Class Discussion

Some topics that stuck out to me in our discussion was, number one, the issue of performance based grade levels rather than age based grade levels.  I have been thinking a lot about it and there are positives and negatives to both sides.  One thing that keeps coming back to my mind is that if students are grouped by age, than the majority of the students will be at the same developmental level.  I think it would be difficult for an educator to teach their students when some of their brains are ready to grasp the concept while other brains have not fully developed to that level.  I can also see the harmful affects to other students if an older brother and younger brother were in the same class.  It might be damaging to the self esteem and self worth of many.  I can also see the positive effects of age grouping because if the majority of the students are on the same level, it might be a more beneficial learning environment.

But then another thing I think is that, if you group students by ability, are lower SES students going to be left behind simply because they didn't have the same opportunities that the other students had at an early age?  Not that I don't think low SES students can do great and still rise above, but is grouping by ability just widening the gap and making the divide between lower and higher SES students even greater?  It's a hard one to call.

And say a student is at and 8 grade math level but at a fifth grade reading level.  Is he going to be expected to do everything at an eight grade level in order to receive the proper level of math?  If so, that would be an unrealistic expectation.  How about if you had a student going to one class for eighth grade math, then going to a fifth grade reading class and then a sixth grade science class, and then a seventh grade social studies class ect.... how could you possibly work out a program that meets every students needs at every different level and have them traveling around all day.  It's more like that in high school, but even then it is not this extreme.

So the question remains what is better.  For me, it is really the lesser of two evils, rather than choosing the good one over the bad one.

Another thing I remember talking about was the current set up of the education system.  I really liked what the one kid in the corner said about having the government set up a curriculum, the state set up objectives, and then the rest was up to individual districts.  I do understand the desire for standardization, but standardization should only be the minimum rather than the only measurement.  I think if your students are at a certain level, a teacher should have the right to explore other topics rather than being bookended by the objectives.  I know this will sound cheesy but I like cheesy and it is appropriate for the situation.  In the movie Pirates of the Carribbean, Captian Barbosa says that the Pirates rules aren't so much rules as they are like guidelines.  I think educational policies should be the same.  They should be more of a guiding path that outlines things that should be taught rather than, "teach this or say good bye to your job."  However, that is just my opinion.

The last thing that I remember about our class discussion was talking about the PRAXIS tests... the first one I can see, even the second one, but history PRAXIS has GOT to change.  It is seriously the most ridiculous thing.  I got a study book and the opening words are, "If you are really going to take this test, all we can say is good luck."  Really?  Thats how you open  a book... written to help you pass this test... I agree with the one student who had the idea of splitting the test into subject areas so you know what your going to be tested on instead of saying, "OK, you are being tested on the creation of earth to today, for every country and culture on earth plus the interactions between them."  What a joke, nonetheless, I can not change the system.  Well, at least in time to make it so I don't have to take the test!