Do You Know the Latest Classroom Lingo?

According to veteran teacher Barbara Callaghan, "less can sometimes be more, and that is one of the driving forces behind block scheduling. Class periods that last less than one hour have drawbacks: Students need to change their focus constantly, not to mention classrooms. Block scheduling allows for more in-depth instruction."

According to veteran teacher Barbara Callaghan, "less can sometimes be more, and that is one of the driving forces behind block scheduling. Class periods that last less than one hour have drawbacks: Students need to change their focus constantly, not to mention classrooms. Block scheduling allows for more in-depth instruction."

According to veteran teacher Barbara Callaghan, "less can sometimes be more, and that is one of the driving forces behind block scheduling. Class periods that last less than one hour have drawbacks: Students need to change their focus constantly, not to mention classrooms. Block scheduling allows for more in-depth instruction."

Proponents say students feel more comfortable and learn better when they're grouped with peers of similar abilities. And they say tracking enables teachers to tailor instruction to the needs of respective groups of students.

Opponents of tracking fear that the labels students are given early on stay with them as they move from grade to grade. And for those on the lower tracks, a steady diet of lower expectations leads to a steadily low level of motivation toward school.

(Source: Education Week)

Proponents say students feel more comfortable and learn better when they're grouped with peers of similar abilities. And they say tracking enables teachers to tailor instruction to the needs of respective groups of students.

Opponents of tracking fear that the labels students are given early on stay with them as they move from grade to grade. And for those on the lower tracks, a steady diet of lower expectations leads to a steadily low level of motivation toward school.

(Source: Education Week)

Proponents of choice say that giving parents more options will revitalize the public school system. In theory, good schools will thrive, and bad schools will either improve or lose so many students that they are forced to close down.

Opponents of school choice, however, fear that the long-cherished ideal of offering every child equal access to quality public schooling may be jeopardized if America starts treating learning like a commodity, rather than a public good.

(Source: Education Week)

Proponents of choice say that giving parents more options will revitalize the public school system. In theory, good schools will thrive, and bad schools will either improve or lose so many students that they are forced to close down.

Opponents of school choice, however, fear that the long-cherished ideal of offering every child equal access to quality public schooling may be jeopardized if America starts treating learning like a commodity, rather than a public good.

(Source: Education Week)

Proponents of choice say that giving parents more options will revitalize the public school system. In theory, good schools will thrive, and bad schools will either improve or lose so many students that they are forced to close down.

Opponents of school choice, however, fear that the long-cherished ideal of offering every child equal access to quality public schooling may be jeopardized if America starts treating learning like a commodity, rather than a public good.

(Source: Education Week)

Proponents of charter schools say that, by competing with public schools for students, charter schools improve the overall standard of education. While charter schools are publicly funded, they are governed by parents, teachers, or other individuals who want to improve education in their community--not bureaucrats.

Critics charge that charter schools do not solve the real problems facing public education, but only provide an escape for the fortunate few. They argue that the money used for charter schools should be spent on fixing the schools we already have.

Proponents of charter schools say that, by competing with public schools for students, charter schools improve the overall standard of education. While charter schools are publicly funded, they are governed by parents, teachers, or other individuals who want to improve education in their community--not bureaucrats.

Critics charge that charter schools do not solve the real problems facing public education, but only provide an escape for the fortunate few. They argue that the money used for charter schools should be spent on fixing the schools we already have.

Proponents of charter schools say that, by competing with public schools for students, charter schools improve the overall standard of education. While charter schools are publicly funded, they are governed by parents, teachers, or other individuals who want to improve education in their community--not bureaucrats.

Critics charge that charter schools do not solve the real problems facing public education, but only provide an escape for the fortunate few. They argue that the money used for charter schools should be spent on fixing the schools we already have.