I am disappointed by Joseph Erickson's comment about ability grouping.  

Forgive my crude translation of JE's comment from professorese to plain 
English: 
JE approves of 'ability grouping' on educational grounds if the groupings are 
based 
on observable differences in mastery of a particular subject.

Now, you might wonder why JE says ability grouping may be useful in math 
and not in the physical sciences, reading, writing, social studies and so 
forth.  
I think it is safe to say that it is generally best to learn certain concepts 
and 
skills in a certain order. For example a certain level of mastery in adding 
is 
desirable before a student concentrates on learning how to multiply numbers.  
A student should be able to recognize at least a small set of letters before 
concentrating on how to sound out words.  And it is best for a student to 
learn 
something about atomic theory and chemical reactions before studying cell 
structure.  If ability-grouping is useful in math, it should also be useful 
in other 
basic subjects.

However, it doesn't necessarily follow that 15 students and a teacher will be 
more productively engaged in learning activities if divided into 2 or more 
curriculum tracks. Students in millions of classrooms around the world move 
on together from one skill or concept to another on a common curriculum track 
despite big differences in mastery levels and without holding back the more 
advanced learners or losing the least advanced students.  That's because the 
teacher and students in a one-track classroom can use their time more 
effectively than if divided into ability-groups.  That's why nearly the 
entire population of students at some schools and school districts in the 
Twin Cities area can be on the same college-bound academic track as the small 
minority of kids who are assigned to the gifted and talented programs in 
Minneapolis.

-Doug Mann
Minneapolis School Board Candidate
http://educationright.tripod.com

Joseph Erickson writes,

"Ability Grouping-
In general, I am against ability groupings merely on equity grounds. It
creates haves and have-nots and will stigmatize children, even at early
ages. That being said, there are specific situations in which grouping of a
sort may be useful. For example, research suggests that grouping students by
mastery level assists students in making smooth progress through various
levels of math work by focusing instruction on work that will be
productively engaging for learners at various levels of complexity. Of all
the basic subjects, math might be the only area in which grouping of one
sort or another may be justified.

"There may be other specific situations in which ability grouping is
justified, but the justification should be empirically based, not merely for
efficiency or out of habit."
_______________________________________
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