1. What strikes me as the most important aspect of this discussion of the relationship between social policy, child development, and later achievement is the idea of spending our money and investing in early education. After watching both movie clips, I can see how valuable education from ages 0-5 years can be. It amazed me the facts that were being told about the students involved in the Perry Preschool Project. This group of students were followed for 40 years and monitored throughout their education and work life. Not only were they on level during their whole educational career, they also went on to get jobs and are contributing back to society and making a fairly decent living. I wonder if we made 2 years of preschool mandatory for all students prior to entering Kindergarten, would we have success and have more students on level?
2. In regards to our conversation on school reform, this idea of investing money into early education (ages 0-5 years) is a real game changer. Throughout our discussion today, we spoke mainly about elementary, middle and high schools. In relation to test scores and NCLB, there is really no way a similar concept of NCLB could be implemented into an early education setting. To me, early education seems like a choice, but also a choice that is in high demand. By investing more money early on, we are setting our students up for success for the rest of their lives. How would we be able to give every student the opportunity of early education?
3. A question I have on this concept of investing money into early education: If we are preparing our children to be successful early on in life, will our elementary school's be enough to push these students to their full potential?
Commented on:
Taylor Franceschi
Kathryn Leonard
Whitney,
ReplyDeleteYour question of "How would we be able to give every student the opportunity of early education?" is one that I was struggling with while I watched the video. The entire time I was listening to the facts, I continued to question why we don't have ALL students participate in an early education program...money popped into my mind, but the more I began to think about it..the more I felt like it should just be a basic requirement. Parents are able to send their children to K-5...and that is definitely NOT cheap..even in public schools, so why would they not be able to do the same for preschool if it became a state requirement? I might be a little bit too strong headed with this idea, but just seeing how beneficial the Perry program was, it seems incredibly silly to not require all students to take part in something like that.
Whitney, I enjoyed your responses to the video clips. I agree that the pre-school years are so important to jump start education. I wish America was more like Qubec and valued early education in the same way. Here no pre-school education is free, and so many families simply can't afford to send their children to pre-school. Nowadays trying to go straight into Kindergarten without pre-school is setting your child up to be behind. Then we as teachers have to play catch up already in Kindergarten! This is a horrible cycle that all boils down to moeny. If our country invested more money in education reforms would be more successful and in turn we would be producing more productive and eduacted citizens!
ReplyDeleteWhitney,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your perspective on these videos. You bring up a good point about the availability of early education. It is very expensive and not readily available for every family, like April said. While the Perry Project and the findings in Quebec have significant impacts on the future of the students and of the economy, its hard for government officials to put so much money into an education reform. I think this is one of the downfalls to education being so political. If reform could be seen as an investment, of both students and society, I think things might start moving in a different direction. It really is a shame that everything focuses on $$$ even when we know it can be extremely beneficial to all involved.
Hi Whitney,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading your blog this week. I agree we need to invest in education 0-5, and I think it would make such a difference for the success of our children and our nation as a whole. I also loved your idea/question about making preschool mandatory for two years before entering K-12. I also think we would see such great results from this if implemented. I was also struck by the research on the Perry preschool, and it was amazing that they followed those students for 40 years. The benefits those children got from attending preschool helped them be more successful throughout their lives. It just seems so easy to ensure the success of all our children. The question I keep having is, why aren’t polices changing to invest in the success of future generations?
Whitney,
ReplyDeleteI too was amazed to hear the findings of the Perry Project. The fact that these individuals, even after 40 years, were still benefiting from the investment that was made in their early years is incredible. And because of their success, the US also benefited. You also raise an interesting point when you mention mandating 2 years of preschool for every child before entering Kindergarten. Having been a Kindergarten teacher for the past 8 years, I’ve seen firsthand how the achievement gap begins so early in education. If the US were to mandate 2 years of preschool before Kindergarten, it would have to do a better job of creating quality early childcare and preschools. Here in the Bay area, there are fewer and fewer students entering Kindergarten without any prior school experience, however the issue seems to be about quality and affordability. There are not enough public preschools and often families are forced to choose a privately run childcare center that it is within their price range whether or not it is of good educational quality.
Whitney-
ReplyDeleteI feel like we had extremely similar write-ups with regards to early childhood education. It seems like such a great idea to implement Early Childhood education and it makes me wonder what exactly it's going to take in order to get it started here in America.
Your question is very intriguing. I think it will be EASIER for elementary school teachers if more and more students come prepared to learn at the proper grade level because of their early childhood education as a 3- and 4-year old. I think the question isn't if elementary school teachers will be able to handle it, but to what extent will elementary teachers use this new advantage within their curriculum.