There are things that we assume by inertia or disguise themselves represent progress when the most deeply conservative theories we can find in education.
In the thirteenth century “lesson” meant “a reading aloud of the Bible” … and even also worth reading anything else, as long as it was written by scholars wiser than us and we, mere mortals! Well, it’s hard to escape our history and we do not claim, much less escape our culture. The fact is that, in the thirteenth century, the lesson was a very progressive thing and a breakthrough, but today it just means the delivery and passive reception of information. Visit http://generationguy.com/ for more info.
Knowledge is power and we will not deny; the problem is just the definition of “knowledge” that we handle. If knowledge is passive reception, linked to the previous point, without trying to attack the very noble “for love of knowledge”, do not believe that such an attitude lacking critical thinking is what is best for our students, sons and daughters.
The rigor is important, provided they are not necessarily associated with the monotony, and other intellectual honesty. The rigor should not mean the need to memorize tons of diligence information, information, information … and puke on a test. The rigor is what gives way to critical thinking and see it rather as a mix between good argumentative capacity, not fallacious, critical use of the data, analysis and synthesis capacity and honesty. Almost nothing…
Teamwork / collaborative
Does memorization is difficult and do group work, communication and collaboration imply, is make it easy for the students? Think about it, because it seems a vision “somewhat” distorted reality: group work is very difficult and collaborative work is as half as an end, not an add simple.
Good / as and bad / is students
The truth is that it is shocking eagerness to label all students according to some criteria as random as it is a teaching system anchored 100 years ago; In addition, the Pygmalion effect shines brightly before our value judgments. Define someone as “bad student” also makes him something that “is” permanent and unchangeable : we must pay attention to how we define our students and have consider our great responsibility as teachers in the self – image that will form themselves. So, we ignore their needs and we take off, too, our other great responsibility: to enable each student to learn the optimal way according to their needs and possibilities; and those learning needs us and we must meet them, indeed.
Children 6 years playing longer hours and have less structured activities have higher executive skills.
That people are diverse in their skills, cognition, ways of thinking, social, cultural, economic, etc … should not be an excuse to try to label and classify students as if they were vegetables…
Continue to study in summer
WHAT? To keep pace? Is the pace of what? Is there fear of forgetting bits of data and information? Is there fear to rest? If the information is forgotten in August is that “hatched” he memorized the more mechanically and he or the student was to approve your subject and go to the pool to forget without having, even, understood: the problem then no data will be lost, as if you were a USB stick, on the beach, but the teaching methodology is little didactic.
You may also like to read another article on WeiWeiCS: How to teach students of emotional management?
If you learn is not forgotten in years but less even, in a couple of months. Everything has its time and leisure is essential for mental and physical health of anyone, even a teenager.
It is education for non-normal people, for people who do not fit the standard script that dictates what the good students. The direction to follow would address needs, and so has been reconsidering some years, and not so much an essentialist conception: it is not the same ‘special educational needs’, which serves to form better or worse to the inevitable diversity in the classroom compulsory education, which “special education” which normally is anything but inclusive.
It is very useful, of course: but disclosure is vulgarized by overemphasizing the mere cognition and neglects the mechanisms of emotional regulation, motivation, flexibility, empathy, etc.