Heather, thanks for sending that article to us. It's quite relevant to the discussions we've been having lately.
One of the author's points makes me wonder, though...Kathleen Kennedy Manzo cites the following information as an argument in support of the idea that canonical texts are somehow no longer serving students' needs:
"Reading scores on national tests may reflect students’ dissatisfaction with the content of their English classes. On the latest 12th grade National Assessment of Educational Progress, one-fourth of students tested could not demonstrate even basic skills on the test of reading comprehension and text analysis. Another third scored at the basic level, which requires overall understanding of text excerpts, as well as some interpretation and analysis."
So, if one-fourth (or three-twelfths) of students are below average (or basic), and one-third (or four-twelfths) of students are average (or at the basic level), doesn't that mean that five-twelfths (or almost half) of the students are above average? I fail to see why this information is alarming. It sounds like a pretty regular distribution to me.
If I'm missing something here, please let me know. Any thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment