1. Discuss the reasons “highly
questionable practices” pose a problem for DOE schools.
According to the text there are four reasons that were placed to
explain the reason for “highly questionable practices” Towards these types of
practices it results to a trend that forms to demand more for kindergarten
students. The first practice is the inappropriate use of screening and
readiness test, second discouragement or outright denial of entrance to
eligible children, third is the development of segregated transitional classes
for children deemed unready for the next traditional level of school and lastly
is the increasing use of retention. From these types of practices its mainly
directed to those children who are able to achieve their groups. Where there
has been evidence that proved that children who are surround by those who are
likely to achieve more then themselves are likely to not do as well as those of
diverse and mixed groups of social, cognitive, and emotional development.
From these types of practices it does stand a problem for the
DOE schools because of the lack of intention of the child and their families
for the “protection of the child” to be able to hold a child back or to deny
their entry of school based off the child intellectual and affective abilities in
order to move to the next “traditional level’” as well as holding a child back
to repeat another year of a grade because of their age and the year that they
were born. So this allows a lot of preschoolers who have been in preschool to
have to take it for two or even three years because of their birthdays are
late.
2. Select your top 2 recommendations and explain why they are vital.
Looking at the recommendations of
the six different principles that look vital would be principle 2 and principle
6. According to principle 2 it is about children being enrolled based on their
legal right to enter. So basically this means that this doesn’t pressure
families to delay their entrance for a year based on the child age making
parent having to find other resources to enroll their child in. This is
something vital because of this a lot of parents are being forced to prolong
their child education but a lot of the time they call this “gift of time” so
parents feel that its no longer an obligation for their child to enter school
yet. To me this is very discouraging to families because of the wait and the
need to have to go somewhere else in order to give their child the education.
In my preschool we have had a handful of children that had to take preschool for
another year due to their “late birthday” because of this it holds a child back
developmentally and having to find a way as preschool teachers to find a way to
reach those standards that they should already be learning in Kindergarten. So
while they stay another year in preschool and they are all turning five its hard
to find other ways to challenge them. So I feel that its sad having to see
children stay in preschool longer and or having to wait another year before
they could ever enter school. For me I didn’t go to preschool and I entered
Kindergarten when I was four where my parents fought the school to let me in
because of the whole “no child left behind” act at the time. So just because a
child birthday is late they still fall under the same developmental year as
those ahead of them right?
Then as we look towards principle
6 we see that this is for all children are welcomed as they are into a
heterogeneous kindergarten setting. So this means that they are not segregated
into extra-year programs to or following regular kindergarten. With that being
said it means that all schools need to be able to accept the responsibility to
accept children with all skills that they bring and for the school to be able
to support the child in all of the learning areas. From that if children are
segregated by their academic achievement that evidence shows that through those
types of programs that children are likely to fail than from being mixed.
Having mixed groups over segregated groups actually help to improve the children’s
development.
1. Should
the field of ECE be standardized? Who benefits and who does not benefit?
If we are looking to standardize ECE like
normal school like in the article used report cards to show the children’s
“grades”. First it does help to benefit the parents and the families on where
their child stands for improvement and what they have already exceeded in. For
the children it would be a pressure where the child is more likely to lash out
emotionally because of their development growth. In most cases its not
beneficial at all because then the focus is more towards the standards then the
development process of the child. We do make observations of the child and we
do have a already set guideline to where the child is in there development but
as you can see that children only grow through their own pace and time so its
something that they are constantly improving on as they go through their
developmental paths. So in my own perspective having it become standardized is
something that is pushing the child too much in what they are already trying to
succeed themselves.
2. Recently
here in Hawaii, there was a bill in the state legislation, that did not pass,
that attempted to allow public funds to go to private preschools if they
complied with an assessment tool to measure readiness skills (academic and
social) and would have tracked student progress through a longitudinal data
system (part of the P-3/P-20 federal grant). What are the benefits and problems
with this approach to institutionalizing ECE?
The
benefits of being able to keep track of the children’s development shows where
the child stands and being able to have that when they are going to schools is
just like a transcripts when you transfer schools or when you get into schools.
In some ways it does create a competition among others entering the school
because it sets a guideline to the types of students that they are looking at
and if they are applicable to be entering the school or not. That would be a
benefit to have for schools but a negative thing would be how allowing only a
certain students in based off of the measurement of what they know so far.
Hi Jas! I agree with you when you say, "To me this is very discouraging to families because of the wait and the need to have to go somewhere else in order to give their child the education." After reading and reflecting, I realized that having children held back another year in preschool due to their age, can actually delay their developmental growth. I found this interesting because I thought that by holding a child back they are able to gain more experiences and knowledge. Thanks for sharing this week! Bri
ReplyDeleteHey Jas!
ReplyDeleteI agree about what you said about who would benefit. Parents will see the improvement that their children our making and where they stand. But yes for the children it would be a lot of pressure on them to do the work and get evidence of they are doing to show to them families. I also agree with that children grow at their own past and having ECE standardize would not beneficial families, children and teachers.
Hi Jasmine,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you about encouraging mixed-ability groups of children. I think it's ineffective to group children based on their similar level of ability or acquired skills and segregating other children who have not yet reached that level by placing them in readiness programs or special needs classes. I agree that by having a mixed group, children's development will improve because children will be given the opportunity to learn from peers who may be more proficient in a certain area than they are. Young children vary so much developmentally and I think it's important to have mixed groups of children so that they can learn and grow together.
Also, you mentioned the challenges some preschool teachers are experiencing with the new Kindergarten entry age cutoff. If you were to go out into the community and visit some Kindergarten classrooms, do you think this might help you come up with ideas on how to challenge those older preschoolers? Since this is something we are experiencing in our preschools, what are some other ways preschool teachers can make curriculum exciting and interesting for those who might have to spend an extra year in preschool?
Thank you for sharing,
Kaliko
Hi Jasmine,
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the answer to your first question, I want to push you a little. Why is moving the birthdays a problem for the DOE? Yes, it is a problem for the children and for families, but the DOE now doesn't have to worry about younger children affecting the scores of their tests (if this is their intention). So how do we address these problems that aren't exactly problems for the DOE but pose problems for the children and families they are supposed to be serving? As you mentioned in the answer to your second question, this problem also affects preschools as well and as the reading suggested, holding children back a year does not make any positive difference over time.
In regards to the last two questions, think about the bind the teachers and administrators in Texas found themselves in. They didn't believe in standardizing the field, at least on some level anyway, but found themselves having to be proactive and creating standards to avoid other people, presumably less knowledgeable than themselves, creating a system that wouldn't be relevant to our work with young children. The argument could be made (and was made in this week's reading) that our well-intended actions to create more access to "quality" early childhood programs winds up creating many unintended consequences that are incredibly detrimental to our work. We could lose our autonomy like those in in the DOE programs have, where they now have to teach to the test and their entire curriculum is more or less prescribed to them. How can we ensure that the legislation we advocate for avoids putting us in situations that we can't foresee? Thanks!