There’s something exceptionally important about the design flaws of the two most popular curricula in K-12 education:
👉 They track children in kindergarten.
That makes them structurally ableist, and some would say racist.
Let’s unpack.
👉 They track children in kindergarten.
That makes them structurally ableist, and some would say racist.
Let’s unpack.
https://twitter.com/karenvaites/status/1493589461057290246
The main reason kids don’t get enough work with books at their grade level:
These curricula put kids into leveled reading groups, in which they do their literacy lessons with books at that level.
When you go into classrooms, you find kids in low, medium, and high groups.
These curricula put kids into leveled reading groups, in which they do their literacy lessons with books at that level.
When you go into classrooms, you find kids in low, medium, and high groups.
It’s treated like a smart, even scientific approach.
But there is zero evidence that it works, and compelling evidence that challenging all kids with books at their grade level develops reading skills more effectively. More info summarized here:
eduvaites.org/2019/11/02/lev…
But there is zero evidence that it works, and compelling evidence that challenging all kids with books at their grade level develops reading skills more effectively. More info summarized here:
eduvaites.org/2019/11/02/lev…
The reality with these programs:
Kids who start below grade level tend to end the year below grade level.
And they get sorted into these groups in every year, starting in kindergarten.
👉 That’s tracking.
Kids who start below grade level tend to end the year below grade level.
And they get sorted into these groups in every year, starting in kindergarten.
👉 That’s tracking.
The movement to get these programs out of schools is an equity movement.
Less privileged kids and kids with disabilities are unsurprisingly heavily represented in the low-level groups. The tracking ensures they stay there.
It’s obscene when you think about it.
Less privileged kids and kids with disabilities are unsurprisingly heavily represented in the low-level groups. The tracking ensures they stay there.
It’s obscene when you think about it.
https://twitter.com/kjwineducation/status/1349423938783248384
So, all those parents, including parents in San Francisco, who are fighting for better curriculum are on a social justice mission.
They meet resistance from district leadership / a school board that claims to be all about equity and social justice, yet keeps this curriculum.
They meet resistance from district leadership / a school board that claims to be all about equity and social justice, yet keeps this curriculum.
https://twitter.com/mgpotente/status/1482655457638502408
When you get into the details, there’s a lot of jaw-dropping stuff.
The tests that are used to assign kids’ reading levels are horribly flawed. @DrMPaff just explained in a webinar last night.
So you really have to ask what’s so science-y about the whole thing.
The tests that are used to assign kids’ reading levels are horribly flawed. @DrMPaff just explained in a webinar last night.
So you really have to ask what’s so science-y about the whole thing.
https://twitter.com/karenvaites/status/1494127345745248256
In any case, this tracking approach is built into the 2 most popular curricula (Reading Workshop, @FountasPinnell), but it's prevalent in other programs and also teacher norms in districts with DIY curriculum.
EdWeek: it's in 70-80% of US elem schools.
edweek.org/ew/articles/20…
EdWeek: it's in 70-80% of US elem schools.
edweek.org/ew/articles/20…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
