Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever the hell they're doing in Singapore, Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong, that's what we should be doing here.

Here are a few differences:
1. School year is much longer
2. School day is much longer
3. Children begin school at age 3
4. Curriculum is more conceptual
5. Textbooks are not a mile-wide and an inch deep, but are focused around the central principles of an academic domain.
6. Parents are highly involved, seeing themselves as partners with the teachers in helping students to learn
7. When students arrive home at night around 6pm after a long day at school, many go to juko school (cram school) starting at 7pm.
8. Teachers are treated as professionals.

I could go on telling you that when these studies like PISA and TIMSS studies control for SES, USA looks about the same. But, I won't because I don't have any respect for these ridiculous comparisons made with standardized testing.

Other than #7, this looks great to me!

I'll sign up for all of that, and if necessary? Tracking included!

Anonymous wrote:Whatever the hell they're doing in Singapore, Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong, that's what we should be doing here.

Here are a few differences:
1. School year is much longer
2. School day is much longer
3. Children begin school at age 3
4. Curriculum is more conceptual
5. Textbooks are not a mile-wide and an inch deep, but are focused around the central principles of an academic domain.
6. Parents are highly involved, seeing themselves as partners with the teachers in helping students to learn
7. When students arrive home at night around 6pm after a long day at school, many go to juko school (cram school) starting at 7pm.
8. Teachers are treated as professionals.

I could go on telling you that when these studies like PISA and TIMSS studies control for SES, USA looks about the same. But, I won't because I don't have any respect for these ridiculous comparisons made with standardized testing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All learners have something strong to bring to the table. Honor all of their strengths. Vary the scaffolding to achieve both common and personal goals for all students.

I'm having a hard time understanding "vary the scaffolding." Can you give a concrete example of what this would look like?

Sure, the idea is that all students receive challenging work in a heterogeneous classroom. Challenging work means that tasks or activities for each student is optimally engaging so that all students are working slightly above their comfort zone. So, growth and progress are the goals. So, when you differentiate the instruction, it looks like choices of books where a wide range of reading materials are offered, varied prompts for writing in a journal, flexible groupings that change throughout the day, multiple levels of questions being asked on the same concept, you create literacy centers where the task/workload varies, using podcasts and other multimedia to "assist" when assistance is needed, or you vary the graphic organizers based on students' interest, readiness. You have can have audio/video recorders as a scaffold; you can highlight print materials, you can have note-taking organizers of varying degrees of difficulty, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please link to research that shows the scenario you outline above is actually effective at achieving excellence for all. I know it looks pretty, feels nice and is taught at all the schools of education. Meanwhile, our scores as a country continue to drop in comparison with the rest of the world. Show me that this approach both narrows the achievement gap and raises the bar for everyone. To me, it is almost impossible to implement effectively beyond the early elementary years and wastes a ridiculous amount of time and frustrates students to no end. Especially when many of them lack the basic social skills to work in groups and lack the self regulation to work.independently. not to mention the more advanced kids who are bored to tears.

This!

Look at international test scores in math and science. 4th grade: U.S. is in 12th place. By 8th grade, in 28th place. By 12th grade, in 19th place - but only because all the Asian nations have already tested out!

Whatever the hell they're doing in Singapore, Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong, that's what we should be doing here.

I suspect that instead of howling over "differentiated models", they're busy pursuing excellence. It's a good thing China owns so much of our debt, it reduces their incentive to make slaves of our children.

You realize those countries track students according to ability and track mercilessly starting in elementary school: Also, very little accommodation for SN. Everyone is expected to perform or sink. No chance of going back on a higher track once you've been tracked to vocational and "not college material." They have no sympathy about minority groups crying "racism" either. Higher education (college) is not available to everyone as it is in the U.S. Would not work here...

Anonymous wrote:Please link to research that shows the scenario you outline above is actually effective at achieving excellence for all. I know it looks pretty, feels nice and is taught at all the schools of education. Meanwhile, our scores as a country continue to drop in comparison with the rest of the world. Show me that this approach both narrows the achievement gap and raises the bar for everyone. To me, it is almost impossible to implement effectively beyond the early elementary years and wastes a ridiculous amount of time and frustrates students to no end. Especially when many of them lack the basic social skills to work in groups and lack the self regulation to work.independently. not to mention the more advanced kids who are bored to tears.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please link to research that shows the scenario you outline above is actually effective at achieving excellence for all. I know it looks pretty, feels nice and is taught at all the schools of education. Meanwhile, our scores as a country continue to drop in comparison with the rest of the world. Show me that this approach both narrows the achievement gap and raises the bar for everyone. To me, it is almost impossible to implement effectively beyond the early elementary years and wastes a ridiculous amount of time and frustrates students to no end. Especially when many of them lack the basic social skills to work in groups and lack the self regulation to work.independently. not to mention the more advanced kids who are bored to tears.

This!

Look at international test scores in math and science. 4th grade: U.S. is in 12th place. By 8th grade, in 28th place. By 12th grade, in 19th place - but only because all the Asian nations have already tested out!

Whatever the hell they're doing in Singapore, Korea, Japan, and Hong Kong, that's what we should be doing here.

I suspect that instead of howling over "differentiated models", they're busy pursuing excellence. It's a good thing China owns so much of our debt, it reduces their incentive to make slaves of our children.

Anonymous wrote:Please link to research that shows the scenario you outline above is actually effective at achieving excellence for all. I know it looks pretty, feels nice and is taught at all the schools of education. Meanwhile, our scores as a country continue to drop in comparison with the rest of the world. Show me that this approach both narrows the achievement gap and raises the bar for everyone. To me, it is almost impossible to implement effectively beyond the early elementary years and wastes a ridiculous amount of time and frustrates students to no end. Especially when many of them lack the basic social skills to work in groups and lack the self regulation to work.independently. not to mention the more advanced kids who are bored to tears.