An article by Jay Mathews in today’s Washington Post discusses a recent study by Robert Rothman in the Harvard Education Letter. According to Rothman (via Mathews), the study suggests that student gains do not necessarily correlate with the type of activities in different classrooms. In other words, regardless of the type of instruction that students experience (higher level or lower level), student gains are based on some “x” factor other than the type of instruction they receive. I beg to differ, but not because of the performance that students exhibit on standardized tests or the growth that they earn in one school year.
I believe that there is a crucial difference in student gains depending on the level of activities they receive in the classroom. I also believe that the study is 100% accurate. I simply think that in the long run, students who bear witness to higher-levels of thinking are able to make stronger connections and transfer knowledge to other facets of life. Developmental learning is a marathon; not a sprint. The fact that it does not happen overnight is NOT a rationale for why we should stop caring about the level of rigor that students experience in our classrooms. It simply means we must be cognizant of the fact that a lack of rapid development might not impede future development and simply emphasizes a need for more support.
Think of it this way. At one point in time, Albert Pujols could not even come close to hitting a 90 mile per hour fastball. He gradually built his skills up to the point where a pitch at this speed was common and natural to his physical and cognitive abilities. Obviously, Pujols is a gifted athlete with a very rare skillset, but feel free to insert any Triple-A baseball player in that spot and you have the same output.
Post Footer automatically generated by Add Post Footer Plugin for wordpress.
0 Comments.