Reasoning: By teaching students history in a modern context, they can better understand the material.

Evidence: "A recent survey found 40 percent of respondents didn't think Native Americans still exist" (Inbody, 2018). This shows the misconception and implicit bias against Indigenous peoples.

Counter Argument: Some may argue that this misconception stems from education rather than outright bias.

Reasoning: The simple implementation of mentors has been shown to improve the learning outcomes of students and those who went without a mentor show less improvement overall.

Evidence: A study with 379 students (128 mentored, 251 comparison) shows that “Multilevel models demonstrate students who participated in MITS [Mentors in Toledo School] made statistically significant, and educationally meaningful, reading gains compared to students who did not participate” (LaVenia & Burgoon, 2019). This shows the change in learning outcomes of implementing mentors in the classroom for many students.

Counter Argument: Some may argue that mentors in the classroom may be a distraction to the students and teachers.

Reasoning: There are many different ways to incorporate outdoor learning into the curriculum to improve student learning and development.

Evidence: A study on the effects of outdoor learning among different age ranges states that, ”Nature-specific outdoor learning has measurable socio-emotional, academic and wellbeing benefits, and should be incorporated into every child's school experience with reference to their local context” (Mann et al. 2022).

Counter Argument: Many teachers worry about having control over all students during outdoor learning or have a lack of materials and funding to incorporate it into their classroom.

Reasoning: Ensuring that students cultural background and lived experience's are included in the learning environment. Helps with motivation and engagement as students are seen and respected as themselves.

Evidence: Research shows that high quality programs that include CRP and SEL improve student academic and mental health, behavior, and classroom climate. 

Counter Argument: Some say that SEL without a cultural infusion has the same effectiveness in student outcome therefore a CRP is not needed with SEL teaching.

Reasoning: If we want students to be successful, we need to teach more than content. We have to help them develop skills, like problem-solving and critical thinking, that will make them stronger learners.

Evidence: Play-based learning increases engagement as students are able to actively explore and discover, while thinking both critically and creatively (Cavanaugh, 2017; Alfieri, 2011; Hassinger-Das, 2017).

Counter Argument: Is learning through play manageable in middle school, when you are teaching to a larger student population?

Reasoning: Standardized testing is used to measure intelligence and performance of schools

Evidence: According to Au, "Within these marketplace logics, “good” teachers and schools produce high test scores in students, “bad” teachers and schools produce low test scores in students, parents can use the data to then make choices about where to send their children (a.k.a. where the investment of their public monies should go), “bad” teachers can receive low evaluations and be fired, “bad” schools with low test scores will lose market share and be closed, and “good” schools with high test scores will remain open and be successful. Simply put, the tests allow education to be reconstructed around a simple model of commodity production and consumption"

Counterargument: Some may argue that standardized testing is an accurate measure of school performance

Reasoning: the DE decides and directs funds to School Districts to provide Students with disabilities, if Congress approves the executive order signed by Trump. States won't have enough funds to provide for what Special Education programs need to help students with disabilities to have an education.

Counter Argument: Some may argue that States should have always the appropriate financial source for individual with disabilities.

Reasoning: When teachers make instructional decisions to incorporate tablets as tools, they can better tailor literacy instruction to individual student needs.

Evidence: Research by Flewitt et al. shows that tablets helped shift classroom dynamics and improved student motivation when teachers effectively facilitated their use.

Counter-argument: Some studies suggest technology-centered approaches with adaptive learning software might provide more consistent and personalized instruction than teacher-led methods, especially when teachers have limited training in digital literacy instruction.