bcantaire
Junior member
Posts: 86
|
 |
« on: April 12, 2009, 11:49:46 PM » |
|
I realize that my idea of an ideal system might not be practical, since it seems like it would be very costly to operate.
Other than that, here is my idea (If I ever start a school, I'd want it to look like this- I am using "we" like it already exists lol):
K-12 Education
*Abolish "grades". Children do not learn every subject at the same rate, and they never have. The classes are structured so that the slowest child in the class can learn the material in a school year (and the slowest child after that goes into a special education class). Children who could have moved on faster are stuck moving at a slower pace. In my own experience on this: I learned to read very early and LOVED books. I wanted to learn as much as I could, and read everything. I think I was just average with Math. I was very bored in school, and spent all my time reading under my desk. I still got good grades, but I would've been better served if they had allowed me to move ahead to what I was ready for.
*If we abolish "grades", we need a different system: Each child can be assessed for level in various subjects, and put on a lesson plan with other students who are roughly on the same level. You might have a (small) group of 7-10 year-olds studying the same reading lessons, or math lessons, but they get to move at a pace that matches how quickly they can pick up material. (We will still maintain the same minimum level of education required for each "grade level" as other schools do. If some of the children who would have been in the 1st grade are slow to learn Math, we will strive to make sure they at least reach the minimum level of understanding that other 1st graders are required to reach. Thus, we follow the national requirements, but restructure the system.)
*It is generally agreed upon that children should spend some time with their peers (I think the research supports this, too, but I could be wrong). We can separate children by general age group for things like recess, lunch, and sports activities. This ensures that they get time with children their own age (that is about all the time they get together in the current system, anyway!). However, they also get to spend time with children of other ages who happen to be in their learning level classes. This can be good, too. We just need to make sure we separate the "big" kids from the "little" kids, insofar as splitting up schools after grade 6 or something. There are parents out there who probably don't want their 6 year old around an 11 year old who has discovered the secret of babies and cuss words (of course, kids seem to growing up much faster these days, so who knows).
*The "Liberal Arts" education, as taught in college, brought down to a lower level for younger kids (I'm talking about the Gen Ed requirements for a BA/BS). (My take: the material I learned in high school and before was so watered down, from what it is at a college level, that it was useless.) Controversial topics should be brought up in schools. Not all kids will go to college, and I think it is important to educate kids on different values and ways of thinking. We shouldn't be afraid to introduce kids (at least by a high school level) to some of the ways social scientists go about studying culture, what their findings and theories are, etc. (Not just social sciences, of course).
I understand parents wanting to shelter their children from certain things in the world when they are young, but we are doing a disservice to these kids (and the rest of the world), when we set them loose after high school with no real new ways of viewing the world and coming to conclusions. Many of them will never attend college. I have learned so much in college that really broadened my horizons. It made me more open-minded. In an increasingly smaller world, we need more tolerance, not more ignorance.
(We do have a weird hang-up in our culture about the teaching of sex, or the presence of nudity in our schools. Kids are surely aware of all of this stuff by the time they are 16 or 17, it is EVERYWHERE in our culture, and yet certain topics are ignored until college. I am not willing to touch this, though, myself. However, for important discussions about racism, sexism, etc, I think 16 years old should be old enough, no? I am very unsure in this area...Maybe everyone else is, which is why high schools water down things so much. This is a topic unto itself.)
*The Arts (Music, etc.):
It is important for students to get experience learning to play an instrument, or acting in a school play, etc. This is nothing different from what most schools do. We will also stress the importance of learning other languages when a child is young.
*An interdisciplinary way of teaching topics:
Even though we will be focusing on "learning levels", instead of grades, we will teach the material in a way that shows the connections between each discipline. I had a teacher in one of my first college classes (in a humanities class) bring it all together for me. It was like a light bulb went off in my head. All those dry, boring subjects from high school were suddenly alive for me. I could see how they were all related, and how each one affected the world I saw each day. It was awesome.
*Who we hire:
*Teachers who have at least a bachelor's degree in their subject. They may be required to have additional certification, but we would likely teach them our methods of instruction, since our approach would be specific to our system. (Our method of educating students would be based on the current research, even if it means I need to change some of these plans. If there is no research, I suppose we can test out these principles and see how they work. ;D) All teachers will be subject teachers, even in the lower levels. Teachers might come together to do group projects with their students, maybe to illustrate how the subjects are interrelated. (Grow a garden with the earth space science teacher, and the biology teacher, and the chemistry teacher! Maybe throw in a social studies teacher who can explain life in farming communities, or problems farmers face in growing their food, or pollution. There will likely be an interesting piece of information in there for every type of student.)
In this case, you might have a few different "levels" together, and the classwork could be based on each groups level of learning and which teacher they are officially assigned to.
I would love to start a school like this.
I was one of the kids who "fell through the cracks". When I was little, people said I was very bright. The school system really killed my love for learning. I never got it back until that humanities teacher helped to switch the light back on. I wonder how many kids were "ruined" and then never went to college to get the experience I had?
Does anyone know a school like this? I want to send my kids there.
If anyone wants to start a school like this, I'd be happy to join in on the process. ;D
|
