I have two problems with that view. First, it is simply not practical in our school. As I've tried to explain, more than 50% of the kids in our school are low-income, and a good number of those are ELL learners. The teachers need all the help they can get with these kids. The teachers can't do it all at school. Maybe in a private school with 10 kids in a K class like hers, the teachers can do it all. But it certainly isn't going to happen in a class with 30 kids, especially when a good percentage of the kids come to school at a disadvantage.
There's no way the teachers can help 30 kids do science fair projects--they simply don't have time. So the only alternative is for kids to do them at home. That leaves saying that because some parents can't or won't help, nobody can help, but I don't see that benefitting anybody. It does come right back to the advantage that kids whose parents are educated and involved naturally have. The answer isn't to try to erase that advantage so everybody does less well.
Second, it also contradicts my own beliefs about education. I don't expect the teachers to do it all at home. I expect to be part of my child's education. It's a team effort. If somebody else feels differently, I would expect them to find a school where parents are expected to be more hands-off.
So you are basically saying that those who can help their children should do so, in order to leave the teacher time to help the disadvantaged kids? I can see that argument, but in that situation I would probably want to move or else simply homeschool.
I think that ideally, schools should teach the basics at school, and what parents do should supplement that. But look around in the U.S. I don't think schools are doing a great job with that. In our district, 70% of the kids are low-income. They start at a disadvantage and they never catch up. HS dropout rates are high. I think that some of the right steps are being taken--paying for preschool and all-day K for low-income kids, for example--but it's still not enough. I'm not a big fan of NCLB, but if you look at our state tests, the only real correlation bewteen who isn't proficient and who is is socioeconomics. That tells me that we can't just leave it all up to the schools. I don't think it's fair to teachers, especially when we don't have the money to give them the support they need. We had 30 kids in our K class this year--I think that's ridiculous, especially when they run the gamut from gifted kids to kids who can barely speak English.
And I think I'm done talking about the science fair, but the science fair and other projects I'm talking about are not part of the basic curriculum. The teachers already do "science Fridays" where each child takes a turn helping the teacher do an experiment for the class, and the kids learn about the scientific method. Doing a science fair project takes it to a higher level. Same with the other projects.
Pages
You are right.
I have two problems with that view. First, it is simply not practical in our school. As I've tried to explain, more than 50% of the kids in our school are low-income, and a good number of those are ELL learners. The teachers need all the help they can get with these kids. The teachers can't do it all at school. Maybe in a private school with 10 kids in a K class like hers, the teachers can do it all. But it certainly isn't going to happen in a class with 30 kids, especially when a good percentage of the kids come to school at a disadvantage.
There's no way the teachers can help 30 kids do science fair projects--they simply don't have time. So the only alternative is for kids to do them at home. That leaves saying that because some parents can't or won't help, nobody can help, but I don't see that benefitting anybody. It does come right back to the advantage that kids whose parents are educated and involved naturally have. The answer isn't to try to erase that advantage so everybody does less well.
Second, it also contradicts my own beliefs about education. I don't expect the teachers to do it all at home. I expect to be part of my child's education. It's a team effort. If somebody else feels differently, I would expect them to find a school where parents are expected to be more hands-off.
I guess I thought it was a big deal because it was presented as part of the school philosophy, my mistake.
PumpkinAngel
I don't wait either...in fact I'm pretty proactive.
PumpkinAngel
I think that ideally, schools should teach the basics at school, and what parents do should supplement that. But look around in the U.S. I don't think schools are doing a great job with that. In our district, 70% of the kids are low-income. They start at a disadvantage and they never catch up. HS dropout rates are high. I think that some of the right steps are being taken--paying for preschool and all-day K for low-income kids, for example--but it's still not enough. I'm not a big fan of NCLB, but if you look at our state tests, the only real correlation bewteen who isn't proficient and who is is socioeconomics. That tells me that we can't just leave it all up to the schools. I don't think it's fair to teachers, especially when we don't have the money to give them the support they need. We had 30 kids in our K class this year--I think that's ridiculous, especially when they run the gamut from gifted kids to kids who can barely speak English.
And I think I'm done talking about the science fair, but the science fair and other projects I'm talking about are not part of the basic curriculum. The teachers already do "science Fridays" where each child takes a turn helping the teacher do an experiment for the class, and the kids learn about the scientific method. Doing a science fair project takes it to a higher level. Same with the other projects.
<
PumpkinAngel
<>
I'm sorry, I thought that since it was part of the school's philosophy that it was a big deal.
PumpkinAngel
Yes, exactly.
PumpkinAngel
Pages