One thing that's always bugged me is that when DS2 was little, well meaning professionals, including people at school, would tell me he couldn't do things he clearly could on the grounds that he was "still very concrete" and that the thing he couldn't do was "abstract".
Anyway, my DH explained to me recently that (i) these terms were coined by Piaget and (ii) in the world of psychology, everyone has moved beyond/on from Piaget's theories, just as they have moved on from older stuff like Freud but (iii) in teacher training courses, they still teach Piaget as bible.
Having taught in a red-brick uni last year and been handed teaching materials rooted in the 1990s for a fast-moving social sciences topic, I can well believe that teacher training moves on very slowly.
Anyway, I suppose what matters is that if I'm right, parents across the land will have well meaning bods telling them that their child's abilities don't exist because they are arising in the "wrong" order.
I know lots of people research SN on this board. Has anyone got any insight? Disclaimer: DS2's needs are now very mild so I feel a bit of a fraud posting, but I used to absolutely live here (l i n g l e if you hadn't guessed- Can we have an emoticon to say "I was special needs royalty once"? :))
Please or to access all these features
Please
or
to access all these features
Here are some suggested organisations that offer expert advice on special needs.
SN children
"concrete" and "abstract" - do they mean anything?
14 replies
ontosecondary · 13/11/2014 12:05
OP posts:
PolterGoose ·
13/11/2014 12:22
This reply has been deleted
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
Frusso ·
13/11/2014 12:41
This reply has been deleted
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
PolterGoose ·
13/11/2014 15:07
This reply has been deleted
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
zzzzz ·
13/11/2014 21:03
This reply has been deleted
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
Please create an account
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.