la situazione
Pretend you’re a teacher. With 25 students, who gets your attention during class? There’s the kid who ask for it, whose hand is constantly up. There’s also the quiet kid in the corner who never says a word... Finally, there’s the kid who finishes everything quickly. She’s looking around and wondering, what am I supposed to do now?...
sondaggi
In a survey of teachers from 2008, just 23% reported that advanced students were a top priority for them, while 63% reported giving struggling students in their classes the most attention
la logica a cui molti si rifanno
Gifted children, on the other hand — they’re on the way to becoming gifted adults. They can take care of themselves, for a minute, the logic goes
e poi... a fronte di molti ritardatari
advanced students are only a small percent of each student body,
3 ipotesi di rimedio soluzione per tutti
- Grouping students of the same age in classes according to their abilities, i.e. tracking (National Association for Gifted Children)
- Accelerating students through the curriculum according to their readiness, ignoring age or grade level (A Nation Deceived)
- Using personalization software to replace a human tutor (How Khan Academy Will Help Find The Next Einstein)
la ricerca di bob salvin sul grouping
In the late ’80s and early ’90s, Slavin performed a series of meta-analyses of the existing literature on tracking and between-class ability grouping. Overall, he found no significant benefits from ability grouping, even for “top track” students across elementary, middle, and high schools... But the other surprising finding of Slavin’s was that nobody was academically hurt by ability grouping — not even the lowest track students. Slavin argued that when you consider all the non-academic concerns, the scales weigh in favor of detracking, i.e. avoiding ability grouping.
inconveniente del grouping
“Ability grouping plans in all forms are repugnant to many educators, who feel uncomfortable making decisions about elementary-aged students that could have long-term effects on their self-esteem and life chances. In desegregated schools, the possibility that ability grouping may create racially identifiable groups or classes is of great concern.” (p.327)
tutti d'accordo sul pericolo delle classi separate. dove le opinioni divergono è sull'efficienza:
The main controversy surrounds Slavin’s claims about the academic impact of ability grouping. His meta-analyses were part of an extended back-and-forth with Chen-Lin & James Kulik, who wrote several competing analyses on the ability grouping literature. Slavin and the Kuliks each criticized the other’s methodology, but the core point the Kuliks made was that ability grouping did have positive effects...Slavin states that he is philosophically opposed to tracking, regarding it as inegalitarian and anti-democratic. Unless schools can demonstrate that tracking helps someone, Slavin reasons, they should quit using it. Kulik’s position is that since tracking benefits high achieving students and harms no one, its abolition would be a mistake (p.17)...
posizioni varie... come al solito in questo campo ce n'è per tuttii gusti
Just to mess with everybody, Figlio and Page argue that by attracting stronger students to the school (because parents seek tracking) students in low-tracks benefit, secondarily.
ma una cosa è certa
At the end of the day, all academic impacts of tracking are mediated by teaching and the curriculum. If a teacher doesn’t change what they teach or how they teach it, no grouping decision will help or hurt a student academically in a significant way. Tracking only could benefit gifted students if it came with some sort of curricular modification.
altri modi per aiutare il dotato
A kid can skip a full grade, or several grades in extreme cases. They can stay in their grade for some classes, but join higher grade levels for some parts of the day. They might be assigned to two classes in one year (e.g. Algebra 1 and Geometry). Or, in some cases, a young student might start school at an even younger age than is typical.
oppure
Acceleration is also not the only option. There is much more to learn than is taught in regular courses. Even in a normal class, a well-designed curriculum or an experienced teacher can create “extensions” to the main activity, so that students who are ready for more have something valuable to engage with
altro modo per aiutare il dotato: tutoring. ma forse è troppo costoso per una scuola
altra soluzione Personalization Software
dubbio efficientista
Through acceleration, tutoring, or ability grouping, some kids could learn more. Why aren’t schools aggressively pursuing that? Shouldn’t they be working to teach kids as much as possible? Isn’t that what a school supposed to do? That educators are skeptical of ability grouping or acceleration can be maddening from the perspective of learning maximization: Why are schools leaving learning on the table?
la risposta è semplice: le scuole non massimizzano la conoscenza, hanno molti obbiettivi in conflitto tra loro. esempio
- democratic equality (“education as a mechanism for producing capable citizens”)
- social efficiency (“education as a mechanism for developing productive workers”)
- social mobility (“education as a way for individuals to reinforce or improve their social position”)
prima conclusione
if a child wants to be accelerated and seems academically prepared for it, acceleration will usually help them...sempre tenendo conto che Most schools aren’t in the business of maximizing learning for every student, and in particular they tend to be skeptical of acceleration.
altra conclusione: agire solo con chi è a disagio
if you think your kid needs to be challenged more and your kid is perfectly happy in school, try really hard not to be a nudge... all'insegnante: If a child is bored in your class and knows the material, they probably shouldn’t be in your class.
tenere presente che
Gifted kids are usually not equally talented in all fields.
discussione spesso equivoca
People almost only talk about educational efficacy. But don’t be fooled — educational debates are only sometimes about what works, and frequently about what we value.
naturalmente, poi, c'è la soluzione voucher
