Reply to Why does mcps do a crappy job with magnet/enriched opportunities

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Why does mcps do a crappy job with magnet/enriched opportunities "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]PP, and this is why tracking could help.

At least the teacher can stick with one lesson!

[/quote]

Tracking just creates levels in a rigid system and doesn’t necessarily promote true differentiation. [/quote]

NP. Is anyone willing to explain the difference between tracking and differentiation? I guess I don’t understand the terminology. I assumed that being on different “tracks” meant having varying levels of instruction and standards, which is what I thought differentiation is.[/quote]

https://www.brookings.edu/research/ability-grouping-tracking-and-how-schools-work/[/quote]

Be careful about studies like the one quoted here - there are lots of software companies subsidizing studies to support the use of their wares. They are selling methods of grouping students, so they find the benefit.

Tracking is a form of differentiation. Differentiation is meeting students at their individual ability level and supporting their learning by acknowledging different abilities, interests, skills and just generally the unique human part of all of us.

Tracking attempts to do this by grouping students into general levels of ability by classroom. It has fallen out of favor for younger students because it can “trap” a student in a level that they may grow out of. It seems suitable for high school. Ability grouping is basically tracking within one classroom, and is generally more accepted in elementary schools because it is easier for a teacher to move students fluidly from group to group if their skills change, and there are more opportunities for children of all levels to work together.

However, as ability grouping is done in MCPS, it is a bandaid and does not really provide true differentiation, because curriculum 2.0 is heavily reliant on almost insanely rigid and boring worksheets, many of which are an almost exact replica of the day’s previous lesson. So despite having children in ability groups, the kids are doing largely similar worksheets which don’t give any room for individual outcomes and are mainly skills drills. Teachers do not have time to hold six groups per class, so they tend to cluster the children into larger ability groups than would be ideal and they also tend to meet much less often with the children in the highest ability groups. Ability groups tend to be more successful for ELA than math because reading and writing and discussion naturally allow for more individual responses. But better constructed ELA assignments that focus more on allowing for inherent differentiation within the assignment for every child and not just the groups would also allow for a much more interesting and engaging classroom.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics