All honors, All onlevel, All blended, or leveled classes - which is best?

[Anonymous]

Which of the following class set ups would you like to have?

1. All students taught honors level. No onlevel classes available.

2. All students taught onlevel. No honors classes available.

3. All students put into a "blended" class that contains honors and onlevel students. Teachers teach both classes at the same time.

4. Students are placed into an honors class or an onlevel class. Both levels are available and are taught at different times by different people.

Does it matter what type of class it is? For example, does blended work better for one type of class but putting students into a leveled class works better for a different type of class?

[Anonymous]

Kids separated by ability.

[Anonymous]

4, onlevel and real honors. Not the "honors" classes we have today to boost GPAs.

[Anonymous]

For high school definitely four.

For elementary school, I think tracking should be minimal.

undecided on middle school

[Anonymous]

For elementary school - flexible ability grouping
By definition, heterogenous grouping means everyone gets less instructional time at their level. Flexible ability grouping allows kids to be taught according to their level, but they are not pigeonholed into rigid tracks. Here’s an example of where it has been implemented effectively.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2007/11/03/ST2007110301386.html

I would think that having the elementary school classes taught at the same time by different people would be most effective, so that students can be easily transferred to another level as necessary without disrupting the schedule.



Middle school should be taught on different distinct levels, like high school classes that are taught at on level, honors, and AP level classes. There shouldn’t be gatekeeping, but if a student can’t meet the demands of the class, they should be prepared to drop to a lower level if necessary. Students should meet the level of the class, rather than dropping the rigor to accommodate students who can’t satisfy the class’s requirements.

[Anonymous]

#4

In ES we were told differentiation happened, but only in the form of math or reading groups, and the high level groups got significantly less I struction (because they didn't need it).

Once you hit middle school, with foreign language for 6th graders, and higher level math classes, there's a little bit more differentiation.

Luckily, there's the AP track, or IB, once your kid gets high school.

The problem with combining is you have kids who know nothing, and have no interest in learning anything, combined with high flyers. It doesn't work

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which of the following class set ups would you like to have?

1. All students taught honors level. No onlevel classes available.

2. All students taught onlevel. No honors classes available.

3. All students put into a "blended" class that contains honors and onlevel students. Teachers teach both classes at the same time.

4. Students are placed into an honors class or an onlevel class. Both levels are available and are taught at different times by different people.

Does it matter what type of class it is? For example, does blended work better for one type of class but putting students into a leveled class works better for a different type of class?

Teacher here (both MS & HS) - it matters what type of class it is.

Mathematics is very much a skills class and students learn at different paces. In early years, students may also learn some content quickly and take longer on other content. At the ES level, heterogeneous grouping in a class, but homogeneous small groups works well. At MS & HS level with a 7 period rotation, they need to be split into homogeneous groups (Honors/on-level) for instructional purposes.

English content spirals throughout the years, with different skills becoming more advanced through reading, writing, and analysis. Any particular lesson can be delivered to students of differing abilities, but then they work and implement at whatever level they are at. English should be heterogeneously grouped (honors) level through ES, MS, and HS until taking a specific AP/IB course with a separate curriculum. All students benefit from hearing different voices during class discussions. Students thoughts about various topics are valuable, regardless of their current reading and writing level.

I think that we should stop giving letter grades for English and Math and actually provide true standards based grading feedback on each standard. If we did this, there would be less tension about the classwork assigned in classes that is "too easy" or "too hard", which leads to the desire to sort kids by current ability.

Social studies and Science are a mix of content knowledge and skills. I think that these should be heterogeneously grouped and taught at an "honors" level through ES and MS, and kids earn letter grades based on their understanding and performance in the class. Students need the opportunity in MS to rise to the challenge of honors courses. Separating them into "easier" classes means that they don't learn the study skills they need for more rigorous courses in HS. At the HS level, I think social studies and science courses should be split into homogeneous groups. AP/IB for the most advanced students - with external curriculum and test to demonstrate actual achievement. I think that the on-level & honors courses should actually be taught as combined classes (blended - everyone in the same class, learning the same material) because there is no distinction in the HS curriculum between on-level and honors. However, I think that in order to earn the "Honors" designation, students have to pass a final exam for the semester material with at least a C grade, and it factors into their semester grade. If students don't take the final exam or earn a D or E on the exam, the designation remains on-level.

[Anonymous]

4, always and forever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which of the following class set ups would you like to have?

1. All students taught honors level. No onlevel classes available.

2. All students taught onlevel. No honors classes available.

3. All students put into a "blended" class that contains honors and onlevel students. Teachers teach both classes at the same time.

4. Students are placed into an honors class or an onlevel class. Both levels are available and are taught at different times by different people.

Does it matter what type of class it is? For example, does blended work better for one type of class but putting students into a leveled class works better for a different type of class?

Teacher here (both MS & HS) - it matters what type of class it is.

Mathematics is very much a skills class and students learn at different paces. In early years, students may also learn some content quickly and take longer on other content. At the ES level, heterogeneous grouping in a class, but homogeneous small groups works well. At MS & HS level with a 7 period rotation, they need to be split into homogeneous groups (Honors/on-level) for instructional purposes.

English content spirals throughout the years, with different skills becoming more advanced through reading, writing, and analysis. Any particular lesson can be delivered to students of differing abilities, but then they work and implement at whatever level they are at. English should be heterogeneously grouped (honors) level through ES, MS, and HS until taking a specific AP/IB course with a separate curriculum. All students benefit from hearing different voices during class discussions. Students thoughts about various topics are valuable, regardless of their current reading and writing level.

I think that we should stop giving letter grades for English and Math and actually provide true standards based grading feedback on each standard. If we did this, there would be less tension about the classwork assigned in classes that is "too easy" or "too hard", which leads to the desire to sort kids by current ability.

Social studies and Science are a mix of content knowledge and skills. I think that these should be heterogeneously grouped and taught at an "honors" level through ES and MS, and kids earn letter grades based on their understanding and performance in the class. Students need the opportunity in MS to rise to the challenge of honors courses. Separating them into "easier" classes means that they don't learn the study skills they need for more rigorous courses in HS. At the HS level, I think social studies and science courses should be split into homogeneous groups. AP/IB for the most advanced students - with external curriculum and test to demonstrate actual achievement. I think that the on-level & honors courses should actually be taught as combined classes (blended - everyone in the same class, learning the same material) because there is no distinction in the HS curriculum between on-level and honors. However, I think that in order to earn the "Honors" designation, students have to pass a final exam for the semester material with at least a C grade, and it factors into their semester grade. If students don't take the final exam or earn a D or E on the exam, the designation remains on-level.

Another teacher here (also both MS and HS) - I disagree with some of this. I think it is undeniable that advanced kids are held back in English, "Social Studies" and Science mixed classrooms. The level of discourse that is necessary to include and engage kids who are barely literate in an English class or who have no background knowledge in History or Science does not advance the kids who are ready to move on, even with differentiated textbooks (which we don't use) and assignments.

I think flexible ability/knowledge grouping for each subject (which recognizes student progress and interest differs by topic) through all of schooling will maximize performance for everyone. Have an objective set of skills and content knowledge that are required to move on, and MEAN it. Stop worrying about stigma. The false compassion of moving kids along through material for which they are unprepared makes them hate school and sends them out into the world unprepared for any career. That is child abuse, not compassion.

If a child shows up at school for the first time not knowing how to hold a book and not knowing what an elephant is, focus on pre-k enrichment for the first year rather than trying to rush them into an academic environment where EVERYTHING will be a challenge for them. See E.D. Hirsch research on how content knowledge is necessary for further progress there. Those kids will be OK if they get a firm foundation. Will they "catch up" to kids who are better prepared? Maybe with effort. But they will be maximizing their time in K-12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kids separated by ability.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which of the following class set ups would you like to have?

1. All students taught honors level. No onlevel classes available.

2. All students taught onlevel. No honors classes available.

3. All students put into a "blended" class that contains honors and onlevel students. Teachers teach both classes at the same time.

4. Students are placed into an honors class or an onlevel class. Both levels are available and are taught at different times by different people.

Does it matter what type of class it is? For example, does blended work better for one type of class but putting students into a leveled class works better for a different type of class?

Teacher here (both MS & HS) - it matters what type of class it is.

Mathematics is very much a skills class and students learn at different paces. In early years, students may also learn some content quickly and take longer on other content. At the ES level, heterogeneous grouping in a class, but homogeneous small groups works well. At MS & HS level with a 7 period rotation, they need to be split into homogeneous groups (Honors/on-level) for instructional purposes.

English content spirals throughout the years, with different skills becoming more advanced through reading, writing, and analysis. Any particular lesson can be delivered to students of differing abilities, but then they work and implement at whatever level they are at. English should be heterogeneously grouped (honors) level through ES, MS, and HS until taking a specific AP/IB course with a separate curriculum. All students benefit from hearing different voices during class discussions. Students thoughts about various topics are valuable, regardless of their current reading and writing level.

I think that we should stop giving letter grades for English and Math and actually provide true standards based grading feedback on each standard. If we did this, there would be less tension about the classwork assigned in classes that is "too easy" or "too hard", which leads to the desire to sort kids by current ability.

Social studies and Science are a mix of content knowledge and skills. I think that these should be heterogeneously grouped and taught at an "honors" level through ES and MS, and kids earn letter grades based on their understanding and performance in the class. Students need the opportunity in MS to rise to the challenge of honors courses. Separating them into "easier" classes means that they don't learn the study skills they need for more rigorous courses in HS. At the HS level, I think social studies and science courses should be split into homogeneous groups. AP/IB for the most advanced students - with external curriculum and test to demonstrate actual achievement. I think that the on-level & honors courses should actually be taught as combined classes (blended - everyone in the same class, learning the same material) because there is no distinction in the HS curriculum between on-level and honors. However, I think that in order to earn the "Honors" designation, students have to pass a final exam for the semester material with at least a C grade, and it factors into their semester grade. If students don't take the final exam or earn a D or E on the exam, the designation remains on-level.

Another teacher here (also both MS and HS) - I disagree with some of this. I think it is undeniable that advanced kids are held back in English, "Social Studies" and Science mixed classrooms. The level of discourse that is necessary to include and engage kids who are barely literate in an English class or who have no background knowledge in History or Science does not advance the kids who are ready to move on, even with differentiated textbooks (which we don't use) and assignments.

I think flexible ability/knowledge grouping for each subject (which recognizes student progress and interest differs by topic) through all of schooling will maximize performance for everyone. Have an objective set of skills and content knowledge that are required to move on, and MEAN it. Stop worrying about stigma. The false compassion of moving kids along through material for which they are unprepared makes them hate school and sends them out into the world unprepared for any career. That is child abuse, not compassion.

If a child shows up at school for the first time not knowing how to hold a book and not knowing what an elephant is, focus on pre-k enrichment for the first year rather than trying to rush them into an academic environment where EVERYTHING will be a challenge for them. See E.D. Hirsch research on how content knowledge is necessary for further progress there. Those kids will be OK if they get a firm foundation. Will they "catch up" to kids who are better prepared? Maybe with effort. But they will be maximizing their time in K-12.

This. I’m not a teacher but have volunteered a ton at both of my kids’ schools. I agree with what you are saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which of the following class set ups would you like to have?

1. All students taught honors level. No onlevel classes available.

2. All students taught onlevel. No honors classes available.

3. All students put into a "blended" class that contains honors and onlevel students. Teachers teach both classes at the same time.

4. Students are placed into an honors class or an onlevel class. Both levels are available and are taught at different times by different people.

Does it matter what type of class it is? For example, does blended work better for one type of class but putting students into a leveled class works better for a different type of class?

Teacher here (both MS & HS) - it matters what type of class it is.

Mathematics is very much a skills class and students learn at different paces. In early years, students may also learn some content quickly and take longer on other content. At the ES level, heterogeneous grouping in a class, but homogeneous small groups works well. At MS & HS level with a 7 period rotation, they need to be split into homogeneous groups (Honors/on-level) for instructional purposes.

English content spirals throughout the years, with different skills becoming more advanced through reading, writing, and analysis. Any particular lesson can be delivered to students of differing abilities, but then they work and implement at whatever level they are at. English should be heterogeneously grouped (honors) level through ES, MS, and HS until taking a specific AP/IB course with a separate curriculum. All students benefit from hearing different voices during class discussions. Students thoughts about various topics are valuable, regardless of their current reading and writing level.

I think that we should stop giving letter grades for English and Math and actually provide true standards based grading feedback on each standard. If we did this, there would be less tension about the classwork assigned in classes that is "too easy" or "too hard", which leads to the desire to sort kids by current ability.

Social studies and Science are a mix of content knowledge and skills. I think that these should be heterogeneously grouped and taught at an "honors" level through ES and MS, and kids earn letter grades based on their understanding and performance in the class. Students need the opportunity in MS to rise to the challenge of honors courses. Separating them into "easier" classes means that they don't learn the study skills they need for more rigorous courses in HS. At the HS level, I think social studies and science courses should be split into homogeneous groups. AP/IB for the most advanced students - with external curriculum and test to demonstrate actual achievement. I think that the on-level & honors courses should actually be taught as combined classes (blended - everyone in the same class, learning the same material) because there is no distinction in the HS curriculum between on-level and honors. However, I think that in order to earn the "Honors" designation, students have to pass a final exam for the semester material with at least a C grade, and it factors into their semester grade. If students don't take the final exam or earn a D or E on the exam, the designation remains on-level.

Another teacher here (also both MS and HS) - I disagree with some of this. I think it is undeniable that advanced kids are held back in English, "Social Studies" and Science mixed classrooms. The level of discourse that is necessary to include and engage kids who are barely literate in an English class or who have no background knowledge in History or Science does not advance the kids who are ready to move on, even with differentiated textbooks (which we don't use) and assignments.

I think flexible ability/knowledge grouping for each subject (which recognizes student progress and interest differs by topic) through all of schooling will maximize performance for everyone. Have an objective set of skills and content knowledge that are required to move on, and MEAN it. Stop worrying about stigma. The false compassion of moving kids along through material for which they are unprepared makes them hate school and sends them out into the world unprepared for any career. That is child abuse, not compassion.

If a child shows up at school for the first time not knowing how to hold a book and not knowing what an elephant is, focus on pre-k enrichment for the first year rather than trying to rush them into an academic environment where EVERYTHING will be a challenge for them. See E.D. Hirsch research on how content knowledge is necessary for further progress there. Those kids will be OK if they get a firm foundation. Will they "catch up" to kids who are better prepared? Maybe with effort. But they will be maximizing their time in K-12.

This. I’m not a teacher but have volunteered a ton at both of my kids’ schools. I agree with what you are saying.

Another super volunteer, and this does not happen in any of my children's classes. The teacher spends all their time on the struggling kids, and the behavior problem kids, and completely leaves the high flyers to themselves

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Which of the following class set ups would you like to have?

1. All students taught honors level. No onlevel classes available.

2. All students taught onlevel. No honors classes available.

3. All students put into a "blended" class that contains honors and onlevel students. Teachers teach both classes at the same time.

4. Students are placed into an honors class or an onlevel class. Both levels are available and are taught at different times by different people.

Does it matter what type of class it is? For example, does blended work better for one type of class but putting students into a leveled class works better for a different type of class?

4 for sure. People should be taught at the level that they are - blended learning doesn't work, particularly for secondary school.

[Anonymous]

Yes but lowest level becomes a class filled with discipline and ld issues. Better to blend these kids.

[Anonymous]

Option 4, at least for MS and HS.