Too Good To Be True? But It Is

Sorry, I’ve got to brag!  No, not brag exactly; the best word for what I am about to do here is “Kvell”. It’s a Yiddish word. I know less than twenty words in that language of my forebearers, and like most of the Yiddish words I know, “Kvell” has no exact English equivalent. If those Yiddish terms were easily translated, I wouldn’t bother to know or remember even twenty of them.

The spelling of “Kvell” here is phonetic and arbitrary; who knows how to spell Yiddish words in English. It has a different alphabet and is primarily a spoken language among the 2nd  and 3rd generation American born, although there is quite an impressive collection of Yiddish literature for those who do read it . We Yankees don’t read it. We just draw on it for the “precise bon mot” on a given occasion.  (An aside: Interesting that we’re illiterate in Yiddish: considering we are called the people of the book.  Which brings me directly to the thing I‘ve got to Kvell about. )

Here we go: Remember that 4 ½ year old grandson I have talked about before—the dude who asked his mother for a new baby once he felt he had taught his 18 month old brother everything he knows and so is ready for a new blank slate recipient for his wisdom?  Well, he’s done it again---made me Kvell. This is a biggy.

He ran out of school one day recently (a new pre-school for him) and rushed excitedly to his waiting mom.  “Mommy, Mommy,” he shouted breathlessly, “Guess What?  Guess What?”   My school has a library in it!!!!”  He was carrying evidence—a newly stamped library book. And this after he had very recently said to me on the phone, “Oh, Grandma, I love reading books”. He doesn’t read yet, but he sure is getting ready. Wouldn’t you kvell if he were your grandson?

Developmentally Appropriate Learning Standards: An Oxymoron?

As promised in my last blog, here's a little more food for thought about Standards and young children.  Are learning standards and developmentally appropriate practice inherently incompatible? The gold standard bearers at the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) say, "NO!" Having Standards to meet, even in very early childhood education, can be consistent with NAEYC's own highest standard---the insistence that educational expectations must fit the developmental level of each individual young child. Educators are expected to start where the kids are, as an age group, and individually. General principles of what to expect of children of any given age or grade, are important to recognize; but so too are individual differences in readiness.

"Learning standards and developmentally appropriate practices can indeed go together! No change in acceptable early childhood practices is necessary.  Learning standards can be incorporated into play, into emergent curriculum and projects and into small and large group times". (Young Children, July, 2008)

"All 50 states and the District of Columbia have adopted early learning standards related to language, literacy, and math for 3-5 year olds." NAEYC strongly recommends that those standards consider "social/emotional development, physical development and approaches to learning in addition to traditional content areas associated with schooling."

Further cautions include: avioding a cookie cutter style curriculum. Trust young children's ability to learn in self-directed, exploratory ways. Be wary of testing and other inappropriate assessment methods for young children.  Find a way to support training of early educators in how to best implement standards. In short, "Take good care of young children and help them to grow and learn and flourish", given who and where they are developmentally.

September 17, 2008

Wanted...

We’re living in a pulse elevating moment. It is not mere political hyperbole to call this a turning point for western civilization. The imminent Presidential/Vice Presidential election offers nominees with a remarkable diversity of origins and self-understanding. Those ultimately chosen to lead us will confront issues demanding insight, humility and wisdom like never before.

To consider some qualities needed to lead, let’s take a look at just one circumscribed aspect of a single issue, the education of young children. I am presuming that it is an issue about which readers of Scholastic blogs share a keen interest. We may not agree about the steps needed to spur kids on to academic success, about what qualities and characteristics, skills and knowledge, will propel them forward and which are likely to leave them behind. But we are all hoping to aim them in the same direction—FORWARD.    

Decision makers about how to go about this are not, for the most part, experts in either education or child development. Many, like the current Mayor of NYC, are gifted political leaders and some, like him, have had highly successful earlier careers, in his case, as an entrepreneur.  The self confidence that allows a would be entrepreneur to take big risks and the ultimate realization of financial success beyond even his own wildest dreams may contribute to his certainty about how to predict academic success/failure. He is absolutely certain and determined to begin formal testing in reading and math in the kindergarten through 2nd grade, rather than waiting until third grade.

Principals in city elementary schools are being urged to enter their youngest kids in a pilot program using standardized pencil and paper tests which last between an hour and 90 minutes. Up until now, kids ages 5-7 have been assessed for literacy on an individual basis by their teachers.  One harsh critic of the proposed change, Jane Hirschmann, quoted in the New York Times, pronounced the proposed pilot program “’criminal behavior’”, slamming the Mayor’s administration for what she called its commitment to “’turning curriculum into a testing regime’”.  

In my view, the Mayor is doing what he thinks is best and doing so in good faith.  But it hasn’t occurred to him to bring in experts in child development and early childhood education who would point out the fact that few children this young, no matter how literate or math skilled, can be expected to stay focused on a standardized pencil and paper test for up to one hour and a half.

In fact, the about to be discarded method of individual teacher assessments combined with the teacher’s familiarity with each child’s every day performance are the best predictors of the learning potential and skills of children this young. (Yes, that does take more time, but what good is a quick, but unreliable measure?)

No one who represents the position of the National Association of the Education of Young Children would consider standardized paper and pencil testing of K-2 children to be developmentally appropriate.     But make no mistake about it: the leaders of NAEYC and the overwhelming majority of its close to 100,000 members are supportive of Learning Standards, those which are truly developmentally appropriate.  Details about this will follow in my next blog along with a further plea for exercising emotional intelligence and humility in governing all the people, no matter how young, at such a critical time.