$500 Million Obama Administration Program Will Help Kids 'Sit Still' in Kindergarten

reply to post by macman


i'm going by your signature so correct if i'm wrong here:

1- is this what's being "taught" in the military nowadays?
2-so according to your reasoning when you "were serving your country" mommy and daddy should have packed you your meals
oh! sorry! at 18 you're a grownup so you're the one who should have to see to it that you get fed, huh, can't have the gov wasting those precious tax dollars on stupid stuff like providing balanced healthy meals.

or did every meal you ate while in service come out of your pocket/salary
[hmm same deal for folks in prison, especially in places that share that kinda hate for po' folks]

it's possible who knows? again i could be wrong as i'm sure you'll point out if necessary

but don't mind me

after all

all gods chillun got shoes, don't they?
========================================================
and now to reply to OP and get on topic:

this utter nonsense and waste of money is a result of of all nepotism and/or the incest common to bizzaro-world

in plain english

somebody's cousin/niece/nephew/daughter/son/granddaughter/grandson/in-law or whatever just graduated from college so room has to be made for them at the feeding trough.

this one of the ways its done.

According to the U.S. Department of Education, awards in Race to the Top will go to “states that are leading the way with ambitious yet achievable plans for implementing coherent, compelling, and comprehensive early learning education reform.”

here's how all the dumbing down of america occurs/occurred

it's competitive
[ prizes for those who find the keys to keeping the kids still.]

so as usual, standards just keep lowering

of course those kids are going to be drugged.

notice how it's all designed:
you read this tripe, knee-jerk kicks in, and you are on
the "all these government people are stupid/retarded/crazy" trope.

crazy like a fox,
but who's getting shafted? eh?

who is it that is stupid/retarded/crazy?

if they really wanted to improve education instead of this piece of arrant stupidity trying to pass it self off as pedagogy

they'd be studying/analyzing what all those Asian students that are way ahead of the average american student in pretty frikkin much everything,

are doing right, what they are eating and whatever.

reply to post by TheWalkingFox

So yeah, it'd be nice if every kid in the world grew up with three square meals on the table every day for eighteen years, delivered by doting parents. In fact that'd be great. But... it's not like that. Sorry if that's a shock to you, but, yeah. There are kids who go hungry.

yup when i was little grandma would come and get my little brother and me up and ready for school early to take advantage of school breakfast yummy powdered scrambled eggs soda crackers and gov cheese, slime i mean oatmeal or farina[never could tell em apart] yummy cause my speedfreak parents would be too strung out to make anything. once she got custody that nonsense stopped.

grandma new all the ways/recipes to make rice and beans [lasagna or meatloaf when she could afford it] so i don't like the stuff much any more unless its Chinese-fried though occasionally i get a craving for
white with chick-peas,corned beef, and 2 fried eggs on top.

my fellow rice eater:
you really should try to see things from his point of view,
if you did you'd realize that he is under the delusion that HIS precious tax dollars are being wasted,
never mind that those dollars stopped being his the moment he foolishly handed them over.

This is what happens when you make a Psychopath the "Secretary of Health & In-Human Services". Do you really need any more proof that the current administration doesn't have a single adult there to run the show? Do you need any proof that not a single person there in that castle in "Camelot" has a clue about what they are supposed to be doing? 500 "Million" to teach a 5 year old to sit still? REALLY? Kathleen Sebelius - Who says the "AnitChrist" has to be a man?

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by macman

 

i'm going by your signature so correct if i'm wrong here:

1- is this what's being "taught" in the military nowadays?
2-so according to your reasoning when you "were serving your country" mommy and daddy should have packed you your meals
oh! sorry! at 18 you're a grownup so you're the one who should have to see to it that you get fed, huh, can't have the gov wasting those precious tax dollars on stupid stuff like providing balanced healthy meals.

or did every meal you ate while in service come out of your pocket/salary
[hmm same deal for folks in prison, especially in places that share that kinda hate for po' folks]

From your signature/avatar, you suggest that you are some mythical comic character??
Please stop before you make yourself into an even bigger fool then you show.
The military teaches many of things, along with jobs and careers.
The meals served and enjoyed by those military members are for WORKING ADULTS. The Military does not step in and push aside the parent and hand out free food, at the expense of other military members.
Mommy and Daddy stopped taking care of me at around 15yrs old.
I take care of my family because, unlike you I guess, I know my expectations and responsibilities and will not live beholden to an every growing Fed Govt.
The comparison between welfare handouts and Military members meals is another failure in this thread. I only hope that some Govt agent steps in for you to assume the role and provides some sort of logical response.
But, as you can't provide one, and the track record of the Fed Govt's nanny/parent role, I think it is safe to say it too will be a failure.

reply to post by jibeho


I was a 5 year old 51 years ago.I still remember climbing
on chairs,running around,talking at the wrong time,not
co-operating at naptime,see how I turned out

This idea of making 5 year olds sit still is an impossible
task,doomed to failure and will stress out the children.
Why can't "they" let children be children and have a normal
childhood?

I just figured I would post the other side of the story in the original thread. Since there are now 2 identical threads on the same forum I looked into it a little further. This is the Race To the Top Early Learning Challenge program that began last year (if i recall correctly) in which states compete by increasing their quality of early learning programs. This is something our President pledged to do during his 1st campaign.

The Race to the Top-Early Learning Challenge grants will encourage states to make the best possible use of current federal and state investments in child care and early learning. The Obama Administration has sought and secured increased investments in Head Start and child care so that more families have access to quality, affordable care, while also pursuing important reforms such as requiring Head Start grantees to compete for continued funding.

www.ed.gov...

By devoting $500 million to early learning, the administration is returning to a pledge President Obama made in his campaign, when he called for greater investments in lifting the quality of education from birth to kindergarten, and extending families’ access to them.

www.nytimes.com...

reply to post by jibeho


I am not sure if you are aware of it, but this $500 Million dollar Race to the Top early learning and development grant is not dedicated to helping kids sit still.

It is to encourage pre-school programs and early learning.

Or more specifically..

1) increase the number and percentage of low-income and disadvantaged children in each age group of infants, toddlers, and preschoolers who are enrolled in high-quality early learning programs;
(2) design and implement an integrated system of high-quality early learning programs and services; and
(3) ensure that any use of assessments conforms with the recommendations of the National Research Council's reports on early childhood.

www2.ed.gov...

Anyone with young children or in the education field understands that kids that enter Kindergarten that haven't had exposure to a classroom setting before are disadvantaged.

This program is aiming to prepare more children for Kindergarten. I am not sure why this is a bad thing beyond the general idea that "education is bad" that some people seem to echo these days.

The CSN site you linked to has it's tongue in cheek Motto ..The "Right" news, Right Now
CSN originally stood for "Conservative News Service"

Terrence Jefferey, the Editor in Chief of that site is Pat Buchanan's Ex campaign manager.

I understand why CSN News would so dramatically distort statements and facts to drive a propagandist agenda, but I am uncertain why someone on this site would do the same with this OP? Deny Ignorance?

reply to post by Indigo5


You said it much better than I could have lol.
Star for you.

reply to post by Indigo5


I understand what you are driving at but these massive programs are riddled with side projects like those mentiioned in the OP. The current approach by the Department of Education and the current administration is the panacea/one big pill approach.

The Department of Education is now seeing the results of their constant interference and resulting "dumbing down" of our education system. It all began under Carter and performance is no better now than it was then. I can see the downward slide since my days in high school over twenty years ago.

Put control back with the parents, the local level and the states where it belongs. Let's identify the real reasons for the downfall of our national educational structure while in the hands of the Federal Govt. The federal govt. will with great certainty destroy nearly everything that it can get its hands on and the rate of destruction increases while in the hands of the liberal left.

Originally posted by jibeho
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Put control back with the parents, the local level and the states where it belongs.

Firstly, that is what the nature of a "Grant" is. This grant is precisely what you are calling for.

These grants are given to the State and local level with broad parameters as to what qualifies as long as the early learning programs are in keeping with current research as to what benefits children.

Also,,,
Parents have always had control as they are responsible for supplementing education received via the education system...the same responsibility they have always had.

We could drift off topic here and potentially direct the blame at the current state of the family in the USA where once a two-income family was an anomaly and now it seems the norm. Is it economically necessary? IMO kids trump everything. Make due with a single old beater as a car rather than 2 new suvs.

I do believe that too many families overly rely on the US School system to raise their children. I am not anti-women working...men can stay home too, but shuffling your children between daycare and school seems a poor way to raise a family. Parents have a responsibility to educate their children beyond the school system. They always have had that responsibility.

The federal govt. will with great certainty destroy nearly everything that it can get its hands on and the rate of destruction increases while in the hands of the liberal left.

The Federal Government is allowing State and local authorities to create and institute the programs (Grant)

If history has shown anything with certitude it is that both the "liberal left" and the conservative right are equally capable of destruction or progress.

Having read both sides…articles on the left and the right, it strikes me that in this instance the “right” is being dishonest about what this program is and has yet to make a convincing argument as to why financing state and local authorities own initiatives to help children with early learning is a bad thing.

reply to post by Indigo5


Grant= tax payer funded program with no repayment.
Why does tax money need to go towards reinforcing common sense?

reply to post by macman


The repayment is improved education. I'm not exactly a fan of two income households but that is the world we have been living in for quite a long time now, that means our young children are in daycare or preschool while mom and dad are at work. Should our tax dollars not be invested in the future generation? What should our tax dollars be going toward?

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by macman

 

The repayment is improved education. I'm not exactly a fan of two income households but that is the world we have been living in for quite a long time now, that means our young children are in daycare or preschool while mom and dad are at work. Should our tax dollars not be invested in the future generation? What should our tax dollars be going toward?

Oh no, I agree, lets dole out more tax payer funded money that reinforce common sense.

Govt:
"We the Govt will hand out grants for people to have children sit still and behave more in class"
Citizen:
"Yeah, why do I need money to show me what common sense tells me that a 5 year old wants to run and play?"
Govt:
"Well, because we have to do something. And this is what falls in line with us in control"


No thanks.
Again, common sense out the window. Throw money at the problem. Cut the leg off because the toe is broken.
I have hundreds of analogies that fit this tired old crap pitched by the over spending Govt.


And sorry, but this is not to fund the "future" or "education". It is just to hand out more money in a vane attempt to buy off the masses and interests.

Originally posted by macman
reply to post by Indigo5

 

Grant= tax payer funded program with no repayment.
Why does tax money need to go towards reinforcing common sense?

In a post bailout world and last years defense spending equalling 670 Billion I don't mind a little money directed at "common sense".

If we are to continue to be the "shining light on the hill" to the rest of the world then one thing is certain IMO, the next generation must be better than the last. It's a worthy goal to aim for. 500m is .0007 percent of what our defense budget cost last year. We won't rule the world by force, though that seems to be the plan as of late.

reply to post by Indigo5

If we are to continue to be the "shining light on the hill" to the rest of the world then one thing is certain IMO, the next generation must be better than the last. It's a worthy goal to aim for

What exactly is that goal? Give our children up to the feds when they are 1 or 2 so that we can go to work and compete with the Chinese or other exporters? This is insanity because exponential growth is not possible over long periods of time.

reply to post by macman


While Kathleen Sebelius may have said that, it is one quote out of who knows what else she said because people have a habit of only pointing out what they want you to see. I highly doubt anyone expects a 5 year old to be able to still for long, but they should be able to participate in a kindergarten class without zooming around the room every 5 minutes. Kindergarten classes despite what the slant is telling you are geared with 4-5 year olds in mind. They sing, play games, draw and start learning to write and do simple math. They are not even given the opportunity to be still for longer than 5 minutes nevermind encouraged or forced to do so. When 4-5 year olds cannot do these things something has gone wrong somewhere, the program under fire is aimed at correcting it.

Originally posted by macman
Oh no, I agree, lets dole out more tax payer funded money that reinforce common sense.

Govt:
"We the Govt will hand out grants for people to have children sit still and behave more in class"
Citizen:
"Yeah, why do I need money to show me what common sense tells me that a 5 year old wants to run and play?"
Govt:
"Well, because we have to do something. And this is what falls in line with us in control"


No thanks.

The grant is not to teach children to sit still. That was an excerpted quote that was inflated for political purposes. I provided links on this page.

On that misunderstood and spun topic though...children have higher energy levels than adults and programs in Chicago have shown dramatic increases in learning and performance when that truth is acknowledged.

Critical topics like math and reading are scheduled after recess when that physical energy is spent and they are able to focus better. Some teachers even have hippity hop balls for kids to sit on while they are going over lessons and believe it or not the kids learn more quickly.

Kids need to burn energy more than adults and if teachers don't respect that they get distracted kids.

Research supports this and the grant is not aimed at making them sit still, it is aimed at teaching them when they are naturally receptive to being taught...after activity. Sounds dumb, but I have trained a lot of dogs and it is the same thing. You run them first, then teach.

There is a lot of confusion as to this grant. How much of that confusion is intentional for political or idealogical purposes?

It bugs me to see petty politics enter into topics such as educating our children.

Originally posted by GalacticJoe
reply to post by Indigo5

 

If we are to continue to be the "shining light on the hill" to the rest of the world then one thing is certain IMO, the next generation must be better than the last. It's a worthy goal to aim for

What exactly is that goal? Give our children up to the feds when they are 1 or 2 so that we can go to work and compete with the Chinese or other exporters? This is insanity because exponential growth is not possible over long periods of time.

The schools are local, not federal.

The goal is not to compete directly with China or India's youth in Math or Science. The Chinese practically give their children an abacus in place of a rattle. Where we compete is where we have always led the way...the computer, the television, the telephone, the internet, the fricken automobile ad infinitium. The chinese can manufacture, they can copy things very well and very cheap, but not innovate, not invent...America's unique independant culture affords the most fertile ground on earth for innovation and invention. We need to give our children a foundation to compete in the world and the rest will follow naturally IMO.

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by macman

 

The repayment is improved education. I'm not exactly a fan of two income households but that is the world we have been living in for quite a long time now, that means our young children are in daycare or preschool while mom and dad are at work. Should our tax dollars not be invested in the future generation? What should our tax dollars be going toward?

you could be right....

except there one little problem.

those same kids will have to PAY BACK the MONEY !!! IN spades plus interest !!

put the money in a bank account for each kid.

it might work better.

new debts won't make a kid learn better, neither will giving new money to new con artists !

it seems the politicians are "learning" new ways to steal money !

the politicians just can't seem to sit still when there hands get sticky !

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by macman

 

While Kathleen Sebelius may have said that, it is one quote out of who knows what else she said because people have a habit of only pointing out what they want you to see. I highly doubt anyone expects a 5 year old to be able to still for long, but they should be able to participate in a kindergarten class without zooming around the room every 5 minutes. Kindergarten classes despite what the slant is telling you are geared with 4-5 year olds in mind. They sing, play games, draw and start learning to write and do simple math. They are not even given the opportunity to be still for longer than 5 minutes nevermind encouraged or forced to do so. When 4-5 year olds cannot do these things something has gone wrong somewhere, the program under fire is aimed at correcting it.

Thanks, You just proved my point that Tax money need not be applied.
Common sense still trumps throwing money at the problem. You, on the ATS board just did what the Govt wants to pay $500m out for.