no resolution) we had to down-rate the story. The author turned out to be a young friend of mine. But I still held by my decision. My problem happened when I divulged (after we found out) that I knew the child, and the (very bombastic but totally ignorant) competition organiser disqualified that entry (which the other judge and I had still placed) after the process was complete. Nothing inappropriate had taken place (I checked by asking other, more experienced competition judges of my acquaintance) and interestingly, the organisation I had judged for, has now folded due to lack of anyone to do the work, who has any knowledge of what they're doing. The insult to me led to a mass exodus of anyone capable. But I digress. (although that experience last year has made me hypersensitive). Kathy,on the subject of the whole employment issue, here is a website which might explain it more. I don't ant to go into too much detail because it could identify me. [url]https://www.det.nsw.edu.au/employment/promotion/internalapps.htm[/url] It is the information for applicants, but it could also lead you to information for panel members, including the rules concerning conflict of interest. It has been my experience that every single panel I've been on, has had someone have to declare conflict of interest for at least one candidate. In some cases, we all had to declare (for different reasons) on one of more candidate. It is unavoidable. But conflict is not just from a parent rep, it can be from a colleague or boss. You might want to promote a particular staff member; or you might want to block that staff member's promotion. The panel is designed to make it impossible for personal bias to bear such fruit. It also is designed to give all parts of the school community a voice. It actually is similar to scientific ethics committees which include community representation. I've had experience there, too. There are so many checks and balances that you couldn't very easily 'cheat' at it. However, if doubt is thrown onto a panel member's integrity after the event, it could make a panel decision open to challenge. Until this incident, I would have praised tis teacher to the skies. However, little things are now percolating through my brain and I wonder if I've been a gullible idiot this year. I also strongly suspect that the accusation did not come merely from her own fertile imagination - I strongly believe colleagues were consulted and the issue was discussed with them. Where there is doubt, they have to respond. I get that. But I feel they should have given us more opportunity for dialogue and clarification, and not simply stalled until I now have to wait through the holidays for a satisfactory resolution. I do think that was badly (and deliberately) done. I can't remember exactly what she said, but what I recall leads me to believe that the accusation was made with the knowledge and approval of the head teacher. I also now question this teacher's previously stated requirement, when she began working with these face to face lessons with difficult child 3, that I be absent from the room. Now, I would have preferred to be present so I could listen in and take mental note of what she told him, so I could reinforce her lesson at home and keep it consistent. Her stated concern was that he would work better in my absence, if he was refusing to work with me at home as I stated (he refuses to let me help him; not quite the same). I now wonder if she believed, way back then, that I was telling difficult child 3 what to write in his class work. Yes, there have been times I've done that, but I have always been open about it and only done it when the teacher had previously given me permission to do so, when things were desperate and difficult child 3 needed to both catch up, and also discuss the work. I've had mixed messages on this for years but choose to err on the side of "do it yourself." And that was class work, not assessment, which is always strictly hands off. It is vital that those who cheat learn not to. But it is also vital that kids who do well from their own efforts are not punished for success. I do feel that the special class they put on the week before, undoubtedly stimulated a number of students to excel. I hate to think how they are coping over their holidays. I know I have enough backing form others at the school, to publicly be vindicated. But what I really need, more than that, is for this teacher (and those she has possibly convinced) to realise that I would never do this; and the corollary of this, is that difficult child 3 produced this work on his own and this means the help he needs, is subtly different. Or perhaps not so subtly different, but extremely different. I don't want him to be given short shrift, because of someone's mistaken belief that he is not capable on any level. They may verbally apologise, say, "oops." But if the mistaken belief continues privately, if I cannot be vindicated, our time working with them will be an utter waste. I also have memories of past wrongs from teachers as well as others. As I mentioned - the most recent was just last year and I was devastated. I think I posted about it. Interestingly, I also confided in the school's principal about it while we were on a break during a staffing panel. Yes, it hurts. And it can greatly sap your confidence. It is not an accusation to ever be made lightly, I really feel it should have been raised face to face and with a great deal more caution and sensitivity. I will make this point when I get the opportunity in the meeting that I'm certain will happen. More time needing to be wasted... but then, if it changes a mindset which was previously hidden and has now been forced into the open, it won't be a waste. A positive outcome will be if we can have a clearer understanding of where difficult child 3 is highly capable, so we can better pinpoint where he needs support, and how best to equip him. Marg [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Parent Support Forums
General Parenting
Nasty accusation
Top