Compromised childhood - School system reinforces early-childhood crisis
Published: Sunday | July 12, 2009
Dr Marigold Thorburn, Contributor
While I agree with many of Dr Ralph Thompson's 'Get to the Root!' recommendations in last Sunday's publication, I do not think that the early-childhood education system is the root of our problems. It fails to remediate an already compromised situation.
In January 2007, the prestigious British journal the Lancet carried a series of articles (some of which were based on Jamaican research) about the loss of developmental potential in 200 million preschool children in the developing world - a loss that the Third World cannot afford. Four major causes were cited for this loss: stunting, iodine deficiency, anaemia and lack of sufficient cognitive stimulation in the preschool period.
No jobs for yobs
In Jamaica, the first three of those are of much less importance, but, unfortunately, the fourth one, lack of stimulation, is probably one of the major causes of school failure in our children, which has begun even before children start basic school. The school system just reinforces an already compromised childhood. The final result, as The Gleaner boldly put it last year in a front-page headline, 'No Jobs for Yobs'.
I have done research on children entering basic school for the first time in 2006 in which we asked parents a series of questions about their child's behaviour and developmental milestones. This was done in six clusters of nine basic schools in different parts of Jamaica. We found that the parents reported behaviour problems in 47 per cent of the children.
Developmental screening using a second test showed that 21 per cent were behind in their development, especially in language. However, the figures varied a lot from one area to another, with much higher frequencies in certain clusters.
Summer schools
We tried to rectify this situation by providing various types of intervention, including teacher training and parent training. But our most successful efforts were the provision of summer schools for the children who failed the tests. While the parent training had an impact, less than two-thirds of the parents attended! Those most in need of help did not show up.
There were many conclusions from this project, but I think the most important ones were:
1. The problems are already there when children enter school
2. The school programme does nothing to remediate the problems and they move into primary school unprepared to deal with the challenges they face there and where, again, there are no remediating programmes.
After the second set of summer schools last year, the teachers who participated made the following comments:
The summer schools differed from normal school as follows:
These speak to the main needs of basic schools. The only addition I would mention is the great need for teachers to understand and manage children's behaviour appropriately. These children are coming from an understimulating, negative environ-ment and often enter another similar situation when they go to school. In our summer schools, no punishment was allowed and the teachers made report cards that showed the improvements in the children's social skills.
Encouraging and reinforcing those social skills generated a positive, reinforcing atmosphere and the children benefited significantly.
This brings me back to the recommendations made in the Lancet articles cited at the beginning. It was stated that the reason governments do not invest (sufficiently) in the early childhood period include:
Governments respond to short-term effects and find difficulty in justifying the long-term investment in human development
Early intervention
Finally, 'Why governments should invest in interventions for early child development':
In all this, I have not mentioned behaviour problems. Like delays in development, these problems do not disappear unless intervention is provided, and punishment is not the answer.
