Well, in some way, I'm sure everyone has been affected by the recent firestorm. I sincerely hope that everyone's lives are coming back to as close to normal as possible. While we still have a lot to do, I don't think that we are in jeopardy of missing out on anything uber-important. We will still have a virtual class this Wed to allow the parents to trick-or-treat with the kids! I still think we can get through everything. . .I'll just combine a few things and hope that everyone can work on her/his own for the next week.
Assignments in progress: Copyright (due Nov 2), Spreadsheet/Excel (Nov 9), Journals 6-10 (Nov 23), and TaskStream Narratives (NETS II-VI, due Dec 3). I really hope that, given any normalcy, everyone is taking advantage of the time to work on the TaskStream narratives. I have already given comments to those who submitted the narrative for NETS I. Please check TaskStream to look for my feedback.
Journals 6-10: You should receive your first L&L this week! Feel free to scan it to select an article (or two or three) for the journals. Also, the October issue of Edutopia revolves around environmental issues . Feel free to select an article from this issue.
Please obtain a V-Drive: go to the following address, v-drive, and sign-up for your very own v-drive. This will allow you to work on video from multiple computers, which will be very important when we begin our movie projects (next week)!
New Assignments: Inspiration/Kidspiration/InspireData. . .Check webCT for instructions!! Also, I would like everyone to use the Classroom 2.0 link and sign-up for a free account. This is a very-cool social networking site for teachers! We will incorporate this website into a future journal assignment!
This week's Question: Do you believe in tracking? Assuming it was in place, would you rather work with at-risk or GATE students? Would you put your kids in a GATE class if it were offered to you? Explain your answer.
19 comments:
I have mixed feelings about tracking. I think that it can be productive in less diverse societies, such as Japan or China, where there may be more level learning opportunities, but here in the United States I think that it would eliminate many students before they have an equal opportunity due to cultural or language barriers. In regards to working with at risk students or GATE student, my preference would be working with at risk students. I think that at risk students need the assistance and it presents more of a challenge to both the student and the teacher. Also, the reward of seeing and contributing to the growth of a student that probably did not have the confidence to achieve to begin with is much more self fulfilling. As for my own child being put into a GATE class, I would not approve. I think that GATE and AP should be eliminated all together. Why can't we make all classes, even in primary school, like a GATE or AP class? Maybe we could further minimize the number of students who later in their educational careers fall into the remidal group. Just my opinion.
I'm on the District Advisory Committee as a parent representative for the Gate program through Poway Unified. There are alot of misconceptions about GATE students and that they are receiving an elitist form of education, when in fact,they are considered an "at risk' population. In our district, we are trying to minimize this thinking and are moving towards terminology like "gifted identified" versus "gifted qualified". When you identify something, it just means that something has been found that needs further attention. In Poway, Gate Services is under the "support services" umbrella which also includes Title 1 and ESL students. These children think divergently and therefore may need to be taught in a different manner. A fair amount of GATE students are underachievers especially when they get to the high school level and we are working to get those #'s up, so they can reach their potential. GATE is also considered a form of Special Ed, yet funds are continually cut. This results in the mainstreaming of this population moving those who are above average to average and minimizing the opportunity to achieve excellence. I think all children should be given the opportunity to work at their level. If they need additional help, they should be getting it. If they can do more, they should be given the opportunity to work towards their potential.
I have taught at two colleges: Cal Poly-SLO and now San Diego City College. Teaching at City is highly rewarding for me because I interact with a wide variety of cultures, classes and learning styles. Most of my students are considered "at-risk", as they have a poor foundation, have real-life issues and/or work full-time with family obligations. I love what I do, but it takes a lot more time, energy and encouragement to do my job well.
I terms of the GATE Program, I am a supporter of this program. Although I have no formal edxperience with this program, I am fresh from the "SPecial ED" Course at CSUSM and recognize that accelerated students have special considerations. San MArcos offers the gifted program in Grade 4, I beleive, and I hope that my oldest son qualifies, in some capacity, as he needs extra challenges. He is currently in 1st grade and is quite bored. He is started to act up a bit, and is challeged at home. We have tried to get him some additional reading accomodations, and so far that has been helpful.
I strongly agree with tracking students. I have worked with both GATE and RSP students and ones with IEP's.
I think we better address the students needs if we group them together. The resource student gets more one on one attention, and the Gate student gets challenged more. I'm currently subbing for a Gate class and I have about 38 kids in there. They tend to be pretty talkative, till you get them started working. They are very serious about their work, and have high ethics when it comes to their work. They are hard workers, and deserve to be treated differently. They've earned it, and proven they are dedicated to learning.
Students with learning disabilities also need special attention. They may need more accomodations and extra time or help on assignments.
I have one child that had an IEP, and my other is taking AP classes in High School. I actually didn't have her tested for GATE in 4th grade because I didn't like the teacher that taught it for the 5th grade. Most of her teachers grouped her with their GATE groups throughout Elementary School.
Well, that's where I stand on this topic. You may feel differently, but that's what my experience has led me to believe.
I believe there is some merit in tracking students. I remember my high school where it was very competitive. I was in a mix of classes, and the AP classes I had were more demanding. I definitely felt I was a getting a better education from AP classes than my regular classes. However, there is no way I could have handled an AP math class, and I would have slowed the class down. Students need to be grouped where they are at, but without all the political implications that come with that grouping. I don't think that GPA should be tied to AP classes, etc. Keep the tracking system, but don't reward better students with more gpa points because they are working in an AP history class versus students in a CP or BP version. Every student works at his or her level. Let the grades and test scores place those kids in appropriate colleges. It's not fair to reward or punish "better" or "worse" students with the gpa credit point system. Plus, I have met some AP students from rural high schools who would NEVER qualify as a AP student at my high school. My point is this: AP, CP, BP tracking is subjective and locally-influenced. I still think it has merit to challenge students' at their levels, but it must not be so important to determine someone's future.
I believe tracking is important because it gives parents, students, and educators an idea of how our efforts are working (or not working). We need benchmarks to work off of to know where we need to improve or emphasize.
GATE Education is just as important as Special Ed, as it is catagorized to be. Students with any kind of special needs should be provided with the resources necessary to succeed. Sometimes this can mean the difference between losing a child to boredom or lack of interest and that would be terrible.
I believe that GATE students should be given the opportunity to progress in a program that will recognize their talents, rather than be forced to perform at the same pace as other students. Educators should be able to identify students who are gifted and talented and test scores might not give a good overall analysis. Test scores ignore the qualities of students with special abilities, such as organizational or leadership skills, communication skills, and artistic talent. I would like to work with 'at risk' students as they are the ones who have a greater need.
If my children had the ability to attend a GATE program, I would encourage them. A challenging environment is good as long as the child has time to digest and retain the information.
From first hand experience, both as a student and as a parent, I believe in tracking. When classrooms are leveled, it allows children to proceed at an appropriate pace, neither too fast or too slow. I am a parent in the Vista school district and both of my children have been identified as GATE students, but in our district that doesn't mean a whole lot. I believe the district receives less than $100 per GATE-identified student per year; at our school we use this money to provide interesting afterschool classes open exclusively to GATE students - marine biology, game theory, etc. We do not have entire classes made up of GATE students, but beginning in sixth grade students are leveled for literacy and for literacy and math in seventh and eighth grades. I'd probably prefer teaching GATE students because they are more familiar to me, but I think the opportunity to open a child's eyes up to the wonder of literacy or math or science would be an amazing thing.
Any program that is put together to help students has its theory and the actual consequences of the program. Tracking in it's theory groups students of like abilities so that they can learn with others who are at the same level. This sounds fine but the stats show that it also can lead to lower excectations and fewer resourses for students in lower tracks. Tracking would be ok if the system would enable students to leave one group and move to another if they have shown progress. The lack of this flexability leads to cultural sterotypes, and a predetermined outcome for those students. Often times these programs become a dumping ground for some students. I would prefer to work with at risk students. The obstacles that these students face can be very difficult and to make a difference in their life and education takes time and patience, but the rewards are great.
I have no direct experience with tracking and know very little about it but from what I know it sounds like a labeling system. I instinctively don't like that. Kids are naturally prone to labeling each other,( not always in a good way) and probably don't need any help from teachers. If I were working in a school that used tracking I think I would rather work with the non GATE students, the ones at risk because they seem to need and benefit from extra attention. My limited experience has included being in classrooms where tracking was used and it didn't take long to figure out who was who. Also the kids seemed to self segregate. These experiences left me with one opinion, that is that the gifted kids shouldn't be encouraged when they act like little smart alecs. When the segregation leads to insults and bad citizenship then things have gone a little off track. Competition in the classroom is good but how do you make it fair in a mixed classroom.
If I was offered the chance for one of my kids to be placed in a GATE class I would take the time to really think it through. It would depend on what the circumstances were and whether or not there was a need. My bias would be to leave them placed in a regular class, one that is as close a representation of life as could be.
While the theory of tracking is noble in its intentions, as with most "systems", its implementation is highly dependent on resource management, utilization, and availability. Therefore, different programs should be assessed on an individual basis in accordance with real and authentic assessment rubrics.
I would definitely enroll my child in eighter GATE or another "at risk" program dependent on her/his needs. As a former GATE student, the enriched programs and activities allowed me the flexibility and ability to express my interests in a supportive and challenging atmosphere.
I would not have a preference for instructing either group. Both groups require original, in-depth, and nurturing learning activites in order to support and encourage their personal abilities.
I also have mixed feelings about tracking - while I would love to have kids at a lower level integrated into regular or advanced classes to enhance their learning, I'm not sure how it would impact the more advanced students. I learned in my other class that GATE kids are considered "special needs," like kids with dyslexia or physical disabilities. I didn't realize that exceptionally bright kids have needs that might not be met in lower levels of learning. So tracking can help meet their needs. But it is sad that some kids are told that they have to go into a lower level class, and it can become a self-fulfilling prophecy when the student starts telling themselves that they're "dumb" and stop trying.
I know for sure that if someone approached me from my kids' school and asked if I wanted her in a GATE program, I would definitely say, "No." I am not against a student taking AP courses in high school to prepare for college, but I do not think that seperating students in elementary is appropriate. It's another form of segregation, and it doesn't lend to a productive learning environment of life long skills. I myself would much rather work with at-risk students. Personally I believe in bringing up those who need more help. I have always been one to root for the underdog, and as an educator, I would feel better with myself and my abilities if I could reach out to those at-risk students and help attain the same goals as GATE students.
I think tracking is both good and bad. It is good becase it can help benefit those students that need more rigor to meet their educational goals. It is bad in the sense that some students will be labeled and possibly stigmatized by there peers. This could cause them to withdraw from the learning process, thus not promoting edecuational equity. Would I want my own children to be tracked....I would say yes. I think as long as I would teach my child the benefits of the program they are in it will help them to cope with any obstacles they may encounter at school.
I do believe in tracking, it puts students in classes with other students who are working at the same level. Students do not have to stay in the track where they are originally placed. Teachers and parents need to stay involved in the childs education and move the child when needed. I have had my child in a Gate-like program while in Oklahoma and it was great.
For the most part I think tracking can be beneficial to students. All children learn at a different level and progress at different levels as well. tracking can help the progression of learning at the rate the student is comfortable with, along with being challenged. I also believe that GATE students are considered special needs just as much as at risk students. I would teach both gate and at risk. I think both would provide equally rewarding benefits. If my child had the opportunity to participate in a GATE program I would encourage them to do so because it creates a challenge eliminating boardom and class disruptions. My brother was referred to the gate program because he is gifted. His teacher is hoping that it will challenge him and take up some of his free time that leads to disruptions.
Tracking overall is a bad idea. All students need to be provided with an equal opportunity in school. The difficult piece is when we are talking about our own children. We all want to do what is best for our children and provide them with as many opportunities as possible. At this point in time I would have to say that I would choose to put my children through the same school that all the other children were attending and not provide them with special privileges. However I am in school right now to become a teacher... am I really going to have the resources to put them in a better school?
I do not believe in tracking. I have seen numerous occasions where it has not been in the best interest of the student to be categorized. If it was in place in my future teaching environment I would teach at-risk students. I find that may at-risk students have a different way of looking at everyday environments. I appreciate these different outlooks. I would not place my child in a GATE class. I know that I have a lot to learn yet, to be a teacher, but my past experiences lead me to believe that categorizing students it not usually in their best interest. Since we all learn different subjects at different rates and through the use of a variety of techniques, I don’t see where we can categorize one student to be better, the same or worse than another overall. Depending on the subject each student will be unique.
Post a Comment