<html><div style='background-color:'><P><BR><BR></P>
<DIV>
<DIV class=RTE>
<P>Begin their day with enough breakfast and enough sleep.<BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #a0c6e5 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"><FONT style="FONT-SIZE: 11px; FONT-FAMILY: tahoma,sans-serif">
<HR color=#a0c6e5 SIZE=1>
<DIV></DIV>From: <I>"Sue Hovey" <suehovey@moscow.com></I><BR>To: <I>nickgier@adelphia.net, vision2020@moscow.com</I><BR>Subject: <I>Re: [Vision2020] Good Education Results Begin at Home</I><BR>Date: <I>Thu, 1 Mar 2007 13:08:20 -1000</I><BR>>Somewhere I have a journal article that supports the idea of raising test<BR>>scores; not by more remediation, not by longer school days, not by correct<BR>>placement of teachers, but by somehow ensuring all students began their<BR>>school day with a healthy breakfast. Seems like a winner to me. My high<BR>>school students were continually dieting or needing a latte hit. Not that<BR>>the other isn't important, too, but good nutrition really does need to be a<BR>>part of this equation.<BR>><BR>>Sue Hovey<BR>>----- Original Message
-----<BR>>From: <nickgier@adelphia.net><BR>>To: <vision2020@moscow.com><BR>>Sent: Thursday, March 01, 2007 6:55 AM<BR>>Subject: [Vision2020] Good Education Results Begin at Home<BR>><BR>><BR>> > Good Morning Visionaries:<BR>> ><BR>> > David Brooks is a conservative columnist and I agree with his assessment.<BR>> > In fact, I've believed this for a long time. Because of poor family<BR>> > environments, our children are destined to fail even in the best schools.<BR>> ><BR>> > The reason why the students at Logos do well is not because they have<BR>> > better teachers; rather, it is because they come from good families. The<BR>> > same goes for students who do well in public schools. Students with good<BR>> > virtues and work habits will be successful independent
learners.<BR>> ><BR>> > As Brooks himself implies, the European welfare states are again way ahead<BR>> > of us in the programs that we've found successful here. European schools<BR>> > are directed by competent national education ministries, their teachers<BR>> > are highly unionized, and their parents get strong social and medical<BR>> > support. Danish schools, for example, are required to have two resident<BR>> > dentists, which prevents tragedies of the sort that Bill London reported<BR>> > recently.<BR>> ><BR>> > In Denmark, where my daughter went to a private international school,<BR>> > private school teachers must be certified and their schools are fully<BR>> > subsidized by the state. Danish private school teachers are also 90<BR>> > percent unionized. So we
can reject the notion that somehow teacher<BR>> > unions are at fault.<BR>> ><BR>> > My position that strong families make for the best students is connected<BR>> > to my commitment to character education in the schools (as well as at<BR>> > home). And, Ted, I promise to answer your questions about virtue<BR>> > education very soon.<BR>> ><BR>> > March 1, 2007<BR>> > Op-Ed Columnist, The New York Times<BR>> > A Critique of Pure Reason<BR>> > By DAVID BROOKS<BR>> ><BR>> > All the presidential candidates this year will talk about education. The<BR>> > conventional ones will talk about improving the schools. The creative ones<BR>> > will talk about improving the lives of students.<BR>> ><BR>> > The conventional ones, though they don’t know it, are prisoners of the<BR>> >
dead husk of behaviorism. They will speak of education as if children were<BR>> > blank slates waiting to have ideas inputted into their brains with some<BR>> > efficient delivery mechanism.<BR>> ><BR>> > The creative ones will finally absorb the truth found in decades of<BR>> > research: the relationships children have outside school shape their<BR>> > performance inside the school.<BR>> ><BR>> > The conventional candidates will give the same old education reform<BR>> > speeches, trumpeting this or that bureaucratic reshuffle. The creative<BR>> > ones will give speeches like the one David Cameron, who is reviving the<BR>> > British Tory party, gave last month. They will talk, as Cameron did, about<BR>> > the mushy things, like love and attachment, and will say, as Cameron did,<BR>> > “Family relationships
matter more than anything else.”<BR>> ><BR>> > They will understand that schools filled with students who can’t control<BR>> > their impulses, who can’t focus their attention and who can’t regulate<BR>> > their emotions will not succeed, no matter how many reforms are made by<BR>> > governors, superintendents or presidents.<BR>> ><BR>> > These candidates will emphasize that education is a cumulative process<BR>> > that begins at the dawn of life and builds early in life as children learn<BR>> > how to learn. These candidates will point out that powerful social<BR>> > trends — the doubling of single-parent families over the past generation,<BR>> > the rise of divorce rates — mean that government has to rethink its role.<BR>> > They’ll note that if we want to have successful human capital policies,
we<BR>> > have to get over the definition of education as something that takes place<BR>> > in schools between the hours of 8 and 3, between the months of September<BR>> > and June, and between the ages of 5 and 18.<BR>> ><BR>> > As Bob Marvin of the University of Virginia points out, there is a<BR>> > mountain of evidence demonstrating that early childhood attachments shape<BR>> > lifelong learning competence.<BR>> ><BR>> > Children do have inborn temperaments and intelligence. Nevertheless,<BR>> > students make the most of their natural dispositions when they have a<BR>> > secure emotional base from which to explore, and even the brightest<BR>> > children stumble when there is chaos inside.<BR>> ><BR>> > Research over the past few decades impressively shows that children who<BR>> > emerge from
attentive, attuned parental relationships do better in school<BR>> > and beyond. They tend to choose friends wisely. They handle frustration<BR>> > better. They’re more resilient in the face of setbacks. They grow up to<BR>> > become more productive workers.<BR>> ><BR>> > On the other hand, as Martha Farah of the University of Pennsylvania has<BR>> > found, students who do not feel emotionally safe tend not to develop good<BR>> > memories (which is consistent with cortisol experiments in animals).<BR>> > Students from less stimulating environments have worse language skills.<BR>> ><BR>> > The question, of course, is, What can government do about any of this? The<BR>> > answer is that there are programs that do work to help young and stressed<BR>> > mothers establish healthier attachments. These programs usually
involve<BR>> > having nurses or mature women make a series of home visits to give young<BR>> > mothers the sort of cajoling and practical wisdom that in other times<BR>> > would have been delivered by grandmothers or elders.<BR>> ><BR>> > The Circle of Security program has measurably improved attachments and<BR>> > enhanced social skills. The Nurse-Family Partnerships program, founded by<BR>> > David Olds, has produced rigorously examined, impressive results. Children<BR>> > who have been in this program had 59 percent fewer arrests at age 15.<BR>> > (Presidential candidates are commanded to read Katherine Boo’s Feb. 6,<BR>> > 2006, New Yorker article to get a feel for how these programs work.)<BR>> ><BR>> > It’s important not to get carried away. “Enhancing Early Attachments,” a<BR>> > review of the
literature edited by Lisa Berlin and others, is filled with<BR>> > phrases like “marginal success” and “modest but significant benefits.” But<BR>> > these programs can be expanded.<BR>> ><BR>> > And one thing is clear: It’s crazy to have educational policies that, in<BR>> > effect, chop up children’s brains into the rational cortex, which the<BR>> > government ministers to in schools, and the emotional limbic system, which<BR>> > the government ignores. In nature there is no neat division. Emotional<BR>> > engagement is the essence of information processing and learning.<BR>> ><BR>> > In Britain, where both David Cameron and Gordon Brown have grappled with<BR>> > this reality, policy is catching up with the research. In the United<BR>> > States, we are forever behind. But that won’t last. This year,
some smart<BR>> > presidential candidate will help us catch up.<BR>> ><BR>> > =======================================================<BR>> > List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>> > http://www.fsr.net<BR>> > mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>> > =======================================================<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> > --<BR>> > No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.<BR>> > Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.5/707 - Release Date: 3/1/2007<BR>> > 2:43 PM<BR>> ><BR>>
><BR>><BR>>=======================================================<BR>> List services made available by First Step Internet,<BR>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>> http://www.fsr.net<BR>> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>>=======================================================<BR></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr> <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMAENUS/2755??PS=47575" target="_top">The average US Credit Score is 675. The cost to see yours: $0 by Experian.</a> </html>