The whole idea of streaming is flawed from the get-go. It presumes that all the students streamed into a certain class will be able to do a certain level of work, which is demonstrably not true. Result: teachers fall prey to the thinking that says: "I taught it, it's not my problem if they didn't learn it." Second, it allows students to develop an identity based on group placement which can then work against improvement. Why would a kid want to improve out of the stream where all their friends are, especially when the kids in the higher stream are looking at them like they've crawled out of the dump? Third, of course, is mentioned above: presence in a certain stream is considered by many to be indicative of overall aptitude rather than a potential stepping-stone to the higher stream, and kids are judged based on it.
It occurs to me that probably most of the kids in NB's level 2 would have been capable of doing the level 1 work if they had enough support, since moving back and forth was so easy. In that case, why not give them the extra support and expect their very best? Having two streams seems to be a way of legitimizing lower aspirations.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2011-08-16 04:49 pm (UTC)It occurs to me that probably most of the kids in NB's level 2 would have been capable of doing the level 1 work if they had enough support, since moving back and forth was so easy. In that case, why not give them the extra support and expect their very best? Having two streams seems to be a way of legitimizing lower aspirations.