| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"Dom" |
| Date: |
28 Aug 2006 05:28:00 PM |
| Object: |
Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
Isn't edu-research truly amazing?
<<Dee said his research raises valid questions. Should teachers get
more training about the learning styles of boys and girls?>>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.courant.com/news/education/hc-boygirl0828.artaug28,0,923504.story?coll=hc-headlines-education
He Taught, She Taught - Gender May Matter
Study: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers
By BEN FELLER
Associated Press
August 28 2006
WASHINGTON -- For all the differences between the sexes, here's one
that might stir up debate in the teachers' lounge: Boys learn more from
men and girls learn more from women.
That's the upshot of a provocative study by Thomas Dee, an associate
professor of economics at Swarthmore College and visiting scholar at
Stanford University. His study will appear today in Education Next, a
quarterly journal published by the Hoover Institution.
Vetted and approved by peer reviewers, Dee's research faces a fight for
acceptance. Some leading education advocates dispute his conclusions
and the way in which he reached them.
But Dee said his research supports that gender matters when it comes to
learning. Specifically, as he describes it, having a teacher of the
opposite sex hurts a student's academic progress.
"We should be thinking more carefully about why," he said.
Dee warns against drawing fast conclusions based on his work. He said
he is not endorsing single-sex education or any other policy.
Rather, he said he hopes his work will spur more research into gender's
effect and what to do about it.
His study comes as the proportion of male teachers is at its lowest
level in 40 years. Roughly 80 percent of teachers in U.S. public
schools are women.
Dee's study is based on a nationally representative survey of nearly
25,000 eighth-graders that was conducted by the Education Department in
1988. Though dated, the survey is the most comprehensive look at
students in middle school, when gender gaps emerge, Dee said.
He examined test scores as well as self-reported perceptions by
teachers and students.
Dee found that having a female teacher instead of a male teacher raised
the achievement of girls and lowered that of boys in science, social
studies and English.
Looked at the other way, when a man led the class, boys did better and
girls did worse.
The study found switching up teachers actually could narrow achievement
gaps between boys and girls, but one gender would gain at the expense
of the other.
Dee also contends that gender influences attitudes.
For example, with a female teacher, boys were more likely to be seen as
disruptive. Girls were less likely to be considered inattentive or
disorderly.
In a class taught by a man, girls were more likely to say the subject
was not useful for their future. They were less likely to look forward
to the class or to ask questions.
Dee said he isolated a teacher's gender as an influence by accounting
for several other factors that could affect student performance. But
his study is sure to be scrutinized.
"The data, as he presents them, are far from convincing," said Marcia
Greenberger, the co-president of the National Women's Law Center, which
works to advance the progress of women.
Greenberger said she found Dee's conclusions to be questionable and
inconsistent. More broadly, she said, boys and girls benefit by having
male and female teachers as role models.
"I don't think there are many parents or students, looking back over
their educational careers, who haven't been inspired by a teacher of
the opposite sex," she said.
"And many have had very unhappy experiences with teachers of the same
gender that they are. We have to be careful of too many
generalizations," Greenberger said.
Student success cannot be narrowed to the gender of the teacher, said
Reg Weaver, president of the National Education Association, the
country's largest teachers' union.
Experienced teachers, good textbooks, smaller class sizes and modern
equipment all influence how boys and girls do in class, Weaver said.
"Students benefit by having exposure to teachers who look like them,
who can identify with their culture ... but this is just one variable
among many," Weaver said.
Dee said his research raises valid questions. Should teachers get more
training about the learning styles of boys and girls? Should they be
taught to combat biases in what they expect of boys and girls?
In the nature-nurture debate, he said, teacher gender belongs.
"Some people will react strongly to this," he said. "But I've taken
pains to explain that we need to be cautious about drawing policy
conclusions. As provocative as this all might seem, I really haven't
gotten that much negative feedback."
.
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
28 Aug 2006 10:32:25 PM |
|
|
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
Isn't edu-research truly amazing?
No.
<<Dee said his research raises valid questions. Should teachers get
more training about the learning styles of boys and girls?>>
That would be a valid question with or without the research in
question.
As for the benefits of a same-sex teacher, we could ask the same thing
about the workplace. So men work better under a male office manager
and women under a female office manager (or vice versa), and if they
do, does this mean that we should be allowing office sex
discrimination in order to obtain this higher productivity?
What about race discrimination, or age, or culture, or even religion.
One might find that any of these factors might affect the workplace,
and the various traits of the teacher might affect the learning of the
student. But if we want an nondiscriminatory society, some things are
more important than productivity, and similarly some things are more
important than educational achievement per unit of time..
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
29 Aug 2006 06:27:36 PM |
|
|
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:1tc7f2hlgc0b0sbbjsvc0rbb0vd81lt1gj@4ax.com...
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
Isn't edu-research truly amazing?
No.
<<Dee said his research raises valid questions. Should teachers get
more training about the learning styles of boys and girls?>>
That would be a valid question with or without the research in
question.
While we are talking about learning styles, why stop at gender? I just
started a class in Teaching Math, and today was the first day of the course.
Interesting course--seems to be heavier on manipulatives than on strict rote
learning, and one of the first things that the text mentions is that
teachers should be changing their paradigms because too many students are
simply doing repetitive problem solving without inherent understanding of
the concepts...
The reason why I bring up the manipulatives, especially in the context of
"learning styles" is this: Math is my weakest subject. I was taught by
teachers that were primarily female (i.e., "same gender") by were using
teaching styles that were auditory...Problem is, I am a visual/kinesthetic
learner....
Manipulatives would have made math much easier to learn for me, because they
suit my learning style--not my gender...
Question: What are the "learning styles assigned to the genders"?
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dom" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
30 Aug 2006 11:03:31 AM |
|
|
Sumbuny wrote:
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:1tc7f2hlgc0b0sbbjsvc0rbb0vd81lt1gj@4ax.com...
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
Isn't edu-research truly amazing?
No.
<<Dee said his research raises valid questions. Should teachers get
more training about the learning styles of boys and girls?>>
That would be a valid question with or without the research in
question.
While we are talking about learning styles, why stop at gender? I just
started a class in Teaching Math, and today was the first day of the course.
Interesting course--seems to be heavier on manipulatives than on strict rote
learning, and one of the first things that the text mentions is that
teachers should be changing their paradigms because too many students are
simply doing repetitive problem solving without inherent understanding of
the concepts...
The reason why I bring up the manipulatives, especially in the context of
"learning styles" is this: Math is my weakest subject. I was taught by
teachers that were primarily female (i.e., "same gender") by were using
teaching styles that were auditory...Problem is, I am a visual/kinesthetic
learner....
I find your claim difficult to believe. None of my math classes were
taught by "using teaching styles that were auditory," except for some
recitation of fundamental relationships. The classes were taught by
writing and diagrams, by both teachers and students, in great deatail
on the blackboard.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
30 Aug 2006 01:55:04 PM |
|
|
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote in message
news:1156953811.747547.66860@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Sumbuny wrote:
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:1tc7f2hlgc0b0sbbjsvc0rbb0vd81lt1gj@4ax.com...
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
Isn't edu-research truly amazing?
No.
<<Dee said his research raises valid questions. Should teachers get
more training about the learning styles of boys and girls?>>
That would be a valid question with or without the research in
question.
While we are talking about learning styles, why stop at gender? I just
started a class in Teaching Math, and today was the first day of the
course.
Interesting course--seems to be heavier on manipulatives than on strict
rote
learning, and one of the first things that the text mentions is that
teachers should be changing their paradigms because too many students are
simply doing repetitive problem solving without inherent understanding of
the concepts...
The reason why I bring up the manipulatives, especially in the context of
"learning styles" is this: Math is my weakest subject. I was taught by
teachers that were primarily female (i.e., "same gender") by were using
teaching styles that were auditory...Problem is, I am a
visual/kinesthetic
learner....
I find your claim difficult to believe. None of my math classes were
taught by "using teaching styles that were auditory," except for some
recitation of fundamental relationships. The classes were taught by
writing and diagrams, by both teachers and students, in great deatail
on the blackboard.
So you are saying that lecture classes are also "kinesthetic" because it
forces students to take notes???
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
31 Aug 2006 03:18:45 PM |
|
|
In article <7alJg.226223$k%3.89888@dukeread12>,
Sumbuny <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote in message
news:1156953811.747547.66860@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Sumbuny wrote:
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:1tc7f2hlgc0b0sbbjsvc0rbb0vd81lt1gj@4ax.com...
"Dom" <DRosa@teikyopost.edu> wrote:
Isn't edu-research truly amazing?
No.
..................
The reason why I bring up the manipulatives, especially in the context of
"learning styles" is this: Math is my weakest subject. I was taught by
teachers that were primarily female (i.e., "same gender") by were using
teaching styles that were auditory...Problem is, I am a
visual/kinesthetic
learner....
Manipulatives still hide the basic concepts. We still
can't teach prospective teachers the mathematical concepts,
because they have learned arithmetic as the basis of
mathematics. It most definitely is not.
I find your claim difficult to believe. None of my math classes were
taught by "using teaching styles that were auditory," except for some
recitation of fundamental relationships. The classes were taught by
writing and diagrams, by both teachers and students, in great deatail
on the blackboard.
I do not know of any auditory mathematics. One can
communicate in most languages either orally or in writing;
in mathematics, it is that kind of communication which is
important. The purely linguistic use of variables is the
language by which one can express mathematics clearly; the
same written expression will be pronounced differently by
different speakers, but it carries the same meaning.
So you are saying that lecture classes are also "kinesthetic" because it
forces students to take notes???
My efforts to take notes failed utterly. This did nothing
to keep me from becoming a research mathematician in more
than one field. It made no difference whether I heard
something in lectures or read it; a good lecture explains
the notions, and does not provide "instructions".
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Beeler" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
03 Sep 2006 01:01:07 AM |
|
|
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:ed7g75$4nhi@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
Manipulatives still hide the basic concepts. We still
can't teach prospective teachers the mathematical concepts,
because they have learned arithmetic as the basis of
mathematics. It most definitely is not.
That's like giving a student a calculator because it's not "fashionable" for
rote memorization of some math elements. Give someone a calculator, tell
'em to push the "5" key, then push the "-" key, the push the "2" key and
then push "enter". Wow, look at this brilliant student do math ... but
don't ask 'em how far it is from 2 to 5, or how much more 5 is than 2, or
what is five less two, or (heaven forbid) five less than two (which for the
mathematically impared, is NOT the same as five less two) because they have
no CONCEPT of numbers - just pushing keys. When you get to absolute value
you just enter the expression and push the "ABS" key ... wonderful, now,
what does absolute value mean? The common response is "it's always
positive" .. after which I go into a mile cardiac arrest.
Our school spent (literally) $1,000s on manipulatives (Algebra Tiles and the
like) - classroom sets for 30 sections of Algebra is not inexpensive. I
couldn't even estimate the $$$ spent on the interminal "training" to use
them. They remain to this day, gathering dust in the storeroom. Using them
to factor quadratic equations is nice ... providing the binomial factors are
integers .. providing that the coefficients are nice small integers ..
providing the quadratic *has* a solution .. providing there are no
fractional coefficients in the quadratic .. providing there are no decimal
coefficients .. providing factoring is the only method that you want to
teach. Do you really want to inforce the *concept* that a quadratic is an
area, but only with integer factors? Not in a million years. Not to
mention that the students hated them.
Every once in a while we have the classical "consultant", who has never been
in front of an Algebra class .. or was in front of a class 30 years ago, to
show us the joys of using these manipulatives. I well remember once asking
one of these high $$ speakers how to effectively make the transition between
moving these plastic tiles around --- and the pencil and paper - because
that is precisely what it comes down to in the final analysis. The response
was classic: "We'll get to that later". At the end of the lecture I
restated my question. Ready? "Oh, don't worry, the students will make the
transition themselves". <THUD>
Then there was the time I had to sit through two hours of using the (pardon
my French) damned things in my Algebra II GT class. I was ready to apply
for medical disability since it nearly drove me to drink!
So here we are ... between 600 and 800 sets of Algebra Tile manipulatives
gathering dust with the single exception of the special ed teachers using
them. With the "full inclusion" model I'm wondering if they're going to
force the entire class use 'em since the special ed kids use 'em ...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
03 Sep 2006 01:25:04 PM |
|
|
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DcuKg.5735$yO7.1467@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:ed7g75$4nhi@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
Manipulatives still hide the basic concepts. We still
can't teach prospective teachers the mathematical concepts,
because they have learned arithmetic as the basis of
mathematics. It most definitely is not.
That's like giving a student a calculator because it's not "fashionable"
for rote memorization of some math elements. Give someone a calculator,
tell 'em to push the "5" key, then push the "-" key, the push the "2" key
and then push "enter". Wow, look at this brilliant student do math ...
but don't ask 'em how far it is from 2 to 5, or how much more 5 is than 2,
or what is five less two, or (heaven forbid) five less than two (which for
the mathematically impared, is NOT the same as five less two) because
they have no CONCEPT of numbers - just pushing keys. When you get to
absolute value you just enter the expression and push the "ABS" key ...
wonderful, now, what does absolute value mean? The common response is
"it's always positive" .. after which I go into a mile cardiac arrest.
You sound like my mother, who refused to allow me to use a calculator,
because she feared that it would prevent me from learning my basic math...to
this day, I still do not trust my own basic math skills, even though she had
me do extra drills at home, and while my fellow classmates were using
calculators to do my homework (and doing their homework in 20 minutes, I was
taking hours--seems I was developing my math difficulties in elementary and
middle school...even into college my teachers commented about my abilities
to grasp higher math concepts while still having difficlties with basic math
skills when I had to do them on paper...but why let such a minor
processessing problem stop an adult from telling a child that he cannot
progress?
<sigh>
It has taken me almost 30 years to get over that hurdle in my own
confidence...as an *adult*...but who cares about what we adults do to
kids.....
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 08:33:50 PM |
|
|
In article <DcuKg.5735$yO7.1467@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>,
Jerry Beeler <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:ed7g75$4nhi@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
Manipulatives still hide the basic concepts. We still
can't teach prospective teachers the mathematical concepts,
because they have learned arithmetic as the basis of
mathematics. It most definitely is not.
That's like giving a student a calculator because it's not "fashionable" for
rote memorization of some math elements. Give someone a calculator, tell
'em to push the "5" key, then push the "-" key, the push the "2" key and
then push "enter". Wow, look at this brilliant student do math ... but
don't ask 'em how far it is from 2 to 5, or how much more 5 is than 2, or
what is five less two, or (heaven forbid) five less than two (which for the
mathematically impared, is NOT the same as five less two) because they have
no CONCEPT of numbers - just pushing keys. When you get to absolute value
you just enter the expression and push the "ABS" key ... wonderful, now,
what does absolute value mean? The common response is "it's always
positive" .. after which I go into a mile cardiac arrest.
One can teach the concept of numbers without using Arabic
numerals. Those who cannot understand that the Arabic numerals
may have given some small manipulative advantage over the
decimal approaches of Roman, Greek, or Egyptian numerals,
but no real change in what is being done, do not understand
numbers. Nor is there any difference in the numbers, but
there is in the representation, of the Sumerian-Babylonian
base 60, and the Mayan base 20.
Our school spent (literally) $1,000s on manipulatives (Algebra Tiles and the
like) - classroom sets for 30 sections of Algebra is not inexpensive. I
couldn't even estimate the $$$ spent on the interminal "training" to use
them. They remain to this day, gathering dust in the storeroom. Using them
to factor quadratic equations is nice ... providing the binomial factors are
integers .. providing that the coefficients are nice small integers ..
providing the quadratic *has* a solution .. providing there are no
fractional coefficients in the quadratic .. providing there are no decimal
coefficients .. providing factoring is the only method that you want to
teach. Do you really want to inforce the *concept* that a quadratic is an
area, but only with integer factors? Not in a million years. Not to
mention that the students hated them.
Algebra was better taught 60 years ago. But it was not taught
to dummies.
The most important part of algebra, variables, needs to be
understood as a totally linguistic device. Variables can
stand for anything, not just numbers. They can stand for
names or places or relations or anything else. Euclid could
not use variables for numbers, but he could for points and
lines and planes. I will not go into the development, but
it was not until well into the 20th century that the utter
simplicity of variables lay in its generality, and that
building it up only confuses.
Teaching tricks, which is what those manipulatives do for
quadratics, is irrelevant. The concepts are simple, once
understood, but they must be taught as concepts for the
student to have a good chance at understanding them. The
"new math" failed because the teachers were then, and still
are, incapable of understanding arithmetic as other than
the manipulation of Arabic numerals in base 10.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "toto" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
03 Sep 2006 01:28:23 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 06:01:07 GMT, "Jerry Beeler"
<jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
So here we are ... between 600 and 800 sets of Algebra Tile manipulatives
gathering dust with the single exception of the special ed teachers using
them. With the "full inclusion" model I'm wondering if they're going to
force the entire class use 'em since the special ed kids use 'em ...
Imo, algebra tiles can be useful with younger students. I think that
there are things that can be done with them that help children to
picture variables. You can also use them to help with signed numbers.
the distributive property, adding and subtracting polynomials, solving
equations (you can use a balance scale instead for this too). Despite
the fact that not all situations are covered, you start simple and
then abstract to the *idea* and add in paper and pencil computations,
it seems to me. I do think that it's more appropriate with 5th to 8th
graders than with high school students though certainly some high
school students may need the concrete representation first (they
should be beyond that, but there are certainly those who are not).
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Beeler" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
03 Sep 2006 07:12:56 PM |
|
|
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:ha7mf2ta4qjc5oojqoq7hjpvgcf4c2n81n@4ax.com...
I do think that it's more appropriate with 5th to 8th
graders than with high school students
Agreed!
(they should be beyond that, but there are certainly
those who are not).
*That* is the understatement of the year! Parents don't seem to understand
that we, in the 9th grade, simply cannot back up to the 5th or 6th grade (or
earlier!). For the life of me I can't understand how someone can go through
5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th grade and then tell me that 2/9 is the same as 9/2 -
better yet we have some that will say that 9/2 is 7, or that 2/9 is zero
because 2 is smaller than 9.
Jerry
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Beeler" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 12:09:35 PM |
|
|
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:ha7mf2ta4qjc5oojqoq7hjpvgcf4c2n81n@4ax.com...
I do think that it's more appropriate with 5th to 8th
graders than with high school students ...
I forgot .. can you imagine my frustration when the powers-that-be thought
that I should use Algebra Tiles in my Algebra II/GT class !!! <THUD>
Jerry
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 09:34:21 AM |
|
|
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:ha7mf2ta4qjc5oojqoq7hjpvgcf4c2n81n@4ax.com...
On Sun, 03 Sep 2006 06:01:07 GMT, "Jerry Beeler"
<jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
So here we are ... between 600 and 800 sets of Algebra Tile manipulatives
gathering dust with the single exception of the special ed teachers using
them. With the "full inclusion" model I'm wondering if they're going to
force the entire class use 'em since the special ed kids use 'em ...
Imo, algebra tiles can be useful with younger students. I think that
there are things that can be done with them that help children to
picture variables. You can also use them to help with signed numbers.
the distributive property, adding and subtracting polynomials, solving
equations (you can use a balance scale instead for this too). Despite
the fact that not all situations are covered, you start simple and
then abstract to the *idea* and add in paper and pencil computations,
it seems to me. I do think that it's more appropriate with 5th to 8th
graders than with high school students though certainly some high
school students may need the concrete representation first (they
should be beyond that, but there are certainly those who are not).
I can see that...if you see a need, if you see that a student is not
understanding something, you go back and fill that need, go back and
re-teach it--perhaps in a slightly different way. If the student did not
understand it the way you taught it the first time, how is the student going
to understand it any better if you re-teach it the second time if you do it
exactly the same way? If a student benefits from using a different
technique, why not use it even if they are "technically" supposed to be past
it? If we were going to go with that concept, of "they are supposed to be
past that point because they are "too old" for that, then we would not be
reviewing what they know, what they were supposed to be taught by a previous
teacher, etc...we would simply assUme that they had learned whatever they
were supposed have learned the previous year and only teach what we are
supposed to teach for our grade alone.
But we are not like that...at least I hope not <g>
Most of what I have seen on this board over the past years indicates tha
most teachers teach above and beyond the specifics of the grade that they
are "supposed" to teach...they teach "recovery" as well...they teach a lot
of review...a lot of reinforcement as well, because from what I have seen,
both here and in my own experiences, that seems to be how we learn...it also
seems that no two people learn the same way, so we all need to be flexible
in our approach...
Or is this not true in "the real world" of teaching?
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
| User: "toto" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 12:46:10 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 09:34:21 -0500, "Sumbuny"
<Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
If we were going to go with that concept, of "they are supposed to be
past that point because they are "too old" for that, then we would not be
reviewing what they know, what they were supposed to be taught by a previous
teacher, etc...we would simply assUme that they had learned whatever they
were supposed have learned the previous year and only teach what we are
supposed to teach for our grade alone.
It's not that they are *too old* but that they are supposed to be
ready to take high school classes not repeat what they should have
learned in elementary schools. High school teachers cannot teach what
should have been learned in 8 years of elementary school in every
class especially since they have 100 to 200 students each day not 30
or even 40. This is what irks me about an elementary school mindset.
High school is *not* elementary school and it shouldn't be. In fact,
middle school is different from primary school too in many ways and
there is a different standard for each level.
--
Dorothy
There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..
The Outer Limits
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 02:48:34 PM |
|
|
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:d2pof291vjr1kji26519u6iltm9blgfeqq@4ax.com...
On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 09:34:21 -0500, "Sumbuny"
<Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
If we were going to go with that concept, of "they are supposed to be
past that point because they are "too old" for that, then we would not be
reviewing what they know, what they were supposed to be taught by a
previous
teacher, etc...we would simply assUme that they had learned whatever they
were supposed have learned the previous year and only teach what we are
supposed to teach for our grade alone.
It's not that they are *too old* but that they are supposed to be
ready to take high school classes not repeat what they should have
learned in elementary schools. High school teachers cannot teach what
should have been learned in 8 years of elementary school in every
class especially since they have 100 to 200 students each day not 30
or even 40. This is what irks me about an elementary school mindset.
High school is *not* elementary school and it shouldn't be. In fact,
middle school is different from primary school too in many ways and
there is a different standard for each level.
<nodding> I totally agree with the frustration...but what can we do with the
kids? We can't "leave them behind" can we? We can't let them continue to
suffer because they were not taught previously....and what this tells me
that is that what is being done is not working--at least not with
everyone...
<BG> I know I am "preaching to the choir" here...but the "cookie cutter"
mentality is what irks *me*...the "one size fits all" mentality is what irks
me, and I think that is what is hurting many kids, why they are in this
situation later on in life--they slip through the cracks, "faking it" for a
while, until they hit a wall where they can't fake it any more--such as high
school--and then they get into trouble and irriate the teachers like
this...if they only had been "properly taught" at the lower levels...but it
may have simply been a matter that the "cookie cutter" teaching was not
effective with them--and not entirely fair to them (or their future
teachers) either...
(all this being supposition, of course <g>)
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 08:47:44 PM |
|
|
In article <6q%Kg.230139$k%3.156349@dukeread12>,
Sumbuny <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:d2pof291vjr1kji26519u6iltm9blgfeqq@4ax.com...
On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 09:34:21 -0500, "Sumbuny"
<Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
If we were going to go with that concept, of "they are supposed to be
past that point because they are "too old" for that, then we would not be
reviewing what they know, what they were supposed to be taught by a
previous
teacher, etc...we would simply assUme that they had learned whatever they
were supposed have learned the previous year and only teach what we are
supposed to teach for our grade alone.
Some have learned it; some have not. Some knew it so early
that they should have been advanced in the subject. The ONLY
way that this problem can be solved is to teach to the rate
and ability of each student in each subject, and forget about
age grouping or grade a year, or even a student being in the
same grade for all subjects.
..................
<nodding> I totally agree with the frustration...but what can we do with the
kids? We can't "leave them behind" can we? We can't let them continue to
suffer because they were not taught previously....and what this tells me
that is that what is being done is not working--at least not with
everyone...
See the above. Forget the athletic teams, and teach EACH
child as much and as well as he or she can learn. And let
them try; telling them that they are not ready, or making
other excuses, should not be permitted. But do it honestly;
never grade on a curve. Grades need to be absolute, or
they mean nothing.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
05 Sep 2006 11:01:17 PM |
|
|
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:edil00$5uus@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
In article <6q%Kg.230139$k%3.156349@dukeread12>,
Sumbuny <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:d2pof291vjr1kji26519u6iltm9blgfeqq@4ax.com...
On Mon, 4 Sep 2006 09:34:21 -0500, "Sumbuny"
<Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
If we were going to go with that concept, of "they are supposed to be
past that point because they are "too old" for that, then we would not
be
reviewing what they know, what they were supposed to be taught by a
previous
teacher, etc...we would simply assUme that they had learned whatever
they
were supposed have learned the previous year and only teach what we are
supposed to teach for our grade alone.
Some have learned it; some have not. Some knew it so early
that they should have been advanced in the subject. The ONLY
way that this problem can be solved is to teach to the rate
and ability of each student in each subject, and forget about
age grouping or grade a year, or even a student being in the
same grade for all subjects.
That is why the middle- and high-schools seem to be a little "easier" on
this--I have seen some students who were advanced in a single subject (and
not others) or had to be held back in a single subject (but not others)--in
departmentalized schedules of the upper grades, they could do that--it was
more difficult in the elementary grade levels (though not impossible--but
usually required an IEP)
..................
<nodding> I totally agree with the frustration...but what can we do with
the
kids? We can't "leave them behind" can we? We can't let them continue to
suffer because they were not taught previously....and what this tells me
that is that what is being done is not working--at least not with
everyone...
See the above. Forget the athletic teams, and teach EACH
child as much and as well as he or she can learn. And let
them try; telling them that they are not ready, or making
other excuses, should not be permitted. But do it honestly;
never grade on a curve. Grades need to be absolute, or
they mean nothing.
<nodding> I can see that...if we can also work with the other subject
matter as well...I have never been a fan of "coasting" because the student
ends up in this very predicament....
Thanks for the ideas...
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Beeler" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 01:56:35 PM |
|
|
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:d2pof291vjr1kji26519u6iltm9blgfeqq@4ax.com...
This is what irks me about an elementary school mindset.
High school is *not* elementary school and it shouldn't be.
That is precisely our problem in the 9th grade. Some of these students have
been passed and passed and passed with somewhat than less than minimal
learning. Now, they're in the 9th grade and (naturally) assume that they're
going to somehow pass - it's a real shocker when they see that first "F" on
their progress report or report card .. having never seen an "F" before in
their 8 hears of school.
Jerry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 02:50:06 PM |
|
|
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DF_Kg.5603$tU.3009@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:d2pof291vjr1kji26519u6iltm9blgfeqq@4ax.com...
This is what irks me about an elementary school mindset.
High school is *not* elementary school and it shouldn't be.
That is precisely our problem in the 9th grade. Some of these students
have been passed and passed and passed with somewhat than less than
minimal learning. Now, they're in the 9th grade and (naturally) assume
that they're going to somehow pass - it's a real shocker when they see
that first "F" on their progress report or report card .. having never
seen an "F" before in their 8 hears of school.
<nodding> But who has failed? Have they failed to learn, or have their
previous teachers failed to effectively teach them? Or, more likely, a
combination of both? Can we *all* learn from this....? ...more importantly,
are we *willing* to learn?
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 04:44:46 PM |
|
|
"Sumbuny" <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DF_Kg.5603$tU.3009@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:d2pof291vjr1kji26519u6iltm9blgfeqq@4ax.com...
This is what irks me about an elementary school mindset.
High school is *not* elementary school and it shouldn't be.
That is precisely our problem in the 9th grade. Some of these students
have been passed and passed and passed with somewhat than less than
minimal learning. Now, they're in the 9th grade and (naturally) assume
that they're going to somehow pass - it's a real shocker when they see
that first "F" on their progress report or report card .. having never
seen an "F" before in their 8 hears of school.
<nodding> But who has failed? Have they failed to learn, or have their
previous teachers failed to effectively teach them? Or, more likely, a
combination of both? Can we *all* learn from this....? ...more importantly,
are we *willing* to learn?
I'm skeptical that they never learned. I've seen how much my kids can
forget over the summer, or even during the course of the school year
when the subject been taught moves to a new topic. My son could learn
enough to (barely) pass tests on reducing fractions, or whatever topic
was being taught, but a month or two later, if there wasn't continued
work with precisely those kinds of problems, he would not have a clue.
Even basic math facts - had him use flashcard programs at home, and he
could do 100 basic facts problems with no more than a couple of errors
(possibly typos at that speed) in 3 or 4 minutes, but a month later
without doing them would have a 50% error rate taking 10-15 minutes.
and only doing that well because he was counting on his fingers.
For him, virtually every year might as well have been starting over
from scratch with the primary benefit of the prior year's teaching
meaning that he could RElearn it more quickly if REtaught it. (And
then relearn it again even more quickly when they did the reviews for
the annual state tests during April and May, without which review, he
would probably be done with everything he can do on the test in about
15 minutes, most of which would be spent checking off random answers.
Jerry would have found my son extremely frustrating, and indeed would
not have been able to pass him in an algebra class - I think his D-
passing grade was probably a gift from getting partial credit for
going over all the questions he missed on tests with the teacher after
school or at lunch and "redoing" them - not that he could do the
problem on his own a week later.
Interestingly, though, he almost passed the algebra SOL test (missed
by probably 1 question) after scoring so badly on the 8th grade
general-math test that they had to retest him 5 times after heavy
tutoring before he could pass that one. But then in geometry class,
he simply had no grasp of the necessary algebra fundamentals needed to
pass the class, even with the teacher doing massive reteaching. He
was switched to a class that taught the one-year of geometry over two
years with lots of review, and he still flunked both years.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Beeler" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
05 Sep 2006 03:49:08 PM |
|
|
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:ig6pf297f0tm8up2d63uk5086va16mjaju@4ax.com...
Jerry would have found my son extremely frustrating, and indeed would
not have been able to pass him in an algebra class - I think his D-
passing grade was probably a gift ....
I'll be the first to admit that over the last 15 years I've given similar
"gifts". The question that I have to ask myself is "does this student have
the requisite skills to make it through geometry" ... even though I know
that Algebra II may be a nightmare for him/her. Granted, I've only done it,
oh, perhaps 4 times in 15 years - and - I always talk to the parent first to
let them know what I'm doing and why I'm doing it. Of the 4 times I can
remember only one time that the student did not make it through geometry -
primarily because he had an aversion to homework.
Jerry
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 08:51:00 PM |
|
|
In article <ig6pf297f0tm8up2d63uk5086va16mjaju@4ax.com>,
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
"Sumbuny" <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DF_Kg.5603$tU.3009@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:d2pof291vjr1kji26519u6iltm9blgfeqq@4ax.com...
..................
<nodding> But who has failed? Have they failed to learn, or have their
previous teachers failed to effectively teach them? Or, more likely, a
combination of both? Can we *all* learn from this....? ...more importantly,
are we *willing* to learn?
I'm skeptical that they never learned.
I am not; I see college students who cannot learn.
I've seen how much my kids can
forget over the summer, or even during the course of the school year
when the subject been taught moves to a new topic.
This is when facts or routine is taught, instead of
general structures and concepts. Those were not well
taught in the past, but they were taught, and students
knew that they could be expected to use what they were
supposed to have learned before without notice.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rowley" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
04 Sep 2006 09:52:43 PM |
|
|
Herman Rubin wrote:
In article <ig6pf297f0tm8up2d63uk5086va16mjaju@4ax.com>,
Bob LeChevalier <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote:
"Sumbuny" <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:DF_Kg.5603$tU.3009@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
"toto" <scarecrow@wicked.witch> wrote in message
news:d2pof291vjr1kji26519u6iltm9blgfeqq@4ax.com...
..................
<nodding> But who has failed? Have they failed to learn, or have their
previous teachers failed to effectively teach them? Or, more likely, a
combination of both? Can we *all* learn from this....? ...more importantly,
are we *willing* to learn?
I'm skeptical that they never learned.
I am not; I see college students who cannot learn.
Just jumping in with my 2 cents. I've seen a lot of students who
a) don't want to learn and don't put any effort into it, and b)
don't know how to learn - they really haven't come up with their
own best way of connecting the dots.
Haven't really seen many that truly cannot learn.
Martin
I've seen how much my kids can
forget over the summer, or even during the course of the school year
when the subject been taught moves to a new topic.
This is when facts or routine is taught, instead of
general structures and concepts. Those were not well
taught in the past, but they were taught, and students
knew that they could be expected to use what they were
supposed to have learned before without notice.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Beeler" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
05 Sep 2006 03:56:06 PM |
|
|
"Rowley" <industry3dREMOVE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44FD0187.9158A9BE@yahoo.com...
Just jumping in with my 2 cents. I've seen a lot of students who
a) don't want to learn and don't put any effort into it, and b)
don't know how to learn - they really haven't come up with their
own best way of connecting the dots.
AMEN! They're in for the shock of their life in about 3 years from my class
(I teach 9th graders). The 'real world' has a solution for "don't want to
learn" - it's called "you're fired".
Jerry
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
05 Sep 2006 10:55:51 PM |
|
|
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:GvlLg.15591$%j7.11659@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
"Rowley" <industry3dREMOVE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44FD0187.9158A9BE@yahoo.com...
Just jumping in with my 2 cents. I've seen a lot of students who
a) don't want to learn and don't put any effort into it, and b)
don't know how to learn - they really haven't come up with their
own best way of connecting the dots.
AMEN! They're in for the shock of their life in about 3 years from my
class (I teach 9th graders). The 'real world' has a solution for "don't
want to learn" - it's called "you're fired".
<G> There is only one way to teach, and only one way to learn, right?
Nothing new under the sun, and nothing has changed in teaching methods since
the first school in the U.S....
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Herman Rubin" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
06 Sep 2006 02:37:39 PM |
|
|
In article <8FrLg.230187$k%3.74929@dukeread12>,
Sumbuny <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:GvlLg.15591$%j7.11659@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
"Rowley" <industry3dREMOVE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44FD0187.9158A9BE@yahoo.com...
Just jumping in with my 2 cents. I've seen a lot of students who
a) don't want to learn and don't put any effort into it, and b)
don't know how to learn - they really haven't come up with their
own best way of connecting the dots.
AMEN! They're in for the shock of their life in about 3 years from my
class (I teach 9th graders). The 'real world' has a solution for "don't
want to learn" - it's called "you're fired".
<G> There is only one way to teach, and only one way to learn, right?
Nothing new under the sun, and nothing has changed in teaching methods since
the first school in the U.S....
There are many ways to teach, and many ways to learn.
One touted way to teach how to prove things, which can
work well, is the R. L. Moore method, about which much
has been written. The problem with it is that not much
material is covered, and so it can rarely be used for
a course which is a prerequisite. I tried it for one
day a week in a graduate course, and had to give it up.
Someone who understands the subject may find it a good
idea to change a method of approach on the spot. This
is especially the case when answering questions by those
who did not understand the previous presentation. Just
repeating it only works for rote or routine, if then.
The teaching methods, and goals, have changed. Grammar
schools used to teach grammar, and structure. Now, it
is common to ask children to write, ignoring spelling
and grammar completely.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
hrubin@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
06 Sep 2006 05:39:55 PM |
|
|
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:edn823$592c@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
In article <8FrLg.230187$k%3.74929@dukeread12>,
Sumbuny <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:GvlLg.15591$%j7.11659@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
"Rowley" <industry3dREMOVE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44FD0187.9158A9BE@yahoo.com...
Just jumping in with my 2 cents. I've seen a lot of students who
a) don't want to learn and don't put any effort into it, and b)
don't know how to learn - they really haven't come up with their
own best way of connecting the dots.
AMEN! They're in for the shock of their life in about 3 years from my
class (I teach 9th graders). The 'real world' has a solution for "don't
want to learn" - it's called "you're fired".
<G> There is only one way to teach, and only one way to learn, right?
Nothing new under the sun, and nothing has changed in teaching methods
since
the first school in the U.S....
There are many ways to teach, and many ways to learn.
One touted way to teach how to prove things, which can
work well, is the R. L. Moore method, about which much
has been written. The problem with it is that not much
material is covered, and so it can rarely be used for
a course which is a prerequisite. I tried it for one
day a week in a graduate course, and had to give it up.
Someone who understands the subject may find it a good
idea to change a method of approach on the spot. This
is especially the case when answering questions by those
who did not understand the previous presentation. Just
repeating it only works for rote or routine, if then.
Hmmm..how about this....you teach the more traditional way, and the majority
of the class "gets it" and then sets to work on the class assignment...then,
with the ones that still do not "get it" you have the time to work in
smaller groups with the alternative methods, since the more traditional
methods did not work the first time. Any classwork that is not finished in
class is to be completed at home as homework (which has been the "normal
procedure anyway for my kids in middle school and high school). It also
gives the opportunity for the closer insturction with the ones who need it
for that particular subject, or that particular lesson...
The teaching methods, and goals, have changed. Grammar
schools used to teach grammar, and structure. Now, it
is common to ask children to write, ignoring spelling
and grammar completely.
I have not seen that with my own kids' teachers...though I *have* sent back
notes that my kids' teachers have sent to me that were filled with
misspellings (i.e., that my kids' teachers had written! <sigh>) and asked
how the teacher was teaching spelling (with the words highlighted)....this
was only done *after* the 4-5th occurance of the quarter, mind you--I
understand the occasional misspelling, but for it to happen *routinely*?!?!
A case of Pot calling the Kettle black indeed!
(Especially when my son is one who tends to be an overly literal one who
also tends to be one whose disability causes him to need to follow "the
rules" more closely than most...and I had to bring that to the attention of
teachers early on--that particular teacher as well--hard for him to
understand how she could mark him wrong on a spelling test when he was
seeing her spelling errors on her notes home as well <g>)
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
07 Sep 2006 07:08:59 AM |
|
|
"Sumbuny" <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
The teaching methods, and goals, have changed. Grammar
schools used to teach grammar, and structure. Now, it
is common to ask children to write, ignoring spelling
and grammar completely.
I have not seen that with my own kids' teachers...though I *have* sent back
notes that my kids' teachers have sent to me that were filled with
misspellings (i.e., that my kids' teachers had written! <sigh>) and asked
how the teacher was teaching spelling (with the words highlighted)....this
was only done *after* the 4-5th occurance of the quarter, mind you--I
understand the occasional misspelling, but for it to happen *routinely*?!?!
A case of Pot calling the Kettle black indeed!
What Herman is talking about is primarily a practice in the primary
grades when kids are first learning to write. The idea of the
assignment is to get them to *write*, not to teach grammar and
spelling, so they ignore the latter two, especially since they haven't
yet been taught to any significant degree.
Once kids are writing fluently, I suspect that it is rare that
teachers "ignore spelling and grammar completely". It is likely the
case that a science or history paper would have a lower weight on
spelling and grammar in the grade, than an English paper would.
The changeover for my kids was at about 3rd grade, and even before
then, for specific assignments that went through the rough draft
process they were expected to correct errors that were identified. In
addition, spelling was not "ignored" in that the teacher took note of
the words that kids misspelled and used them to derive the weekly
spelling lists. But the spelling errors did not detract from the
grade.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
07 Sep 2006 03:30:38 PM |
|
|
"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab@lojban.org> wrote in message
news:6j20g21egmd0hfu02uc5p9fcl0gapj2tlt@4ax.com...
"Sumbuny" <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
The teaching methods, and goals, have changed. Grammar
schools used to teach grammar, and structure. Now, it
is common to ask children to write, ignoring spelling
and grammar completely.
I have not seen that with my own kids' teachers...though I *have* sent
back
notes that my kids' teachers have sent to me that were filled with
misspellings (i.e., that my kids' teachers had written! <sigh>) and asked
how the teacher was teaching spelling (with the words highlighted)....this
was only done *after* the 4-5th occurance of the quarter, mind you--I
understand the occasional misspelling, but for it to happen
*routinely*?!?!
A case of Pot calling the Kettle black indeed!
What Herman is talking about is primarily a practice in the primary
grades when kids are first learning to write. The idea of the
assignment is to get them to *write*, not to teach grammar and
spelling, so they ignore the latter two, especially since they haven't
yet been taught to any significant degree.
Once kids are writing fluently, I suspect that it is rare that
teachers "ignore spelling and grammar completely". It is likely the
case that a science or history paper would have a lower weight on
spelling and grammar in the grade, than an English paper would.
The changeover for my kids was at about 3rd grade, and even before
then, for specific assignments that went through the rough draft
process they were expected to correct errors that were identified. In
addition, spelling was not "ignored" in that the teacher took note of
the words that kids misspelled and used them to derive the weekly
spelling lists. But the spelling errors did not detract from the
grade.
Thanks for the clarification...this was something that I had heard of, but
had never actually seen in my sons' classes--I actually had written it off
as some kind of urban legend, because it had not occured in their schools as
described. Whenever my kids would make a mistake, if it was not in their
spelling lists, it would not be "docked" per se, but chances are it would be
noted so that they would be able to improve their spelling by awareness...
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rowley" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
06 Sep 2006 09:23:15 PM |
|
|
Sumbuny wrote:
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:edn823$592c@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
In article <8FrLg.230187$k%3.74929@dukeread12>,
Sumbuny <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:GvlLg.15591$%j7.11659@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
"Rowley" <industry3dREMOVE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44FD0187.9158A9BE@yahoo.com...
Just jumping in with my 2 cents. I've seen a lot of students who
a) don't want to learn and don't put any effort into it, and b)
don't know how to learn - they really haven't come up with their
own best way of connecting the dots.
AMEN! They're in for the shock of their life in about 3 years from my
class (I teach 9th graders). The 'real world' has a solution for "don't
want to learn" - it's called "you're fired".
<G> There is only one way to teach, and only one way to learn, right?
Nothing new under the sun, and nothing has changed in teaching methods
since
the first school in the U.S....
There are many ways to teach, and many ways to learn.
One touted way to teach how to prove things, which can
work well, is the R. L. Moore method, about which much
has been written. The problem with it is that not much
material is covered, and so it can rarely be used for
a course which is a prerequisite. I tried it for one
day a week in a graduate course, and had to give it up.
Someone who understands the subject may find it a good
idea to change a method of approach on the spot. This
is especially the case when answering questions by those
who did not understand the previous presentation. Just
repeating it only works for rote or routine, if then.
Hmmm..how about this....you teach the more traditional way, and the majority
of the class "gets it" and then sets to work on the class assignment...then,
with the ones that still do not "get it" you have the time to work in
smaller groups with the alternative methods, since the more traditional
methods did not work the first time.
That use to be the way I taught - nowadays though, the majority
are the kids at the other end of the spectrum. I'm so busy
dealing with multiple alternate methods that I sometimes don't
have time to deal with the kids who can do the traditional way.
One of my classes this year is going at a snails pace compared
to the other, simply because there is only one of me and 25+ of
them and most have different learning abilities and levels (not
to mention a smattering of sophomoric behavioral problems, which
I'm attempting to deal with). Then I'm usually so exhausted from
that class when my other class comes in I'm almost too tired to
teach them.
Any classwork that is not finished in
class is to be completed at home as homework (which has been the "normal
procedure anyway for my kids in middle school and high school).
Problem with my classes though, is they are all computer-based
and most of the kids don't have a computer nor the software at
home. I heard a news piece on NPR this morning about how there
are still high numbers of kids who don't have access to a
computer or the internet outside what they get to experience in
school.
It also
gives the opportunity for the closer insturction with the ones who need it
for that particular subject, or that particular lesson...
But, what happens when the number of those kids start to exceeds
those of the others?
Martin
The teaching methods, and goals, have changed. Grammar
schools used to teach grammar, and structure. Now, it
is common to ask children to write, ignoring spelling
and grammar completely.
I have not seen that with my own kids' teachers...though I *have* sent back
notes that my kids' teachers have sent to me that were filled with
misspellings (i.e., that my kids' teachers had written! <sigh>) and asked
how the teacher was teaching spelling (with the words highlighted)....this
was only done *after* the 4-5th occurance of the quarter, mind you--I
understand the occasional misspelling, but for it to happen *routinely*?!?!
A case of Pot calling the Kettle black indeed!
(Especially when my son is one who tends to be an overly literal one who
also tends to be one whose disability causes him to need to follow "the
rules" more closely than most...and I had to bring that to the attention of
teachers early on--that particular teacher as well--hard for him to
understand how she could mark him wrong on a spelling test when he was
seeing her spelling errors on her notes home as well <g>)
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sumbuny" |
|
| Title: Re: Kids Benefit From Same-Sex Teachers |
07 Sep 2006 03:08:40 PM |
|
|
"Rowley" <industry3dREMOVE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44FF9D9B.9F635358@yahoo.com...
Sumbuny wrote:
"Herman Rubin" <hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:edn823$592c@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
In article <8FrLg.230187$k%3.74929@dukeread12>,
Sumbuny <Sumbuny@THISSHOULDBEGONEcox.net> wrote:
"Jerry Beeler" <jerrybeeler@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:GvlLg.15591$%j7.11659@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
"Rowley" <industry3dREMOVE@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:44FD0187.9158A9BE@yahoo.com...
Just jumping in with my 2 cents. I've seen a lot of students who
a) don't want to learn and don't put any effort into it, and b)
don't know how to learn - they really haven't come up with their
own best way of connecting the dots.
AMEN! They're in for the shock of their life in about 3 years from
my
class (I teach 9th graders). The 'real world' has a solution for
"don't
want to learn" - it's called "you're fired".
<G> There is only one way to teach, and only one way to learn, right?
Nothing new under the sun, and nothing has changed in teaching methods
since
the first school in the U.S....
There are many ways to teach, and many ways to learn.
One touted way to teach how to prove things, which can
work well, is the R. L. Moore method, about which much
has been written. The problem with it is that not much
material is covered, and so it can rarely be used for
a course which is a prerequisite. I tried it for one
day a week in a graduate course, and had to give it up.
Someone who understands the subject may find it a good
idea to change a method of approach on the spot. This
is especially the case when answering questions by those
who did not understand the previous presentation. Just
repeating it only works for rote or routine, if then.
Hmmm..how about this....you teach the more traditional way, and the
majority
of the class "gets it" and then sets to work on the class
assignment...then,
with the ones that still do not "get it" you have the time to work in
smaller groups with the alternative methods, since the more traditional
methods did not work the first time.
That use to be the way I taught - nowadays though, the majority
are the kids at the other end of the spectrum. I'm so busy
dealing with multiple alternate methods that I sometimes don't
have time to deal with the kids who can do the traditional way.
One of my classes this year is going at a snails pace compared
to the other, simply because there is only one of me and 25+ of
them and most have different learning abilities and levels (not
to mention a smattering of sophomoric behavioral problems, which
I'm attempting to deal with). Then I'm usually so exhausted from
that class when my other class comes in I'm almost too tired to
teach them.
<nodding thoughtfully> That is why I thought it would be good to come here
and ask...what "looks good on paper" does not always translate to being good
in practice <g> The question then becomes--what is the alternative? How do
we reach the kids who do not get it so that they do not continue to fall
through the cracks and do not then become next year's teacher's problem
(i.e., which is most likely whatr happened *last year* and <generic> you are
now dealing with....)
Any classwork that is not finished in
class is to be completed at home as homework (which has been the "normal
procedure anyway for my kids in middle school and high school).
Problem with my classes though, is they are all computer-based
and most of the kids don't have a computer nor the software at
home. I heard a news piece on NPR this morning about how there
are still high numbers of kids who don't have access to a
computer or the internet outside what they get to experience in
school.
<nodding> One of the alternative schools that I work with as a sub is set
up that way as well...
It also
gives the opportunity for the closer insturction with the ones who need
it
for that particular subject, or that particular lesson...
But, what happens when the number of those kids start to exceeds
those of the others?
As the parent of a son who is gifted, I know what you mean...he has been
given the chance to be a peer tutor, and actually enjoys it. For him, it is
a good idea, because it gives him and his classmates a chances to realise
that even though he has a disability, the disability does not mean that he
cannot shine in other areas and be able to be "ahead of the game" in some
areas that his peers might not be...i.e., each individual has strengths that
can contribute to the whole. It was actually a requirement in my own
college class a semester or so ago, "Technology in Education." Since it was
a given that some students would be ahead of others in the tech field, it
was a requirement that anyone that "exceeded" the others was required to
help the classmates that were having difficulty. The "take home lesson" was
that this was something that could also be used in any class that we eneded
up teaching...
--
Buny
" Nobody realizes that some people expend tremendous energy merely to be
normal."
~ Albert Camus
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
