3 ms·

Do any primary schools use the mastery learning method? Why don't all schools use it?

jrumbut 5y ago
I had it for a class in college and it was an absolute nightmare for me. This was from someone well known in mastery learning so I don't think it was poor implementation. The only thing I learned was empathy for people who struggle that way with the typical mode of instruction (which works very well for me).
- mleonhard 5y ago
  Would you please tell me more about your experience?
ofou 5y ago
Khan Academy
hexane360 5y ago
I've seen middle schools integrate Aleks (https://www.aleks.com/ https://www.aleks.com/) online learning along with regular math classes. I don't have the data to know how successful it was at bringing the lower tail of the distribution up, but it was great for kids who were smart and motivated by the material. Some were even able to complete two years' worth of curriculum and test out of their next math class.
- selimthegrim 5y ago
  UCSB uses it I think too
barry-cotter 5y ago
Schools are set up for the convenience of the people who work there. Mastery learning is a nightmare. Differentiated learning is really hard because you have to teach what amount to three classes at the same time. Mastery learning is worse because you have to try and teach as many classes as there are students. I exaggerate but you get the point. I know of absolutely no examples of schools using mastery learning. The school I'm in moved to streaming English classes by ability for grades 6,7,8 (Foundation) into A,B,C,D and 9 into A,B,C. Teaching the Foundation classes works ok but I can see why so many teachers hate streaming. Teaching lots of low ability/motivation students is unbelievably dispiriting. Low ability students you can at least help but if you're teaching them something they don't care about, like most teachers do for most of every class then low motivation students are hell to teach. Schools are mostly child care and ranking by academic ability. Education is secomdary. Mastery learning is really hard and would reqire a wholesale reorganisation of schools. That's a large part of why it isn't done.
- mleonhard 5y ago
  Please don't exaggerate. Mastery learning doesn't have to be harder than regular teaching. It just requires the teacher to split the class after each quiz and spend some time teaching remedial content to the under-performing group. I think your point is that teachers don't like teaching unmotivated students so they ignore mastery learning programs. Many Charter schools are specifically set up to teach under-performers. Why do those schools ignore mastery learning?
  - barry-cotter 5y ago
    > Mastery learning doesn't have to be harder than regular teaching. It just requires the teacher to split the class after each quiz and spend some time teaching remedial content to the under-performing group. This very easily leads to teaching three different grade levels of material. If you have a larger class the spread can very easily be even bigger. This is why ed schools emphasise enrichment over acceleration. You cannot teach a class where most of the class is doing Grade 6 material, three are doing Grade 9, two aren't really ready for Grade 5 and one kid is doing Grade 11. > I think your point is that teachers don't like teaching unmotivated students so they ignore mastery learning programs. Not really. I don't think mastery learning is necessarily harder than age based classes but it would require at minimum a complete reorganisation of how schools work. You would have to abandon age based classes altogether. > Many Charter schools are specifically set up to teach under-performers. Why do those schools ignore mastery learning? It's weird. The teachers don't want it. There's no demand for it.
    - mleonhard 5y ago
      Are we talking about the same Mastery Learning as described in the article? Can you please explain why Mastery Learning requires teaching different grade levels to the same class? My understanding is that all students study the same material, take a quiz, then the ones who aced it get to study whatever they want for the rest of the period and the ones who didn't ace it must listen to more lecture and discuss the content with the teacher and take another quiz. Where are the multiple grade levels of material? > it would require at minimum a complete reorganisation of how schools work. You would have to abandon age based classes altogether. Can you please explain this?

I had it for a class in college and it was an absolute nightmare for me. This was from someone well known in mastery learning so I don't think it was poor implementation. The only thing I learned was empathy for people who struggle that way with the typical mode of instruction (which works very well for me).

mleonhard 5y ago
Would you please tell me more about your experience?

ofou 5y ago

Khan Academy

hexane360 5y ago

I've seen middle schools integrate Aleks (https://www.aleks.com/ https://www.aleks.com/) online learning along with regular math classes. I don't have the data to know how successful it was at bringing the lower tail of the distribution up, but it was great for kids who were smart and motivated by the material. Some were even able to complete two years' worth of curriculum and test out of their next math class.

selimthegrim 5y ago
UCSB uses it I think too

barry-cotter 5y ago

Schools are set up for the convenience of the people who work there. Mastery learning is a nightmare. Differentiated learning is really hard because you have to teach what amount to three classes at the same time. Mastery learning is worse because you have to try and teach as many classes as there are students. I exaggerate but you get the point. I know of absolutely no examples of schools using mastery learning. The school I'm in moved to streaming English classes by ability for grades 6,7,8 (Foundation) into A,B,C,D and 9 into A,B,C. Teaching the Foundation classes works ok but I can see why so many teachers hate streaming. Teaching lots of low ability/motivation students is unbelievably dispiriting. Low ability students you can at least help but if you're teaching them something they don't care about, like most teachers do for most of every class then low motivation students are hell to teach. Schools are mostly child care and ranking by academic ability. Education is secomdary. Mastery learning is really hard and would reqire a wholesale reorganisation of schools. That's a large part of why it isn't done.

mleonhard 5y ago
Please don't exaggerate. Mastery learning doesn't have to be harder than regular teaching. It just requires the teacher to split the class after each quiz and spend some time teaching remedial content to the under-performing group. I think your point is that teachers don't like teaching unmotivated students so they ignore mastery learning programs. Many Charter schools are specifically set up to teach under-performers. Why do those schools ignore mastery learning?
- barry-cotter 5y ago
  > Mastery learning doesn't have to be harder than regular teaching. It just requires the teacher to split the class after each quiz and spend some time teaching remedial content to the under-performing group. This very easily leads to teaching three different grade levels of material. If you have a larger class the spread can very easily be even bigger. This is why ed schools emphasise enrichment over acceleration. You cannot teach a class where most of the class is doing Grade 6 material, three are doing Grade 9, two aren't really ready for Grade 5 and one kid is doing Grade 11. > I think your point is that teachers don't like teaching unmotivated students so they ignore mastery learning programs. Not really. I don't think mastery learning is necessarily harder than age based classes but it would require at minimum a complete reorganisation of how schools work. You would have to abandon age based classes altogether. > Many Charter schools are specifically set up to teach under-performers. Why do those schools ignore mastery learning? It's weird. The teachers don't want it. There's no demand for it.
  - mleonhard 5y ago
    Are we talking about the same Mastery Learning as described in the article? Can you please explain why Mastery Learning requires teaching different grade levels to the same class? My understanding is that all students study the same material, take a quiz, then the ones who aced it get to study whatever they want for the rest of the period and the ones who didn't ace it must listen to more lecture and discuss the content with the teacher and take another quiz. Where are the multiple grade levels of material? > it would require at minimum a complete reorganisation of how schools work. You would have to abandon age based classes altogether. Can you please explain this?