K has been at the same daycare since he was two. They take care of infants through preschool-aged kids, and have a preschool class for the older kids. K just started the preschool class. They typically have circle time in the morning with singing, reading and talking, then take a trip to the playground. After lunch they have naptime, then usually some sort of art or pre-writing activity followed by free play. A few times a week they have special programs, like Tumble Bus on Tuesdays (an old school bus retrofitted with mats, swings, and tunnels!), yoga on Wednesdays, a singer on Fridays, and on occasion "Binky Bear" -- I've never quite figured out what this is, but apparently some woman who dresses up and entertains the kids.
Once in a while I question whether he should be going somewhere else that might be, I don't know, more stimulating or challenging, or a place where there's more of a parent community and the kids tend to graduate and go to kindergarten together. But this place is very close to home, it's affordable, K likes it, and we like his current teacher and the people who run the program.
Reading back on what I just wrote, it doesn't seem like much of a dilemma. I just saw some openings in the Harvard-affiliated daycares on a parents' list that I'm on, and thought back to the expensive Montessori preschools that we toured, and wondered if we were somehow affecting K's future by not sending him to one of those places. I even googled "how much does daycare matter" (answer, according to first page results: a lot, and you should do extensive research before selecting one). But at this age, I think running around and playing, learning how to socialize with other kids, and occasionally gluing something to something else is really all he needs. We'll probably stick with the current place until he goes to kindergarten.
When I had those moments, I had to pull out the Elkind books. Have you read "Miseducation" or "The Power of Play?" Every time I freak out I'm not doing enough (parent peer pressure is the worst!), I go back to those books, take a deep breath, and relax. No academics until 7 (unless P is particularly interested in something).
ReplyDeleteThere's a fabulous lecture he did that's available for free on iTunes in which he distills his philosophy down to about a 45 minute spiel, and that always helps, too. I even made M listen. :)
I was just having a debate/discussion with one of my co-workers on this issue yesterday! I don't think it makes any difference in the long run. Maybe some kids enter Kindergarten already knowing more than others, but I think that it quickly evens out. If you are smart, you're going to be smart and do well in school whether you learned to read at 3 or 6. There's just a level of inherent "brightness" that you have and that can be developed through play until you get to real school. My co-worker thought her son really would be behind in Kindergarten (and then handicapped in some way forever) because he went to a small church preschool versus the kids who went to a fancier montessouri school or real prep-type school. I just don't think so. I was a stay-at-home kid who just played until kindergarten and I did great- at that age, you can still catch up on all the "academic" stuff.
ReplyDeleteAs an ex-teacher, I am a huge believer in play. Your preschool sounds a lot like the one we chose for Clownfish. I loved it, he loved it ... and now he's in first grade kicking ass on spelling tests and math quizzes and having me read to him about planets. So if that's any comfort...
ReplyDeleteHaven't heard of Elkin, but I'll check him out.
ReplyDeleteI'm not worried about K being behind in school, since we read and talk about all kinds of things at home... just have this vague idea once in a while that maybe he could be "developing" more. Developing what, I'm not quite sure... his brain? His innate abilities? Anyway, he's fine. Most of the time I'm sure that spending more money on a place filled with Ivy League offspring won't actually equate to a kid that's more "developed" somehow, just once in a while I wonder when I hear about all the stuff they do in the fancy schools.
He's so young. He should play! I think there's a backlash now against the notion of overscheduling kids. The key is that he's happy where he is!
ReplyDeleteJust to clarify, I'm not talking about play versus academics -- like most sane people, I'm firmly on the side of play for a toddler. But when we went to visit this Montessori school that I absolutely loved, they had all these perfectly age-calibrated activities that immediately drew K in. And they weren't fancy or expensive toys -- they were things like little tubes that you could stick cotton pom-poms in, and sorting trays, and a ball hanging down from the ceiling at just the right height. The teacher explained how the kids, even at age 2, were expected to take off and put away their shoes and hang up their coats every morning. There was a kitchen area where the kids could fix themselves a snack. And the teacher talked about some of the activities they did, like weekly "food tastings" where they would talk about a certain food, and pass it around, and then everyone would try it. (That week was cantaloupe.) When I think about enriching and stimulating environments, that's really my ideal. It wasn't realistic for us because it was so expensive and the "extended day" ended at 3 p.m., so we would have had to hire another babysitter on top of that, and the school had lots of vacations for conferences and things and was closed for the summer. Coordinating all that would have been a headache and it would have cost over $40K a year. But I still think longingly of that school. Anyway, he's happy, and he's fine, and I'm not stunting his growth somehow by sending him to his current place... probably.
ReplyDelete