Previous | Next
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100 of 100
are very talented. I mean, with no resources for doing anything
about it. So we try to get the music lessons, or we try to get them
into art classes. We try to get them into athletic activity. A lot
of children are very talented athletically. So we're constantly
using all the resources that we can, for the family. No, you're right
Incidentally, in this testing, I think the way our conversation
was going, we didn't say “psychological testing” all the time. It
was implicit. But you give vocational tests, aptitude tests, the
gamut, to find out --?
Oh yes. Oh yes. And also we teach the children how to take
tests. This is one the things children don't seem to learn in these
schools. And they test them all the time. But we teach them how to
take the tests. And when children are -- we have children up to 16.
Some of the children are in high school. We teach them how to take
tests. We teach them about careers that are open, avenues that they
can travel. This is something they don't get in the public schools.
You're really saying here, then, that in the public schools, very
often they go through whatever instructionis given, but they don't know
how to respond to a test?
They may have learned more than you think they've learned.
That's right. That's right.
© 2006 Columbia University
Libraries | Oral History
Research Office | Rights and
Permissions | Help