Samson
Póg Mo Thóin
Education, like many social "sciences" faces a particular limitation on testing theories; it is impossible to isolate variables and provide rigorous, reproducible tests of theories. Too often the "theory" which is now touted was a success only because of the particular combination of teacher, administration and students. When it is applied by the masses of teachers it only results in confusion; something along the lines of the military axiom- Order, Counter Order, Disorder.One man's crackpot theory is another man's Law of Gravity. The whole purpose of academia is to render forth "Crack-pot" theories.
Yes.
Not sure what point you're making?
Should social sciences NOT test theories?
No, but holding back the underachievers is the only way to instill a sense of consequence in some students. If the weakest half of the students failed, as they probably should, only the entry level would be hit with extra students, and then only for a year because the students, held to standards, would adapt.Hmmm..........so, you wanna teach a classroom of Johnny's?
There is no evidence to support your assertaion that holding back underachievers will do anything but allow them to more concretely define themselves as underachievers.
But, let's imagine that threatening underachievers with underachievement might motivate and underachiever.
And let's imagine that teachers who have a underachieving student for 9 months, cannot wait to get another crack at them AGAIN.
And let's imagine classrooms have unlimited space in which to deposite underachievers.
And let's imagine parents of underachieving students will be just tickled pink to pick up their living expenses for an additional year of public schooling.
You've already pointed out the difficulties associated with having Special Ed kids in a room already full of "normals." Don't you think that having an 8th grader that's beginning to shave (or worse) might be distracting in a 6th grade class?
Last edited: