I don’t think there are that many piece of shit humans in this world, I can’t recall ever seeing one on the NZ lemmy instance including you. I think the only thing I have said is that you could be a bit more inclusive, it’s not that bigger deal, most people aren’t.
Which is a weird thing to say because I never said anybody should be excluded from anything. It was you that wants to exclude maori words from school books.
You are asking for exclusion. Yon can’t aim for the lowest denominator and ALSO to everyone else. This si what people are entry to explain. You are asking not for inclusion, but for privilege to by switched to YOUR CHILD instead of the others.
Yes they should be included, not by removing others.
I’m pretty sure here problem isn’t your kid by now though.
The child has to be struggling with reading to ever be issued an early reader to take home for homework.
If you are in reading recovery ( ~5 of my sons class ) you make heavy use of the reading resources and will probably go through all of the early readers, in all of the incremental stages.
Me and my son have read either one or two every night for the last year and a half.
It seems like I’m talking with people who are mostly clueless about reading education here and are all here for the rage bait headline.
For about the fifth time, I do not want to exclude Te Reo from school books, I don’t even believe the minister wants to do that.
This is clearly not true because you are defending and excusing this action. The minister absolutely wants to do it which is why she did it.
That isn’t what she has done. The book has moved from the early reader list into the general reading list.
Early readers are the learning resources that take a learner from rote memorizing lists of sight words to being able to start decoding and reading unknown words themselves.
We asked our school to borrow a bunch of early readers to cover our evening reading over last Christmas, which we were a bit nervous asking for. When they figured out were a bit embarrassed asking, the teacher said something to the effect that they don’t use most of these that much anymore. The structured literacy approach ( that is fairly new ) means most of the kids only have to work over a couple of books to learn the techniques to decode and sound out words and apply them. She said they usually just use “Pip and Tim” unless the kid is bored of it.
The reading that kids who that aren’t specifically struggling do now is more just regular resources from their other subjects than specific reading resources.
You keep accusing me of not wanting Te Reo in school books, this is absolutely false.
My initial post was that we had a bad experience with a specific book. When I boil that down, it was because the book had too many new words.
It’s not that it is a bad book. It is the spot it was in the early reading program.
You could make it fit, they would have to:
Seed the sight / heart word lists with more Te Reo.
Find or have someone write a bunch of early readers that have Te Reo introduced as the new words one by one, just like they do for every other word.
I support both of these things, but I’m not the one making the calls on that.
That isn’t what she has done. The book has moved from the early reader list into the general reading list.
Yea so has prevented those students from being exposed to maori words.
And again for no reason. Nobody was complaining about those words. Not the teachers, not the students, not the parents. The only reason she did this is because she is racist and she wants to throw a bone to the racists who vote for her party.
My initial post was that we had a bad experience with a specific book. When I boil that down, it was because the book had too many new words.
you experience is based on the fact that your child is suffering from a learning disability. You are demanding that because your child is incapable of dealing with maori words no child of the same age should be exposed those maori words. I am saying this is not just immoral and foolish but it’s downright evil. We should not deny every student of educational materials that you child is unable to cope with.
Nobody was complaining about those words. Not the teachers, not the students, not the parents.
I’m a parent, my child is a student.
you experience is based on the fact that your child is suffering from a learning disability. You are demanding that because your child is incapable of dealing with maori words no child of the same age should be exposed those maori words.
My child isn’t diagnosed with any learning disability and I’m not demanding anything. I am offering our real world experience.
There are about five kids in my sons class who are really struggling with reading out of a little less than 30 kids. Our school would have been a lower decile school back when that was still a thing.
You are deluded if you think small changes in the first year or so of a reading program is going to stop kids from being exposed to Te Reo in primary schools.
I started making a list of all the ways kids build their Te Reo vocabulary at my sons school and then I decided you probably don’t care
What they said was they were glad the people involved on the kapa haka group were more inclusive than you.
You then flew off the handle at the minor slight. They then joined you afterwards.
You were doing great with the argument that the curriculum shouldn’t be shaped by outliers. Simple, factual and not attacking the person - just debating the point constructively.
This appears to be a reading and comprehension issue (possibly complex dyslexia if there’s an autism diagnosis that early on in the kids life?), you perhaps could have stuck with that? I dunno, you do your thing. I’m just pointing out how needlessly rude you were.
I called her sick because she wants to deny students books with maori words in them because her child has a learning disability.
I never said kids with disabilities of any kind should be excluded from any kapa haka group or anything else, she made that accusation out of the blue.
And look in your defence, they DID have a clumsily worded anecdote that was only tangentially related (and it took AGES to reveal the additional challenge these books created for their kid, was what they were getting at - I understand that).
I guess what I’m getting at is: attack their point - not the personality.
Wow, do you have to be so aggressive with your communication?
Because the OP accused me of being a piece of shit human being who is opposed to inclusion and diversity.
How should I have reacted to such an insult?
I don’t think there are that many piece of shit humans in this world, I can’t recall ever seeing one on the NZ lemmy instance including you. I think the only thing I have said is that you could be a bit more inclusive, it’s not that bigger deal, most people aren’t.
Which is a weird thing to say because I never said anybody should be excluded from anything. It was you that wants to exclude maori words from school books.
For about the fifth time, I do not want to exclude Te Reo from school books, I don’t even believe the minister wants to do that.
This is what you said:
This is pretty well the definition of not being inclusive.
You are asking for exclusion. Yon can’t aim for the lowest denominator and ALSO to everyone else. This si what people are entry to explain. You are asking not for inclusion, but for privilege to by switched to YOUR CHILD instead of the others.
Yes they should be included, not by removing others.
I’m pretty sure here problem isn’t your kid by now though.
Cheers.
The child has to be struggling with reading to ever be issued an early reader to take home for homework.
If you are in reading recovery ( ~5 of my sons class ) you make heavy use of the reading resources and will probably go through all of the early readers, in all of the incremental stages.
Me and my son have read either one or two every night for the last year and a half.
It seems like I’m talking with people who are mostly clueless about reading education here and are all here for the rage bait headline.
This is clearly not true because you are defending and excusing this action. The minister absolutely wants to do it which is why she did it.
You should look up the meaning of that word.
That isn’t what she has done. The book has moved from the early reader list into the general reading list.
Early readers are the learning resources that take a learner from rote memorizing lists of sight words to being able to start decoding and reading unknown words themselves.
We asked our school to borrow a bunch of early readers to cover our evening reading over last Christmas, which we were a bit nervous asking for. When they figured out were a bit embarrassed asking, the teacher said something to the effect that they don’t use most of these that much anymore. The structured literacy approach ( that is fairly new ) means most of the kids only have to work over a couple of books to learn the techniques to decode and sound out words and apply them. She said they usually just use “Pip and Tim” unless the kid is bored of it.
The reading that kids who that aren’t specifically struggling do now is more just regular resources from their other subjects than specific reading resources.
You keep accusing me of not wanting Te Reo in school books, this is absolutely false.
My initial post was that we had a bad experience with a specific book. When I boil that down, it was because the book had too many new words.
It’s not that it is a bad book. It is the spot it was in the early reading program.
You could make it fit, they would have to:
I support both of these things, but I’m not the one making the calls on that.
Yea so has prevented those students from being exposed to maori words.
And again for no reason. Nobody was complaining about those words. Not the teachers, not the students, not the parents. The only reason she did this is because she is racist and she wants to throw a bone to the racists who vote for her party.
you experience is based on the fact that your child is suffering from a learning disability. You are demanding that because your child is incapable of dealing with maori words no child of the same age should be exposed those maori words. I am saying this is not just immoral and foolish but it’s downright evil. We should not deny every student of educational materials that you child is unable to cope with.
I’m a parent, my child is a student.
My child isn’t diagnosed with any learning disability and I’m not demanding anything. I am offering our real world experience.
There are about five kids in my sons class who are really struggling with reading out of a little less than 30 kids. Our school would have been a lower decile school back when that was still a thing.
You are deluded if you think small changes in the first year or so of a reading program is going to stop kids from being exposed to Te Reo in primary schools.
I started making a list of all the ways kids build their Te Reo vocabulary at my sons school and then I decided you probably don’t care
What they said was they were glad the people involved on the kapa haka group were more inclusive than you.
You then flew off the handle at the minor slight. They then joined you afterwards.
You were doing great with the argument that the curriculum shouldn’t be shaped by outliers. Simple, factual and not attacking the person - just debating the point constructively.
This appears to be a reading and comprehension issue (possibly complex dyslexia if there’s an autism diagnosis that early on in the kids life?), you perhaps could have stuck with that? I dunno, you do your thing. I’m just pointing out how needlessly rude you were.
No they made a specific insult and said I was against inclusion of children with disabilities in kapa haka groups.
I feel no need to be polite to people who hurl unwarranted insults at me and accuse me of being a bigot.
No that all happened after you questioned their education and called them sick.
Edit: read from here https://sh.itjust.works/comment/20376613
I called her sick because she wants to deny students books with maori words in them because her child has a learning disability.
I never said kids with disabilities of any kind should be excluded from any kapa haka group or anything else, she made that accusation out of the blue.
And look in your defence, they DID have a clumsily worded anecdote that was only tangentially related (and it took AGES to reveal the additional challenge these books created for their kid, was what they were getting at - I understand that).
I guess what I’m getting at is: attack their point - not the personality.
Needless to say, I’m over it…