From: Richard Ulrich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, April 26, 2004 10:51 am Subject: Re: [edstat] Why do we transform data????
> - just a question here. (The topic has drifted to the same > questions as the 'education' thread.) > > On 26 Apr 2004 07:31:50 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [snip, earlier discussion] > > > > Any plan to provide services to the bright students is met with > > resistance both inside and outside the schools. It is quickly > labled > > "elitist" and therefore evil. Even programs that are shown to > > improve performance among the low end students are labled > elitist if > > they increase the spread between high and low. > > > > It is sad that in the name of "equality" bright students are > held back. > > But until there is a change in attitude and legal requirements > it > > won't matter if a student is gifted or merely bright. They will > be > > ignored. > > > > Is this a fact or popular fiction? The resistance is real. I am blessed to live in a relatively small college community and we have this problem, at least in the K-8 grades. It is amazing, to me, to see otherwise intelligent people arguing that it is somehow immoral to improve low ability students' performace if the upper level kids will improve more. In K-8 is where we see cutting of programs that benefit the bright kids, when they exist. You will not typically find the elementry equivilent of AP courses anywhere. > > There used to be Advanced Placement courses for bright > students, and things like faculty sponsored Science Clubs, > and science contests. > > Are those a thing of the past, or in serious decline? In my district they have been preserved, for now. But, they are in jepordy. (As are the more vocationally oriented courses.) Oddly enough it is only in high school (and occassionally the late middle grades) where we see programs for the bright kids. Prior to that the focus is on "at risk" kids. It would be nice if legislators could understand that bright kids can also be at risk if not properly stimulated in the primary grades. > > I've read that the tax squeeze has caused schools to cut > out recess and phys. ed., as well as fine arts. Did AP go first? > Not in my district. Fine arts is going first. But, it is just a matter of time, unless we can pass a special tax levy. Ironically fine arts, in my district anyway, is one of the areas that provided some incidental enrichment for the brighter kids. > [snip, rest] > > -- > Rich Ulrich, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html > . > . **************************************************** Michael Granaas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Assoc. Prof. Phone: 605 677 5295 Dept. of Psychology FAX: 605 677 3195 University of South Dakota 414 E. Clark St. Vermillion, SD 57069 ***************************************************** . . ================================================================= Instructions for joining and leaving this list, remarks about the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES, and archives are available at: . http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/ . =================================================================
