Default Style Register
Daycare.com Forum
Daycare Center and Family Home Forum>I'm a Daycare Provider, Not a School Teacher!
hsdcmama 01:03 PM 09-22-2014
I have been catching some flak lately bc I do not follow a preschool curriculum in my daycare. I believe in child-led learning, and learning though play. IMO, children 4 years old & younger are just too young for the pressures of a school-type environment. Kids need to play! At this age, their play IS their work. I just don't understand this movement to make 3- and 4-year-olds sit & learn their ABCs and 123s before they are interested and ready. Don't get me wrong, if one of my kids shows an interest in reading, writing, or something along those lines, I will absolutely follow that interest and help them with that. My own 4-year-old loves to do cut-and-paste activities, write his name, and learn the letter sounds. But I won't force a child that young to do school-type activities if they don't want to. Please tell me I'm not alone in this!
Reply
Heidi 01:10 PM 09-22-2014
Nope! I just posted a long rant on my daycare FB page about this subject.

I don't understand the rush at all!
Reply
CraftyMom 01:13 PM 09-22-2014
I agree!! I just follow their lead. For example today dcb 3 pointed to the color chart and said can we do colors? Sure! Those who wanted to pointed out colors, those who weren't interested continued playing
Reply
nanglgrl 01:21 PM 09-22-2014
You're not alone, I think a lot of providers would agree including me! My own four children learned through play and a lot of it. They were allowed to explore and get dirty and all of them excel in school.
I've never gotten the push. To date I've never met an adult who didn't know their colors, shapes, alphabet, body parts and numbers. I always laugh because after aboout second grade how often do we even use shapes, body parts and colors in conversation? We do use them but not often enough to warrant quizzing a toddler for weeks on end vs. a child learning it when they are naturally ready at around 4 years old. I think of learning these things like potty training, when they are ready it's easy.
Sometimes learning these things earlier helps a child learn other things earlier but IMO those children would go just as far without prodding. I was in a kindergarten classroom last year and there were children who could read, write their name and do everything they used to learn in kindergarten by the start of the year. There were also a good amount that couldn't read, didn't know their alphabet, numbers, colors etc. and several ELL students and some obvious but undiagnosed (because of age) learning disabilities. The students that knew all that stuff ahead of time weren't learning anyhting new and were bored most of the time since the teacher was managing a class of 25.
Of course she did try to give them more advanced things to do but truthfully they were usually frustrated and bored. During those younger years you have so many different ability levels and undiagnosed disorders and to top it off you have children still getting used to the structured schedule of school and children that aren't ready to be there yet even the best teachers have trouble teaching to the individual when the class has such a wide range of abilities but aren't mature enough to understand.
Reply
jenboo 01:24 PM 09-22-2014
I think there is a lot of pressure because of the high standards of kindergarten these days. My sister went to the kinder orientation a couple months ago and it is insane. They are learning in kinder what I learned in first/second grade!
They expect the kids to already know a lot coming into kinder.
Reply
nannyde 03:05 PM 09-22-2014
Are they paying for school or care? Preschool is expensive so if they want it they need to pay for it. I don't offer it. I just do care.
Reply
Cat Herder 04:37 AM 09-23-2014
This is going to be a huge topic for Congress in 2015.

Make your views known. Do something. Oppose. Agree. Whatever you believe.

NAEYC is already forwarding prefilled forms to members in support and leading new providers to think it is for the best. My QRIS requires a membership. nice?

Start here:
http://www.edweek.com/ew/articles/20...gress.h34.html

Congress appears poised to act
By Lauren Camera




As the curtain begins to close on the 113th Congress, lawmakers showcased a brief burst of bipartisanship to push forward on two education measures that had been languishing in the legislative pipeline, one that underwrites child care for low-income families and another that directs federal education research.

Though neither bill is a blockbuster—and one got snared in wrangling over a single provision—the fact that they made the short list of actionable items last week just before the pre-election recess was impressive given the number of high-profile competing interests.

During the two weeks since Congress returned to Capitol Hill from its summer break, lawmakers have spent most of their energy negotiating a fiscal 2015 stopgap spending measure to avert a government shutdown, assessing the risk of the Ebola outbreak in Africa, and grappling over the growing conflict in the Middle East.

But before members of Congress returned to their home districts to make one last campaign push prior to the Nov. 4 midterm elections, they managed to make significant headway on the Strengthening Education Through Research Act and legislation to reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant program, likely to be two of the first bills sent to the president's desk during the upcoming lame duck-session.
Increasing Information, Options

The child-care law, which governs a $5 billion program, hasn't been updated since 1996. It provides funding for states to help low-income families pay for child care while a parent works or is in an educational or job-training program.

Reauthorization negotiations were led by the chairmen of each chamber's education committee, Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, and Rep. John Kline, R-Minn.

Specifically, the measure would give parents more information about available child-care options, including faith-based and community-based providers, and allow parents to choose a program that best suits their family's needs.

The bill would require all providers to comply with state health, safety, and fire standards and undergo annual inspections. For instance, states would have to conduct comprehensive backgroundchecks on child-care providers, something only about a dozen states call for now.

The proposal would also require states to set aside a greater portion of their own funds for program improvement, 10 percent, up from the current 4 percent. The additional money could be used for a range of activities, such as beefing up training for providers and making available "consumer information" to parents so they can compare different providers.

Education advocates who pushed Congress to update the law applauded the negotiation, but some of them said it should have included more money to help programs and states cover the costs of the new quality improvements.

The House passed the reauthorization under suspension of the rules on Sept. 15, amid much fist-bumping from members on both sides of the aisle.

"This bill isn't on suspension because it's unimportant," said Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the Education and the Workforce Committee. "It's on suspension because we recognize we need to get it done this year."
Minor Roadblock

However, highlighting how difficult it is to get anything done in this historically dysfunctional Congress—even something as bipartisan and noncontroversial as the child-care bill—the measure quickly hit a roadblock in the Senate.

Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., put a hold on the bill, essentially holding it hostage until one of his bills, which would require all schools to perform background checks on all employees, gets a vote.

The language in Sen. Toomey's bill, the Protecting Students From Sexual and Violent Predators Act, is similar to the language in the child-care bill that requires background checks of employees at child-care centers but would make it a requirement for the entire P-12 space and for every school.

"Senator Toomey believes that we should protect all children from sexual predators, not just those in federally funded day care," said Elizabeth "E.R." Anderson, the communications director for the Pennsylvania senator. She added that Sen. Toomey wants a swift vote on both his bill and the child-care one.

The House unanimously passed the Toomey bill last October. But both the chairman and ranking member of the Senate education committee, Sens. Harkin and Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., have specific grievances with the measure, though they support its overall goal.

Still, Sen. Harkin predicted last week that it wouldn't take long to free up the child-care bill by coming to a final agreement on Sen. Toomey's bill.

"We've been working with him for a long time to get it right," said Sen. Harkin.
Making Research Relevant

Meanwhile, the two chambers reached a bipartisan, bicameral deal on the Strengthening Education Through Research Act, which would reauthorize federal education research through the Institute of Education Sciences.

Specifically, the bill would require outside evaluations of IES, including each of IES' centers every five years, with interim findings every three years, and mandate ongoing evaluations of its regional educational laboratories and comprehensive centers.

The measure would also cap the number of centers at 17 and the labs at 10 to "reduce overlapping duties," and eliminate the specific topics that the National Center for Education Research's research and development centers must cover. The bill would instead require the centers to balance coverage of prekindergarten, K-12, and postsecondary issues.

Finally, the proposal would replace "scientifically based research standards" with "scientifically valid research," intended to encourage more research methodologies beyond the so-called "gold standard"of randomized-control trials.

The Senate education committee cleared the measure with bipartisan support on Sept. 17, altering slightly the version the House passed in May.

"This bill enhances the relevancy of research and makes it easier for states and schools to access data," Sen. Harkin said, adding that he expects the largely noncontroversial research bill to be offered for passage under unanimous consent on the Senate floor, likely after the midterm elections in November.
Closing Act

Related Blog
Visit this blog.

Lawmakers aren't due back to Capitol Hill until after Veteran's Day. By that time, they will have roughly four legislative working weeks before the close of the 113th Congress.

Both the child-care bill and the education research bill appear slated for quick passage, but Sen. Harkin hinted that he also intends to take on the Higher Education Act reauthorization, including marking it up in committee and putting pressure on Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to bring it to the floor for a vote.

"I feel very strongly about it," said Sen. Harkin, who is retiring at the end of this year after serving in Congress for more than four decades. "I may try to push it in the lame duck. I really might."




http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/campa...l?r=2011472550


What Should Be the Federal Role in School Research?
By Alyson Klein on September 10, 2013 5:05 PM

By guest blogger Sarah Sparks. This item is cross-posted at Inside School Research.

Washington

Research experts and congressional lawmakers seemed to agree this morning that the U.S. Department of Education's research agency has become considerably more rigorous since the passage of the Education Sciences Reform Act in 2002. The question that concerned House Education and Workforce Committee members at a Hill hearing on reauthorizing the law is whether that more rigorous research is actually being used by anyone.

"Relevance" was the word of the day, from the research experts called to testify and from the members themselves.

"Until ESRA and [the Institute of Education Sciences], education research was allowed to function at a standard that would never pass muster with public health, employment, and training or welfare policy, let alone medicine or agriculture," said James Kemple, the executive director of the Research Alliance for New York City Schools at New York University.

IES is in some ways "still burdened with the legacy of more than two generations of ineffective education research," Kemple said, but this may have made the research agency too single-minded in its early days: "It's a work in progress. In some cases, IES has forwarded rigor at the expense of education policy and practical relevance."

Bridget Terry Long, the Harvard Graduate School of Education academic dean and the chairwoman of the National Board for Education Sciences, IES' advisory board, noted that IES under Director John Easton has required more partnerships between researchers and practitioners, and has launched a new center devoted to evaluating how well research is being translated into usable knowledge. Both she and Kemple argued that IES should be strengthened in the next authorization of the law.

By contrast, Rep. Tim Walberg, R-Mich., questioned whether ESRA should be reauthorized at all. "I'm not hearing strength in the answer that this could not be done in a market-based approach," he said. "If we're talking about [research based on] trust and independence in the federal government, we have a major hurdle to get over."

New Jersey Democratic Rep. Rush Holt begged to differ: "We badly need rigorous research. We've been hampered for decades, maybe forever, because every policymaker, every school board ... was a student and therefore an expert in education, and so we end up with the same old things, with overlays of fads."

Holt asked Kathy Christie, vice president of knowledge and information management and dissemination for the Education Commission of the States whether the state education agencies could take over producing rigorous research without IES; she responded that most could not, because they "don't have the capacity."

Similarly, Holt asked whether private groups could take over for IES, but the witnesses warned that not many private groups would be able or interested in pursuing only purely independent research.

"So the conclusion I draw from this is we need this," Holt said—though by that time Walberg had already left the hearing.

Regional Labs in the Crosshairs Again

If the lawmakers' questions were any indication, the federal regional educational lab system and other networked centers could be in for yet another rough ride in the reauthorization process.

Preliminary results of a Government Accountability Office study on the Institute of Education Sciences were presented at the hearing. (The full report is expected later this year.) Among the initial findings, George A. Scott, the director of GAO's education, workforce, and income security issues, testified:

• Some of IES' initiatives, such as the research and development centers, do not have clearly defined audiences or ways to measure whether they are responding to their users' needs.
• Results of research often come too late for them to be of use to policymakers or practitioners. In particular, GAO noted that IES' average peer review time has lengthened from 117 days in fiscal year 2011 to 175 days in fiscal year 2012.
• IES does not routinely translate all of its research into language easy for non-academics to understand.

Scott specifically criticized IES for not having clear accountability measures and public reporting of progress by the regional labs. "Certain RELs are more productive and more relevant than others," he said. "At what point are we going to have more public accounting for the [labs]?"

House Education Chairman John Kline, R-Minn., referring to the GAO report, suggested that there could be too much overlap among IES' regional lab and research and development center networks and the Education Department's comprehensive and content centers. "As we develop policies to strengthen the Institute, we should consider streamlining the federal research structure to reduce duplication, enhance accountability, and make it easier for states and school districts to access important information," Kline said.

Coincidentally, I'm sure, the IES Newsflash, the agency's alert service, sent a positive blizzard of updates on new practitioner-focused studies and products this morning, including updates to the State Education Reforms database and strategies for using its longitudinal databases to study new teachers' retention and progress.

House lawmakers were definitely looking for specific examples of useful policy suggestions coming from IES research.

"I've been in this business for a long time, and this panel, we could be in a time warp here," said Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., "I first heard this kind of discussion back in the 1960s, when I was on a school board. ... We've been dealing with this issue forever, in terms of how do we get the research, the knowledge we have, applied appropriately in the places it could do the most good? It seems we still haven't figured that out yet and we have people decrying the fact that people in education just ignore the research and results."

The debate on IES' future is just starting. Alexandra H. Sollberger, the committee's communications director, said she expects some legislative language on the next iteration of ESRA to be drafted in the next few weeks, but so far there's no word on the Senate beginning discussions of the research law this session.
Reply
Play Care 05:20 AM 09-23-2014
Originally Posted by hsdcmama:
I have been catching some flak lately bc I do not follow a preschool curriculum in my daycare. I believe in child-led learning, and learning though play. IMO, children 4 years old & younger are just too young for the pressures of a school-type environment. Kids need to play! At this age, their play IS their work. I just don't understand this movement to make 3- and 4-year-olds sit & learn their ABCs and 123s before they are interested and ready. Don't get me wrong, if one of my kids shows an interest in reading, writing, or something along those lines, I will absolutely follow that interest and help them with that. My own 4-year-old loves to do cut-and-paste activities, write his name, and learn the letter sounds. But I won't force a child that young to do school-type activities if they don't want to. Please tell me I'm not alone in this!
Don't be surprised if you are soon required to have a curriculum on file with licensing. Some states already have this requirement. This is what comes of the outsourcing of parenting. Providers taking on more and more parental responsibility.
Reply
NoMoreJuice! 05:24 AM 09-23-2014
I feel pretty strongly that my parents are paying me to give their children the very best start in life possible. Each provider will always have their own opinion of which is the best route to take towards that goal. For me, I offer preschool for the kids that are ready for it. All of my 4 year old kids are in it, and one 3 year old. Another of my 3yo boys just isn't ready for it, so we're holding off until after the holidays and we'll reevaluate.

I don't feel like my preschool program forces them to learn, it's really fun and my kids beg every morning to start. Most of them ask their parents to go to my house on weekends because they miss it. We incorporate tons of art and dramatic play and I've seen these kids blossom from it.

I guess when I think of "preschool" I think of play with specific goals.
Reply
Thriftylady 07:57 AM 09-23-2014
I think as providers we all have to offer what we believe is right for the kids and the parents have a choice! I do have a preschool curriculum, however I tell parents it isn't set in stone. I have two hours a day set aside for it, but that includes arts and crafts and all of that. But, I tell the parents if the kids aren't into it that day and want to play, we are going to play. I believe in early learning, but IMHO forcing the kids is not going to help they are going to be upset about being forced into it and not learn anything anyway. I also think we can learn a ton by play. There are countless opportunities to talk about colors, shapes, math, counting, and tons of other stuff with play.
Reply
Laurel 09:11 AM 09-23-2014
Originally Posted by hsdcmama:
I have been catching some flak lately bc I do not follow a preschool curriculum in my daycare. I believe in child-led learning, and learning though play. IMO, children 4 years old & younger are just too young for the pressures of a school-type environment. Kids need to play! At this age, their play IS their work. I just don't understand this movement to make 3- and 4-year-olds sit & learn their ABCs and 123s before they are interested and ready. Don't get me wrong, if one of my kids shows an interest in reading, writing, or something along those lines, I will absolutely follow that interest and help them with that. My own 4-year-old loves to do cut-and-paste activities, write his name, and learn the letter sounds. But I won't force a child that young to do school-type activities if they don't want to. Please tell me I'm not alone in this!
You are not alone! I just retired in June and my grandson (4 in November) is coming home with 'homework' from his daycare center. So far they don't seem to be overdoing it but if he wants to do the homework we let him and if not he doesn't. It seems unnecessary at this age.

Laurel
Reply
AmyKidsCo 09:24 AM 09-23-2014
I'm with you! One thing that can help with the pressure is if you can point out what children are learning through play. Any if you can do it in "school language" it carries even more weight with parents. I use our statewide early learning standards language when I do portfolios - each picture has a description of what's being learned in the same words out early learning standards use.
Reply
Annalee 09:32 AM 09-23-2014
Originally Posted by Play Care:
Don't be surprised if you are soon required to have a curriculum on file with licensing. Some states already have this requirement. This is what comes of the outsourcing of parenting. Providers taking on more and more parental responsibility.
In 2005, all licensed providers in my state were given book with Early Learning Standards for each age....It is mandated that we get 3 hrs training every three years on these standards....since that time, the early learning standards have been re-written for Four year olds aligned to the common core standards....so I agree with you, it will be required for all gradually...I DO NOT agree with the change but it is one of the perks of rolling with the change just like QRIS!!!!
Reply
Unregistered 12:47 PM 09-23-2014
When we start taking on more responsibility, there is more liability, more accountability. I think it would only be fair that we have more support. Some of us are not paid enough to provide a curriculum, we would have to hire someone to help us out. It is sort of like running a small nursing home and being your own activities department, your own cooking department, your own housekeeping department, and your own human resources.

If we are going to start having more responsibility give us the means to do so or there will be no childcare providers left. Or childcare providers are going to have much smaller groups that they can manage with no openings.

Priorities when we are a sole proprieter should be safety, engagement, nourishment, and love. Not paper pushing, pull your hair out added busy work.

Hey while I am at it, how about childcare providers don't owe any taxes, thats right I said it. How about we only pay self employment tax and that is it. We make nothing as it is and they are adding more and more requirements that cost. This is a huge pitfall. I hope everyone hangs in there. Cat herder thanks for the post.
Reply
SSWonders 06:01 AM 09-24-2014
Originally Posted by hsdcmama:
I have been catching some flak lately bc I do not follow a preschool curriculum in my daycare. I believe in child-led learning, and learning though play. IMO, children 4 years old & younger are just too young for the pressures of a school-type environment. Kids need to play! At this age, their play IS their work. I just don't understand this movement to make 3- and 4-year-olds sit & learn their ABCs and 123s before they are interested and ready. Don't get me wrong, if one of my kids shows an interest in reading, writing, or something along those lines, I will absolutely follow that interest and help them with that. My own 4-year-old loves to do cut-and-paste activities, write his name, and learn the letter sounds. But I won't force a child that young to do school-type activities if they don't want to. Please tell me I'm not alone in this!



You get the idea.
Reply
midaycare 07:51 AM 09-24-2014
Originally Posted by Thriftylady:
I think as providers we all have to offer what we believe is right for the kids and the parents have a choice! I do have a preschool curriculum, however I tell parents it isn't set in stone. I have two hours a day set aside for it, but that includes arts and crafts and all of that. But, I tell the parents if the kids aren't into it that day and want to play, we are going to play. I believe in early learning, but IMHO forcing the kids is not going to help they are going to be upset about being forced into it and not learn anything anyway. I also think we can learn a ton by play. There are countless opportunities to talk about colors, shapes, math, counting, and tons of other stuff with play.
Exactly this.
Reply
Tags:education, legislation, qris, quality, subsidy
Reply Up