3 ms·
Grouping children by age is silly, of course, but maybe it's preferable to grouping "by level of intelligence". Why? First, you need to teach to the level per
by david927 13y ago
Grouping children by age is silly, of course, but maybe it's preferable to grouping "by level of intelligence". Why? First, you need to teach to the level per activity. A child that excels at reading may be slower at math, one that is good at math might be poor in art. And each child will have a different response to different teaching methods.
What we're looking for is individualized learning, where possible.
For example, I think it's crazy for teachers to lecture, when the best lecturers for any field can be found on-line. Why listen to someone drone on about the Battle of Hastings when you can have a professor who is passionate about exactly that doing the talking? Children should have the ability to explore topics and listen to lectures individually, moving at their own speed, and then come together to do group activities in class.
- caw 13y ago> First, you need to teach to the level per activity. This can be accomplished. Imagine you have a set of similar students by age, say Kindergarten - 2nd grade. Imagine that you have 4 classrooms and 4 teachers, each with a particular subject (math, science, reading/writing, geography/history). Each teacher teaches the same subject at multiple levels. Then you just send the student to the skill appropriate class. If you were to take classes above your age determined grade, it'd basically be like skipping a grade. If you're at your age level for learning, there's no difference. But for everyone in between they get a mix of more advanced learning where they need it. I may or may not have had first hand experience with this model
- JoeAltmaier 13y agoRight. Teaching depends upon age level - attention span, available concepts to build on, interests. I have dealt with boys for years as a Scout leader, and age matters a lot when determining the teaching approach.