- At what age should we start worrying about their "academics"?
- At what age should we send them to preschool full-time, or should we ever do that?
- Should we require that the preschool offer things such as Spanish language classes and music classes?
- Assuming we get them onto the right track in preschool, how will the public school kindergarten in our area compare?
- How soon do our public schools offer accelerated tracks and what can we do to ensure that our little boys end up on those accelerated tracks?
- We have a very active and physical little boy -- the balance of academics with physical activity is important for him -- how do we achieve that balance?
- When do we start him in organized sports -- and will that be enough of an outlet for his energy and physicality?
- Learning a foreign language is supposed to be easiest at a young age -- how do we provide that opportunity for our boys, if the public schools do not really have a means for teaching a foreign language except in the upper grades?
The list of questions goes on and on and on. We want the best for our boys, but we also want them to have a real experience of being little boys -- playing in the woods and riding bikes with their friends and making imaginary forts. Once they are in the public school system, can we just sit back and say that the educators know what they are doing and will challenge them adequately, so we, the parents, do not need to worry or supplement or consider sending them to private schools?
What about the studies that say that, economically, it makes more sense to invest $$$ in the early years of school than it does to play "catch up" and pay $$$ for the later years? And, all of this consternation about a proper education for our children is in preparation, ostensibly, for college? Or is it about making sure that they can function well in and contribute to society? And, if it is the latter, then, does it really matter whether Drew learns to read before he reaches kindergarten?
As for college, Brooke and I have a fairly practical approach for our boys -- neither of us cares about whether they go to an Ivy or even a top twenty-five school, for that matter. We want them to go to college first of all, and we want them to go where they feel comfortable, but, most importantly, where they can excel. If they want to (and are able to) go to an Ivy, we'll send them, but, an honors program at the state university and a semester abroad is fine with us as well. I want them to do well in college, and if they want to go to grad school, that is when I think getting into a really good school matters. But, college, as I posted a couple of posts ago, should be time to explore the world of ideas and your place in it.
So, after sending our children to the best public schools in our metro area, can we just sit back on auto-pilot and assume that they will get an adequate education -- that any gaps through the system will be filled in just because we will provide enrichment and perspective for them? Does fretting about their education every step of the way really produce different, better results -- and when we say "better" -- what does that mean, exactly?
Stressful.
2 comments:
You and I seem to start with very different assumptions about this topic, so I can't contribute much. (Not as though you were sitting around thinking, "Boy, I sure hope Mary Beth comments," but anyway...)
I'm considering enrolling Joshua in preschool (real preschool, not daycare masquerading as preschool) next fall for two mornings a week. My intention is certainly not to ensure that he has some sort of "edge," but only to give him the opportunity to socialize with other kids his age. I doubt he'll ever go to full-time preschool. He has twelve years to be in school and only a few to be a little kid.
You should definitely check in to your state's requirements for physical activity in school. Tennessee's requirements are atrocious...something like one hour a week of PE and I don't remember how much recess but I do remember thinking "There's no way Joshua's going to manage that." It's insane to think that little kids can stay in school all day with only 30 minutes of physical activity. And studies show that kids learn better when they have time to burn off their energy.
How does one invest economically in a child's early years and how in the later years? What's considered "later" in these studies?
I don't think it's ever a good idea to assume that someone else is going to take care of your child's education 100%. I believe that constant involvement is necessary, particularly to provide outside enrichment opportunities.
I would not say that we are terribly interested in giving Drew "an edge" per se -- we just want to take advantage of his young brain sooner rather than later. It is best to introduce language and music and math, etc. early, early, early -- from what "they" are telling us -- and, I would rather have him exposed early than look at his parents and say, "why didn't you start me with language early?"
That's where the stress comes in -- you want to do what is BEST for your child, but according to whom and to what end?
Post a Comment