About the Book
Taking Sides volumes present current controversial issues in a debate-style format designed to stimulate student interest and develop critical thinking skills. Each issue is thoughtfully framed with an issue summary, an issue introduction, and a postscript or challenge questions. Taking Sides readers feature an annotated listing of selected World Wide Web sites. An online Instructor’s Resource Guide with testing material is available for each volume. Using Taking Sides in the Classroom is also an excellent instructor resource. Visit www.mhhe.com/takingsides for more details. Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Educational Psychology, 6/e (print text) is packaged with a FREE access code card for Annual Editions: Assessment and Evaluation 10/11 CourseSmart eBook by Sandra Williamson. CourseSmart is an online eTextbook. Visit www.coursesmart.com for further information.
Table of Contents:
Table of Contents
Clashing Views in Educational Psychology, Sixth Edition
Unit 1 Meeting the Diverse Needs of a Diverse Classroom - Issue 1. Are Single-Gender Classes Necessary to Ensure Equal Educational Opportunities for Boys and Girls?
YES: Frances R. Spielhagen, from “How Tweens View Single-Sex Classes,” Educational Leadership (April 2006) NO: Jo Sanders and Sarah Cotton Nelson, from “Closing Gender Gaps in Science,” Educational Leadership (November 2004)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. Jo Sanders and Sara Cotton Nelson argue that gender differences in achievement in physics, chemistry, and computer sciences are caused by inequities in classroom practices that deny young girls full participation in the activities required for success in these academic domains. They also describe a program initiated in the Dallas school system in which the classroom behavior of teachers and students in coeducational classrooms is targeted for change so as to provide more gender-equitable pedagogical experiences.- Issue 2. 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 3. Is Full Inclusion Always the Best Option for Children with Disabilities?
YES: Michael F. Giangreco, from “Extending Inclusive Opportunities,” Educational Leadership (February 2007) NO: James M. Kauffman, Kathleen McGee, and Michele Brigham, from “Enabling or Disabling? Observation on Changes in Special Education,” Phi Delta Kappan (April 2004) Michael F. Giangreco, who is a professor of education at the University of Vermont, argues that even students with severe disabilities are best served within the “regular” education classroom along with their typically developing peers. He also outlines strategies for achieving inclusion and shows how it creates a classroom that benefits all students, regardless of ability level. James M. Kauffman, who is a professor at the University of Virginia at Charlottesville, and Kathleen McGee and Michele Brigham, who are both special education teachers, argue that the goal of education for students with disabilities should be to increase their level of competence and independence. They conclude that full inclusion involves “excessive” accommodations that actually become barriers to achieving this goal.Issue 4. Can Schools Close the Achievement Gap between Students from Different Ethnic and Racial Backgrounds? YES: Carol Corbett Burris and Kevin G. Welner, from “Closing the Achievement Gap by Detracking,” Phi Delta Kappan (April 2005) NO: William J. Mathis, from “Bridging the Achievement Gap: A Bridge Too Far?” Phi Delta Kappan (April 2005) Carol Corbett Burris and Kevin G. Welner argue that the achievement gap between white students and African American and Hispanic students is a consequence of the overrepresentation of students from ethnic and racial minorities in low achieving-track classes. They argue that the watered-down curriculum and low expectations associated with low achieving-track classes prevent ethnic and racial minority students from achieving the same levels of academic success as white students. William J. Mathis argues that the achievement gap between white and African American and Hispanic students has been created by discriminatory social and political pressures that pervade all facets of life. He argues that it is, therefore, unreasonable to expect to eliminate the gap through curricular or other innovations in the schools. Mathis cites school vouchers as an example of a failed attempt to use schooling as a means of undoing the achievement gap. Issue 5. Should Schools Try to Increase Students’ Self-Esteem? YES: Robert Sylwester, from “The Neurobiology of Self-Esteem and Aggression,” Educational Leadership (February 1997) NO: Maureen A. Manning, from “Self-Concept and Self-Esteem in Adolescents,” Principal Leadership (February, 2007) Robert Sylwester, an emeritus professor of education at the University of Oregon, argues that self-esteem is rooted in brain biology and that low self-esteem can result in impulsive and violent actions. He sees schools as a particularly important mechanism for delivering the positive feedback and successes that are required for the development of high self-esteem. Maureen A. Manning, a school psychologist in the Maryland public schools, argues that self-esteem should not be targeted independent of academic skills. In particular, she believes that the best method to increase self-esteem is to improve student academic skills. Issue 6. 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 Ellen Dachnowicz, who are all affiliated with Character Education Partnership in Washington, DC, 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, formerly a faculty member at Antioch University, now affiliated with University of Washington Bothell, and Sara Efron, a faculty member at National-Louis University, 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. Unit 2 Theories of Learning and Their Implications for Educational Practice - Issue 7. Should Schools Adopt a Constructivist Approach to Education?
YES: Mark Windschitl, from “The Challenges of Sustaining a Constructivist Classroom Culture,” Phi Delta Kappan (June 1999) NO: E. D. Hirsch, Jr., from “Reality’s Revenge: Research and Ideology,” American Educator (Fall 1996) Mark Windschitl, a member of the faculty in the department of curriculum and instruction at the University of Washington, 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. E. D. Hirsch, Jr., a professor in the School of Education at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, argues that child-centered approaches have failed and points to research demonstrating the superiority of fact-based, teacher-centered approaches.- Issue 8. Does Reinforcement Facilitate Learning?
YES: Tashawna K. Duncan, Kristen M. Kemple, and Tina M. Smith, from “Reinforcement in Developmentally Appropriate Early Childhood Classrooms,” Childhood Education (Summer 2000) NO: Charles H. Wolfgang, from “Another View on ‘Reinforcement in Developmentally Appropriate Early Childhood Classrooms,’” Childhood Education (Winter 2000/2001)Tashawna K. Duncan, Kristen M. Kemple, and Tina M. Smith, from the School of Teaching and Learning at the University of Florida, a
rgue that reinforcement has a long history of successful application in the classroom. They dismiss concerns that it lowers intrinsic motivation or that it is ethically equivalent to paying children to learn. They do acknowledge, however, that reinforcement must be integrated with a consideration of the developmental and unique needs of each child. Charles H. Wolfgang, a professor of early childhood education, admits that reinforcement and other techniques derived from behaviorist theory do control children’s behavior in the short term. He asserts, however, that such techniques do little to encourage internalization of the types of standards that will ultimately lead children to behave effectively and appropriately in a range of situations in the future.- Issue 9. 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: Perry D. Klein, from “Multiplying the Problems of Intelligence by Eight: A Critique of Gardner’s Theory,” Canadian Journal of Education (vol. 22, no. 4, 1997)Seana Moran, a graduate student at Harvard University, Mindy Kornhaber, an associate professor of education at the Pennsylvania State University, and Howard Gardner, the long-time Harvard University faculty member who originally proposed the theory of multiple intelligences, argue that the theory can transform the ways in which teachers teach and students view themselves. Perry D. Klein, a member of the Faculty of Education at the University of Western Ontario, argues that although a number of diverse pedagogical practices have been inspired by Gardner’s theory, the theory is really too broad to be particularly informative about education.Issue 10. Will a Push for Standards and Accountability Lead to More Motivated Students? YES: Lauren B. Resnick, from “From Aptitude to Effort: A New Foundation for Our Schools,” American Educator (Spring 1999) NO: Kennon M. Sheldon and Bruce J. Biddle, from “Standards, Accountability, and School Reform: Perils and Pitfalls,” Teachers College Record (Fall 1998)Lauren B. Resnick, a professor of psychology at the University of Pittsburgh, presents a plan for reforming American schools. One critical feature of the plan is clear achievement standards set for all students, not just those who are assumed to have the highest academic aptitude. Such standards, Resnick argues, will motivate students to work harder and, thus, increase achievement by all students. Kennon M. Sheldon and Bruce J. Biddle, both members of the faculty in the department of psychology at the University of Missouri, argue that the mission of schooling must be to create “lifelong, self-directed learners”—adults who enjoy learning for its own sake. They argue that an emphasis on standards is inconsistent with this mission because it rewards (and punishes) students and teachers for achieving a narrowly defined set of outcomes. Issue 11. Do Recent Discoveries about the Brain and Its Development Have Implications for Classroom Practice? YES: Eric P. Jensen, from “A Fresh Look at Brain-Based Education,” Phi Delta Kappan (February, 2008) NO: Gerald Coles, from “Danger in the Classroom: ‘Brain Glitch’ Research and Learning to Read,” Phi Delta Kappan (January 2004) Eric P. Jensen, from the University of California, San Diego and co-founder of the Brain Store and the Learning Brain Expo, argues that recent findings from neuroscience research have important and immediate implications for classroom practices. Gerald Coles, an educational psychologist who writes regularly on a range of educational issues, considers current claims about the neural bases of reading problems. He concludes that the research is often ambiguous about whether learning problems arise from differences in brain structure or function or from limitations in experience or skill, which in turn affect brain development. Unit 3 Effective Teaching and the Evaluation of Learning - Issue 12. Is the Whole Language Approach to Reading Effective?
YES: Stephen Krashen, from “Defining Whole Language: The Limits of Phonics Instruction and the Efficacy of Whole Language Instruction,” Reading Improvement (Spring, 2002) NO: G. Reid Lyon, from “Why Reading Is Not a Natural Process,” Educational Leadership (March 1998) Stephen Krashen, a professor emeritus from the University of Southern California, argues that flawed studies and misinterpretations plague research on this topic and that the evidence to date suggests whole language is effective. G. Reid Lyon, chief of the Child Development and Behavior Branch of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), at the time of this article, argues that becoming a skilled reader requires explicit, systematic, and direct instruction and practice.- Issue 13. Is Greater Parental Involvement at School Always Beneficial?
YES: Laura Van Zandt Allen and Eleanor T. Migliore, from “Supporting Students and Parents Through a School-University Partnership,” Middle School Journal (January 2005) NO: Rodney T. Ogawa, from “Organizing Parent-Teacher Relations Around the Work of Teaching,” Peabody Journal of Education (1998) Laura Van Zandt Allen and Eleanor T. Migliore point to evidence that parental involvement in children’s schooling is associated with improvements in children’s academic performance and social-emotional development. Van Zandt Allen and Migliore also describe a program to help teachers solicit and use parental input, something the authors argue few teachers are normally prepared to do. Although Rodney T. Ogawa acknowledges that there is evidence that parental involvement has a positive impact on student outcomes, he questions the assumption that if some parental involvement is good, more must be even better. Ogawa argues, instead, that schools must build “buffers” as well as bridges between themselves and parents. - Issue 14. Should Schools Embrace Computers and Technology?
YES: Marcia C. Linn and James D. Slotta, from “WISE Science,” Educational Leadership (October 2000) NO: Lowell W. Monke, from “The Overdominance of Computers,” Educational Leadership (December 2005/January 2006) Marcia C. Linn, a professor of cognition and development, and James D. Slotta, director of the Web-based Integrated Science Environment (WISE) project library at the University of California, Berkeley, present an overview of the WISE project, which is designed to teach science and technological literacy through Web-based activities. They contend that this project will make teachers more effective and increase their flexibility in the classroom. Lowell W. Monke, an assistant professor at Wittenberg University, argues that schools have been too uncritical in their adoption of computers and related technologies. Moreover, he suggests that younger students might not be “ready” for such technology and that the premature introduction of the technology might interfere with their ability to acquire important academic, social, and ethical foundation. Issue 15. Should Schools Decrease Class Size to Improve Student Outcomes? YES: Bruce J. Biddle and David C. Berliner, from “Small Class Size and Its Effects,” Educational Leadership (February 2002) NO: Kirk A. Johnson, from “The Downside to Small Class Policies,” Educational Leadership (February 2002) Bruce J. Biddle, a professor emeritus of psychology and sociology at the University of Missouri, Columbia, and David C. Berliner, a regent’s professor of psychology in education at Arizona State University, argue that the gains from smaller classes in the primary grades benefit all types of students, and, importantly, that the gains are greatest for students traditionally disadvantaged in educational access and opportunity. Kirk A. Johnson, a senior policy analyst in the Center for Data Analysis, Heritage Foundation, argues that although the notion of reducing class size is popular among politicians, it is a costly initiative. He argues that the research suggests that in terms of raising achievement, reducing class size does not guarantee success. Issue 16. Can a Zero-Tolerance Policy Lead to Safe Schools? YES:Albert Shanker, from “Restoring the Connection Between Behavior and Consequences,” Vital Speeches of the Day (May 15, 1995) NO: Alfie Kohn, from “Safety from Inside Out: Rethinking Traditional Approaches,” Educational Horizons (Fall 2004) The late Albert Shanker, long-time president of the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), advocates a policy of zero tolerance for violence and other disruptive behavior in school. He argues that such a policy is necessary because disruptive and violent behavior denies equal access to educational opportunities for the nonoffending students in a class or school. Alfie Kohn, a writer and commentator on issues related to children, parenting, and schools, argues that not only are zero-toleran
ce polices ineffective, they are also harmful—creating fear rather than a sense of security and trust and replacing programs that are effective in treating the root causes of youth violence. Issue 17. Should Student Time in School Be Changed? YES: Elena Rocha, from “Choosing More Time for Students: The What, Why, and How of Expanded Learning,” Center for American Progress (2007) NO: Larry Cuban, from “The Perennial Reform: Fixing School Time,” Phi Delta Kappan (December, 2008) Elena Rocha, a scholar at the Center for American Progress and education consultant, uses multiple case examples and argues that the expansion of school learning time is necessary for meaningful school reform and improving student outcomes. Larry Cuban, a professor emeritus of education at Stanford University, provides a brief history of school reform efforts related to school time and argues that the call for expanding learning time in the form of lengthening the school day or year is not new and has little evidence supporting its effectiveness.
