How the sending of report cards home is connected with problems in a family?

Recently, the situations, when teachers have faced with children cruel treatment, have become more frequent. The alleged cause of these incidents is students` report cards. The suggestion was confirmed by the research of the University of Florida (UF). The research team had found out that such cases increase on Fridays when report cards reach the students’ home.

The result of research of the University of Florida

Last year an NEA Higher Ed member Melissa Bright, one of UF research scientists, had some conversations with teachers and paediatricians who were confronted with the patient’s exposed mistreatment. From the dialogues, Melissa noticed it is true that after sending report cards the number of patients in health centres goes up. Besides, she got the information from educators about they could not stay to dispatch home report cards because they knew it reflected poorly on the atmosphere in certain families. After that researchers began looking for evidence.

Later, when all cases about sending report cards with students at home were cross-referenced with required dates, the team of researchers detected that these incidents happened mostly on Fridays and on Saturdays. However, when the documents on students’ achievements were sent earlier in the week, such situations were not found.

Reasons and proposals to address

The problem solving seems obvious – send report cards earlier in the week. Melissa Bright summed up, if it is really happening because of the day in the week, they indeed should change the day of report cards sending.

They also investigate facts which could the reasons.

Assumptions about what happens on Fridays:

  1. Salary day;
  2. Family meeting day;
  3. Pre-weekend day;
  4. The day of substance abuse, etc.

They are not sure which of these facts could be the real reason for the incidents.

Further, it is relevant to know what kind of information consist of these papers to understand the problem. Apart from grades, they contain as usual the information about student`s behaviour. Probably, because of the last reason, they became so grumpy and it leads to such consequences.

Bear that in mind, it can be concluded that it is meaningful to enhance the connection between school and home. It is necessary more serious involvement to suppress abusive treatment. Parents, as well as teachers, should do a great deal of work to help children reach success. They also should target it themselves as the main aim of their activity and do not forget about that.

At the moment, the local government of Florida actively pursues to teachers and parents to be on the same wavelength through teacher-home visits.

The vision of the observer of cuts that are insensitive to the financing of the school.

Three months ago, Education Minister Lord Agnew offered to betting every director with a “bottle of champagne and a letter of recommendation” that he could find unnecessary spending at his school. It was a crude, dejected commentary made at a time when some schools close early on Friday to save money.

The government’s response to concerns over declining school funding was restrained from the start. The analysis by the Institute of Fiscal Studies shows that real funding per student in England has fallen by 8% over the past decade. This is the biggest cut in school funding in three decades. However, the government claims to have invested more money in schools than ever before. However, the figure does not take into account inflation and a significant increase in student numbers over the decade. He was rightly reprimanded by the UK Bureau of Statistics for using distorted and exaggerated figures. David Spiegelhalter, President of the Royal Statistical Society, concluded last year, “For a department that is responsible for the numerical capabilities of the country, this is shameful.”

Schools need to find savings in ways that can impact their education. In Birmingham, many elementary schools end on a Friday noon. In other areas, some schools were delayed until November. Others have created Amazon Wish List to encourage parents to buy basic items such as pens and gluesticks. Some bosses report that they are doing tasks such as driving the minibus and cleaning to counter the staff shortage. It’s no wonder that Chancellor Philip Hammond’s pledge to pay 400 million pounds for “little extras” like white boards caused so much trouble.

But schools face more than significant cuts in their own households. Schools really are the first public service, the only part of the state that children come into contact with day after day. If other services are expanded, they must compensate for the problem.

And what the government has amassed at its doors goes far beyond the drop in school fees. Schools also compete with even more significant cuts for child welfare services run by community councils supporting their most vulnerable students. In the English councils, government subsidies have been cut by almost half since 2010. Childcare expenditure has been cut by nearly a third since 2010 in all areas. However, they are the least-needed areas of greatest need, where councils can not trust the tax base council of the most affluent areas – they have to endure the worst.

Spending on children in the poorest areas has fallen six times faster than in the richest. This means that teachers who can no longer rely on social services, educational psychologists and psychosocial services will support children’s learning with emotional and behavioral problems. It is increasingly difficult for the system to bring children to safety, and the increasing incidence of knife crime is just one symptom.

In addition, child poverty will reach record levels by 2022 due to benefit cuts and tax credits for low-income families. The schools are facing the terrible daily consequences, not the ministers in Whitehall. Principals report that children go gray with hunger; Some schools wash dirty uniforms for families who can not do it themselves.

Conservative Chancellors argue since 2010 that austerity is a necessary price we must pay to put the nation’s books in order. This is simply wrong: even if they have curtailed benefits and support for low-income families with children, they have provided expensive tax breaks for richer families and businesses.

Contrast this with Agnew’s Champagne Bet or Hammond’s “little extras” and it’s clear the government has heard the school’s resources. But ignore the teachers who sound the alarm bell at their own risk. They tell the ministers something that they should know is the case: 10 years of austerity will ruin the lives of a generation of children in the coming years.

The “transforming power” to reach children in front of the kindergarten.

Mothers who leave their children in one of the primary schools of public preparation, whether in the Bronx, New York or the Lower East Side of Manhattan, often carry a much smaller child in a carriage or carriage.

It is a scene that Ian Rowe, executive director of the network of five-fold, same-sex, five-person schools, often contemplates what their schools and the K-12 system could generally do to better avoid some of the delays in school , Development and others. In preschool and kindergarten children in schools.

“There are a large number of very young single mothers raising very young children,” Rowe said last week at a roundtable organized by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) in Washington. “I’ve been thinking about how to get to this little boy who’s still three years away from our Girls Prep or Boys Prep School.”

He then discovered the Parent-Child-Home Program (PCHP), a 50-year home-visit program that employs trained “early learning specialists” to conduct 30-minute home visits to low-income families for two-year-olds, ages 18 and up. Each week, families receive a textbook or toy, and specialists focus on modeling the interaction with the child.

A year ago, the charter network launched a pilot program of 30 families, delivering the program to the youngest siblings of current public-preparation students. Rowe said the partnership is being expanded.

“It’s a transformative force to reach families before their children enter a classroom,” said Sarah Walzer, CEO of PCHP, during the event. While Public Prep will not know for some years how far this particular group of children will benefit from visits, Walzer provided data on the short- and long-term outcomes of the program. This implies that the likelihood that they are ready for kindergarten is 50% higher, the probability that they will graduate from high school by 30% and the likelihood that they will be identified for an individualized education program is 50% lower.

“If we can dispel these negative experiences by providing these positive experiences for the child and the father before school starts, we will significantly reduce the number of children referred to special education, which represents a great savings for the districts. for the school and for society, “said Walzer.

“Before the children arrive at kindergarten”

While public readiness focuses on the program specifically for student siblings, the partnership is an example of how K-12 schools can play a more important role in providing home-based services to families with small children. To do that, I noticed Katharine Stevens, an AEI scholar who directs the think tank’s early childhood program.

He added that it was “amazing” how often the All Students Act Success uses the words “from birth” to describe the potential extent of early school efforts in schools or districts, while the term this was not part of Acts No Child Left Behind.

“We know that good schools are crucial to children’s success, but we also know that education really means human development, not school,” Stevens said. “And an important scientific foundation now clearly suggests that the essential basis for educational opportunities is not created until five or four years, not even three, but from birth.”

The AEI event also follows a recent report showing that 300,000 families received home visits in 2017, but millions more could benefit from these early intervention models.

The most advanced data tools can also help school and district leaders identify which neighborhoods they should target when working with a home visit organization. In California, for example, the First 5 Association, a group of members of the state’s top 58 state agencies, and the Children’s Data Network at the University of Southern California have created the Index of California’s Strong Start.

The index focuses on indicators, eg. For example, that he was born of parents with at least a high school diploma and belongs to a family that has access to medical care. The Index provides district-level census profiles to help providers better align their services.

“The strength of the Strong Start data is that many of the problems that occur in the K-12 environment are also evident in the birth of the children,” said Moira Kenney, Executive Director of the First 5 Association, E-Mail. Mail. “This provides an opportunity to discuss how school districts can work together with organizations and institutions that provide services before children reach kindergarten.”

Most states and a growing number of local governments have been developing and expanding public pre-school programs over the last two decades, and some have made their programs widely available regardless of family income.

Chester E. Finn Jr., education policy chair and emeritus president of the Conservative Learning Institute of Thomas B. Fordham, who also spoke at the event, said there was much “political momentum” behind the K system. -12. However, he argued that public prep’s partnership with PCHP was a better approach as it was “as close to the cradle as possible” and addressed the “most disadvantaged children”.

“The push for [universal pre-K] is at war with the greatest needs we’ve talked about,” he said.

Another obstacle to such efforts is that educators are often “ambivalent” when working with low-income parents, said Ralph Smith, executive director of the Read-a-Level campaign, which is now active in 300 communities.

“These kids will not go to the program by themselves,” Smith said, adding that it was important to “involve parents and recognize them as co-producers for good results for their children.”

Rowe said the pilot program, rather than “taking more responsibility,” is an attempt to find a strong partner who can support the child’s learning and parents’ skills.

Finally, Walzer pointed out that the fluctuation among department heads is another challenge. Executives may not be keen to provide Title I funding for a program for children who will not even be in kindergarten when moving to another district, he said.

However, Thomas Gentzel, Executive Director and General Manager of the National Association of School Boards, said there had been “a big change in how principals think about these issues.” I think we’re seeing more and more interest in school districts trying to work with them. “early learning in general.”