Ten O'Clock Scholar - Learning styles of girls vs. boys

In general, do girls and boys have different learning styles? Find out here!

                It seems that the different learning styles reflect, in general, the learning differences between girls and boys. Of course there are always exceptions, but girls tend to be more audio-sequential (left-brain), while boys tend to be more visual-spatial (right-brain). No wonder boys typically do better with 3-dimensional video games and girls generally enjoy writing more! (For more in-depth discussion of learning styles, see my previous blogs.)

                This is counter-intuitive to the original left-brain/right-brain theory of men vs. women, but explains why many boys don’t catch up academically to girls until middle school age. I was always taught that men were more logical and left-brained, and women were more right-brained. Dr. Silverman’s research shows, not necessarily. Perhaps the idea that men are more “logical” stems from the truth that it is more common for females to network both brain hemispheres simultaneously, whereas males tend to use one side at a time. Often men don’t to understand the leaps that women make in connecting multiple data streams, therefore think they are illogical. Quite the opposite is true, actually.

                Plus, socially it is more acceptable for women to express emotions, so they do. The emotions can still be based on intuitive logic, but misunderstood by men, who have learned to suppress most emotions in public (except anger). Both sexes feel the whole range of emotions, but their intensity and manifestation may differ. And what is important to males and females may be different, whether genetic, social, or both. Thus they can misinterpret each other’s motivating factors. This does not mean one is more logical or emotional than the other. They complement each other.

                Personally, I seem to have parts of both learning-styles: I learn better by seeing than hearing, but I am more sequential than spatial. Call me, visual-sequential, with a little of everything else thrown in.

        There is an intriguing article by Sharon Begley, Gray Matters, Newsweek (March 27, 1995), at http://www.newsweek.com/1995/03/26/gray-matters.html. Quoting several sections:

                “Of course men and women are different. Boy, are they different. In every sphere of life, it seems, the sexes act, react or perform differently. Toys? A little girl daintily sets up her dolls, plastic cups and saucers, while her brother assembles his Legos into a gun -- and ambushes the tea party. Navigating? The female tourist turns her map every which way but right, trying to find the way back to that charming bistro, while her boyfriend charges ahead, remembering every tricky turn without fail. Relationships? With spooky intuition, women's acute senses pick up subtle tones of voice and facial expressions; men are insensitive clods who can't tell a sad face until it drenches them in tears. Cognition? Females excel at language, like finding just the right words to make their husbands feel like worms; males can't verbalize even one good excuse for stumbling home at 2 a.m.

                “Stereotypes? Maybe -- but as generalizations they have a large enough kernel of truth that scientists, like everyone else, suspect there's something going on here. As Simon LeVay, a Salk Institute neuroscientist put it recently, "There are differences in the mental lives of men and women.''

And from a scientific study:

                “With new technologies like functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET), researchers catch brains in the very act of cogitating, feeling or remembering. Already this year researchers have reported that men and women use different clumps of neurons when they take a first step toward reading and when their brains are "idling.'' And, coming soon to a research journal near you, provocative studies will report that women engage more of their brains than men when they think sad thoughts -- but, possibly, less of their brains when they solve SAT math problems.

                “Twenty-two male and 22 female students were PET-scanned while they solved SAT math problems. By detecting areas of the brain using the most blood, PET pinpoints active regions.

                “Male students with high SAT scores showed intense activity in the temporal lobes (red spots at top and sides), compared with men with average scores. In men, it seems, ability is related to how hard the brain works.

                “Brain activity in the mathematically gifted women was less intense than in the high-SAT men, even though their scores were comparable. These women expended no more neural effort than the average-SAT women.

                Summarized from the PET Scan Photo:

·         The region of the cerebral cortex that helps control hearing, memory and a person's sense of self and time, is stronger in men.

·         Women have more neurons in a tiny region of the temporal lobe behind the eye, which understands language as well as melodies and speech tones. In cognitively normal men, this region has about 10 percent fewer neurons than it does in women.

·         The bundle of neurons that is the main bridge between the left brain and the right, carrying messages between them is larger in men. (A bigger brain area matters only if it has more neurons, the cells that carry communications, in it. This is not yet proven.)

·         In women, the back part of the callosum is bigger than in men. This may explain why women use both sides of their brain for language. A man's corpus callosum takes up less volume in his brain than a woman's does, suggesting the two hemispheres communicate less.

·         In men, the commissure is smaller than it is in women, even though men's brains are, on average, larger than women's. The larger commissure in women may be another reason their two cerebral hemispheres seem to work in partnership on tasks from language to emotional responses.

                “Women tend to have better language skills -- perhaps because the emotional right brain enriches their left-brain vocabulary. And women have better intuition -- perhaps because they are in touch with the left brain's rationality and the right's emotions simultaneously.

                “Women can't understand why men find it so hard to be sensitive to emotions. According to the PET scans, women's brains didn't have to work as hard to excel at judging emotion. Women's limbic system, the part of the brain that controls emotion, was less active than the limbic system of men doing worse. That is, the men's brains were working overtime to figure out the faces. But the extra effort didn't do them much good.

                “Men and women were asked whether the expressions on actors' faces were sad or happy and were monitored by PET scans as they decided”

                “Men did as well as women -- 90 percent right -- in identifying happy male and female faces. But they were worse at sensing sad women. Overall, women were better able to judge facial expressions of both sexes. The PET scan showed their brains required less energy than the men's to decide.

                “But if the first tantalizing findings are any clue, the research will show that our identities as men and women are creations of both nature and nurture. And that no matter what nature deals us, it is we -- our choices, our sense of identity, our experiences in life -- who make ourselves what we are.”

                Great article, right?! But some people may try to use such scientific data to prove one sex is superior over the other. The truth is, society needs both types of brains, male and female, to function well. Our need for men’s single-minded focus and for women’s networking abilities became obvious to me in a wonderful book, Women's Diaries of the Westward Journey, by Lillian Schlissel, Schocken Books (1992).

                In her book the author gives the historical account of the United States’ westward movement through the eyes of the women. Historians typically write from the men’s journals and perspectives, but Schlissel’s work showed a different side to seeking land in Oregon, following the California gold rush, or the Mormon exodus to the Salt Lake Valley, to name a few of the prospects that pulled pioneers westward. The viewpoint of pioneer women gave a much richer flavor to the decisions and approaches to leave everything behind.

                Men sought the bigger picture, gold, land, religious freedom, with a one-track mind, and made sure the wagons, animals, tools, rifles, etc., were ready to go. Women saw the difficulties in the details of how to keep children safe, keep yeast-starter for bread dough alive, how to cook, how to find water, pack enough food, essentially take care of everyone’s everything. They had no desire to leave their established, comfortable homes in the East to head into the unknown. They must have been terrified to imagine giving birth without a midwife in the middle of nowhere. What if their children fell under the horses’ hooves or wagon wheels? What if they got sick? Most pioneer women would never have gone west if their husbands hadn’t insisted. Yet they were the glue that held the journey together.

                As I read these true stories, I realized that progress takes both men and women; men to fearlessly forge ahead, and women to make sure everyone is safe, nurtured and cared for. That does not mean that they are pigeon-holed in those roles; there is a lot of overlap as men and women help each other. But in general, men’s brains, using one brain hemisphere – or the other – at a time, give them the ability focus on the end goal. 

               Women’s brains, using both hemispheres simultaneously, give them the ability to keep track of the details of everyday life and families. Men may be more aggressive to confront problems, while women may be more willing to compromise. Both ways of thinking balance each other. Neither is superior. We should celebrate everyone’s gifts and appreciate each contribution to the community and family as a whole. I am equally proud of my eight daughters and my seven sons. All are encouraged to pursue whatever interests, talents, and vocations they enjoy.

                Some quote studies saying that our genes make us who we are. But that’s only part of the truth. Environment and our own free-will both play a big part in whom we choose to become. Our consciousness is more than just the genes in our DNA. In fact, we can choose to overcome our genetic tendencies.

Dr. Stanton E. Samenow’s book, “Before It’s Too Late – Why some kids get into trouble and what parents can do about it,” reports many cases of mind-over-matter in juvenile delinquents and their siblings. Nature plays a part in our tendencies; nurture plays a large part in galvanizing them; but our choices of how we respond to events play an equal part in whether we solidify those tendencies or not. Of course, good nurturing can help guide our choices towards the positive.  http://www.amazon.com/Before-Its-Late-Stanton-Samenow/dp/0812916468 

                Health Day News reports that “it's not nurture or nature that determine a predisposition toward delinquent behavior in adolescents, it's the combination of the two,” say researchers from the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. Genetics and social factors are tied to male delinquency: family, friends, and school all impact the expression of certain molecular variants.

                The American Sociological Review points to three genetic polymorphisms that, when paired with social factors, can predict future serious and violent delinquency:

                "While genetics appear to influence delinquency, social influences such as family, friends and school seem to impact the expression of certain genetic variants," said study author – Professor Guang Guo of North Carolina-Chapel Hill. "Positive social influences appear to reduce the delinquency-increasing effect of a genetic variant, whereas the effect of these genetic variants is amplified in the absence of social controls."

                "Our research confirms that genetic effects are not deterministic," Guo added. "Gene expression may depend heavily on the environment."

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/brain-and-behavior/articles/2008/07/17/genetics-social-factors-tied-to-male-delinquency 

                As Begley said, “…no matter what nature deals us, it is we -- our choices, our sense of identity, our experiences in life -- who make ourselves what we are.”

                This is why dyslexia is not genetic but induced. Even if a child has hearing-processing difficulties or genetic tendencies for dyslexia (and related disorders), his exposures to parenting and/or teaching methods are the most significant factors. The physical problems and tendencies can be surmounted. Triggers for dyslexia (et al), such as noise pollution and sight-reading, can be avoided. Early reading the right way erases dyslexic tendencies.

Taken from my book, Vol. 8, It's Not Rocket Surgery! by Shannah B Godfrey

http://thegodfreymethod.com

Do not use Your Baby Can Read

Do not use Your Baby Can Read. It is sight reading in the worst way. It wires the brain in the wrong place for proper reading later.

http://godfreymethod.com/default.aspx

Phonics improves brain function

Phonics improves the structure of the brain

A research team headed by scientists from the esteemed Yale School of Medicine announced in 2004 a particularly significant finding for children who have trouble learning to read. It was reported by Gilbert Zarate in the Brownsville Herald: http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/opinions_more.php?id=61072_0_11_0_C

The focus of this study, as much of the writing on this topic, is on how to assist struggling readers. While struggling readers show us what the critical issues are, children who are not struggling will be able to learn much more, much quicker, if they are also given exposure to the best teaching practices. Unfortunately, as is commonly the case, teachers leave good students to fend for themselves on the mistaken assumption that they don’t need help. Mom and Dad can and should do things at home to enhance their child’s learning and intelligence.

In the words of the reporter:

“The study reported that the brain function of poor readers actually changes to resemble the brain function of “good” readers when they have been taught to read through instruction that is direct, systematic, and focuses on the sounds and letters that make up words, the meanings of words, and helping children read accurately and quickly.

Using functional MRI scanners, researchers were able to document that effective reading instruction not only improves reading ability but actually changes the brain’s functioning so children can read more efficiently. These struggling readers were taught to read using a comprehensive reading program that focused on systematically teaching phonemic awareness, phonics, reading fluency, vocabulary and spelling and, as a result, formed new and lasting neurological connections and pathways in parts of their brain that regulate reading ability.

We know that almost every child in America — whatever race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic level — can become a strong and confident reader when taught through a comprehensive approach grounded in systematic, research-based instruction. And we know that scientifically based reading instruction can be successfully implemented in all schools — whether urban, suburban, or rural.

Unfortunately, the reality today is that nearly 40 percent of fourth-grade students are unable to read at grade level. While many policymakers, educators and parents are enthusiastic about teaching children to read, not all schools and school districts are implementing instruction grounded in scientific approaches that have been proven to increase reading skills. Despite what we know works, not all schools have put in place carefully developed, comprehensive reading programs that include research-proven instructional practices. This is a travesty.

We know that reading instruction for struggling readers must be explicit, systematic, and allow sufficient time for student learning. We also know that the reading curriculum should include the five critical components that are fundamental to learning to read — phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and reading comprehension.”

So if the scientific evidence strongly proves that phonics instruction re-maps the brain for the better, why does the educational establishment, for the most part, continue to ignore the data and teach ineffective reading (and math) methods? Part of the answer may be found in the lobbying and monetary influence of textbook publishers, who follow fads for personal gain rather than true research results. Part of the answer may be found in the egos of some educational people pushing their own theories and agendas. Part of the answer can be found in the inertia and ennui of large government entities, schools, to resist change.

Whatever the factors, it is clear that parents must not let their gifted children be left to fend for themselves in school. Parents can follow the best practices of phonics reading instruction (and math instruction) with their children at home to ensure a great foundation for success.

http://godfreymethod.com/default.aspx

Why do gifted girls play dumb with their peers?

The author agrees whole-heartedly with the recent study (June 1, 2009) at the University of Wisconsin- Madison- that definitely culture, not biology, accounts for the differences in math performance among men and women. Professors Mertz and Hyde say the data just do not support the stereotype. http://www.cardinal.wisc.edu/article/23150

In fact in elementary school, girls are usually ahead of boys in math. It isn’t until middle school that girls start falling behind. And why, on average, do they fall behind?

Early teen years are when girls begin to realize the patriarchal order that exists in most societies. They begin to see that they are quickly approaching womanhood and what that means in relation to men. They also quickly understand that boys have sensitive egos about being ‘bested’ by girls. So they often downplay their intelligence and physical abilities to win the attention of the boys.

One of my daughters hid her report card and down-played her straight A's in an effort to keep friends. She didn't want to stand out. She was ashamed of her gifted abilities, sad to say. Thankfully, as an adult, she learned to value her good mind.

A woman named Joyce hosted a Japanese businessman’s visit at work, who brought his wife on the trip with him. It was obvious that the wife spoke better English than him, but she held her tongue in his presence. Many cultures subtly- or not so subtly- discourage a female from embarrassing a male in front of others. She has to hide her talents to be accepted. In the name of “respect”, the often better person has to play dumb. Isn’t that sad?

One woman says, “Lucky for me, my 8th grade algebra teacher was a woman, Mrs. Barton, who was also a mother of 4 children. She became my role model. She taught math so well, so understandably, and juggled motherhood, too. From that moment on, I excelled in math, going all the way through calculus in high school.

“Doing well in math spilled over into doing well in physics and chemistry, too. College was the obvious next step. I realized that I didn’t have to give up using my brain to be a mother or give up motherhood to use my brain. Because of Mrs. Barton, I have always excelled at math and science and motherhood.

“And I was the older sister of several boys, so I was used to out-performing males. I had a bit of an ego myself. In fact, I liked to prove that I was smarter and better than most of the males around me. I figured a guy could like me and my intelligence, or I didn’t need him.”

Girls today have more social freedom to choose a professional career than the previous generation did when they were young. However, most of the magazines for girls and women still focus on hair, nails, clothes, and being sexy. So the messages that other women editors in society give to girls, still focus on traditional feminine interests. More of this will be discussed below.

This makes it harder for science and engineering women to get their message heard. The narrow focus to be attractive is stronger than to be intelligent, even in these modern times. Society needs to blend the two. A smart woman can be attractive, and she attracts a better caliber of men.

In this way, it is the social messages that girls get at puberty, not necessarily the hormones, which draw them away from mathematics in the adolescent years.

Why do gifted girls play dumb with their peers?
To tell you the truth, it also has a lot to do with what the magazines and other media push at them. The idea of needing a boyfriend to fit in is everywhere.

The "dating" ideas in teen magazines often rival the porn mags. It takes away their childhood much too young. Many models are young teens and pre-teens dolled up to look older and sexier. What kind of message is that? It seems that some companies will do anything to make a buck.

Those magazines and shows that focus on all the other interests and abilities of girls- instead of being sexy- should be applauded.

Another problem is mothers who promote the objectifying of their daughters. Pride and vanity are very immature needs. It's sad when they come from mother to daughter. The mothers are trying to live through their daughters.

Feminism used to mean, not wanting to be a sex object and wanting equal opportunities. Now it seems to mean, put everything out there for the whole world to see. This is not power. It is not progress (though I'm sure the makers of spring break videos and others are enjoying the show). What happened to the original feminist ideas of self-respect and not being used? How can our daughters be seen as equals in the workplace when they are so willing to be mere decorations? This is not empowerment.

Girls use their bodies to get attention at younger and younger ages. But that's just it - they are being used. They dress like Britney Spears and Madonna for school, which is unfair to the male students and teachers. It also takes the girls' focus away from developing their minds and talents the way they should. They need to become women of substance who contribute to society, not just eye candy, which is fleeting.

All of the conflicting messages create great confusion for our girls. Teenagers and pre-teens don't have the ability to fully understand cause and effect. Science has shown that brain chemistry actually changes after age 18, giving their frontal lobe more ability to project the long-term effects of our choices.

So while our children are adolescents, it is up to us adults to help them see the half-truths out there for what they are. Adults have a responsibility to help them feel their self worth for something beyond looks and boyfriends.

Taking away girls' childhoods is also taking away their future possibilities in adulthood. Keeping themselves free from bad choices now will keep their adulthoods free to be their best selves. Parents need to give their daughters the tools to combat peer pressure. They need to teach them things they can say to their friends to get out of an uncomfortable situation. They need to take time to show them how. They need to help them have the inner strength to be true to themselves, even if it means losing those friends.

Just because society has changed doesn't mean that the natural consequences have changed. Adults need to make sure that our girls know what those consequences are. We need to help steer them toward choices that keep their self-esteem and dignity in the long run, so that they don't change the whole course of their future before they're even old enough to understand what that is.

And moms need to quit living vicariously through their daughters to be sexy and popular. The short-term reward is not worth the long-term cost. Sometimes parents just have to say no to certain media and clothes. Sometimes they just have to do what's best. Their girls will understand later. When they have daughters.

Teen years can be a great time to help your gifted child explore unconventional careers. There are a lot of ideas at http://giftedkids.about.com/od/giftedadolescents/Gifted_Teens.htm to help you help your gifted daughters be proud of their abilities.

Get them involved in Expanding Your Horizons (EYH), which gives hands-on workshops in math and science for girls. I used to be an EYH workshop coordinator and taught girls how to make their own scented lotion. They had fun learning math and chemistry. They saw women mentors in science and engineering. They learned to be proud to be smart! http://www.expandingyourhorizons.org/ and choose your state for local chapters.


http://godfreymethod.com/default.aspx

No child left behind means all children left behind

Are you kidding me?! At the end of each school quarter, the teachers in many school districts get a whole or half-day off for "professional development" days. I thought they were learning better teaching skills or something. Not so! Guess what they do on those days?

They all get together and re-evaluate the performance of their class from the last quarter, and readjust the curriculum down to fit the lowest achiever in class.

Are you kidding me?! They are in effect dumbing down the whole class so that one or a few aren't "left behind." Isn't this the same as leaving them all behind? I don't think this was the intention of the No Child Left Behind Law. Why can't the schools just get a tutor or aide or resource person to help the slow kids, and stop holding everyone back?

It makes me just about ready to home-school my kids. First, Project Follow Through ruins over 3 generations of US kids, then NCLB is mis-interpreted to mean that the whole class has to learn on the level of the most-challenged student.

What is the real political goal, here? To have citizens too stupid to vote with any intelligence? To make sure that all our technology jobs keep going to India and China? Do we enjoy talking to a help desk half-way around the world whom we can't understand? Why promote this?

Any parent who cares anything about his/her child's future would not depend on the schools to do the teaching. Even if you can't afford public school or to home-school, you can supplement at home. You can teach your child to read by phonics before kindergarten. You can find math systems to do at home. And you should!

How do you get parents to care?

You know, I am absolutely amazed at how hard it is for people to catch the vision of teaching their child to read before kindergarten.
Don't they care about giving their kids the ability to take the opportunities that will come their way?
Don't they care about helping their children become their best selves?
Don't they realize that IQ is only 50% genetic? The other half is the home environment and mental stimulation, especially between the ages of 2-5 years old.
I am doing everything I can to try to help as many kids as possible out there, with the least amount of time and money required by mom and dad.
I wish people could understand how important early reading is! I wish they understood how simple the Godfrey Method is!
I wish I could get them to see the importance of my picture-letters to young minds.
The foster mom in me wants to scoop up all children and help them myself, but they learn best from their own mom and dad.
Where are the proactive, purposeful parents?
Please tell me the homeschoolers aren't the only ones who get it!

Why school administrators won't listen

Why administrators don't listen

It has come to my attention that the public educational system not only holds children back in reading, but in math as well. I just have to post this article from Laurie Rogers in its entirety. She is brilliant with the problems in public math instruction.

Friday, July 3, 2009
Why administrators don't listen

“In the name of God, stop a moment, cease your work, look around you.”
-- Leo Tolstoy, author of “War and Peace”

A common complaint among math advocates is that the education establishment continually rejects pertinent data and valid research on how reform mathematics curricula are deeply, fatally flawed.

“It’s like watching a completely preventable traffic accident,” I’ve said. “How do they not see it? Why won't they listen to reason?”

No advocate has the answer, although there are suspicions. Some of the possibilities I’ve heard include these:

Kickbacks from publishers
Overly friendly relationships with publishers
Ignorance
Stupidity
Herd mentality
Indoctrination
Ego
Habit
Personal comfort
Political philosophy
Ennui

Spokane Public Schools persists with its reform math curricula despite all contrary evidence from the district, state and nation – and despite distressing results (a scary, black hole of dropouts, remediation and failed tests). The district must have some very compelling research on its side - research that math advocates haven’t seen.

In April and May, I asked district administrators for the research and data that support their continued use of reform curricula. Despite several formal requests for public information and a friendly phone call, I’ve received no data and no research. I was told that supporting research was tossed with yesterday’s meatloaf. No, I was actually told it wasn’t kept on hand. (The meatloaf is still there.) I don’t know why the research wouldn’t be kept because administrators keep referring to it (as in “research shows” and “according to the research”).

Instead, I was given the names of three organizations and two types of tests, and I was invited to the central office to look over their “great number of materials on the subject of effective instruction in mathematics.” Technically, this is not “data” or “research.” Technically, I think this is called “skating.”

You’d think they’d at least try to have a good excuse. I would give points for creativity, like: “It’s lost in the Bermuda Triangle.” “It was destroyed by a magic bullet from a grassy knoll.” “Jimmy Hoffa had it with him when he disappeared.” “We were hoping Geraldo Rivera would find it in Al Capone’s vault.”

If the data and research don’t support these curricula, and the entire nation has found that a steady diet of reform leads to math incompetence and cataracts in laboratory rats … what is the real reason for their continued use? Could it be aliens? Think about it. If aliens came to Earth and wanted to take down America without firing a shot, this would be the ticket: Infiltrate public education, teach the children to think conceptually about nothing, and then pretend to fret as the country falls to its knees. It’s the perfect crime.

Look, I’m just saying it’s a possibility. Otherwise … well, choose your preferred explanation.

Leo Tolstoy reportedly said this about people who refuse to listen:

“I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.”
(Well, OK, but I still think some of them might be aliens.)

Meanwhile, we math advocates manage to keep each other going. We disagree about many things, but our dissent is generally friendly and respectful. It helps to keep us honest and thoughtful. We agree on one major point: American public-school math instruction is a blight upon the land. It’s a crater, a crime, a sin against the children.

It takes a strong stomach to know the truth of how bad it is, and still speak politely with administrators who keep saying the most ridiculous things. It’s tough to keep pushing, to keep trying, and to somehow avoid sinking into despair. When we talk with district decision-makers, we often find their eyes are glassy. They’ve breathed in the smoke and mirrors and can’t seem to hear anything but the twaddle from curriculum coordinators.

Tolstoy also reportedly said this:

“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.”

Education’s decision-makers appear to be “firmly persuaded” – many will do whatever curriculum coordinators tell them to do. So we troop over to the curriculum coordinators, and we find they’re certain, too. They don’t care what we bring to the table, even if it’s the best information, the most pertinent research and the most brilliant arguments. It’s their table – not ours – and they’ll decide (thank you very much), what happens with it. Our evidence is swept off the table onto the floor. They walk over it on their way out. Later, it’s disposed of in an environmentally friendly way.

Sitting through certain interviews and meetings, listening to the idiocy that passes for argument (for example, “How do we know a 45% pass rate isn’t good? It all depends on where that group began”), I develop headaches, jaw aches and an upset stomach. I’ve had dark moments where I felt that nothing would ever improve, administrators would never listen, and parents should just grab their babies and run for the hills, as far away from the aliens as possible.

The obliviousness of the education establishment is impressive. The deceit and the covering up of the children’s reality are immoral, if not technically criminal. I’ve sat at my computer and blanched at the cheerful destruction of so many children’s futures.

Meanwhile, since 1989, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) happily became “relevant” as they pushed their national standards. Across the country, school districts happily spent truckloads of taxpayer dollars chasing after every mangy, stray-dog program, and Texas Instruments (TI) and textbook publishers happily made enough money to wallpaper the moon at least twice in pretty thousand-dollar bills.

It’s all happening again. The National Governors’ Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) are the “new black,” pushing for new national standards (because it worked so well the last time). TI continues to deliver fancy calculators to wee tots, and textbook publishers and the College Board pant and salivate at being in on the ground floor of new national curricula and assessments.

Math advocates weren’t invited to this table, either, but who cares? I could sit at that table, lie down on that table, take off my clothes and dance the fandango on that table, and all of the deals would still be made – right next to my sweaty feet.

Math advocate Mike Miller said: “A culture that embraces purposeful perversion will be more resistant to both exposure and change.”

What if the purposeful perversion affects children’s futures and the stability of the country? At what point does it become evil?

Maybe the public-education establishment is already there. Maybe if we look up from our work long enough, we’ll see this for what it really is: An ongoing bloodless takeover by aliens.

Mark my words.

Please note: The information in this post is copyrighted. The proper citation is:
Rogers, Laurie. (July, 2009). "Why administrators don't listen."
Retrieved (8 Jul 2009) from the Betrayed Web site: http://betrayed-whyeducationisfailing.blogspot.com/
This article also was published July 5, 2009, on Education News at http://ednews.org/articles/why-administrators-dont-listen-.html.

Increase your child's IQ with the Godfrey Method

Did you know that Americans tend to believe that their children’s intelligence is either genetic or comes from what they learn in school? But guess what, that isn’t true. “Children’s intelligence levels can change in response to some types of environmental influences… In other words, one arrives in the world not with a fixed IQ but with intelligence that can be damaged or enhanced, primarily by one's parents and mainly during the pre-school years.”

A book based on a study from George Mason University professor- David J. Armor- shows that intelligence is plastic or changeable. The book, Maximizing Intelligence, gives ten key factors in a child’s life that shape her intelligence. Only about half of IQ may be genetically determined, which means that half or more can be improved by the environment in which a child is raised. This is great news!
The key years for developing IQ are birth to 5 years old. The most important factors that influence intelligence are the parenting behaviors of breast-feeding, cognitive stimulation, and emotional support.

Breast-feeding studies have long proven that it raises intelligence by several points and is the best start for a child, if possible. If medically impossible, babies should always be held while being bottle-fed, even after they are old enough to hold the bottle themselves. And it should never be propped in their mouths. Proper nutrition is also important throughout a young child’s brain development.

Cognitive stimulation includes providing a learning environment at home with time for instruction, time for interaction and attention, and money spent on educational outings, reading materials, toys, and other educational materials. Such cognitive stimulation activities have a significant correlation to a child’s test scores and intelligence.

Emotional support is the other part of important parenting behaviors that increase a child’s intelligence. Children with emotional support at home have significantly higher test scores, on average.

That leads Armor to conclude that the best way to maximize children's intelligence is through their parents and that the appropriate tools include strengthening parents and families and mitigating the adverse "risk factors."

It is important for parents to be more involved in early childhood learning, not less. More pre-school is not the best answer. Teaching parents to teach their children to read before kindergarten, in a nurturing environment, is much better.

The author of A Pretty Girl Was Alpha Bette lives in a suburb of Kansas City, MO, and is available to help any parents of young children learn how to give them cognitive stimulation and emotional support through The Godfrey Method. Contact her at (816) 886-7904, http://godfreymethod.com/default.aspx, and shannahbgodfrey@gmail.com

Why teach your child to read early?

1. Why should parents teach their children to read before kindergarten?

There are many good reasons, such as:

To increase their child’s IQ, by catching the child’s optimum developmental window for reading, as proven by Dr. Glenn Doman and Dr. Michael Merzenich.
This will increase their capacity for learning for the rest of their lives.

To prevent dyslexia and other learning problems, because prevention is much better than remediation.
Yes, gifted children can have hidden learning disabilities.

To reverse the downward educational trend, because parents are their child’s best teacher, as proven by Dr. Glenn Doman and Ms. Glynne Sutcliffe, M.A. Dip. Ed. Only parents doing something at home can reverse the whole language fiasco of public education.

To feel confident and have a good self-esteem at school, by staying ahead of the class.

To create a joyful bedtime routine, giving children the 2 most crucial things they need – parent time and reading skills.

To help children excel in the technology workforce of the future, because reading is the foundation of everything else.

2. Why should parents teach phonics instead of sight-reading?

Phonics wires a child’s brain properly for reading. Phonics is the only proven cure for dyslexia.

Sight-reading limits a child’s vocabulary and can cause reading problems later in life. Sight-reading requires memorizing the shape of about 4,000 words, while phonics only requires memorizing 42 sounds.

Phonics allows a child to decode an unfamiliar word, avoiding embarrassment as an adult.

3. How is the Godfrey Method different?

The Godfrey Method, as found in A Pretty Girl Was Alpha Bette, helps all children learn easier and faster.

And it helps those who are struggling to come up to speed.

TGM connects the letters to their sounds in a child’s mind in a way that makes sense to her.

TGM has two important components: picture-letter phonics cards and the way to teach them properly.

TGM allows children to learn phonics at younger ages.

TGM easily fits into any busy family schedule, and makes a great bedtime routine.

TGM is affordable, and costs less than you’ll spend at the convenience store next week.

TGM purposely does not use electronics or video to teach- since television, video, and radio noise can be precursors to autism and dyslexia in young children. Its book and cards help parents give their children the one-on-one attention they need.

TGM, as found in APGWAB, provides both the phonics tools and the method to teach them properly.

TGM guidelines are easy to understand and fit on only one page.

Anyone can do this. You don’t need a teaching certificate to teach your child to read.