In a brilliant essay in the Los Angeles Times, Susan Ochshorn says that the United States is squandering its future by not investing in the well-being of children.
Ochshorn, an advocate for early childhood education, cites an Urban Institute study showing that “federal spending on children fell by $2 billion from 2010 to 2011, the first dip in 30 years. The children’s share of the budget pie was reduced from 10.7% to 10.4%. By 2022, the children’s portion of the budget is expected to drop to 8% and their share of GDP is expected to drop from 2.5% to 1.9%, which will include significant cuts in early care and education. With the Census Bureau reporting nearly 25% of the nation’s children younger than age 6 in poverty, this is not good news.”
It is a cliche to say that “children are our future,” but it is actually true. Children are our future, and if we neglect their basic needs, we sacrifice the future.
Ochshorn writes: “We now know more than ever about how to nurture human capital, with eye-popping technology offering graphic evidence of the rapid pace and complexity of brain development in the first years of life. The bottom line is that kids need time for sensitive, stimulating interactions with adults to promote growth, resilience and mastery, the foundations for their healthy development and academic success. They need access to good healthcare and nutrition, and high-quality early learning settings, not to mention viable communities invested in their well-being.”
Her article cites numerous authoritative sources to demonstrate one basic fact: We are not investing in the well-being of children. Instead, we are spending more and more to test them and to hold their teachers accountable. This is not good social policy. This is criminal neglect.
Very good points, but seeing children referred to as “human capital” made me wince.
According to the Rheeject they are assets.
According to Rahm Emanuel, 25% of them are deficits.
“Rheeject” – LOVE it! In that vein- Rheeject should RHEEnege on her idiotic “educational ” RHEEform ideas and projects.
We could go on, I’m sure.
We could go on and on because she is RHEEdiculous and RHEEpugnant and she makes me want to RHEEgurgitate. 🙂
Adding on to Michael’s comment.
“It is a cliche to say that “children are our future,” but it is actually true. Children are our future. . . ”
Yes, it’s cliche and a bad one at that. NO, children aren’t our future. They will be their own future when it happens. Yes, what happens to them in the meantime will shape them and their own perceptions but no one has a right to make a claim on another’s future.
Word usage matters. This year the admin of our school has bought T-shirts for the staff with RRR U Ready on the front and Reading (in a normal font) and RIGOR and RELATIONSHIPS in a bolder font (at least 3-4 times as thick of lettering. They want us to wear them on the first day (allowing for a dress down day, you know, one can also wear jeans-hot damn-haven’t owned a pair of jeans in 30 years). So I’m stuck, should I wear the shirt with rigor crossed out and “flexible” written in or should I refuse to wear it and just give the shirt back. I know I’m not wearing it (not the first time I’ve refused to wear a t-shirt promoting idiocies that was given to staff).
Wow. They really made those?
What about just a tee shirt with the school name?
How about buy some red shirts and socks and wash them with the new tee shirt on hot water, which will turn the new shirt pink and then you can say Woops, ruined it in the wash? Kinda like a friend whose grandmother gave him a nerdy watch at age 11, so he wore it in the tub.
It’s creative disruption? Right?!
We are squandering only the future of some of our country’s children. The sad fact is that those with more than adequate resources are providing their children with every resource available to insure that their children will grow up to be productive citizens of our country and very possibility have leadership roles. The rest of the country’s children-not so much.
We are creating or actually in many places have already created, a two tiered system. There was a time when public schools provided opportunities for children who in other circumstances didn’t stand a chance to change their lives. Currently it is more difficult to break out of your caste.
Is this what we really want for the United States?
Sheila:
You make a very valid point. Looking at the stats released for NYC last night on a TV program, once again, two groups are faltering badly, according to racial/ethnic breakdowns.
IMO, if people are seeking real reform, why not look at the reasons for WHY these groups are seemingly perpetually behind academically, without ascribing blame, and seek solutions instead?
Diane, I was reading your twitter feed and I saw this:
Would @DianeRavitch back this? RT @LouisianaSupe It’s time to get beyond talking ab charter vs traditional vs private.Time to talk quality
It is my belief that people in the general public do not know that reformers openly advocate privatizing public schools. “Reform” is bait and switch. It was sold on the basis of improving public schools, not privatizing them. They have changed the terms of the debate on ed forums, but not to the general public. Educators are the only people who read ed forums. Is there a way we can get what ed reformers say in education circles out to the general public? I don’t think the public supports “getting beyond” public schools. In fact, all the polling I’ve seen indicates people support PUBLIC schools.
Do people in Louisiana know that Louisiana state officials are “beyond” public schools?
I am curious. Can anyone tell me
what happened to orphanages?
Weren’t orphanages state run facilities
to protect children?
Why did we stop using them?
Was it just cost?