APP - Evaluating Teacher Performance

Good teachers know how to meet the needs of those academically at the ends, though when extreme, if parents can afford I'd suggest gifted schools or public schools for very low, (IQ in 80's and below).

For kids with IQ's up to high 140's, more in depth study is called for. The problem with not-so-good teachers is that they give 'more work', not different work. Worst of all, make that kid their mini-me and have him/her helping the slow students.

what about those above 155, like me - i tried to hide my intelligence because i learned that people like me were not welcome
 
what about those above 155, like me - i tried to hide my intelligence because i learned that people like me were not welcome

That is in the range where differentiated lessons and alternative assessment are no longer effective. There is no way for a teacher with a regular classroom to deal with that far off the norm, just as dealing with IQ's in the 70's and below really is not doable in regular classroom.

Special schools for the gifted, not 'gifted' classes are the best recourse. Truth is, homeschooling works better than regular classroom in most cases.
 
That is in the range where differentiated lessons and alternative assessment are no longer effective. There is no way for a teacher with a regular classroom to deal with that far off the norm, just as dealing with IQ's in the 70's and below really is not doable in regular classroom.

Special schools for the gifted, not 'gifted' classes are the best recourse. Truth is, homeschooling works better than regular classroom in most cases.

true, 'gifted' classes sucked

but gifted schools are undemocratic :( as are classes for the challenged
 
true, 'gifted' classes sucked

but gifted schools are undemocratic :( as are classes for the challenged

Are you sure you're a genius? seems like not. The point of school is for each child to get the educational experience that works for them, not to whitewash human difference. Or maybe...?
 
Are you sure you're a genius? seems like not. The point of school is for each child to get the educational experience that works for them, not to whitewash human difference. Or maybe...?

i was being sarcastic

too many school boards have decided that students need to have the experience of going to school with their age peers rather than with their intelligence peers

i am not doing well these days, my doctor has spotted a 'dark' spot in my neck that looks like the thyroidectomy did not get all of the cancerous materials and i go in next week for various scans and tests :(
 
i was being sarcastic

too many school boards have decided that students need to have the experience of going to school with their age peers rather than with their intelligence peers

i am not doing well these days, my doctor has spotted a 'dark' spot in my neck that looks like the thyroidectomy did not get all of the cancerous materials and i go in next week for various scans and tests :(

ok. yeah. sarcasm is hard over the net sometimes.:)

Sorry about your bum neck. try some accupressure.
 
The educational profession emphasizes the ideal that every student should graduate from high school, and thus you can see a concerted effort in all areas to achieve that goal. Differentiated instruction is an attempt to "teach to all students" and not just certain ones, which is a common charge made about the education system in the past.

There are of course, many other areas in which changes have occurred to help yield this ideal, and many people believe that quality of education has been sacrificed in favor of quantity of graduates. Is this your guys' assessment of the matter?
 
true, 'gifted' classes sucked

but gifted schools are undemocratic :( as are classes for the challenged

Schools, like home should not be run as democracies in the main. The best for the student should be the concern. With that said, resources are limited and with the exception of homeschooling not every kid is going to get one-on-one most of the time. Those outliers, high/low have very different needs. If it were my child, I'd address them with or without the school.
 
The educational profession emphasizes the ideal that every student should graduate from high school, and thus you can see a concerted effort in all areas to achieve that goal. Differentiated instruction is an attempt to "teach to all students" and not just certain ones, which is a common charge made about the education system in the past.

There are of course, many other areas in which changes have occurred to help yield this ideal, and many people believe that quality of education has been sacrificed in favor of quantity of graduates. Is this your guys' assessment of the matter?

Well if the goal is quantity meaning 100% graduating, some districts fall woefully short. IMHO too much is asked of the schools, they do not make good parents for one thing. I have nothing against teaching sex ed, in fact think it's a good thing, but no need to work on the 'attitudes' of students beginning in kindergarten towards all the possible match-ups. Considering the ages kids are beginning puberty, classes on basics should be in 3rd grade, probably within a science or health course.

Diseases and such, middle school.

Instead of programs on bullying, etc., a code of conduct should begin early, be enforced. (I'm not in favor of zero tolerance.)

If parents want 'more' from the school, they should pay for it as they do band lessons. Should be after school, etc., not taking away from core curriculum.

These though are very different than the discussion of addressing the needs of very high or low ability students.
 
Dewey was a socialist who served to ultimately undermine classical education.

Indeed. If students knew more philosophy behind the subject areas, they'd be able to master the material much more easily. Unfortunately that is gone in most classes, hell the university educated instructors for the most part have only read about the philosophers, not the writings themselves.
 
Back
Top