According tdn.com, police officers in Cowlitz County in Washington believe that by expanding preschool may help reduce or prevent crime.
Cops were visiting schools in the county to talk to students and to help push state lawmakers to “add 1,000 additional slots to the state-funded Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program.”
“A long-range study of Michigan’s Perry Preschool found that at-risk children who did not participate in a high-quality program were five times more likely to be chronic offenders by the age of 27 than those who did not attend. Another Chicago study found at-risk kids were 70 percent more likely to be arrested for a violent crime by the age of 18 if they missed out on quality preschool.”
If so, and if implemented in Washington, a move of this nature will eventually cut costs as it is much cheaper to educate kids than it is to jail an adult.
Additional statistics from the state show that “[t]here are 235 children enrolled in the state-funded Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program, plus an additional 300 clients in the federally funded Early Head Start serves pregnant moms and their kids up to 3 years old.”
That’s a lot of students, and if the program is extended to allow for more kids, it will certainly serve as a life changing event for many of the state’s low-income children.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
A guest post by Nick Grantham
Overview
Remind (formerly Remind101) is a one-way messaging service created specifically to help teachers communicate with their school community as simply and safely as possible. Allowing students and parents to sign up via text, email or online using a unique class code, the service keeps phone numbers completely hidden so teacher-student-parent communication is 100% private and secure.
As the main purpose of the Remind platform and app, simple and secure messaging is the primary use for most educators. This could be an alert to students when work is due, a reminder to parents to fill in permission slips, weather information, school closures or even just a motivational quote or message for the day.
2. Send more than words
One of the huge advantages Remind has over conventional SMS is the ability to attach files to messages. As long as the attachment is less than 10MB in size, any file type can be used. Try sending an end of week happy snap of your class to parents each Friday to keep them feeling connected. Attach a map or flyer if you are messaging about an event. Even attach a pdf copy of the homework, just so parents know exactly their children are working on.
3. Archiving message history
One key safety feature of Remind is that you cannot delete messages once they are sent. This ensures there is always a clear record and trail of your messages and allows you to stand over every interaction you have made. What is particularly useful is that the system also allows you to easily download a PDF copy of every message you have made. This is extremely useful for archiving, potential legal requirements and any administrative requests.
4. Send messages from the future
Remind lets you schedule messages to be sent at any time in the future (unfortunately the past is not yet possible…). This works extremely well for setting project deadlines or dates for upcoming tests. This way messages can be created when you think of them rather than at awkward times or when you may not have the capacity to craft the message carefully.
5. One way conversation
Make sure to remember when using Remind that it is a one way communication channel. If you need to have a discussion or require feedback from parents or students, email, phone or face to face conversation may be a better option. Over time you will find that certain individuals react better to certain communication mediums, so although Remind may not allow replies, you can use it as a trigger speak or mail on a subject further.
The founder of Fractus Learning, Nick Grantham is an Australian educator living and working in Dublin, Ireland. With a background in education, engineering and digital product development, Nick launched Fractus Learning in 2011 to connect people with a shared passion for technology and how it can bring education to life.
In view of the large influx of refugees from Syria and the growing concern about their integration in European societies, the launch of a new report on immigrant children in education systems could not be more timely.
The report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), noted reassuringly that there was no relation between the amount of immigrants in a country’s education system and a decline in education standards. It’s as if the OECD were pre-empting criticism from populist anti-immigrant politicians that the influx of Syrian refugees will be a disruption to western societies, and in particular a drain on schools.
The main focus of the report is actually on the performance gap between children of immigrant background and their non-immigrant peers and what schools can do to close it. Although the achievement gap has closed across the OECD – by a semester between 2003 and 2012 – on average, immigrant students still perform worse than their peers. The OECD gives some quite explicit advice to politicians if they are serious about enhancing the performance of these children: provide additional language instruction, arrange early childhood education, prevent segregation, don’t force them to repeat grades and eliminate the early streaming (also known as tracking) of children into different ability groups.
While the first two recommendations are uncontroversial, the last suggestion is politically sensitive as there are quite a few states who practice and cherish the tracking or streaming of children. In Germany, the Netherlands and Austria, different tracks coincide with different kinds of schools, while in England, ability grouping is organised within schools in what is called setting.
Provocatively the report said: “While ability grouping, grade repetition and tracking are harmful for all students, immigrant students are more likely to be affected by these practices.“ This is likely to raise some eyebrows, particularly among political parties advocating early tracking such as the Christian Democrats in Germany and the Conservatives in the UK.
Many education researchershave stressed that early tracking only reinforces achievement gaps, not only between immigrant and non-immigrant children but also between children of different social backgrounds. As early as 1974, the French sociologist Raymond Boudon notedthat the more tracks a system has and the earlier these tracks start to branch out, the greater the inequality in educational performance and the more difficult it will be for children of modest backgrounds, including many immigrants, to do well in school. In this sense the OECD can be said to be a late convert to the cause of late selection – or comprehensive education as it is more widely known.
The report also noted that early tracking on the basis of ability amounts to social and ethnic sorting and so only adds to school social and ethnic segregation, which is an observation widely sharedin academia.
Segregation and achievement
Segregation is also mentioned by the OECD as another factor contributing to the performance gap. This is based on the idea that large concentrations of immigrant children give rise to peer influences that reduce performance, irrespective of the individual social and ethnic background of children. In other words, when immigrant children are surrounded by peers of the same background in school, they are doubly disadvantaged, both in terms of their own background and in terms of the backgrounds of their classmates.
Language lessons for refugee children in Germany. Ole Spata/EPA
In mixed settings, by contrast, they should be able to learn from their more privileged peers. Desegregated schools can thus help to compensate for the effect of family disadvantage. Again this theory is not new. In 1966 a famous report by American sociologist James Coleman noted that it makes a great difference who you go to school with. This report greatly reinforced the desegregation campaign that was set in motion by the 1954Brown vs Board of Education US Supreme Court ruling declaring that de jure segregation was “inherently unequal” and therefore unconstitutional.
What’s best for immigrant children
There is more controversy among researchers, however, about whether segregation enhances achievement gaps. In 2005, American researchers Russell Rumberger and Gregory Palardy notedthat when it comes to student achievement, the social composition of schools matters much more than the racial composition. Taking a closer look at social composition they found that several school characteristics, including teacher expectations of children, the amount of homework that students do, and the number of rigorous courses that students take, explain all of the effect of social composition.
This would imply that in theory immigrant children can perform just as well in segregated schools, provided they are exposed to the very same curriculum and teaching input as their peers in mixed schools. The question, however, is whether equalising these resources across schools can be achieved in practice – as they are so inextricably bound up with the social and ethnic mix of schools.
The OECD report deserves praise for letting the data speak and ignoring possible political pressures to revise the policy messages emanating from its findings on what works to close the achievement gap. It does not deal, however, with two relevant questions of quite a different nature: namely whether the policies it recommends can be adopted in the same way in countries with different educational cultures and whether they will produce the same results across the board. This debate – a hot topic among researchers – so far remains unresolved.
When are children “ready” for school? There is much debate about when the transition between play-based pre-school and the start of “formal” schooling should begin. The trend in the UK primary school curriculum over recent decades has been towards an earlier start to formal instruction, and an erosion of learning through play.
But the evidence from international comparisons and psychological research of young children’s development all points to the advantages of a later start to formal instruction, particularly in relation to literacy.
Among the earliest in Europe
Children in England are admitted into reception classes in primary schools at age four; in many cases, if their birthdays are in the summer months, when they have only just turned four. This is in stark contrast to the vast majority of other European countries, many of which currently enjoy higher levels of educational achievement. In Europe, the most common school starting age is six, and even seven in some cases such as Finland.
European Commission. EURYDICE and EUROSTAT 2013. * Although education is not compulsory until six in Ireland, approx. 40% of four-year-olds and almost all five-year-olds are in publicly-funded primary schools.
From the moment children in England enter the reception class, the pressure is on for them to learn to read, write and do formal written maths. In many schools, children are identified as “behind” with reading before they would even have started school in many other countries. Now the government is introducing tests for four-year-olds soon after starting school.
There is no research evidence to support claims from government that “earlier is better”. By contrast, a considerable body of evidence clearly indicates the crucial importance of play in young children’s development, the value of an extended period of playful learning before the start of formal schooling, and the damaging consequences of starting the formal learning of literacy and numeracy too young.
Importance of play
A range of anthropological studies of children’s play in hunter-gatherer societies and other evolutionary psychology studies of play in the young of mammals have identified play as an adaptation which evolved in early human social groups, enabling humans to become powerful learners and problem-solvers.
Some neuroscientists’ research has supported this view of play as a central mechanism in learning. One book by Sergio and Vivien Pellis reviewed many other studies to show that playful activity leads to synaptic growth, particularly in the frontal cortex – the part of the brain responsible for all the uniquely human, higher mental functions.
A range of experimental psychology studies, including my own work, have consistently demonstrated the superior learning and motivation arising from playful as opposed to instructional approaches to learning in children.
There are two crucial processes which underpin this relationship. First, playful activity has been shown to support children’s early development of representational skills, which is fundamental to language use. One 2006 study by US academics James Christie and Kathleen Roskos, reviewed evidence that a playful approach to language learning offers the most powerful support for the early development of phonological and literacy skills.
Second, through all kinds of physical, social and constructional play, such as building with blocks or making models with household junk, children develop their skills of intellectual and emotional “self-regulation”. This helps them develop awareness of their own mental processes – skills that have been clearly demonstrated to be the key predictors of educational achievement and a range of other positive life outcomes.
Longer-term impacts
Within educational research, a number of longitudinal studies have provided evidence of long-term outcomes of play-based learning. A 2002 US study by Rebecca Marcon, for example, demonstrated that by the end of their sixth year in school, children whose pre-school model had been academically-directed achieved significantly lower marks in comparison to children who had attended child-initiated, play-based pre-school programmes.
A number of other studies have specifically addressed the issue of the length of pre-school play-based experience and the age at which children begin to be formally taught the skills of literacy and numeracy. In a 2004 longitudinal study of 3,000 children funded by the department of education itself, Oxford’s Kathy Sylva and colleagues showed that an extended period of high-quality, play-based pre-school education made a significant difference to academic learning and well-being through the primary school years. They found a particular advantage for children from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Studies in New Zealand comparing children who began formal literacy instruction at age five or age seven have shown that by the age of 11 there was no difference in reading ability level between the two groups. But the children who started at five developed less positive attitudes to reading, and showed poorer text comprehension than those children who had started later.
This evidence, directly addressing the consequences of the introduction of early formal schooling, combined with the evidence on the positive impact of extended playful experiences, raises important questions about the current direction of travel of early childhood education policy in England.
There is an equally substantial body of evidence concerning the worrying increase in stress and mental health problems among children in England and other countries where early childhood education is being increasingly formalised. It suggests there are strong links between these problems and a loss of playful experiences and increased achievement pressures. In the interests of children’s educational achievements and their emotional well-being, the UK government should take this evidence seriously.
Hard Evidenceis a series of articles in which academics use research evidence to tackle the trickiest questions.
David Whitebread, Senior Lecturer in Psychology & Education, University of Cambridge
The recent horrifying spectacle of a disturbed student fatally stabbing his teacher in front of his classmates in Leeds has spurred a national dialogue about how schools should address violence.
Perhaps the most controversial measure under consideration is expanding the use of knife arches – known in the US as walk-through metal detectors. Given metal detectors’ longevity in some US schools (since 1992 in Chicago’s high schools), the number of studies that have assessed their effectiveness is abysmally low.
In the UK, teacher union leaders and the deputy prime minister have rejected the idea of more knife arches. Their opposition to this expensive technology is understandable given that armed violence is extremely rare in UK schools. Responsible policy-making is driven by patterns and sound cost-benefit analysis rather than the uproar over single tragic incidents.
But such a proposal may resonate in the minority of schools where the risk of violent threats and victimisation are more than remote. Some students in these schools reportedly arm themselves for protection and their next minor altercation could (but rarely does) escalate into serious violence.
In these jurisdictions, police and school officials may employ knife arches in order to signal that safety is a top priority, while raising awareness about the dangers that knives pose. But do knife arches promote the aims that matter most to students, parents, and teachers? Do they make schools safer? Do they alter the school climate in a manner that promotes students learning?
The answer to these questions surely depends, in part, on how the knife arches are employed. Arches, when deployed in the UK, are used sporadically – around one day, gone the next. Confronted with this temporary barrier, most knife-toting students will either ditch the weapon or ditch school (assuming smuggling the knife through a window or side entrance is not a realistic possibility). These potential assailants can be quite confident (and their potential victims reasonably concerned) that no knife arch will impede their next attempt.
Lessons from US schools
Whereas the limited capacity of sporadic knife arches to act as a deterrent seems obvious, you can reasonably predict that more frequent use would substantially enhance this capacity.
In the USA, as in the UK, opposition to metal detectors is intense and largely successful across the socio-economic spectrum. But there are some schools – predictably comprised largely of urban youth of colour – where the lockdown environments feared by campaigners in the UK are a daily reality.
In 2010, an exhaustive meta-analysis of studies on metal detectors, either deployed alone or combined with other fortification strategies, uncovered no studies that compared student outcomes before and after installation.
Among the five studies that compare student safety measures (all self-reported) in schools with and without metal detectors, only one reflects positively on metal detectors. This 1992 study involved students who attended three sampled New York City high schools that scanned their students at random with hand-held metal detectors approximately once a week. They were 43%-49% less likely than students of twelve other high schools to report carrying weapons inside or en-route to school (even though they were equally likely to carry them at other times).
Fear remains
But reducing weapons possession is of limited benefit unless it translates into reduced violence or fear. Collectively these five studies and a subsequent one from Rutgers University suggest that metal detectors fail to reduce threats, fighting, fear, and perceptions of violence and disorder. Injuries and deaths resulting from smuggled weapons are so uncommon that any benefits are likely to elude statistical detection.
The apparent failure of metal detectors to reduce fear is especially disappointing, because fear reduction is the most promising pathway through which metal detectors may improve academic performance.
Frequent and effective scanning requires a large investment of time and money, and it inevitably widens the net of surveillance. The thousands of hours that students collectively spend waiting in line to be scanned are hours that could have been spent engaging academically.
The money spent on arches and their operation is money that could have been spent on programmes that address the needs, struggles, fears, and hopes that students carry through the school doors, gates, and arches each day.
It is beyond any doubt that low-performing schools would benefit from developing strong parent-school partnerships. However, it is not always easy to promote such a culture of shared responsibility. Schools may face difficulty in attaining an efficient collaborative framework among stakeholders, which include teachers, parents, students, the community, and the administration.
Generally, education and school leaders try to generate a social framework that will help teachers, administrators, and parents resolve differences in a peaceful and supportive manner. Overall improvement of student performance can be the outcome of improved relationships between teachers and parents.
Education leaders can encourage parental involvement by improving the structural environment of schools that directly affects teachers, administrators, students, and parents. Historically, American culture has tried to promote a locally inspired, community-based school structure; however, most of the calls for decentralization of schools and school district systems have failed to remove the bureaucratic nature of schools. This includes a structural division of responsibilities, a strict set of laws and regulations, and hierarchical control over the functionality and operation of schools.
Bureaucratic systems often create barriers that prevent teachers from developing effective student-teacher relationships and discourage parents from taking part in helping students develop their learning skills. Centralized schooling systems under the burden of stern bureaucracies can also cause alienation of teachers and obstruct student development. On the other hand, bureaucratic systems help teachers control and use their expertise to guide students effectively. A reduction in bureaucracy would increase administrative tasks among teachers, which would then have a negative impact on their performance.
The bureaucratic system should be based on flexible formulae that will guide the teachers, administrators, and parents in promoting the learning skills of students and help them achieve better results. The centralized or hierarchical authority of schools can be used to implement these supportive regulations and policies to enhance parental involvement. On the other hand, the wrong set of policies or the lack of flexibility may harm the process of teaching and learning.
Schools must be prepared for the fact that one outcome of effective parental involvement programs will be the desire of parents to become partners in the decision-making process existing in schools. Thus, school personnel must possess a genuine belief that shared responsibility for multiple aspects of the educational enterprise will result in improved learning environments for children and youth.
Understanding the deep-rooted importance of family and parental involvement in education and its effect on the academic performance of a child, requires recognizing the fact that parents are children’s first teachers. Home is the first school, and as such, it is the place where children learn an abundance of skills, knowledge, and attitudes, some of which supports what is taught in schools.
When parents get involved with their children’s education, they tend to succeed academically and perform better on exams. They miss fewer school days and tend to be more conscientious about completing school-related work outside of school. Conversely, children, whose families are not as involved in their school experiences, are often unable to compete academically with peers, have irregular attendances, and are less likely to graduate from high school.
Because of the positive impact that parent and family involvement in education has on the performance of children, schools often try to encourage parents and family members to increase their participation in the educational process. In order to increase partnership of parents with schools, schools must create an environment that offers enough incentives and support for parents.
Schools cannot expect that all parents and family members will increase their level of parental involvement on their own. School staff, including teachers, other school personnel, maintenance staff, and administrators, must work together to develop an environment that encourages parents to ask questions and share their feedback with school personnel. Some parents will need to be invited to schools, and learn to view schools as places where they may seek advice, receive suggestions on any number of school/student related issues, and understand it is a place where their inputs and thoughts are welcomed.
Some parents may be dissuaded from getting involved with what they perceive as a group of close-knit educational professionals who engage in language and practices meant to exclude parents from the work of educational systems. School districts must make sure parents understand state standards and assessments so that parents can be more involved in monitoring the progress of their children. Schools are required to make sure that communications with parents are in a language and format that are understandable to parents. In order for America’s children to succeed academically, the crucial role of parental involvement must be embraced wholeheartedly.
Science is one of those topics that just has to be experienced to be understood. When I was a public elementary school teacher, I truly saw the importance of hands-on activities where science was concerned. For kids to be able to connect to what is truly magical about the world around us, they have to feel it, touch it, and experiment with it.
Finding ways to come up with experiments to perform, and the money to do it, is harder to do than it sounds. Even if you have both the money and supplies, giving kids the one-on-one time in class to really understand and perform the experiments is challenging. That leaves a lot of the responsibility to parents to help instill a love and comprehension for science to their kids. Finding that time, energy, money and expertise (not every parent completely understands scientific concepts, like chemistry, themselves) can feel futile. Kids needs extra help with science, though, more than ever. Consider these statistics:
For the first time in 2009, more than half of U.S. patents were awarded to non-U.S. companies because of STEM shortcomings.
All of these factors add up to a need for convenient, expert science tools that parents can implement at home and kids can have fun doing.
Convenient Chemistry at Home
I recently got a behind-the-scenes look at MEL Science, a company that offers an interactive chemistry experiment subscription service that pairs the best of hands-on learning with mobile technology. These standalone education packages include:
38 (!!) interactive chemistry sets
Free mobile app for tablets or smartphones
Website access to other science facts and stories to complement the experiments
The MEL Science subscription is designed to last for the course of a year, with 3 monthly packages with 1 to 3 experiments each (so each customer gets a total of 4 to 7 experiments per month). The experiments are strengthened by a complementary mobile app that essentially works as a virtual 3D microscope and a website with in-depth information on the projects and science behind them.
The company was founded by a small group of self-proclaimed “science geeks” who saw the need for better at-home science options when they had children of their own. The combined expertise and personal passion are what makes MEL Science so unique in the Ed-Tech field, I think.
I got a chance to look at the app, site and some of the experiments being performed and I actually walked away with a greater understanding of chemistry than I had before. It certainly made me want to get my hands on more of the experiments that MEL Science offers. It was fun, and fascinating, all at once.
According to MEL Science, this subscription service “actually teaches you chemistry instead of showing tricks with a scientific slant.” In other words, young learners aren’t just supposed to be impressed with the flash of science, but they should walk away with a real understanding of the underlying concepts of the experiments. What’s more – parents don’t need to worry that the experiments are unsafe for their kids. There are no explosions. No harmful chemicals. Just safe, but fun, experiments that can be done at home.
A Better Approach to Science Learning
The service that MEL Science offers in its subscription chemistry sets fills a gap that this generation of students desperately needs: hands-on science experiments connected to internet and mobile technology. There is a lot of political rhetoric out there pushing STEM education but our actions have not yet caught up to those lofty words. Science learning starts in our P-12 classrooms and should be supported at home whenever possible. Giving parents easy-to-use tools helps the push for higher science achievement and also serves as a family bonding experience. The student-teacher-parent combination is truly what is needed for the strongest science outcomes, we just have to make it a priority.
To learn more about MEL Science and its chemistry experiment subscription series, visit MelScience.com.
**Editor’s note – These tips are applicable to teachers too, as educators face the challenges of teaching kindness in K-12 classrooms**
Kids and teens can view of themselves as powerless in a world where adults call all the shots. But that’s not the whole story. Kids have power. And every day, your children and mine get opportunities to use that power to do good or to do harm. Sometimes, turning a blind eye and choosing to do nothing results in more harm.
If we truly value kindness and appreciate it when it comes our way, we can’t ignore suffering. We’ve got to do our part to keep kindness alive… every chance we get. And we’ve got to teach our kids to be kind. But how?
Child or adult, it takes extra social courage to exit our comfort zone and to help a vulnerable person. When kids ask me about standing up for someone who is being harassed, I tell them they should never put themselves directly in harm’s way. But I make it clear that there are many ways to help an underdog and let him or her know: “I’m not like the others who are giving you a hard time. I’m here to help.”
Fuel for Thought (for adults) —At different times we have all been underdog, top dog, and middle of the pack dog, so we know what it feels in each of those places. Being on the bottom, without support, can be terribly lonely. Think about a time when you felt like an underdog. Where did you turn for support? What response did you get? Think of a time when you helped an underdog. What happened?
Conversations That Count (with kids)– Talk about the concept of a “pecking order” among animals and humans. Say this to your children: “Most of the time, when we’re not on the bottom, we don’t give much thought to those who are.” Now ask your kids what they think about that. True? Not true? How do you know? Talk about who is “on the bottom” in your child’s class. (Even kids as young as second or third grade have a keen awareness of social strata.) How do other people treat that child? How do you treat that child? What might happen if you stood up for the underdog?
Teach—Challenge your child to be a hero and shake up the social strata at school by standing up for someone who needs a friend. Follow up and find out from your child what happened with the challenge.
Please let me know how you teach your kids and students about the importance of standing up for the underdog.
_____
Annie Fox is an internationally respected parenting expert and family coachwho empowers parents with the special support, leadership skills, and practical tools needed during our children’s tween and teen years. Her books include The Girls’ Q&A Book on Friendship and Teaching Kids to Be Good People.
**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding a P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**
By JaVohn Perry
As parents we often ask ourselves, “Why isn’t my child listening to me?” We seem to have the assumption that just because we say something, our child should automatically obey. Wouldn’t that be nice? Well it seldom works out that way. In fact, it is frequently the total opposite. We sometimes find that when we tell our child to do something, they don’t do it. Or, when we ask our child not to do a particular thing, they do it anyway. Why is this? Well this happens for a number of reasons including rebellion, misunderstandings, and sometimes our children are just testing us. Whatever the cause may be, there are ways to increase the chances of our children listening to us.
Talk to your kids, not AT them. As parents, we should talk to our children instead of talking at them. Lectures can sometimes be discouraging and one sided. A better option would be having conversations with our children. Try talking to your child about what is expected of them. Let them know what type of behavior is acceptable and what consequences they may encounter if rules are not followed. Encourage your child to engage in the conversation by asking questions. It is also important to let your child speak as well.
Leave out the judgement. It also helps to be non-judgmental when talking with your child. Judging actually does more harm than good because it causes a feeling of shame, which sometimes leads to rebellion. There is a way to tell your child what is acceptable behavior without judging them. By setting the ground rules and making them aware of expectations, you are putting a foundation in place.
Be proactive. Another good idea is to discuss issues with your child before they come up. Talk to your child about listening at a time when everything is calm and there is no issue. Children are more likely to listen and actually remember when issues are discussed while they are in a calm mood. While you and your child are just sitting around or having fun, it would be a nice time to tell them how good it feels when they listen to you. You should also ask them how it feels when people listen to them.
Set a good example. Always try your best to be a good example to your child. It is important for you to listen to your child when he or she is trying to relay a message to you. This can be a verbal message or one shown through behavior. Tell them what you are getting out of the message so that they will know for sure that you understand and that you were really listening. If you pay attention to your child, they are more likely to listen to you.
Follow through. Another very important thing we must do as parents is follow through. If you have established consequences and they are clear to your child, it is important to actually do what you say you will do. Children are very smart and they know when they can get away with things. If there is no follow through, it sends the message that they don’t have to listen because there won’t be a consequence. It also shows inconsistency between your words and actions.
In conclusion, we need to remember that each individual child is different. It is important that we know our child so we know what type of technique works for him or her. This is why we have to try to strengthen the bonds with our children. Having a close relationship with your child is very important. Children with distant relationships with their parents are less likely to listen to them. Children need to know that we care and that they are being heard. Once we start listening to our children, we are one step closer to them listening to us.
___
JaVohn Perry is a devoted mother of three, Early Childhood Educator, Freelance Writer and Business Owner. As a writer, she holds many titles including Seattle Childhood Education Examiner for Examiner.com. With writing and working with children being her two passions, she makes it her duty to utilize her skills in those areas.
Personal histories and records exist for every student who attends, and every teacher who teaches, at a school. This history, in the form of school records, test scores and the opinion of teachers and mentors, can have a huge impact on a student’s future. In some cases, it is on the basis of these assessments about an individual’s potential and overall disposition that life-changing decisions are made about them.
These histories could determine what colleges they attend, the privileges that they are allowed, or even the jobs that may eventually be able to attain. It’s important, then, for these records to be maintained properly and justly and be void of impartial or biased content.
School records and who should have access to them was first realized in the 1970s when instances of parents and students being denied access to them came into the spotlight. The passing of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (or the Buckley Amendment, as it is popularly known) by the U.S. Congress in 1974 was the first federal piece of legislation that expressly addressed what students could and could not access.
The Act makes clear who may have access to a student’s records and who may not. The move was largely beneficial for parents who were previously denied access to records that were very likely to affect their children’s lives. The Act made it mandatory for schools to share all information about students with their parents, when requested. It also required schools to explain or interpret the recorded observations to parents, with the failure to do so resulting in federal funds being denied to the school. At the same time, the Act serves in the best interests of teachers. It clearly denies parents the right to inspect a teacher’s or an administrator’s unofficial records.
The Buckley amendment applies to all schools that receive federal money. The act has been a promising step in ensuring transparency in dealing with and handling student’s records. Aspects of the Act, such as the confidentiality granted to both parties, and fundamental fairness, make it stand out as a reformative measure in ensuring the right to privacy for individuals wanting to be educated.
Here is how the FERPA Act empowers parents and guardians and puts them in a better position than they were previously:
Parents and guardians can inspect their child’s school records.
The Act ensures that information about students under 18 years of age cannot be passed on without parental consent.
Parents have the right to challenge the accuracy of information at any point in time and to request a hearing to contest such information.
A legal route to get corrections made in children’s school records and to place a statement of disagreement in student regards too is now open to parents.
Parents can single-handedly decide who can access the information about their child.
In cases where parents find any discrepancies, they can always file a complaint with the U.S. Department of Education to seek relief in the civil courts.
It is important for schools, parents and students to realize the importance of what is contained in teacher and student records, while still having reasonable access to both.
t. And we’ve got to teach our kids to be kind. But how?