Shriya Nevatia
FremenBecause Everybody, As We Know, Is NOT The Same.
July 11th 2009 11:36
So I think America in general has become far too oversensitive to making everybody and everything so excessively "politically correct" that people are afraid of anything that divides anyone, in any way, anywhere, ever.
The problem is, division is completely and totally essential for the very best elementary education, especially at a public school level.
Here is how it would go:
1) Take a public school with 30-1000 students in each grade
2) From past performance with disabled and very gifted students, lump teachers into three piles depending on who they seem to be best at teaching; low, middle, high (yeah, as you can see i'm not going to be very politically correct ever, mainly for actual practicality and clarity of the ideas)
3) Give ALL students entering grades K-5 (or 6, if that counts as elementary still in a particular school system) to take exams with questions below, at, and above their expected level of proficiency in language and quantitative abilities. These could be separated for even better instruction, and more tests in areas such as the arts could be developed to extend these ideas to many areas of the academic experience, but I'll just stick with those two for now.
4) The grade is divided into a number of classes by whatever number of available teachers and classrooms the school has (obviously) and ranked by performance on this test.
5) Teachers have been randomly assigned to teach certain classes, within the third of the grade that they're best at teaching (okay, and that they like to teach the most, but this would probably get everyone pissed that they're not in the genius pile. alternate: give the teachers an adult-level test of similar skills, IQ-style, attempts at more inherent things. then the smartest teachers teach the smartest kids. I kind of love this, but I could never trust the dumbest teacher around the kids who need so much attention and help at the low end. maybe we could distribute it with the most intelligent at either end of the spectrum) this switches every year...or people can be reassigned to a certain group if they were postiviely awesome.
6) Students learn more because they're all closer to each other on speeds of comprehension and previous knowledge. Obviously still different, but it's better than some of the stupid crap you have to endure at either end of the spectrum in normal classes...I had a chapter book thrown at me in first grade because the teacher didn't know what she could possibly do to actually teach me.
7) Midyear, parents can request a retest. This is inevitable and a bajillion kids will sign up because parents are crazy and think their kid is the biggest friggin genius in the universe, especially when they're younger. Also, teachers can move kids up or down if they noticeably get bored or lag behind.
8) The near-lowest class (ok, anyone with near-avg to avg IQ and up) has to meet NATIONALIZED standards for education in all academic disciplines, and everybody above that has to too, obviously, but hopefully everyone exceeds it by increasing amounts. The very lowest, those who have severe disabilities won't be hard to identify alright, may have a different set of standards with a nationalized test to determine if they belong in this group to begin with. It's kind of absurd to drag down grade-level educational standards to match something someone with an IQ of 70 could conceivably learn at a certain grade and age level, they will progress differently and maybe a different order of learning can be created so during middle school there is little "catching up" to do...all disorders and disabilities are different, so I really don't know how to handle this well but, hey, I'm only a high school kid that's why I'm gong to college. I'll learn this stuff.
9) Tests are taken at the end of each year to determine placement the next year. Teachers are assessed too, but that's a different subject for a different rant.
Do i really need to list all the insane benefits to learning this would give? Fine, maybe people are socially stratified, but if you want public schools to prepare kids for the "real world", the "real world" is pretty socially stratified, too. Might as well just use it to our advantage (our EXTREME advantage, seriously, trust me)
This will branch into other discussions but I would really love to hear what people think about this and why, if anyone hates it, you hate this idea and think it's wrong. Just don't comment on something i said being insensitive. I just don't care. I said things plainly for clarity for myself and for the reader.
The problem is, division is completely and totally essential for the very best elementary education, especially at a public school level.
Here is how it would go:
1) Take a public school with 30-1000 students in each grade
2) From past performance with disabled and very gifted students, lump teachers into three piles depending on who they seem to be best at teaching; low, middle, high (yeah, as you can see i'm not going to be very politically correct ever, mainly for actual practicality and clarity of the ideas)
3) Give ALL students entering grades K-5 (or 6, if that counts as elementary still in a particular school system) to take exams with questions below, at, and above their expected level of proficiency in language and quantitative abilities. These could be separated for even better instruction, and more tests in areas such as the arts could be developed to extend these ideas to many areas of the academic experience, but I'll just stick with those two for now.
4) The grade is divided into a number of classes by whatever number of available teachers and classrooms the school has (obviously) and ranked by performance on this test.
5) Teachers have been randomly assigned to teach certain classes, within the third of the grade that they're best at teaching (okay, and that they like to teach the most, but this would probably get everyone pissed that they're not in the genius pile. alternate: give the teachers an adult-level test of similar skills, IQ-style, attempts at more inherent things. then the smartest teachers teach the smartest kids. I kind of love this, but I could never trust the dumbest teacher around the kids who need so much attention and help at the low end. maybe we could distribute it with the most intelligent at either end of the spectrum) this switches every year...or people can be reassigned to a certain group if they were postiviely awesome.
6) Students learn more because they're all closer to each other on speeds of comprehension and previous knowledge. Obviously still different, but it's better than some of the stupid crap you have to endure at either end of the spectrum in normal classes...I had a chapter book thrown at me in first grade because the teacher didn't know what she could possibly do to actually teach me.
7) Midyear, parents can request a retest. This is inevitable and a bajillion kids will sign up because parents are crazy and think their kid is the biggest friggin genius in the universe, especially when they're younger. Also, teachers can move kids up or down if they noticeably get bored or lag behind.
8) The near-lowest class (ok, anyone with near-avg to avg IQ and up) has to meet NATIONALIZED standards for education in all academic disciplines, and everybody above that has to too, obviously, but hopefully everyone exceeds it by increasing amounts. The very lowest, those who have severe disabilities won't be hard to identify alright, may have a different set of standards with a nationalized test to determine if they belong in this group to begin with. It's kind of absurd to drag down grade-level educational standards to match something someone with an IQ of 70 could conceivably learn at a certain grade and age level, they will progress differently and maybe a different order of learning can be created so during middle school there is little "catching up" to do...all disorders and disabilities are different, so I really don't know how to handle this well but, hey, I'm only a high school kid that's why I'm gong to college. I'll learn this stuff.
9) Tests are taken at the end of each year to determine placement the next year. Teachers are assessed too, but that's a different subject for a different rant.
Do i really need to list all the insane benefits to learning this would give? Fine, maybe people are socially stratified, but if you want public schools to prepare kids for the "real world", the "real world" is pretty socially stratified, too. Might as well just use it to our advantage (our EXTREME advantage, seriously, trust me)
This will branch into other discussions but I would really love to hear what people think about this and why, if anyone hates it, you hate this idea and think it's wrong. Just don't comment on something i said being insensitive. I just don't care. I said things plainly for clarity for myself and for the reader.
| 76 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
