Kindergarten: Is later better?

No
Mark R. Ginsberg:
At-risk kids could suffer

Some states and school districts have raised expectations for children's academic achievement in kindergarten, causing concern that a number of children are not ready for school at age five. Other states have changed the cut-off date, keeping children with late summer or fall birthdays from enrolling until they are close to six years old. In many school districts, children are barred from kindergarten if they do not demonstrate specific skills and abilities. Across the country, parents whose children are technically eligible for kindergarten delay school entry to give their children an academic advantage.

Obviously, many policy makers, teachers and parents believe that later entry into kindergarten will help children meet high expectations and succeed in school. While it is true that later entry may help some children, for many others, the delay in enrollment does not advance their potential for school success. Children whose family income, background or circumstances put them most at risk for school failure remain at risk when they enter kindergarten a year older than their peers.

Families with higher educational backgrounds and financial resources may be expected to provide children held out of kindergarten with rich learning environments at home and in high-quality preschools. However, the children most at risk for school failure are not likely to have the same learning experiences. When these children are held out of kindergarten, they simply miss a prime opportunity to develop their skills, competencies and interests in a supportive classroom environment.

Later is not better. It is better for schools to prepare for children with a broad range of abilities than to bar students from school entry based on readiness tests that are not reliable or appropriate for young children. It is better for states, school districts and teachers to set broad goals that all children can be expected to achieve than to concentrate on narrow expectations. It is better for teachers and parents to work together to identify specific learning goals and classroom activities that will be interesting, challenging and achievable for individual children than to limit a teacher's ability to tailor the curriculum.

It is better to be responsive to the unique family and cultural backgrounds of all students than to ignore the diversity of the student population. It is better to train teachers to meet children's special needs than to let children fail kindergarten. Finally, it is better to seek ways to provide more children with high-quality learning opportunities before they enter kindergarten than to continue to expect their early childhood education to begin at age five.

Mark R. Ginsberg is the executive director of the National Association for the Education of Young Children.

* * * * * * * * * * *

Yes
Judith Nygren:
Many need more time to mature

Each time the California Legislature considers passing a bill to delay kindergarten entrance for young children, I whip out my arsenal of beliefs and facts to bolster the argument favoring the delay.

As an administrator of preschool-age programs for the past 17 years, I frequently experience first hand how correct it is to give children more time to grow and mature physically, cognitively and emotionally before coping with the challenges and rigors of public school kindergarten.

Preschool-age children have a natural and sure need to absorb their knowledge and discover their world through play. This is the way they create their understanding of the principles that define their universe. This is the way they discover who they are and what they are capable of. Some children need to play uninterrupted for a longer time than others.

Kindergarten entrance at four years, nine months is certainly not a bad thing for all children. But I also believe--strongly--that it is not a good thing for some. How do we know which children need more time? Reason and good sense tell us that we want our children to be able to function comfortably in an academic environment. Therefore, what I look for in a four-year-old child is evidence of an interest in doing "table work"--drawing, cutting, memory games, puzzles; the ability to listen with focused attention to stories and to follow the discussion and respond in group time. This tells me that the child has developed the attention span and the fine motor skills and eye-hand coordination needed for success. Four-year-old boys, far more than girls, often show us that they have little interest in writing and in listening. They want to play--and play is absolutely the right thing for them to do. Readiness has nothing to do with intelligence. An extremely bright child can still need more time to attain physiological readiness.

The demands of kindergarten can create feelings of inadequacy and a loss of self-esteem for a child who is not developmentally ready. Children themselves are acutely aware of when they cannot meet a challenge comfortably. Kindergarten is such a crucial year for children. Why would we want to place a playful, still exploring child in a setting that asks him to meet rigorous expectations for attention and behavior when, in another year, he will be so much better able to meet that challenge?

I truly believe that we cannot go wrong by giving children more time to develop and mature. On the contrary, we can hurt a child by pushing him into an academic environment too soon.

American Federation of Teachers, AFL•CIO - 555 New Jersey Avenue, NW - Washington, DC 20001