Academic literature on the topic 'Children who failed second grade'

Amanda Bryant-Friedrich (Fig. 4.1) is Dean of the College of Graduate Studies at the University of Toledo (Toledo). Amanda was born in Enfield, NC, a small town about fifteen miles from the North Carolina-Virginia border. Her father was a farmer and her mother was a housewife. Her father only had a sixth-grade education and did not read or write much. Her mother graduated from high school in Enfield. Her maternal grandfather was a child of a slave and her mother was one of twenty-two children from two wives. They lived on a farm owned by a man named Whitaker. As her mother’s family had been enslaved by the family that owned the farm, her last name was Whitaker. Amanda’s paternal grandfather was a businessman who owned his own farm, on the other side of town. He was also involved in the illegal production of moonshine. Amanda went to Unburden Elementary School in Enfield. Her first experience with school was dramatic, because she lived at the end of a dirt road and was really isolated from other families. The first day she went to kindergarten she saw all those little kids, and she was afraid because there were too many people there. But the daughter of her mother’s best friend was there and invited her to come in to the classroom. Her first science class was in general science in fourth or fifth grade. She was so fascinated, she changed her mind about her future career of secretary or teacher and decided on science. Amanda went to Enfield Middle school in Halifax County, then the second poorest county in the state. The school had only basic infrastructure for science classes. She remembers her middle school chemistry teacher, Ms. Crowley, who told the students to put a mercury thermometer in a cork and Amanda accidently stuck it in her hand. They did not have much in the school, but her teacher taught her what she could.

To be literate, people must be able to read and to write. There has been a large amount of research on the first aspect of literacy, reading. We now know a good deal about how adults read and about how children learn to read. We know much less about the second aspect of literacy, writing. One aspect of learning how to write is learning how to spell. How do children manage this, especially in a language like English that has so many irregular spellings? That is the topic of this book. In this book, I present a detailed study of the spellings produced by a group of American first-grade children. I ask what the children’s spellings reveal about their knowledge of language and about the development of spelling ability. In these days of computerized spelling checkers, is learning to spell correctly still necessary for being a good writer? I believe that it is. In her review of research on beginning reading, Marilyn Adams (1990, p. 3) states that “the ability to read words, quickly, accurately, and effortlessly, is critical to skillful reading comprehension— in the obvious ways and in a number of more subtle ones.” Similarly, the ability to spell words easily and accurately is an important pan of being a good writer. A person who must stop and puzzle over the spelling of each word, even if that person is aided by a computerized spelling checker, has little attention left to devote to other aspects of writing. Just as learning to read words is an important part of reading comprehension, so learning to spell words is an important part of writing. In the study reported in this book, I focus on a group of American first-grade children who were learning to read and write in English. These children, like an increasing number of children in America today, were encouraged to write on their own from the very beginning of the first-grade year. Their teacher did not stress correct spelling. Indeed, she did not tell the children how to spell a word even if they asked.

Heralded as the most progressive legislation of the world, the Children Act of 1989 revolutionized children’s law in England and Wales. It is underpinned by six principles: the supremacy of the child’s interest in all decisions concerning their upbringing and education; the recognition that it is best for any chid to be brought up by their blood family, that his religious and ethnic background must be respected, and that siblings should not be separated; the abolition of the stigma of illegitimacy and its replacement with the attribution at birth of paternal responsibility to the child’s father; the unification of public and private law, and the creation of the ‘menu’ of Residence, Contact, Prohibition, and Specific Issue orders available to the court; the establisment of the new principle that time is of the essence in all cases relating to children; and the creation of the presumption that ‘no order is better than an order’ thus the ingerence of the court must be minimal. I believed in those principles and in the benefits that the Children Act would bring to my clients—children and parents alike. I had some reservations: the system was expensive to implement on two counts: first, it gave the child a ‘guardian’ (a qualified social worker appointed by the court through CAFCASS, a governmental agency), as well as their own solicitor paid for by Legal Aid, as was the representative of the parents, who had the right to instruct independent experts; second, because its requirements of social services and other agencies involved further training and increased resources, as well as further involvement of the judiciary, and increased court time. Hornby and Levy were at the forefront of its implementation: our entire staff received in-house training that was open to other disciplines, within the spirit of cooperation between agencies that permeated the Act and its implementation. I also lectured in Britain and abroad and was proud to tell others that social services were under a duty to keep families united, rather than removing children from parents, and make efforts to return to the family the child removed from it, or if this failed, to place the child within the extended family, or with adoptive parents, within a year.

Read some chilling statistics, reported in an accurate Roper Organization survey a short time ago. Pollsters telephoned a nationally representative cross section of 1,000 families with kids from three to fourteen years old. Over ninety percent of moms and dads said reading was essential to their boy or girl's success. But of those with a child who could read, only 66 percent were happy with how their youngster was reading. According to age group, these are the numbers regarding parents who thought their child was interested in reading: . . .SCHOOL LEVEL PERCENTAGE Preschool 56% Kindergarten-second grade 59% Third grade-fifth grade 53% Beyond fifth grade 39%. . . At best, therefore, according to parents, six out of ten youngsters in any of the four groups found books stimulating. Of all the families surveyed only forty-four percent said their children read for pleasure each day. The implications are astounding. Personal happiness, future education, good jobs, enlightened citizenry, the society's continued advance: these all are at stake. Looking beyond the elementary and junior high school years, a Carnegie Foundation survey of 5500 college professors revealed that 75% think undergraduates at their institutions are seriously underprepared in basic skills; 66% think their colleges are paying too much money and spending too much time teaching what students should have learned prior to college admission. The failure of our schools to develop essential skills, the pervasive indifference to books among our children, the minimal achievement level at which so many youngsters hover throughout their educational lives—these are grim barriers to knowledge, happiness, and success. We read about this new study, that commission's report, those irrefutable data. We worry for awhile and then shrug with resignation. I'm not hopeful that the depressing statistics we hear about so regularly will improve any time soon, no matter what changes we make in our country's formal educational system. But in the informal realm;—the home, the supermarket, the playground, the various child-parent intersections—fertile, untilled soil stretches out around us.

High quality interventions, which employ an extended contact model, wherein stories, roleplaying, and other appealing informational media are used to promote more positive intergroup attitudes, tend to be effective at enhancing the attitudes, intentions, and interests of typical children toward their peers with differences. The following four studies assess the efficacy of The Realabilities comic book series and the Addy & Uno off-Broadway musical, which promote kindness, empathy, and a stop-bullying platform while teaching about disabilities and/or mental health disorders. The studies include 1) a qualitative study of 19 fourth grade students from an elementary school in Paramus, NJ, who viewed the Addy & Uno off-Broadway musical and participated in the full Realabilities educational comic book series intervention; 2) a qualitative study of 20 high school students with diverse disabilities, who participated in the full Realabilities comic book series intervention; 3) a quantitative study of 76 students from a high school in Long Island City, NY, who read the first mental health-based Realabilities comic book; and finally, 4) a quantitative study of 66 students from a high school in Long Island City, NY, who read the first and second mental-health based Realabilities comics. The researchers used a coding system to find principal themes in the qualitative data and used modified versions of the adjective checklist (ACL) and shared activities questionnaire (SAQ), along with a knowledge measure, to assess quantitative changes from pre to post-testing of the comic book series. Study findings help support the efficacy of an extended contact model and suggest that programs like these may serve as useful antidotes to counter negative attitudes of children and adolescents towards disabilities and mental health disorders, respectively.

High quality interventions, which employ an extended contact model, wherein stories, roleplaying, and other appealing informational media are used to promote more positive intergroup attitudes, tend to be effective at enhancing the attitudes, intentions, and interests of typical children toward their peers with differences. The following four studies assess the efficacy of The Realabilities comic book series and the Addy & Uno off-Broadway musical, which promote kindness, empathy, and a stop-bullying platform while teaching about disabilities and/or mental health disorders. The studies include 1) a qualitative study of 19 fourth grade students from an elementary school in Paramus, NJ, who viewed the Addy & Uno off-Broadway musical and participated in the full Realabilities educational comic book series intervention; 2) a qualitative study of 20 high school students with diverse disabilities, who participated in the full Realabilities comic book series intervention; 3) a quantitative study of 76 students from a high school in Long Island City, NY, who read the first mental health-based Realabilities comic book; and finally, 4) a quantitative study of 66 students from a high school in Long Island City, NY, who read the first and second mental-health based Realabilities comics. The researchers used a coding system to find principal themes in the qualitative data and used modified versions of the adjective checklist (ACL) and shared activities questionnaire (SAQ), along with a knowledge measure, to assess quantitative changes from pre to post-testing of the comic book series. Study findings help support the efficacy of an extended contact model and suggest that programs like these may serve as useful antidotes to counter negative attitudes of children and adolescents towards disabilities and mental health disorders, respectively.

A strong research base supports the rationale for community schools. We have selected a few exemplary studies that document the impact of various community-school components on the problems children confront. Children come to school with an array of issues that limit their capacity to learn. They do better in school if they have access at very early ages to health and mental health services and family supports. . . . Chicago’s Child-Parent Centers provided sustained and comprehensive education, family and health services, and included half-day preschool at ages 3 to 4 years, half- or full-day kindergarten, and school-age services in linked elementary schools at ages 6 to 9 years. Relative to a preschool comparison group, children who participated in the preschool intervention for one or two years had a higher rate of high-school completion (49.7% versus 38.5%; P = .01); more years of completed education (10.6 versus 10.2; P = .03); and lower rates of juvenile arrest (16.9% versus 25.1%; P = .003) [and] violent arrests (9.0% versus 15.3%; P = .002). . . . Both preschool and school-age participation were significantly associated with lower rates of grade retention and special education services. The effects of preschool participation on educational attainment were greater for boys than girls, especially in reducing school dropout rates (P = .03). . . . These findings are among the strongest evidence that established programs administered through public schools can promote children’s long-term success. Parents need help not only with parenting skills but also in many other aspects of their lives. Strong parent centers in schools can assist parents with many of the obstacles that stand in their way—for example, learning English as a Second Language (ESL), gaining employment, finding housing, and dealing with immigration problems. When parents are involved in their children’s school experience, everyone benefits. Henderson and Mapp’s review of 20 studies provides ample evidence that when families are engaged in their children’s education, the results are better. No matter what the income or background, students with involved parents earned higher grades and test scores, were more frequently promoted, attended school regularly, had improved social skills and behavior, and tended to graduate and go on for further education.

A hands-on coloring activity is developed that teaches participants basic mechanical concepts using visual, auditory and tactile learning styles. The fist version of the coloring activity book is geared toward 4th-6th grade students, and is easily expandable to high school and beyond by incorporating more detail and associating the colored-in drawings with relevant physics and mathematical equations. A facilitator leads the students through the coloring activity, one part at a time. For example, the frame of a bicycle is colored one tube at time, the students are directed to write in the name