Susan Ochshorn of the ECE Policy Works writes here about the marginalization of those who teach early childhood. Governor Chris Christie defamed them as “babysitters.” No one asked for their expertise when the Common Core standards were written.
In this post, she describes a report released by “Defending the Early Years,” called “Teachers Speak Out.”
“The report highlights the concerns of early childhood teachers about the impact of school reforms on low-income children. Authors Diane E. Levin and Judith L. Van Hoorn culled their data from interviews with 34 educators in California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, and Washington, DC.
“The link between socioeconomic status and academic achievement has been firmly established in research. According to the National Center for Children in Poverty, 47 percent of children under six years old lived in low-income families near or below the poverty line in 2014. The level rises to nearly 70 percent for Black and Native-American children and 64 percent for Hispanic youngsters. In a recent survey conducted by the Council of Chief State School Officers—which helped design the Common Core standards—teachers across the United States listed family stress, poverty, and learning and psychological problems as the top barriers to student success.
“Yet the mandates of the Common Core are exacerbating the problem. As Levin and Van Hoorn point out in the report’s introduction, “recent reforms…have been developed and implemented by people with good intentions but often little formal knowledge of early child development.” Those with the expertise now face a “profound ethical dilemma.” As top-down mandates dictate the teaching and assessment of narrow academic skills at younger and younger ages, early childhood educators are forced to do the “least harm,” rather than the “most good.”
“In an exchange at the [DeVos] hearing, between DeVos and Todd Young, a Republican senator from Indiana, she crowed about our “great opportunity…to really empower [teachers] in a new way to do what they do best.” She horrifies educators. They’ve been leaving the field, exhausted and dispirited, in record numbers. Respect for the profession and morale are at an all-time low, as teachers have picked up the slack for a society that starves its schools and communities, and blames them for all its ills. But out of this malaise, a new activism has emerged, with great energy dedicated to defeating her.
“Early childhood teachers—with some notable exceptions—have been missing from the action. The reasons are complex. This is a workforce that has long been marginalized, their work devalued, and expertise ignored….
“As I read through the report, I kept underlining the quotes from the teachers, as if to amplify them, to lift them off the page. They’re struggling to honor early childhood’s robust evidence base, but they’re undermined by a lack of agency and autonomy:
“The trust in my expertise and judgment as a teacher is gone. So are the play and learning centers in my classroom. Everything is supposed to be structured for a specific lesson and rigidly timed to fit into a specific, tight, preapproved schedule.
“The negative impact of reforms on children’s development and learning can’t be overstated. Practice has become more rote, and standardized, with less time for deep relationships—among children, and between them and caring adults. We’re stealing the heart of high-quality early education, as the individual strengths, interests, and needs of children get lost:
“With this extreme emphasis on what’s called ‘rigorous academics,’ drills are emphasized. It’s much harder for my children to become self-regulated learners. Children have no time to learn to self-regulate by choosing their own activities, participating in ongoing projects with their classmates, or playing creatively. They have to sit longer, but their attention spans are shorter.
“The authors bring us into the classrooms studied by Daphna Bassok, Scott Lathem, and Anna Rorem, of the University of Virginia, who used two large, nationally representative data sets to compare public school kindergarten classrooms between 1998 and 2010. More formal, directed instruction in reading, writing, and math, once the province of first grade, has trickled down into kindergarten. Close reading is becoming part of the expected skill set of 5-year-olds, and the pressure has extended, in some cases, to prekindergarten, where children are being asked to master reading by the end of the year. The repercussions are severe:
“It’s essential for every kindergarten child to feel welcomed and included, to be part of the class. Instead, we’re separating the cream from the milk. From the beginning, we’re telling kids who are poor, ‘You’re deficient,’ instead of helping them become competent and feel successful and part of their class. Then it’s ‘remedial this, remedial that.’ It’s discrimination.
“The report concludes with a series of recommendations—from the real experts in the room. The first calls for the withdrawal of current early childhood standards and mandates. Another urges the use of authentic assessment, based on observations of children, their development, and learning. Number ten addresses child poverty, our national stain:
“Work at all levels of society to reduce, and ultimately end, child poverty. To do this, we must first acknowledge that a narrow focus on improving schools will not solve the complex problems associated with child poverty.
“Breaking the silence was never so sweet. Now it’s time, as John Lewis says, to get in good trouble.”
“No one asks”
No one asks the parents
No one asks the teachers
No one asks the students
No! One asks the leechers
France has a national early childhood education program. When the program was implemented several decades ago, it was kept in the public school and not privatized. Teachers had to be highly qualified with a masters degree in early child education, and go through a year of training and support with a master teacher similar to yearlong urban teacher training program in the United States that are considered the best teacher training there is.
Poverty in France, when this program was launched, was about 15 percent or more. Poverty today is
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/dispatches_from_the_welfare_state/2014/02/universal_pre_k_france_is_about_180_years_ahead_of_america_on_preschool.html
A global history of early childhood education and care
“In reviewing the value of preschool, the benefits identified and discussed included: lower
child morbidity, fewer primary school-related problems, improved primary school performance, and in several developing countries, improved health care and nutrition. Over the 35 years reviewed here, the public became increasingly aware of the value of these programs, in both developed and developing countries. The brain research as well as school outcome research appears to have been influential, albeit only in the later years, beginning in the 1980s.”
The results for poverty in France:
“Poverty in France has fallen by 60% over thirty years. Although it affected 15% of the population in 1970, in 2001 only 6.1% (or 3.7 million people) were below the poverty line (which, according to INSEE’s criteria, is half of the median income).”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_France#Number_of_persons_in_France_estimated_to_be_living_below_the_poverty_line_.281970-2002.29
My cousin lives in France. When her husband passed away, her children were young. She could have returned to the US, but opted to stay in France. In addition to the maternelle schools, the government offers affordable, government sponsored child care, which allowed my cousin to work without worry. Now that her children are grown, she still remains in France. Her reason was simple. She prefers the “quality of life” in France.
I have a question concerning the following statement: “As top-down mandates dictate the teaching and assessment of narrow academic skills at younger and younger ages, early childhood educators are forced to do the “least harm,” rather than the “most good.”
Does this refer to often imposing the departmental teaching system into ever lower grades?
Yes, Lowell, it means exactly that. See what more than a hundred early childhood teachers and academics–including Lord Layard, director of the well-being program at the London School of Economics–did to protest this phenomenon at this op-ed Inwrote for CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/06/opinions/ochshorn-education-performance/index.html
The Buffalo News published the results of an interview with the BPS Superintendent Shriner Cash who pinpoints several of the issues of the public schools in Buffalo. One neglected issue is that preschool students starting school who come from poverty have a vocabulary of about 600 words vs the normal 6000-10000. If they don’t catch up within three years, the widening gap is almost insurmountable.
How can a one size fits all curriculum meet the needs of these children who start school already at a deficit?
The individual needs of the many are lost by catering to the few who are alteady “proficient”. And we haven’t even mentioned physical and social development skills which are not addressed in the proscribed “curriculum”.
Carl Paladino is still on the Buffalo Board of Education despite his racist rant
Current Superintendent Shriner Cash threatened to leave before his five year commitment is up (he’s been here a year and a half) if the Buffalo School Board doesn’t get their act together. I’m not sure if he was specifically referring to Paladino, but I don’t expect those words to have much effect on Carl’s behavior. So far he has been able to stay above the fray despite his outrageous behaviors (and the latest outburst was just another in a long line of his racist rants). We keep hoping he will lose interest and resign, but as long as there is a chance he can grab some profits by selling one of his numerous properties to potential charter schools, I’m afraid he’ll stick around. Luckily for us, he has been thwarted in his attempts to change the “failing” Buffalo Public Schools into Charter Schools by the past few Superintendents as well as the Buffalo Teacher Federation who were able to get a couple of Carl’s cronies off last year’s School Board Election Ballot by successfully contesting the validity of their petitions to run for office and by supporting teacher friendly candidates. That is why the Charter Advocates are now a minority and the Buffalo Teachers finally have a new contract after going without for twelve years. There was quite a bit of ground to cover, especially since salaries were frozen for three of those years. The retirees even got a little something for suffering through those years.
The moral of our saga is to never give up, wait for the right moment, and advocate for your rights whenever and wherever you can with whoever is around to listen. There’s some truth to the old saying – “the squeaky wheel gets the grease” even if you have to keep making the same noise over and over. Sitting back and waiting for a handout or a pat on the head just doesn’t get the same results.
What is not mentioned is the deleterious effect over time on teacher quality. Since money cannot attract smart people to teaching and keep them, education is forced to lure the best and the brightest by other means. For years the attraction was academic freedom and respect from superiors and quality relationships with the students. When less academic freedom means fewer quality relationships, the quality of our teaching corps will ultimately erode.
Sure wish more preschool teachers would chime in here. I don’t completely buy the Dey Report’s conclusions, at least as regards preschools (as opposed to K)– at least in NJ.
The teacher input quoted in the report addresses K only. Blog posts here support: many pubsch districts buy into K screenings & assessments that cut into play-oriented activities, shift curriculum focus from age-appropriate social-devpt toward early academics. The thrust of the report is that govt mandates [NCLB, RTTT/ CCSS] are to blame. Where states have adopted K-2 stds that mimic CCSS-assessed grades, allowing K-2 to become a training ground for 3rd-gr assessments (NJ is such a state) I agree in part.
But it’s on the district if they tie in K screenings & assessments. They weren’t reqd before, nor are under ESSA, & Christie signed a bill banning stdzd assessments in K-2. I blame district admins & their BOEd’s if K changes in this way. There is an overlap here: K-12 vs PreK stds. Parents/ voters must hold the line– ideally at 3rd grade, but AT LEAST AT K!
As to PRE-K stds, in NJ they are still quite good– progressive & age-appropriate– even tho the original ’90’s teacher/ECE-created ‘PreK Expectations’ went thro iterations aligning them w/ NJ core then CCCS. Which means if we’re seeing the changes described at the PreK level, we need to look at PreK Directors– the selected curriculum– the teachers & their training.
I teach for-lang enrichment at preschools in my central-NJ area. So I don’t have a thorough grasp of day-to-day ops, but observing classroom trends for over 15 yrs in a variety of preschools: Montessori, trad’l private PreKs, employee daycares, & chain franchises.
The trends described– less unstructured play, less outdoor time, more teacher-directed lessons, too-early focus on reading/ writing/ seat-work– were obvious (a)at a once-progressive hospital-based employee daycare which sought to reduce costs by adding local govt-subsidized [Abbott] students [causing a switch to state-approved curriculum], & (b)at chain franchises w/ working-class students.
In both types of schools, low-budget is the driver. It’s achieved via canned curriculum & low-wage classroom teachers. Observing various such schools, I noted the key is NOT the low-wage teachers– it’s the director (& w/ franchises, the vision of the owner). Even given the scripted/ overly-teacher-directed lesson plans, owners/ directors w/vision & ECE instincts/ background can successfully develop subordinates, creating the nurturing, child-centered environment needed for every kid.
The biggest challenge presented by preK stds like NJ’s is not fed mandates. It is better described as a plethora of goals– multiplied in the last decade by subdividing into many [academic & social] categories– still mandated to connect curriculum goals to age-appropriate play– complicated by a demand for accountability reporting.
Connecting the dots is overwhelming, thus in low-budget schools subbed-out via canned curriculum which suffer from cookie-cutter mentality– by definition requiring too much teacher-direction despite stds to the contrary. (Yet in higher-priced private PreK’s you
still see plenty of activities which are based on tradn, untested by planned goals/ outcomes).
The only existing curriculum I know of which is equal to this exhaustive demand is Montessori [perhaps also Reggio Emilia & Waldorf, I am not acquainted.] Montessori’s program is inherently play-based; their multi-disciplinary curriculum is embedded in their playthings; accountability is built-in via the student’s own daily reporting of self-selected goals accomplished, plus the roving teacher’s observation notes…
No one asked any teacher for their expertise when putting together Common Core. There’s a pattern here.