More evidence that 2.0 and Starr is backward looking
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Anonymous
|
This is an old article, but this is also interesting. Everyone touts Finland as a model for an educational system, yet they appear to have no grouping:
http://www.businessinsider.com/finland-education-school-2011-12?op=1 |
Anonymous
|
Read the study that these news reports are documenting: http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2013/03/18-tracking-ability-grouping-loveless
The report does not advocate tracking, and in fact suggests ability grouping - which still occurs in MCPS under 2.0 - is the most common form of differentiated education in elementary schools. But please, OP, don't let actual research get in the way of your own vast expertise, which is based upon...??? |
Anonymous
| I know everybody loves Finland. But Finland is likely Montgomery county taking out everyone who lives on the wrong side of the track. I am not sure any of their lessons are applicable. Also people keep saying they don't start school until 7. But they have universal preschool starts at 3. |
Anonymous
|
http://www.nber.org/papers/w18848
Interesting study on the benefit of ability sorting. |
Anonymous
|
<i>But Finland is likely Montgomery county taking out everyone who lives on the wrong side of the track</i>
I suggest reading up on Finland. |
Anonymous
| My first grader has "ability grouping" for both reading (groups in class) and math (switches to another class). |
Anonymous
Are you suggesting that Finland is less homogeneous than MoCo? |
Anonymous
This isn't what the OP is talking about. Prior to 2.0 entire classes were pulled out for math. For example, in second grade there was an entire class (or more) doing third or fourth grade math. With 2.0 that is gone. |
Anonymous
| My now 5th grader used to receive advanced math class starting at 1st grade. It really gave him great academic opportunities and motivation to learn. Now there are no leveled classes and, IMO, this is a huge mistake for all the kids (with varied academic achievement levels). It's a lose-lose situation. |
Anonymous
The OP posted links to two articles referencing a study on "the resurgence of ability grouping." The OP apparently did so in order to argue that "Starr is backward looking." As a rebuttal, I indicated that my son has plenty of ability grouping under the current system. |
Anonymous
| The current system is "differentiated instruction," which is what the Atlantic article criticized. |
Anonymous
| Preschools in Finland and much of Europe are all play based. They do not teach letters or numbers until age 7, when children are developmentally ready to learn to read, and they learn quickly at that point. What distinguished Finland most is the social aspects of learning. Social development is a huge priority there, whereas here it is completely ignored. I just heard about a study showing that classrooms that emphasized social and emotional learning had fewer behavior problems and better academic learning. As far as math, I have heard that some high school teachers in MCPS and univ. profs say that MCPS pushes kids to be accelerated at the expense of developing a proper foundation in math. They get kids who think they are advanced, they've been pushed to get past calculus, bla bla bla, and in fact are unprepared and have major gaps. So acceleration may not be as great as some think it is. |
Anonymous
| In some way, I think 2.0 is the worst of both worlds. It got rid of the grouping and acceleration, which in some case was overdone. But kept the reform math. And added the 21 century skills nonsense. I would have hated school if I were a student today. And I am speaking as someone who spent more than 20 years in schools. |
Anonymous
| Do your kids actually hate school? |