I would like to share my views on the questions raised by buddhistpunk, a member of the Siampinoy.com discussion forum, on the NO FAIL policy program of most if not all Thai schools in the primary and secondary levels.
HOW do you ensure that children with learning disabilities, or who are simply slow learners can keep up/cope with the demands of even the most basic skills and get promoted ON TIME so that they are not left behind?
Ideally, children with learning disabilities are taken cared of by SPECIALIZED teachers. Since they are regarded as learners who need MORE attention, the learning competencies that they are hoped to achieve is different from that of a regular school curriculum.
In a heterogeneous class, it is assumed that the classroom teacher is well-prepared and trained to handle this type of learning environment. The curriculum and evaluation processes are flexible that a combination of these two ensures helping the learner cope with the lessons.
With the complex theories and unexplained occurrences to learning and its processes, a slow learner may not be achieving ideal academic standards NOW but may show gradual improvement as he progresses to the next level of his schooling. In Thailand, teachers are given the benefit of the doubt that they are helping slow learners cope with their learning difficulties. In fact, some classroom teachers in the province of Chiangrai are required to re-teach their “weak” pupils until 7 in the evening. This entails sacrifice and much effort from the teachers and the learners.
The “no child left behind” policy does not necessarily mean taking the child to the next level whether or not he is ready and prepared. In general, it means easy access to education...to educate ALL children.
The idea of ‘ON TIME’ is very subjective. It is expected that they will eventually be allowed to finish their studies as soon as they are prepared to face the next level.
HOW do you ensure that they are at par with academic standards when DIFFERENTIATION [oops, there's that word again, please refer to my post on differentiation] is used as a technique/method to help ease the burden of these students. Are we doing them a favor or disfavor by catering to and adjusting OUR TEACHING AND STANDARDS to their level?
This was how you defined “differentiation”:
“Differentiation is wunna 'em newfangled pedagogical techniques to support the no child left behind, and other similar policies.”
“Differentiation means we design chunks of learning and tests around what the child can grasp and how s/he can perform.”
You are probably referring to the use of an ECLECTIC and LEARNING-CENTERED approach to teaching. For learners with “special” needs, they are NOT expected to be at par with what is standard to ALL types of learners. Otherwise, there is no sense of identifying and classifying learners according to their levels IF they are required to achieve THE SAME academic standards.
A classroom teacher is expected to know WHAT to teach; and WHEN is the need to increase learning tasks. The main goal of using different approaches and strategies to different types of learners is to help them cope with the lessons in order to achieve sense of accomplishment. In comparison, even a doctor prescribes different proper medicine dosage to his patients though all were diagnosed with the same illness.
And when che1959 mentioned the word ‘CULTURE’ in relation to designing school policies, he/she probably meant to highlight the importance of culture as a deciding factor to the interest of every country’s thrust toward its education. Thus, USA strongly believed that its “no child left behind” policy is culturally adequate to its citizens. In the case of Thailand, its “no fail” policy which would probably better termed as “remedial classes” is also culturally based.
Even a classroom teacher CANNOT force a student to do something that is beyond his comprehension. And so we make ADJUSTMENTS. It shows one good quality of a teacher: BEING FLEXIBLE. With this strategy, will the student be able to finish the required competencies in due time? Well, it depends on how resourceful and “helpful” the teacher is and how aware the learner is with the teacher’s intention.
What's a teacher to do if the child does deserve to fail or be kept back a year? Remedial classes? Best of luck if the student can afford either.
There really are students who don’t deserve to pass to the next level because of tardiness, laziness, absences and other unacceptable alibis. They are provided with an option though: attend remedial classes.
The remedial classes given during school days are free. Students who cannot afford for special classes should be required to attend remedial classes instead.
And if they fail to do so, I’m sure the Ministry of Education in Thailand has some other plans for them.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Many foreign teachers in Thailand are ‘fighting’ the system of the schools’ leniency to their ‘clients’ in the sense that they find ways to dispel the negative outcome of this NO FAIL policy system. Some teachers require their students to take remedial classes while others leave the decision and paperwork to their employers on what lesser evil ways they can do to pass these lucky students to the next level.
Abel Morales Cadias
