-> Hi Sheila,
Hi Ruth,
-> You wrote that advocates for a National Curriculum hope it will help
-> kids, who move and change schools, across states, etc. find
-> themselves working on approx. the same material.
-> Now, I've missed a little of this discussion, so maybe I'm way off
-> here, but I do take it that a National Curriculum only covers what
-> should be taught in each grade - not when it should be taught in that
-> grade?
That's what I envision.
-> If so, having a National Curriculum will not guarantee that a child
-> who moves does not miss the material.
-> For example, if you are doing a unit in November, and a child comes
-> to your class in January, maybe that unit is the one the child's
-> teacher was waiting until the Spring to do, etc.
True. I never said it would "guarantee" that students wouldn't miss any
material. But it's still better than what exists now, which is no sort
of national plan at all.
-> If the Curriculum is going to be so regimented that it dictates
-> exactly when a teacher should teach a unit I could see one running
-> into major resource problems.
I agree.
-> I don't know how clearly I've put things but hope you and everyone
-> else can understand what I've been trying to say.
-> So what do _you_ think?
It was very clear, and I'm glad to hear from you.
Sheila
--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 10
---------------