# Learning disabilities



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

Does anyone have one?(diagnosed or not)or family members?
Some common ones:dyslexia/adhd/autism etc?

I have dyslexia,explains why i drop out of formal school(and had immense trouble)I know for a fact i can learn just as well if not better sometimes than people without dyslexia(i just learn in my own way,almost a unteachable way)

Obviously the core feature of dyslexia is having trouble with reading comprehension and written

I love learning! but i often go about it in a unconventional way(i thrive in a uncontrolled learning environment that has a emphasis on people skills and or soft skill-or requires independent thought)delegating also etc

I am also lucky i have strong motor skills(working with my hands)

With activities of investing and business what i like about it and gravitate towards it is there is no linear set of procedures

Was thinking if because i have dyslexia it forced me early on to try a 'bridge' the gap and rely on a 'alternative' way
One of the most frustrating things i hated about school was how ridged it was,you had to learn in a very specific way and teachers and society did not allow for allowances.

I actually do best jumping in,fiddling around,not following a set of concrete learning steps and than testing it against what works and what doesn't(if i am learning something,i also like learning independently and having trouble learning subject matters that is taught in a authoritative way-hence my huge dislike of being in a group of pupils and one teacher....i am rambling here

Anybody have a learning disability?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Went through much of it with our son.

Schools aren't set up to provide additional support for kids who struggle, for whatever reasons. 

They don't offer quality alternative learning techniques. They collect the "per student" money and let them languish.

We have governments who complain about the cost of teachers, as if the job isn't all that important.

In Finland, the highest ranked school system in the world, the teachers must have a Masters degree in education and are paid very well.

They have more of a relaxed atmosphere to learning, with little or no homework and a more hands on approach.

We could learn a lot from their system.

The Harris government changed years back from a 5 year high school program to a 4 year program.

Why ? Was it important to get kids into university at 16 or 17 years old ?

Nope. It was to cut the number of teachers and the cost of education. It had nothing to do with the quality of education, as the statistics now show.

They cut the years from 5 to 4.........piled on a whole lot of more work............and wonder why it failed.

One thing the McGuinty government deserves credit for.......especially Education Minister Gerard Kennedy, was to start to repair the damage.

He made positive changes but they didn't go far enough, and the education system still underperforms.

I don't know if it is still the case, but Universities implemented 1 year pre-induction courses for high school graduates to get them up to speed.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)




----------



## wendi1 (Oct 2, 2013)

Dyslexia runs in my family - my brothers and my dad were affected by it much more than I was (but I had a little bit - mirror writing and difficulty telling right from left).

Both of my brothers are doing well, one in music education and one in database design. My mom had to intervene on their behalf more than once, though - once taking one of them out of school entirely, and often having to teach the teacher how to teach them.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

sags said:


> 1. *In Finland,* the highest ranked school system in the world, the *teachers* must have a Masters degree in education and *are paid very well.*
> 2. *The Harris government* changed years back from a *5 year high school program to a 4* year program. *It was to cut the number of teachers and the cost of education.*
> 3. Why? Was it important to get kids into *university at 16 *or 17 years old?
> 4. They cut the years from 5 to 4.........piled on a whole lot of more work............*and wonder why it failed*. It had nothing to do with the quality of education, *as the statistics now show.*


*1.* Have you actually compared salaries?

*Teacher pay: Canada near the top of the OECD class* [what's changed since 2012?]
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repo...ear-the-top-of-the-oecd-class/article4541629/

*2.* Education — *A Royal Commission* [and there were others before it]

*The Rae [NDP] government* created a Royal Commission on Learning — co-chaired by Gerald Caplan and Monique Bégin - which delivered its report and recommendations: "For the Love of Learning" in January 1995. Among the reports' more prominent recommendations were:

- the creation of a common curriculum for Ontario schools
- the equalization of funding per pupil
- *the elimination of grade 13*
- the appointment of pupil representatives on Ontario school boards
- the creation of a College of Teachers
- the implementation of uniform testing of students at various grade levels.

The incoming Progressive Conservative provincial government acted upon the recommendations of the commission in 1998, but students still in the five-year system would continue in the OAC system until they graduated. The motivation for phasing out OAC was largely thought of as a cost-saving measure by the Progressive Conservatives, *and to bring Ontario in line with the rest of the provinces.*
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_Academic_Credit

*3.* Depending on one's b'date [excluding grade skippers], in the 5 year system, a student would have graduated between 18-19 years of age, and between 17-18 under the current one [where did u get age 16?]. The latter is perfectly fine. However, what I have been totally against, is the dual curriculum/credit program, i.e. separating would be college/university students. Excluding the needs of children with gifted/learning disabilities, everyone else should be learning the same, and given less freedom to pick & choose courses.

*4.* What statistics/failures are you referring to?

2009 - then Minister of Education *Ms. Wynne:* [Liberal] "In fact the four-year grad rate is even a better story than the five-year grad rate, so the gap is closing. Despite the number of students returning for a fifth year, *eliminating Grade 13 was the right thing to do, especially when Ontario was the last jurisdiction in North America with the extra year of high school.* I don't think it's a mistake, but I also don't think we need to worry about kids who want to come back and do some extra courses." 

I wonder how non-Ontarian students managed with 12 years of education instead of 13? What about Quebecers, who I believe only have 11 grades? Russia used to have 10 [now 11?].


----------



## dubmac (Jan 9, 2011)

donald said:


> I actually do best jumping in,fiddling around,not following a set of concrete learning steps and than testing it against what works and what doesn't(if i am learning something,i also like learning independently and having trouble learning subject matters that is taught in a authoritative way-hence my huge dislike of being in a group of pupils and one teacher....i am rambling here
> 
> Anybody have a learning disability?


Donald - 

I teach at a boys school - The school I teach at has been focused heavily on boys learning, and how to best meet their needs. Most boys are spatial and visual learners - many of the attributes that you describe above on how you learn (ie: jumping in, ..fiddling around, ...testing it) are not the exception, they are quite within the norm. Many learning disorders are on a spectrum - it isn't a matter of having one - rather more like a sliding scale. Same with intelligence. Intelligences are often thought of in a similar way; numerical, spatial, athletic, artistic, the list is long. 

Math however, is a different beast - abstract reasoning is a tough one to teach and learn. Good math teachers are like good car mechanics - if you find a good one, keep them as tutors for your kids in the later years!
English teachers too. so much about English is having a good, passionate teacher - heck they can make the phonebook a fascinating read!

I like to think that things are changing in education - because of the changing requirments from employers and the future of education. So much of the change is not institutional, it starts with the teacher. If the teacher won't introduce change and grow, then, well, they'll stagnate (and these are the ones that most students/parents/teachers know complain about). 

I recently returned from a school in San Diego called High Tech High which is one school (750 kids) among a group of schools that delivers curriculum that is entirely project-based. Math lessons are infused into a project that a student owns and develops - that way, the math is seen to be a functional part of developing an idea/product, from conception through to final product. With your description of your "disability" *you'd have thrived there!* No homework per se. Students produce projects in each "class" that draw from all disciplines. Teachers, by necessity, are required to colaborate among themselves and with students. Some amazing work adorned the walls - and this was a charter school -kids get in by lottery. Many kids from tough neighborhoods etc. 

Project-based learning is not however a panacea. It has limitations - getting through the curriculum can be a challenge for a teacher using this approach.

In BC, the plan is changing http://www.bcedplan.ca/assets/pdf/bcs_education_plan_2015.pdf, see page 5 for a nice info-graphic. not sure about Ontario.


----------



## m3s (Apr 3, 2010)

Toronto.gal said:


> However, what I have been totally against, is the dual curriculum/credit program, i.e. separating would be college/university students. Excluding the needs of children with gifted/learning disabilities, everyone else should be learning the same, and given less freedom to pick & choose courses.
> 
> I wonder how non-Ontarian students managed with 12 years of education instead of 13? What about Quebecers, who I believe only have 11 grades? Russia used to have 10 [now 11?].



Germany has like 5 or more types of high school and it seems to work alright. What is more interesting though is that university and vocational school is essentially free and skilled trades are held in a much higher regard (wonder why they still have a prospering manufacturing sector!) Otherwise you get a bunch of university students partying at mom and dad's expense and digging deep debt for nothing (not everyone gets can work university type jobs)

I went to university in Ontario after their grade 13 and 12 graduated together. I had to work a bit harder than the grade 13 grads, but I started earning money a year younger. High school in Canada is mostly a joke anyways.. I remember easily teaching some major slackers an entire math course in about an hour before the final test. The typical university student in Canada crams for an entire course in a few nights (before the mid term and exams)

All the major slackers and socialites from my high school are now high school teachers :hopelessness:


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

I have very mild dyslexia, but my disorder is Asperger's Syndrome (undiagnosed). I'm also left-handed, which made some sports difficult because I was taught to hold the stick/bat right-handed. I was generally bad at sports already due to poor hand-eye coordination.

I was a fairly average student and at times above average, but struggled with social interaction. Teachers and parents were worse than clueless and did nothing but pass the buck. This was the 1980's when autistic spectrum disorders were still considered rare. No one even considered you had it unless you were completely non-functional. Teachers just assumed you were a problem child and/or abused.

Also, I became a target of bullying in grade 6, which lasted into high school. Things began to improve in grade 10 mainly because I could pick and choose some courses to avoid certain people.

Looking back now, school seemed like a mostly negative experience that I don't have particularly fond memories of.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

CHRONOLOGY

The debate over eliminating Grade 13 dates back to the 1960s. A brief chronology of how Ontario moved to a four-year high school system.

1984: The province does away with Grade 13 and introduces the Ontario Academic Credit system. The theory was students wanting to go to university could cram those credits into four years. But, in practice, most didn't and the fifth year of high school survived, just under a new name.

1995: The Royal Commission on Learning, set up by the then-NDP provincial government, recommends scrapping the fifth year of high school.

1998: The Harris Tories announce a move to a four-year high school program, but students still in the five-year system continue until they graduate.

2003: Two classes -- students in the new four-year system and those under the old five-year system -- graduate at the same time.

2005: Queen's University professor Alan King, co-author with former premier Bob Rae of a report on post-secondary education, releases results of the students he tracked after Grade 13 was eliminated. *His findings include the staggering statistic that 46% of students don't graduate on time under Ontario's four-year high school system*

http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2009/08/29/10664926-sun.html


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

sags said:


> *1.* The debate over eliminating Grade 13 *dates back to the 1960s.*
> *2.* *2005:* Queen's University professor Alan King, co-author with former premier Bob Rae of a report on post-secondary education, releases results of the students he tracked after Grade 13 was eliminated. *His findings include the staggering statistic that 46% of students don't graduate on time under Ontario's four-year high school system*


*1.* That's what the link I posted indicated as well, that there had been several calls over the years to abolish grade 13. It was your 1st post that gave all the credit [or rather blame in your view] to Mr. Harris.

*2.* That's a 2005/decade old statistic that you hi-lited, which may have been of some use when the article was written back in 2009, but not so much in 2015. Same article says: *'In 2008*, only 69% of Ontario students completed the four-year high school program in four years.' So, from 2005 to 2008, the # of students that failed to graduate in the 4 year period improved by 32% [-46% vs -31%], did I get that right? 

*Scroll forward to 2014:* 'Now, *83 per cent of students are graduating*. That means there are an additional 138,000 high school graduates in Ontario because of the education reforms of the past 10 years.' It doesn't say how many of the 83% within the 4 year, but given the improvement between 2005 & 2008, it's probably even better now. 
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/about/renewedVision.pdf

Anyhow, what is your point, that we should go back to a 1921 system, and that only Ontario students should not graduate at 17-18, while all other provinces {per the article you posted yourself} *'have virtually always had a four-year system.'?*. Given the 2014 figures above, it would seem that about 17% of students require additional time, and apparently the system is accommodating them, so where is the problem, why subject the other 83% to an additional year of high-school when not needed? 

IMHO, that 17% figure could be reduced further if it weren't for the dual curriculum & choices given to students to make. There is one such teenager on this forum, who said he had underestimated what he had wanted to do..'In all honesty I wish they still had grade 13 so a person doesn't have to decide what they want to do for the rest of the life when your 16 (The age you have to decide your grade 12 courses and what program you want to go into with right required courses)'. That's exactly the problem, making students pick from a dual curriculum. 

Btw, ran into Ms. Wynne at a boutique today. 

This is really off-topic, sorry Donald, but I didn't start it.


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

donald said:


> Does anyone have one?(diagnosed or not)or family members?
> Some common ones:dyslexia/adhd/autism etc?
> 
> I have dyslexia,explains why i drop out of formal school(and had immense trouble)I know for a fact i can learn just as well if not better sometimes than people without dyslexia(i just learn in my own way,almost a unteachable way)
> ...


My daughter is one the other side of learning disabilities, she is considered gifted, an this is also a special coded. We were lucky we a pick non traditional first school, that let kids explore based on their own individual learning styles from preschool to k. Then we put her on a regular public school. Our challenge is because she is so far ahead of her classmates we have to really advocate for her. In our school. They are spending time with the kids that are behind and with the other learning disabilities, and my child is left to do often what she wants.

We are fortunate, as we have worked with her since she was very young to help advocate for herself, and I am constantly finding ways to keeps her challenged. We turned down the gifted school because we wanted her to be balanced and have an opportunity to learn to socialize, which is hard for gifted kids. We are okay with this for now, but keep debating on going back to private school, but then I fear she losing the opportunity from learning from people with diverse backgrounds.


I am In the classroom volunteering when I can, and often I am helping those whom are behind. What I have seen is that the public system has challenges deAlingwith kids that don't fit the average mold. I have had some wonderful teacher, and some not so much, and I find that I am the one that has to give them ideas on how to help my child learn. Our school is so full it is really hard to give attention to any child that needs the either extra help or challenge. I will send different activities or ideas when my child is done her work. 


I worry about my kids, as there is an statically high number of high school drop outs that are considered gifted. I have one who has been tested, the second shows similar talents to. 

I agree that the school doesnt do well for those that don't fit the mold, but until they spend more timing giving teachers different ways to teach, then I think parents have to keep advocating for their own child, and they are the ones who will do the research.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

It's almost one of the same thing and I don't say this because I had trouble but some learning disabilities can have gifts(that's the otherside of the coin)
Now obviously a high majority are more likely to be found in prison than the boardroom but it is interesting how many entrepreneurs especially have them I know for example the likes of Richard Branson,Steve jobs,Charles schwab,Ted turner etc
The Brian wiring helps
I have read a ton on it and some studies are fascinating.
I also am interested in personality types,I am according to the test intj which seems like it fits also


----------



## Plugging Along (Jan 3, 2011)

You are totally correct that a lot of gifted gifted are also double coded with another learning disability (like the above mentioned). A lot of people don't think if it that way. 

I haven't researched the career paths, but I am no surprised that many are Entrepnuers. Many people with learning disabilities just process their their information in a different way, this would just be out of the box thinking. I think the trick is to help people that learned from mainstream to find the way they best learn and work on their uniqueness. The oldest who is highly gifted is an ISTJ and my youngest is a ENFP. I haven't run the tested on them yet, and the uoungest is still devevloping her persoanality but I think it's pretty aclose.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

Plugging Along said:


> 1. until they spend more timing giving teachers different ways to teach, then *I think parents have to keep advocating for their own child...*
> 2. I have had some wonderful teacher, and *some not so much*....


*1.* Could not agree more! Especially when there have been numerous reports suggesting that teachers are not adequately trained to meet the needs of students with learning disabilities. Unfortunately parental involvement is not always present or even possible.

In googling a name, I found this paper that has some interesting facts:

*'Differentiated Instruction and Universal Design for Learning* - The trend towards inclusive education requires that teachers attend to a diverse range of needs in the regular classroom. Two approaches are widely promoted as responsive to a wide range of learning needs: Differentiated instruction (DI) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL). Using these approaches, teachers attempt to reduce or eliminate barriers to learning by tailoring instruction to meet diverse needs.'
http://canlearnsociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/BestPracticesInTeachingLD1-final-2013.pdf

On the issue of differentiation, I think a % of teachers fail to use the above mentioned approaches correctly, hence fail to assess/recognize the various skills & other needs of students early enough, when intervention [if applicable], would be most beneficial. 

OTOH, there also seems to be a rush to label certain differences, such as immaturity for example, as disabilities; or perfectly healthy energetic students as having brain disorders like ADHD; or those wilfully not paying attention as perhaps having hearing problems, when probably a good % of all these are plain cases of just normal disobedience/misbehaviour.

*2.* It reminds me that I once heard a [grade 1] teacher complain to another 'I'm a teacher, not a parent', and wondered what exactly she meant, though I suspected she was referring to behaviour.


----------



## MoneyGal (Apr 24, 2009)

Hey, one of my kids is profoundly dyslexic (in the initial assessment of her reading capacity, the psychologist was recording scores of 0.0001 "because the software doesn't allow use to enter values of zero"). 

We put her in a private school for dyslexic kids three years ago and she is reading, writing and "math-ing" well above grade level now, and testing as gifted.

Edit: IMO dyslexia is in a different category than ADHD, Aspergers, etc. (which are "learning differences" vs. learning disabilities). No amount of extra parental involvement or "doing more of what didn't work" was going to allow my kid to learn effectively in a mainstream classroom. She was only progressing as well as she was (with her LD undetected) because she was essentially memorizing the curriculum. Her nickname (from her peers, not me) is "The Library"


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Unrealistic expectations = filling a class with 25 kids and 1 teacher and expecting individual learning plans for each child.

If our school system is going to be better, and provide better options for a diverse group of young men and women, it will have to be revamped completely from top to bottom.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

When accurately diagnosed, ADHD, is considered a disability, as it interferes with attention/concentration/memory, that even in mild cases could require professional intervention. Also, it is estimated that up to 50% of students with LD have co-existing ADHD, just like some students diagnosed as gifted also have LD, and known as 'twice-exceptional'.

Asperger's syndrome, also referred as high-functioning autism, is defined as a developmental disorder.

From posted link above:

*Learning Disabilities* refer to a number of disorders, which may affect the acquisition, organization, retention, understanding or use of verbal or non-verbal information. These disorders affect learning in individuals who otherwise demonstrate at least average abilities essential for thinking and/or reasoning. As such, learning disabilities are distinct from global intellectual deficiency. Learning disabilities result from impairments in one or more processes related to perceiving, thinking, remembering or learning. These include, but are not limited to: language processing; phonological processing; visual spatial processing; processing speed; memory and attention; and executive functions (e.g. planning and decision-making). Learning disabilities range in severity and may interfere with the acquisition and use of one or more of the following:

- oral language (e.g. listening, speaking, understanding), 
- reading (e.g. decoding, phonetic knowledge, word recognition, comprehension),
- written language (e.g. spelling and written expression),
- mathematics (e.g. computation, problem solving).

As the late Dr. Feurstein, developer of the structural cognitive modifiability theory noted, given the neural plasticity of the brain present in everyone, that intelligence was modifiable rather than fixed/static, but that specific & timely stimulation based on the learner's need was necessary.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

sags said:


> 1. 1 teacher and *expecting individual learning plans for each child.*
> 2. it will have to be *revamped completely from top to bottom.*


*1.* Not every student needs an individual learning plan. With respect to students with specific learning disabilities that would require an individual education plan, as per Statistics Canada [2012 figures], the number is 3%+.

*2.* Canada already places in the top 10 when it comes to global education rankings, so total revamping is hardly the case here, but given the dizzying rate of tech & other global changes, educational systems are always in need of reforms, starting from the curriculum, teacher training, etc. In this province, the reforms of the last 10+ years, such as the dual curriculum in high-schools, which was intended to give a balance between college/university grads., did not work out so well IMO, as there is still a shortage of skilled workers compared to the # of university grads [many with so called 'useless degrees', yet expecting employment]. However, it did increase the % of high-school graduates to 83% as of 2014, so the elimination of that extra year of high-school that only Ontario had, did have its positives & was the right thing to do.

You mentioned that we could learn from the Finnish model, which btw has also adopted methods of other countries, so certainly we can all learn from those who do things more successfully [even when specific structures are quite different]. Note that in Finland, compulsory education is between the ages of 7-16 [to be revised to 17 this year per below document pg.222].

*Canada - Key issues and goals - Students*: Improving the performance of minority-language and Aboriginal students can contribute to better equity and quality of education in Canada. Also, it would be important to strengthen the apprenticeship system through measures such as increasing the attractiveness and completion rates of apprenticeships and skilled trades’ programmes among youth, as well as the participation of employers. Institutions: Canada also faces the dual challenge of achieving a well-sized and prepared teacher population where it is most needed, and of providing support and guidance to schools. 
http://www.mecd.gob.es/dctm/inee/ea...-outlook-2015.pdf?documentId=0901e72b81bdc851


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

When I use the word "revamped", I mean examining the system from top to bottom.......figuring out if we want to or will "stream" students more effectively, and I think most importantly provide competent teachers and equipment in the area of skilled trades.

When my son took his "shop" classes in high school, his textbooks on machining were ancient. My union rep has signed in the book and he was in his 50s.

The auto mechanics class consisted of the teacher doing the work and the kids standing in a group watching him.

None of the students were allowed to touch any of the machinery or so any of the work.................for insurance liability reasons.

I don't believe that kids need 30 credits to graduate from high school. It is too much of a load on them to effectively learn the subject matter.

When I went to high school in the US, we took 4 full time courses a year..........90 minutes per class for both semesters.

The requirement was 16 credits to graduate, with only 4 option credits such as Physical education, typing and American Government.

It was a simple curriculum...........algebra, geometry, trigonometry, physics. English 1, 2, 3 and 4. Science, Biology, Chemistry, I forget.

It was designed so one year built on the studies of the past year. It was consistent and thorough.

Today, a student's transcripts can be all over the place, with bits and pieces from here and there.

The result is that many students opt for the basic core subjects, fill in with a clutter of optional subjects........and then discover they are lacking the prerequisites for higher education.

My son's girlfriend skipped 2 elementary grades and was on course to graduate high school at 15.

She quit school and later returned for her GED. (a creation necessary due to the high dropout rate)

She has found out that she qualifies for very few college programs and no university programs...............without updating her education.

A friend of mine was a teacher and principal for many years, and has 2 Masters Degrees in education and literature.

She told me years ago that educators knew the emphasis was designed to provide a stream of future employees for low income jobs.

Given the state of employment today, with contract and temporary workers and low wage service jobs.........I think she knew what she was talking about.

If everyone had a university education...............who would be interested in the McJobs ?


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

sags said:


> 1. I don't believe that kids need *30 credits* to graduate from high school/*too much of a load on them to effectively learn the subject matter.*
> 2. The *result is that many students opt for the basic core subjects*, fill in with a clutter of optional subjects........and then *discover they are lacking the prerequisites for higher education*.


Got it on the 'revamping' part, but OTOH, you're talking about what was in the 50s/60s [which is irrelevant], so it seems you want to go back to prehistoric times. 

*1.* However, 18 out of the 30 credits are compulsory, the other 12 are optional credits [much easier]. Each full course = 110 hrs. of instruction, so hardly inadequate time to learn. I don't know what you meant by 'Today, a student's transcripts can be all over the place, with bits and pieces from here and there.' But if you drop out, or don't take or complete the required courses for either college/university [if that's what u mean], then of course the dates will be all over the place.

Not too high a load for a well-rounded education IMO.
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/extra/eng/ppm/graduate.pdf

*2.* That is what I have been saying about the dual curriculum, that it's a mistake the way it has been crafted. Too much choice given to students. IMO, as long as teachers were using the differentiated instruction/assessment method, hence tailoring the diverse need of students, I don't see why there needs to be a dual curriculum, as those with advanced skills would simply learn quicker, while the others would catch up a bit later [not referring to gifted or LD students who may require differently].

If students opt out of the required courses, how then, can they be surprised when they don't have the requirements for either college/university? Where are the parents/teachers/counsellors when they are selecting their courses & need help deciding?


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

A student may take Grade 9 math in the first semester of their first year, and not return to math again until the second semester of the second year.

The delay means the teachers must spend a lot of time catching the students up on what they have already been taught.

In an ideal world, the students would flow from one math year into another.........because math is a subject that requires a full understanding of the previous building blocks.

But that won't happen, because there are more students than math classrooms, so they two years of study are spread out over 4 semesters.

The mandatory part of the curriculum is less than ideal. There is no requirement to complete all levels of core subjects to graduate.

Compulsory courses may include religion, physical education, French, career studies, and other subjects that should be replaced with math, English and science courses.

This system creates "holes" in a students transcript that have to be filled in later at one of the plethora of pre-entrance courses now offered at colleges and universities out of necessity.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

sags said:


> 1. first semester of their first year, and not return to math again until the *second semester of the second year.*
> 2. Compulsory courses may include religion, physical education, French, career studies, *and other subjects that should be replaced with math, English and science courses.*


*1.* You're ignoring all the strengths of a semester system. For example, it gives students much more time to absorb & learn, i.e. 3 courses from Sept. to Dec./3 from Jan. to June, so more time for assignments/homework/tests/exams/social life/extracurricular activities/extra help if required/and even a p-time job, as you're only dealing with 1/2 the load over the course of the year. And given that courses are taught more frequently in the semester scenario, that important 'full understanding you're talking about', would take place. I think the refreshers prior to starting the next grade are sufficient in the majority of cases. And students don't have to wait for formal refreshers either, they could do so on their own as well.

*2.* You're contradicting yourself a bit here, as first you said there are too many credits, and now you're saying there should be more compulsory courses in just 3 subjects.

9 compulsory courses are required for Eng./math/science, and surely you don't mean to increase these *by eliminating* arts/French/geography/history/phys-ed, are you? :confused2:

I would, however, replace the two 1/2 credits with a financial literacy course. 

Students deserve a well-rounded education, and the above is needed at minimum. JMHO.


----------

