首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
职业资格
Today’s adults grew up in schools designed to sort us into the various segments of our social and economic system. The amount of
Today’s adults grew up in schools designed to sort us into the various segments of our social and economic system. The amount of
admin
2019-06-08
24
问题
Today’s adults grew up in schools designed to sort us into the various segments of our social and economic system. The amount of time available to learn was fixed: one year per grade. The amount learned by the end of that time was free to vary: some of us learned a great deal; some, very little. As we advanced through the grades, those who had learned a great deal in previous grades continued to build on those foundations. Those who had failed to master the early prerequisites within the allotted time failed to learn that which followed. After 12 or 13 years of cumulative treatment of this kind, we were, in effect, spread along an achievement continuum that was ultimately reflected in each student’s rank in class upon graduation.
From the very earliest grades, some students learned a great deal very quickly and consistently scored high on assessments. The emotional effect of this was to help them to see themselves as capable learners, and so these students became increasingly confident in school. That confidence gave them the inner emotional strength to take the risk of striving for more success because they believed that success was within their reach. Driven forward by this optimism, these students continued to try hard, and that effort continued to result in success for them. They became the academic and emotional winners. Notice that the trigger for their emotional strength and their learning success was their perception of their success on formal and informal assessments.
But there were other students who didn’t fare so well. They scored very low on tests, beginning in the earliest grades. The emotional effect was to cause them to question their own capabilities as learners. They began to lose confidence, which, in turn, deprived them of the emotional reserves needed to continue to take risks. As their motivation warned, of course, their performance
plummeted
. These students embarked on what they believed to be an irreversible slide toward inevitable failure and lost hope. Once again, the emotional trigger for their decision not to try was their perception of their performance on assessments.
Consider the reality—indeed, the paradox—of the schools in which we were reared. If some students worked hard and learned a lot, that was a positive result, and they would finish high in the rank order. But if some students gave up in hopeless failure, that was an acceptable result, too, because they would occupy places very low in the rank order. Their achievement results fed into the implicit mission of schools: the greater the spread of achievement among students, the more it reinforced the rank order. This is why, if some students gave up and stopped trying (even dropped out of school), that was regarded as the student’s problem, not the teacher’s or the school’s.
Once again, please notice who is using test results to decide whether to strive for excellence or give up in hopelessness. The "data-based decision makers" in this process are students themselves. Students are deciding whether success is within or beyond reach, whether the learning is worth the required effort, and so whether to try or not. The critical emotions underpinning the decision making process include anxiety, fear of failure, uncertainty, and unwillingness to take risks—all triggered by students’ perceptions of their own capabilities as reflected in assessment results.
Some students responded to the demands of such environments by working hard and learning a great deal. Others controlled their anxiety by giving up and not caring. The result for them is exactly the opposite of the one society wants. Instead of leaving no child behind, these practices, in effect, drove down the achievement of at least as many students as they successfully elevated. And the evidence suggests that the downside victims are more frequently members of particular socioeconomic and ethnic minorities.
Which of the following will be triggered by the assessment results according to the passage?
选项
A、Students’ learning efforts.
B、Leaving-no-child-behind policy.
C、Socioeconomic and ethnic ranking.
D、Social disapproval of schools’ mission.
答案
A
解析
细节题。由倒数第二段可知,根据考试结果决定继续努力还是放弃的是学生自己,在做此决定的过程中的重要情感都是由学生对自己在考试中反映出的能力的态度所决定的。故本题选A。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/NA3v777K
本试题收录于:
英语学科知识与教学能力题库教师资格分类
0
英语学科知识与教学能力
教师资格
相关试题推荐
英国人弗雷德里克·泰勒在其著作《柏林墙》中指出,柏林是美苏两个大国博弈的棋盘,而柏林墙就是双方都最看重的那颗棋子。下列对此理解正确的是()。
WhichofthefollowingcannotberegardedasafeatureofsuccessfulEnglishteacher?
Ifateacherattemptstoimplementthetop-downmodeltoteachlistening,he/sheislikelytopresent______.
Todistinguishsounds,studentsareencouragedtopractice______.
Themedicalcommunityoweseconomistsagreatdeal.AmartyaSenwonaNobelPrizeforEconomicSciencesin1998.Hehasspenthi
Socialchangeismorelikelytooccurinsocietieswherethereisamixtureofdifferentkindsofpeoplethaninsocietieswhere
WhichofthefollowingdescriptionsofthesoundsegmentsisNOTcorrect?
Socialchangeismorelikelytooccurinsocietieswherethereisamixtureofdifferentkindsofpeoplethaninsocietieswhere
Children______alotofenergyandmayneedmorehigh-energyfoodthanadults.
随机试题
患儿男,10岁。1周前摔伤右肘关节,逐渐肿大,疼痛。APTT102s,纠正试验33s;PT13s。该患者最有可能是A.血中存在病理性抗凝物质B.遗传性纤维蛋白原缺乏C.遗传性Ⅻ缺乏D.血友病AE.血友病B
患者,女,29岁,已婚。妊娠中期出现腹大异常。胸膈满闷,呼吸急促,神疲肢软。舌淡胖,苔白腻,脉沉滑。应首先考虑的是()
糖皮质激素的不反应不包括
依我国《保险法》规定,保险合同成立后,投保人不能解除保险合同。( )
在我国的银行体制中,中央银行是指()。
木桶的容量由最短的那块木板决定,义务教育公平程度、群众对教育的满意程度,也由教育资源中的短板决定。推进均衡发展,不能截长以补短,应努力补短来追长。因而教育发展的思路,应该是把工作重点放在补足短板上,强化弱势学校,努力缩小地区、城乡和校际差距。最适
根据《中华人民共和国民法总则》的规定,企业法人的住所为()。
张家和李家都使用90米的篱笆围成了长方形的菜园,已知李家的长方形菜园的长边比张家短5米,但是菜园面积却比张家大50平方米,则李家的长方形菜园面积为()。
A.右下肺实变阴影B.右下肺炎性阴影伴空洞有液平C.双下肺环状、卷发状阴影D.两肺多发性结节阴影肺脓肿
为考生文件夹下WALL文件夹中的PBOB.TXT文件建立名为KPBOB的快捷方式,并存放在考生文件夹下。
最新回复
(
0
)