The tension between equal opportunity and individual dignity in education, particularly as it relates to both remediation and intervention, is whether remediation results in a loss of dignity, or whether remediation is sometimes preferred over intervention. A democratic society has an obligation to prepare individuals with the education and tools they need to do well in that society; at the same time, a democratic society also needs to ensure there is both equal opportunity, and that all individuals are treated with dignity, despite having different needs and capabilities (Mastroprieri and Scruggs, 2017).
The difference between remediation and intervention is that remediation often involves a form of reteaching a student who did not learn the material when initially taught. An example of remediation would therefore be having a student stay back in his or her grade level for an additional year. In contrast, an intervention involves teaching targeted skills that a student is seen to lack. In an intervention, a student is not relearning a topic, but rather being given instruction that specifically targets skills the student will need.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Equal Opportunity and Dignity in Education".
The three possible levels of intervention are primary, secondary and tertiary, with each level increasing the amount of intensity within the curriculum. Primary levels of intervention involve teaching core instructions and strategies, along with monitoring student progress. A primary intervention would generally be used for a larger group, including an entire classroom. For instance, if there is an observation that many students within the group do not read at an appropriate age-level, a primary intervention might involve a specific time period being set aside to focus on these core skills. This would increase promotion of equal opportunity, and would not compromise the dignity of any individual student.
A secondary level of intervention would be more focused, and involve a smaller group size; these would be more intensive in their focus. For instance, providing ESL opportunities that focuses on teaching non-native English speakers might be a form of secondary intervention. The goal is to provide them with equal opportunities, but this perhaps introduces a loss of dignity, as some students undergoing secondary intervention might feel marginalized by this status (Smith et al., 2015). A tertiary level is the most intensive form of intervention, involving small groups or even an individual, based on need. Again, the goal is to provide equal opportunity, but this can create a loss of dignity if the individual feels ostracized from his or her peers.
DuFour’s model of Professional Learning Communities (2004) involves three key ideas that can best be used to improve interventions, maximizing both equal opportunities and dignity: ensuring that students learn, instilling a culture of collaboration, and focusing on results. This model would benefit more effective interventions because ensuring that students learn the required material will reduce the need for later interventions. Students should therefore be given opportunities to learn, and monitoring results will let a teacher know which lessons or teaching styles create the best results. Additionally, a culture of collaboration can ensure that teachers communicate potential deficiencies with one another, particularly if they currently or are expected to share the same students.
For instance, if reading levels are not at the expected level for third grade students, communicating this fact with the fourth grade teacher might indicate a need to adjust the curriculum, rather than compounding the problem further. Finally, focusing on results through monitoring performance and setting goals can help make sure that students do not fall behind. Goals should be clearly defined. If this model is used, the need for an intervention will lessen, and therefore this is the model that best promotes equal opportunity and individual dignity.
