ExchangeEveryDay Past Issues

I think we need to be careful in jumping to the conclusion Fuller has is facts twisted. I'm reading his book and am finding it fascinating and covers quite a few different ideas and agendas on the UPK movement. The care needs to be taken in assuming we know all the facts and politics. Fuller talks about Rob Reiner's push for universal preschool. You might be surprised by his focus. I strongly suggest reading the book.

cI am totally and completely opposed to "mandatory" pre-school education. Our state doesn't even have mandatory kindergarten - in the districts that do offer public pre-school education, they offer a 5 day per week program with no part week options. Pre-school children are held to the same attendance policies as the older children. For some children - it's just too much, too soon. Not all children attend child care away from the home, for those that do some are part time programs, some cared away from the home in a child care center setting, some in home settings, some by extended family. WHY are we taking children out of the home "unnecessarily", away from parents, away from the nurturing, loving, "at play" learning environment that is most appropriate at this age, into a structured, stressful setting earlier than necessary? When will our children ever get to be CHILDREN - run free, in a learn thru play environment, in their own time, in their own place?? It's just too much, too soon with long term negative ramifications -in my opinion. Our schools are already struggling for funding for the appropriate age children - and we want to add more programs to fund? Our children are too standardized already - and we want to "standardize" our 3 & 4 year old children's day - even more than they already are for those children who must attend child care center settings?? I would not want this for my children. There are better ways if there are children in need of a better "early education".

I think 4 year degreee qualified staff are essential to provide leadership to early childhood services. They can effectively argue the case for play based curriculum and fight against the push down curriculum.
Early childhood services associated with schools leads to a greater acceptance of the professional knowledge and expertise of teachers in this area. It also promotes understanding between the two sectors of education. We are not that different.
In Victoria, Australia, some schools are trying a play based curriculum in the early years of school. For more information about this go to www.kathywalkeredcon.com.au

I agree with Fuller to a point and detest the idea of the "push down" curriculum that may happen if preschools are part of the elementary school experience. However, more often than not, child day care centers are staffed by inexperienced and unqualified teachers who only make minimum wage. When preschools are housed in elementary buildings, two positive things happen.
1) preschool teacher salaries go up and 2) elementary teachers attitudes and views of preschools and what they can accomplish are heightened.

Professor Fuller, has twisted the facts in his 2007 book. Progressive advocates of ECE never did ask any public education policy maker, to "adultify" young children with so much early academic pressure. Instead, they have advocated that young children learn through games, play, and fun filled activities in a high quality and relaxed environment.
The Bush's legacy of NCLB did have its toxic effects on early childhood field as well. Indeed, for the first time, NRS(National Reporting System) was forced on Head Start community in the name of Public Accountability. The intent was to discredit the public role, in educating our children, and instead shifting funds to selective banks in charge of public education. Look at the mushrooming of the Charter preschools across the land.

Finally, liberals advocated that providing public funds for preschool would help the economy, because parents need a quality child care for their kids in order to keep their employment. At the same time, the liberals advocated that the preschoolers learn through play, fun, and positive parents teacher guidance.

Conservatives, and their think tanks, like the Hoover Institute at Stanford University, advocated that preschoolers are not learning because teachers are not accountable in preparing preschoolers for kindergarten. Today, every public child care in this country looks like a mini kindergarten. The Conservatives guided the national policy with their reps. either in the White House, or across from it in the halls of Congress, or in the church!!

Although there is always a need to "test out" government funded programs, testing such as Work Sampling that is geared towards young children is so subjective that I find it hard to truly judge outcomes. I do believe that such a system of seeing outcomes is necessary. Just as in the school districts, there has to be some measure of success. Standardized testing has "left many children behind" as schools teach to the test and in Pennsylvania have instituted PSSA classes that remove children from the classroom. This has really limited the fully rounded school curriculum for these children. This became so clear to me when my own child said, "Mom. I am glad I am not stupid." I asked why she would say such a thing. She explained, " I would have to be in PSSA classes." This made me think...WOW not only is she afraid that her performance is being so closely scrutinized, but what opinion has this school district given her of some of her peers? It took some good conversations to make her see the whole picture and change the way she viewed her peers. Now, letting these same school districts get a hold of our youngest children would be an injustice to children and families. That is not the right environment for the young children, and I fear that teachers not properly trained in child development would only begin to fail our children at a younger age. As we in Pennsylvania now know, it is not always the best qualified teacher that gets the job! I know some people think that "state run" may not be bad, but remember that the state is not the trained professional and many state run programs depend on the laws and decisions of financially bound budgets. The best decisions must be in the best interest of children and families. It is the only way to ensure the desired outcomes, no matter how you measure them.

Government control and oversight is responsible when public funds are spent- I don't believe that "government control" is synomonous with standardization of what children experience or what their outcomes are- you can 'standardize' many aspects, including access to preschool programing that is developmentally appropriate. It doesn't mean that all children HAVE to go, (just like Kindergarten in most states), It does not mean that every State has to do the same thing- it does mean that children who might otherwise not have access would. While four year degrees may crowd out some from being a classroom teacher, there is room for talented and gifted adults in many settings, and salaries and benefits in the early childhood field reflect the ceiling that has been firmly in place. Early childhood as a field is following regular and special education for all children and we all benefit from working with the funding, laws and systems that enable young children who need access to access high quality programming.

Unfortunately, government "control" does demand standardization. Standardization goes hand in glove with bureaucracy, and government is by nature a bureaucracy. In addition government changes as the power of political parties shift. That means who is in control will constantly change and with that there will be philosophic shifts. The less centrist you are in your philosophic perspective the more disconcerting these shifts will be. Vouchers might be a solution, but that means less control.

WHy does "state run" inherently mean standardized and bad for kids? I never ever see this issue paired with the reality that children who are identified with special needs are entitled to FAPE (Free and Appropriate Public Education) from birth, and for 3 to 5's, that means with their typically developing peers. This is the law, where and how is this to happen? Only publicly funded preschool (NOT CHILDCARE) will ensure that all children, not just the poor or affluent, have access to preschool. We have NAEYC standareds to ensure that it's appropriate for all kids-

I agree with Bruce Fuller - we do not need to standardize our youngest children. Children learn through play and standardization will require teacher-led activities instead of child-initiated ones to make sure the tested skills are being met. Let's let kids be kids and not require such high demands on them until their brains are developmentally ready to acquire and retain the higher learning required for later years.