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: 06-27-1998
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 5:30pm

I thought it was

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 5:32pm

Hey, whatever works for you.

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 5:34pm

Whell. Speaking strictly subjectively, I don't much like being called a liar and having my "integrity, honesty, and character" called into question. But objectively? All I can say is that I wouldn't be convicted by a jury of my peers.

Now homeschooling, that's one of those rare words with an objectively definite meaning, at least when you're desperately trying to save face in a debate. And when it comes to teletubbies, I believe their gender is like their race - whichever box they want to check on their census forms.

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-03-2005
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 5:37pm

the mission statement for my elementary school:

"The mission of Sangre Ridge Elementary School is to provide a positive environment that encourages academic motivation and success and enables our youth to become responsible, perceiving, self-educating individuals."

The mission of the entire district:

"The mission of the Stillwater Public School District is to provide a learning environment that respects the individual needs of its students and helps them to reach their full potential."

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 5:39pm
I'm thinking gender is one of those subjective and culturally constructed categories when it comes to puppets. Unless there are objective criteria, you know, DNA tests? Different kinds of Teletubby genitals?
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 5:45pm
Our district's mission statement is quite similar to yours.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-03-2005
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 5:49pm
Then we interpret them quite differently. Earlier you said it was their mission to educate each child to their potential. I see that as significantly different from providing an enviroment that encourages their potential or helping them reach their potential. The latter (as our statements are worded) give room for the reality that a school cannot, and should not, be wholly responsible for the quality of a child's education. The child himself and the parents, and society to an extent, also have responsibilities there. And any school whose mission statement says that they will educate each child to his potential is gonna fail, if for no other reason than for the simply realistic fact that they cannot control at least two of the most important determinents of that child's success.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-28-2003
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 6:03pm
No. I would choose to help the group to whom it would matter more. Yes, I know that's up for debate, but a gifted child in a regular classroom is more likely to be functional in society than an MR child in a regular classroom.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-28-2003
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 6:23pm

But it isn't just about money. See my post #1875.

It is about a traditional school system that isn't working for some kids. It's about the general population not even having a baseline of knowledge on these kids, what they are like and what they might need. Look at the resistance just on this board, the grudge that people have against gifted kids getting any other education than that which is already offered. One woman is married to a "genuis" and since he thrived at regular traditional school, all gifted children can get what they need at regular traditional school, regardless. That's the mentality we're up against.

You went to medical school, right? Did you get a good education about nutrition and sleep? I have heard that many medical schools do a completely inadequate job of educating new doctors about proper nutrition and the value of sleep. (I don't know if that is still the case; perhaps the problem has been remedied in recent years.) So when a person goes to the doctor with symptoms of say, sleep apnea, many doctors don't see it because they simply haven't been educated about it. It's simple yet important. The same thing occurs in the educational system with gifted kids. Teachers aren't educated about giftedness and don't know how to recognize these kids, nor do they know what to do with them. The teachers aren't even sure how to recommend kids for the gifted program that may exist. They overwhelmingly choose high achievers over any other kind of kid. There are all sorts of old "wisdom" these teachers hold that just doesn't make sense in light of what we know about the brightest kids. Such as skipping a grade is social suicide for most bright kids. (A Nation Deceived is an academic report that disputes that notion, thoroughly researched and collaborated by many experts in the field.) Or that in reading proficiency the kids all even out by third grade and a precocious early reader is nothing to get excited about.

I really don't think it is about the money. It is about a system set up to do something other than educate all types of learners.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2006
Thu, 04-20-2006 - 6:23pm

whew....you scared me there for a second,susannah. at first glance, that pdd looked like ppd! ;)

i think all kids deserve a positive identification to their learning style, not negative.....when we were first counseled on special ed/iep, that negative stereotype was alive and well. but as we got to know the teachers in there, the other kids that were getting modifications, we realized it wasn't at all about not being smart enough, being dumb instead of mainstream or dumb instead of bright. it simply was an outlet to help our child learn a little better.

unfortunately, others have no problem stamping that *dumb* or *stupid* label on others and find absolutely nothing wrong with it. heck, websters even validates the meaning. but that's sad........those who can rise above and stop such cycle of criticism are the very ones smarter than those who find stupid, dumb ok.




Edited 4/20/2006 6:33 pm ET by egd3blessed

 

Pages