The answer from the University of Chicago is abstract and vague.  Can they be pressed for more specific answers?  Do these tutors engage the students in drill and repetition of the basics till they know them well?

The more the public knows what works well, the better chance children have of being taught properly.

Hi Bev:  I don’t find their answer vague at all.  It describes almost exactly what I did this morning with at student I am tutoring.

We spent the first 45 minutes working on reading skill deficits.  In our case, that was phonological awareness drills, creating examples of the ‘hamburger essay’ form, and a discussion of self-monitoring of understanding. 

After a break we spent the next 45 minutes with his biology textbook, reviewing and discussing material that he had covered in class but only partially understood.

I did the same thing for my youngest, first the teaching of the skill deficit and then I tied it into what the current classroom instruction and lessons. According to the teachers,  I did the impossible.

As in the article, the students had been written off by the educators. ” In other words: abandon the hope that these students can make it academically and double down on vocational education.”

Rather odd to offer vocational education when good math skills is required at that level too. “As the Temple University psychologist Laurence Steinberg points out in his path-breaking new book “Age of Opportunity: Lessons From the New Science of Adolescence,” during the past decade neuroscientists have realized that adolescence, like early childhood, is a “period of tremendous ‘neuroplasticity,..........but the teen years may be just as important for shaping a person’s future.”

My extensive home math tutoring all paid off and throughout high school she was in advanced math classes. . It all started by the educators throwing in the towel for my youngest and as the Chicago mayor has said - “What this shows is, don’t ever throw the towel in on the kids,”

Tom, not to argue, but you are more specific.  I’d like to know exactly what these tutors do to remediate students’ skills deficit.  No nuts and bolts talk so-to-speak…

I too find the Chicago answer vague.  I’ve long since given up being charitable about what educators’ words mean, ever since I learned what “Progressive” means (sounds great, has awful results, but is “progressive”).

Here’s a question that probably should come ahead of all others:  Do they use phonics?

(Warning:  I’ve been told that “phonics” is a bad word that instantly identifies one as being a right wing Christian fundamentalist.)

Frank, Burlington

Frank

I too found the Chicago response vague.

I have given up being charitable about what educators’ words mean, ever since I found out what “Progressive” means (sounds great, has awful results).

Then what’s a better question?

Try:

“Do they use phonics?”  (yes or no; no educators’ words such as “blended methods” allowed)

Frank, Burlington

Agree with above. I see no actual description of the program used for remediating skill deficits, which allows readers to interpret “skill-building curriculum” in however generously or cynically they are feeling. From conversations that I have had, it is an ambiguous term.

When a teacher uses “skill-building” I am more likely to believe that they are using a constructivist approach (particularly as I come from a history background). Is this how you interpret it?