It's a little crazy that "it's easier to do a good job of teaching if you group kids by ability" has become a contrarian hot take, but it turns out that this works well.
Conversation
![David Watson 🥑](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="96" height="96"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
Post your reply
Teachers’ unions as a whole prioritize equity. Tracking can improve top-end outcomes but can also stratify—and the unions fear that disadvantaged communities will be locked into lower strata.
AI will drastically change the role of teachers in education.
But it will be for the better.
Want to learn how? Read this:
Sure seems like teachers unions arr opposed to almost every positive educational reform.
I’d guess part of the issue is that it’s unpleasant and stressful to divide up children by abilities and then to explain to mom and dad why their kid isn’t in the smart group.
Grouping kids by age, passing them along no matter what, teaching them all the exact same thing, and having them sit quietly in rows for hours at a time while doing it seems bad.
One difficulty is there aren't enough teachers to execute in this manner. Let's look at the complete picture. We would need enough teachers for two per class. Then enough to rotate them through the students. The teachers must remain fresh.
Federal direct funding is necessary.
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content