Does it incense anyone else that "poor" kids are portrayed as the face of the need for early education?
I will grant you that a home where the money sometimes runs out before the month are much less likely to have bookcases full of books; however, that doesn't mean that those parents are averse to making good use of the public library. I mention this because many have stated that poor children are so far behind because they are not read to on a regular basis. That might be true for some, but let's get out of the habit of painting with such a broad brush. And let's take socio-economic status out of the conversation when we discuss how better to provide a quality education to America's children. Gray matter reacts the same whether the annual income is a six-figure one or an income that falls at or below the recognized poverty-level.
Isn't it a good thing that George Washington Carver didn't know that he couldn't learn because he was poor? I wouldn't have been able to enjoy peanut butter on my apple at lunchtime today. Let's take money (lack thereof) and color out of the equation when we discuss how to better educate our kids and focus on the solutions. If we continually tell a child that she cannot learn because her parents don't have much money, guess what happens...she begins to believe that lie, so it's one of those self-fulfilling prophecies. We all know that children are like sponges and they absorb what's thrown at them. Let's give them encouragement and the opportunity to learn rather than saddling them with labels and subsequent low expectations.
Surely, someone out there has more opinions on this topic?
ReplyDelete