There is much discussion in the United States concerning the lack of opportunities for most children to acquire a quality education. There are many examples emerging of successful programs being designed and implemented.
Most of the strategies involve planning that improve instructional strategies, and testing students to assess the quality of instruction. But testing must be frequent, and feedback to the students and teachers immediate, if remediation is to be timely in laying foundation for future instruction.
During reform efforts in Texas in the mid 80s, much emphasis was placed on instructional objectives, testing for levels of mastery, and reteaching when student performances were not satisfactory. Many teachers tested at the ends of weeks or chapters.
In most cases, however, too much content from previous lessons had been covered for students to review and learn, while keeping up with current assignments. Students who could not satisfactorily master one week or chapter of content now were expected to master two. Many teachers were only going through the motions of reteaching. and administrators who didn't know how to help them do better didn't complain.
In many areas, immediate mastery is required before student can mastery the content that follows. Daily testing--and immediate feedback to the teacher and student--are imperative if subsequent learning is not to be impeded by lack of prerequisite learning. This requires planning and cooperation between teachers and students, not only within the classroom during regular school hours but before and after school, and during study hall periods, where students study and learn how to do so effectively. The strategy extends opportunities for parents and the community to offer assistance.
One strategy involves giving students copies of chapter objectives, time-lines for coverage of sets of objectives, quiz schedules, copies of all exercises and examples that accompany each set of objectives, and textbook sections related to the objectives,which were to be read. In some cases students should be given problem answers associated with both current and future lessons so students who choose to study and work ahead will know if they were doing so successfully.
Students should be quizzed everyday on homework, and received credit for the homework only if the quiz was passed. Three attempts might be allowed, only the first during regular class time. Students soon realize that they must do their own homework--or study what they copy--if they are going to pass quizzes and get credit for the homework.
It is helpful to label all objectives and problems as (a) advanced, (m) medium and (b) basic. Students wanting to earn A's would be required to work the most difficult problems and answer the most difficult questions. Grades of "C" would require mastering the basic content at the 90% level. Grade of "B" would require mastering basic and medium content at the 90% level. And grades of "A" would require students to master the total content. All students should exposed to entire content and students allowed to find their own levels. This process was not perfect, but it will produce better students.
During Texas' reform effort in the mid 1980s there was much discussion in professional literature circles about "Effective Schools research." A school was considered effective based, not on the percentage of students passing a test, but on tests showing improved student performances at all levels.
School success based on the percentage of student passing a test can be effectively achieved by giving the poorest students access to the best teachers during before school and after school sessions. But that should not deny the top students access to these teachers and to appropriate levels of challenge. No school should be considered exemplary unless it also is effective..
In effective schools, principals and teachers were effective. And in the most of them students are not segregated, academically. In academically mixed classes, top students are able to help teachers help other students. Such tutoring reinforces what top students have already learned, and their presence allows them to be role models for other students. Many underachievers are academically talented but don't know how to develop that talent and use it. Many have had no previously encouragement or incentives to do so. Effective principals expect and help all teachers become effective consistent with their potentials to perform.
Students learn better when they take daily quizzes, chapter tests, semester tests and final examinations. Quizzes and tests encouraged review and practice, and are themselves review and practice. Unfortunately, limiting the definition of success to pass-fail does not challenge top students to become mathematicians, scientists, engineers, doctors, nurses, technician, teachers and other quality professionals.
But effective principals must either have been effective teachers themselves or have learned and practiced the qualities of effective teaching during their pursuit of administrative certification and advanced degrees. Not all effective teachers, however, possess the other qualities necessary to become effective principals. And neither is administration an ambition of most effective teachers.
Despite the current emphasis on improving out children's education, though, little is heard about effective schools and effective schools research. Perhaps the reason is that it's easier to increase the number of students passing a test than it is to enable all students to maximize their potentials to improve.
Students also tend to do better when they took five academic classes and physical education or band. One reason: Class periods were longer and students had fewer classes for which to prepare. There was once a belief that less was more, that engaging students at greater depth in fewer courses laid foundations for more challenging content and careers later. Now, we seem to be exposing students to more but expecting less.
Ronald
Email: rcspoon@earthlink.net
Blog: ronaldspooner.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment