A new study investigates adult chatter with their children while in the grocery store and find that it may help overcome the "word gap"that exists between children entering elementary school.
Showing posts with label young children. Show all posts
Showing posts with label young children. Show all posts
Thursday
Bing! asks for support for ad-free searches
K-12 students are children and youth inundated by information everyday. Some of that information -- and probably more than we'd realize -- is marketing of products, services, and entertainment. To that end, Bing! has launched an initiative to provide ad-free searching to schools to reduce some of this exposure to students in learning environments.
If you support this effort, go here.
Friday
Case of First Impression: Georgia Supreme Court rules that 12-year cannot appeal his placement decision -- UPDATED
The case is In the Interest of W.L.H., No. S12G1049 (Mar. 4, 2013) in the Ga. Supreme Court. The article on which I am relying can be found on The Daily Report, "Ga. high court: Children can't contest rulings on their care."
On the facts, a young man had been cared for by his cousin from the time that he was 17-months old until he was 12-years-old. His father is deceased and his mother not in the picture. He stayed with his cousin by authority of a placement from the state of Georgia. However, after accusations of abuse on the young man surfaced and there was evidence that he had been struck by the cousin, a Georgia court appointed a legal guardian for the minor. Later, the court made a legal determination that the minor was experiencing deprivation in his home. The court ordered that the young man be removed from the cousin's care-- first to foster care and then to a group home.
The young man, armed with an attorney, appealed the court's decision, and then appealed the decision of the Georgia Court of Appeals. When the case reached the Supreme Court, the question was whether the judges would grant the young man "standing" to actually be heard on his case. Standing is a legal burden that must be overcome before one can bring a case or controversy to court. Basically, if one is not appropriately situated in his relationship to the facts and harms of the case, a court will not allow that person to bring the matter to the court's attention. (Of course, standing is much more complicated, but that's the idea).
On the facts, a young man had been cared for by his cousin from the time that he was 17-months old until he was 12-years-old. His father is deceased and his mother not in the picture. He stayed with his cousin by authority of a placement from the state of Georgia. However, after accusations of abuse on the young man surfaced and there was evidence that he had been struck by the cousin, a Georgia court appointed a legal guardian for the minor. Later, the court made a legal determination that the minor was experiencing deprivation in his home. The court ordered that the young man be removed from the cousin's care-- first to foster care and then to a group home.
The young man, armed with an attorney, appealed the court's decision, and then appealed the decision of the Georgia Court of Appeals. When the case reached the Supreme Court, the question was whether the judges would grant the young man "standing" to actually be heard on his case. Standing is a legal burden that must be overcome before one can bring a case or controversy to court. Basically, if one is not appropriately situated in his relationship to the facts and harms of the case, a court will not allow that person to bring the matter to the court's attention. (Of course, standing is much more complicated, but that's the idea).
Monday
Head Start has to keep its Federal Support
Data suggests that enrollment in Head Start is not determinative of whether a child is a successful elementary school student or whether a child is a higher-functioning learner through elementary grades. Hence, those waiting for Head Start to be the silver bullet to end the achievement gap are sentenced to wait some more. What Head Start does do (as supported by this study) is ready young children for kindergarten and deliver them to a high-quality kindergarten teacher as eager little sponges ready to grow to their next level of learning (see Exhibits 3a and 3b showing statistically significant cognitive impacts of Head Start for the four-year-old cohort and three-year old cohorts, respectively (p. xxiv-xxvi)). This is what we should want for all children—to have the skills and readiness to begin to learn. A program that ensures our nation’s children are ready to learn when they reach school is a program worthwhile.
But the prompt asks whether Head Start is still relevant, which probes not just into the effects of the program (though, excitingly the random assignment of this study allows us to be able to determine actual causality of Head Start), but asks us to explore whether Head Start should continue to take up policy space, research, and public priority. Should the federal government continue to support the program?
I point to two reasons why Head Start should continue to be supported by the federal government: (1) the alternative to no federal government support is likely state-only support (rather than no support at all) and states are not currently in positions to take on this additional responsibility and (2) the federal government has societal interest in the secondary benefits Head Start has shown to produce in low-income children and families.
See why after the jump.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)