Rock and a Hard Place

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-12-2003
Rock and a Hard Place
1524
Thu, 11-20-2003 - 10:45am

There's something on this board that has been bothering me, and I hope I can articulate it.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 12:43pm
What would make you more concerned at Gr 1 than at K?

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Avatar for outside_the_box_mom
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 12:54pm
I'm beginning to really like you.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 1:01pm
They are apparently in CLWs neighbourhood, and they are also in mine.

And I am not in a lower class neighbourhood. The kids of which I'm thinking did know what a book was and what it was used for - in someone elses hands. But reading is not a skill that will develop instinctively with passive exposure. Unlike walking, talking - development of reading skill requires another level of direction beyond simple exposure. The childish brain won't just start reading because it is exposed to adults who do it. The idea that developing the skill is something to which the young child should aspire - needs to be actively put into that childish brain, and reinforced actively, constantly. I would bet CLW is wrong - I bet those kids in her area WERE read to. I bet it was something else that was missing.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2002
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 1:16pm
Well, I can say from my experiences with the Swedish school system that grading doesn't even start until 8th grade, when children are 14 years old. Before that, work is evaluated through twice-a-year meetings with the teacher(s) who give detailed descriptions of exactly where your child is and where he/she is expected to be skills-wise. An end of the year written report is also given to the parent that contains an extremely detailed description of what a child has accomplished in that year and what still needs to be worked on, all in the context of an expected level of competence which has nothing to do with the level of any other student in the class. The whole point of school up to 8th grade is to get all children up to a certain standard, having learned a certain (and quite specific) set of skills. Comparison between children is useless because it doesn't focus on the main task, which is to make sure that all children have reached the same level of competence by 8th grade. After that point, children start to divide into groups according to abilities and interests and, at the end of 9th grade, will have to test into the high school of choice (high schools have specialty areas that a child will choose to emphasis such as sciences, languages, art etc...the overall education is still fairly well-rounded, but more emphasis is put on the different areas depending on the school and the section within the school).

Does this work? All I can say is that the Scandinavian countries did very well in the last round of PISA tests, certainly much better than the U.S. and most other European countries.


Laura

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 1:27pm
I can't think of a time when charts comparing students in a classroom would be meaningful. When my oldest child went through school, I never saw her rated on a classroom scale. She was graded the same way all the students are - ABCDF or H for honors. I can't imagine when or why I would be interested in where each student in the class is ranked. The day it happens, is the day I will transfer my child to a new school.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 1:32pm
It is not touchy feely at all. Of course I want benchmarks - and they are there. A child is supposed to master various skills before they move on to the next level. Yes, I want my child to be graded - but I don't need to see where he compares in relation to the other children in his classroom. I do of course need to know if he is achieving to his potential. Charting classroom progress may be a valuable tool for the teacher - to mark HER progress, but it surely isn't necessary from my pov.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 1:33pm
Because from the age of 4 to 6 one would expect to see some progress...
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 1:34pm
Awh shucks... I've liked you since I got here! Thanks!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 1:43pm
YES I HAVE! MORE OUTRAGEOUS.

It came from our principal. He was explaining to a group of us how, in his school, and with his philosophy, children would be assigned to mixed grades on a rotating basis year by year. So that all kids ended up there sooner or later and no group of kids ended up there more than others. I think thats just a dumb idea. Its a more complicated learning environment, and I am much more in favour of the other philosophy where the kids chosen to be part of mixed grade classrooms, all of them, the upper and the lower grades, are those who are most able to work independantly and function in the environment. But that isn't the outrageous part.

So I asked him why he didn't use the philosophy I prefer, which makes so much sense and helps minimize the occurence of kids ending up in environments they can't handle thus loosing out completely for an entire year at a time, and also helps minimize the occurence where other kids who can handle it loose entire years because they teacher is trying to cope with a large percentage of a class who can't. Well. Can you believe it. This was his answer. "Well we don't want to have kids assigned to classes in such a way that some classes can be identified as more highly achieveing than others. How would YOU feel, Mrs Opinion, if your child was always in the slow class?" And that is the outrageous part. I was told that the educational experience of children was going to be sacrificed, entire years at at time...to preserve the egos of as many parents as possible! HELLO. THAT is the most OUTRAGEOUS thing I have ever heard. I can't believe you people support this kind of thinking. Its really sad that parental ego is so tied to kids that the parents can't stand dealing with a little concrete comparative analysis of their childrens ability and performance. Especially since I notice how willing all you PARENTS are to have the performance of SCHOOLS compared. Oh sure - as long as you can blame the shortfalls on something other than yourselves - as long as the results of the comparison place no responsiblity for the situation for it on YOUR parenting shoulders...its ok. But boy, just let anyone imply that Mommy or Daddy's performance stands to impvrove and its a little ego meltdown fest. BLECH.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-02-2003
Wed, 11-26-2003 - 1:53pm
I have to say I truly have difficulty understanding you. I am not sure why you think that my opposition to meaningless comparisons of children in a K classroom translates to my not wanting to take responsibility for my children's education. I take full responsibility to tell you the truth. I do not rely on the school system to educate my children. If my child's teacher believes that my child could benefit from extra help or specific skill enhancement/development, I am all for it. I believe in working cooperatively with the system for my child's benefit. The fact that I see no benefit in comparing children's skills (especially in K!)has no bearing on my responsibility or my ego. BTW, I very much favor multi level classrooms. The research is absolutely clear that children in split classrooms do better. The reason they do better is because the teacher is forced to look at the individual child as opposed to the average.

Pages