澳洲墨尔本作业代写 学校的能力
Keywords:澳洲墨尔本作业代写 学校的能力
长期以来，学校的能力分组一直是激烈争论的话题。许多反对者声称，能力分组并不会为天才学生带来学习上的收获，反而会阻碍典型学生的学习(Matthews et al, 2013)。约翰·霍普金斯大学的罗伯特·斯拉文在他1990年关于中学跟踪的最佳证据综合中得出结论，当对跟踪的研究比较同质群体和异质群体时，跟踪没有任何优势。当跟踪研究意味着高能力组和低能力组的比较时，跟踪对高能力组产生积极结果，对低能力组产生消极结果。为了找出后一种结果的原因，Slavin得出结论，两组在许多变量上存在差异——最初的成就差异、动机、社会经济地位、材料、教学质量等等——因此，要决定是什么导致了差异几乎是不可能的(Slavin, 1990)。因此，本文的研究将侧重于相关性，而不是因果关系。Oakes还注意到，学生进入低水平课堂的教师和教学质量不平等，尽管这可能是一个实施问题，而不是能力分组本身的特点(Oakes, 1987)。这里列出的许多文献只是根据是否分组来。比较类。但分析表明，每个分组计划的效果在很大程度上取决于其特点。更充分地根据能力水平调整课程的项目对学习有更大的影响，据报道，参加速成班的学生在成绩测试中比同龄和智商的学生高出近一整年。
澳洲墨尔本作业代写 学校的能力
Ability grouping in schools has longer been the subject of heated debate. Many opponents have claimed that ability grouping does not produce academic gains for gifted students and impedes the learning of typical students (Matthews et al, 2013). In his 1990 best-evidence synthesis on tracking in secondary schools, Robert Slavin of Johns Hopkins University concluded that, when research on tracking compares homogeneous groups with heterogeneous groups, tracking holds no advantage. When research on tracking means comparing high-ability to low-ability groups, tracking yields positive outcomes for the high-ability groups and negative outcomes for low-ability groups. Trying to find the reasons for this latter outcome, Slavin concluded that the two groups differed on so many variables — initial achievement differences, motivation, socioeconomic status, material, quality of teaching, etc. — that deciding what produces the difference is nearly impossible (Slavin, 1990). For this reason, research outlined in this paper will focus on correlation, not causation. Oakes also noted the inequity of teacher and instructional quality for students grouped into low-track classrooms, though this likely is an implementation issue rather than a feature of ability grouping itself (Oakes, 1987). Much of the literature outlined here compares classes only on the basis of being grouped or not. But analyses have shown that the effects of each grouping program depends heavily on its features. Programs that adjust the curriculum to ability level more substantially have larger effects on learning, in which students from accelerated classes are reported to outperform those of the same age and IQ by almost 1 full year on achievement tests。
