Posted on 05/23/2002 7:32:48 AM PDT by Truth Addict
She is bothered by the insistance on the part of certified teachers that non-certified teachers cannot do an adequate job of teaching pre-schoolers. The kids coming out of her school are far better prepared for kindergarten than those who attend the public pre-k classes because they teach them phonics, which is not done in the public system. It is not rocket science to teach these young children, and does not necessarily require a college degree.
BTW, I have participated in FR since '98, and this is my first time posting an article; I hope I did OK!
I homeschool, and believe me, my twelve year old can teach my four year old what she needs to know! This is a power grab, pure and simple.
The NEA and feminists' goal is to put all kids in public school by age two or three, and it has to start somewhere.
Yes, private school IS better. I went to a private daycare/pre-K, and came out reading whole sentences (I was ready and a very intelligent child). My problem is that then I attended public school after that.
While there are many talented and resourcefull teachers in the public system, your comments directed at the teachers unions and educational beaureaucrats are very true.
Thanks for your input and your kind words.
Is there any evidence that this makes a difference? Or is even important?
My children all started out either in homeschool or private schools, although they either finished or are still in the public system. I believe the private education they all received in the earlier years has helped them to excell in the later years.
While it may be important for schools to insist on a teaching degree if, for nothing else, to try to weed out the incompetents, I can see no extra benefits on insisting on them for pre-K.
The state classes that my wife was required to complete to get a CDA certificate stressed how it was wrong to try to teach skills that were too advanced, and this means that bright kids are prevented from learning in the public settings because those skills are not allowed to be taught.
So, to answer your questions: No on both counts! Sometimes it is even an impediment to learning.
Your thoughts on this?
Congratulations on a wise choice. We homeschooled our oldest through all of elementary school, and she had an excellent education. Circumstances have not allowed that option for us since.
The simply amazing thing about this article is that these school districts are so desperate to hang onto these pre-k classes, that they are moving funds from other areas to pay for them, since the state is only allowing the same (lower) rate as what the private schools charge. They are not interested in what is best for the children, they want control! The higher grade level classes are being denied funds and teachers so that they can keep control over these younger kids.
This quote from the article is pertinent:
"These are the same school districts that have been saying that they have overcrowded classrooms and shortages of teachers," Cronon, a member of the state partnership and the Orange County coalition, said Tuesday. "They could use those teachers to reduce class sizes."
It's kind of in between; she gets both kinds of families.
these kids who often attend public school pre-K would not be attending your wife's pre-K school anyway because they can't afford it.
This is where you are confused. There are many kids in the school who receive government assistance that pays for the entire tuition, which costs the state far less than providing the same class in a public school. The new law now only provides the same amount of money per student regardless of them being in a private or public school. Since the public schools cannot afford to provide the classes at that rate, they are being forced to cease the pre-K classes or make up the loss in revenue from other sources. Orange County is spending an extra two million dollars of surplus money next year to make up this difference, but where will the extra money be the next year?
I imagine her school is not impacted by the students being served in public school pre-K.
If the public system can succeed in keeping all these kids in their system, then it does impact the pool of students that are available for the private sector. More importantly, though, is the concept that I believe the private pre-schools are able to provide a better educational experience at a lower cost, and yet the public school teachers and beaureaucrats do not want to give up the control that they have over childrens' lives. They keep expanding their influence into younger years as well as post high school. It's a power and control issue.
Three Central Florida counties have joined a number of Florida districts sidestepping state policy
These counties are trying to find ways to circumvent state policy passed by our elected representatives.
competing needs: Better education or making it easier for welfare recipients to find and keep jobs.
The stated assumption is that the public schools provied better education than privaate schools. My own experience as well as most studies insist that that is not true. Almost all experts outside the public system and teachers unions agree that private schoold provide better education.
Schools want to put more low-income children into their preschool classes -- taught by certified teachers -- to prepare them for kindergarten and give them a jump-start on reading.
Again the assumption that "certified teachers" do a better job is unsupported. One other point about this is the question of what is a "certified teacher"? The state has mandated that even private pre-schools must have teachers with a CDA degree, and these schools are working towards that goal. This is a form of teaching certificate, so it should qualify its holder as a "certified teacher". Even some counties, such as Seminole, allow teachers with "only" a CDA to teach their pre-K classes, so this is a red herring.
The state wants to put more children into day care -- with lower-paid workers who are not teachers
This statement is false; private school teachers may be paid less than their public counterparts, but they are still teachers!
"We are unwilling to take these teachers out of the classroom," said Cynthia Muller, a Miami-Dade district administrator. "The school district did not want to compromise quality."
So, this administrator is willing to flount the law to satisfy her erroneous perception that public school education provides better quality education?
But school officials in Orange and Osceola said they tried to work with the coalitions but decided that new state rules would have forced them to lower their standards.
How does sending kids to private pre-schools that provide a superior education force these counties to "lower their standards"? My answer: it doesn't, the opposite is true.
Osceola also disliked a new rule requiring both parents to be employed in order for their children to receive state funding for child care.
This rule simply states that if a two-parent family has one parent who does not work, the child should stay at home with the child. IMHO, this is the best place for any pre-K child.
Cronon, from the state partnership, said parents, particularly those at home, have the primary responsibility of taking care of their children. He also said that school officials are missing a crucial point of the readiness law -- to help families take care of themselves.
Well stated, Mr. Cronon!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.