Feds Give Pre-K Guidelines
"No Child left at Home?"
Washington, DC - At the annual conference of the National Association
for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), in November, federal officials
announced that states will be required to establish learning guidelines for
preschool children. An article in Education Week (12-4-02) quoted associate
commissioner Shannon Christian of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services Child Care Bureau as stating that, while local daycare centers "will
not be under a mandate to adopt the guidelines, states will be required to
have them in place."
This announcement is part and parcel of the Bush Administration's
early childhood initiative, Good Start Grow Smart, which is based on the flawed
premise that early childhood education programs can make a significant long-term
difference in how children perform in school. Good Start Grow Smart promises
to improve Head Start and promote other early childhood education efforts.
Good Start's executive summary laments: (1) "Most states
have a limited alignment between what children are doing before they enter
school and what is expected of them once they are in school"; (2) "Early
childhood programs are seldom evaluated based on how they prepare children
to succeed in school"; and (3) "There is not enough information
for early childhood teacher, parents, grandparents, and child care providers
on ways to prepare children to be successful in school."(By
whose 'standards'....atg)
'Bright' Beginnings?
"When preschool programs are evaluated, however, results consistently
show that there is no difference in achievement by the 3rd grade among
children who participate compared to those who do not. (See Education Reporter,
November 2002 and April 2002. Last summer, the results of a
study of children who took part in a preschool program called Bright Beginnings
in the Charlotte Mecklenburg School District in North Carolina, showed that
participating students scored no higher on tests by the end of the 3rd grade
than children who did not participate. These students were enrolled in Bright
Beginnings in 1997, and were the first to be evaluated by 3rd-grade-end-of
year tests.
After the study findings were made public, North Carolina newspaper
publisher Warren Smith pointed out that, in some cases, the scores of the
Bright Beginnings students were actually lower than those of "the 200
or so kids who were eligible for the program but did not participate."
Smith estimates the cost of Bright Beginnings to be approximately $10,000.00
per child per year, noting that "we should be seeing exponential
gains in performance for this kind of expenditure." (How
much is being spent on similar programs in SC?)
Although Bright Beginnings is limited to "at risk"
children, such programs are becoming more common and efforts to make preschool
"universal" continue to increase. Alabama's "Kidstuff"
and Arkansas"s "Better Chance (ABC)" programs are also geared
to "at-risk" toddlers but have the potential to become more inclusive.
NAEYC Certification
Hand-in-hand with the nationwide preschool push is the effort to expand
teacher certification. According to Education Week (12-4-02), "earning
a national teaching certificate is now the ultimate credential quest for a
small but growing number of early-childhood educators."
These educators perceive that certification will make them better
teachers and pave the way for higher wages. In North Carolina, Bright Beginnings
has spurred more preschool teachers to obtain national certification because
state certification is already required to work in the program.
The NAEYC is one of two major organizations providing national
certification, and NAEYC also provides curricula for early childhood "education"
programs" (Totally based on 'social engineering'
of children -atg). Readers of Education Reporter
(April 2002) are familiar with the organization's "Anti-Bias Curriculum,"
which promotes "diversity" and teaches sex education to preschool
children.
In the January 2003 issue of Georgia
Insight, Sue Ella Deadwyler describes how "diaper-changers take it
upon themselves to explain to toddlers the genital differences between boys
and girls." She explains that "NAEYC instruction trains children
to use gender-neutral vocabularies," replacing words like man, woman,
boy an girl with non-gender-identifying terms. "NAEYC, the accrediting
agency for preschool and kindergarten programs in Georgia, wants children
to change their vocabularies, by, using terms such a 'firepeople' instead
of 'firemen.'" (SC is quite proud of having
at least 1600 'certified' teachers).
"NAEYC-approved teachers alternate using
male and female pronouns when reading to children," Mrs. Deadwyler explains.
"NAEYC admits that '[These are] small changes, but it is the numerous,
repeated small steps that provide two-year-olds with the data they
need to begin to construct non-sexist gender identity."
"NAEYC leaves nothing to chance," she concludes.
"The curricula overtly teach acceptance of alternative lifestyles. Four-year-olds
are taught about children with two mommies or two daddies from books their
teachers read to them in preschool. The primary goal of the Anti-Bias-Curriculum
is to destroy traditional values in very young children."
At the NAEYC's November conference, U.S. Department of Education
assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education Susan Neuman,
challenged the organization to devote more energy toward defining what young
children should know and be able to do so. She added that states are not
taking full advantage of the "freedom" they have to divert funds
to early childhood program under No Child Left Behind.
But many observers, including North Carolina's Warren Smith,
believe that there is too much taxpayer money already being poured into preschool
programs, with little or no accountability. Referring to North Carolina's
Bright Beginnings program test results, smith wrote: "The expectations
of the program have been cleverly managed. We were told not to expect to see
results for years. Now, years have gone by and still not results. In the meantime,
$62 million has been poured down the drain." (In
the closing seconds of the SC Legislative session another $44 million was
handed over the the educational "system" with no audit and not clear
budgeting as to where it is to go).
Education Reporter, February, 2003.