gino crocetti wrote: > > I don't mean to sound preachy, but the details of the class composition > and management are the determining factors in deciding what should be > done. > > In some circumstances, a fairly broad range of student work can be > included in a positive way within a class. One way is to have the more > advanced students help the others. Frequently, trying to understand the > difficulties of the other students greatly enlarges the "more advanced" > students understanding of the subject area (especially math) and human > nature. Having the advanced students work together can also work, but in > an integrated class, the teacher must be creative in guiding such a > group to enlarge (enrich) their understanding rather than simply going > ahead faster. Most texts make some gesture in this direction, but it is > rarely adequate. > > Both of these have limits, usually not approached in practice in my > opinion. Although throwing chairs (mentioned at one point) is not > acceptable, such dramatic actions by a student are usually based as much > on frustration and unmet needs as an inherent love of flying objects.
Gino, The proponents of inclusion make the assumption that all kids in school want to be there and to get an education. They do not. Many in our society not only do not want an education for themselves, but are succeeding in preventing others from getting same. Why do we as educated people try to make every one the same? I do not know what grade you teach, but I can testify that many 8th graders of all abilities will migrate to the lowest level when given the chance. The notion that bad kids will become good kids if given the role model is a neat sounding idea that simply does not work. The opposite is more likely true for 14 year olds. And what would you do if your own children had to sit in a public school setting where a kid was allowed to throw chairs all year? Mine did. Best of luck, Chuck, email@example.com