Early learning news, events & information
early learning and basic education
I recently had this letter to the editor posted on seattletimes.com. I would like to hear other thoughts on this topic:
Reform should include early learning
I applaud the recent Times editorial for stressing the importance of early learning.
In terms of redefining basic education, the real question is, does our current definition uphold our constitutional mandate of "ample provision for the education of all children ..."? There is much discussion exploring the question of "ample" in terms of financial responsibility. The question of adequate funding is difficult and relatively subjective.
Another question to ask is whether this state meets the constitutional mandate of "all." I would suggest that an objective response to this, simply put, is no. Scientific evidence has proved that a child's early experiences directly influence his or her later ability to learn. It's more than just a good investment. Learning begins at birth, yet our current definition of basic education explicitly excludes children under age 5.
Including early learning in a definition of basic education would be costly, especially if it covered all of our youngest citizens, not just a targeted group. However, it would not make sense to make major education reforms and not resolve the question of this state's constitutional responsibility to early learning while trying to establish viable funding formulas for the future.
-- Mike Sheehan, Shoreline
Reform should include early learning
I applaud the recent Times editorial for stressing the importance of early learning.
In terms of redefining basic education, the real question is, does our current definition uphold our constitutional mandate of "ample provision for the education of all children ..."? There is much discussion exploring the question of "ample" in terms of financial responsibility. The question of adequate funding is difficult and relatively subjective.
Another question to ask is whether this state meets the constitutional mandate of "all." I would suggest that an objective response to this, simply put, is no. Scientific evidence has proved that a child's early experiences directly influence his or her later ability to learn. It's more than just a good investment. Learning begins at birth, yet our current definition of basic education explicitly excludes children under age 5.
Including early learning in a definition of basic education would be costly, especially if it covered all of our youngest citizens, not just a targeted group. However, it would not make sense to make major education reforms and not resolve the question of this state's constitutional responsibility to early learning while trying to establish viable funding formulas for the future.
-- Mike Sheehan, Shoreline
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Heidi Scott on -
Great points! Through my experiences as both a preschool teacher and an elementary teacher, I have found that not only is their an exclusion of young children in the definition of basic education, there is also a huge lack of knowledge in some of our public schools on how intelligent and capable young children are before they enter kindergarten.
Again, from my own experiences as an educator, I do not believe that we are upholding our constitutional mandate for educating all children. With all of the quantitative scientific data on early learning I am still surprised that there isn't a huge movement to push for meeting the educational needs of our societies young children. Educating young children also leads to the importance of paying close attention to the developmental and age appropriate ways in which to implement a variety of proven educational theories all the while recognizing each child's unique strengths, weaknesses and ways in which they learn best.
© 2010 Created by Foundation for Early Learning
