CHARLES BEAMS spoke of And Now This.. to DAN TRIPLETT on 10-19-96
CB>DT>From this research, teachers can establish the level at which
CB>DT>their children perform.
CB>Up to this point, I liked the basics of his program. I do not think
CB>we can allow teachers to determine individual levels of performance
CB>for children.
I think all that was meant here was that teachers can establish the
level of performance (what they can do) and that standards (what we want
them to be able to do) can reasonably be guided by our knowledge of
ability levels at specific grade levels. In Washington we have what we
called "Essential Academic Learning Requirements" with benchmarks tests
and target dates for full implementation. The EALR's are put out by the
Commission of Student Learning and are legislated. Schools will be held
accountable for results.
cb> Making some allowance for individual differences
CB>is part of the instructional process, not part of the evaluation
CB>process.
This is really what I am saying and in no way do I want standards
lowered. I think they need to be reachable. But I know what I am
working with in my kindergarten class. I have high expectations for all
exiting kindergartners. What is it I want a kindergartner to know when
they leave my classroom? The answer to this question is for ALL my
students. However, I know, since my standards are high (standards =
expectations = desire) that some students will fall slightly below to
way below my general expectations. I work very hard to get every
student as close to those standards as I can. But I can tell you,
without a doubt, Andrew and Derick and a few others will not make it.
And no matter how hard I try, no matter how much help I can give
individually or how much home tutoring is done, they will still fall
short. I will NOT give up however. It is my job to see that they get
as far as they are cognitively able. Who knows, maybe they will prove
me wrong.
CB>I can accept this, within limits. We must still set standards and
CB>work to get all children to reach that level.
Yes!! Work hard to get all children to reach that level. Another way
to look at it is: Work hard to get all children to reach their full
potential.
CB>I don't mean to
CB>imply that Kindergarten children should all be spelling difficult
CB>words, but a select spelling list made up of appropriate words does
CB>not seem unreasonable to me.
Many kindergarten children can barely spell their name. By the end of
the year many are just becoming phonetically aware. They have not
mastered all the letter sounds and for many, some letter shapes still
confuse them. Any spelling testing at this level would be completely
inappropriate -- At least in my experience (I have seen at least 450
different students over the past 8 years and this is true for nearly all
of them.)
The more capable students can write words like their name, then cat,
dog, mom, dad, all brothers and sisters names, and other names of
interest. This year I have two children who stand out as early readers
(already!) and have had both tested by the reading specialist. I am
struggling to keep them challenged.
CB>I'd like to know what he considers "tradtional methods" and why he
CB>believes they are ineffective. At the beginning of this message you
CB>said, "DT>He is probably more of a traditionalist when it comes to
CB>DT>spelling instruction. In his book he offers hundreds of
CB>DT>activities to stimulate writing and offers many word lists to
CB>DT>"raise spelling achievement at each grade level..." This leaves
CB>me wondering what sorts of traditional spelling techniques he
CB>promotes and which he disparages.
I'll have to read this book more closely. I have many books here and
his book I have only read select chapters. Lately I have read more and
it appears he is not entirely a traditionalist nor a Whole language kind
of guy. Something in between maybe? I'll know you're dying to know so
I'll read more and then let you know what I've discovered.
Dan
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12
---------------
* Origin: R-Squared BBS (1:352/28.0)
|