tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1589405835312873091.post6411787459267005718..comments2023-03-23T09:51:05.485-04:00Comments on Eduwonkette: Spotlight on STAReduwonkettehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05072705276536120758noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1589405835312873091.post-57213547926656323572007-12-30T08:59:00.000-05:002007-12-30T08:59:00.000-05:00DT: "I'd like to expand alternative schools for ki...DT: "I'd like to expand alternative schools for kids with disciplinary and truancy problems. But institutional resistance is always fierce, and what if we are wrong? What if we expand alternative classes and the lower sizes aren't enough to counter-balance the potential stigma?"<BR/><BR/>One of the problems of alternative settings is the impact kids have on each other - why mainstreaming in many ways makes some sense. But that has to be done with great care and why smaller class sizes can make such a difference. I would add the factor of having another adult in the room - this was the setting for the kids who were considered emotionally disturbed - 12 kids and 2 adults - teacher and para. For the LD (learning diaabled) the numbers were 15 kids and 1 teacher alone. The DOE began to squeeze these numbers to save money and do more mainstreaming along those lines - a disaster in many cases.ed notes onlinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15018047869059226777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1589405835312873091.post-43344437248677322852007-12-25T21:05:00.000-05:002007-12-25T21:05:00.000-05:00"Great criticism"? Flattery will get you everywhe..."Great criticism"? Flattery will get you everywhere. There's no question that a single student can disrupt an entire class. It's important to understand the sources of the disruption, some of which may lie in a student's family and community experiences, and others of which may be a response to how the school treats the child. The main challenge in removing disruptive students from "mainstream" settings is that we have a long track record in education documenting that separate is almost always unequal. As you note, alternative settings are frequently stigmatized, and, especially when it comes to disruptive students, can devolve into warehouses. Small classes may be an element of effective alternative settings, but there's no substitute for a program design that's rooted in a deep understanding of why youth are behaving in the way that they do.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1589405835312873091.post-28039971308316656342007-12-25T13:58:00.000-05:002007-12-25T13:58:00.000-05:00You should feel good about the "projective" respon...You should feel good about the "projective" responses. Great literary criticism, like great literature, should inspire a diversity of subjective responses. Shouldn't the same apply to educational research?<BR/><BR/>You are on solid ground in setting a priority for class reduction in the early years and in high poverty schools. And we need to think hard about ways of reducing classes enough to produce lasting benefits.<BR/><BR/>You are also correct that high school is different than elementary. But the John Hopkins studies in dropout prevention show that the challenges faced by poor children change throughout their life cycle, and we need continued interventions. That's why my class sizes are always 1/3 smaller in June than September.<BR/><BR/>Coming from alternative certification, I support that option in recruiting the additional teachers. But like I implied, my graduate degrees were less beneficial to my effectiveness than my life experiences. Responding to defeats is the best single preparation for teaching our most challenged kids.<BR/><BR/>Regardless of where the additional teachers come from, if we want to retain talent in inner city secondary schools we need to address chronic disruptions. Like most of my colleagues, I'd like to expand alternative schools for kids with disciplinary and truancy problems. But institutional resistance is always fierce, and what if we are wrong? What if we expand alternative classes and the lower sizes aren't enough to counter-balance the potential stigma?<BR/><BR/>So, I'd like to expand alternative schools with very intimate class sizes for kids with attendance problems. What could be the down side of that? They surely couldn't be better off on the streets. If we reduce secondary class size as much as we can afford, and reduce the problems associated with students whose attendance problems keep them from succeeding, then we should be able to create a school culture that attracts talented adults, as well as helps teens.<BR/><BR/>Even this year, with our much improved culture resulting from smaller classes, we are still losing about the same percentage of our most troubled kids. If we could afford to permanently lower size enough, we could make much more progress. But in the real world, I suspect we need to invest in more alternative settings with very small class sizes.<BR/><BR/>Like I said, I'm looking for feedback, because the implications of what I'm saying even scare me. But if my ideas offend, then blame the Eduwonkette.<BR/><BR/>John ThompsonAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com