What value would a system like this afford?
What problems do you foresee? What advantages?
The Alaskan school has adopted a system where no grade levels or grades are kept in the traditional sense. The school has the standards (what is expected of each child to learn) written out from 5 to approximately 17 years old. The levels are written as emerging, developing, progressing, and advanced. The core categories (like science, math, reading, social studies and writing) are listed with various achievement levels. Each student needs to achieve at least a proficiency level before advancing to the next level. This reminded me of the time when I took my daughter to a Christian school. She had a series of workbooks in each subject. When she felt she was ready, after doing the progressions, she took a test. If she received a 80% or above she could go to the next workbook series. She was at a more advanced level in writing (like a 4th grade level when she was age appropriate at a 3rd grade level) and lower in science. The teacher had to encourage her to catch up with subjects that were not her strongest ones. When I put Courtney into a traditional setting at a public school the next year, the differences were amazing. She already knew her multiplication facts and could read fluently. She finished homework very fast and felt bored at times because she could not get ahead. I believe the system is similar to that in Alaska. I think all people should learn at their own pace and excel in areas they do well in. The downfall I see is that a teacher needs to have a wide range of knowledge at various levels. If you have one student on the basics of math in addition and another in calculus, then you would have to work at extremes to help both of them. A teacher would have to monitor each subject area and encourage development in each. A student wouldn't seem to do well if they ignored reading and tried to gain in writing as the two goes hand in hand. I like the system because I have seen the results first hand and believe each child should be considered an individual and not just a number in role call.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)