iaskedalice09
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2007
- Messages
- 56
- Reaction score
- 0
Personally, I am vehemently against it in all education, but especially Deaf ed, where many students read English as a second language.
My other gripes about it include: lack of higher level thinking questions (analysis? Socratic method?), the fact that it does not ask questions connected to the "big picture" of the book, and that in my old Honours English class where it was used, it actually boosted cheating.
I think it is often used to SUBSTITUTE teaching and I hate that. My soph English class used no AR, and was basically just a free-form discussion of the book we were reading using the Socratic method. Students that didn't like reading for pleasure started showing interest and each student's analysis skills was bolstered.
I took Accelerated English in 8th grade. Basically, it is 8th grade books taught on a 9th grade Honours level. What distracted me from focus on what REALLY needed improvement - writing and analysis, and organisation - was AR. And most kids were doing all HS classes so they cheated on AR!
The teacher hated AR, too, she bumped down the number of required points from 40 to 30. The teacher hates standardised testing and let us know that.
Now, as a student at a Deaf school that uses AR, I am even more enraged, especially among struggling readers. I am in the upper English class but still...AR distracts teachers from REAL goals and kills motivation in both teachers and staff. All while the AR company rakes in the profits!
There is a percentage of us at OSD that speak English as a first language, and for those the "hearing school" problems of AR apply. But for ESL learners...why the Hell would anyone in their right mind implement Accelerated Reader?!?!
Stay strong, Deaf Education militants and hearing advocates (Extra cookies to Shel and Jillio)!!
P.S. - Who, in OH, wants to start a letter-writing campaign to Strickland and the Reps/Congresspeople to abolish the Ohio Graduation Test?
My other gripes about it include: lack of higher level thinking questions (analysis? Socratic method?), the fact that it does not ask questions connected to the "big picture" of the book, and that in my old Honours English class where it was used, it actually boosted cheating.
I think it is often used to SUBSTITUTE teaching and I hate that. My soph English class used no AR, and was basically just a free-form discussion of the book we were reading using the Socratic method. Students that didn't like reading for pleasure started showing interest and each student's analysis skills was bolstered.
I took Accelerated English in 8th grade. Basically, it is 8th grade books taught on a 9th grade Honours level. What distracted me from focus on what REALLY needed improvement - writing and analysis, and organisation - was AR. And most kids were doing all HS classes so they cheated on AR!
The teacher hated AR, too, she bumped down the number of required points from 40 to 30. The teacher hates standardised testing and let us know that.
Now, as a student at a Deaf school that uses AR, I am even more enraged, especially among struggling readers. I am in the upper English class but still...AR distracts teachers from REAL goals and kills motivation in both teachers and staff. All while the AR company rakes in the profits!
There is a percentage of us at OSD that speak English as a first language, and for those the "hearing school" problems of AR apply. But for ESL learners...why the Hell would anyone in their right mind implement Accelerated Reader?!?!
Stay strong, Deaf Education militants and hearing advocates (Extra cookies to Shel and Jillio)!!
P.S. - Who, in OH, wants to start a letter-writing campaign to Strickland and the Reps/Congresspeople to abolish the Ohio Graduation Test?