Sorry, Daniel, I guess I didn't write clearly.
If someone in their senior year in CA moved to NYS and their HS
transcript said they had never studied LOTE before....ie. they did not
have credit for Spanish I, then yes, they would be enrolled in a HS
Spanish I class. If however, you had three years before you got here,
then you would be given credit for that.

I've seen kids come from VA or NC that were not required to study a
foreign language before (it was optional in their state/school). So as
a Jr. they were enrolled in Spanish 1.

LOTE in NYS simply means Language Other Than English....another word
for Foreign Language. It is not referring to a particular test. In NYS
we give Regents exams. LOTE is tested at level 1 and level 3.
Depending on the school the tests could be administered in grades 8
and 10, or in grades 9 and 11.

On 11/04/09, Daniel Hanson (to CNYTeach wrote:
> On 11/04/09, cnyteach wrote:
>> The OP did not say what state they are from. In NYS, in order to
>> get HS credit for a MS class, they need to pass a state exam. So
>> after Spanish in 7th and 8th grade, there is the NYS Proficiency
>> Exam. If they get a passing grade of 65 or better, they go to
>> Spanish 2. If not, then they take Spanish 1. At my school, we
>> frequently get transfer students from other states that do not
>> require LOTE. If that is the case, they all end up in the same
>> class. The parents have no say in this, as it is not a district
>> policy.
>
> Wow! NYS is that strict about students taking Spanish in another
> state? So, if I were a high school student in California, took
> Spanish I - III in California, got A's, then moved to NYS, I would
> have to be enrolled in Spanish I as a senior in high school just
> because I didn't take the LOTE the first three years of my Spanish
> in California? That sounds pretty extreme. I think that's great
> that NYS is on the ball about testing these students, but the issue
> with transfer students sounds a bit harsh. Maybe I'm
> misinterpreting what you wrote.
>
>> Differentiated instruction (defined as different teaching that
>> reaches the same outcome) can work well in times like these. The
>> problem I see tho is that the term of "differentiated
>> instruction" is bantered about like hot cakes and it doesn't
>> always mean the same thing to the same ppl. I know some
>> teachers that give three different things to three diff ppl in
>> the same class....the instruction doesn't lead to the same
>> outcome, but the test is the same. 2/3 don't do well. A rose by
>> any other name isn't necessarily "differentiated instruction".
>
> Yeah, that's true. I would like to get better at differentiated
> instruction, but right now I'm just trying to become better at
> other things, like consistency in instruction and classroom
> management, and grading. :) (I'm mid-way through my 5th year of
> teaching.)

Share This Post | Report This Post

Next Post >>

Posts on this thread, including this one