My homeschool prodigy

I’m a little embarrassed to admit this.

I’ve been holding something back. It’s just, well, difficult to acknowledge this and feel certain that people won’t think I’m bragging. I mean, it’s one thing to homeschool your children. You already look like Superwoman to all those women out there who have real jobs and get paid and can afford to go out to lunch. They hear that you’re still wearing your pajamas at 10 a.m. and they are so envious that it’s hard for them to be nice to you anymore. And when they find out that you actually get your laundry done occasionally? Then the real jealousy sets in.

But on top of that, when you admit that you have a supergenius prodigy in your household? That you’re the mother of a homeschooling phenom? Well, that can be hard to admit. It’s a show-stopper, like telling a working mom that instead of taking the time to make your own lunch, you just eat the crumbs and slimy bits off your kids’ plates. I mean, you have to be careful not to make your friends too jealous, you know?

But I just can’t hold it in anymore. I am so proud of my little boy, the one I call my little bandit. He’s amazing! He talks, he does math, he steals things, and he proves over and over that he is much smarter than his older brother, who is six.

And here’s the kicker: he’s only two.

Oh, and he’s also my most handsome child. Here is a recent photo:

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

 

I’m sure you can just see the intelligence pouring forth: the distinguished brow, the alert ears, the apathetic expression.

He’s seen it all. You can’t fool this boy.

So perhaps you think I’m exaggerating. He can’t be all that smart. Well, let me tell you a few things:

Most two-year-olds have a limited vocabulary. They get what they want by throwing fits and grabbing.

This child has never, ever grabbed something or thrown a fit. He is a perfect gentleman. He speaks in complete sentences. Now, it’s true that most of his sentences contain only one word, but that’s because he’s a master of brevity. He always gets straight to the point.

Most two-year-olds don’t even know what heat registers are. They walk right by them without a notice.

Look at my brilliant young man. He’s not just sitting on the heat register: he’s guarding it. He knows a secret that even most adults haven’t yet figured out: If you sit by a heat register long enough, occasionally a tasty fish pops out!

Not only that, but he knows how to open up registers. People deny that a two-year-old could do such a thing, so he finds it necessary to prove his abilities over and over. He opens every register in the house and leaves them for us to find, just to remind us of his brilliance.

Another piece of evidence that he is the most intellectually advanced two-year-old on the planet:

He steals reading glasses.

You probably find that ridiculous. Of course he doesn’t steal reading glasses – he can’t know how to read yet! But he does. I bought a four-pack of reading glasses from Costco, and I’m down to one pair. My prodigy has been taking them and hiding them in his secret fort, where he also takes the books that he reads them with. We haven’t figured out which books those are, but we’ll keep looking and I’ll start his reading list on Goodreads soon.

OK, one final proof of his brilliance: do you know any other two-year-olds who can do such insightful self-portraits as this?

catcake.jpg1

 

Imagine the mind that can produce such an image, and in the medium of cake and frosting, no less! He’s a born master of modern art. I’m sure he’s ready to start selling in galleries, if we could only figure out how to preserve his creations so that they wouldn’t get eaten.

So there you have it. My secret is out. I know you’re probably raging with jealousy at this point. You’re going to call me all sorts of nasty names online, and write scathing notes on your friends’ Facebook pages. But I just felt that it was unfair to my precious darling to hide him from the world any longer.

He is a homeschool prodigy, and I am his mother.

I feel so fulfilled, I think I will go eat some chocolate. And then I’ve got to take some time for phone calls. CNN and the Huffington Post will want to know about this, for sure.

Book review: The Explosive Child

The Explosive Child: A new approach for understanding and parenting easily frustrated, chronically inflexible children
Ross W. Greene, Ph.D.
HarperCollins, 2009

The Explosive Child by Ross Greene has been on my reading list for a long time. I regret that I didn’t get to it earlier, though reading it now, when many of the other difficulties in our household have been ironed out, has been good timing.

Greene, who is a clinical professor of psychiatry, starts with a simple thesis that many families with sensitive, twice-exceptional, ADHD, learning disabled, or emotionally volatile children figure out over time: the usual parenting strategies don’t work with these kids. Many of us have taken a journey in this regard. We start out looking for help from standard parenting manuals, friends with typical kids, or even professionals. They have great ideas, but for some reason our kids are different.

Greene speaks directly to parents who feel like they’ve tried everything, and he points out that most of the solutions we’ve heard about boil down to two approaches. What he calls Plan A is otherwise known as authoritarian parenting; this is the “Because I said so” approach. Greene notes that even milder-sounding terms like “consequences” are a form of Plan A, because they don’t take the child’s point of view into account.

What he calls Plan C is the opposite: just giving in and letting explosive kids get their way. This permissive approach often seems easier in the short term, and Greene acknowledges that sometimes it’s a necessary part of getting through the day. Though most parenting books don’t advocate permissiveness directly, they do often counsel parents to offer understanding and support to their children in the midst of a tantrum, without giving any guidance for addressing the root causes of the behavior, as typically developing children will usually outgrow tantrums without intervention.

Greene’s interest is in helping parents put together a plan that not only addresses the root of the problem but also helps the child learn valuable life skills in the process. Neither Plan A nor Plan C fulfills these criteria, and in fact, both approaches can damage a volatile child’s chance of developing into a healthy functioning adult.

Greene’s Plan B isn’t easy. First of all, he acknowledges that it pushes a lot of common parenting buttons. Most of us harbor deep suspicions about letting badly behaving children “get away with it.” Also, we have immediate goals, such as wishing our children to be polite in public, that Plan B will put off for a more distant time while we work on our own responses to our children’s behavior. And, he admits, Plan B can be hard for our extended community, such grandparents, teachers, and adult friends, to buy into.

But the great thing about this book is its watertight argumentation: no matter what your resistance to moving to this new—difficult—mode of dealing with your child’s explosive behavior, Greene has a thoughtful, empathetic response.

I can’t vouch for the longterm success of Greene’s approach in my own parenting life, as I just read the book and am working slowly to implement changes in my own responses to common situations in our household. But I can say that as I read this book, I kept saying, “yes,” “yes,” “yes,” as Greene outlined the difficulties of raising a volatile child, and solutions that are at once sympathetic, humane, practical, and based on the longterm goal that we all have: raising happy, well-adjusted adults.

Update, 5 years later

I see that I wrote this five years ago. I can now revisit my last paragraph above and unequivocally state that Greene’s approach has been successful in my family and also for me as a teacher. I believe that reading this book changed the path our family was on. My fifteen-year-old is a happy, well-adjusted kid. Yes, sometimes we argue, but in a normal, healthy way. I can’t recommend Greene’s collaborative approach highly enough.

Are MOOCs going to destroy education as we know it?

MOOCs, Massive Open Online Courses, have lately been promoted as the new phenomenon that is going to destroy the university system. Why will people pay for a university education, the line of reasoning goes, if they can get the same thing online for free? And given that college grads are having so much trouble getting jobs to pay off their loans, won’t people start seeing college as a bad investment?

As I’ve written before, I am not a fan of the “college for everyone” theory that has dominated American educational planning for the last generation. On a policy level, I think it’s shortsighted to think that we’d want a country where everyone was college-educated, or that it was even feasible. On a personal level, college education simply doesn’t suit everyone. All of us have our own individual paths in life, and sometimes a college education does not lead in the direction we need to go. I think that pushing more and more kids into college as the default option after high school has degraded the quality of our universities and led to less respect for all the important and valuable pursuits for which college is not a prerequisite.

As a homeschooler, however, I do think that MOOCs are a welcome new addition to the options for learning outside of structured environments, and I love the idea that the breadth of human knowledge is being made available to everyone, everywhere.

But will MOOCs make the whole idea of the university education obsolete?

I don’t think so, but I do think that they will change the way we view self-education, and their use will drive what incoming college students will expect to get for their investment of money and time.

What do MOOCs do well?

MOOCs provide access to information and current ways of analyzing and presenting it. They provide connections between professors who once were perched on a pedestal to the rest of the world. They allow students who formerly were cut off from college–by geography, money, or life experiences—the ability to access some of the teaching they would have otherwise missed. MOOCs allow people to continue their education or just to fill in areas of interest. They also allow the students to access to help and ideas from fellow students around the world.

What do universities do well?

When the right students attend them (see my note above about “college for everyone”), universities are places that bring together advanced thinkers with less-educated people who want to advance their knowledge and skills. An optimal undergraduate experience is one in which the student’s perspectives get broadened and they are introduced to new ideas and ways of thinking. And this happens largely because of the new environment, being able to work directly with professors, and hanging out with other students who are going through the same transformation. The other thing that universities offer is a place for the highly educated to work together, exchanging ideas and research. Sometimes this part of the university life seems inaccessible to lower-level students, but usually they are worked in to the process, especially if they are in a field that mostly happens in the university environment. Lastly, universities provide an all-important networking opportunity. Future entrepreneurs find each other, future political leaders develop their skills together, and—I won’t deny that this is important—future best friends and spouses meet each other.

So if MOOCs won’t kill universities, what will they do?

First, a caveat: I do think that MOOCs may end up changing education as we know it at community colleges and lower level universities. Already, what with the recession and the sudden availability of free education, they are feeling the pinch. Some of these colleges are already doing what I expect all of them will eventually do: using MOOCs to provide part of the education that they offer their students. [See how San Jose State is doing this.] Other lower level colleges are just going to fail to attract enough students to remain viable, especially for-profit colleges which often prey on their students rather than educate them.

But I believe that MOOCs will never be able to provide the benefits that an in-person degree at a good university can provide:

  • Working directly with the best thinkers in your field
  • Developing mentoring relationships with professors or more experienced students
  • Learning from, helping, and arguing with your fellow students
  • Creating the sorts of connections that in some fields are absolutely necessary for success
  • Having guidance in honing your analytical skills in ways that can’t be done alone

What bothers me is not that people are excited about online learning (so am I) or that people think it has some benefits over traditional college (it does), but that everyone is so happily throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Traditional college is still going to be the best choice for people who should have been there to begin with.

So will MOOCs destroy education as we know it?

No, but they are a welcome addition to the tools available for self-education and advancement.

See related: Helping teens get the most from MOOCs

 

When children are force-fed violent entertainment

Every family I know has had the experience: They were in a public place and their children were exposed to violent entertainment that they didn’t choose. If you’re at the shopping mall or a restaurant, you can vote with your feet. But when you’re in an airplane, there’s nowhere to go.

One of my favorite organizations, the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, is lobbying United Airlines to stop playing “PG” movies after an incident where a family objected to their children being force-fed a violent film while on a flight. United treated the family like they were the ones who had a problem, but clearly, any organization that thinks that it’s right to force everyone on a plane to watch objectionable material has a seriously damaged moral compass.

Appropriate for kids?

“For parents who travel with young children, being unable to escape from violent and/or sexualized media is an all-too-familiar experience.”

Please join me in support CCFC’s effort to curb this practice:

Tell United Airlines: No Media Violence on Overhead Screens

For years, United Airlines has refused multiple requests from parents and advocates to stop showing violent movies on overhead screens. But after a flight crew’s overreaction to a family’s efforts to shield their children from the violent PG-13 film Alex Cross (pictured), the airline has agreed to review its policies. For parents who travel with young children, being unable to escape from violent media is an all-too-familiar experience. Let’s change that. Learn more and add your voice to the nearly 2,000 parents who have urged United to stop showing violent PG-13 movies on publicly-visible overhead screens by visiting http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/action/tell-united-no-media-violence-overhead-screens.

Book review: Children with High-Functioning Autism

I have recently come upon two books that I think are important books for those of us with “quirky” kids to read. This is the first of my reviews—the second will be about The Explosive Child, which I’m still digesting! If the topics of these books speak at all to your child’s quirkiness, I highly recommend them.

Children with High-Functioning Autism
Claire Hughes-Lynch

Book coverIn general, I don’t expect that books on autism will give me much insight into my parenting challenges. I regularly speak to parents with kids who have profound disabilities and feel like I’m whining about the comparatively small problems we face. I’m in awe of parents who face all the difficulties of raising children who may never be able to live independently.

I was intrigued by the title of this book, however, because I often have conversations with parents who have chosen not to pursue diagnosis for one reason or another. These conversations drift into the subject of how various of our kids, spouses, and even ourselves could probably be placed on the high end of the autism spectrum. Lots of the kids who fit into the scope of this book aren’t diagnosed, for a variety of reasons. But the parents of those kids will find interesting and thought-provoking information in its pages.

Hughes-Lynch is neither a medical professional nor simply a parent. She was a teacher in special education and gifted education before her children were diagnosed. This gives her a particular point of view that I think is novel: she writes both as a parent, frantic for information and insight, and as a professional who is now seeing her profession from the other side.

There are large sections of these books that won’t apply to many families directly, such as navigating the public school IEP and 504 plan system. But on the whole I found the author’s approach a novel and helpful one. She dissects the job of parenting a quirky child – in her case, one diagnosed autistic but also gifted, another diagnosed PDD-NOS – and separates out the various issues that parents will face. But on top of that, she follows up with knowledge and insights gained from her professional life. The result is a very balanced book, with both the mother’s passion and willingness to try everything, as well as the professional’s insistence on standards and data.

It’s a welcome book that recognises the difficulty of calling a high-functioning child “autistic”.

Hughes-Lynch writes:

“Despite the warning signs of autism, there often are signs of significant strengths that can signal high-functioning autism. “Experts” can watch children and say, “Nope, I don’t see autism” because the child is making eye contact, or is listening to you, or is engaging in imaginative play, or is talking—behaviors that often are not found in children with more traditional autism. These are the challenges that families face: there is “something,” but what? Giftedness? Autism? Anxiety? Asperger’s syndrome? These children often defy easy classification and are ultimately amalgams of many different, overlapping issues.”

Her insights about how autistic kids’ reactions are different from the norm offer parents a way to classify their children’s behaviors and weigh them against other high-functioning children’s behaviors:

“When autism has hijacked their reactions, children appear unable to control anything, and when they are momentarily in charge of their autism, they can be “too good.” There often is very little middle ground.”

The book is a goldmine about everything from support to therapy, with lots of pointers to research and other books. The one drawback of the book is that she cites lots of research that has become dated, given how quickly autism research is moving. So readers should check data that she cites before believing that they are still current.

Otherwise, I think book helps out in a couple of grey areas: Not for parents of profoundly autistic kids, it focuses on the unique concerns of children who may even be gifted learners and are more likely to be able to “graduate” from their autism into an independent adult life. Also, this is neither the story of a parent’s journey through autism nor a book written by a clinician – it spans both genres in a helpful and insightful way.

 

Now available