Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If it turns out that, even after various help has been given, as required by law, your son is unable to do the work required to pass a key element of the curriculum, you want the school system to give him a high school diploma anyway.
I would suggest you look into a big inner city high school in a big urban district. There, if he shows up every day, makes an effort, and doesn't cause trouble, he'll be passed.
No, that is not what I said.
I never said, "let him fail Geometry and give him the same diploma."
I never said, "don't have him take math."
I never said, "give him the same diploma as everyone else." (Frankly, I don't care what diploma he gets.)
My argument is that students with learning disabilities should be allowed to take a lower level course (in this case, some sort of math other than Geometry or Algebra II), instead of forcing that student through a higher level course with modifications/accommodations.
I am advocating for appropriate course work for learning disabled students. Forcing an LD student to take a class they are not equipped for is counterproductive.
I never said, "let him fail Geometry and give him the same diploma."
I never said, "don't have him take math."
I never said, "give him the same diploma as everyone else." (Frankly, I don't care what diploma he gets.)
My argument is that students with learning disabilities should be allowed to take a lower level course (in this case, some sort of math other than Geometry or Algebra II), instead of forcing that student through a higher level course with modifications/accommodations.
I am advocating for appropriate course work for learning disabled students. Forcing an LD student to take a class they are not equipped for is counterproductive.
Why you have a problem with that is beyond me.
The problem with this is, with modifications such as being allowed extra time, using a calculator, adjusting the grade on a different scale, etc. They are still covering the necessary content. A lower level course not meeting the standard needed for graduation is not exposing them to the necessary content.
I would say that anyone who cannot solve a simple equation with an x variable finding the value by high school has to have some kind of dyslexia or no comprehension of number sense. That is basically just arithmetic that a 3rd grader should be able to do.
My argument is that students with learning disabilities should be allowed to take a lower level course (in this case, some sort of math other than Geometry or Algebra II), instead of forcing that student through a higher level course with modifications/accommodations.
Where does that end though? If your son can't pass geometry and another kid can't pass her english class, and a third can't manage science, should they all be given a diploma? At what point does the diploma become meaningless?
Where does that end though? If your son can't pass geometry and another kid can't pass her english class, and a third can't manage science, should they all be given a diploma? At what point does the diploma become meaningless?
High school is four years long. Surely a diploma is about more than one particular class in the presence of a demonstrated learning disability.
As I noted up thread, colleges including Yale University exempt learning disabled students from the foreign language requirement. A substitute class is offered. These students still graduate from Yale with a Yale diploma. Not being able to pass French doesn't negate all the other work the student does.
If exemptions are not ideal, then schools could teach specifically to learning disabled students. Have an English class for dyslexics instead of mainstreaming them and putting a band aid on the situation with accommodations/modifications. (This will never be done, of course).
High school is four years long. Surely a diploma is about more than one particular class in the presence of a demonstrated learning disability.
As I noted up thread, colleges including Yale University exempt learning disabled students from the foreign language requirement. A substitute class is offered. These students still graduate from Yale with a Yale diploma. Not being able to pass French doesn't negate all the other work the student does.
If exemptions are not ideal, then schools could teach specifically to learning disabled students. Have an English class for dyslexics instead of mainstreaming them and putting a band aid on the situation with accommodations/modifications. (This will never be done, of course).
So if not being able to pass a foreign language does not negate all the other work for a learning disabled student, should it negate the work of a non learning disabled student? Should there be two different standards? One for learning disabled and a different, more challenging standard for non learning disabled?
What does a diploma mean if every individual gets to pick their own definition?
So if not being able to pass a foreign language does not negate all the other work for a learning disabled student, should it negate the work of a non learning disabled student? Should there be two different standards? One for learning disabled and a different, more challenging standard for non learning disabled?
What does a diploma mean if every individual gets to pick their own definition?
Why shouldn't there be different standards for neurotypical students vs. learning disabled students, the same way there are different standards for physically able people versus those who are not fully able bodied?
That doesn't mean that "every individual gets to pick and choose". There are committees that work on these standards, although I agree that what those standards are may vary from person to person, since learning disabilities affect different people in different ways.
Why shouldn't there be different standards for learning disabled students vs. neurotypical students, the same way there are different standards for physically able people versus those who are not fully able bodied?
Because the whole point of school is the learning of academic subjects. If a physical disability requires adjustment of PE standards (or, for that matter, deaf kids aren't required to take classroom music; blind kids aren't required to take art), that is acceptable because those subjects are peripheral to the purpose of school.
By analogy, the whole point of sports is athletic competition. We don't have "different standards" for physically disabled athletes; they compete separately. In professional sports, for example, a baseball time may very well hire an interpreter and a language coach to assist a player from Cuba who doesn't speak adequate English; because the speaking of English is peripheral to the job of a professional baseball team. But no baseball league amateur, school, or professional, is going to allow a legally-blind player to be pitched to from half the standard distance using a softball and only underhand because he can't see well enough to hit a regular fastball; while all the other players have to bat normally. No, if there are sufficient visually impaired people who want to play baseball, they'll set up a league for visually impaired people and they'll compete in that league.
Why shouldn't there be different standards for neurotypical students vs. learning disabled students, the same way there are different standards for physically able people versus those who are not fully able bodied?
That doesn't mean that "every individual gets to pick and choose". There are committees that work on these standards, although I agree that what those standards are may vary from person to person, since learning disabilities affect different people in different ways.
I could be in favor of schools having a small number of diplomas, PROVIDING they are labeled as such. For example:
Academic Diploma
General Diploma
Special Services Diploma
Why shouldn't there be different standards for neurotypical students vs. learning disabled students, the same way there are different standards for physically able people versus those who are not fully able bodied?
That doesn't mean that "every individual gets to pick and choose". There are committees that work on these standards, although I agree that what those standards are may vary from person to person, since learning disabilities affect different people in different ways.
Because there has to be some standards. I fully support making accomodations for special ed kids and allowing them to stay in school as long as they need to in order to graduate, but to allow a kid to bypass core requirements for which there are no real substitutes degrades the value of the diploma.
Most programmers do not, however, need abstract algebra. The algebra you learn in high school is probably enough.
Try earning a BS in Software Engineering without high school algebra.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
