Aspies For Freedom

I think most public schools (in my area) are pretty terrible for most kids and almost completely inappropriate for my AS son.  Grade-school classrooms are made for quite, NT girls and, frankly, I see no benefit to helping my AS son accomodate to such an environment. It will rarely be repeated in The Real World, and certainly not in the type of environment he is likely to choose and prefer.

As soon as he is able, I have little doubt that my AS son will gravitate toward groups and programs that suit him - science/art/etc - and where quirky/Aspie traits are the norm, not the exception.  So why make him "conform" now?  I would much rather see him taught in ways that maximize his strengths, not constantly point out his weaknesses. With AS being increasingly recognized in kids, especially boys, it seems logical that we would be able to find such as environment....

Greetings from a new member. Liz, an NT (mostly) in an Aspie (mostly) household.

Greetings Lizmom.

Why do you believe that grade school classrooms are made for "quiet, NT girls"?

Hi Liz, and welcome.  And I agree.  The rules for most schools become useless at age 18, so why have children learn them when they are already challenged to get the hang of the one set of rules they need for their whole lives. The only other place I can think of that resembles a school environment is prison. My children are thriving outside of the school environment.

You make a good point, but experts seem divided on who - male or female- is being slighted in our schools. Some feel girls lose out because they are not as aggressive as boys esp. in math and science and so aren't called upon, asked to participate.

Then others, including my son when he was in school, told me certain teachers prefer girls as they are quieter. My son had a couple of teachers who seemed to dislike boys in general, not sure why.

That said, I benefited GREATLY by going to an all girls' school my high school years. It has made all the difference in my life as I was able to excel, distinguish myself in a couple of major ways. I had an identity, I was not invisible in high school like so many others. I was known for my tennis skills and poetry. Girls would stop me in the hall and compliment me on my latest poem (the poetry/fiction magazine was named Cerberus after the dog that guarded hell in Greek mythology, or is it Roman?). There was also less overall competition because boys weren't present.  I loved high school as a result.

To me, school mirrors the larger society so is necessary for kids to learn about and adapt to. School is "the man", if you will. My daughter goes to a VERY diverse high school here in SC, with about 40% of the kids black I would guess. As a result she knows how to interact with them, talks to them a lot, and at one time dressed like them a little. Many of them are much nicer to her than the white NTs actually.  She sat down at one of their exclusive tables early on, as a freshman, and there was a little laughter, but they didn't run her away or anything. They know she likes and accepts them. This will help her in the workplace in the future I am SURE.

IMO, most Aspies need the social aspect of school even though it is difficult. Let's face it- the homeschooled are only learning to interact with their family- a very secure, controlled environment if there is one! Not good in my opinion unless the child is just totally unable to cope. I know a kid like that in a nearby city actually who isn't mainstreaming well even though her mother teaches at her high school. They homeschooled her last year and may have to again next year.

BTW, everyone- the peer support group I pushed for for an entire year is finally becoming a reality, though it will be an occasional thing. Hope's history teacher is organizing a dinner out soon with some popular, sweet NT kids and my daughter, another Aspie boy, and perhaps a few other special educ. kids, I don't know. Hope is excited, I am excited.

*Generalizing alert*

I fully realize that I am generalizing, but I have a daughter and two sons, so I have some feel for the comparison I am making.  In general, I think that elem classrooms require mostly passive learning from the kids - the teachers presents orally, or directs an activity, kids are required to be receptive, follow directions, and participate mostly as a group.  I think the goals of early elem classroom are very group-oriented. The goal is to have all the kids at a certain reading level by the end of the year, for example.  And the kids all spend time in "reading groups" where all the kids track together.  These factors favor girls, IMO, who are more likely to be cooperative in groups and peer-driven.  Plus, the activites are almost always physically passive, again favoring (in general) girls.

As for the NT part, that is increasingly obvious (to me) as elem progresses.  The classrooms are noisy, chaotic (at times), almost always orally-focused (messages are over the loud speaker, the teacher stands and addresses the group, etc).  Physical activity (ie recess) is unstructured, leaving kids to navigate peer activites on their own.

Mostly, I have arrived at my generalizations by what is rewarded and what is punished.  Talking too loud or too much/at wrong time is punished. Figeting/moving too much is punished. Not cooperating with the unstructured play at recess is punished. Kids are going to get bored, overstimulated, etc (especially my AS son) but how they cope is either punished or rewarded. My extroverted NT daughter's coping mechanisms tend to involve other kids so she, too, runs into problems. In contrast, I was the model student in grade school because my coping mechanisms (to the exact same circumstances) were quiet and book-ish.  

"You make a good point, but experts seem divided on who - male or female- is being slighted in our schools. Some feel girls lose out because they are not as aggressive as boys esp. in math and science and so aren't called upon, asked to participate."

I think there are two distinct phases with middle school representing the transition years.  In higer grades, you are absolutely correct that girls fall behind their male peers in schience and math achievement despite comparable (or better) achievement earlier on. Some of it may be due to unconscious bias from teachers, but it is undoubtedly complicated.

In the early years, the opposite is true. Girls are considered "more verbal" "more social" etc and may physcially and mentally reach milestones related to language earlier than boys.  And, I think, that translates into a classroom environment that favors girls by rewarding their strengths but may be disserving boys by assuming that developmental  progress = ability/aptitude. I can't tell you how many parents have bragged to me about their daughter's reading skills (in 1st and 2nd grades!) and pushed to have their child in gifted programs. Reading is a lot like walking - kids get to it when they are ready, and early walking does not equal physical prowess any more than early reading signifies superior intellect.  

"To me, school mirrors the larger society so is necessary for kids to learn about and adapt to. School is "the man", if you will."

I disagree to an extent.  School rewards success in school. That's about it. I am a scientist and I can guarantee my AS son that a day will come somewhere in his 2nd or 3rd year of college when he will look up and realize he is surrounded by other people JUST LIKE HIM. And, if he chooses, he can comfortably function in such environments in "the real world". The social pecking order of school is, generally speaking, optional for many adults.

I think boys are more hands on, electronics or computer or chemistry lab or even a woodworking or metal shop.  My brother would take electronics apart.

When Laser Tag was hot, he made a simple light-sensitive unit (LED would light when lit, designating a kill).  He said it was a simple one-bit computer.  

That was when we weren't tying up the phone line calling electronic bulletin board systems in a three state area.  How did we ever survive the pre-Internet days?

Input: Light source
Output: LED activation
Processing: light-sensitive switch (capacitor?)
Memory: ???? (light stayed on, though)

All nicely soldered to a wafer thin piece of motherboard)

When I went to school, girls weren't given much of a chance to be "hands on" in science. That led example reminds me of the 80's movie "Real Genius", and what's the bet some of the characters in that movie were probably Aspie?

School is still an artificial environment, and homeschooling doesn't have to mean children don't get the chance to play with others of their own age and/or who have similar interests.

Public school isn't much better for my fidgety, talkative- but smart, 5YO girl.

As an aspie myself I think in a lot of ways I managed better because I was a quiet girl that withdrew from stressful situations rather than act out...  which worked out great in school- not so good in real life...

Uhh... just realized my last post seems short.   Welcome to AFF hope you find it a supportive place like I have.

I wonder where they get their ideas about child development from as five year olds are naturally fidgety, whether AS or not and despite what their gender is.

I usually was "good" and "quiet" but quickly got bored in a regular classroom in the first couple of grades and "acted out" if pushed far enough (thankfully, not very often).

5 year olds usually need frequent breaks to walk around or even stretch, and expecting them to sit still for more than half an hour at a time (even that's too much for some) is not at all reasonable.

Let's face it - you must not know much about homeschooling, or have formed your opinions based upon a single family that didn't take the time to integrate into the homeschooling community.  My children have more truly "social" opportunities, and more friends, out of school than they had in. Everything has a "social aspect," or did you stop having friends when you left school? <*sarcasm alert*> Gee, it's a shame that some of our greatest presidents never had the benefit of huge, institutionalized education. What social idiots they must have been. <*end alert*> Two years ago my children were all in school and all mainstreamed well, but they are thriving outside of the school environment. There is a big difference between "doing well" according to normative criteria and "thriving."  

I picked up a book of essays by Alfie Kohn (http://www.alfiekohn.org) last summer that really resonated with me. Although it is his intention to spur change in the structure and function of schools, the reasons for overhauling American education are also compelling reasons for looking elsewhere for the children's education.

Don't misunderstand. Every family will choose what works for them -- education is not one size fits all and every school is different. You have chosen and will choose what works for you, but don't assume that what you choose is the best choice for everyone. And, please, reserve judgment on those things of which you are ignorant.

For your information, you're kinda contradicting yourself here, as an all-girls highschool does not mirror society very well. Nor does any other school for that matter. Where in society do you hang out with people exactly your own age all day long? Etc...

Like someone else said, there are homeschooling groups. Aside from that, homeschooled kids have tons of time to join clubs and do volunteer work and the like. Besides, I was never homeschooled and I still don't have any friends, but I did hate school and was bullied a lot.

Plus, why is school from about 5 to 18yo? Kinda arbitrary, don't you think?