We had an interesting, if brief, discussion with breakfast this morning.
I commented to my wife about an article in the Post concerning a family with triplets -- all of whom were autistic. I said that life's got to be rough for them. She asked our daughter if she had any autistic kids in her class, and she replied that she did not; they were all in the special-needs class. She then said that she thought that was good, because there they could get the special help they needed. I nodded and said that was true. Of course, I added, that also means that they don't get to routinely see how the other kids act and learn in their class, which means they don't get role models, and the other kids don't see difference in action. She thought about that for a minute, and said that she still thought it was better for them. I agreed again -- then added that it was, of course, not just autistic kids where you have to decide whats best. Do you put the brightest kids in a class with the regular kids? Oh, no, then the brightest kids have to slow down and wait while the regular kids get the toughest concepts. Oh, no, then the regular kids get lost while the brightest kids get challenged. Who do you aim the class at? Or do you try to do both?
She decided it was time to go watch TV for a while.
4 comments:
I think its best to mix them. Thats what we did at our school, where I was teaching. And we found that the brighter kids did have a big influence on helping the other kids build confidence in learning. And if not that way it did make them motivated to be brighter and study harder.
I'm not sure that it has a motivating effect. I think it can, but the instructor has to make it happen; by themselves, I think it more likely kids will mostly perform at their comfort level. But if the instructor helps the process along, then yes, there's a definite likelihood of benefit.
In this case, what I was really doing was trying to provoke my daughter to think about the ideas...
This is a question that is really personal to me, and I have to support separating those students who are so far above the mean, the same way we help students so far below the mean. Socially, it can make things make difficult for the students who are singled out, as I've written about here and
here, but I believe the benefits to them outweigh the social stigmas.
I was never regarded as a bright kid (and if you saw my high school grades, you'd not doubt it)so I can't speak to that. I do wonder about the effectiveness of special programs, both because I've heard the common stat that if you treat the kid as capable of exceptional work, they frequently do perform at that level, and because I've heard the stereotype of the geek clique that is years ahead of the rest of the crew. My daughter didn't qualify for an advanced program last year (oh, the shame) but she did this year; however, we're going to keep her with the pack, because we don't see the value. Oh, yeah, I want her to emulate my friend the cardiologist, who went to MIT, then Harvard Med, and now has a zip code of 90210 -- but I don't want her to feel pressure - well, much pressure -- and I think advanced programs can give that right along with the experience.
Post a Comment