Giving Children a Real First Amendment ‘Voice’ in Services and Education

The recent, well publicized non-event, originating from what was portrayed as a small (in membership) church in Gainesville, Florida was variously examined in media echo chambers as a First Amendment (freedom of expression) activity.  As distasteful as this non-event turned out to be, it prompted me to reflect on the rights granted to adult citizens in the U.S. compared to the rights of children citizens, but not in a freedom of expression context, rather as a matter of ‘redress of grievances’ which is an often overlooked element found in the last three words of the Amendment.

The First Amendment states: 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

No matter where your opinion leads you on current events, we have a large section of our population –our children–who do not have a clear cut process to redress their grievances about sub-standard educational experiences.

As an adult, I am free to express my opinion to state legislators, Congress and Senate representatives about proposed legislation and how it will affect my life and that of my grandchildren, now and in the future.  My calls and emails maybe answered, and I trust considered, at some level.  My vote on Election Day offers me another opportunity to express my concerns.  At work, I am free to express my views to colleagues and supervisors.  While we may not always agree, in most instances I sense they consider what I have expressed.  In other words, I have an impact within my work and work environment.

However, my reflections about the First Amendment, have led me to consider that while children have in many instances freedom of expression, they do not have a ‘voice’ concerning sub-standard, non-competent educational opportunities.  Their behaviors may indicate that curriculum, programming or teaching is not ‘on target’, but children lack the communication skills, opportunities, and credence as adults.  Thus, children do not determination what will happen to them and what they will experience.  In the realm of children’s education, growth and development, there are many people who believe they know ‘what is best for children’.  Groups claiming this ‘best’ knowledge vary greatly in their actual knowledge of children and education, but all groups are certain they are right. 

Children’s lack of a ‘voice’ is evidenced in two ways: 

1.  On a broad political and legislative landscape, children often lack advocates who have their best interests at ‘heart’.  Funding for Parents as Teachers in Missouri has been cut this year for other educational venues.  State legislatures have reduced the funding for Pre-kindergarten classrooms.  In funding reductions such as these, legislators ignore research which demonstrates for every $1.00 spent in programming for young children, anywhere from $8.00 to $17.00 is saved in the social and criminal justice services when those children become adults.

1. Children often experience curriculum and instruction that is not appropriate for their age, developmental level, and also disregards their social/cultural experiences and family context.  The real injustice in this situation is that teachers may know and understand the inappropriateness of what they are doing in the classroom, but may be told to use the curriculum/instructional strategy, or experience subtle pressure for its use.

Children may exhibit behaviors because of not having had a foundation of knowledge or experiences from a preschool or pre-kindergarten, or they may be experiencing sub-standard teaching or curriculum.  Children’s behaviors may be indicators which send up ‘red flags’ for adults that there is a problem. But it is up to adults to determine what the problem is, and how best to ‘fix’ it.

I have found state legislators are most concerned about young children when they actually have a child of their own in school or they are a grandparent.  Still then, the information gathered in making legislative and funding decisions may be from a range of individuals who are ‘agenda’ driven, believing they have the answer.  Our current environment of accountability and standardized assessment is fertile ground to for politicians and educators to ‘kick the can’ of ‘who has the right answers’ further down the road.

As a reader you may be asking yourself, “So how do we change this?”  It’s easy to point out problems, but solutions are much more complex and difficult to achieve.  Families are responsible for children, but they so often defer to the political process, or educators who they believe must know what is right.  Families can understand, given the information is provided in a non-condescending way, without professional jargon.  Other solutions lie in educators/teachers having opportunities to voice opinions in a ‘risk-free’ environment.

Somehow, we need to examine our values, and act on what is in the best interests of children.  Early childhood and elementary educators and families must take an active role.  We must speak for children, giving them a ‘voice’—-ours.

What is Right for Children’ blog is researched and written by Deb Moberly, Ph.D.  The intent is to offer information and reflection on current issues/concerns regarding young children, elementary age children, and families.  I look forward to your responses as the dialogue is so important in our educational arena and in our society. 

Children Living in Poverty: It Is Our Problem Too!!!!!

           Poverty rates for families are climbing.  On September 17^th, the St. Louis Post Dispatch reported that Missouri’s poverty rate grew 3.5 times faster than the national average since the 2000 census.  From these statistics, we can see that we have had families in crisis longer than the current recession.  The Post Dispatch further reported that 15.5% of Missouri population lives in ‘official’ poverty.  While I am confident there are an abundance of ‘spin doctors’ who can ‘paint’ these numbers with magic colors to make them look not quite as bleak, in my view poverty is poverty!

            If you look at the threshold of poverty being what qualifies children for free meals at schools or child care centers, a family of four would have an income of $22,050.  We know that poverty is cyclic, with health crises and illiteracy possible factors. Innovative programs to help families have come and gone.

           Yet, in all of my years in education, I have never met a parent who didn’t want something better for his child than what he has had.  

            When I was working with an Even Start program in another state, (Even Start was a multi-service program qualifying adults who had low literacy skills), I had the privilege of knowing a young, single mother who was extremely courageous.  She wanted the best for her children and was committed to self-improvement so she could provide more for her family.  Just as she was on the brink of meeting her goals, she would be hit with another crisis, not a child having a cold, or something short-lived, but rather significant events solidifying her poverty status.  Crises happened about every two weeks—these would be events or situations that would bring you and me ‘down to our knees’. 

        For more of our families, the ‘official’ poverty level is just a paycheck away.  Poverty is no myth and is, in my view, far more extensive than the statistics represent.  That is where the schools and teachers come in, we do not have to make things more difficult for families and children. Schools do not have to be multipliers to the poverty cycle, but can be a haven for children.  Children, from all of our neighborhoods, can have their needs met physically, emotionally and cognitively.  All children can experience success in our schools; as educators it is our job to tackle the complexities of poverty and education!

Will Superman Come? Waiting for a Good Education

           We are used to waiting:  at service centers, in the grocery, at drive-up windows.   But, our patience can run quite thin at times, particularly when whatever activity we are engaged in, takes longer that we anticipated or are accustomed.  Our tolerance and patience can, of course, quickly ‘go to zero’ when the product and/or we finally receive turns out to be not what we ordered, or worse has an imperfection that renders it non-functional with the only option being to return it or accept it, as is. 

            A similar analogy can be applied to many of our children, who are waiting—waiting for better, more productive, less disruptive, and certainly safer days at school, success in reading and mathematics, and better lives. 

            David Guggenheim’s documentary movie “Waiting for ‘Superman’” featured five students from Los Angeles, the Bronx and Harlem in New York City, Washington, DC, and Silicon Valley, all of whom were waiting.  The children conveyed personal excitement about their education, so did their families.  Yet, their futures were limited by the experiences of the next grade level or school.  So, all five were in the proverbial lottery of their ‘educational life’ waiting to learn if they had been selected for enrollment in a charter or private school.  As the numbers were drawn in the lotteries, the movie documented some celebrations by families as well some heartbreaking moments.

            Guggenheim’s film has certainly prompted and influenced a lot of conversation locally and nationally that probably would not have otherwise taken place.   One thing is for sure, teachers, teachers’ unions, and public schools were collectively portrayed in a less than favorable light. Some of these groups have responded by shouting loudly and clearly about what they believe was a misrepresentation (in the film) of their role and contribution to (public) education system in U.S. society, and that is okay.  Educators, families, and the public as a whole need to talk about the current situation, or educational crisis, our children face daily. 

            Perhaps your child is one of the ‘lucky’ ones because your income enables you live where you do– with a public school system that has fewer problems, fewer risks, better classroom-teaching environment, and is able to hire and retain good (better) teachers. Or perhaps your income allows you to enroll your child in a private school.  But as a society, we really do have a responsibility for the education of all of our children, not just the ‘lucky’ ones.

            So this post is for everyone.  I am confident we would find little, if any argument relative to semblance of fairness to have children experience failure, when we could be providing a much better curriculum, instruction, and yes, teachers.

            Fifty percent of our teachers leave teaching within the first five years.  Teachers ‘shy’ away from urban, high poverty areas where problems are so embedded in the schools and the community; it makes it all the more challenging to provide students with what most of us can agree they need.

            Conversations about our educational challenges frequently focus on quick ‘sound bite’ types of answers or other ‘quick fixes’ such as: more funding, longer and more school days, better curriculum, and removing parameters that teachers face which make the job even more difficult.  Politics seems to further complicate the situation—more standards, more assessment, and more accountability.  And of course, what agency/government has more money to ‘fix’ the situation and who makes the decision of the best method in improving education? 

            Children shouldn’t be waiting—where do we start to remedy the educational dilemma we face?  These next blogs will examine some solutions from a teacher, teacher educator, and grandmother’s point of view.  First, I am convinced we must fund quality programs to work with young children and their families.  We have research that shows for every $1.00 invested in educational programming for young children, there is a return on investment up to $17.00. Pre-kindergarten and parenting programs are threatened with funding cuts and have experienced substantial ones this year. 

            A program that has been substantially cut in funding is the Missouri Parents as Teachers Program.  Parents as Teachers enables parent educators to visit homes of mothers/families who have children ages infant through five years. Developmental information, assessments, and activities are shared with parents.  Children and family group activities are offered.   The parent educator also has informative printed information to share.  It is an exceptionally successful program and is replicated across the nation. Yet, Missouri legislators did not see the significance of funding programming for our younger children.  We just did not have enough public ‘outcry’ to influence the final decision.

            So, let’s get it right!  It is time for looking at what works.  It is time for action, rather than continuing to ‘debate’ what is wrong. We need to invest in programs for young children and their families.  Let’s not make our youngest start ‘Waiting for Superman’!

Stickers, Candy, and Prizes: Should We Be Using Rewards in the Classroom?

The first grade teacher gives Jon a sticker for getting his math assignment completed. Susan receives a token for being quiet during ‘Morning Meeting’ and if she earns enough tokens this week she can pick a prize from the teacher’s ‘Treasure Chest’. If these external rewards work, why not use them? Or in other words, ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’.
In the short term, it seems like Jon and Susan improve their behavior, but what happens in the long-term? Will they expect a token every time or for everything? What if, in their perception they have been ‘good’ and the teacher did not reward them? What about their relationships with their peers, do peers eventually resent Jon and Susan?
For the children who are facing many challenges in the classroom, from inappropriate behavior to operating on a lower academic level in math or reading, will they ever earn a reward? What happens to the relationship with other children and with their teacher?
Anytime we do ‘something to’ a child, we need to reassess our practice. We may be using external rewards because it is easier, takes less time than dealing with the behavior, and seems to work. The use of rewards is really being done by the authority, the classroom teacher, with dependents, the children. Deci and Ryan call this ‘control through seduction’.
Kohn writes in Punished by Reward, rewards do not alter children’s attitudes, or emotional commitments (which are the basis for behavior). In fact, the use of rewards can:
•have a negative effect on the quality of the behavior or performance,
•discourage children to take risks academically and in inquiry activities
•be detrimental to relationships with other children and the teacher
So, if rewards are not used, what should teachers do in the classroom?
Teachers can:
•establish a close relationship with each child
•spend time teaching classroom procedures and routines, differentiating the curriculum
•foster an atmosphere of respecting each other
•encourage children to state how they are feeling
•have children observe and state how others are feeling and affected by their negative behaviors or actions.
Also, it is important for teachers to become reflective of their own behaviors and teaching practices. Are they are doing or not doing something that has, in turn, a negative effect on children’s behaviors. Using external motivation is a serious matter and may have long-lasting effects on children.

Growing up in a ‘Princess’ World

Shopping in a discount story or on-line for toys for girls’ leaves us with basically one choice: buying a princess related item. You may ask yourself, ‘what is so bad about that?’ And if you are female, you too in your youth may have wanted to dress-up sometimes like a princess, particularly if you saw Disney’s film “Cinderella”. Yet, today, our purchasing options are overwhelmingly princess related. Very little other choice is available. Peggy Ornstein (2011) writes that there are over 26,000 related princess items with a Disney revenue of $4 billion. If the item does not have a princess on it, the colors may be pink or lavender.
We have to ask ourselves are manufacturers providing what the adult consumers and girls want or are they telling us what to buy? This conundrum is somewhat reminiscent of the scenario of the ‘chicken and the egg’—which came first. Ornstein (2011) found out that the ‘princess’ craze began with a Disney executive attending a Disney on Ice show and seeing girls who had put together princess outfits. The result was a stroke of marketing ‘genius’ with long lasting effects.
The overabundance of princess items does cause us to reflect on what, if any harm is there for girls to grow up in a ‘princess’ dominated play environment. Granted, preschools, child care centers and educational programs may not reflect this marketing influence. The real impact for girls may be in the family and/or friend play environment.
We need to ask ourselves what are the influences that the ‘princess aura’ may be having on our girls’ expectations and desires:
• Is playing a ‘princess’ a positive thing?
• Are we setting expectations for girls that they must be ‘good’ all of the time?
• Do they need to be ‘pretty’ and ‘thin’?
• Do the toy representations of a princess look like all of our girls—do they represent all ethnicities and cultures?
• Are girls happy all of the time, never mad? Princesses are always happy.
• Are they girls subordinate to the males in their lives or are they supposed to be?
• Are they from homes where everyone has wealth, the same family structure, and no problems? And does this reflect their future adult homes?
• What are their futures? Will their jobs be the stereotyped femininity, and not scientists, corporate executives, construction workers, etc..?
These questions impact girls’ lives now and in their future. Those of us who lived through the feminine era may be now faced with what seems a regression in societal beliefs if you are of the view that marketing reflects our society’s values. We made such strides for equal pay, equal jobs, and pursuing careers that were typically male dominated. We worked to break out of the “Leave It to Beaver” television role of ‘June’, the consummate mother, always in perfect dresses and high heels, differing to Ward (husband) on decisions, and always at home.
Research demonstrates that by age of two years children are gender conscious in selecting toys, even if all types of toys are available. So, we must ask ourselves, if the major selection of toys is princess related, what happens physiologically to our girls as they grow up? Ornstein considers another issue that is a worry: will her daughter be ostracized by other girls if she is not a princess, or play with princess things? Children can be extremely hurtful in play interactions and exclusions from play groups.
The solution to this issue might be quite simple—stop buying princess items. But that is not so easy, for the child or the adult. Perhaps our most important tool is having an abundance of conversations about the ‘princess’ expectations, being a female in society, and the potential in girls’ lives for careers and happiness. Will our princesses of today be scientists? Will they believe they must fit a certain mold for beauty and behavior? The responsibility rests with us—the adults.

What Happened on the Way to Kindergarten?

Children decide very little for themselves. Of course there is the “which cookie do you want?” or “what do you want to wear today?” The real, important things such as “what preschool or child care center do you want to attend? or, “which program meets your needs and provides the best for you?” are questions and decisions for adults. Sometimes, families make greatly deliberated decisions about where their children will spend eight or more hours a day, five days a week. Parents can readily find information about the quality of the program, consult professional organizations such as the National Association for the Education of Young Children’s (NAEYC) accredited list of centers (6380 accredited centers). Also, families observe centers’ classrooms and get to know the teachers, curricula and discipline policies.

But the majority of children are in a child care center, preschool, or pre-kindergarten program based on: 1. their families’ financial resources, 2. the location, and 3. the hours of the program. A February, 2011, report by the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation found that selecting child care programs is one of three decisions being made at the same time by the parent; the other two decisions are employment and transportation. While parents try to find a program that meets their children’s needs, it also must meet employment parameters. And the final selection vacillates between the two factors.

Now ‘put into the mix’ what is available to families and children. Our three year economic ‘downturn’ has resulted in many states cutting funding for pre-kindergarten classrooms (often located in school districts). The result–there are fewer ‘free’, quality pre-kindergarten programs available.

Legislators continue to ignore the research that for every $1.00 invested in early childhood programs, such a pre-kindergarten classes, saves the state $11.00 in services when those preschool children become adults. The Chicago Longitudinal Study (CLS), published in June 2011, had for 25 years followed children who attended quality preschool programs and whose families were involved in services. As teenagers and adults, they achieved more education, higher academic performance, and later earned higher salaries. These adults were less frequently involved with social services and the justice system. The CLS is another study confirming what those of us in early childhood education have been advocating for years.

“What Happened on the Way to Kindergarten?” is a question that must be guarded by the public. Cutting funding for child care assistance, pre-kindergarten programs, family literacy centers, and school-based community centers does affect our children. It does affect their readiness for Kindergarten and the rest of their lives!

Children cannot speak for themselves! They are not afforded conventional First Amendment rights. And in more subtle ways, some of their families do not have a ‘voice’ in the budgeting/legislative process. It is a problem and a responsibility for all of us. Speak up—advocate for children!

Living with Toddlers

One of the first things to remember is that toddlers do not like change. Moms know that just trying to get a toddler to stop playing with a toy and go do something else can be a struggle. Toddlers are egocentric, so what they want and what they are doing are thinking and doing is “the only way to look” at the situation. With this caveat in mind, transitional warnings are greatly important. Even then, Moms know that crying and unhappy toddlers may still happen when a change occurs.

There are five questions that I am frequently asked about living with a toddler:
1. How do we ‘give up’ the bottle?
2. How do we move into a big bed for sleeping?
3. How can I help my child adjust to a new sibling?
4. How can I effectively use a babysitter for the first time?
5. How can I ease the transition for my toddler into a preschool?

it is important for any young child to have one thing to adjust to at a time. So a new sibling, new babysitter and giving up a bottle all at the same time is a recipe for disaster. It certainly is a time to let the child have a ‘lovey’ anytime she wants one, for as long as she wants it (blanket, doll, stuffed animal, etc.) Let’s start with the bottle. Introducing a sippy cup and small glass at meals like Mommy are looked upon as important by the child. Eventually, even the night time bottle of milk can be replaced with a small glass of milk in the getting ready for bedtime routine—bath, book reading, milk, etc.. This transition takes time—so don’t be discouraged. I once had a cook at a child care center, whose toddler made his own bottle at home—I asked her, “What does this tell you?”

Sleeping in a big bed is a big step. When is the child ready? Is your child climbing out of a crib? Sometimes your child picking out new sheets, pillows, etc. helps. I think a smaller bed is helpful; remember how small a toddler is. A key will be keeping the bedtime routine exactly the same. Understand transitions take a long time. You are dealing with a toddler’s intellectual and emotional growth.

The new baby is a much anticipated event, with lots of preparations and of discussions. But when the baby’s arrival comes, the toddler has to share ‘your’ time and attention—simply put you. And the acceptance and skill of sharing usually occurs at about 5 or 6 years of age. So getting used to sharing you may take some time. Letting the toddler help with the baby’s care (when possible) can help. Also, having time each day that is just for you and the toddler is critical. Keeping the toddler routines, especially bedtime the same is important. You might let your toddler wear something physical of yours such as a bracelet. This is a physical reminder of you. You can expect regression of development during this time—toileting accidents, more crying, baby talk, etc…

Adjusting to a babysitter is a transition that can be planned for and implemented with a fair amount of success. First, the babysitter and toddler need to spend some time together with you present. Then the first time leaving the two of them, should be for a short time. It isn’t the length of time that is important but the fact that you leave and come back. Again, leaving something physical of yours is a good idea—a physical reminder that you are indeed coming back.

The orientation to a preschool can be a successful transition. First, you and your child visit and the two of you play there. Conversations about your child with the teacher/director should be at another time. Your child should find out where the bathroom is, where she plays outside, what will happen if she gets hurt, etc… She should have time with the teacher one-on-one with you there. Additionally, the first few visits without you should be short and gain in length. It is the principle that you leave and come back. Again this is an opportunity to leave something physical of yours with your child. Also,’ loveys’ are essential during this time. Some regression in development is to be expected during this adjustment. And adjustments take longer than adults expect. So, the first week after the ‘newness’ of the toys, children, and place wears off, you may see a more difficult start to the day at school. Attending after a weekend, illness, etc. may be more difficult. Going to a preschool is a huge adjustment. Patience and tolerance is needed. You may reach a point after a couple of weeks that talking about what a good time she is going to have is more negative than positive. In fact, the less said the better, just say “you are going tomorrow and you will have lots of fun”.

What is frequently seen in toddlers and preschoolers starting the day at the preschool are tears when a parent leaves, then the child starts playing and stops crying. The parent is upset, and feels guilty all day. I suggest calling the director and getting an accurate report on what is happening. Additionally, it may have been a great day for your child, but at dismissal,when she sees you at the classroom door, she may start crying. It seems to be something about a release of built up tension.

Toddlers are fascinating and challenging children. They have intense emotions. When they love something, they really love it. When they are sad or mad, emotions seem to go to the far end of the continuum. But also toddlers are sensitive to what parents are feeling (even your nonverbal expressions and nervousness) will be identified and may influence their behavior and feelings.

Toddlerhood is a fascinating age. So much is open to a toddler and new. Relax, enjoy, and know that many problems will eventually change and be solved.

Making Barbie Dolls Reflective of Our Lives: Bald Barbie

Children use toys to help them dramatize what they see and are learning in the world. Dramatizing helps children understand what is happening around them. It enables them to sort through their feelings, express knowledge and in the right setting provide an opportunity for a ‘keyed’ in adult to correct misconceptions.

Often we see girls and boys dramatizing everyday activities such as cooking, going to the grocery, taking care of babies. Also, we observe children acting as a parent disciplining a doll. For an observer such as a parent or teacher, it is humorous to hear our ‘own’ words being used.

So when families wanted their children to have the experience with a Barbie that offered opportunities to dramatize illnesses in their lives, I was surprised at Mattel’s reaction. Parents and children wanted to have a Barbie doll that lost her hair from having cancer and chemotherapy. It seems logical this bald Barbie would offer a chance to reenact what was happening in the family and to see the continued beauty in Barbie in this situation. Mattel has declined the opportunity and let us down.

Mattel’s attempt into the world of a different Barbie started in 1997 when they made a Barbie doll in a wheel chair. A 12 year old with cerebral palsy and in a wheel chair discovered Barbie’s wheel chair was too big to fit in the elevator of Barbie’s Dream House. Mattel discontinued production of the doll and missed an opportunity to help families, and most of all, children.

In 1959, Barbie was originally designed as a teenage fashion model. Her appearance has changed multiple times; Barbie’s creator Ruth Handler believed the doll should have an adult appearance. In the 1970s, the side look in her eyes was changed and more recent designs of the doll have made her have a wider waist. Certainly, these modifications have reflected Mattel understanding of having the doll be a better representation for children.

Research has shown us that children need dolls who reflect their ethnicity and lives of themselves and others. Thus, Mattel would surely want to have dolls that offer children experiences to have dolls look like some children and/or mothers. Cancer and therapy is not the only Illness that affects hair loss, alopecia, and others will result in bald spots or complete baldness. Wouldn’t be logical to have a Barbie who is bald and beautiful with accessories that are sometimes used such as turbin, wigs, scarves, etc…

Mattel has taken from us an opportunity to have Barbie be more like real women with real lives. What went into their decision? Was it the selection of particular focus groups or the bottom line of a profit? Whatever it was, it affects real mothers, aunts, and most of all children.