Promotion, appropriateness and placement

Regular readers and colleagues will know that I believe in developmentally-appropriate programming and am against birthday-based class assignments. Other than in some large cities, and the independent school sector, the typical approach is the latter which precludes the former. So for many families, the best option for "advanced" students, formerly known as "Gifted and Talented" and today often called "curious" (I kid you not!), is acceleration or skipping a grade. However, a recent study suggests that this is not without risk. 

Gifted, possibly not, but why can´t public school meet her needs?

UK parents claim that their child is gifted, that the public system cannot meet her needs and that their only option is to go to the private sector. This raises so many questions.

Dual-enrolment is a great idea

I had breakfast with a former colleague this morning. I say breakfast, but it would have been more accurately described as lunch. She was telling me about the dual-enrolment program at her local school and I confessed to being a fan although my dual-enrolment experience was different. It was for elementary students.

One size fits all does not

Regular readers will know that I believe in developmentally appropriate teaching and learning which has a direct effect on grade or class placement. I disagree with putting children in classes based on random dates of birth which are unrelated to what a child can do and/or for whcih s/he is ready, leads to gaming the system through red-shirting and is a recipe for disaffection and a lack of engagement when a child is placed too "low" or too "high". So what is better?

Play-based or experiential learning versus play

A few years ago I was at a meeting of the local NAEYC affiliate and listened to several of the attendees ramble on about "play" and play-based programs and play being a toddler's "work". All seemed smug and supercilious, and one sneered at what she called "academic" pre-schools. Needless to say, not one defined her terms.

Learning to read

You probably know that in Germany and Finland, formal reading instruction begins in G2 whereas in the UK and the US it begins in K. The fundamental consideration here is not student capability vis-a-vis reading per se, but philosophy re teaching and learning for children aged birth to 7. The important thing is that neither view of reading is right or wrong, nor is it the final answer. Both must be a part of an holistic view of education. In mine, reading starts in the first year of PK or around age three.