Long hrs in preschool/daycare harmful
Find a Conversation
Long hrs in preschool/daycare harmful
| Sun, 03-19-2006 - 3:09pm |
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051101/news_1n1earlyed.html
Very interesting. Particularly the difference in the middle to upper income kids vs low income.
"I personally feel children need the nurture of their parents and the home," she said. "Those early years, that's when they are bonding to their family. That nurturing, only the family can give that."
I tend to agree.
MM, WOHM to B&E, 7.24.03

Pages
Oh, it doesn't have much to do with the priority school districts put on the needs of a certain type of learners versus another type of learners. It has to do with the federal mandating of school districts in providing special education services, school disticts complying with the law, which resulted from some very effective advocacy and political action by parents and supporters of children with special needs back in the 70s. The difference is that the parents and supporters of gifted children have not enjoyed similar political success in making educational law or educating the general population about the needs of the gifted (as you have so aptly demonstrated throughout our various conversations.)
I could go on but based on your last sentence, I can tell that anything I say here is falling on deaf ears. If you really think that "the gifted will certainly thrive without any intervention," you've absorbed nothing of what I've been spouting for the past few months, not one little nugget, and you've certainly not read the reports and books I've recommended which I believe include A Nation Deceived (The Templeton Report,) Losing Our Minds, and Genius Denied (which I'm mentioning for anyone out there who has an interest in this stuff.) Here's what I figure: If one is in the midst of a discussion about a certain topic in which both people appear to be engaged and interested in, and one participant refuses to educate herself further on the matter, then it just doesn't make sense for the person who has gathered information to continue the discussion, does it?
It's a Venn diagram. There are children with intellectual giftedness, circle one. There are children with learning disabilities, circle two. There is an intersection of the two circles, children who are both intellectually gifted AND have learning disabilities, a funky pointy egg shape area that if it has a name, I don't know what it is called. Hence, the two are not mutually exclusive. Have I misused the term in your opinion? Otherwise, I thought it was a pretty simple concept.
A gifted child can be learning-disability free.
"I disagree. If there are limited resources, the disabled child is a priority before the gifted child"
Did you catch the last 3 sentences of the link?
BTW, do you agree or disagree (with the statements below)?
"Providing adequate programs and staff for cognitively disabled kids is considered necessary and good. Providing adequate programs and staff for sports or other extracurricular activities is considered necessary and good.
Providing adequate programs and staff for gifted kids must be included in what we consider necessary and good."
"That link doesn't argue your case."
I disagree. BTW, here's another link for you.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/education/jan-june04/education_05-25.html
"But the price that a gifted kid pays for not living up to his potential is lower than the price a disabled kid pays."
Again, I disagree.
The price of *any* child not living up to his or her potential, gifted or disabled, is equal.
No child left behind, should mean just that.
*No* child should be left behind, which most definately includes the gifted.
Also, how would you respond to the question below which was posed in the link?
"Would you, in good conscience, ever cut programs for the mentally handicapped? No. And when "gifted" is just the other side of the same coin, how could you, in good conscience, cut that?"
"BTW, since your dd received non-Christmas presents from her grandparents, do they also celebrate non-Christmas with you, or do they actually celebrate "Christmas"?"
No, actually Dd receives Christmas presents as well as celebrating Christmas.
BTW, I would say that the origin of gift giving is more in line with my version of Christmas than it is yours.
Thoughts?
"Christianity actually DOES have a monopoly on Christmas."
That is incorrect. Please cite.
"He's a girl now."
What on earth are you talking about?
She (La La) has always been a girl.
Have you watched the show?
"I'm afraid I've explained the difference about as clearly as I can. If you didn't get it then, I'm pretty sure you are incapable of understanding my point of view and further attempts to communicate it would be sort of like trying to teach a pig to sing."
Ditto.
"Both Christmas and Easter are Christian holidays."
Incorrect.
Both Christmas and Easter are of Pagan origin.
"Christmas is a celebration of the birth of Christ."
Incorrect. Again, Christmas is of Pagan origin.
"Just because you choose to ignore that doesn't change the meaning."
Just because you choose to ignore that doesn't change the origin.
Pages