# compulsory school: can children be flunked in your countries?



## TimeHP

Hi all.
I'm interested in complusory school system. I'd like to know if in your country it's possible to be 'bocciati', that means to be obliged to repeat twice the same year.
A Japanese friend of mine told me that in Japan children don't repeat the same year twice. In Italy teachers may be very severe and they can 'bocciare' (get flunked?) someone even in the primary and in the secondary school. 
Many thanks.
Ciao.


----------



## la reine victoria

TimeHP said:
			
		

> Hi all.
> I'm interested in complusory school system. I'd like to know if in your country it's possible to be 'bocciati', that means to be obliged to repeat twice the same year.
> A Japanese friend of mine told me that in Japan children don't repeat the same year twice. In Italy teachers may be very severe and they can 'bocciare' (get flunked?) someone even in the primary and in the secondary school.
> Many thanks.
> Ciao.


 

I don't know if it still happens in the UK today but when I was at school I saw it happen to a fellow pupil. 

At the end of the school Year 1 (at high school) she had performed so badly that she was made to repeat the whole year again. While we, her friends, moved on to Year 2 she was left behind with all the new entrants to the school.

I remember vividly her humiliation. She still remained our friend but was teased badly by her younger classmates.

She never quite managed to catch up and left school with rather a poor record. In those days there was no remedial help available and to ask parents to come in and help was unthinkable.

Today, with a large number of parents giving voluntary help, the employment of classroom assistants and special remedial classes I don't think any child would be made to repeat a year.

My old school, once a flourishing and successful Grammar School, is now struggling in Government League Tables. The majority of the girls are from ethnic minorities and are not native English speakers. Many also have social problems and severe behavioural problems.  I think they struggle on as best they can, looking forward to the day when they will be able to leave school.  Many leave with no qualifications.  I don't think they are made to repeat a year - it seems pointless to teachers and pupils.  Very sad.


LRV


----------



## TimeHP

> I remember vividly her humiliation. She still remained our friend but was teased badly by her younger classmates.


 
It's quite common in Italy. And nobody seems to care about the fact that 
it lowers children's self esteem. 
Don Milani in his beautiful 'Lettera a una professoressa' (1967) wrote 
that if a factory worker makes a bad product, he can be dismissed, but if school workers fail, only the children have to pay...
Thank you.
Ciao


----------



## danielfranco

When I was a kid in Mexico City, I had many friends that would tell anyone who asked (or even to the ones that didn't ask) about how many times they had to repeat second (or whatever) grade. Even in the USA up to a recent date you could hear about kids that were "held back" for a year because "they were sick a lot". I suppose that has changed somewhat with the "No child left behind" thingy...


----------



## Chaska Ñawi

It occasionally happens here, usually by parental request.  Sometimes the parents have to fight for it to happen.

Because so many classes are split-grade, the child can often remain with his or her peer group, but work with the younger children.  I've seen it happen with children who had a learning disability which was undiagnosed at the time; and with children who had to miss a substantial amount of school in a given year.

As a parent and teacher, I see no point in promoting children who haven't mastered the fundamental skills they need to move on to the next grade .... unless they will have their own education plan to remedy those deficiencies.  (I'm not talking about learning-disabled children who advance with their classmates but have an independent curriculum.)


----------



## cuchuflete

TimeHP said:
			
		

> It's quite common in Italy. And nobody seems to care about the fact that
> it lowers children's self esteem.



It used to happen when I was a student.  In AE of that time,
we said that the student was "left back".  I don't know how frequent it is today.  Decades ago I suppose that something less than 5% of students were left back, to repeat a grade.
For reasons as varied as each individual case, students were 'left back' due to any one or more of--
-learning disabilities, diagnosed and undiagnosed;
-lack of effort
-distractions in a student's personal life
-poor instruction

As to lowering self-esteem, I think that we deceive a child into having groundless and false self-esteem if we promote them
when they have not--for whatever reason--mastered the material of a grade.  Self-esteem, as the term says, should come from within.  

If a student works and accomplishes something, they will have no trouble with self-esteem.  Their own accomplishments will provide it.  If a student doesn't accomplish something, for whatever internal or external reasons, and we acknowledge that they have accomplished it, we will have taught that person that those 'in charge' are dishonest, that there are always excuses for what has not been done....  If self-esteem
is based on fiddling the system, or if the system is dishonest,
we do the student no favors.

Some students are left back due to problems not within their control.  Others are left back because they decide that schoolwork is not what they want to do.  Still others try as hard as they are able, and lack the ability to progress at the same rate as classmates.  Each of these cases needs a different kind of attention from parents, from teachers, and perhaps from others.

What do we do for the self-esteem of a nine year old who cannot do the math taught to nine year olds, and is "promoted" to the next class?  The self-esteem of a child who cannot fathom schoolwork, having been falsely and erroneously 'promoted' will be abysmal.

Let us focus on educating each child.  If we do that well, self-esteem will take care of itself.  If we treat a child as if they have learned something, when they have not, we will
be guilty of deception, and the ultimate effect on the child's self-esteem will be tragic.


----------



## Bilma

Yes, it is still common that kids who do poorly in school have to repeat the school year.


----------



## Outsider

TimeHP said:
			
		

> Hi all.
> I'm interested in complusory school system. I'd like to know if in your country it's possible to be 'bocciati', that means to be obliged to repeat twice the same year.
> A Japanese friend of mine told me that in Japan children don't repeat the same year twice. In Italy teachers may be very severe and they can 'bocciare' (get flunked?) someone even in the primary and in the secondary school.
> Many thanks.
> Ciao.


You mean, is it possible to flunk in public schools?

It used to be very possible in Portugal, but the enlightened ones at our Ministry of Education have been making it next to impossible.


----------



## Vanda

Till very recently children could and were flunked in compulsory school here. Some years ago a - to repeat Outsider - "enlightened" Education Secretary and later Governor of my state stated that children weren´t to repeat series in this state anymore. And what was bad turned into worse very fast! Once I taught a 3rd grade high school student coming from this plural school, as it is known, who could barely read and understand a reading, his handwriting looked like that of a child in earlier education. He was doing bad in all subjects and his excuse was always the same: teacher I came from plural school! 
Well, the end of the story, everybody knows. Whenever there's a PISA and any other world evaluations like that we are the LAST in the rank of all countries enlisted. 
Our _graduandos_ barely understand an intermediate level text and let me not begin to talk about writing.... Of course, there are exceptions. There are good private schools for those who can afford and there a few excellent students resultant of public schools. But as rule, students coming from this "forbid to flunk" ideology are real disasters.


----------



## Krümelmonster

In Germany flunking is very common, too... In some schools it is not unusual that there are classes where up to 5 students have to repeat... And I even know children at the age of 8 who were flunked in their second year... (but that's not that common, of course)


----------



## cuchuflete

Obviously, the enlightened ministers are showing deep concern for the self-esteem of the students.  Now let's extend that enlightenment to medical schools.  All students who cannot cope with anatomy and organic chemistry and pharmacology must--to protect their self-esteem--be allowed to graduate and to practice medicine.  Their first patients will be the education ministers!

This is offered as a solution to injured self-esteem, and to solve the problems of bad education policy.  Shall we all meet at the cemetary to see the good effects?


----------



## maxiogee

cuchuflete said:
			
		

> Shall we all meet at the cemetary to see the good effects?



You go there, and I'll go to the cemetery just in case the dead aren't dyslexic.


----------



## TimeHP

> Now let's extend that enlightenment to medical schools. All students who cannot cope with anatomy and organic chemistry and pharmacology must--to protect their self-esteem--be allowed to graduate and to practice medicine. Their first patients will be the education ministers!


 
I'm talking of 'compulsory school': primary and secondary school.
I suppose that students practising medicine are men and women.
A bit different. 



> If a student works and accomplishes something, they will have no trouble with self-esteem. Their own accomplishments will provide it. If a student doesn't accomplish something, for whatever internal or external reasons, and we acknowledge that they have accomplished it, we will have taught that person that those 'in charge' are dishonest, that there are always excuses for what has not been done.... If self-esteem
> is based on fiddling the system, or if the system is dishonest,
> we do the student no favors.


 
I understand your point of view, but I'm not sure that flunking is the right solution.
Di solito gli studenti che sono stati bocciati, sono i primi ad abbandonare la scuola. Una buona scuola dell'obbligo non dovrebbe bocciare, dovrebbe lottare contro la dispersione scolastica con tutti i mezzi: quando un ragazzo abbandona la scuola, è la scuola che ha perso.  

Ciao


----------



## cuchuflete

> Di solito gli studenti che sono stati bocciati, sono i primi ad abbandonare la scuola. Una buona scuola dell'obbligo non dovrebbe bocciare, dovrebbe lottare contro la dispersione scolastica con tutti i mezzi: quando un ragazzo abbandona la scuola, è la scuola che ha perso.


 And I understand and agree with your attitude, but not with the mechanics with which you propose to achieve it.  If a school focuses all of its good energy and effort on education, more students will succeed, and their self-esteem will be in accord with that success.  If, on the other hand, a school tried to promote self-esteem, it will have taught a failing student that standards are meaningless.  È il studente che ha perso così.


----------



## Residente Calle 13

Kids in NYC are getting left back more often. There are more city tests for students so even if the teacher thinks the student should be promoted, the city can decide otherwise. I think what they are trying to avoid is graduating students who are virtually illiterate because teachers just keep passing the problem to the teacher in the grade above.

This is a specific measure to a specific problem. I have no doubts that getting left back can be traumatizing. In fact, when I was in the first grade the school wanted to have me skip a grade and my mother objected. I agreed with her then and I agree with her now. I wanted to be with my peers and not stuck in another class (above or below). But in some places, we have to find out how the kids are doing and not just keep passing the problem on to the higher grade. 

Even in our city colleges we have Remedial English, Remedial Math...why are schools spitting out students who can't write or do Math and what can we do to fix that? Social promotion isn't the best way, I think.


----------



## Keikikoka

If a student doesn't know the material of his present level, for any reason, it would be unfair to the student to promote him to the next level. Not only will he not know the previous material, but he will be unable to learn the next level of the subject without the foundation of the previous.


----------



## ILT

In México it is possible for students to flunk and repeat the school year. Not only it is not fair for the child to be forced to take classes in a level he/she is not capable for, but it is unfair to those who are, because the teacher is forced to slow down to accommodate to the rythm of the slower students, thus slowing down the whole year. Depending on the parent's commitment, students who are flunking the year are sent to remedial school during the summer, and depending on the evaluation there, they are promoted or definitely flunked. Kids don't like loosing the summer vacation to remedial classes so, as far as I know, most children have to do it only once.

As for humilliation for flunking a shool year, I think it's worse for them to see that all their classmates can read and write fluently when they are still strugling with the alphabet, or that their classmates are learning multiplications when they are still having troubles to understand additions.

I am in favor of flunking a kid when said kid still has material to learn in the current grade, just as I am in favor of having kids on the grade they are supposed to be according to their age; it is very difficult for a child to be in a class when everybody else is one or two years older, but this is the subject of a different thread. End of off-topic comment


----------



## cincinnasty

In some schools you are allowed to fail one class, and still go on to the next grade level.


----------



## Fernando

Outsider said:
			
		

> You mean, is it possible to flunk in public schools?
> 
> It used to be very possible in Portugal, but the enlightened ones at our Ministry of Education have been making it next to impossible.



Portugal and Spain are much the same (in this point, I mean).

It was common in Spain "repetir" ("repeat") one course if you did not pass three or more signature a year in Primary and Secondary School (6-18). Past socialist government modified this to make it possible the flunk, only if the student wanted!

Last (rightist) government tried to reverse this, the law was passed but not apllied since they lost the elections. So, I assume that it still works the flunking-on-demand system.


----------



## natasha2000

In Serbia, a student, event the youngest one (7 year-old), must pass all the subjects in order to be able to pass to a higher course. The students that in June have one or more subjects failed, they have the opportunity to make it better - in August, by being examined in all material of the whole course in the subject in question. He is examined by a commission that consists of his teacher (the one who lectured to his class the whole year), and two teachers more, they don't have to teach the subject in question, they just have to be present to witness on the quality of the answer. If the pupil passes this exam, and has no failed subjects, it is allowed to pass to next course. Usually, this does not happen very offten, and if happens, this means that a child REALLY did not want to study, since on those exams, usually it is required the minimum of the knowledge to pass. Normally, it does not happen very often, but if it happens, parents are very alarmed, and a child is very ashamed, and normally, next year, they do a lot better, since they want to prove they are not neither stupid nor lazy. This is what generally happens, of course there are some hopeless cases...

I believe this is the only fair way of teaching children, not only in subjects in question, but also in life. Live is not easy, everything that you want, you have to work very hard to achieve it, and you have to prove you are worth it. Any other way of teaching seems unfair, towards the very same child, and then towards the other children who, unlike the failer, did work during the whole year in order to get positive mark.
I don't think the self-esteem of a child would suffer a lot. If we let them pass to a higher level without the knowledge of the previous course, we achieve to: make this child to think that lazyness is OK. Make that child to see their classmates who study as jerks. From the educational point of view, we criple this child, because his "knowledge" will have holes, each time bigger, so he cannot follow the next level since he doesn't know a thing from the previous one, and at the end, he will end up in the street, or even worse, with some job of resposability. If this child ends up with a job where responsability is necessary, do you think this, now man or a woman, will be at the level of their job, if they are not taught what is the responsability, in the first place?

When a child does well, they should be awarded, and when they don't do well they should be punished, because if they don't, they will never realize that doing badly, laziness, unresponsability, and all bad behavior is not good. They will think they can be irresponsible and lazy and get away with it.

In Spain, a child can repeat the whole course, but they must have more than 3 or 4 (I don't know the exact number) of failed subjects. Otherwise, if they have one or two failed subjects, they can pass to the higher course, and at the same time to go to classes with younger children in subjects they failed. I met many children here, (I give private English classes, so in this way I am in touch with a various families with different society levels) and I must say I was schocked with the number of children that repeat subjects, and who also repeat the whole course, not once, but twice or three times, and for them and their families, it is not a big thing. It is, well, it is not something nice, but well... ¡Qué le vamos a hacer!!! And usually, there is always some professor that has something against the poor child, so the professor is a crazy freak, and a child is an angel... I think that children are overprotected, no wonder there are so many professors that hate every day they have to go to work, since they are constantly bullied by their own pupils. I think that if repeating of the course is abolished, this is what a society that does it, will get: ignorant bullies that mistreat (ill-treat?) both professors and their own class mates. And what future is waiting for those kids? I wouldn't like my child to be one of them. No way.


----------



## Outsider

Fernando said:
			
		

> Portugal and Spain are much the same (in this point, I mean).
> 
> It was common in Spain "repetir" ("repeat") one course if you did not pass three or more signature a year in Primary and Secondary School (6-18). Past socialist government modified this to make it possible the flunk, only if the student wanted!
> 
> Last (rightist) government tried to reverse this, the law was passed but not apllied since they lost the elections. So, I assume that it still works the flunking-on-demand system.


Their attitude towards education is definitely one thing I don't like about the Portuguese left. Although, at least around here, I don't think the right has fared much better. I like to hear the right talk about education (usually), but I don't see them do much better than the left, in practice.

In all fairness, the last rightwing government we had did try to turn things around, or so it seemed to me. I liked the minister of Education they picked. Unfortunately, he got caught in a bureaucratic cock-up, became too unpopular, and had to be dismissed. It's not easy.


----------



## moirag

I don´t agree with fernando. It´s still very common to repeat here in Spain. At primary level, I think the parents have to agree to it. In my son´s class there have been kids repeating since they were 6 years old. At present he´s aged 12, year 6 primary, and there are 3 repeaters in his class. At secondary level I´m pretty sure it´s not optional, and it´s very common - my other son has 2 in his class. It is used very much as an instrument of control by teachers. There is a limit on how many times you can be made to repeat but, believe me, it is very common here and some kids repeat several times.


----------



## gato2

Es posible que repetir sea un trauma para el niño pero el problema es que si se va pasando de curso en curso sin importar los progresos el estudiante puede llegar al final de sus estudios sin apenas haber aprendido lo mas elemental.

Yo creo que a la larga a los que mas perjudica el que no se repita en la escuela publica es a las clases sociales mas desfavorecidas. 

Ya que si los padres tienen dinero suficiente siempre pueden enviarle a un colegio privado,  pagarle clases particulares o incluso una vez acabados los estudios, aunque no se haya sido brillante siempre es mas facil salir adelante si puedes escoger una escuela de lo que te interese sin la necesidad de ganar dinero.

 En cambio en muchas familias no tan acomodadas  esa es la unica oportunidad que pueden dar a sus hijos y me parece conveniente que si por el motivo que sea no han llegado a unos minimos, vuelvan a repetir el curso.


----------



## emma42

It doesn't happen in English state schools ("public school" here, means private school, eg Eton).

There is a widespread policy of "inclusion", which has lead to the training and employment of thousands of teaching assistants. These assistants can be employed to do anything from cleaning out the paint pots to teaching classes (for Higher Level Assistants), to teaching small groups with special needs, to mentoring individual children.

I agree with Cuchu, that it would be pointless to allow a child to proceed to the next class level on the basis of "self-esteem" in the absence of any intervention. But experience has shown that interventionist policies, such as the ELS programme (Early Literacy Support), whereby children who have not reached the required standard of literacy are removed from their class for a time each day, do work. And they avoid the possible humiliation of children having to take part in a class composed of younger children. Children needing, for example, extra literacy support, may be extremely good at maths or PE or music and may be at an equivalent level to their peers in certain subjects.  Also, education is not just about reading and writing and maths. Social education is important as well. Children need to be with their peers, but interventionist policies are essential. Also, such children have (or should have) clearly defined Individual Education Plans, in which goals are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-based, and which are regularly reviewed.


----------



## natasha2000

Vamos, nadie repite el curso porque sí, sino porque no estaba haciendo nada durante el año. Entonces, me parece justo castigar la pereza. Dejar al niño pasar al curso siguiente sin pasar el mínimo del anterior, me parece como premiar la pereza e irresponsabilidad.


----------



## gato2

natasha2000 said:
			
		

> Vamos, nadie repite el curso porque sí, sino porque no estaba haciendo nada durante el año. Entonces, me parece justo castigar la pereza. Dejar al niño pasar al curso siguiente sin pasar el mínimo del anterior, me parece como premiar la pereza e irresponsabilidad.


 

Aunque estoy a favor de que se pueda repetir curso no creo que deba plantearse como un castigo (al menos en principio) porque no creo que la pereza sea la unica causante de que un niño no rinda lo suficiente en el colegio. Yo creo que hay que plantearselo como que no has asumido unos minimos conocimientos sin los cuales no vas a ser capaz de aprender lo que se estudia en el siguiente curso y el problema se va ha ir convirtiendo en algo cada vez mayor.

Todo esto claro a parte de ayudas especiales que se puedan dar a niños con problemas concretos  sociales o de aprendizaje.


----------



## natasha2000

gato2 said:
			
		

> Aunque estoy a favor de que se pueda repetir curso no creo que deba plantearse como un castigo (al menos en principio) porque no creo que la pereza sea la unica causante de que un niño no rinda lo suficiente en el colegio. Yo creo que hay que plantearselo como que no has asumido unos minimos conocimientos sin los cuales no vas a ser capaz de aprender lo que se estudia en el siguiente curso y el problema se va ha ir convirtiendo en algo cada vez mayor.
> 
> *Todo esto claro a parte de ayudas especiales que se puedan dar a niños con problemas concretos sociales o de aprendizaje.*


 
Esta es la frase crucial. Claro que no todos los niños son capacitados de igual manera. Algunos necesitan trabajar más, otros menos. A los que necesitan apoyo, hay que ayudarles con las clases extra. Si algún niño no avanza porque tiene problemas en la familia, también hay que prestarle ayuda de sicólogo, o cualquier otra ayuda que necesite. Pero dejar a priora a TODOS los que no cumplen con el mínimo de conocimientos exigidos es ante todo injusto hacia los mismos niños. Esto es favorecer a los vagos e igualarlos con los que se esfuercen. Voy a aclarar con un ejemplo esto que digo: Imaginate a un niño que es un niño de inteligencia pormedia tirando a inteligente, de una familia altamente culta y con recursos, pero un vago y malcriado que no veas. Y otro, que es un niño de inteligencia igual, pero le cuesta estudiar porque no tiene a nadie que le explique las cosas ni su familia tiene recursos como para pagarle a un profesor privado, pero pone todos sus esfuerzos para sacer unas notas que le permitirán pasar en el próximo curso. El primero no estudia ni una pizca, y el otro se mata estudiando. Al final de año, los dos pasan al curso superior.
¿Te parece eso justo? A mi no. Si el primero se quedara repetir el curso, ¿te daria pena por él? A mi, desde luego que no.
Además, muchas veces he sido la testigo de cambio brutal en el comportamiento de un niño malcriado a un niño resposable, sólo por el hecho de repetir el curso.
Creo que este tipo de educación es bueno, pero tambíen hay que vigilar muy de cerca a todos los críos, ya que cada uno es un mundo aparte, y tienen sus días buenos y sus días malos, sus problemas que a lo mejor a nosotros nos parecen ridículos pero para ellos son enormes... El problema es mucho más complejo de lo que parece. Siempre hay que premiar el esfuerzo.
Ya he explicado antes como es en mi país. Tienes que pasar todas las asignaturas para poder pasar al curso siguiente. A veces he visto que se han dejado pasar a los niños en el examen de agosto (que es un examend de segunda oportunidad)m¡, no porque mostraban el conocimiento suficiente, sino por el esfuerzo que han invertido durante todo el año, pero por cualquiera de las razones que estaban fuera de su control, no ha podido rendir como debería.


----------



## emma42

gato.  Evidentemente (de que has dicho), repetir un curso no es la misma cosa en Inglaterra que es en Espana.  Me parece que en Espana es mas normal, mientras que aqui (en los tiempos actuales) repetir no es en la cultura educativa.  Por eso, aqui, repetir seria gran castigo.

En lo que se refiere a los ninos con problemas concretas y de aprendizaje, ?como decedir que es "una problema"?  Es muy sujectivo.  Por ejemple, ?el nino es perezoso/travieso? o ?el nino es deprimido/ha dislexia?

Perdoname.  My Spanish is not good and I cannot type tildas.  Also, I have not yet read Natasha's post.


----------



## gato2

natasha2000 said:
			
		

> Esta es la frase crucial. Claro que no todos los niños son capacitados de igual manera. Algunos necesitan trabajar más, otros menos. A los que necesitan apoyo, hay que ayudarles con las clases extra. Si algún niño no avanza porque tiene problemas en la familia, también hay que prestarle ayuda de sicólogo, o cualquier otra ayuda que necesite. Pero dejar a priora a TODOS los que no cumplen con el mínimo de conocimientos exigidos es ante todo injusto hacia los mismos niños. Esto es favorecer a los vagos e igualarlos con los que se esfuercen. Voy a aclarar con un ejemplo esto que digo: Imaginate a un niño que es un niño de inteligencia pormedia tirando a inteligente, de una familia altamente culta y con recursos, pero un vago y malcriado que no veas. Y otro, que es un niño de inteligencia igual, pero le cuesta estudiar porque no tiene a nadie que le explique las cosas ni su familia tiene recursos como para pagarle a un profesor privado, pero pone todos sus esfuerzos para sacer unas notas que le permitirán pasar en el próximo curso. El primero no estudia ni una pizca, y el otro se mata estudiando. Al final de año, los dos pasan al curso superior.
> ¿Te parece eso justo? A mi no. Si el primero se quedara repetir el curso, ¿te daria pena por él? A mi, desde luego que no.
> Además, muchas veces he sido la testigo de cambio brutal en el comportamiento de un niño malcriado a un niño resposable, sólo por el hecho de repetir el curso.


 

Tienes parte de razon. Enseñar que el esfuerzo tiene sus recompensas es tan importante como enseñar a dividir o hacer analisis sintacticos, pero en lo que no estoy de acuerdo es en asociar la idea de repetir curso con la idea de castigo sino que yo lo asociaria con la idea de que el objetivo de la escuela es aprender y si en un año no se ha aprendido lo necesario pues lo logico es que se vuelva a hacer antes de estudiar algo nuevo.


----------



## gato2

emma42 said:
			
		

> En lo que se refiere a los ninos con problemas concretas y de aprendizaje, ?como decedir que es "una problema"? Es muy sujectivo. Por ejemple, ?el nino es perezoso/travieso? o ?el nino es deprimido/ha dislexia?
> 
> Perdoname. My Spanish is not good and I cannot type tildas. Also, I have not yet read Natasha's post.


 

Cuando yo iba al colegio no se entendia que un niño pudiera tener problemas que le impidiese avanzar en el colegio. Si un niño suspendia o era tonto o un perezoso. Hoy en dia,afortunadamente, las cosas parece que han cambiado y se comprende que hay niños con problemas de atencion, niños hiperactivos, dislexicoso o con otros problemas de aprendizaje o peor aun niños con problemas familiares graves, como maltratos.

Yo creo que todo esto es para bien, pues un niño aparentemente travieso, puede esconder  algun problema realmente muy grave. 


Respecto a tu castellano, no te preocupes, te agradezco el que hagas el esfuerzo de expresar tus ideas en este idioma, ya que a mi me pareceria imposible hacerlo en ingles aunque llevo años estudiandolo.


----------



## natasha2000

gato2 said:
			
		

> Tienes parte de razon. Enseñar que el esfuerzo tiene sus recompensas es tan importante como enseñar a dividir o hacer analisis sintacticos, pero en lo que no estoy de acuerdo es en asociar la idea de repetir curso con la idea de castigo sino que yo lo asociaria con la idea de que el objetivo de la escuela es aprender y si en un año no se ha aprendido lo necesario pues lo logico es que se vuelva a hacer antes de estudiar algo nuevo.


 
Estoy de acuerdo contigo. Pero creo que se trata más como nombrarlo que lo que es. Llamalo castigo o como lo llamas tú (de una manera más sofisticada y elaborada, admito) lo importante es que tiene que haber la posibilidad de que los niños repitan el curso si no cumplen con el mínimo exigido por la ley.

Quizá la palabra castigo suena muy mal o demasiado fuerte para asociarla con un ser tan delicado como es un niño, o aun más complicado, un adolescente.

Repito: pongo el acento en el seguimiento desde muy cerca de todos y cada uno de los alumnos por parte de los profesores durante todo el año con el fin de evitar lo peor. Pero si el niño no responde de una manera positiva con todos estos esfuerzos, lo único que queda es repetir.


----------



## mjscott

You can dig up research to justify just about anything you want to do these days.

In the past, retaining, or holding students back was the norm.
Nowadays, in my school district, they promote up through 8th grade, but then retain students if they're not ready for high school.

Besides self-esteem, it is difficult for a student who has previously failed to be in the same class as a smaller student who is achieving. What usually happens is bullying by the larger student who is suffering (as some would say here) from self-esteem problems. In order to compensate for their own academic inadequacies, they will, by mere size, focus on some other poor kid's physical inadequacies. This can cause serious classroom management problems!  By the time students are in eighth grade, they are back in what sociologist Erik Erikkson calls a second phase of self-consciousness (adolescence). When all their friends leave them for high school and they are held back, they are self-conscious enough to re-prioritize their lives, and mature enough to handle the rigor. Before that time, their peers in the next grade up are constant reminders of flunkees' own inadequacies and sometimes egg them on to bad behavior.

I believe with NCLBE (No Child Left Behind --the acronym pronounced _NICKEL-bee_) there will be a change in students' priorities in the US. Along with it, there may be changes, also, in retention policies.


----------

