Hi, Richard!  Recently you wrote in a message to Ardith Hinton:

AH>  We have IEP's here too.  As a teacher, I wrote some of
AH>  them....  ;-)

RW>    THought you might.  oUr systems are similar in
RW>  many ways I understand .


          Uh-huh.  Folks in Canada as well as the US also have the Vietnam
war vets to thank for a bit of consciousness-raising about wheelchair
access.  :-)



AH>  As a former teacher & as a parent, I expect to work on a
AH>  collegial basis with professionals.  AFAIC the real gems
AH>  actually appreciate that.  :-))

RW>  THose who really have a grasp of what's going on wish for
RW>  that sort of relationship with all the parents of their
RW>  students 


          Those who really have a grasp of what's going on know how much
there is still to be learned, when any one answer may raise ten more
questions.  :-)



[re "talking books"]
AH>  in my experience kids generally prefer to have some
AH>  opportunity to interact with the reader....  :-)

RW>  YEp, and it's difficult if at the learning stage you
RW>  use recorded books and readers to learn much about
RW>  your written language.


          I imagine it would be!  Even now, I read to our young adult
daughter on occasion.  It helps that (unlike the majority of other students
I've known) she'll ask about words she doesn't understand.  If she doesn't
ask directly, I can tell by her raised eyebrows or by a slight shift in her
body position that she's puzzled about something.  I know she's paying
attention because she will correct me if I've misread a word or she'll
insist I look it up if she doesn't approve of my explanation.  For a
teacher, it can't get much better than this. For a student, it's important
to get feedback from the opposite direction too. Who else would notice
& chuckle openly in delight, after all these years, when their kid uses
a new word??  AFAIC a recording is no serious competition.  ;-)



RW>  tHe theory ended up further handicapping a generation
RW>  of blind youth, and that slide down the slippery slope
RW>  continues to this day.


          I'm seeing much the same phenomenon WRT English grammar.  During
the 1960's some influential linguists felt dictionaries should be
descriptive, not prescriptive... and sought to improve on ye olde parts of
speech etc.  The net result seems to be that very few people can write a
coherent sentence nowadays unless they are in the "fifty-five
plus" age category or learning English as a second language.  Parents
thanked me for teaching traditional grammar during a time when other folks
supported the idea that whatever the majority of kids in grade eight said
was okay.  Although hindsight may be 20/20, there is no going back because
the younger generation of teachers never learned this stuff.  :-(



RW>  WE reject what we don't understand, or try to ignore it
RW>  altogether.  THey started me in that "Sightsaver" thing
RW>  when I first started school, but my mother wasn't going
RW>  to have any of that nonsense.


          And since her brother was blind, she knew whereof she spoke....  :-)



RW>  SUch things have caused me over the years to develop a
RW>  bit of schepticism toward any professional that comes to
RW>  me with an attitude of "trust me, I know what's best for
RW>  you" and won't discuss his/her intended course of action
RW>  in much more detail than that.


          Their preferred learning style is different from yours & mine.  They
like to be told what to do, where you & I thrive on analyzing individual needs
and doing whatever is necessary to maximize somebody's potential.  Whether the
individual in question is a performer who wants you to make them sound good or
a kid who can't relate to standard teaching methods we're in our element.  :-)




--- timEd/386 1.10.y2k+