Preschool Behaviors

Preschool behaviors,preschool behaviour issue,difficult preschool behaviors,managing preschool behaviors,challenging preschool behaviors,bad preschool behaviors,dealing preschool behaviors,disruptive preschool behaviors,common preschool behaviors,articles preschool behaviors
 
Today there was a Washington Post article reprinted in the Salt Lake Tribune, Study: Day Care Can Lead to Bad Behavior. It was very similar to an article that I talked about in the blog last year. Some recent research studies suggest that children in daycare and preschools seem to display more behavior problems, which continue through grade 6. The study quoted in this article suggests that this happens even in quality preschool settings. I was disturbed that the study downplays the fact that children in these settings do display increased language and school preparatory skills. In other words, preschool/daycare settings seem to be accomplishing academic tasks.
 
Critics of the research point to the fact that there were no control groups and the turnover in early childhood settings would naturally contribute to children's behavior issues. I agree that social and emotional strategies are not taught and used effectively in many preschool/daycare settings. I also agree that the parent element is often the one that keeps behavior in check, as mentioned in the study.
But, I must agree with the critics of the study and add that until we pay early childhood educators a high enough salary to make them stay, the staff transition rates will always be high. Yes, that would definitely effect children's behavior. Unless parents take on a more active role in their child's behavior, school can only do so much. The researchers should not be so quick to blame all negative behaviors on the preschool setting. More funding and parent responsibility seem to be at issue as much or more than the preschool.

Childhood Obesity

Childhood Obesity,childhood obesity facts,childhood obesity in america,childhood obesity articles,childhood obesity statistics 2012,childhood obesity prevention,childhood obesity causes,childhood obesity definition,childhood obesity in america statistics
  
We definitely have an obesity epidemic in our country. I recently researched the topic for a presentation and was sad to learn that close to 10% of our preschool children are overweight. When children are overweight they have an 80% chance to be an obese adult. There is a list of culprits, but the main dangers are high-fat foods and lack of physical activity. It doesn't help that many school systems have recently cut physical activity from the school day. 
Add to that high-fat school meals and it is a recipe for an obese child. We need to be more responsible than that. The first thing I have done is get rid of any high fat/sugar treats for my grandchildren. Now we have healthy treats at my house and we try to be outside doing activities more often. I want them to be healthy adults.

The Early Childhood Science of Discovery

Early Childhood Science,early childhood science experiments,early childhood science lessons,early childhood science curriculum,early childhood science activities,early childhood science articles,early childhood science units,early childhood science education,early childhood science books
 
 
Early Childhood Science, we were talking in one of my university classes about creativity in science. Our discussion led to how important it is to help a child 'discover' or learn about the world around her. In fact, in this age of technology and electronic gadgets, I think that many people fail to observe what is happening to the Earth around them. It usually takes something devastating, like the earthquake/tsunami in Japan, to bring people back to the reality of how our world functions. Providing science discovery activities in the classroom can help the child understand when events like this do happen.
Early Childhood Science, the biggest reason to provide great science discovery is to help the child enjoy and notice the beauties of the world. I think this discovery leads to more respectful citizens who value the earth and perhaps will be more inclined to care for our precious environment and resources. I also think that teachers who 'don't have time to teach science,' don't understand how science reinforces reading and math and science activities can be used just as effectively as activities we usually label math and reading. When I have children sort and classify seashells or leaves in the science center, they are using skills that will help them sort mathematical items and letters of the alphabet. All the world can work together if we just give it a chance.

Early Childhood Education Journal

Early childhood education journal,early childhood education journal articles,early childhood education journal acceptance rate,early childhood education journal impact factor,early childhood education journals online,free early childhood education journal articles,free early childhood education journals,contemporary issues in early childhood education journal
Early Childhood Education Journal is a professional publication for early childhood practitioners such as classroom teachers child care providers and teacher educators all of whom are dedicated to the education and care of young children ages birth through eight. The journal publishes peer-reviewed articles covering curriculum child care programs administration staff development family-school relationships equity issues multicultural units health nutrition facilities special needs employer-sponsored care infant/toddler programs child development advocacy and more. Articles analyze issues trends policies and practices as well as offering well-documented points-of-view and practical recommendations. Areas of Emphasis : International studies; Educational programs in diverse settings; Projects demonstrating inter-professional collaboration; Qualitative and quantitative research and case studies; Theory research and practice relating to professional development; Family support and community action programs.

Early Childhood Studies

Early childhood studies, early childhood studies degree, early childhood studies jobs, early childhood studies review
Early Childhood Studies, As the number of infants and toddlers entering early childhood studies continues to grow, a Victoria University researcher has been investigating what the role of the teachers of very young children should be.

Professor Carmen Dalli, a leading expert in early childhood education, will share her research on early childhood education for under-two year olds in her inaugural professorial lecture at Victoria University next Tuesday.
Her lecture will explore some of the ideological debates surrounding early childhood education for under-twos, and how they impact on the teachers working in the sector.

"My research is concerned with the role of the teachers of very young children, and the unique challenges they face. Ultimately, it?s about finding out how people working in early childhood services can do their very best for young children."

Professor Dalli has spent much of her academic career conducting research into this issue-

which affected her personally, as she balanced raising three children with completing her own PhD studies and working as a Lecturer at Victoria University.

Her research has involved many different aspects of early childhood education, including how to enhance the experience of starting childcare for parents and children. She has also conducted national surveys of early childhood educators as part of her interest in professionalism in the workforce. In the 1990s, she worked on the creation of New Zealand?s first Code of Ethics for early childhood teachers.

"Professionalism is not just an individual attribute. It is ethical and political. It is embedded in the broader context of teachers? work."

Vice-Chancellor Professor Pat Walsh says Victoria?s inaugural lecture series is an excellent opportunity for professors to share insights into their specialist areas of study with family, friends, colleagues and the local community.

"Inaugural lectures are also an excellent opportunity for the University to celebrate and acknowledge our valued professors," says Professor Walsh.

Professor Dalli is based in the School of Educational Psychology and Pedagogy at Victoria University, and is Director of the Institute for Early Childhood Studies. She is also an Associate Director of the Jessie Hetherington Centre for Educational Research.

Professor Dalli has advised a variety of organisations, governmental departments and early childhood education groups throughout her career, and this year has provided advice to the Minister of Education as a member of a Ministerial Advisory Group on Quality for Under-Two Year Olds in Early Childhood Centres.

Early Childhood Education Salary

early childhood education salary,early childhood education salary in georgia,early childhood education salary in ohio,early childhood education salary in florida,early childhood education salary 2011,early childhood education salary nyc,early childhood education salary in wisconsin,early childhood education salary 2012,early childhood education salary in california,early childhood education salary illinois
Early Childhood Education Salary, If you’ve ever thought of changing into a preschool teacher and supporting kid development then you have to be compelled to understand that the salary you may earn is unquestionably mammoth. and also the future appearance smart for those that earn their degrees for this field. you may do a lot of worse than earning an Early Childhood Education Salary.
The states are paying additional for childhood development each passing year. which means the first Childhood Education Salaries go up yet.

The kind of places you may work in with a degree in Early Childhood Education would be grade faculties, kindergartens, preschools, or day care centers. The salary vary goes from $22K a year to $39K a year. this is often hooked in to location, experience, employer, and alternative circumstances.
There are lots of universities yet as alternative establishments that have well established Early Childhood Education department. With all the varied pre-schools, nursery faculties, and daycare centers displayed all across America it’s quite simple to land a footing during this career field.

There are thereforeme who say that Early Childhood Education jobs don’t pay so smart. this is often not true in any respect. The people that say this are those who didn’t wish to use themselves. Once you begin out if you choose promotions like moving up from an assistant teacher to being a full teacher, and then from there to guide teacher, things may be specialized.

You Can Earn An Early Childhood Education Salary several Ways:

This career field opens several doors. One would be teaching kindergarten youngsters and children from the primary grade to the third. Some faculties have their Early Childhood Education go up to the second grade. In America Early Childhood Education happens to be compulsory. which means you'd be able to realize these jobs in public faculties yet.

With your degree you'll additionally realize work at a replacement ECE center. If you've got the proper qualifications during this field then you'll initiate and additionally run a replacement ECE center anywhere at intervals the us.

Private faculties are open for you to use. The are personal academies yet as church-sponsored faculties where you'd be able to apply to show.

There are lots of Child-Care centers where you'd be required. you may work as a baby Care Teacher or a baby Care Director. it'd depend upon the precise degree and qualifications you've got however it may be attainable for you to use to figure as a director or a coach.

Another risk for you once you've got your ECE degree is functioning as a Recreation aide or a program leader. There are some of those government-aided programs and a few privately run programs existing within the US.

You could choose changing into An Early Childhood Interventionist. Your degree may be used to use for employment at an establishment that deals specifically with youngsters beneath 3 years elderly.

When you work for a personal college or a non secular organization then the salary are negotiated between applicant and establishment. once you work in an exceedingly public college then the salaries are all fastened and also the government determines them.

Earning an Early Childhood Education Salary will cause you to a pleasant living. particularly if you choose your promotions once you start. And there may be no worth placed on the reward and satisfaction of serving to our very little future voters get off to a decent begin. There are some smart on-line programs to assist you start. All it takes is a few analysis and obtaining enrolled. Get enrolled these days.

Early Childhood Development

Early Childhood Development, early childhood development stages
The Welborn Baptist Foundation, Inc., through its Early Childhood Development Committee, has to established and implemented a comprehensive early childhood program that, beginning at birth, emphasizes the child’s health as a whole, including behavioral, emotional, and intellectual development, as well as physical well-being.1 This program acknowledges, promotes and encourages parents as children’s first and best teachers and provides the tools to help children develop language and literacy skills with the support of their parents or primary caregivers, who will also have the opportunity to improve their own skills.

It  also endeavors to: 1) address child care needs of children through age five, in a variety of care settings, driven by age appropriate strategies; 2) engage and inform parents, the public, and policymakers on issues affecting child care; 3) provide access to support services to parents, the child care providing community and the direct caregivers of children. This program is designed employing leading expertise in the respective subject areas (in the form of nationally recognized experts as well as a local knowledge base that will serve as an Advisory Committee to the Early Childhood Committee). It has established the highest standards of care and utilize the best practices available to ensure the highest quality program. It has also incorporated rigorous evaluation standards that will assess whether the program is successful in achieving the desired outcomes, measure the program’s costs and determine the relation of the program’s costs to its outcomes.

This program incorporates the following components:
 ·   Behavioral and physical development of children ages birth to 5;
·    Parent Education;
·    Family Literacy;
·    Child Care

In 2005, the Welborn Baptist Foundation began a major new initiative in early childhood development. This initiative is now in entering its third year, and has resulted in significant Foundation investments directed towards improving the quality of early childhood development.
Child care providers (family home and center-based) interested in learning more about, or participating in, this initiative are encouraged to contact 4C of Southern Indiana, Inc. at (812) 423-4008 or visit the 4C website at www.child-care.org.

In 2007, the Foundation funded the establishment of the Healthy Steps for Young Children Initiative in two pediatric clinical settings. Healthy Steps is a national initiative that focuses on the importance of the first three years of life. This program was developed by an interdisciplinary pediatric team at the Boston University School of Medicine and piloted in 24 public clinic and private practice/residency settings across the country. Healthy Steps emphasizes a close relationship between health care professionals and parents in addressing the physical, emotional, and intellectual growth and development of children from birth to age three and seeks to incorporate into the pediatric and family practice settings, preventive developmental and behavioral services.

Based upon the continuing development of initiatives related to early childhood development, the Foundation is not accepting letters of interest in this target area at this time.

Early Childhood Education Research

early childhood education research, early childhood education research topics, early childhood education research articles, early childhood education research paper
Early Childhood Education Research, Some of the most ambitious and expensive educational evaluations conducted in this country have looked at programs growing out of Head Start – that is, programs begun in the 1960s to help disadvantaged young children.  One of those efforts, known as Follow Through, was originally intended to provide support for children after they left preschool.  Threatened by the Nixon Administration with a loss of funding, Follow Through was hastily reinvented as an experiment involving more than a dozen different models of instruction at more than a hundred sites around the country.  Among the results of that comparison was the finding that some programs emphasizing basic skills – in particular, a model known as Direct Instruction, in which teachers read from a prepared script in the classroom, drilling young children on basic skills in a highly controlled, even militaristic fashion, and offering reinforcement when children produce the correct responses – appeared to produce the best results.  Proponents of this kind of teaching have trumpeted this finding ever since as a vindication of their model.

Of course, even if these results could be taken at face value, we don’t have any basis for assuming that the model would work for anyone other than disadvantaged children of primary school age.  But it turns out that the results can’t be taken at face value because the whole study was, to put it bluntly, a mess.  It’s worth elaborating on that assertion at least briefly because of the role these findings have played in giving the appearance of empirical support for a drill-and-skill approach to teaching – and also because it will help us to understand why other studies have supported exactly the opposite conclusion.
To begin with, the primary research analysts wrote that the “clearest finding” of Follow Through was not the superiority of any one style of teaching but the fact that “each model’s performance varies widely from site to site.”[1] In fact, the variation in results from one location to the next of a given model of instruction was greater than the variation between one model and the next.  That means the site that kids happened to attend was a better predictor of how well they learned than was the style of teaching (skills-based, child-centered, or whatever).
Second, the primary measure of success used in the study was a standardized multiple-choice test of basic skills called the Metropolitan Achievement Test.  While children were also given other cognitive and psychological assessments, these measures were so poorly chosen as to be virtually worthless.[2]  Some of the nontraditional educators involved in the study weren’t informed that their programs were going to end up being judged on this basis.[3]  The Direct Instruction teachers methodically prepared their students to succeed on a skills test and, to some extent at least, it worked.  As the study’s authors put it, Follow Through proved that

models that emphasize the kinds of skills tested by certain subtests of the Metropolitan Achievement Test have tended – very irregularly – to produce groups that score better on those subtests than do groups served by models that emphasize those skills to a lesser degree.  This is hardly an astonishing finding; to have discovered the contrary would have been much more surprising.[4]

Finally, outside evaluators of the project – as well as an official review by the U. S. General Accounting Office – determined that there were still other problems in its design and analysis that undermined the basic findings.[5]  Their overall conclusion, published in the Harvard Educational Review, was that, “because of misclassification of the models, inadequate measurement of results, and flawed statistical analysis,” the study simply “does not demonstrate that models emphasizing basic skills are superior to other models.”[6]  Furthermore, even if Direct Instruction really was better than other models at the time of the study, to cite that result today as proof of its superiority is to assume that educators have learned nothing in the intervening three decades about effective ways of teaching young children.  The value of newer approaches – including Whole Language, as we’ll see -- means that comparative data from the 1960s now have a sharply limited relevance.

That suspicion is strengthened by recent anecdotal evidence about Direct Instruction and similar programs in which children are trained, not unlike pets, to master a prescribed set of low-level skills.  Reporters for the New York Times and Education Week visited Direct Instruction (DI) classrooms -- in North Carolina and Texas, respectively -- and coincidentally published their accounts in the same month, June 1998.  The Education Week reporter found that sixth-grade students, successfully trained to do well on the main standardized test used in Texas, couldn’t explain what was going on in the book they were reading or even what the title meant.  Apparently, she concluded, “mastering reading skills does not guarantee comprehension.”  The Times reporter had been told by the for-profit company running a DI-style school that all of their kindergartners had been trained to read.  “All you have to remember” as a teacher, he was told, “is that you can’t go off the script.”  But when the reporter showed the children “something basic they’d never seen,” they couldn’t make heads or tails of it.  A regimented drill-and-skill approach had trained them to “read” only what had been on the teachers’ script.[7]

Even apart from journalistic investigation, it’s common knowledge among many inner-city educators that children often make little if any meaningful progress with skills-based instruction.[8]  But failure in this situation is typically attributed to the teachers, or to the limited abilities of the children, or to virtually anything except the model itself.  In contrast, whenever problems persist in nontraditional classrooms, this is immediately cited as proof of the need to go “back to basics.”

Not only does this represent an indefensible double standard, but a lot more research dating back to the same era as the Follow Through project supports a very different conclusion.  Several independent studies of early-childhood education have compared tightly controlled, skills-oriented classrooms (such as DI) to an assortment of “developmentally appropriate” (DA) approaches, including those referred to as child-centered or constructivist, and those making use of the Montessori or High/Scope models.[9]

For example, an Illinois study of poor children from the mid-1960s found immediate achievement gains in reading and arithmetic for the DI group, a result that might have given the traditionalists something to boast about if it weren’t for the fact that the investigators continued tracking the students after they left preschool.  With each year that went by, the advantage of two years of regimented reading-skills instruction melted away, and soon proved equivalent to “an intensive 1-hour reading readiness support program” provided to another group.  One difference did show up much later, though:  almost three quarters of the DA kids ended up graduating from high school, as compared to less than half of the DI kids.  (The latter rate was equivalent to that of students who hadn’t attended preschool at all).[10]

Research that follows people over a considerable period of time is expensive to conduct and therefore relatively rare, but its findings are far more powerful than those from short-term studies.  Frankly, given how much happens to us over the years, it would be remarkable to find that any single variable from our early childhoods had a long-term effect.  That’s why the results from another such study are nothing short of amazing.  Back in the 1960s, a group of mostly African-American poor children from Michigan were randomly assigned to DI, free-play, or High/Scope constructivist preschools.  They were followed from that point, when they were three or four years old, all the way into adulthood.  As in the Illinois sample, the academic performance of the DI children was initially higher but soon became (and remained) indistinguishable from that of the others.  By the time they were 15 years old, other differences began showing up.  The DI group had engaged in twice as many “delinquent acts,” were less than half as likely to read books, and generally showed more social and psychological signs of trouble than did those who had attended either a free-play or a constructivist preschool.[11]

When the researchers checked in again eight years later, things had gotten even worse for the young adults who had attended a preschool with a heavy dose of skills instruction and positive reinforcement.  They didn’t differ from their peers in the other programs with respect to their literacy skills, total amount of schooling, income, or employment status.  But they were far more likely to have been arrested for a felony at some point and also to have been identified as “emotionally impaired or disturbed.”  (Six percent of the High/Scope and free-play preschool group had been so identified at some point, as compared to a whopping 47 percent of the DI group.)  The researchers also looked to see who was now married and living with his or her spouse.  The results:  18 percent of the free-play preschool group, 31 percent of the High/Scope group, and not a single person from the DI group.[12]

It might be tempting to say that these disturbing findings have to be weighed against the academic benefits of a back-to-basics preschool model – except that both studies showed that any such benefits are washed away very quickly.  Moreover, a third experiment, with kindergartners in Louisiana, failed to find even a short-term boost in test scores.  There were no significant differences between the two groups at the end of the year, or at the end of first or second grade.  What did distinguish the different models in this study was that the children who had been taught with the skills-based approach were “more hostile and aggressive, anxious and fearful, and hyperactive and distractible” than children who had attended more developmentally appropriate kindergarten classrooms – and they remained so a full year later.  (Other research has confirmed the presence of much higher levels of “stress-related behaviors” as a result of direct instruction techniques.)[13]  Furthermore, when the researchers broke the results down by race, economic background, and gender, they found that low-income black males were “most likely to be hurt by . . . teach-to-the-test instruction.”  This was true, first, because they experienced an unusual amount of stress, and second, because, for this group, there was a difference in academic achievement:   those in the skills-oriented classrooms didn’t do as well even on skills-oriented tests.[14]

Three other studies conducted in the 1980s and ‘90s seem to clinch the case:

* When DI was compared to a constructivist model not unlike High/Scope in six Alaskan kindergarten classrooms (whose students were mostly white and from economically diverse backgrounds), the latter students did as well or better on standardized tests of reading and math.[15]

* When a didactic, basic-skills focus was compared to a child-centered focus in 32 preschool and kindergarten classes in California, children in the former group did better on reading tests (consistent with the short-term advantage found in some of the other studies), neither better nor worse on math tests, and terribly on a range of nonacademic measures.  The skills kids had lower expectations of themselves, worried more about school, were more dependent on adults, and preferred easier tasks.[16]

*  A study of more than 250 children in Washington, D. C. that began in 1987 compared those from “child-initiated,” “middle-of-the-road,” and “academically directed” preschool  and kindergarten classrooms.   Those from the child-initiated preschools “actually mastered more basic skills by initiating their own learning experiences” and continued to do well as the years went by.  The middle-of-the-roaders fell behind their peers.  As for those from the academically directed group, their “social development declined along with mastery of first-grade reading and math objectives. . . . By fourth and fifth grades, children from academic pre-K programs were developmentally behind their peers and displayed notably higher levels of maladaptive behavior” – particularly in the case of boys.[17]

In keeping with my earlier cautions about deriving a single conclusion from a range of very different studies, I should emphasize that the research with young children includes many different variables that might affect the results:  social and economic class, age (what’s true of preschoolers may not be true of second graders), the specific nature of the child-centered alternative(s), and a focus on short-term versus long-term effects as well as on academic versus nonacademic issues.  Still, with the single exception of the Follow-Through study (where a skills-oriented model produced gains on a skills-oriented test, and even then, only at some sites), the results are striking for their consistent message that a tightly structured, traditionally academic model for young children provides virtually no lasting benefits and proves to be potentially harmful in many respects.



Addendum:

Newer references dealing with the use of traditional instruction for young children

* superiority of preschool classrooms in which children can choose their own activities (as compared with more academic and/or whole-group instruction):

Rebecca Marcon, “Moving Up the Grades,” Early Childhood Research & Practice, Spring 2002

J.E. Montie et al., “Preschool Experience in 10 Countries: Cognitive and Language Performance at Age 7,” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 21 (Fall 2006): 313 –331

*  disadvantages of direct instruction in preschool:

Arthur Reynolds et al., “Long-Term Effects of an Early Childhood Intervention on Educational Attainment and Juvenile Arrest,” Journal of the American Medical Association 285 (2001): 2339-46

*  how explicit instruction impedes exploration and learning:

Elizabeth Bonawitz et al., "The Double-Edged Sword of Pedagogy," Cognition 120 (2011): 322-30

*  academic superiority of constructivist kindergarten classrooms:

Judy Pfannenstiel and Sharon Ford Schattgen, “Evaluating the Effects of Pedagogy Informed by Constructivism,” paper presented at the annual meeting of AERA, 1997

*  academic benefits for 2nd-3rd grade students whose teachers have a constructivist orientation:

Fritz C. Staub and Elsbeth Stern, “The Nature of Teachers’ Pedagogical Content Beliefs Matters for Students’ Achievement Gains,” Journal of Educational Psychology 94 (2002): 344-55

*  academic & psychological benefits of nontraditional (differentiated, supportive) teaching in 1st grade:

Kathryn E. Perry et al., “Teaching Practices and the Promotion of Achievement and Adjustment in First Grade,” Journal of School Psychology 45 (2007): 269-92

Early childhood education

Investing in early childhood education will yield spectacular economic edges — each for kids and taxpayers, per a National Institutes of Health study that followed participants till age twenty six. every greenback spent on Chicago-based, federally funded Child-Parent Centers generates $4 to $11 in come, each as a result of kids finished highschool or faculty, earning quite their peers, and additionally as a result of participants were less probably to be held back, arrested, depressed, concerned with medication or sick, the study says.
That's up to an one hundred and eightieth annual rate of come, says Arthur Reynolds, a professor at the University of Minnesota and lead author of the study, printed these days in kid Development.
The program, that has concerned quite 100,000 low-income families since 1967, includes options like serious parental involvement and education, meals, health services and residential visiting, Reynolds says. kids begin preschool at age three and continue through third grade, regarding age nine.
"A comparatively modest investment early will pay massive dividends throughout the lifetime of a toddler," says James Griffin, of the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institutes of kid Health and Human Development, who wasn't concerned within the study.

Researchers analyzed records for quite one,500 low-income kids born in 1979 or 1980. regarding ninety three of kids were black and seven were Hispanic, the study says.
Without additional attention, several low-income kids fall behind before they even enter kindergarten, Griffin says. youngsters then realize it more durable and more durable to catch up, and are a lot of probably to drop out of faculty, he says. sensible preschool programs will create a powerful early impression, alllowing youngsters to thrive and become assured learners, Griffin says.

"Most 3- and 4-year-olds are needing to learn," Griffin says. "You will either build on that, otherwise you will squash it."

Finding the cash to launch such programs is robust, says Bruce Fuller, a professor of education and public policy at the University of California-Berkeley, who wasn't concerned within the new study. He notes that the Chicago program — that spends quite $8,500 per preschool student — is costlier than similar programs.

And the Child-Parent Centers might not deserve 100 percent of the credit for the children's success, Fuller says.

Fuller notes that folks were able to value more highly to be part of the program. thus it's potential that kids did well a minimum of partly as a result of their folks were committed to their education, not simply because of the program.

The Chicago program's success might return partly from the very fact that it continues through early elementary college, Fuller says.

He notes that a recent study of Head begin, a federally funded preschool program for at-risk youngsters, found that the majority of the program's edges seem to disappear by the time youngsters are in 1st grade.

"We have to be compelled to improve our elementary college education, as well," Fuller says.

Childhood Education

Childhood Education, Childhood Education Tips

A Guide for Parents Seeking Help for Special childhood education
Special childhood education can be a touchy subject for parents. Most of the time, parents would be the ones seeking out that needed extra assistance when children begin to show signs of autism. This is not to say that schools are not doing anything to help, when they should. For all we may know, they could be trying to find help but the given circumstances just makes it easier said than done. Reality tells us that the funding for special education is low, its resources are limited, and the waiting lists are long.

This does not mean, however, that all hope is lost. Sometimes, such as in these situations, being squeaky is necessary if it would mean getting the grease. If you are among the parents who are seeking educational help for their special children, here are some advices to get you started:

First, make the first move and start today. Do not rely on your child’s school because, chances are, they will not take in the problem. You might get the attention you want at first, but most often, schools will just dismiss initial concerns at the end of the day. Time is precious here; do not waste it dealing with them. You could complain, and begin your squeaking with them, but what for? It would get you nowhere since the school will not exactly be the one to provide help anyway. Like you, they will just be seeking that help from the higher organizations that focus on special childhood education. Furthermore, unless you know someone on the inside, the school is practically your only means of reaching those organizations. Thus, no matter how frustrating it could be, do not antagonize them. Rather, be friends with them. It could prove to be helpful.

Second, if you can afford to hire professionals to work for your child’s case, being organized is vital. Failure to attend one meeting will already count against you. Be sure to keep every document given to you throughout the entire duration of the case such as notes on meetings, reports and results.

Third, be patient. The testing process will take time so you might need to wait for long. Sadly, many parents who badly need to get the testing over with resort to privately hiring someone to speed up the process. While waiting, do your homework. The more information you can get about the condition of your child, the better it will be for you to get help.

And fourth, know your rights. Do not hesitate to complain to higher authorities if your child’s school is still not doing anything to help your child after you have long communicated your concerns. Special childhood education is not to be taken granted. You have all the right to seek legal assistance so speak up if you have to.

1950s education and childhood in England

I am so glad that I've finished my presentation for ethnography research today. Although I used so many videos from different resources at least I got most my points cross through new way of presenting. I have to admit that I hated it's ICT tech from the beginning but I became really enjoy in the end.
After the presentation, we were talking about how the exam system worked differently with different teachers and personal circumstance such as parents and financially can't afford to carry on the education in 1950s.
'Gate keeper' is the word that Brian mention today in the class. Although the exam system was available to children who were academic doing well then if the teacher didn't put you through the exam then you would miss the chance to achieve higher education. It's like put every child into the pot, you go here, you go there, the child's future lay on the point of finger of the teacher in 1950s.
Looking at today's education system, children have much more chances to achieve their academic goal and individual educational needs. Many more legislation such as Every Child Matters 2004, Education and Skills Act 2008, Childcare Act 2006 etc. all provide children stay better chance for their education and future. Even though it comes long way to get to this stage, again I think the children are so lucky today.

Children and the Brain: Think Big!

What is good for the body... is good for the brain!

Often when we hear the term "healthy" we generally think in terms of our body. However, realizing the positive impact healthy habits have on our brains and the dramatic effect they have on children can make an remarkable difference.

When I am presenting on the effects nutrition has on a child's brain, learning and behavior, I commonly find that people are amazed with this knowledge. This is the reason for my post today. I am sharing this wonderful article written by Lauren Zimet which was previously published in Common Ground Magazine, Nov 2011.
I have had the pleasure of co-presenting with Lauren. She is a dedicated, knowledgeable and passionate professional. 
Enjoy the valuable tips she provides for the benefit of healthier brains for everyone!


Nourishing Tips to Nurture New Neurons

The brain. We all have one. Yet sometimes it gets neglected. Our brain needs certain things to stay healthy, and when it doesn’t get what it needs, it doesn’t work its best. In fact, sometimes it gets the opposite of what it needs—stuff it doesn’t know what to do with, such as artificial dyes, preservatives, GMOs, the list goes on. When this happens, both our brain and body can have a sensitive reaction that can look different from one person to the next, but that can result in a brain not performing to its highest standard.

We are born with 100 billion brain cells, and the brain continues to develop after a baby is born. New connections between neurons—the cells in the brain—form quickly from birth to 3 years of age and older, and continue to form
throughout our lives, based on our experiences.This means that we need to
nourish our brain. We need to give it both the experiences and the nutrients it needs to develop.

It helps children to know that with each healthy food they eat, and with each new experience they have, they are making a new connection in their brain.
This is powerful stuff . Imagine a child, face filled with pride, after making a new neural connection by simply taking a nibble of kale.

The following seven tips offer
simple ways you can guide your
children in making mindful, brain-healthy
choices as they play, learn, work, and grow.

1. Eat a rainbow. Eat a colorful array of organic
fruits and vegetables every day. Be sure
to wash the produce to loosen and rinse away
any dirt and toxins. Kids can do the washing—
they benefit from being part of a team, by having
their own chores within the family.

2. Don’t eat fake stuff. The body really likes
food. Real food, such as whole grains, protein,
lots of colorful vegetables and fruit, and
healthy fats. Limit or eliminate artificial dyes,
colors, and flavors; processed foods; fast foods;
junk foods; hydrogenated fats; sodas; and refined sugars.

3. Keep your brain lubed. Your brain needs
omega-3s, also known as essential fatty acids
(EFAs), for proper growth, particularly                                      
for neural development
and maturation of sensory systems.
EFAs speed neural signals
along, making for smoother,
easier, more efficient communication
across synapses. EFAs are
necessary for proper immune
function, cognitive development,
and for skin function and
maintenance. A deficit in EFAs
has been linked to ADHD, dyslexia,
and other behavioral and
psychological disorders. Your
body can’t make EFAs, so you
need to consume them. They are
found in nuts, seeds, olives, seaweed,
and fish. It’s always best to
eat foods that contain vitamins, minerals, and
other essential nutrients, but if you are unsure
that your child is getting a well-balanced diet,
a purified, molecularly distilled fish oil supplement
is a great EFA source. My trusted brand
of choice is Nordic Naturals.

4. Stay awash in oxygen and water. Drink
H2O to hydrate—check with your health care                    
practitioner for how much, but a quick rule is
to divide your body weight by two to get the
approximate number of ounces to drink per
day. Also, take slow, deep breaths to reset and
calm the sensory and neurological system.
Deep breathing helps children self-regulate
and improves immunity, nervous system functioning,
and emotional regulation. A recent
study published in the International Journal of
Nursing Studies reports that deep breathing is
effective for reducing anxiety in children with
asthma.


5. Learn to move and to chill. The brain
loves exercise, and exercise boosts brain power.             
But you also need to teach your child how
to relax—for example, by getting out into nature,
reading an entertaining book, or playing
a board game. Long-term stress can be toxic,
and a stressed brain doesn’t learn the same way
as an unstressed brain. Emotional stress has an
impact on a child’s ability to learn. Sustained
stress can damage a developing brain’s architecture,
which can lead to problems in learning,
behavior, and physical and mental health.

6. Rewire your thinking. Create “Band-Aid
thoughts” as a tool to acknowledge and work
through bad, sad, mad, frustrated, and negative thoughts.
Demonstrating positive self-talk in front of your children—
for example, reflecting on how you expertly handled a 
difficult or challenging situation—lays a blueprint for how
they may handle their own problems. Negative
thoughts or mistakes can be opportunities to
learn and grow from.

7. Name that feeling. Teaching your child
to label emotions and recognize feelings helps
connect the nonverbal and verbal pathways in
the brain. Strengthening these pathways can
improve a child’s ability to take on another’s
perspective. This is especially useful for children
with learning challenges, who need more
support developing flexible thinking.