class divide hits learning by age of three

[ulysses]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2100032,00.html

Disadvantaged children lagging a full year behind before they start school

John Carvel, social affairs editor
Monday June 11, 2007
The Guardian

By the age of three, children from disadvantaged families are already lagging a full year behind their middle-class contemporaries in social and educational development, pioneering research by a London university reveals today.

A "generation Blair" project, tracking the progress of 15,500 boys and girls born between 2000 and 2002, found a divided nation in which a child's start in life was still determined by the class, education, marital status and ethnic background of the parents.

***

In a series of vocabulary tests, the three-year-old sons and daughters of graduate parents were found to be 10 months ahead of those from families with few educational qualifications; they were 12 months ahead in their understanding of colours, letters, numbers, sizes and shapes.

Researchers from the Centre for Longitudinal Studies at the Institute of Education in the University of London found girls were three months ahead of boys on both measures. Less predictably, Scottish children were three months ahead of the UK average in language development and two months ahead in "school readiness".

more...

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. It breaks my heart that we actually have to educate people about this

Damn. It should be common knowledge that many of our children are not ready to learn when they come to kindergarten. It should be accepted that some of our kids are more expensive to educate than others. And as a society we should be willing to take on this responsibility and do what is best for ALL kids. Damn. Just damn.

[ulysses]

2. oh, they know.

Most people do, anyway. We lack the courage to deal with the problem.

[proud2BlibKansan]

3. My district is going to universal pre-K next year

We have had all day kindergarten for 20+ years.

[ulysses]

6. must be nice.

:)

I had really hoped that the NCLB reauthorization would inspire *some* kind of ed. debate in the country. Why I keep doing this to myself I don't know.

[kineneb]

4. saw the article

and almost posted it- thanks.

Interesting data; and probably goes for children in the US as well. The income level, etc. of the family does matter! A child raised in a home where there is intellectual stimulation automaticly has a better chance in school. That stimulation is more likely to occur in homes where the parent(s) have time, money and the education to provide an interesting developmental environment for their children.

[ulysses]

5. yup.

I have to believe it goes for any child in an industrialized country, at least.

[fed-up]

7. BULLSHIT-I was a single mother, poor (daycareprovider), with an AA-my son

was ahead of kids his age.

I say genetics and environment kept him from lagging behind. I soooooo hate these studies that trash poor single mothers.

He was homeschooled and when he went to public school for 3rd grade they were doing things we had already done for his 2nd grade studies. He also was young for his class as he was an October baby.

And he just completed his first traditional year of junior college with straight A's. (Anatomy/Physiology, English, etc) He did take jc classes when he was in high school.

[librechik]

8. we were poor and on welfare too, and my kids were above average and gifted

The study is talking about a broad average across 15,000 cases, not about you and me, exceptions to the general trend.

[LeftishBrit]

13. Yes. And it's not trashing the mothers; it's trashing a system ...

that allows so many children to live in poverty, and then treats them and their schools as 'failures' when they don't all jump through the same testing hoops at the same age as children from wealthier backgrounds.

[ulysses]

9. it's an averaged thing.

Not to detract from your son's accomplishments - or yours - but in my experience the article rings true. A lot of folks don't have the resources or knowledge.

And he just completed his first traditional year of junior college with straight A's. (Anatomy/Physiology, English, etc) He did take jc classes when he was in high school.

Kudos to both of you!

[kineneb]

11. internal and external resources of parent(s)

I was raised by my working-class grandparents, who had only graduated from high school. BUT- they were "life-long learners" who were able to assist me with my schooling. I have a BA in Music and have finished my graduate classes in Music History. It is all about the attitude of the parent(s) towards learning.

Many parents do not have the internal resources to assist and/or encourage their children's education. Indeed some parents hinder their children's education by providing a poor learning environment (learning not valued, poor parenting skills, lack of parental education, no physical place to study, etc.). I see many of these problems in the community in which I live.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

10. I worked in a special needs preschool

for four years--we took kids from birth up. All had some sort of problem--failure to thrive, autism, bi-polar, physical and mental challenges. And some were there because home life wasn't much. I think our early early intervention helped some kids. Even though its been 8 years since I worked there, parents and kids sometimes greet me and the parents comment on how well their kids are doing in school.

Early early pre-school can really help many kids.

[LeftishBrit]

12. To clarify, this is about the UK; though I would be very surprised if it wasn't at least as true in

the USA.

[ulysses]

16. right - I think it applies over here. n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

14. Ok, Am I Missing Something Here Or Did They Just Simply Say That Educated Parents Help Their

children be more educated?

Was there more to it or did it really come down to a study that showed that if parents are smarter, have better vocabulary, and better all around education; that they are able to better pass that on to their children during the most absorbent years of a child's learning development?

I ask because from what I read in the OP that appeared to be what they were saying, which would seem like a no brainer in which no study was required. But there has to be more to this than that, right?

[ulysses]

15. you're missing the class part. n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

19. I Saw Nothing That Provided Evidence That Was A Factor In And Of Itself.

They did provide evidence for the educated vs non educated, but there wasn't anything significant in the article that pointed to class itself as a factor. It appeared level of education was more of a factor than anything else.

What were their arguments for as to why class was a factor? It makes sense that some who are poorer are potentially less educated than those who aren't, so it would still be education level that was the root cause. Unfortunately, since it would be sort of a vicious cycle, it would be a need to break that cycle. But it would still be due to level of education than actual assets right? I can fully understand that as the children grow older, it would be all about the school systems and opportunities available to them which would contribute to their educational level. In that case I think class would absolutely be a factor. But when talking about 3 yrs and younger, I couldn't find a thing in that article that yielded it was class driven as opposed to simply the education level of the parents themselves. At that young of an age, children learn most of everything from their parents and their parents' interactions. Doesn't really take a dime to do that.

[ulysses]

22. you're asking for more than is in the article.

What were their arguments for as to why class was a factor?

A Google search on "generation blair" reveals this - http://thedifferencemagazine.blogspot.com/2007/06/generation-blair.html Hope it helps.

[Lex]

17. My mom was a teacher and she worked in a specific program helping

kids who were behind in reading in the 3rd grade--trying to get their reading skills up to par before they got further behind.

ANYway, she said once in a while, she'd have to take a kid home from school or something and she'd be horrified to note there were NO books, NO magazines, NO newspapers, NO reading materials in any form to be seen in the living area of the houses at all.

Some kids just get no reinforcement at home at all for basic skills.

[ulysses]

20. in the neighborhood where I worked through this year,

more than a few parents were functionally illiterate themselves. The foundation of the ability to read starts very early - seeing your caregiver reading, being read to, figuring out which way to hold a piece of text, etc, the kinds of things your mom noticed were lacking. These kids often don't get that.

Of course, there are wealthy kids who don't get it too, but it's much more often the poor who don't have the tools.

[proud2BlibKansan]

23. Even after 30 years in the business,

it still amazes me how many kids come to kindergarten every year and they have never been read to. Can you imagine never reading to your child? I sure can't.

[MedleyMisty]

18. I have to say - duh.

I was identified as gifted in school and have done a lot of research on it.

I read about these kids who learn four languages at three and go to college at 10. I didn't do that, but my first reaction is not "OMFG I'm stupid!" It's "Must be nice to have that sort of money and free time."

It's not all or nothing, not all nature or all nurture. Like most dichotomies, the answer is both.

And of course, duh, your lot in life is most likely based on how you did in the birth lottery. Damn Horatio Hornblower. Damn him to hell.

Ooh, I really hate it when people go on about poor people just not wanting to change their lifestyle - as if there's a grove of money trees right outside the "bad" neighborhoods, just no one wants to go pick them.

[ulysses]

21. ?

I didn't see anything in the article about "poor people just not wanting to change their lifestyle". :shrug: