A blog for members of PS460 and PS308, Wartburg College, 2013 and 2014 (and specially designated associates who are deemed worthy of membership in this exclusive club by members themselves). The aim is to facilitate conversation between class members between classes.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
College After 10th Grade?
I thought this article from today's NYT was interesting. What does everyone think?
I just checked my email and realized that DT sent out this exact article. Whoops! I should have checked beforehand. Nonetheless, I'm still interested in people's opinions as to whether or not this is a good move?
I'm having trouble articulating my exact thoughts on this, and i'm a little confused about exactly how it would work, but basically I don't see why this is considered new. If there are programs that get students up to college levels, then they should be taught. Why would anything else be taught? It just seems like a minor adjustment to a broken system.
This concept seems pretty good. It allows students to move on to college when they are ready instead of being trapped in school a standard period of time, which should help them in college as less knowledge may be lost in the transition.
At least one negative I considered though. This program seems to be over promoting specialization to some degree.
I understand that students have to be tested in multiple areas, but the concept seems to push students to concentrate in a certain trade instead of exploring other options more fully.
Although specialization may be great to get a job, it could serious limit their perspective on many other things and not make them as well-rounded a person for the rest of their lives.
I share the concern that Joe raises about specialization, but I think that those who are on the college/ professional career path will not be affected. However, the students who otherwise might not see themselves as taking the path towards a college education can benefit greatly from this program, and it could give them some concrete career aspirations.
I would also wonder how getting on the "fast track" could affect a student's social development.
I agree with Sam's comments about specialization, but I shared the same reservations about the developmental aspect. Are kids missing out on the social interaction that high school has to offer, and are they developmentally prepared for the community college classroom at age 15-16 just because some entrance exams deem them as cognitively qualified? It will be interesting to follow up on this as it goes into effect.
If students want to get done early, I believe this is already an option. I also have concerns about specialization. This approach makes it seem like being in school is what should be shortened. This could send the wrong message. On the other hand, students who don't enjoy being in the high school setting could move onto higher level academics more quickly. I can't say this is definitvely a positive option.
I just checked my email and realized that DT sent out this exact article. Whoops! I should have checked beforehand. Nonetheless, I'm still interested in people's opinions as to whether or not this is a good move?
ReplyDeleteI'm having trouble articulating my exact thoughts on this, and i'm a little confused about exactly how it would work, but basically I don't see why this is considered new. If there are programs that get students up to college levels, then they should be taught. Why would anything else be taught? It just seems like a minor adjustment to a broken system.
ReplyDeleteThis concept seems pretty good. It allows students to move on to college when they are ready instead of being trapped in school a standard period of time, which should help them in college as less knowledge may be lost in the transition.
ReplyDeleteAt least one negative I considered though. This program seems to be over promoting specialization to some degree.
I understand that students have to be tested in multiple areas, but the concept seems to push students to concentrate in a certain trade instead of exploring other options more fully.
Although specialization may be great to get a job, it could serious limit their perspective on many other things and not make them as well-rounded a person for the rest of their lives.
I share the concern that Joe raises about specialization, but I think that those who are on the college/ professional career path will not be affected. However, the students who otherwise might not see themselves as taking the path towards a college education can benefit greatly from this program, and it could give them some concrete career aspirations.
ReplyDeleteI would also wonder how getting on the "fast track" could affect a student's social development.
I agree with Sam's comments about specialization, but I shared the same reservations about the developmental aspect. Are kids missing out on the social interaction that high school has to offer, and are they developmentally prepared for the community college classroom at age 15-16 just because some entrance exams deem them as cognitively qualified? It will be interesting to follow up on this as it goes into effect.
ReplyDeleteIf students want to get done early, I believe this is already an option. I also have concerns about specialization. This approach makes it seem like being in school is what should be shortened. This could send the wrong message. On the other hand, students who don't enjoy being in the high school setting could move onto higher level academics more quickly. I can't say this is definitvely a positive option.
ReplyDelete