|
These thoughts are my opinions ... of which I'm not sure are completely accurate ... mostly because I am probably biased with the experiences I've encountered.
I believe Prep Classes are Inefficient.
This inefficiency is inherent in what the Instructor is being asked to do. When s/he is teaching a subject like Chemistry or Biology et cetera, the differences in student ability, work ethic, mastery of fundamentals, are not of as much consequence as when it is a Prep Class.
Strong Students will usually do well, weak students will usually do bad. This is out of the instructor's control. When you're teaching something like Chemistry, you just teach. Your job is to present the material in as easily digestible a way as possible. You set a difficulty level and base the curve around that.
This is not true when you are teaching a Prep Class. Your purpose no longer is to teach. The purpose now is to prepare the students for their test. Here's the big dilemma: How do you effectively teach SAT Math which is basically just algebra and some geometry to a class where 50% are bad at math and 50% are good at math? (*By bad at math, I don't mean born bad, I mean having never put in the time to become good.)
If you cater to the weak students, strong students become bored out of their mind. Likewise, if you go at a faster speed, weak students have no idea what's going on. The end result usually tends to be striking some distance in the middle, catering to no one. You're bored. They're bored. Everyone's kind of bored.
From my experiences in teaching and being a student, what a class can offer more than anything else is the social dynamic of many minds learning the same material. This is the true power of a class. If fellow students are high caliber, it greatly increases overall learning. If fellow students do not want to be there, overall learning is decreased.
When students can be made to work together meaningfully (which is hard to achieve), great things happen. This type of cooperation is easier to induce for creative endeavors or discussions. With a Prep Class, where you are not learning anything new, it is hard to achieve meaningful cooperation. Usually it's just, "I got B. What'd you get?" "Yeah I got B too."
I have been teaching for some time SAT prep and I still have no idea how to do it as well as when I tutor an individual. What "Teaching a Test" actually is is helping the student understand how to break down the test in a way that is comfortable for him. Everyone breaks things down differently. Everyone focuses on different details. Everyone has their tendencies. Lebron James always goes right when the clock is winding down. Or he shoots a three.
When I break things down in a classroom setting, I do not feel it is effective. Sure I can elucidate why Choice B is better than Choice C, I can give general strategies, but I can't say the words that would directly cater to the way you think because there is a whole class of humans present. It is impossible and unfeasible to cater to one in the midst of many.
The testimonials of my friends who have taken MCAT prep courses usually are pretty much the same: "We go through the material." "We take a test every other week." That 'material' can be found in every textbook and probably youtube. The hard part is the subtleties. I've never taught MCAT but I have no idea how you talk about the subtle features of Chromatography. You'd have to make sure everyone understands solvent-systems, polarity, etc. With an individual, you could go through and patch up the deficiencies. They might not feel comfortable with polarity because they don't really get Electronegativity. With a class, not everyone is going to have the same deficiency. It simply becomes ineffective to going into depth on subtleties.
Finally, there is the idea of a time frame. Most prep classes go from 6 weeks to 9 weeks. Unless you severely dedicate yourself, it's fucking impossible to radically change reading habits, vocabulary habits, general cognitive abilities in the span of six to seven weeks. If you do have the severe dedication to accomplish the feat, it means you have already achieved a certain level of mental maturity and work ethic which the average high school student does not possess.
It is hard for me to come up with reasons to take a Prep Class.
1. It provides a social environment for learning.
1a. Not really. Prep Classes don't usually feature student interaction.
2. I see other people preparing and it motivates me to prepare harder.
2a. I suppose ...
3. To provide a regimented structure.
3a. A Personal tutor can do that as well ... perhaps even more effectively.
4. To teach me things I don't know.
4a. Assuming tutor and teacher are of equal quality ... 1 person teaching 1 person teaches is a much more concentrated learning experience.
5. Pricing.
5a. Per hour basis, tutors are more expensive. But in that hour, much more can be conveyed. 2 hours of tutoring + 8 hours of self study per week will get you much farther than 4 hours of a class and 6 hours of self-study.
Basically point of this long ass blog:
If you want to learn something, take a class.
If you want to prepare for something, get a tutor.
It could be that I am biased. I have always enjoyed teaching an individual vs teaching a class. If you're of the opposite view point, that classes can be more effective than tutoring, or have insights for the other side, please respond! Would love to hear them.
 
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
I agree with you that prep classes are not efficient. But it's really no different from regular classes. "Strong students do well, weak students do bad". In both types of classes, students are not learning as efficiently as they could with a private tutor.
I took SAT prep classes and thought they were a waste of time. I learned so much more reading the SAT prep book they gave me than listening to the instructor. I guess I'll try private tutoring if I need help, but it's so expensive.
|
Prep classes are inefficient in teaching real content. But they excel in ensuring that students score well in tests. They cater to students who study purely for the sake of scoring well so they can get good university placements and a good job in future.
Prep classes can actually end up conditioning students to approach lessons in a way that is geared solely for examinations, at the expense of deep understanding and exploration of subject material. Like you mentioned in your previous blog, some students end up just wanting information to be fed to them and have no interest in class discussions.
I think the problem can partially tackled by changing the way examinations work. Currently, test-setters have to adhere to certain guidelines, resulting in questions becoming quite formulaic and easy to prepare for. If test setters have more leeway to test concepts in novel situations, students will have to deal with something new every time, resulting in the brand of rote learning, which prep classes promote, diminishing in effectiveness.
I actually view the existence of prep classes with a certain amount of disdain as they vitiate the correlation between grades and actual ability by churning out students who don't really understand subject matter, but are well versed in problem solving skills.
|
Your whole post seems almost tautological. Your mistake, I think, though, is thinking that everyone needs a tutor. No doubt a tutor would be more effective for nearly everyone, but the average student probably doesn't NEED a tutor. If you're lost in a prep class, maybe you should pay the fuck attention in class or buy a book.
I agree that there is an overemphasis on testing, but in my academic research of educational methods, the alternative to testing is 'curriculum'. Like wtf is curriculum but the mirror of testing?
I also agree that there is a large segment of students who have great test scores, impeccable grades and are the most uninteresting human beings you could possibly imagine. That doesn't mean you're cool, Mr. C student in the back. I see you.
|
husniack, just out of curiosity, what's your background in teaching? You've mentioned that you're a standardized test tutor and that you've taught SAT classes, but have you ever taught in a school? And how long have you been tutoring? The problems with instruction that you're listing are pretty basic, and the fact that you don't have at least theoretical solutions to them makes me feel like you don't really have much experience teaching a school classroom. Here are some examples:
With a Prep Class, where you are not learning anything new, it is hard to achieve meaningful cooperation. Usually it's just, "I got B. What'd you get?" "Yeah I got B too." ... Prep Classes don't usually feature student interaction.
As the teacher/ public tutor, it's your job to elicit discussion and promote meaningful collaboration (unless you just want to lecture to them, obviously). Whether you want them to work on a problem together, or each do the problem on their own and then compare, it's your job to get a dialogue going if that's what you want. You could try to give three simultaneous private lessons to the three students in your prep class, but you'll be juggling a ton of different questions and some students will be kept waiting as you finish with their classmates.
If you cater to the weak students, strong students become bored out of their mind. Likewise, if you go at a faster speed, weak students have no idea what's going on. The end result usually tends to be striking some distance in the middle, catering to no one. You're bored. They're bored. Everyone's kind of bored.
There's a little buzzword being thrown around in current educational theory, called "differentiated instruction". It's nothing particularly new, but the idea is to find a way to cater to each student (or group of students if you can manage to group them based on ability level) simultaneously, so that you don't end up with students who find a generic lecture too easy or too hard (i.e., having your outlier students "fall through the cracks" of education). It takes practice and more work, but it's an effective way of teaching to everyone. For example, if you're teaching a fifth grade class about fractions, they're going to have different mastery levels. So you break down the instruction into multiple levels that appeal to each student's/ group's current ability: finding common denominators, adding/ subtracting fractions, multiplying/ dividing fractions, operations with 3+ fractions, mixed numbers and improper fractions, decimal and percent conversions, application problems, etc.
How do you effectively teach SAT Math which is basically just algebra and some geometry to a class where 50% are bad at math and 50% are good at math?
You can do the same thing in an SAT prep class, especially since the work is essentially done for you if you have SAT practice books (I prefer to use the College Board big blue books). The SAT has problems that get progressively harder in each section (each section contains around 20 problems), and so as a tutor, you should be learning how to create extensions of problems and transitions between easier and harder ones. You should know the types of questions that the SAT will ask, and find ways to start all the students on a certain problem and then add a second and third part for those who find the first part easy.
I still have no idea how to do it as well as when I tutor an individual. What "Teaching a Test" actually is is helping the student understand how to break down the test in a way that is comfortable for him. Everyone breaks things down differently. Everyone focuses on different details.
It's common knowledge that private tutoring/ teaching is more effective than public (an entire class of) tutoring/ teaching. You can't make teaching a class exactly as helpful as teaching one student, because at the very least, your time is split between other students (so one student won't have your undivided attention like he would in a private session). But differentiated instruction and creating extensions and applications are great ways to appeal to more than one ability level of student at once. In terms of SAT prep, a decent amount of time does go into how to take the test itself, as most students have never taken a test as long or complex as the SAT, and there are special hints and tips to keep in mind (penalized for guessing wrong... except on the fill-ins, when to guess or not to guess, how to find distractor answers, how to pace yourself, etc.).
Finally, there is the idea of a time frame. Most prep classes go from 6 weeks to 9 weeks. Unless you severely dedicate yourself, it's fucking impossible to radically change reading habits, vocabulary habits, general cognitive abilities in the span of six to seven weeks. If you do have the severe dedication to accomplish the feat, it means you have already achieved a certain level of mental maturity and work ethic which the average high school student does not possess.
Prepatory classes (and even tutoring) are not for everyone. They aren't for the students who won't take a weekly grind of extra math (or English or science, etc.) seriously. But if they're willing to make the commitment, you can still get a lot done in a few weeks, especially since you should be assigning them plenty of homework over the 2-3 months you might work with the student. There's not going to be change overnight, but giving them practice tests to pinpoint their weak areas for each subject, and then focusing on them and general strategies to help boost their ability and confidence, can certainly create a positive change in merely a few weeks.
It is hard for me to come up with reasons to take a Prep Class.
As opposed to a private tutor, the reason is almost always money-related. Public tutoring isn't going to be as good as private tutoring, and most parents know that. Your preemptive rebuttal to pricing is "But in that hour [of private tutoring as opposed to public tutoring], much more can be conveyed" and I don't disagree with you, but there are ways to make the proportion learned of public tutoring to class price pretty close to/ competitive with the proportion learned from private tutoring and private price. It just seems like you lack a bit of experience. It gets better and easier with time 
(I've been private tutoring and public tutoring for ten years now, with a particular focus on mathematics and standardized test prep. I'm also a professor and I've taught high school in the past. And I have a bachelor's in math, a master's in math education, and I'm currently working on my PhD in math education. So feel free to ask me anything you want about tutoring or teaching, especially of mathematics; I'd like to think I have a bit of expertise and a lot of experience regarding those subjects )
|
On February 16 2014 22:53 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:husniack, just out of curiosity, what's your background in teaching? You've mentioned that you're a standardized test tutor and that you've taught SAT classes, but have you ever taught in a school? And how long have you been tutoring? The problems with instruction that you're listing are pretty basic, and the fact that you don't have at least theoretic solutions to them make me feel like you don't really have much experience teaching a school classroom. Here are some examples: Show nested quote +With a Prep Class, where you are not learning anything new, it is hard to achieve meaningful cooperation. Usually it's just, "I got B. What'd you get?" "Yeah I got B too." ... Prep Classes don't usually feature student interaction. As the teacher, it's your job to elicit discussion and promote meaningful collaboration (unless you just want to lecture to them, obviously). Whether you want them to work on a problem together, or each do the problem on their own and then compare, it's your job to get a dialogue going if that's what you want. You could try to give three simultaneous private lessons to the three students in your class, but you'll be juggling a ton of different questions and some students will be kept waiting as you finish with their classmates. Show nested quote +If you cater to the weak students, strong students become bored out of their mind. Likewise, if you go at a faster speed, weak students have no idea what's going on. The end result usually tends to be striking some distance in the middle, catering to no one. You're bored. They're bored. Everyone's kind of bored. There's a little buzzword being thrown around in current educational theory, called "differentiated instruction". It's nothing particularly new, but the idea is to find a way to cater to each student (or group of students if you can manage to group them based on ability level) simultaneously, so that you don't end up with students who find a generic lecture too easy or too hard. It takes practice and more work, but it's an effective way of teaching to everyone. For example, if you're teaching a fifth grade class about fractions, they're going to have different mastery levels. So you break down the instruction into multiple levels that appeal to each student's/ group's current ability: finding common denominators, adding/ subtracting fractions, multiplying/ dividing fractions, operations with 3+ fractions, mixed numbers and improper fractions, decimal and percent conversions, application problems, etc. Show nested quote +How do you effectively teach SAT Math which is basically just algebra and some geometry to a class where 50% are bad at math and 50% are good at math? You can do the same thing in an SAT prep class, especially since the work is essentially done for you if you have SAT practice books (I prefer to use the College Board big blue books). The SAT has problems that get progressively harder in each section (each section contains around 20 problems), and so as a tutor, you should be learning how to create extensions of problems and transitions between easier and harder ones. You should know the types of questions that the SAT will ask, and find ways to start all the students on a certain problem and then add a second and third part for those who find the first part easy. Show nested quote +I still have no idea how to do it as well as when I tutor an individual. What "Teaching a Test" actually is is helping the student understand how to break down the test in a way that is comfortable for him. Everyone breaks things down differently. Everyone focuses on different details. It's common knowledge that private tutoring/ teaching is more effective than public (an entire class of) tutoring/ teaching. You can't make teaching a class exactly as helpful as teaching one student, because at the very least, your time is split between other students (so one student won't have your undivided attention like he would in a private session). But differentiated instruction and creating extensions and applications are great ways to appeal to more than one ability level of student at once. In terms of SAT prep, a decent amount of time does go into how to take the test itself, as most students have never taken a test as long or complex as the SAT, and there are special hints and tips to keep in mind (penalized for guessing wrong... except on the fill-ins, when to guess or not to guess, how to find distractor answers, how to pace yourself, etc.). Show nested quote +Finally, there is the idea of a time frame. Most prep classes go from 6 weeks to 9 weeks. Unless you severely dedicate yourself, it's fucking impossible to radically change reading habits, vocabulary habits, general cognitive abilities in the span of six to seven weeks. If you do have the severe dedication to accomplish the feat, it means you have already achieved a certain level of mental maturity and work ethic which the average high school student does not possess. Prepatory classes (and even tutoring) are not for everyone. They aren't for the students who won't take a weekly grind of extra math (or English or science, etc.) seriously. But if they're willing to make the commitment, you can still get a lot done in a few weeks, especially since you should be assigning them plenty of homework over the 2-3 months you might work with the student. There's not going to be change overnight, but giving them practice tests to pinpoint their weak areas for each subject, and then focusing on them and general strategies to help boost their ability and confidence, can certainly create a positive change in merely a few weeks. As opposed to a private tutor, the reason is almost always money-related. Public tutoring isn't going to be as good as private tutoring, and most parents know that. Your preemptive rebuttal to pricing is "But in that hour [of private tutoring as opposed to public tutoring], much more can be conveyed" and I don't disagree with you, but there are ways to make the proportion learned of public tutoring to class price pretty close to/ competitive with the proportion learned from private tutoring and private price. It just seems like you lack a bit of experience. It gets better and easier with time (I've been private tutoring and public tutoring for ten years now, with a particular focus on mathematics and standardized test prep. I'm also a professor and I've taught high school in the past. And I have a bachelor's in math, a master's in math education, and I'm currently working on my PhD in math education. So feel free to ask me anything you want about tutoring or teaching, especially of mathematics; I'd like to think I have a bit of expertise and a lot of experience regarding those subjects )
I can't respond, but I read this and now I feel more educated. Thank you DPB.
|
On February 17 2014 02:26 docvoc wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2014 22:53 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:husniack, just out of curiosity, what's your background in teaching? You've mentioned that you're a standardized test tutor and that you've taught SAT classes, but have you ever taught in a school? And how long have you been tutoring? The problems with instruction that you're listing are pretty basic, and the fact that you don't have at least theoretic solutions to them make me feel like you don't really have much experience teaching a school classroom. Here are some examples: With a Prep Class, where you are not learning anything new, it is hard to achieve meaningful cooperation. Usually it's just, "I got B. What'd you get?" "Yeah I got B too." ... Prep Classes don't usually feature student interaction. As the teacher, it's your job to elicit discussion and promote meaningful collaboration (unless you just want to lecture to them, obviously). Whether you want them to work on a problem together, or each do the problem on their own and then compare, it's your job to get a dialogue going if that's what you want. You could try to give three simultaneous private lessons to the three students in your class, but you'll be juggling a ton of different questions and some students will be kept waiting as you finish with their classmates. If you cater to the weak students, strong students become bored out of their mind. Likewise, if you go at a faster speed, weak students have no idea what's going on. The end result usually tends to be striking some distance in the middle, catering to no one. You're bored. They're bored. Everyone's kind of bored. There's a little buzzword being thrown around in current educational theory, called "differentiated instruction". It's nothing particularly new, but the idea is to find a way to cater to each student (or group of students if you can manage to group them based on ability level) simultaneously, so that you don't end up with students who find a generic lecture too easy or too hard. It takes practice and more work, but it's an effective way of teaching to everyone. For example, if you're teaching a fifth grade class about fractions, they're going to have different mastery levels. So you break down the instruction into multiple levels that appeal to each student's/ group's current ability: finding common denominators, adding/ subtracting fractions, multiplying/ dividing fractions, operations with 3+ fractions, mixed numbers and improper fractions, decimal and percent conversions, application problems, etc. How do you effectively teach SAT Math which is basically just algebra and some geometry to a class where 50% are bad at math and 50% are good at math? You can do the same thing in an SAT prep class, especially since the work is essentially done for you if you have SAT practice books (I prefer to use the College Board big blue books). The SAT has problems that get progressively harder in each section (each section contains around 20 problems), and so as a tutor, you should be learning how to create extensions of problems and transitions between easier and harder ones. You should know the types of questions that the SAT will ask, and find ways to start all the students on a certain problem and then add a second and third part for those who find the first part easy. I still have no idea how to do it as well as when I tutor an individual. What "Teaching a Test" actually is is helping the student understand how to break down the test in a way that is comfortable for him. Everyone breaks things down differently. Everyone focuses on different details. It's common knowledge that private tutoring/ teaching is more effective than public (an entire class of) tutoring/ teaching. You can't make teaching a class exactly as helpful as teaching one student, because at the very least, your time is split between other students (so one student won't have your undivided attention like he would in a private session). But differentiated instruction and creating extensions and applications are great ways to appeal to more than one ability level of student at once. In terms of SAT prep, a decent amount of time does go into how to take the test itself, as most students have never taken a test as long or complex as the SAT, and there are special hints and tips to keep in mind (penalized for guessing wrong... except on the fill-ins, when to guess or not to guess, how to find distractor answers, how to pace yourself, etc.). Finally, there is the idea of a time frame. Most prep classes go from 6 weeks to 9 weeks. Unless you severely dedicate yourself, it's fucking impossible to radically change reading habits, vocabulary habits, general cognitive abilities in the span of six to seven weeks. If you do have the severe dedication to accomplish the feat, it means you have already achieved a certain level of mental maturity and work ethic which the average high school student does not possess. Prepatory classes (and even tutoring) are not for everyone. They aren't for the students who won't take a weekly grind of extra math (or English or science, etc.) seriously. But if they're willing to make the commitment, you can still get a lot done in a few weeks, especially since you should be assigning them plenty of homework over the 2-3 months you might work with the student. There's not going to be change overnight, but giving them practice tests to pinpoint their weak areas for each subject, and then focusing on them and general strategies to help boost their ability and confidence, can certainly create a positive change in merely a few weeks. It is hard for me to come up with reasons to take a Prep Class. As opposed to a private tutor, the reason is almost always money-related. Public tutoring isn't going to be as good as private tutoring, and most parents know that. Your preemptive rebuttal to pricing is "But in that hour [of private tutoring as opposed to public tutoring], much more can be conveyed" and I don't disagree with you, but there are ways to make the proportion learned of public tutoring to class price pretty close to/ competitive with the proportion learned from private tutoring and private price. It just seems like you lack a bit of experience. It gets better and easier with time (I've been private tutoring and public tutoring for ten years now, with a particular focus on mathematics and standardized test prep. I'm also a professor and I've taught high school in the past. And I have a bachelor's in math, a master's in math education, and I'm currently working on my PhD in math education. So feel free to ask me anything you want about tutoring or teaching, especially of mathematics; I'd like to think I have a bit of expertise and a lot of experience regarding those subjects ) I can't respond, but I read this and now I feel more educated. Thank you DPB.
Any time
I'd be happy to get into more specifics if other questions about teaching and tutoring are asked.
|
On February 16 2014 18:29 Jerubaal wrote:
Your whole post seems almost tautological. Your mistake, I think, though, is thinking that everyone needs a tutor. No doubt a tutor would be more effective for nearly everyone, but the average student probably doesn't NEED a tutor. If you're lost in a prep class, maybe you should pay the fuck attention in class or buy a book.
Yeah, I should have worded it better as: If you want to pay for assistance, I'd advocate paying a tutor over a class.
@DarkPlasmaball - Thanks for the in-depth response. I don't have any formal teaching training, but I do like teaching and thinking about it. My background: In undergrad, I started teaching SAT prep and giving chem review sessions / personal tutoring and it has continued for a few years now.
There's a little buzzword being thrown around in current educational theory, called "differentiated instruction".
I can see how this works in elementary school. How do you do this if you're teaching high school AP Calculus - where ideally, by May, everyone is prepared for the test?
How do you effectively teach SAT Math which is basically just algebra and some geometry to a class where 50% are bad at math and 50% are good at math? Show nested quote +You can do the same thing in an SAT prep class, especially since the work is essentially done for you if you have SAT practice books (I prefer to use the College Board big blue books). The SAT has problems that get progressively harder in each section (each section contains around 20 problems), and so as a tutor, you should be learning how to create extensions of problems and transitions between easier and harder ones. You should know the types of questions that the SAT will ask, and find ways to start all the students on a certain problem and then add a second and third part for those who find the first part easy.
The idea here is to let the good students ascend the harder difficulty questions and give easier questions to the weak students. I'm not sure how this can be considered effective though as easy questions will not prepare them for the harder tiers of the test. I have done this in the past, "sacrificing" them out of convenience.
|
All you can do is cater to the "strong." If the "weak" are worth their weight in salt they'll realize their performance is inadequate.
For me it was the fear that I was a total dumbass that effected me negatively. Indeed I was bad, but I would have been better if they just gave me easier shit. People who are bad jus need to admit it and take some easier work.
|
On February 17 2014 04:22 husniack wrote:@DarkPlasmaball - Thanks for the in-depth response. I don't have any formal teaching training, but I do like teaching and thinking about it. My background: In undergrad, I started teaching SAT prep and giving chem review sessions / personal tutoring and it has continued for a few years now. Show nested quote + There's a little buzzword being thrown around in current educational theory, called "differentiated instruction". I can see how this works in elementary school. How do you do this if you're teaching high school AP Calculus - where ideally, by May, everyone is prepared for the test?
I'm actually creating a calculus powerpoint for my class at this very moment, so that's a perfectly timed question ^^ I'm just starting the unit on differentiation, and I'm introducing all the derivative rules (product, quotient, power, chain, e^x, trig., etc.) little by little. And I'm creating a whole list of problems that span a broad spectrum of difficulty. When you create math problems, you can make them as simple or as intricate as you want. You can test for comprehension of just one rule or the synthesis of multiple rules. You can use multiple terms or just a pair. You can use nice integer values or start including irrational numbers. Et cetera.
Show nested quote + How do you effectively teach SAT Math which is basically just algebra and some geometry to a class where 50% are bad at math and 50% are good at math? You can do the same thing in an SAT prep class, especially since the work is essentially done for you if you have SAT practice books (I prefer to use the College Board big blue books). The SAT has problems that get progressively harder in each section (each section contains around 20 problems), and so as a tutor, you should be learning how to create extensions of problems and transitions between easier and harder ones. You should know the types of questions that the SAT will ask, and find ways to start all the students on a certain problem and then add a second and third part for those who find the first part easy. The idea here is to let the good students ascend the harder difficulty questions and give easier questions to the weak students. I'm not sure how this can be considered effective though as easy questions will not prepare them for the harder tiers of the test. I have done this in the past, "sacrificing" them out of convenience.
The weaker students need to learn the easier material first, whereas the stronger students can move to the more difficult questions faster. Ideally, the weaker students will still eventually get to the more difficult questions over time, but it's obviously going to take them longer. Recognizing that different students will learn (and improve) at different rates, and accommodating them accordingly, does not mean we're "sacrificing" the weaker or slower ones. It just means they need more practice.
It seems to me like you're assuming that every weak student should end up exactly where every strong student is going to end up, over the same period of time, and that's simply not going to be the case. What you should be looking for is improvement that's proportional to their current ability and scores. So if a student just got a 500 on his SAT Math, he may very well get up to a 600 next time... but it would be an anomaly if he hit a perfect 800 next time, which would actually be a reachable goal for a different student who just got a 720 on his SAT Math. Your goals for each student should be based on previous performance and proportional objectives. The students are going to start out at different levels of comprehension, and they're going to end at different levels as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
