WobLog

As Michael Phelps smashes swimming record after record, he's had to overcome challenges beyond the constant, grueling training and the need to eat 12,000 calories a day: Phelps also had to beat attention deficit disorder and hyperactivity (ADHD).

Diagnoses of ADD or ADHD generate a lot of controversy, no doubt in part because today being a "normal kid" can be considered problem behavior. But along the spectrum of learning styles and abilities, there are certainly kids who don't respond well to conventional teaching methods. In Michael's case, he had the good fortune to have a mom, Debbie Phelps, who recognized this. Here's an interview with Debbie from the May/June 2007 issue of ADDitude:

Michael might not have loved swimming at all, were it not for the ingenuity of his mother, Debbie Phelps. "At age seven, he hated getting his face wet," says Debbie. "We flipped him over and taught him the backstroke."

Michael showed swimming prowess on his back, then on his front, side, and every way in between. But in the classroom, he floundered. An inability to concentrate was his biggest problem.

"I was told by one of his teachers that he couldn't focus on anything," says Debbie. She consulted a doctor, and nine-year-old Michael was diagnosed with ADHD.

"That just hit my heart," says Debbie. "It made me want to prove everyone wrong. I knew that, if I collaborated with Michael, he could achieve anything he set his mind to."

Debbie, who had taught middle school for more than two decades, began working closely with Michael's school to get him the extra attention he needed. "Whenever a teacher would say, 'Michael can't do this,' I'd counter with, 'Well, what are you doing to help him?'" she recalls.

The article goes on to describe some of the novel techniques they used to help Michael learn to focus and to attack difficult subjects (like math). Interestingly, as their efforts bore fruit, Michael himself decided he wanted off his Ritalin. While the article doesn't make the claim, I got the impression from reading it that the swimming and teaching style changes were the keys to Michael's success, not the stimulant medication. This is a helpful, hopeful sign for parents of kids with learning challenges who are trying to avoid putting their kids on ADD medication.

Go Michael!

Posted by Don Roberts at 3:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

A state appellate court, which had previously ruled that Californians have no right to homeschool, reversed itself today. Here's the story from the San Francisco Chronicle

(08-08) 10:49 PDT LOS ANGELES - -- A state appeals court reversed itself today and ruled that parents in California have the right to home school their children even if they lack a teaching credential.

The Second District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles had ruled Feb. 28 that the state's compulsory education law requires parents to send their children to a full-time public or private school or have them taught by credentialed tutors at home. The ruling caused an uproar among home-schooling advocates and could have made truants out of an estimated 166,000 children in California who are taught at home by their parents.

After hearing from an array of objectors that included state education officials and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the court agreed to reconsider the case and issued a new ruling today that reached the opposite conclusion: State law allows home schooling, although children can be required to attend school if they're being abused or neglected at home.

Although the compulsory-education law hasn't changed since 1929, some alter laws "demonstrate an apparent acceptance by the Legislature that home-schooling is taking place in California, with home schools allowed as private schools," Justice H. Walter Croskey, author of the earlier ruling, wrote in today's 3-0 decision.

"Recent statutes indicate that the Legislature is aware that some parents in California home school their children by declaring their homes to be private schools," Croskey said. He said one of those laws, a 1998 measure exempting parents from fingerprinting requirements imposed on private school employees, indicated "a legislative approval of home-schooling."

Because the 1929 law itself did not explicitly allow or prohibit home schooling, Croskey said, the court should interpret it consistently with the Legislature's current understanding, along with the views of state government and education officials.

He said such an interpretation also allows the court to avoid deciding "difficult constitutional questions" about parents' rights to exempt their children from compulsory-schooling laws. The previous ruling found that no such right exists.

The court ordered a Los Angeles County juvenile judge to reconsider the case of a Lynwood family that has educated their eight children at home, with the mother, who has an 11th-grade education and no teaching credential, acting as the teacher.

The judge initially concluded that the parents had an absolute right to home school their children. The court said today that the right to home school is not absolute, and told the judge to decide whether to send two of the younger children to school in light of the father's history of child abuse.

The case is Jonathan L. vs. Superior Court, B192878.

The ruling is available at www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/B192878.PDF.

Posted by Don Roberts at 12:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)