student a: behind mostly everyone in his/her class. can't count well. can't read well. teacher needs to try to spend extra time with him/her.

student b: ahead of everyone. for the most part, seems bored by teaching level. way ahead of everyone else.

the dilemma: does the teacher spend more time with student a, who needs it? in turn, student b is not given the teaching that will make him/her smarter.

or does the teacher spend equal time, as student a lags behind?

quite a problem.

I've been both student A (Algebra, Geometry, Chemistry - anything that mixes numbers w/ letters kicks my dyslexia into high gear), and student B, (reading, english . . . just about everything else).

Spend time with the kid that needs it, provide opportunities for the kid that's ahead. They're not going to need as much one on one work - just harder or more interesting work.

That's why we have gifted classes up round here.

I fell into the category of Student B when I was in school, and the solution that was devised for myself and about four or five other kids was to send us to gifted and talented classes for a few hours each week. Just a little perspective for you.

I've been in both places before and I think that the teachers should spend more time with the kids behind in their levels than the ones at or higher.

well the problem because then that you are limiting the smartest kids from being even smarter possibly.

i've been hanging out with a girl who's a preschool teacher and it came up in conversation and she said it is tough dealing with having one girl who can read books and having another kid who has trouble counting.

The problem is that we've lowered the standard and cater to those unwilling to work hard.

well can a 3-year-old kid really decipher if he's working hard or not?

How about the parents of 3 year olds not understanding development?

now we're getting somewhere.

no child left behind!

You can say that about pretty much every Federal education bill.

Here's a thought.

Why don't we segregate these kids so that we can efficiently use our teaching resources and get the most out of each child?

Just a simple thought. Not too politically correct, but...

Why don't we just kill the stupid, lazy people and therefore, clean up the gene pool a bit?

Provide for specialised programs, so student b can study within an accelerated environment, while student a gets the specialised attention he/she needs.

I seriously get tired of other people holding me back.

Why don't we just kill the stupid, lazy people and therefore, clean up the gene pool a bit?

Sigh.

Wherefore art thou, Quad?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=428471&in_page_id=1770

Scale of 'grade inflation' exposed as half of students get As

The scale of "grade inflation" in schools and universities since Labour came to power is laid bare in official figures today.

The number of A grades at A-level and top honours degrees has soared more than 50 per cent since 1997.

The trend at GCSE is almost as marked, with pupils now passing 36 per cent of exams at the top two grades of A and A*.

The figures triggered accusations Labour has presided over dumbing down which has now permeated the entire education system.

Critics said it was unlikely the increases were purely down to rising standards and warned that public exams and the historic honours system were in danger of becoming meaningless.

In a tacit admission of the problem last year, ministers pledged to toughen up A-levels with an A* supergrade and a return to traditional open-ended questions.

It has also backed a review of the degree classification system amid claims by the official university standards watchdog that it is little better than a "lottery".

A Daily Mail analysis illustrates starkly the extent to which grading has drifted upwards at the three most crucial stages of the education system.

At GCSE, top grade passes have risen from 14 per cent in Labour's first year of office to 19.1 per cent last summer.

The brightest pupils now find the exams so undemanding that huge hauls of passes are becoming standard.

The number of teenagers amassing 14 or more has risen from just 67 in 1997 to nearly 18,000 last year.

Yet performance in the crucial disciplines of English and maths was this week shown in school league tables to be lagging behind many other subjects.

Fewer than half of teenagers are achieving decent grades in the two subjects.

Meanwhile sixth-formers now pass a quarter of A-levels at grade A - up from just 15.7 per cent nearly a decade ago.

And figures from the Higher Education Statistics Agency have shown how first-class honours degrees have rocketed 55 per cent.

More than one in ten undergraduates now achieve the highest university accolade while more than half achieve the top two grades - either a first or upper second.

Out of 289,200 undergraduates awarded degrees last year, 172,000 were awarded one of these degrees.

Most of the rest gained lower seconds, while 26,800 failed their degrees completely, gaining no classification at all.

Firsts alone have gone up from seven per cent in 1997 to more than 11 per cent.

The Government-backed review of the degree classifications system, headed by Leicester University vice-chancellor Bob Burgess, is expected to report on a possible alternative later in the year.

Widespread disagreement among university bosses has delayed its conclusions but it is expected to recommend a new system based on a simple pass/fail grade.

This would be backed by a detailed transcript of students' achievement.

The review has already concluded the ancient system is "unfit for purpose".

Alan Smithers, professor of education at Buckingham University, said: "The figures hammer home that degree classifications as currently applied no longer distinguish sufficiently.

"Employers now tend to do it on the basis of which university a graduate attended, which, in effect, is using A-levels to distinguish between students.

"This does not leave room for students or universities to develop."

Shadow higher education minister Boris Johnson said: "I wish I could believe that students are getting ever more brilliant.

"I am sure they are, but probably not to this extent.

"The grim truth is that too many universities are now feeling a competitive pressure to attract students with the implicit promise they will emerge with honours at the end.

"They must recognise that in the end employers will rumble them in just the same way that universities have rumbled the A-level."



***************

Who do we trust to be the judge of a students progress? The teacher who will get sued or fired for damaging little Twadna's self esteem? The parent who is so absent they don't realize their kid is obese and stoned half the day? The society that pats themselves on the back for giving every child an equal, though increasingly meaningless, high school education?