ExchangeEveryDay Past Issues

I am very happy it

Help to choose a videocamera. What standard to choose?

Hi, why nobody responds me?

This site is awesome. Your site is really nice! I really enjoy your site! Just cool site! No any words else to say...

Help to choose a videocamera. What standard to choose?

hi
Prompt how to get rid of advertising?

hi
Why I can not insert the image into my message?

Good site. Me very much has liked.

Hi
To write the letter, it is necessary ...

I want mp3 player. What will advise?

What is the most important information I should know about Cymbalta?

Hi. Images are not loading.

Good site. The answer

What that problems.(I would like that you have corrected problems with scripts. And some menus do not work! del to it of attention. Thanks!

Good site. Me very much has liked.

Hi all!

I want to establish the same guest book. Prompt as?

Hi
As to me to adjust correctly time on my computer?

Hi! How at you with weather? At us absolutely of gloom = (

Hi
Do not prompt how to adjust a font of the messages?

Hi
I can not find coordinates for a feedback.

And how many there is a print on the photoprinter? Who knows?

Hi! Do not prompt as me to send e-mail? = (

Greate site. Thank you :)

Day Care is usually just what it says and not a place that may be qualified to stimulate the absorbent minds of those in its care. Often, in talking to parents it is said, "Oh that Montessori school is expensive compared to the other day cares in the area".
To this I tell them, "Take a peek at what goes on in the classroom. Now tell me what are you paying for now? Is it an investment in your child for now, for his future? What is your child learning? In balancing the two environments, how can you afford not to place them in this class?

Excellent information which I am able to use and pass on in my workshops.

Everyone should read the USA Today article in the link above! I agree with every word of it, and am thrilled that somebody finally said it.

Daycare is not yet "right", so it makes sense that one would critique it and find it wanting. I do not understand why early childhood employees feel threatened by research that indicates there are still significant problems associated with group care for young children. It is not a personal attack on your class or center. I do believe there are important aspects of quality care that are missing in typical, traditional daycare environments. I do believe there are low standards for the training of daycare staff. I also believe that what we have been doing is NOT good enough! We need to change our approach and think outside the box, and then children , parents, staff, and society will benefit. Perhaps the parents who frequently say with a casual indifference that they "like to spend money too much for them to give up that second income " need to understand the truth about how it affects the children they chose to bring into the world.

Perhaps the author should read Joan Lombardi's "Time to Care". We need to stop arguing about whether or not child care is "right" and start discussing how to make it very high quality for Everyone.

I would agree that children in childcare tend to be more assertive and possbily agressive. They are being cared for in groups of children by untrained professionals. We cannot afford professionals until our society wants to pay for them.

For too long the myths have been accepted about the "benefits" of babies and children spending most of their waking hours in the care of a revolving door of daycare workers.
I am happy to see the subject explored more honestly.
The fact remains that our society is not committed to establishing quality training at affordable cost for childcare "teachers".
Many Center Directors are equally underpaid and undertrained, and become poor leaders in an industry that suffers from perpetually high turnover and low morale.
Parents who choose to work full time, run errands after work, and finally, as the day comes to a close, rush in to pick up their child at the last minute, are guilty of outsourcing their parental responsibilities.
The issue is not government funding that relieves parents of their economic responsibilites for childcare, but society's acceptance of underpaid, undertrained staff doing the job of raising other people's children so that the parents can make and spend more money.
There are consequences that children will suffer as a result of this outsourcing, and it is time to examine those consequences honestly and with integrity.

As a long time member of the early childhood educational community, I am pleased attention is being payed to daycare.
All children deserve quality care situations. Having said that daycare suffers from a lack of support by the public in general. Teachers/ childcare workers make less money then fast food workers usually without benefits of any kind. Federal funding for daycare has continued to be cut yearly.
The money that had been around in recent years for teacher/ provider education is gone. So research and the reports that come from that research that blame aggressive behavior, poor social skills, and academic un-readiness on daycare is just plain mean sprited. Tell the truth, the federal government has been trying to get rid of Head Start since Bush got in office. Public pre-k, 4 year olds in the public schools is what is coming. Earlier and eariler academics is what is coming. Public schools nationally have served older children so well that we need now to expose younger children to the impact of too much testing and instruction then geared to that testing. Young children deserve quality childcare situations that focus on their physical, emotional, social, developmental not just academic needs. I have seen what research has done to public education, NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND is leaving many kindergarteners and first graders as well as high schoolers and many in special education way behind. Do we want to now add 4 year olds to the list?

If only findings in studies like these could be used to improve the quality of care for children and support families in our country. Still, there exists such a gap between those who can afford to stay home with their children (or who can hire home care) and those who must work. The gap only widens as the cost of healthcare, real estate, gas and groceries increases at rates far exteeding salary increases for middle income and lower income Americans.

I believe children in quality care have increased social skills. If we had the funding that was availabe to other agencies, then the quality of care would increase in most centers. I hate reading "studies" and "surveys", I do not believe they have complete information to make comparisions.

It sounds like a mix of poor quality care, long hours in out-of-home settings, and other factors (possibly poverty, child temperament, parenting styles, family stressors, etc.) may be the recipe for disasterous impacts on some vulnerable young children. Can we afford to ignore this?

Certainly I am glad to hear positive results of the survey. As quality childcare continues to evolve we will see greater test scores in our future. However I hope the statement in the survey "the researchers still found a strong link to poor social skills. They also found a continuing connection between the amount of time children spend in center-based care and conflcts between them and their parents." is not blaming the childcare setting. As a quality childcare provider I would hope the survey would ask what the childcare provider had to endure when dealing with the parents of these defiant or at risk children and what they had to endure when dealing with the children themselves. Our "microwave" society makes us impatient as a whole. Technology, fast food, we want it and expect it NOW mentality makes poor social skills even for adults. Early care and education teaches coping skills, if that knowledge was accepted at home this survey might have only positive results.

Rather then bashing the oppinion of the researcher and rather then closing all day cares, I would like to know what the researcher feels should be done to make day care a better place for children.

Time spent in day care does have an impact on the young child, but convincing the parent is yet another issue. Mothers have days off and we provide care for the child. In many instances I feel the child is better off with us than having the stress of being in a situation where feelings are not positive. My feeling is that children do not need group care and auditory stimulation for 11 1/2 hours a day.

I have spent many years providing high-quality child care and am now also teaching college students to do the same. But I can't help noticing that most children who have not been left in care are smarter and have better psycho-social skills. Most of the challenging children I've worked with really do need therapy -- I am seeing more out of control children than ever before. The only thing that keeps me going is realizing that some of these children are better off being away from abusive or clueless parents for most of the day. It really is a paradox. I look forward to seeing the new issue of Psych Today and reading what Dr. Belsky has to say.

The numbers are inadequate to make such blank statements. If this is trying to make women feel more pressure about the problem of taking care of their families by joining the work force, this should do the trick. High quality child care is a must for all children but inadequate training and funding for some families is the biggest problem. Children who are a product of good quality childcare should have an advantage in social habits. Manners and treating others with respect is part of any quality program. In the USA mothers often have to be in the work place to maintain a minamal lifestyle. Please do not place all childcare in the lowest possible light. If you want better quality put your money where your mouth is!

I have been a day care director for over 25 years, and last week saw one of our "graduates" receive a MD degree from the University of Illinois! We have had numerous successes, and I think Jay Belsky is a certifiable moron, having heard him speak here in the Chicago area some 20 years ago! Tell him to come over and visit a NAEYC Accredited, quality early childhood program, many of which exist here in Lake Conty, Illinois! Charlene Ackerman, M.Ed.

I am very curious if the $100 million dollar study differentiates between high quality, early education and care centers that are accredited, have small class sizes and are well staffed by experienced, trained teachers AND other centers that only meet states' minimum requirements, in terms of staff training and adult child ratios. We can only get a clear picture of the effect of group care on children if we contrast and compare amongh four possible combinations: high quality centers vs centers that only meet minimum requirements, vs high quality home environments with loving, nurturing adults with adequate resources to care for children vs home environments with absent or abusive adults or adults without adequae resources to care for children. That is the only kind of study that will give us any usable information, other wise we are just throwing good money after bad, instead of making sure that what ever environments young children are in have caring adults who can meet their needs physically, socially, emotionally, and cognitively.
And of course none of this addresses the issue of the compensation of child care providers in the United States. How can we expect child care workers to provide the services needed to enhance children's development when we pay them on par with parking lot attendents and animal handlers.

As a 24-year veteran in this field, I am angered by Mr. Belsky's comments and bias. To draw a broad conclusion, as he and others have done, that childhood aggression is caused by child care, is ridiculous. Aggression and other undesirable behaviors are caused by both nature and nurture. Aggressive behaviors occur naturally at various times during childhood--normal child development or nature. When children see mom and dad shouting, hitting, and cursing at each other; angry people on TV; and angry drivers on the road, the children learn that "angry" is okay--nurture. Parents are supposed to teach their children more appropriate behaviors. Sadly, too many parents are unwilling to do the hard work of parenting. And, while our teachers make a difference, we cannot replace what's missing at home. The researchers need to expand the scope of their questions and assumptions.

It seems counterproductive to be fussing over 'whether' child care is good or bad. What are the alternatives? Homelessness? Inability to afford food, shelter, health care? Taking children to the workplace? What is needed is a focus on what makes it work well and what are the most positive aspects of child care. Is Belsky staying home changing diapers these days?

I read the article on daycare. I believe that if the childcare program spends significant amounts of time/energy teaching children how to problem solve and focusing a good percentage of its curriculum on social skills, children will be much better able to handle the social challenges of elementary school (and life), whithout resorting to violence and bullying. However, the key element here is the purposeful teaching of healthy problem solving skills.

I have been concerned about the negative effects of child care for the last 30 years. It maybe too soon to tell but when combined this with some of Lynn Kagan's conclusions and the ramifications of the Hart/Risley findings on verbal interaction we should at least be open to the real possibly that we may be causing harm --
It should be a major topic of discussion at the World Fourm

Did they also study the effects of starvation and homelessness on children? That's what my own and many other children would be facing if child care were not a choice. I have worked in child care and early childhood education for 15 years. I know we, as a profession, do good things for children and families and are a positive force in an increasingly negitive world. We must remember that correlation does not equal causation and fight negative press with the reality of our profession.

It seems to me that the key sentence in this discussion is "Children, however, benefit by spending time in nonmaternal care when its quality is high". (I assume we can equal nomaternal with nonpaternal) It seems to me that without having to do much research, common sense would tell us that children who are in a child care environment that is nurturing, stimulating without being overstimulating, that provides space for child-initiated activities, that gives some control of schedules to children, that gives time for privacy during a full day, in short what we consider high quality care, will be beneficial for children. Being around other children and being exposed to experiences outside the home after all are generally considered beneficial, even to very young children.
The probelm with child care is the problem of full-time care and low quality care. Both problems are directly related to a society's priorities. When parents who work full-time receive ten days of paid vacation, and when child care is exclusively paid by parents, children will spend more time in child care than at home, and child care professionals will be disgracefully underpaid. Consequently children will miss the pleasure of being in their own house, playing with their own toys, and reading books with their own parents, and in poor quality care they will miss age appropriate nurturing and stimulation (including language stimulation), they may be overstimulated, they may lack physical exercise, and they may not receive help in developpment of social skills.
I think that it is very important for child care professionals to push for research that dicriminsates between the effects of high quality and low quality care. We also need to continue working on all front (parental, political etc.) to make people understand that it is not child care that is the culprit, but the length and quality fo care.

Many families depend on the earnings of the mother; many other families depend on the income from both parents. These families need high quality care for the young children, not criticism. Mr. Belsky displays a disturbingly cavalier attitude towards families who are not upper middle class. He does not seem aware of the existence of the need for quality care for families in which the mother or both parents must work outside the home. The general press and media seem equally unaware. The present national administration talks about how families should be self-sustaining but remains ignorant of what it takes to make ends meet.

Why should we be afraid to look at this research and make the right changes? Not just child care providers, but parents and society as well? Our children deserve the best. The biggest problem is that right now it looks like child care centers and mothers are being "condemned." What about the responsibilities of employers, schools, government, families, social agencies? It is much more complicated than Mr. Belsky would have us believe.

Naturally, we don't want our profession to be blamed for lack of social skills and poor behavior lingering into grade school, but I think it's important to face the hard truth that yes, poor quality child care for long hours is bound to have a negative effect on children's social and emotional development, if not cognitive as well. I see this study as driving home the point that if kids are going to be in group care, it has GOT to be high quality. Haven't most of us observed centers where we would never leave our own kids? As negative as Belksy may have been, he was clear about the stark difference between a child's experience at a high quality center versus a poor one.

While I haven't yet seen this study I feel it does show why as Early Childhood Educators we need to ensure that the center's we work in are of the highest quality. I have always beleved that good or bad our influence over the children in our care makes a strong impact over who they will be as adults. The person in charge of this research project should be using his information to lobby government for better support of qulity centers as the reality is that parents need childcare in the modern world.

Belsky and others like him are stuck in a past that they can't accept will never come again. Instead of railing against day care, opponents should join the rest of us in seeking SOLUTIONS! If the child care system has flaws, the answer is to improve it -- because the need for it is not going to go away!

While I am willing to wait for further interpretation from the results of this study, I take issue with Mr. Belsky's comment that "mothers" should not be made to feel bad. What about FATHERS, Mr. Belsky? In the case of single moms we all agree they have no other choices - but why wouldn't dads feel bad as well if child care is indeed a damaging place for their children to be?

The article discussing "The Trouble with Day Care...." brings up a very important point regarding quality. Other issues of quality - defingin quality and how much are parents willing and or able to pay for quality care is paramount to this issue.

Childcare where there is a lack of programming, and in which the childcare providers lack education and or training is one issue of quality.

A contributing factor to aggressive behavior is the number of hours a child is left in childcare each day;each week. Children who are ALWAYS in care - withouit a break and who are stressed by having to come to care on days when they are not well, whose parents do not take responsibility for sick days and may even take every vacation without their children -are underlying reasons for a childs high stress level, aggressive behavior, and their need for therapy. Parents need to take responsibility for parenting as partners with their childcare providers. They need to see the importance of using their sick, personal and vacation days to be with their children. For many parents their children are "trophy" children - trotted out for show when necessary. In care each day for 12 hours or more five days per week and then of course with babysitters or au pairs on the weekend.

Programs need to take responsibility for providing creative programming to enhance the childs day. programs that a paren5t would take their child to if they did not work- Yoga, Computer Tots, Musical Munchkins and for the older children - Tae Kwon Doe, Gymnastics, etc. Programs need to stress lessons in good manners and conflict resolution, as well as the art of negotiation. Teachers need to be educated and trained and to also work to help families deal with stress/ crisis.

the author of this study is full of crap! there are many and more than not positive sides to daycare, especially the benefits of the one to one of family daycare.

This research along with the brain studies coming out about how little ones develop empathy and self control through responsive interaction,
are starting to add up to the conclusion many of us have felt all along-
that daycare is not for the under twos. I wonder when we are going to get honest with ourselves, and the parents about this. We can care our best, but its not the same as a loving parent. We shouldn't pretend otherwise.

My son had a wonderful teacher. She was everything you could ask for in a daycare teacher for toddlers in a time when daycare is tough enough to swallow. Then poof she was gone. When I exclaimed because she was truely wonderful with all 6 of the kids, I was told she was a "bad employee" and even though she was great with the kids, they had to let her go. so to replace this "bad employee" they brought in a ditzy blonde barely out of high school who just stares at me blankly when I ask questions about my son's day, and says "um" more than anything else!