Table of Contents

Issue: Are Single-Gender Classes Necessary to Create Equal Opportunities for Boys and Girls?

YES: Frances R. Spielhagen, from “How Tweens View Single-Sex Classes,” Educational Leadership (April 2006) NO: Kelley King and Michael Gurian, from “Teaching to the Minds of Boys,” Educational Leadership (September 2006) Frances R. Spielhagen, a postdoctoral research fellow at the Center for Gifted Education at the College of William and Mary, argues that single-gender classes are viewed as more conducive to learning than are coeducational classes by students, especially younger students. Kelley King and Michael Gurian argue that coeducational classrooms can be made to be more accommodating to the learning profiles of both boys and girls, and they illustrate this approach through the example of classrooms that became more “boy friendly” through the inclusion of experiential and kinesthetic activities around literacy.

Issue: Should Struggling Students Be Retained?

YES: Jon Lorence and Anthony Gary Dworkin, from “Elementary Grade Retention in Texas and Reading Achievement among Racial Groups: 1994–2002,” Review of Policy Research (September 2006) NO: Nancy Frey, from “Retention, Social Promotion, and Academic Redshirting: What Do We Know and Need to Know?” Remedial and Special Education (November/December 2005) Jon Lorence, an associate professor of sociology, and Anthony G. Dworkin, a professor of sociology, both cofounders of the Sociology of Education Research Group at the University of Houston, argue that although the majority of educational researchers contend that making low-performing students repeat a grade is ineffective, careful analysis of primary-grades data from school districts in Texas shows persistent positive effects of retention on academic performance over time. Nancy Frey, an associate professor of literacy in the School of Teacher Education at San Diego State University, argues that the policy of retention and associated procedures such as social promotion and academic “redshirting,” in which there is purposeful delayed entry into kindergarten, are largely flawed with little compelling evidence to support their practice.

Issue: Is Full Inclusion Always the Best Option for Children with Disabilities?

Issue: Is a Constructivist Approach to Teaching Effective?

YES: Kaya Yilmaz, from “Constructivism: Its Theoretical Underpinnings, Variations, and Implications for Classroom Instruction” Educational Horizons (Spring 2008) NO: Richard E. Clark, Paul A. Kirschner, and John Sweller, from “Putting Students on the Path to Learning: The Case for Fully Guided Instruction” American Educator (Spring 2012) Kaya Yilmaz argues in favor of constructivism, a child-centered approach to education that is defined by student participation in hands-on activities and extended projects that are allowed to “evolve” in accordance with the students’ interests and initial beliefs. The student regulates his or her learning and discovers the “facts” or structure of a problem without being explicitly taught those facts or that structure. Richard E. Clark, Paul A. Kirschner, and John Sweller distinguish between the different learning needs of novices and experts. They also argue that constructivist approaches have failed and point to research demonstrating the superiority of teacher-centered fully guided approaches.

Issue: Can Howard Gardner’s Theory of Multiple Intelligences Transform Educational Practice?

YES: Seana Moran, Mindy Kornhaber, and Howard Gardner, from “Orchestrating Multiple Intelligences,” Educational Leadership (September 2006) NO: Lynn Waterhouse, from “Multiple Intelligences, the Mozart Effect, and Emotional Intelligence: A Critical Review,” Educational Psychologist (vol. 41, no. 4, 2006) Seana Moran, Mindy Kornhaber, and Howard Gardner, who originally proposed the theory of multiple intelligences, argue that the theory can transform the ways in which teachers teach and students view themselves. Indeed, the theory should lead to changes in what is assessed, what is valued as educational outcomes, and how teaching should occur. Lynn Waterhouse argues that there are serious inconsistencies in the theory of multiple intelligences, there is a lack of empirical evidence to support the specific intelligences proposed, and that there is compelling psychometric evidence for a general intelligence.

Issue: Should Schools Teach Students Self-Control?

Issue: Should Schools Adopt a Common Core Curriculum?

YES: E. D. Hirsch, Jr., from “Beyond Comprehension,” American Educator (Winter 2010–2011) NO: Tom Loveless, from “The Common Core Initiative: What Are the Chances of Success?” Educational Leadership (December 2012/January 2013) E. D. Hirsch, Jr., argues in favor of a common core curriculum, one in which language arts is infused with a requirement to gain a broad base of domain-specific knowledge about the world that is assumed by writers of newspapers, magazine articles, and other everyday texts. Hirsch contrasts this approach to language arts with one that teaches general literacy skills devoid of content knowledge about the world. He also argues that adoption of a common curriculum better meets the needs of an increasingly mobile student body than does a curriculum that is variable and idiosyncratic across schools. Tom Loveless argues that a common core curriculum is unlikely to lead to the promised improvements in educational outcomes. In part, this argument is based on the failure of past large-scale efforts to adopt a common set of educational targets at each grade, but with little impact on outcomes. He also points out that the common core entails adoption of common set of target skills but not a single approach to teaching those skills and thus individual variation is likely to continue to characterize education in the United States.

Issue: Should Character Education Define the Values We Teach Students?

YES: Merle J. Schwartz, Alexandra Beatty, and Eileen Dachnowicz, from “Character Education: Frill or Foundation?” Principal Leadership (December 2006) NO: Pamela Bolotin Joseph and Sara Efron, from “Seven Worlds of Moral Education,” Phi Delta Kappan (March 2005) Merle J. Schwartz, Alexandra Beatty, and Eileen Dachnowicz argue that identifying and teaching core values such as civic engagement and virtue can improve academic performance, school climate, and individual character. Pamela Bolotin Joseph and Sara Efron argue for a broader moral curriculum, one that goes beyond character education to include cultural competence and a commitment to peace, justice, and social action.

Issue: Does Homework Lead to Improved Student Achievement?