Hi Wendy - You've gotten such thoughtful replies, and I'd like to kind of
sum up my experience and these replies and say: I think he'd need to have a
truly compelling reason (not an excuse) to change to this and I think he'd
have kind of a hard time doing so. He needs to think, In what way would
I would like to just throw a wrench into the works, or however that
metaphor goes. I have two objections to ability grouping across
classrooms. One is that research shows that the lower groups tend to
stay lower without role models. But that's not my main objection.
My main objection is
Wendy,
I have to say that the thing that disturbs me most about your original
post is that your principal has visited this idea again and again and
your colleagues have rejected the idea again and again and still your
principal is pushing it. Principals of schools should be giving
I think I'd just like to express this: What I'd consider as a good reason
to do such a thing would NOT include it being easier for teachers. That's
not why we're here.
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Renee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to just throw a wrench into the works, or
We had a consultant in our district who said that research shows
that teachers can only handle three groups for differentiation.
Where did that come from? Does anyone know about this research? He is
a learning theorist, I think, so maybe it has to do with learning
theory?
Carol
On Oct 9,
Lori,
This is one of the most excellent points of all.
For some reason people seem to think it's easier to group across
classrooms by ability.
It just isn't so, in reality. Nor is it good for kids.
Renee
On Oct 9, 2008, at 5:44 AM, ljackson wrote:
I am thinking of the impact on instructional
Beverlee, I absolutely agree with you, and hope my post was not
inferring that that would be a good reason to do it. What I DO think,
though, is that it IS a reason used by some teachers for doing things.
Renee
On Oct 9, 2008, at 7:00 AM, Beverlee Paul wrote:
I think I'd just like to
Here's another thought. With all the frenzy over teacher
accountability, I think this arrangement completely takes a teacher's
accountability away, not only for reading, but across the board, for
precisely the reason stated below. The teacher has an incomplete sense
of the student unless
I think that's called bull
:-)
Renee
On Oct 9, 2008, at 7:10 AM, Carol Carlson wrote:
We had a consultant in our district who said that research shows
that teachers can only handle three groups for differentiation.
Where did that come from? Does anyone know about this research? He is
a
Our principal also had us group kids by ability and send them out to other
teachers for reading instruction. The purpose was to raise our state test
scores. Some of our first and second grade teachers seemed to like this
arrangement. It was easier and didn't require as much planning, because
good one, Renee!!
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Renee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's another thought. With all the frenzy over teacher
accountability, I think this arrangement completely takes a teacher's
accountability away, not only for reading, but across the board, for
precisely the
I am thinking of the impact on instructional delivery. With a group of
mixed ability kids, as a teacher I can make important decisions about time
management and release of control. More competent readers can be given
quick mini lessons, released and the check upon later, freeing up my time to
I had a principal do the same thing. After a month or so, I refused and
fought it hard, eventually getting my way. I also felt it fragmented my
kids and my relationship with them. My curriculum was so integrated that I
would refer to something that I taught in Reading and not everyone knew what
Wendy
We regroup...but not by ability... we regroup by strategy needs for just
part of the day.
For example, in K we might have a rhyming group, a letter sound group, a
blending group and a comprehension group. In Fourth grade, we might have a
fluency group, a inferential thinking group,
Wendy,
Your principal is probably responding to RtI by suggesting this. I'd like to
explain how we did something like this in our building, but it was in addition
to our reading block - not in place of it. We developed something called an Rx
or prescriptive block in reading for each grade
It being an easy road for teachers certainly is not the message I got from
Renee. Teaching thematically is hardly 'easy'--good teaching, regardless of
what might be imposed on us from affair, is never easy. But when kids,
particularly those who don's seem to come to learning with ease, are
One should never type with a headache!! Afar not affair, thought it does
create some interesting mental images.
On 10/9/08 12:34 PM, ljackson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Teaching thematically is hardly 'easy'--good teaching, regardless of
what might be imposed on us from affair, is never easy.
Oh my goodness, I hope Renee and others didn't think I was responding to
her. I guess I replied to the wrong thread of this; there are several going
around. The post I was responding to was from someone who said that some
teachers were FOR walking to reading because it made it easier for
Hello Everyone,
Does anyone have any units for Kindergarten and First Grade for teaching
schema, reading comprehension, etc. that they would be willing to share?
Thanks in advance
~ Yvonnee~
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of stacy hall
Sent:
We have a wonderful problem of having two grade 5 teachers AND a computer
teacher and educational assistant to work with during our Reading block.
This is my current schedule for that block (The students are ability grouped.):
9:20 - 9:55am Groups 1 and 2 leave me for the computer teacher and
Gaynor wrote:
=
Hello Everyone,
Does anyone have any units for Kindergarten and First Grade for teaching
schema, reading comprehension, etc. that they would be willing to share?
Thanks in advance
~ Yvonnee~
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL
Wendy,
We did this kind of grouping for almost ten years. It has pros and cons to it.
We did think it worked at the time. Some years we had 6 groups at a grade
level. Top, near top, middle, low middle, low, IEP. The low groups had low
numbers and the high group often had 25 kids in the
Wendy,
We did this kind of grouping for almost ten years. It has pros and cons to it.
We did think it worked at the time. Some years we had 6 groups at a grade
level. Top, near top, middle, low middle, low, IEP. The low groups had low
numbers and the high group often had 25 kids in the
23 matches
Mail list logo
