<p>Our local high school is proposing changing the current set up from offering standard and honors classes in 9th and 10th grade to offering only honors classes with heterogeneous grouping. This means that all students will be in the same classes (except for math) no matter what classes they’ve had before or how well they did in those classes. All incoming 9th graders next year will have honors English, honors Bio, and honor US History.</p>
<p>Does anyone have this at your high school and if so, how is it going? </p>
<p>Can I get thoughts/questions from parents even if you do not have heterogeneous grouping?</p>
<p>I don’t think heterogeneous grouping works very well at the middle or high school level. It’s not like elementary school, where the teacher can work with one group of students while other groups complete written assignments. In middle and high school, most of the class time is supposed to be devoted to lecture and discussion, with most of the written work completed at home. So how do you group?</p>
<p>When my son was in middle school, they experimented with heterogeneous grouping for science and social studies. What ended up happening is that the students were allowed to spend a considerable amount of time in class “getting started” on their homework, so that the teacher could work with one group at a time. The kids liked it because they often finished their homework in class, but the downside was that the class covered less material during the year than they would have in a more conventional setting.</p>
<p>I am completely against heterogeneous grouping for most classes. The issue is not all about the ability level of the students, but also about the desire/interest levels of the students. I have no doubt that a class of students at different ability levels that are all interested in content and learning heterogeneous might work. Our experience has been that class time ends up being eaten up by behavior problems. And I would piggyback on what Marian stated about homework in class. The upper level students end up “helping” the lower level students without much direction or instruction from the teacher. Additional issue is grading expectations. If you have a mixed ability class, how do you grade and test appropriate to a students academic level?</p>
<p>Exactly what we are worried about. We have very many talented teachers at our school, but how can you differentiate instruction for that wide of ability/desire? Teachers typically already have some range in any class; standard, honor and AP. </p>
<p>The proposed solution for this is tiered assignments, meaning different kids get different assignments depending on their reading level and then the question of grading comes into play. What’s an A? B? You’re not doing the same level of work. Apparently it all depends on what the teacher thinks you capable of so an A is capability dependent. Sounds awful to me and sets up so many problems.</p>
<p>We live in Canada. The curriculum is standardized across highschools, at the provincial level. With the exception of math, for the most part everyone takes the same curriculum, writes the same provincial exams. It seems to work just fine. Students are no less prepared for university (and in fact, the top 5% of Canadian students do significantly better than the top 5% of of American students on tests such as the PISA).</p>
<p>True Starbright - we could get better at having all of our classes more rigorous, but still think there is room for higher level work on some kids part.</p>
<p>If all incoming frosh have the honors “core,” then what is in place to keep it an honors curriculum? It then becomes the standard curriculum. How can there be an “honors” (accelerated) when there is nothing standard to compare it to?
Instruction is going to have to be modified to address the lower-performing students and, as in heterogeneous grouping in elementary/middle school, the higher-performing students will be waiting for the others to catch up.
Anyone who has had a child in honors vs. standard knows honors comes with a significant difference in level of material, it isn’t just a label and not all students are capable of working at that level. At that, even fewer are equally advanced in math vs. science vs. english.
Maybe I don’t understand the new setup. Am I missing something here?</p>
<p>Water down curriculum is all you are going to get. Once again every child needs a trophy for participation. </p>
<p>Our county is doing away with stardard level and making it honors. This means the new honors will really be taught at standard level with the higher weight for gpa. More kids will try to avoid the bad behavior kids by taking AP and these classes will be water down. On top of this change our high school is an E free zone.</p>
<p>Many high schools are trying to address the problem of tracking by creating heterogeneous grouping and calling it whatever name they want. It results in an educational system that does not work for anyone. The brighter kids are bored by the watered down curriculum, the struggling kids continue to struggle or act out because they are frustrated, and the teachers are more stressed out trying to differentiate and meet the needs of too many children. </p>
<p>In our school district, middle school classes were heterogeneously grouped except for math, and most bright kids were outrageously bored. Many left the district if their parents could afford private school. Those who got to h.s. were relieved that honors and A.P. classes existed and there was finally an opportunity to learn at a pace that met their needs. Ability grouping is not elitist - it’s the right thing for all kids. Just my two cents.</p>
<p>It’s different because magnets and private high schools are not expected to serve everyone. Many of them have selective admissions and can choose to only admit students who can handle honors work. In the case of open-admissions magnets, the school can state during the admissions process that all students will be expected to do honors-level work and that if this doesn’t work out for a particular student, that student will be expected to transfer back into the regular program.</p>
<p>The way the school is electing to try and serve all students in one classroom is with tiered assignments. For example, in govt class some kids would read New York Times, some Wall Street Journal and some USA today with differing assignments. In bio, advanced kids would get a blank sheet with the directions to explain meiosis versus mitosis whereas another student would have a chart with parts filled in but they have to fill in the rest. Like that. Some kids needing more help/higher level reading to get to the same end result.</p>
<p>And teacher needs three heads. Why is it better to have three classes in one versus one for each level?? Makes no sense accept for “self-esteem”. Kids KNOW where they fall.</p>
<p>This is a public high school, with a magnet IB program. Very
wide range of achievement within the school. PS this seems a good time to ask
what is OP? I figure that’s me, but…</p>
<p>I would think if this was done at a public school it would just slow everything down.</p>
<p>The kids that shouldn’t be in these honors classes will just be holding back the students that should be and diluting the attention of the teacher. </p>
<p>This is a horrible idea. If the students that aren’t in honors classes now really wanted to be in them they would, they would try harded. Forcing these students on the actual honors students won’t make them any smarter.</p>