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: 09-04-1997
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 3:45pm
Because it's pretty clear that you, by refusing to honor the commonly accepted definitions the rest of the people on the board are using, and managing to use to good effect to communicate among themselves, have found them to be a hindrance to whatever it is you want to get across.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-01-2003
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 3:54pm
ITA - even in the richest school systems in the country they cannot accommodate everyone to their level. It is a nice goal, but IMO unrealistic. My nephew was/is very bright. He is now in college, but when he was young his parents supplemented his learning with courses and tests for kids out of the 'Center for Talented Youths'.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-13-2006
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 3:55pm

"Because it's pretty clear that you, by refusing to honor the commonly accepted definitions the rest of the people on the board are using, and managing to use to good effect to communicate among themselves, have found them to be a hindrance to whatever it is you want to get across."

You have stated that common definitions do not = objectively true definitions.

Why then are you of the opinion that common definitions simply aren't up for debate?

Seems rather contradictory don't you think?

iVillage Member
Registered: 08-27-2005
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 3:56pm

"The average child, IMO, if drilled by their parents could be reading at an early age, earlier than is formally taught in school."

Yes, I agree with that, though I have to say that many children still won't get reading before 6 or 7 even with drilling. What I find hard to deal with is parents who won't accept that learning to read at 6 or 7 is just fine as well.

Don't let the multiple languages fool you, btw :-). Most kids easily transfer reading skills between languages. Bilingual children often figure out how to read in a second language on their own if the alphabet and many of the phonetic rules are similar. Once dd figured out how to read Swedish (she was much later than her brother but still didn't need much help), she could read German equally well straight away. The phonetic rules are very similar between the two languages. She struggles more with English because she just plain doesn't like the idea of sight words. Everything should be phonetic, as far as she's concerned! Ds tended to prefer learning sight words in the beginning so he had an easier time with English.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 4:00pm
Well, you caught me. I don't know much at all about Teletubbies. They look like puppets to me, but I admit my acquaintance is limited, having seen them only on the shelves of stores. But I do know this. They have no biological sex, because they are not found in nature, correct? Somebody imposed a gender onto them. And an imposed gender is a cultural notion of what it is to be a woman or a man; a construct based on the social shaping of femininity and masculinity. Gender includes subjective concepts about character traits and expected behaviors that vary from place to place and person to person. Unless you can show me the male and female organs that differentiate Teletubbies and allow them to reproduce, I'm gonna say that your perception of whether LaLa is gendered male or female is based on entirely subjective cultural criteria.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 4:07pm
Definitions are up for debate if and when the community of debaters finds it reasonable or interesting or necessary or productive to do so. You have so far been unable to elicit any interest in questioning the meanings of common terms such as "homeschooling" probably because no one except yourself sees any reason to to do. None of the rest of us have any problem with the term as it is used in current parlance, hence no interest whatsoever in searching for a new commonly-agreed upon definition.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-29-2004
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 4:15pm

<>

IYO. Otherwise, anything goes. Gotcha.

<<"Now homeschooling, that's one of those rare words with an objectively definite meaning,">>

Ahem. Any true "homeschooling" devotee should be able to recognize irony when she sees it. Also that certain point where a poster has gone well past taking a debate seriously.

<>

The real "homeschooling" aficionado should also be able to tell the difference between an *opinion* and "objective meaning", which seems for some reason to be important to you.

<>

In that case, you should be fine with *my* definition of homeschooling. Which is: "the things I do with my kids when they're not in public school". But somehow I don't think you will be fine with my definition. You just want everyone else to be fine with yours. Even though it's not an "objectively definite meaning". Hm-m-m-m... okay.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-01-2003
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 4:21pm

Yes, I agree with that, though I have to say that many children still won't get reading before 6 or 7 even with drilling. What I find hard to deal with is parents who won't accept that learning to read at 6 or 7 is just fine as well. >>>

When my boys were little (now 14 and 12) we read to them every night. We did this really up to about 3rd grade. I never sat down with them and tried to teach them letter sounds etc. Not once. But we read every night. My older son was sounding words out a bit at the beginning of 1st grade and it was probably March before he really took off. Once he did, though, he developed very quickly. My younger one was sounding words out at the end of kindergarten and really took off 1st grade as well, earlier in the first grade year than the older child though.

Now in 8th and 6th grades, my older son gets a mix of A's and B's; the younger gets mostly A's (but that's what the 8th grader got in 6th grade as well - all A's). That is with minimum effort in schoolwork. We live in a very competitive school district with tough academic schools so I think they are doing very well. In some of our surrounding towns they would probably be A/A+ students consistently. With a little more effort, my older one could be all A's but he's full of himself right now as a big fish in the 8th grade.

They are by no means geniuses, but they are both good strong students with good work habits. And they learned how to read in 1st grade. I was just fine with it, but you are right some parents tend to panic about stuff like that. I feel sorry for their kids.

There is a town around here that I just read about that had an exorbitant # of teen suicides and even more attempts in the last year. This is a town with excellent school systems and very high achieving kids. I think a lot of these kids are just feeling so much pressure to perform either self-imposed, or by their parents or by their school systems. I don't know but it is very sad that it has come to this.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-05-2000
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 5:23pm

My personal quirk is that while education is important, school isn't the only way to get one. Dylan goes to public school not just to get an education but for the social education of working in a group, learning to work cooperately with others, follow the rules even when there is no adult leading the game, etc. Things he is also getting out of karate class. But these are things that he is somewhat lacking at home because of the age disparaty with his sisters.

Chris

The truth may be out there but lies are in your head. Terry Pratchett

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-13-2006
Fri, 04-21-2006 - 5:51pm

"It is a fact that I believe these things to be true."

A fact or an objective fact?

Pages