Mother Talkers

A Walk Through the Education Sections

by Dana

Sat Apr 28, 2007 at 08:00:55 PM PDT

A bevy of interesting articles in the past few days:

  • The Christian Science Monitor examines proposed changes to the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). As lawmakers debate its reauthorization, they are considering whether the evaluation of schools should emphasize progress, rather than merely achieving certain goals.
  • Across the pond, educators in the U.K. are also considering changing school testing to focus on progress rather than preparation for high-stakes tests at set stages, BBC News reports. The plan would also stress individual progress and provide opportunities for individual tuition to students who are falling behind.
  • Even those who do make it through the rigors of higher education may fall short in their knowledge of personal finance, however, the Christian Science Monitor claims. They offer some suggestions for recent college grads on basic budgeting and saving.
  • The Christian Science Monitor also reports on the growing number of mothers attending college while they still have young children. Not many colleges make provision for housing undergraduate mothers, nor for childcare, though some are now taking steps to change that.
  • Gaining further education can benefit not only mothers but also their children, says the BBC News. A recent study by the Institute of Education found that mothers with higher education and family incomes reported more interactions with their children—and it is parental interactions, more than specific toys or numbers of books, that impact child development.
  • Income and education don't always guarantee good parenting, however, and the Times Online takes on middle-class parents who overemphasize toddler classes and toys at the expense of parenting attention. (See also this Atlantic Monthly article from last fall about the dubious benefits of Baby Einstein and its ilk.)
  • Finally, the New York Times reminds us there are more paths to success and measures of excellence than getting into an elite college.

(Crossposted at Mombian.)

  • ::

Tags: education, child development (all tags)

Permalink | 7 comments

  • Toys and children: (0 / 0)

    When my kids were little, they ofcourse had toys...however, because we had several children, I noticed very early on that they tended to play with each other much more than they played with actual toys.  As to the claim of "educational toys"...well, I think any toy can serve this purpose.  I've seen my kids take small toys and play out all sorts of scenarios with them.  To me, that is educational...I don't begin to believe a kid can be "educated" by a talking toy.

    I will say, however, that my younger kids did use a computer program a lot that truly fostered their letter and sound recognition...trying to remember what it was called, but it was very simple.  Very Sesame Street like in that it just showed letters and made funny sounds demonstrating the sound they made.  This means nothing, however, if the parent doesn't take it to the next step and help the child put this into day-to-day use.

    by tjb22 on Sun Apr 29, 2007 at 11:43:40 AM PDT

    • Educational toys (0 / 0)

      Agreed--it's not that toys are bad, or that there aren't some that can be educational. Like the catalyst in a chemical reaction, though, it's a parent's involvement that transforms.

      Was the program your kids used starfall.com? I've found it to be a great, free site for early reading skills--and with no ads or ties to named-character media franchises.

      --Dana
      Mombian: Sustenance for Lesbian Moms
      http://www.mombian.com

      by Dana on Sun Apr 29, 2007 at 01:14:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  • Parental interactions (0 / 0)

    I'm not sure if the education level of the parent matters as much as the interacting itself - some time with the child one-to-one each day.  As a working mom, I'm aware that the time to do this is sometimes limited, but I also know there's no toy or computer game or tv show (Einstein included) that can substitute.

    by Sue in Queens on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 04:32:35 AM PDT

    • Combo (0 / 0)

      I think it's a combo.  You can be there, but not be directly interacting, and then of course, you need the direct interaction too.

      I know as a SAHM, I would go nuts (and my kids would too) if I was constantly trying to directly interact.

      by NJmom on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 06:45:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • Absolutely ag ree (0 / 0)

        In no way do I think moms should be with their kids face-to-face non-stop!  Sorry if my post read that way.

        What I was thinking of was homes where the kid has great toys, but families spend little or no time on the floor playing.

        by Sue in Queens on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 10:06:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  • Great articles! (0 / 0)

    I thought I had nothing to do on Sunday morning until I logged on and saw all the great links that hit upon a lot of topics that are very important to me.  I didn't get to finish them all since my 2.5 year old was demanding my attention in the middle of reading the article about how we really need to interact with our kids, so I felt guilty and played with him instead.

    One thing I found really interesting is that one article explains overscheduling/overeducating young kids as an American phenomenon, yet there was also a British article about the exact same thing in Britain.

    by Treena on Mon Apr 30, 2007 at 02:06:43 PM PDT

Permalink | 7 comments