I read a blog that was posted on Twitter (http://bit.ly/rYztra) by Scott Mcleod. In his blog, he dissected several of the parts of the blueprint that he found problems with. Scott did a great job with his dissection including some graphs to help explain what he was talking about. Scott started with why he felt the 3rd grade retention policy was a poor decision. He went on to talk about how the blueprint lacks areas where students should be actively processing what is being taught. He concludes with his thoughts on how education reform needs to be created by educators and not politicians.
This article did a great job of making a point through either the author's research or research already done. Scott explains that there is an overwhelming amount of research that shows retaining students leads to a much higher drop out rate in high school. He comments that he wonders why the governor does not need to use research for parts of the blueprint.
Another section of the blog breaks learning into three parts. The three parts are input, process, and output. He states that students need to spend a lot of time processing so they can truly learn the information. He broke down each aspect of the blueprint and determined that 56 parts of it related to input, 25 parts of it related to output, and only 4 parts of it related to process.
He concludes the blog by talking about how there is a chance to make some real changes for improvement but we are held back because educators aren't leading the reform. He considers this a lost opportunity. There are several other great points to this blog and I encourage everyone to read it.
No comments:
Post a Comment