Long hrs in preschool/daycare harmful

Avatar for myshkamouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Long hrs in preschool/daycare harmful
2470
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

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-03-2005
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:12am

That's my thoughts too. I always find it odd when programs use IQ as a basis for determining whether or not a child can/should/qualify to receive additional/special services.

There are many children who are gifted in a particular area, but who may not have an above-average intelligence level. Based on IQ alone, those children would never receive services.

By the same token, there are many people with an above-average IQ who, while highly intelligent, aren't gifted.

I think IQ CAN be a factor ... and should be considered ... but it is, imo, small factor out of many factors.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:28am
How do you define "gifted" and on what criteria would you determine when to offer special services for a particular student?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:43am
"Dumber than a stump"????!!!!??? THAT is your term for kids with cognitive disabilities?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:47am
"Dumber than a stump" kids (your term) definately needed labels such as "cognitively disabled" and "mentally challenged" for people other than their families to find it worthwhile to teach them to read and do simple math.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-16-2005
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:49am

I can't understand why you are taking this personally. This is a debate board. I disagree with you. You say your children's educators also disagree with you. So why the surprise with my disagreement??

Anyway, despite my bringing your attention in a post above to how you apparently talk down to people like myself who ask for simple clarification of a very difficult to believe situation, you continue here once again with your pedantic tone. Perhaps you are not entirely free from blame in the unhappy response you are getting from the school.

Regardless, I disagree entirely with your approach. If I had a child with as serious a learning disability as you described above to Mondomom, any hopes or dreams I had of getting my child accepted into a gifted program would rightly scatter to the four winds. My only concern would be to get the correct therapies and treatment for such a serious learning disability. You disagree. Your and my approach yield the same result ~ no gifted program.

Apparently, the decision-makers in your school's gifted program are being honest with you that they cannot possibly educate your gifted child who has a serious learning disability. It is very understandable to me that the gifted teacher cannot handle both the gifted curriculum and a single student who needs remedial services. I think that's reasonable. Do you have reason to suspect they are lying to you about what they are capable of? If not, why would you fight to get him accepted into a program where he will not succeed? Why keep banging your head against a brick wall if your school is being honest that they cannot handle it?

It's like the earlier question I asked you and you didn't answer:

You: <>

Me: So then you are saying that there's no solution anyway. If the gifted child with an LD is indeed receiving remedial services while at the same time participating in a gifted program, yet still ~ as you say ~ does not benefit, what more do you want?

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-03-2005
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:52am

I don't know and I don't know. It isn't my field and I'm not particularly knowledgeable ...

For me, as a parent, it is more of a basis of knowing when your child's needs are being met or not. And if they're not, there's a problem. Whether its becaue they're gifted or have a disability or are just "different" learners.

Unfortunately, there has to be some sort of criteria somewhere, or you'd end up with a financially-burdened system in which a great many kids were basically being individually tutored all day. And that just can't work. So systems have to implement some sort of guidelines and criteria. I'm not qualified to say what those should be.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:53am
If you think that I really meant to apply that or any other pejorative label to any child, you haven't been paying attention. My whole point is that I don't think labels are very helpful at all when dealing with individual children, who should each be treated as individuals with individual needs. I have kids with a variety of labels, from "gifted" on down to "dumber than a stump," and "stubborner than a mule," none of which has proven very helpful within the educational system.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:54am
That would be correct. IQ is popular as a criterion because it's convenient, that's all. At the margins, it reveals how quickly a person learns. It predicts school achievement; it tells you who will be or has been "good at" school. Those with very low IQ scores usually are truly mentally handicapped. Error analysis within an IQ battery can also describe unusual learning profiles, such as LD or Nonverbal Learning Disorder. But it doesn't begin to tell the whole story wrt learning potential, talent, or giftedness. Many gifted people score high on IQ tests, but not all.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 11:58am
"Dumber than a stump" is not an educational lable the way that "gifted" is. It's a pejorative and you used it as such. Nobody in education labels kids "dumber than a stump". It's an insult pure and simple. You could have used a different term, but you didn't. Neither "gifted" nor "average" are pejoratives. So why couldn't you come up with some non-insulting term for kids with cognitive challenges too?
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Wed, 04-19-2006 - 12:01pm
Who knows? Maybe I'm dumber than a stump. Or a box of rocks. Pick your favorite inanimate object and insert.

Pages