Question:
A recent article in the New York Times highlights the problem of "middle" students getting "lost in the shuffle." Which group do you think deserves more attention than they are currently receiving in your school: the low, the middle, or the high-achieving students? Is your school doing anything to address this problem?
Replies:
rajasthan
The middle group needs more attention because they are not low but if attended properly, many can be the gem of high-achieving group. Some have psychological or particular problems which can be cured by counselling and boosting them up.
NY
All students deserve the opportunity to succeed, however, if I must choose where to put limited resources, the hig-achieving students would be the focus. We must make sure that entry into this "class" is open to all who are willing to work hard.
cA
We are doing a disservice to our nation and our high-achieving students by focusing solely on bringing everyone up to a certain median. By definition, half will be below and half above a median. We need to make sure that everyone has equal opportunity and right now many of our high-achieving students don't have the opportunity to use their gifts enough. Often, they become bored and drop out. A nation that neglects its brightest is a prognosis for failure. We cannot afford to do this, especially now. We must make sure that all our students get exposure to lots of things (including the arts, the practical arts, trades, etc.) so that whatever level they are at (intellectually) they will be able to follow the path that is right for them. We have stripped the schools of anything that doesn't relate to getting test scores up and deluded ourselves that everyone should go to college -- a recipe for a failed economy and country.
CA
Although it may be politically incorrect to say so, the pendulum has swung too far. Low-achieving students are receiving too much attention to the detriment of all students, including future low-achieving students. California public schools, for example, are spending so many of their dwindling resources on those students who have little chance of making a significant contribution to the future of the state, while they are doing little if anything for the high achievers. The school district I work in uses the GATE tag to get funds but spends them on non-GATE materials, programs, etc. Middle kids are getting short shrift, too. It's the 80:20 rule: the bottom 20 percent of the kids take up 80 percent of teachers' (and almost all paraprofessionals') time and energy.
Those brilliant and mid-range kids, who - if they got some attention - might become the scholars who turn around our weak public school system, are languishing in classes they find boring, because their teachers are forced to teach to the lowest common denominator. Should we turn our backs on the low achievers? Of course not, but neither should we turn our backs on the best and brightest.
Terri - Port Orchard, WA
In the past it seems like the kids, "stuck in the middle" were being left behind when it came to receiving services. We have LAP; Learning Assistance Program, Special Ed and Gifted, but our kids in the middle that were not quite meeting standard were being left out. Every spring we did a WASL prep for our middle kids to prepare thm for state testing,, but that has not been enough. We are piloting RTI (Response to Intervention) It has made us look hard at every student and planning out what we are going to do meet the needs of all kids regardless of ability.
MS
I believe we have failed and continue to fail the brightest students. Sure we have a 'pull-out' program for some of them. But often they must meet the expectations of others who do not understand their needs or even care. It is assumed they will "get it" with or without help. Our country consistently tries to make everyone into a mold. Some students will never fit. It is silly to try and trying only makes students feel unable to fit in. Let students be proud of whatever level of success they can achieve. Challenge them sure, but don't set goals they could never achieve.
nj
If anything, i think the higher groups are being overlooked! They are being left to their own devices in their education, as we as educators assume they can work more independently on more challenging work, as we devote most of our time and energy on our two lowest groups, or low and middle groups!
Jim - St.Louis, MO
If our "effectiveness" as a teacher is based on test scores we will have to continue to teach to the "bubble" students. Our time and energy (based on some administrators) should be spent on the students that are most likely to "pass" the test. In most states, schools are rated on the percentage of students that pass the state test. If you want to be in a "blue star" school, the obvious answer to the question is teach to the middle group. However, I don't think this happens in Singapore, Japan or any of the other countries that continue to dominate in math and science. If our country wants a chance of leading the world in education we need to understand that some students are not college bound. Beyond that, some students are not highschool bound. We should have a system in place for those who dream and aspire to go to college or a university. Likewise, there should be a system for those that want or need to be more hands on. Laborers of many kinds are needed in the US just as a doctor, a lawyer or a teacher. The problem is, thats not going to happen.
If you would like to read and respond
to this week's question, click here. |
