As far as class goes, I could not find a clear "positive" and a clear "negative" trend. All trends that we discussed I felt were a mixed bag of pluses and minuses.
For example we talked about NCLB. It is a positive in that its goal is to increase students learning and hold teachers accountable for student learning. However, it is negative in that one test is supposed to be a standard for all. I have a friend who has very bad test anxiety, and has to take tests in a seperate room from everyone else. Also, I am sure many people can name a "smart" kid in class who always has an answer in class during discussions, yet fails tests. What happens if a student is feelin sick on day of test? That would factor in how they do as well.
Anther trend we talked about in class is online high schools. I was surprised when we read the article about how every student in Michigan has to take at least one online course to graduate. A plus is that this class will make the student more computer savy, but I wonder what the student is missing out in terms of social interaction that they would normally get in a classroom. Sure people say that this generation is extremely connected to eachother with texting and facebook, but how much actual "face time" do these students get. I think this commercial-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAGoqhXtrX4 - sums up my feelings on the importance of interacting face to face with people.
A larger, older trend, specialization, was my favorite. Because teachers have to cater their lesson plans, to the lower achieving students in class, the more gifted students take a back seat.
With “specialization” or group learning, teachers have the ability to serve both ends of the spectrum. This trend involves students, in which they choose a specific path they want to take through high school. Also, these students have courses structured, in relation to what they will do once they get out of high school.
This allows for students to tap into their potential, by putting more control, of their courses, into their own hands.
Of the trends discussed in class, the biggest trend that could be negative is the way South Dakota high schools that different "tracks" for graduation.
When a student enters high school, they can choose the easiest track that eventually will "lead" them to going to a technical school. Students also have the option of going on the regular track or the tougher track that prepares students for a 4 year college.
This seems to segregate students even further into the haves and the have nots, promotes a feeling of inferiority on some students, and makes it difficult for students to switch tracks, especially if they change their minds and want to go to a four year college.
On the flip side, the biggest positive trend seems to be the progress of technology is coming to the classroom so students can adapt to an everchanging world.
Like Eric said it was hard to find a clear negative and positive trend. Everything discussed obviously had both aspects. If there were only postives, we would be using the new trends and loving it. If there were only negatives then we would not even be discussing it. With everything in life you have to give up something to get something. We talked about block scheduling compared to regular fifty minute schedules. Both have advantages and disadvantages. The pros would be that you can spend more time with the kids. You have to prepare for only a few classes as a teacher. The classes with labs are able to complete labs. The negatives are that kids in foriegn language classes tend to forget a lot between classes. You actually lose teaching time, the minutes a kid spends with you for a credit are less than that of a fifty minute classroom. That is just one example of what we talked about. Most everything we discussed was this way.
I agree with both Eric and Kaleb when they we really didn't label any trend as positive or negative during our in class discussion. What we did do was discuss some positive and negative aspects to certain trends. The example I'm going to use briefly is NCLB. We discussed how it is good that our government is trying to make schools accountable for who they hire and make teachers accountable for what they are teaching. We also discussed that this causes teachers to teach to a certain test and not to what might help the students in the long run. We also discussed how it is not necessarily good to judge the performance of the students only on a standardized tests. We also discussed how it is unfair for the government to eventually expect 100% proficiency from all the schools in the United States. Although it is a nice thought, it seems like a goal that is setting every school up for failure. Most of the things we discussed we broke down into positives and negatives this way.
This class period was very informative and helped to boost students into the teaching profession. I was very interested in outcome based learning and No Child Left Behind (NCLB). In outcome beased learned, schools are trying to evaluate students at the same level. This does not work because students learn at different paces and some are learning in a special education program. I think that outcome based learning is not fair for the teacher as well as the student. In NCLB, we learned the negatives of this disasterious bill from congress. the bill stated that students would have to be 100% proficient in reading and math by the year 2013. This goal is unrealistic and the standards for proficient keep raising if you pass the standards yearly. Also, NCLB puts the teachers responsible for the learning of the students. We can try to improve a students attitude toward school but ultimately its in the hands of each individual students. I don't like NCLB because of its harsh standards but I like it that wants to bring a change toward education.
We did not really discuss the fact of whether the trends were positive or negative. We did talk about the fact that tracking and NCLB have positive aspects as well as negative. For example, NCLB is positive because it does hold teachers more accountable. On the negative side, same as eric said, one test is supposed to be the standard for all students. Some students are very bright kids but struggle with tests so this method does not really show how much the student is learning.
We did talk a little bit about the use of technology within the classroom. I enjoyed this portion of the class because, although I struggle with using some of the new technology, it can be a very useful tool.
Of the trends discussed in this week's class, which seem to you the most positive? Which the most negative? Why?
7 comments:
As far as class goes, I could not find a clear "positive" and a clear "negative" trend. All trends that we discussed I felt were a mixed bag of pluses and minuses.
For example we talked about NCLB. It is a positive in that its goal is to increase students learning and hold teachers accountable for student learning. However, it is negative in that one test is supposed to be a standard for all. I have a friend who has very bad test anxiety, and has to take tests in a seperate room from everyone else. Also, I am sure many people can name a "smart" kid in class who always has an answer in class during discussions, yet fails tests. What happens if a student is feelin sick on day of test? That would factor in how they do as well.
Anther trend we talked about in class is online high schools. I was surprised when we read the article about how every student in Michigan has to take at least one online course to graduate. A plus is that this class will make the student more computer savy, but I wonder what the student is missing out in terms of social interaction that they would normally get in a classroom. Sure people say that this generation is extremely connected to eachother with texting and facebook, but how much actual "face time" do these students get. I think this commercial-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kAGoqhXtrX4 - sums up my feelings on the importance of interacting face to face with people.
First off, this class was great.
A larger, older trend, specialization, was my favorite. Because teachers have to cater their lesson plans, to the lower achieving students in class, the more gifted students take a back seat.
With “specialization” or group learning, teachers have the ability to serve both ends of the spectrum. This trend involves students, in which they choose a specific path they want to take through high school. Also, these students have courses structured, in relation to what they will do once they get out of high school.
This allows for students to tap into their potential, by putting more control, of their courses, into their own hands.
Of the trends discussed in class, the biggest trend that could be negative is the way South Dakota high schools that different "tracks" for graduation.
When a student enters high school, they can choose the easiest track that eventually will "lead" them to going to a technical school. Students also have the option of going on the regular track or the tougher track that prepares students for a 4 year college.
This seems to segregate students even further into the haves and the have nots, promotes a feeling of inferiority on some students, and makes it difficult for students to switch tracks, especially if they change their minds and want to go to a four year college.
On the flip side, the biggest positive trend seems to be the progress of technology is coming to the classroom so students can adapt to an everchanging world.
Like Eric said it was hard to find a clear negative and positive trend. Everything discussed obviously had both aspects. If there were only postives, we would be using the new trends and loving it. If there were only negatives then we would not even be discussing it. With everything in life you have to give up something to get something. We talked about block scheduling compared to regular fifty minute schedules. Both have advantages and disadvantages. The pros would be that you can spend more time with the kids. You have to prepare for only a few classes as a teacher. The classes with labs are able to complete labs. The negatives are that kids in foriegn language classes tend to forget a lot between classes. You actually lose teaching time, the minutes a kid spends with you for a credit are less than that of a fifty minute classroom. That is just one example of what we talked about. Most everything we discussed was this way.
I agree with both Eric and Kaleb when they we really didn't label any trend as positive or negative during our in class discussion. What we did do was discuss some positive and negative aspects to certain trends. The example I'm going to use briefly is NCLB. We discussed how it is good that our government is trying to make schools accountable for who they hire and make teachers accountable for what they are teaching. We also discussed that this causes teachers to teach to a certain test and not to what might help the students in the long run. We also discussed how it is not necessarily good to judge the performance of the students only on a standardized tests. We also discussed how it is unfair for the government to eventually expect 100% proficiency from all the schools in the United States. Although it is a nice thought, it seems like a goal that is setting every school up for failure. Most of the things we discussed we broke down into positives and negatives this way.
This class period was very informative and helped to boost students into the teaching profession. I was very interested in outcome based learning and No Child Left Behind (NCLB).
In outcome beased learned, schools are trying to evaluate students at the same level. This does not work because students learn at different paces and some are learning in a special education program. I think that outcome based learning is not fair for the teacher as well as the student.
In NCLB, we learned the negatives of this disasterious bill from congress. the bill stated that students would have to be 100% proficient in reading and math by the year 2013. This goal is unrealistic and the standards for proficient keep raising if you pass the standards yearly. Also, NCLB puts the teachers responsible for the learning of the students. We can try to improve a students attitude toward school but ultimately its in the hands of each individual students. I don't like NCLB because of its harsh standards but I like it that wants to bring a change toward education.
We did not really discuss the fact of whether the trends were positive or negative. We did talk about the fact that tracking and NCLB have positive aspects as well as negative. For example, NCLB is positive because it does hold teachers more accountable. On the negative side, same as eric said, one test is supposed to be the standard for all students. Some students are very bright kids but struggle with tests so this method does not really show how much the student is learning.
We did talk a little bit about the use of technology within the classroom. I enjoyed this portion of the class because, although I struggle with using some of the new technology, it can be a very useful tool.
Post a Comment