When Tutoring Math Do Not Take It Personally

I am continuing my math series for parents with this message. I have had this conversation with parents who love math and those who are math phobic. When tutoring your child in math, never take their problems or your challenge in working with them personally.

Working on math can be hard for parents who love math and those who fear it. Anyone who falls on the spectrum between those extremes may have also felt challenges in working with math with their children. Homeschooling and parents who send their kids to school may have these moments.

One issue that arises is communication. People process math differently. When working with kids it is important not just to reflect on your own processes, but to learn how the child is trying to process the material, too. This is where breakdowns often occur. What is logical for some people is not for others. What is a simple way "to see" a solution is actually more complicated for another person. This can be frustrating to the person who is attempting to help and the person getting help. This leads me back to my original advice do not take it personally. This is not a rejection of you or a reflection of your intelligence. This is about learning to communicate differently.

Even for people proficient in math, I suggest getting some math resource books to develop a common language. I like the Great Source series because they are visual and written which appeals to different styles of learners. They cover a range of learning levels to help students and parents through the various stages of math. Scholastic also publishes books that can help. Programs like Everyday Math often come with a math resource book that some schools send home. Make use of it if your school provides one and learn new ways to approach the material with your child. This is no reflection on your ability to do math. This is about learning a new way to communicate to help your child also be confident about his/her math skills.

Do not be afraid to use manipulatives. Some people express fear that Johnny will be carrying around linking cubes when he is thirty. While some programs fail to help Johnny make the connection as well as he should between traditional math and using manipulatives, using them should not hinder independence. In fact, they should help develop understanding, not provide a crutch to avoid learning math facts. When Johnny understands place value, fractions, geometry, and math concepts using manipulatives it is easier to help him make the connection to traditional written forms of recording these problems.

It is important to realize that not all manipulatives work for all kids. While some kids do well with linking cubes for addition, others do well with coins, stamps, coloring, or other methods to manipulate numbers in order to "see" how numbers function. One advantage tutors or homeschooling parents have over a teacher with twenty students is experimenting with manipulatives to find the one that works for a child. Fractions are another hurdle for children. Pattern blocks, circles split into pie sections, and squares with fraction labels are traditional manipulatives. However, parents have found lots of other methods using cooking, tools, and other methods to teach children about fractions that are not easily available at school. Finding the right "tool" to reach your child is mostly trial and error. Try your favorites, but again do not feel rejected if your child needs something other than what worked for you.

School Attendance a Parent Primer

I have seen several posts lately on school attendance crack down at schools and questions about how to handle the problem.

The first step is to understand why the crackdowns are starting. New federal and some state laws have increased the pressure on local communities to report and mandate attendance or risk losing federal and in some areas state funding for local schools. Now, this is a different issue than the one that has caused problems in homeschooling communities that some have dubbed "Dollars for Scholars." This puts pressure on parents to enroll their children in the local public schools to prevent lost funding to the district. Homeschooling parents have complained this has led to harassment and unnecessary investigations into their actions as homeschoolers. That is a different issue.

The old rule actually in some senses is responsible for the new rules. Under the old legislation the issue was getting children into the seats to qualify for federal funding and where appropriate state funding based on numbers. This has created some issues. For instance, Jane would enroll in Public School A. Public School A qualifies for funding and Jane moves out of district enrolling in Public School B. If the world works the way it is supposed to, Jane is only funded by federal and state resources at one school. If the paper work is not properly filled out a few possible scenarios can happen. Both schools receive funding for Jane. One school or both school looses out on funding depending on how badly organized the schools are when it comes to financial paperwork. Sometimes there is fraud and sadly, sometimes it is just incompetence.

Under the new guidelines, districts are forced to demonstrate that Jane is attending school in order to qualify for funding. If Jane is not in school, they are required to demonstrate a plan of action to show they are trying to bring Jane back to school or they will not be funded for Jane's attendance at school any longer.

How does this trickle down to parents who are asking questions on message boards? These laws were designed to address two issues fraud and truancy. Most parents asking these questions are not engaged in helping school districts commit fraud and their children are not guilty of truancy. The problem is that these laws were designed more as criminal law than civil law. They are focused on crime and punishment, not trying to negotiate contract and payment. As a result, we have many parents stuck in a conflict between school and government.

The first step is to read and understand your local school policy. If this is not given to you by the school, get a copy of it. Check with the school board to make sure that the school's policy complies with the district's policy. Schools have been known to make up their own rules as they go along. It does not make them legal when it comes to attendance.

I would suggest doing this before you have an issue with the school. It is can be dull reading, but this information is important to understand. While your child is healthy now, issues can come up and it that is not the time you want to be researching the attendance policy.

Keep a folder or binder for each child. Some people think this is over kill, but it can make your life easier. Keep school policies, teacher requirements, copies of relevant notes, e-mails, and papers related to each child's school issues in this folder. I would not suggest you use this as your child's portfolio of school papers you want to keep, etc. If you have school papers you want to keep for a meeting or referral, this would be a good place to store them. However, try not to let this become too cluttered.

If your child has health related issues start keeping a calendar of dates missed and copies of notes sent. Do the same for any other attendance related issues. There are many computer calendars you can download and print to help keep track of the dates. Schools are not prepared for organized parents and documentation can be the difference between winning and losing one of these battles.

My advice to parents is to start a conversation with the expectation that a mistake has been made. There is nothing to be gained by starting a war. However, be educated about your rights as a parent. If you are called about an attendance issue, have the documentation ready and know the school policies.

Know the chain of command at your school. It varies from district to district and state to state. Here I always suggest you start by talking with the child's teacher. However, in matters of attendance, they are not always the record keepers that matter. If a mistake has occurred, it may be at the administrative level. Keep that in mind when talking with the teacher and find out what the school thinks is wrong. The next level up here is the principal. From a parent would request a meeting with the superintendent, and then appeal to the school board.

As parents, realize that attendance systems have changed. While many of us hail technology as a great time saver, it is only as accurate as the people entering the information. While great time and care used to be taken doing attendance by hand and more respect given to a parent's word that a mistake had been made regarding attendance, parents are being asked to fight against the word of a computer. Our culture has become dependent on believing their infallibility. While we would have believed a busy secretary might have marked Mark Jones instead of Mary Jones absent, we find it incomprehensible that while doing data entry a teacher did not enter Mark Jones instead of Mary Jones absent. Somehow, if the computer states the record as accurate, we fail to acknowledge the human error is still possible.

This is why documentation is so important.

Another issue to consider however are laws that continue to be passed that punish the innocent in an effort to control fraud and force parents to address the issue of truancy. Do you support being punished for schools that are not accurately reporting attendance in order to get federal or state funding? Do you think that the federal government getting involved in truancy is the right approach? If not it is time to contact your local, state, and federal officials and tell them about your experiences. While local officials can handle this issue with more respect for parents, these laws are going to get more restrictive not less. With the calls for merit pay for teachers, expect teachers unions to demand more emphasis on attendance, too. Logic dictates that if your pay is based on children showing up at school, you are going to want some control over those children's attendance. This will get worse as we put more control over our children in the hands of the government.

Beyond the Prairie The True Story of Laura Ingalls Wilder

I finally had time to sit down and watch Beyond Prairie: True Story of Laura Ingalls Wilder before it is due back to the library. A week flies by fast and I did not want to renew it.

The reviews of this had left me with questions about how I would enjoy it. Some hated Disney's The Little House on the Prairie because it dared to contradict Michael Landon's Little House on the Prairie: The Complete Television Series. Never having been a fan of Landon's series I went into watching the Disney version of Laura's early life with an open mind and it inspired me to research and read more about her life.

I was hoping that this second movie would be equally as good. Sadly, while I disagree with many of the reviews I read, this was not equal to the first movie. Many of the reviews took issue with the color of Meredith Monroe's hair because she is blond and Laura was a brunette. They also were upset that Barbara Reams, a red head, played Mary instead of a blond actress. While many claimed to be Ingalls’ scholars, what confirmed ignorance of the subject to me was many complaints about the failure to include Nellie Olsen in the story. While the TV series kept the Olsen and the Ingalls families in Walnut Grove together, those who actually have studied Laura's life know that the two separated when Laura's family moved to DeSmet. Nellie was never a part of Laura's adult life.

I saw a few problems with this movie. First, it falls far short of being the true story of Lara Ingalls Wilder. The movie adds details and episodes that are not included in Laura's books or in any biographical information commonly known about Laura and Almanzo. The second fault is the timeline. The book starts during The Long Winter (Little House). I was interested in seeing this done as a movie. Unfortunately, this is where the problems started. All movie writers have to select scenes from the material they have available to write their screenplay. What never made sense to me is what was selected and what was left out. Why did the writers feel a need to supplement, when so much wonderful material was left on the cutting floor because there was simply not enough time in a mini-series to include all of her adult life?

I thought the writers did a great job in capturing Pa Ingalls and providing Richard Thomas with material to bring Charles Ingalls to life for the first time. While many love Michael Landon's version he is no reflection of the Charles Ingalls of Laura's books or any biographical information that exists about the man. Unlike many of the reviewers, I also liked Lindsay Crouse as Caroline Ingalls. Again, many look to the Little House TV series, but if you read the books, you realize Ma was not a wallflower. She did have an influence on her husband. By the time, they had settled in DeSmet she and Pa did discuss his desire to move even though he had promised her they would never move again. After Laura married, with a blind adult daughter and two young daughters to consider Carline's concern is reasonable and even expected. Whether the scene would have happened as demonstrated in this movie is questionable. However, having the scene open to the audience did make the couple more real.

I liked Meredith Monroe as Laura. She showed an adult Laura that Melissa Gilbert never seemed to achieve. The problem I had with Laura's character is the writers felt a need to supplement her story. She and Almanzo had an interesting relationship, romance, and marriage. Yet, somehow, it was deemed not interesting enough so the writers sought to add details that did not exist and splice events together to make things happen in an order that did not seem natural. In doing so, they lost the chance to present the true story as promised.

One constant complaint I had while watching the movie is I always felt I was walking in on the end of a scene. I do not know if it was edited after filming or written that way, but there are scenes that seem to make no sense because it feels like you missed a scene. Laura goes off to teach school and Almanzo picks her up and asks her to marry him. In fact, Laura goes off the first time to teach school in Little Town on the Prairie. However, unlike the movie presents it that is not the only time Laura teaches. Almanzo does not marry her after her first teaching job. She returns to school and actually teaches again. The author creates an elaborate outdoor honeymoon for the couple and then we meet Rose. We never see them as a couple and the struggles that first year brought them. Before we know it, Laura is delivering her second child, just as we realize she is pregnant again and the story is changed to a stillbirth.

While the movie does mention Laura and Almanzo's bouts with diphtheria, no mention is made of their moves from De Smet to live first with family and then to Florida to see if the climate would help Almanzo regain his strength. Instead, the movie condenses the story, leaving out the moves. This leaves Laura and Almanzo in De Smet for the entire time. They only leave to head to Missouri where they would make their final home.

The movie was divided into two parts. The DVD I had had both on one. The second part focused on the time period after The First Four Years (Little House). With Almanzo too ill to work the homestead, Laura and Almanzo have decided to relocate. Of course, the movie ignores the fact they have already moved several times. If you read biographies of Laura, you discover Almanzo had read literature on Missouri and hoped that apple growing in Missouri would be a better situation for them. The movie implies Laura was constantly working at becoming a writer. Nothing in her biographies suggests that. In fact, Laura was working on helping Almanzo support the family. Laura helped earn the money that provided the income to buy the property in Missouri. That fact the movie ignores completely. Laura did keep a journal about their wagon trip to Missouri. Her journals were edited and published after her death.

The movie spends a great deal of time on the Wilder's hired hand and hints at a relationship between Laura and the man. We are told the sad story of the man's life and the loss of his wife and child as a means of connecting to Laura's loss of her son. There is a focus on Rose's trouble in school and an incident where she is lost in a cave and Laura and the handyman find her. During all this time Almanzo is nowhere to be found as he is struggling with continued side effects of his diphtheria exposure. This was a problem for me. Almanzo did struggle with reduced physical abilities for the remainder of his life. However, there is no indication that he disappeared from farm life completely. There is no evidence he would have left Laura to negotiate and consult with the hired help. This just kept leading me back to what the writers chose to include and all the MANY incidents they left out that could have been included in the time allowed.

I do not regret watching the movie. It was worth it to see a good portrayal of Charles Ingalls and not to see Mary married and teaching at the school for the blind. While this version played with the truth, at least some facts remained. I was glad to see they did include Laura's final trip home to see her father, mother, and Mary before they died. There are many complaints that the Ingalls family was not included more in Laura's adult life. However, travel was not inexpensive. With Almanzo's physical challenges, leaving him could not have been easy. Rose paid for Laura's expenses when she went to California to see her and Laura worried greatly about Almanzo while she was gone. Instead of making up stories about how Laura got interested in writing, it would have been wonderful to see Laura as a farm writer working from home to help pay off the mortgage on the farm. If the writers eliminated the farm hand stories, there would have been time.

I hope that someone will do film justice to the adult story of Laura Ingalls Wilder one day.

Alcatraz Versus the Shattered Lens

I had hoped I might disagree with the reviews for Alcatraz Versus The Shattered Lens. Unfortunately, I have to say I do believe this was the worst book in the series. While I felt Alcatraz Versus The Knights Of Crystallia was weaker than the first two books that were wonderful, it is a strong book when compared to this last installment.

On a positive note, there were some interesting parts to the book. I loved the latest Smedry, Aydee who has a talent for being bad at math. For children who struggle with math, the way her talent turns out to be helpful is rather amusing. The progression of the war in Mokia has some interesting turns. Alcatraz has a revelation about his parents that shakes his perception of good and evil, as he has understood it until now. This plot was included to carry over into the final book not yet been picked up for publication.

The positives do not balance the negatives. The author destroyed much of what made this series strong. Grandpa Smedry one of characters who carried the series is almost absent from the book. If this were a TV series, you would wonder if they were contract negotiation issues or the actor was sick. The absence leaves holes in the plot that end up with contrived plot tricks to cover his missing time. The author attempts to create growing adolescent tension between Bastille and Alcatraz, but instead just makes Bastille into a flat, dull, character. She has finally lost the energy, strength, and personality that made her so interesting in the first two books. While the author is trying to create a final plot twist for the last book with Alcatraz's parents, the premise is weak and not supported. Finally, while Alcatraz has been a funny storyteller up to this point his voice is lost in the last book. Many reviews have complained about the constant use of the word stupid. That was only a minor annoyance compared to the loss of his voice in the story. When reading the first three and then hearing the first one on CD the attraction has been Alcatraz's narration. There are many fantasy adventure stories on the market. What was appealing about this one was the narration.

As I came to the end of the story, I did have that momentary conspiracy theory wondering who wrote the final book. Either the author had a few bad months of writing, or he farmed this one out to someone with an outline. It lacks the style, voice, and structure of the previous books. This book has the feel of someone trying to write in the style of another author to finish a book. As I said, it was a moment, not a full-blown research project. I have no idea what happened after the author completed the second book. I can only say the quality has decreased dramatically to the point I do not recognize the style in the last book.

I hope Sanderson does get his voice back and finishes the series in the style his readers deserve. Alcatraz deserves better.