This year many students were suspended and rejected. Everything in the standard? It is true that the differences in input of the boys are stratospheric but, essentially, that you do not "ratify". The teaching model "assembly" is suitable for this heterogeneity? We know the real difficulties and the real potential of the boys? 'S response ADI the seminar "Why me bocci? " held in February and the seminar " Customization can " in August. on the concepts of variance (heterogeneity), customization, model school, which emerge as crucial aspects in the two seminars ADI, are a few excerpts from Vertecchi Benedetti, School Defeat , Franco Angeli, pp. 44-46 (quotations in italics).
In relation to the OECD / PISA test, which saw the Italian school in the bottom of the rankings compared to schools in northern Europe - including the high heterogeneity between pupils and between schools (eg north-south):
"You can declare that the purpose of school is to provide all the fulfillment of a certain repertoire of skills, but if it happens that in some schools that footage was actually obtained the vast majority of students and in no other one can not infer that the results of school education have had no school of origin variable, against which enforcement actions have been absent or at least too weak. "
Regarding the virtuous circle between school and society, which takes centuries, not decades, to establish (what we believe to be in Italy "statement ever" actually about nosta the age, so it is very young):
"Finland can boast a far more education rooted in time, which translates into a much more favorable social environment education"
states that you can go on to say that ' education better and more uniform will be a better society and cultural expectations and in turn more smoother, as indeed is happening today in Finland, where there are "schools of excellence" or to available resources or for the results, but where, therefore, all the school is excellent.
"The data now show that common in Italy is changing model of schooling, which tends to become solidarity competitive (as, for example, the United States). The competing systems are the main features for the marked difference between the top and bottom of the distribution. In our case, only the bottom is fraying, and there are no signs to suggest improvements to the top of the distribution: it is like saying that we are in the presence of imperfect competition , where the differences increase because only worsen conditions of the weaker students. [...] The growth of the school in Italy has been a fairly recent phenomenon [...] it follows that the cultural profile of the population Italian is still highly differentiated [...] As a result of differences in cultural profile in the population is the fact that, in most cases, the children who attend secondary schools live in a family of low educational level (average , parents of children attending secondary schools currently have a license to school). [...] A model of inclusive education aims at changing the entire cultural level of the population, encouraging the growth phase. Greater attention is paid to support those students who, with the benefit of less favorable conditions, the greatest difficulty . If switching to a competitive model, the focus shifts to the prevailing party most favored of the population: in other words, waiver of a draft amendment to the overall cultural profile, because it is considered socially desirable to have a range of high performance . The fact is that the transition from integral to a competitive model is not feasible, except for very small segments of the population, when the widespread cultural level is low, you risk getting the same cultural stratification already present in the population. And you do not need to remember here that the development needs of Italian society that require fractions of greater magnitude than the current ones have skills higher level. [...] Through education will help to strengthen the identities of the countries virtuous. "
How to make a specific intervention on disadvantaged students? Currently the attitudes of the teaching staff seem to oscillate between only two non-solutions, equally wrong. That the "promote" the failure (gooders?) and that the failure to reject, often predestined (justicialism? meritocracy "imperfect"?) What is common to both is the inability to make pseudo- real changes in the students with difficulties. It is not enough "not to neglect students with difficulty "of the Code of Honour ADI (Article 27). The comparison with the hospital is once again appropriate: accurate diagnosis is needed for special problems and special care, administered by specialists. Moreover, a suitable framework conditions (division , departments, facilities, organizations) and do not pile up all in the same routine.
If we have children with serious difficulties in establishing a written argument or at least get some information from the reading of a text, and only able to respond to verbal commands, we must first recognize and then take note of these qualitative differences and submit the illitterati specific programs that will enable them to transform signs and symbols into meanings, and not leave them in a school context in which the same texts and the same tasks are used both for those who are able to translate them into meaning, and for those who can not (yet) able to do so.
Heterogeneity in school is down with the personalization of educational interventions, which is not feasible if there are only "good general practitioners' organization and undifferentiated. We talk about quality ... indeed, they speak!
Prof. Alfredo Tifi
0 comments:
Post a Comment