Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you move the motivated kids out of an low end school you are going to lower the overall performance and the experience of the kids that stay. That is a strong downside.
We are moving the high and middle performing students and moving them ahead and giving the low performing students the help they need.
a minority that is unable to get minority status. pathetic racist country we live in. a country where women are considered minorities to the idiotic federal government.
The true motive is a world class educational system like public post-secondary education in the U.S. already is because of selective admissions.
Sort students by ability/skill level. That's what a world class educational system requires. Otherwise, the majority of students are dumbed down to the struggling students' level. There are decades of longitudinal data showing exactly that:
I support sorting students by ability. I just don't think we need vouchers or charter schools to do it. We simply need a change in educational policy and mindset.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
You're wrong, especially in regards to Black students:
We are moving the high and middle performing students and moving them ahead and giving the low performing students the help they need.
How could anyone be against that.
It makes perfect sense, so let's enact policy that allows public school leaders to do this. What doesn't make sense is introducing another party into the mix as a means by which to sort students. It's simply unnecessary.
I read an article this weekend about how the Japanese are kicking our ass in math. They are using a teaching method American math teachers designed, but never implemented. Great article in The New York Times, if anyone is interested.
I support sorting students by ability. I just don't think we need vouchers or charter schools to do it. We simply need a change in educational policy and mindset.
It makes perfect sense, so let's enact policy that allows public school leaders to do this. What doesn't make sense is introducing another party into the mix as a means by which to sort students. It's simply unnecessary.
You seem to think TPTB in Education will just snap their fingers and we'll go back to tracking.
Reality says that is not going to happen and wanting vouchers for charters is the outcome of "everyone's a winner" mindset in K-12.
You say we don't need vouchers and we'll just change the system.
Well how's about allowing those vouchers until you get the system changed and public school K-12 becomes an institution that educates all but based on their abilities ?
And you'll have a long road ahead of you because TPTB in education are in denial about what is right in front of their faces.
The true motive is a world class educational system like public post-secondary education in the U.S. already is because of selective admissions.
Sort students by ability/skill level. That's what a world class educational system requires. Otherwise, the majority of students are dumbed down to the struggling students' level. There are decades of longitudinal data showing exactly that:
Last week Obama while answering a question from a Native American student, talked about "acting white" in the black community. Jonathan Capehart wrote about it and the names blacks call other blacks who don't speak a certain way etc. this generated a firestorm on Twitter, with the black academic/ race punditry claiming acting white is overrated. Some went so far as to say it didn't exist. Many black folks pushed back on that saying it did exist and relaying some stories of their own experience.
The black sociologists Phd crowd finally acknowledged it existed to some degree but blamed it on "racialized tracking". That spawned a whole long discussion on IQ. I was stunned to read how smart people not only don't think IQ tests measure intelligence but seem to doubt the existence of intelligence altogether.
These academics insist that if you dump any kid into high enriching environment they would learn. They won't admit genetics or family plays any role in the intelligence in a child. It was surreal to read.
Considering these people have the ears of the folks that run schools I doubt any changes to tracking will take place.
I support sorting students by ability. I just don't think we need vouchers or charter schools to do it. We simply need a change in educational policy and mindset.
Good luck with that. This is a problem more than 4 decades in the making, dumbing down top and middle public school students for over 40 years.
Quote:
"The contrast was stark: schools that had "severely declining test scores" had "moved determinedly toward heterogeneous grouping" (that is, mixed students of differing ability levels in the same classes), while the "schools who have maintained good SAT scores" tended "to prefer homogeneous grouping."
I read an article this weekend about how the Japanese are kicking our ass in math. They are using a teaching method American math teachers designed, but never implemented. Great article in The New York Times, if anyone is interested.
Why Do Americans Stink at Math?
By ELIZABETH GREEN JULY 23, 2014
The article describes constructivist instructional methods, and they won't work for a majority of students. Here's why: The benefits of such an instructional method are experienced only by those who are already knowledgeable on the relevant topic(s). Novice learners experience cognitive overload in working memory during their processing of such an instructional method which meansless knowledge is transferred to long-term memory resulting in less knowledge acquisition and mastery. That makes it less likely that they will learn. We're already seeing that outcome in global comparisons. U.S. schools have used various math curricula such as described since at least the mid 1990s (Everyday Math, MathLand, TERC, Connected Math, etc.), and U.S. students are falling farther and farther behind their international peers in math.
For a look at the limitations on the use of the progressive teaching methods with novice learners:
The gist: When used on novice learners (anyone who doesn't already have a substantial knowledge base, i.e. children students, early years of any college degree program, etc.), those progressive teaching methods result in little learning, and even what is learned is frequently incorrect.
The constructivist math curricula movement has been an unmitigated disaster. I have no idea why anyone is still trying to push it on unsuspecting parents and their kids. The problem is so severe that a group of mathematicians and scientists banded together to alert parents. More here: http://www.grahamseibert.com/MK/math...ly_correct.pdf
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a problem more than 4 decades in the making, dumbing down top and middle public school students for over 40 years. 