There is little or no doubt in my mind that international socialists and communists understand the political value of indoctrinating children at a young age to accept authority and to inculcate social values which seem as a ?normal? reference point as the child age. Teaching children that the collective is more important to society than the individual, that America has not always been a good ?world? citizen, or that we need to accept sacrifice in order to achieve social justice.
Not to mention that if pre-school education becomes mandatory, the state will use their current unionized teachers mechanism to certify, monitor and control all pre-school teachers. In effect, insuring an expansion of a corrupt, socialist union environment which is rapidly bankrupting municipalities, states and the federal government with unfunded pension liabilities.
Most parents view pre-school programs as government-subsidized day care rather than a real educational opportunity.
Pre-school ?head start? programs cannot be cost-justified ?
There is little reason to believe President Obama?s assertion that every dollar invested in quality early education can save more than seven dollars later on. In fact, Obama, with his proven penchant for lying to the American people for political advantage, makes one wonder if he is in ?campaign mode? or telling the truth.
In his own words: platitudes and unrealistic expectations ?
?Every dollar we invest in high-quality early education can save more than seven dollars later on -- boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, reducing violent crime. In states like Georgia that have made it a priority to educate our youngest children, states like Oklahoma, students don?t just show up in kindergarten and first grade more prepared to learn, they're also more likely to grow up reading and doing math at grade level, graduating from high school, holding a job, even forming more stable families.
What the President is basing his assumptions on are two old social science studies known as the Perry project (1962)? (123 students) and the ABC Project (1972-1985) (111 children) which are dated and may not be relevant to today?s cultural and educational environment. Considering just the change in playground dynamics or the behaviors of children makes these studies irrelevant today. It should also be noted that these were very small studies and very intrusive into family lives ? conditions that are unlikely to scale today.
There is no current statistical proof that a program that has not been implemented yet can increase graduation rates, affect holding a job or produce more stable families in the inner cities. And, to believe that this is possible would require a fundamental shift in community dynamics where the prevailing attitude among youth is anti-education, anti-achievement, pro-victimhood, pro-irresponsibility. One might ask, how such a so-called ?religious? community dominated by faith-based community activists could tolerate so much antisocial and immoral behavior?
And then, at a certain point -- I bet a lot of teachers have seen this -- kids aren't stupid. They know they?re behind at a certain point, and then they start pulling back, and they act like they're disinterested in school because they're frustrated that they're not doing as well as they should, and then you may lose them.? Read the entire Obama speech here.
Apparently, the President picked Georgia because of their state-run pre-school program. A costly program which is unlikely to be replicated elsewhere.
Rank hypocrisy and demagoguery ?
Every dollar we invest in high-quality early education can save more than seven dollars later on -- boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, reducing violent crime. In states like Georgia that have made it a priority to educate our youngest children, states like Oklahoma, students don?t just show up in kindergarten and first grade more prepared to learn, they're also more likely to grow up reading and doing math at grade level, graduating from high school, holding a job, even forming more stable families.
Hope is found in what works. This works. We know it works. If you are looking for a good bang for your educational buck, this is it right here. (Applause.)
Yes, Mr. President, we can look about our nation and see what your promises of ?hope and change? have wrought. But, the biggest problem is the President?s hypocrisy and demagoguery.
But, the real bottom line is that our failed educational system is not doing a good job of educating the children in their charge now ? and that adding additional children to this broken system is unlikely to make any measurable change. Has anyone noticed that between 1970 and 2010 there was a 375% (in inflation-adjusted dollars) increase in educational spending and both reading and math test scores (in spite of teaching to the test and altering the test criteria) remain flat over the same period. <Source>
Consider why children do not excel at school.
- Their home life is chaotic, lack of parental supervision, parents who cannot assist in doing homework, parents who are too tired to be involved with school activities.
- There culture is one which does not promote educational achievement. How many people have seen Asian immigrants, poor and unable to speak the language, push their children towards educational excellence? How many people have seen recently-arrived immigrants find jobs and work themselves out of poverty within a single generation? Why is it that President Obama?s core minority constituency, the Black and Hispanic communities, fail to achieve the same level of growth? Could it be because these cultures promote ethnicity over education? Because these cultures promote victimhood over achievement? Because these cultures promote a sense of ?machismo? which demands a violent response to every real and imagined insult ? and lack of respect?
- Teachers unions are about achieving membership and pension contributions rather than teaching children.
- Governmental ?social policies? are aimed at dumbing down the population lest they question the effectiveness and efficiency of a corrupt political class who runs government for their own benefit.
If the government really had the answer, why is their chaos in the classroom when it comes to classroom discipline? Why are the facilities allowed to continue to crumble as graffiti and vandalism are tolerated as a means of employing additional unionized people to clean up the mess? Why are some janitors paid as much as teachers? Why are textbooks so damn expensive when the material has been well-known and proven over decades
What HHS found ?
Department of Health and Human Services 2011 study
A 2011 report by the Department of Health and Human Services, Head Start Impact, examined the cognitive development, social-emotional development, and physical health outcomes of Head Start students as compared to a control group that attended private preschool or stayed home with a caregiver. Head Start students were split into two distinct cohorts ? 3-year-olds with two years of Head Start before kindergarten, and 4-year-olds with only one year of Head Start before kindergarten. The study found:
- Though the program had a ?positive impact? on children?s experiences through the preschool years, ?advantages children gained during their Head Start and age 4 years yielded only a few statistically significant differences in outcomes at the end of 1st grade for the sample as a whole. Impacts at the end of kindergarten were scattered??
- After first grade, there were no significant social-emotional impacts for the cohort of 4-year-olds, and mixed results on measures of shyness, social withdrawal and problematic student-teacher interactions. The cohort of 3-year-olds with two years of Head Start attendance, however, manifested less hyperactive behaviors and more positive relationships with parents.
- By the end of first grade, only ?a single cognitive impact was found for each cohort.? Compared to students in the control group, the 4-year-old Head Start cohort did ?significantly better? on vocabulary and the 3-year-old cohort tested better in oral comprehension.
The study concludes, "Head Start has benefits for both 3-year-olds and 4-year-olds in the cognitive, health, and parenting domains, and for 3-year-olds in the social-emotional domain. However, the benefits of access to Head Start at age four are largely absent by 1st grade for the program population as a whole. For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits, although access to the program may lead to improved parent-child relationships through 1st grade, a potentially important finding for children?s longer term development.? <Source>
We need to remember, that the government program is not just about providing education to children, but encompasses an entire range of social benefits. Including removing a layer of parental responsibility for their children?s health and welfare as well as increasing the government?s control over parental rights.
?The Head Start Program is a program of the United States Department of Health and Human Services that provides comprehensive education, health, nutrition, and parent involvement services to low-income children and their families.
In fact, if you want to see where the government is almost a total failure, one merely looks at the children raised on Indian tribal land to see how government policies can adversely affect an entire population of children.
Not everyone agrees ?
A report commissioned by the National Bureau of Economic Research, titled ?Does Head Start Do Any Lasting Good? published the following summary.
Head Start is a federal early childhood intervention designed to reduce disparities in preschool outcomes. The first randomized experimental study of Head Start, the National Head Start Impact Study (NHSIS), found impacts on academic outcomes of .15 to .3 standard deviations measured at the end of the program year, although the estimated impacts were no longer significant when measured at the end of kindergarten or first grade. Assessments that Head Start is ineffective based on the NHSIS results are in our view premature, given our currently limited understanding of how and why early childhood education improves long-term life chances. Many of the specific changes to Head Start that have been proposed could potentially wind up doing more harm than good. <Source>
Bottom line ?
The sad fact is that any measurable gains (depending on the tests used) for children enrolled in pre-school programs fade out as the children progress through elementary school. Thus, indicating the results are temporary and the taxpayer?s money is being wasted ? unless you consider bolstering union membership for political purposes to be a net benefit to America. (Just being facetious.) By third or fourth grade, you can?t tell which children were in the pre-K educational program and which simply progressed through the normal school program.
Again, we find the federal government proposing to use taxpayer funding to purchase political power from the democrat base constituency: women, minorities and the poor. These programs are thought to be as ineffective as the war on poverty which has seen trillion dollar expenditures of taxpayer funds with absolutely no significant reduction in poverty since the day the program was implemented.??
The government does not have the answer. If they had the answer, they would have fixed the problem by now. A nation that can put a man on the Moon and a dune buggy on Mars is not without capabilities. What is lacking are honest politicians who put the objective first ? over the profits and welfare of the special interests such as the public employees unions and the special interests who inflate the costs of running and repairing our infrastructure.
I am dead set against any program which will expand the power of unionized public employees as results will show that public employee unions result in increased corruption of politicians, the reward of seniority over merit, promotion of the status quo over innovation, rising taxes, rising costs with no corresponding or provable increase in productivity or effectiveness. In fact, unions go out of their way to bifurcate jobs so that two or more union members are required to do the work of a single person.
While I am for education and improving the health and welfare of children, perhaps the government should look at those parents who insist on having multiple children with multiple deadbeat fathers and are driving the poverty, ill-health, and general decline of education in minority areas. In fact, if the government wants to do something substantive, let them remove the minority-based gangs that are killing minority children and promote a culture where educational achievement is not regarded for ?sucka?s.? Where children can excel without fear of ridicule or punishment from their low-achieving, low-life peers.
Ask yourself, why parents are not teaching their children their A-B-Cs and demanding specific academic and disciplinary performance. WHY ARE WE TRYING TO EXPAND A PROGRAM THAT IS NOT WORKING?
-- steve
aaron smith wilt chamberlain joe arpaio cat in the hat green eggs and ham wiz khalifa and amber rose oh the places you ll go
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.