When did people start getting left behind? Was it when we, well, "they" quit teaching to groups/levels/Bluebirds/Redbirds/A Group/B Group? I am really sure that is when it happened. Unless they still do it and I just can't tell. I know when I was in grammar school I was in special ed for a while I think only for Math. Also I was in B Group in Jr. High. That was pretty good. For some reason the powers that be didn't really understand me. I probably could have done fine in A Group. But on the other hand, I'm sort of an 80%-er. Enough about me.
At some point the Groups fell out of vogue. No longer was it legit to test groups of students and teach them to their own learning speed. To my knowledge, today K-5 is all lumped together like a salad. The tomatoes are in there with the carrot sticks and lettuce leaves. The raisins are completely out of their element, but that's okay because we included them in the salad. We used to group up, and maybe we did not always feel great about our status in life, but with some sensitivity we obviously coped.
Here is the problem. Not all students learn at the same rate. In the science class today, some students really worked and zoomed through their guided reading "fill in the blank" worksheet. Some had answer prompts on their sheets and still had trouble. Frankly the sheets with "help" confused me worse. Some of them solved the questions quickly. Others got hung up for example where the teacher wrote the wrong prompt. The answer was ocean. But the teacher had b_____________n_____. For bottle nose. Because although the question read something like "In a saltwater ecosystem like an ____________, dolphins and squid interact because the dolphins ___________________. "
One student was laughing that he even had to do the worksheet because it's just copying straight from the book. If you can read the sentence, you can fill in the blanks. He was done before everyone else. Others barely got three answers. Not motivated? Not interested? Not innate readers? All three reasons could USE more reading worksheets. The information was not too boring. I tried to make the lesson fun by having everyone call out "things we'd find in a pond" and I challenged each class to think up more answers than the previous class. They were really up for the challenge, everybody was thinking, I could tell, I could see them, and even the silly ones were possibilities. Hippo. Yep, in Africa a hippo can be in a pond. A dog can be in a pond. Dead people could technically be in a pond and contributing to the ecosystem by rotting and providing food for micro-organisms. Live people could be swimming in the pond and providing food for leaches.
My point is, if we group everyone together no matter how much or little time they need to learn certain things, people are going to fall behind. Groups should be used all the way through elementary school. My argument for this is the way we divide up Maths. Algebra I. Algebra II, Algebra IV. Geometry. Business Math. Or Science, Environmental, Chemistry, Physics... we all know that only people who test high enough to get into Chemistry are going to take it. Algebra IV would have absolutely killed me, and when I tried to take higher Algebras, it was the most frustrating, lost feeling of my entire life up to then, so much that I'd be damned if I'd put myself through THAT again. Business Math on the other hand made all kinds of sense. I can add. I can multiply if I use my fingers. Do the rest of the kids feel bad about themselves because they aren't in Chemistry? No, they're freakin' grateful! I would have choked in Chemistry, unless they had like, C-Group Chemistry where they taught me and my similarly right-brained classmates at our particular rate of learning, for our particular learning style. Does anybody know schools that teach "hard classes" to people who aren't innately math-savvy. Because yes I would like to know that stuff. I was awesome in biology. I adored environmental science, but to get anywhere in science one must also take the "hard" classes. Right? Or am I wrong?
Am I wrong? I might be wrong. It just seems like a lot of extra work to have kids at different stages in their learning all globbed together in one classroom. The bored ones are talking, the ones who fell behind are staring into space, the ones on task are rolling their eyes at the teacher for spending all her time scurrying around straightening out the talkers and the ones strolling around the classroom. If we can still group up in high school depending on the way we learn, why are we now NOT grouping up the elementary students. It feels to me like certain elementary aged students are so far ahead of the rest of them in the same classroom. We all still know who is learning quicker, it's just right there in their face now. The ones who read slower, the ones who don't get math, the ones who finished it already and are now doing extra work are all in class together, and I think it's inefficient. There is obviously a need for everyone to work together in the same classroom for some things, I don't deny it, but I think this might be part of the reason people are "falling behind" - they're all swept together by the tide but not everybody is already a great swimmer. Some of us need more help.
Is everyone getting the help they deserve?
4 comments:
Perfect sense to me. I think it has more to do with the scared of labels thing, it's too un-PC to group the kids as A,B,C etc though I suppose it could be done quietly without actual labels given, but even kids would all know Ms. Smith has all the dumb kids and Ms. Jones all the smart. I think it also stems from the need/want to mainstream special education as well.
I'm right along with you in the math. Once my kid gets past 3rd grade I'm gonna be lost. I'm already lost on some of his 2nd grade. I volunteer during his math class once a week and let me tell you it's a whole 'nother way of math than what I was taught.
I know we have learned enough from the past not to do A Group, B Group. But we also already have TAG programs where the Talented And Gifted go to special classes where they have a better challenge. (Here it begins in 6th grade) We need to be honest about our limitations. It could be out in the open: Have a big assembly and admit, "Listen kids, we know labels are bad. Nobody here is stupid. You are smart because you are all in school. Smart people stay in school because they know it will help them learn and get better at things. We are all smart in different ways though! I am smarter in reading and art. That leaves several areas where a lot of people are smarter than me. Some of us need more help with reading, some of us are keeping up with math but not in science, others are better at everything than everybody else, and we all know that. We are very proud of everyone because they stay in school and try hard!"
On the other hand I have read studies where it is acknowledged that in mixed ability classes the kids who are doing better will help the ones who need help. I have also read about where the kids who already know everything resent the kids who really don't get it.
I have a "blended" classroom. In our school this means students ranging from special education to almost gifted and talented all in one room. I have a student on the autism spectrum (aspergers), one with severe emotional issues, a few with learning disabilities, a few in the ESL program, a few with learning disabilities and in the ELS program, a couple who can run circles around me in science and math and everything in-between. This is challenging, but do-able. In fact, it is ideal if the teacher has the ability, desire and time to provide truly differentiated classroom instruction. The higher level kiddos work well with the lower level kiddos and in doing so they enhance their own learning. Once they master a skill or concept, they help another kiddo master it. Teaching deepens their own abilities.
It is very challenging to have this kind of classroom. But I am a huge advocate of it. Sure, it is possible that the lower kiddos can get left behind. But if a teacher is truly differentiating, no one is left behind.
I spend less than half of my instructional time teaching to the entire classroom. Typically I introduce a concept, give the students a task or activity and then pull groups of students to the back table to continue the lesson. That way I am teaching to each student at his or her level. The students who are working independently are grouped in heterogeneous groups so they are at different levels and can help each other if necessary. The back table instruction is where the teaching "at their level" happens. It also ensures no kiddo is left behind because I get immediate feedback on whether or not they are "getting" the lesson and can adjust instruction accordingly.
The parapro who works in my room said last year she had a classroom full of "low" or "slow" learners. It was a struggle for the teachers because all of the students needed extra help all of the time. I think that is a less successful model than the blended room. The blended room gives the struggling students an opportunity to rise up to meet their peers because the teacher (ideally) provides enough scaffolding and support to help them get there.
They are forcing kids into AP classes next year at our high school. There are either regular English or AP. They removed Honors because they want more kids in AP. Ugh. So, you are either in super easy or super hard English with no in between. I'm guessing there are gonna be a lot of kids failing AP or dropping it altogether.
Why are they doing this??? It's madness.
Post a Comment