Gee, I wonder what could be happening?
Posted on 12/05/2016 8:08:13 AM PST by Academiadotorg
Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution wondered why "children who participated in Tennessee's statewide pre-K program had worse attitudes toward school and poorer work habits than children who didn't." Haskins co-authored a policy brief (entitled "Trouble in the Land of Early Childhood Education?") with Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, a professor at Columbia University, and they noted, "the past year has seen a disagreement erupt on the playground" regarding the future of pre-K early education.
They admitted, "One of the most important aspects of early education is its popularity with the public." They continued, "Public support is vital if we aim to expand the availability and quality of pre-K programs." They estimated, "the annual cost of Head Start is around $9,000 per child, and some pre-K programs cost as much as $15,000 per child or more." The program should be for low-income, poor single mothers and their children, the authors said. Citing poll results which could be considered vague, they noted that 89% of children "getting a 'strong start in life' is 'extremely' or 'very' important.'"
They also brought up the idea that pre-K programs may not be as effective as they had hoped.
(Excerpt) Read more at academia.org ...
That says it all.
Here is the routine. Squirt the kid out, stay at home nurturing it for about 6 weeks, then to daycare for 3 to 4 years while working. Now it is time for pre-K while enhancing the career some more. Remember meals provided for the little ones too. Now off to Kindergarten thru 12 grade with school providing breakfast so junior only has to stumble to schoolbus in time. Parents check in from time to time when they have nothing else to do. Wow, now it is off to the state college with all kinds of amenities of course a big pile of debt to go with it. Kid tells the ones who hatched him thanks for everything, daycare, pre k, Kindergarten, school, and all material goods.
And perhaps time to throw the education theories and teacher training created by John Dewey away and go back to pre-Dewey principles. Even the Soviets discarded his ideas as useless for producing an educated population a dozen or so years after they adopted them.
See: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/12/k12_occupied_territory.html
LET THEM PLAY!
And it doesn't matter how much money the government spends on "education".
Well I don’t know about where you live but here these government head start programs are full of nothing but minorities. Blacks and Mexicans. There’s one that operates at our community college and occasionally you’ll see a white kid on their play area.
One vulnerability of all these programs is how government hires the staff. If the hired staff are themselves functionally illiterate, how can they be expected to do anything useful for the kids?
What could go wrong.
Force young Children to sit still indoors.
Force them to listen to indoctrination.
Force them to go hungry with Moochelle approved food.
Force little boys on psychotropic drugs because they can’t sit still.
And administered by people the Brookings folks wouldn't hire to remove dog doodoo from their yards, for fear of them not doing it right, let alone attempting to do it at all.
Exactly.
Folks involved with education will tell you children aren’t ready for formal education at the ages they are trying to instill it in them. Of course even some of them have been brainwashed for political reasons, to support it.
Boys in particular are not wired to sit still and focus until about a year later than girls. Girls generally start out ahead and the boys catch up quickly.
What we all know is that this is about re-education, a word that shouldn’t be used with children, but the powers that be today can’t wait to instill their biases in children.
What’s this early education all about?
The experts know that children form many beliefs and concepts at a early age. The earlier the educators can interrupt the parents instilling their values in the children, the better little Leftist trolls they’ll be able to turn out to be.
Mommy and daddy are two different sexes. Children shouldn’t buy into that concept should they? You and I say yes. The education trolls say no. Get to them early and explain why not. UG!
Kids develop an adverse opinion of education because it is forced on them too early. Who could have seen that coming?
Rob Reiner perhaps?
Head Start has always been popular however (it's for the chirren after all), provides meals and vaccination opportunities and such, and serves as a jobs program for otherwise unemployable inner city women-- paid to babysit their own children, basically.
These may be worthwhile by-products but are sure not worth $9000 per kid.
It's simply become a minority set-aside liberal votes.
Our son, now 51 yrs. old, with a doctoral degree from
Oxford University (Oriel), England and now gainfully
employed. Did not start to school until he was nearly
7 yrs. old (his birthday fell like that). He stayed home
with me until he started first grade. Had a daily afternoon
nap. Did OK.
He had some student loans after we finally tapped out.
He almost despaired of paying them back. I told him he
would have to repay them like he would eat an elephant -
ONE BITE AT A TIME. (I think he’s probably about a third
of the way through devouring that elephant by now.):o)
The range of age when a child goes into Kindergarten can be up to a year. When you account for differences in maturation rates, boys vs girls, etc. you can have up to a three “year” difference between the “readiest” and least ready for school. And this is not accounting for how good or bad parents might be at rearing their children. When you factor that in, you can see why kindergarten teachers earn their pay.
I helped with Kindergarten screening at my school one year. Some kids had already started to read. Some did not know colors. Some, apparently, had never heard the word “no” in their lives, judging by their behavior. At the end of screening someone would have to tell a parent that their child was not “ready”. Of course that meant a loss of a year’s free baby sitting. And some kids who did get in, had to be held back (ie. they flunked kindergarten) because even after a year, they were nowhere near reading for 1st grade.
There are two or three things one can take away from all of this. The most important is that good parenting is vital for future success at school and life. Another is that good parenting can not be required or imposed or replaced by the government. And maybe most importantly, those unprepared, wild-child kindergarten kids in a dozen years will be adults that many of us will get to live near.
My ex was working Head Start when I met her. The poor kids that she was working with do not stand a chance. They are rarely even talked to, let alone nurtured. The children would be better off in an orphanage. Good argument for sterilization too.
Libs think they can educate everybody out of poverty. There will always be people that are too simple minded and will barely know how to do the basics, certainly they will never learn a trade.
“Government subsidized babysitting”
Hey, they need privacy to make more government checks; er, I mean make more babies.
So I was correct. Nothing but babysitting facilities. No learning taking place whatsoever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.