Serving the Flathead Valley & Montana since 2006. A reality based independent journal of observation & analysis. © James Conner.
At today’s New York Times, there’s a Room for Debate discussion on something called “balanced literacy.” Apparently it involves forcing students to work in groups, an educational enthusiasm embraced by the crowd that believes it’s more important that children work together in ways that make educators smile than master the material they’re supposed to be studying.
But I sought a clear definition of “balanced literacy,” so I consulted the Wikipedia, where I learned that:
Balanced literacy is a curricular methodology that integrates various modalities of literacy instruction. Assessment-based planning is at the core of this model. The balanced literacy approach is characterized by explicit skill instruction and the use of authentic texts. Through various modalities, the teacher implements a well-planned comprehensive literacy program that reflects a gradual release of control, whereby responsibility is gradually shifted from the teacher to the students.
Huh? There is little connection between literacy and paragraphs like that. Nevertheless, that definition of “balanced literacy” does, in its clumsy way, suggest that “balanced literacy” does indeed force students, who are by definition ignorant, into groups where they are expected to replace their teachers as the experts in the subjects they’re supposed to be studying.
No wonder so many parents and teachers opposed standardized testing. They’re afraid that good standardized tests would expose “balanced literacy” as a fraud.