Remove accelerated classes?

Question

My son's middle school wants to discontinue acclerated classes because they think it creates a have and have not division. They favor differentiation classes where the teachers teach on many levels within the group. Do you think this is a good idea? This is for 7th and 8th graders. They high school offers AP classes.

Answer 1

Absolutely not. There's no point in dumbing down the educational system. Is it going to do society any good if everyone who graduates high school cannot read?

Different kids have different learning abilities. If some are more advanced, then give them the opportunity to take accelerated classes.

Whoever suggested that should be fired if they hold a position in the school district. Have you ever seen how a kid acts if he's in a class that's too slow for him? You could think they were retarded cuz of their behavior, but it's because the class is too dumb for them.

Plus, this world is full of have and have nots. Want no differences? Create a purely socialist society. Is this practical? Of course not. Why would someone struggle to become a doctor if he'll be paid the same as a janitor? You just dumb down society again and create conditions ripe for abuse (which is how communist countries end up). The world doesn't operate this way so why hold down the kids that have the most likelihood of becoming someone important?

Answer 2

There are definitely pros and cons to accelerated classes. The most obvious advantage is that by weeding out slower students and "problem" students, the best and the brightest can advance at a much higher speed. There are a couple of problems with this: first, even smart students have a hard time maintaining maximum learning levels over a long period of time and tend to burn out before the get through high school if they have been pushed all the way through junior high as well. Another disadvantage is that by removing all the smart, well-behaved students to their own special class (which often has some of the best resources), you basically leave all the average and even above-average students behind in an environment with much worse behavior problems (due to the higher number of "problem" students) and significantly lower learning speed. Thus, it would seem to be preferable to hold off on AP classes until high school.

That said, offering classes in which one teacher teaches to students of various levels can be difficult. If the more advanced students can be trained to help the less advanced students, or if special assistants or tutorers are present to help when a certain student falls behind, then it can work, and often quite well. However, if you simply load the same teacher up with more class preparations without smaller classes or some sort of assistance, then she has no choice but to end up dividing her time and her attention in class to one group at a time or else to simply teach to the lowest common denominator.

If I were you, I would try to find out if there is a tutoring program in place (or if one can be developed) to help students who are having problems with a certain subject. These tutors could be parent volunteers or fellow students. (The local chapter of the National Honor Society often requires its members to volunteer to tutor other students anyway.) Otherwise, all you're really doing with a junior high level pre-AP program is shuffling the problem students around.

Offering AP and pre-AP classes may help the cream rise to the top, but it also tends to produce a lot of spoiled milk.

Answer 3

Mainstreaming children has its advantages and its disadvantages. For example the brightest kids are usually taught on a lower level, for the teacher accommodates the least common denominator. Academically this is a bad decision which leaves many overachievers bored and acting out. Socially it's good because children learn to deal with all types of people. I believe its a schools job to teach children to read, write and do arithmetic. It's my job to socialize my child. Unfortunately, today so many parents have dropped the ball in training and raising their child, the school has to pick up the slack.

Answer 4

I took AP classes in middle school and they made high school a lot better for me. If a student is ready and willing to be challenged, then the school is supposed to be there to fill that need. There is also an advantage to having the faster learners separated from the slower learners. That way both groups can be taught more effective and efficiently.

Answer 5

No way! (my opinion)
ACCELERATED classes are there if ssome kids CAN be better.(Not to sound favored or anything) But that should be encouraged! If kids are working better why depress(for lack of a better word) that??