Oh, if we could only go back to those students of 30 or so years ago.

Today is unbelievable in comparison.


On 4/5/08 9:09 AM, "SKnight" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> What part of this explanation hasn't already been said?  Isn't this why we
> instituted Head Start over 30 or 40 years ago?  Not that we allowed it to
> remain effective.
> Sande Knight
>>  
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>  
>> From: Wilma de  Soto <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>  
>> To: Glenn <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  ; UnivCity listserv
>> <mailto:[email protected]>
>>  
>> Sent: Friday, April 04, 2008 7:20 AM
>>  
>> Subject: Re: [UC] The fourth grade  slump
>>  
>> 
>> I agree somewhat.
>> 
>> From my perspective, I see  kids who come to school after their first four or
>> five years sitting in front  of a TV or PlayStation.  There is very little to
>> build on when they  arrive at school because their best learning years are
>> already behind  them.
>> 
>> We begin by teaching them what they already should have known  before they
>> ever came to school.  Kindergarten, first and second grade  texts have lots
>> of pictures, there¹s coloring to do etc.  These kids are  already behind when
>> they started.  Under normal circumstances at the end  of second grade, one
>> can begin the transition for third grade.  However,  these kids are barely
>> second grade material.
>> 
>> Then, POW! third grade.   Texts have lots more words than pictures.  It¹s a
>> different level  of interaction with assignments, more reading, more writing,
>> higher-order  thinking skills and the like.  They fall further behind.  They
>> cannot make the transition there let alone the transition to Middle School
>> style work of High School.
>> 
>> It really starts at home because their best  learning years are before the
>> age of five.  One has to have something to  build on.  They have to know
>> something before they can be taught  something else.
>> 
>> 
>> On 4/3/08 8:43 PM, "Glenn"  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 
>>  
>>> Newberg comments  on the fourth grade slump:
>>> 
>>> "Others have shown that early school  achievement is a strong predictor of
>>> high school completion (Stroup and  Robims 1972). We were also interested in
>>> reaching students before the  "fourth grade slump," the sudden drop-off
>>> between third and fourth grade in  the reading scores of low-income students
>>> (Chall et al. 1990). Recognizing  the need to intervene earlier in the lives
>>> of the children chosen to  participate in the SYTE program, subsequent
>>> classes of SYTE have been  identified as early as kindergarten. The new
>>> model recognizes that  establishing a connection with children early allows
>>> the program the best  opportunity to capitalize on their strengths and
>>> requires less remediation  of neglected problems (Bogaines 1993)."
>>> 
>>> Newberg, Norman A 2006. The  Gift of Education.  How a Tuition Gaurantee
>>> Program Changed the Lives  of Inner City Youth. The State University of New
>>> York Press, Albany:  192
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> In this week¹s UC Review, University High School to  Close in 2010 for Two
>>> Year Renovation, consider this vague mention (the only  printed mention to
>>> date):
>>> 
>>> "Penn and Drexel have said they would work  with the feeder middle schools
>>> to better prepare those children for the more  advanced academic
>>> opportunities in their neighborhood  school."
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>> Neighbors, if the Penn/Drexel school were  being designed by real Penn
>>> experts from the school of education, they  absolutely would know that they
>>> must, first and foremost, provide details  about preparing the local kids!
>>> The effects of poverty are measurable much  earlier than middle school
>>> regardless of funded or under-funded schools!!!
>>> 
>>> How do years of underfunded schools and barriers to quality  extra
>>> curricular activities compound the problems that start early?   Wilma
>>> pointed out that lots of us don't understand the range of issues  or
>>> problems teachers do their best (and often a heroic job) to deal with
>>> daily.  Properly funded schools (and fewer students with other problems
>>> associated with poverty) have more supporting factors.  The big  problems
>>> like large class size are sometimes recognized. Teacher turnover,  low pay,
>>> low support of staff, and the resulting poor morale can all be  addressed
>>> with proper funding.
>>> 
>>>  If Penn/Drexel start real  quality interventions now, it would take years
>>> before the gaps caused by  decades of neglect would prepare neighborhood
>>> kids, in any significant way,  for any of the magnet high schools.
>>> 
>>> But, the new UC high school is  obviously following the history of mapping
>>> and planning our neighborhood for  Penn¹s real estate goals.  The people of
>>> Phila. simply pay.
>>> 
>>> The  most important details, the oblique plan for assisting the "feeder
>>> schools,"  doesn¹t even make sense on the surface. The need for much earlier
>>> intervention is so obvious and established that the only possible conclusion
>>> is that the neighborhood is being deceived.
>>> 
>>> Penn and Drexel have no  intention of making a real effort to reach the kids
>>> and families they are  attempting to deceive. If I am wrong and "the
>>> experts" are sincere, they are  so out of touch with the literature that
>>> they are incompetent. They would  have made a bold and prominent
>>> presentation of the "assistance" long before  selling the magnet school as a
>>> replacement.  They are deceiving us and  attempting to transfer resources
>>> (the building and funds) from our already  under-funded public system for
>>> the purpose of attracting replacement  residents and condo  buyers!
>>> 
>>> Sincerely,
>>> 
>>> Glenn
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>>>  
>>> 
>> 
> 


Reply via email to