--- Pamela Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The Downtown Inter-District School, of which the MPS
> is a part of, was engaging in this method.  It has
> been used in other parts of the country as a
> credible means of school reform.


Thank you for bringing this up Pamela. You're right;
there has indeed been ongoing experimentation with
this theory. Saint Paul public schools introduced "The
Discovery Method" in 1999 with the stated goal of
measuring multiple intelligences to identify gifted
and talented children for enrollment into Capitol Hill
Magnet School, which offered advanced academic
curriculum.

If the goal was truly identifying gifted and talented
children it was an unmitigated disaster. Teachers
quickly complained that the newly identified children
were in need of remedial, not advanced instruction.
Their inclusion was not only harmful to the advanced
students already present, but to the newcommers
themselves.

I personally spoke with screeners whose job it was to
employ these new methods. They reported that it was
impossible to objectivly make informed evaluations of
these kids.

But in fact, the goal was never to increase the
enrollment of gifted children; it was to increase the
enrollment of the "right sort" (based on
socio-ecomomic as well as ethnic criteria) of minority
children without regard to how gifted they actually
were.

The first documented use of this "technique" was as a
smoke screen and as such it works wonderfully. Such it
is, and such it remains.

> Multiple Intelligence would actually involve the
> parents more instead of putting them on the
> defensive.

Well, I agree that many angry and confused parents did
show up to a well reported school meeting to discuss
the failure of Discovery at Capitol Hill, but I doubt
that is the kind of involvement we should be courting.


> It would give our teachers more "expertise" to teach
> the subjects they are experts in.  Sort of like
> football practice.  In order to get to the Superbowl
> you use various plays and techniques within the game
> itself to create the winning team that gets there.

I'm sorry, but this analogy is completely and utterly
specious. Can you identify any football teams that use
a players talents for anything that does not directly
relate to the playing of football? 

Dance lessons may indeed increase a players agility,
but what I wonder how much teams would value a player
who rendered wonderful paintings in oil but could not
identify a football from a watermelon? 

> The parents, children and the school system would
> become more like partners in the education process. 
> They would share the "expertise."  It would decrease
> your so-called cryptoclastic bureaucracy.

How do you come to this conclusion? In what way would
the use of "multiple intelligences" increase parental
involvement? With all due respect, I believe you're
arguement lacks merit on it's face. 

> As in any system you develop credible means of
> accountability and methods of evaluation.  You just
> don't try to compare apples to oranges.>

You do if your grading the quality of fruit! And
employers to whom our kids will eventually apply
themselves are going to be using a VERY measurable set
of standards when deciding whom they will hire...for
instance, can they read?


TJSWIFT
Saint Paul
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com
_______________________________________
Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more:
http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to