This morning Google Alerts sent me a couple links this morning to a situation in New York State. State Senator John Sabini wants to make it mandatory for children to be in school from ages 4 to 18.
From Albanys Insanity is this observation:
"My son graduated at 17, does this mean he would have to stay an extra year till he was 18? None of my kids went to pre-k, why should they be required to? Seems to me this is all about creating more jobs, increasing taxes and keeping kids in the public school system for as long as possible. What next, required college?"
Jim Lesczynski who writes at Serf City says in Education at gunpoint asks:
"Does anyone really believe that a young adult is going to learn anything just because the state is keeping them in school at gunpoint? For that matter, how much learning will any of the other kids do when their classroom is constantly disrupted by unruly prisoners?"
Education is clearly important. But I don't understand what a politician is thinking when they was to force a four year old to go to school. Developmentally some children are not ready to learn until they are six or eight.
Originally public schools were to teach children how to read and write. Most childen went to school for a couple years. Over time more and more was expected of public schools. One of the reasons why public schools are having trouble is they are asked to do dozens of different tasks.
John Sabini's bill a bad idea. It should be laughed at and ridiculed. Unfortunately many people will think it is a good idea. I'm afraid there is even a chance it might pass.
----------
Technorati tags: mandatory, school, public school, education
2 comments:
Education is clearly important. But I don't understand what a politician is thinking when they was to force a four year old to go to school. Developmentally some children are not ready to learn until they are six or eight.
It seems like it's powerful proponents of universal preschool who are pushing the legislators to push for UP. Teacher Unions LOVE universal preschool or preschool for all.
I'll never understand how they dare to overlook common sense in the growth of adult ed classes for ged's and such for the young (or older) adults that were failed by the school system in the current mandatory age range. But common sense doesn't seem to reign as much as money does in too many cases. Seems like the kids lose most of all. In this case, the littlest ones.
Speaker of the House Pelosi just sent out a press release about early child development and a summit she's planning in May:
Congressman Miller said:“Research over the past decade in the fields of neuroscience and child development shows that during the first five years of life, children’s brains develop dramatically, and the path of this development has a lasting impact on children’s future health, learning, and success. It is critical that we carefully re-examine our public policies to determine if they are adequately helping young children to develop into productive members of our society.”
I thought a legislator(s) talking about young children/productive members/children's brains/first five years of their life was kinda creepy.
The Moores make the point in "Better Late than Early" that children go through developmental stages, and trying to force them past certain stages before they are ready is damaging.
Much of the claim that sending three and four year old children off to preschool will benefit them is based on research into families with serious problems. Yes, if a three year old has no father and the mother is doing drugs, it may make sense to try to have the three year old go off to preschool.
But children in preschool at three and four do worse than children who stay at home.
Post a Comment