Chapter 6 of Clayton Christensen’s Disrupting Class, focuses
on the “education” that children receive before they even enter school and
leads him to conclude:
By some estimates, 98 percent of education spending occurs after the basic intellectual capacities of children have been mostly determined.
Christensen outlines 3 important contributions of pre-school
education:
- Creating intellectual capacity
- Cultivating a positive self-esteem
- Stimulating intellectual curiosity – which will in turn motivate learning
Recent research by Risley and Hart has shown that the first
36 months of life are crucial in
determining a person’s intellectual capacity.
Based on the number of words spoken to infants (an average of 2100 words
per hour by college-educated parents compared with only 600 words per hour by
those on welfare), by the age of 3 children of college parents had heard 48
million words in contrast to 13 million words heard by children whose parents
were on welfare. In addition parents who
were talkative to their children during the first year of life (before the
children could speak back) gave their children a definite advantage in terms of
vocabulary, which later led to better performance on reading comprehension.
Risley and Hart also observed the type of language – some
parents spoke in an adult way to very young children, asking them questions and
prompting them to think about what is happening. These parents modeled thinking aloud,
commenting and planning and this led to curiosity in their children. These children also showed better auditory
processing skills and this led to an improved capacity for learning as their
brains became better at sophisticated thinking.
When these children then entered school, they were more confident and
more able to succeed when faced with difficult intellectual challenges. Children who are not so well prepared for
school are more likely to struggle and suffer from poor self-esteem and therefore
switch off from demanding academic work.
Christensen quotes from an article Hart wrote for the New
York Times where he stated “80 percent of the variation in public school
performance results from family effects … not school effects”. He argues that “if we persist in believing
that the problems of schools can be solved by only improving schools, we will
never succeed.”
Reflection: Given the
research about the importance of early learning within the family, I'm wondering what teachers can do to best help students who don’t grow up in a language-rich home environment
before they come to school. It seems a very bleak prospect to think that all teachers are doing is stopping them slipping even further behind those students who come from more educated families. How can this cycle be broken? How can schools really make a difference?
Photo Credit: Jeans by Pulihora, 2006
No comments:
Post a Comment