2007-01-09 01:18:11 · 9 answers · asked by Forlorn Hope 7 in Education & Reference ➔ Primary & Secondary Education
Yes, to the extent possible. And this is not only for their benefit, but for the other kids. The others don't try if they know Hermione knows and will have her hand up before the rest of them have even puzzled out what the question was.
Very gifted students can become MAJOR discipline problems when they get bored, and they cannot help getting bored when a class may go for weeks before a single fact they didn't already know comes up. Many, like when I was a kid, read the entire textbook as soon as they get it, and then wonder why it should take so long.
Also, it's not fair to the kid who could be learning real things, getting a real head start on a good college curriculum and even a career path, to spend their time at school as if it were a prison: just doing time. I had that, and I dropped out as soon as I was legally able.
The teachers didn't like me, the other kids didn't like me, and I didn't like myself much, either. It wasn't until years later when I took the SAT test, that I found out why. In spite of having never gone past the middle of tenth grade, and having a GED instead of a real high school education, I got 780 on the verbal and 690 on the math. College was a whole lot nicer to me than high school ever was.
2007-01-09 01:31:47 · answer #1 · answered by auntb93again 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Golden Education Ideal: Everyone should be educated at their own pace and needs, not just brighter or dimmer kids, not just affluent or poor kids.
The reality: we can only strive for this. Budgets are important and while we fight a war in Iraq, there will be much less money for federal education programs. The Headstart program is one example of something that worked well being dropped. Florida is a state of retirees -- that's certainly one reason why the schools are bad for all the students in Florida.
I grew up in a barefoot rural area of Pennsylvania. One way the teachers dealt with brighter kids being bored was to have the older (5th - 8th grade) tutor the younger kids. Volunteers in the area taught 8th graders calculus (yes, the farmers produced a couple of geniuses every year). Other volunteers taught sewing.
2007-01-09 01:30:54 · answer #2 · answered by hawkthree 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The less academically able are not less academically able. They just lazy, put no effort into it, or have bad parents. If anything they should be in the faster classes. They're never going to catch up by going slower than us! They also need to change the speed classes are going in from 1 mph to 100mph
I'm an A student and I'm bored as hell.
2007-01-09 01:23:35 · answer #3 · answered by Brian 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it's a great idea. They stream children as young as seven or eight in my former primary school for subjects like maths and English and it works really well. It not only prepares children for a high school environment of moving to different classes and having different teachers other than just their class teacher but it's also beneficial to learning.
The brighter kids are able to move on with their work, getting full attention from their teacher who doesn't have to hover around the less-able kids. This means these children aren't bored with their work or are being kept back.
As for the less-able children, they are too are able to get proper attention from the teacher and, in a smaller class, it's easier to identify those who need a bit more help. It also prevents these kids feeling bad when they look at the harder work that the brighter children are doing.
There are two things that need to be watched, though, when streaming children on their ability. One, children need to be taught all together at least for their first two years of school to get a proper idea of their natures and abilities (for example, is a child who is having problems reading actually having difficulties with the work or is it because they feel shy about reading aloud?). And two, children shouldn't be pigeon-holed into groups. Just because a child is less-able at six doesn't mean they can't improve and go into a higher class at ten.
2007-01-09 10:16:37 · answer #4 · answered by starchilde5 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It would be kind of degrading to be put in the less able group i think. There are AP courses and challenge programs for the kids that are academically advanced...
2007-01-09 09:51:53 · answer #5 · answered by bluecolouredflames 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
YES!!! When I was in school, I was achedemically advanced, and I was always bored! I felt as though I was wasting my time. I also upset the rest of the students because I always screwed up the bell curve, or always had the answer to blurt out in class, so they would get frustrated and pissy. I skipped 9th grade, and still I was extremely bored. The only good thing was by the time I was out of high school, I already had a semester worth of college credits.
2007-01-09 01:28:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Depends on the less academically challenged..If they really want to learn, than no. If they are just filling up classroom space , than yes, put them in a "class by themselves"..
2007-01-09 01:30:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think it is a fine idea. If the brighter students are held back to the level of the less smart, they become bored and trouble makers.
2007-01-09 01:23:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes, cuz good students dont deserve to get bad influences by bad students
2007-01-09 02:30:50 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋