[IAEP] Response to Intervention - Is this being used outside the US?
droujkova at gmail.com
Fri Mar 12 08:08:58 EST 2010
On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 1:48 AM, <forster at ozonline.com.au> wrote:
> The strongest argument against is that any easily administered testing is
> biased towards lower level skills (as defined in Bloom's taxonomy). That
> would be OK, depending on how the data is used. Any attempt to modify
> teaching in response, biases the teaching towards the lower level skills.
> In the Australian case, schools will be forced to confine their teaching to
> lower order skills to maintain their ranking, preserve enrolments and avoid
> criticism and funding cuts. In the case of RTI, it risks defining student
> progress by a narrow subset of education skills and overly concentrating
> teaching on this narrow subset.
This is my perennial response to the existing programs of this sort. When I
plan interventions, I start with meaning and significance of math in the
life of the person, their family and their social networks. Then some major
concepts areas that can support and advance these meanings become apparent.
More information about the IAEP