Further Exploration of Division of Early Childhood (DEC)

What information does the website or the e-newsletter contain that adds to your understanding of how economists, neuroscientists, or politicians support the early childhood field?

The website showed examples of how the government had come to this professional organization to gain their feedback on important policy issues.  This shows that the government is looking to engage this group of professionals on a topic they have expertise in and will be the end user of the system they are creating.  The DEC held a conversations with the candidates and asked them pertinent questions relating to the plight of early childhood today and the candidates all seemed to support the idea of investing in early childhood.

What specific section(s) or information seemed particularly relevant to your current professional development?

            The Division for Early Childhood in their News & Notes tab listed a recent letter submitted in support of the new requirements the HHS is requiring states to impose on programs who receive child are funds through the CCDBG.  As I read through the comment they were proposing, it helped me gain a different perspective on the new requirements.  Since I work for the Lead Agency in our state consulting and coaching in childcare centers, homes, and preschools, these new regulations will directly impact my future work very soon.  I did find one statement in their comments that was new to me.  I did not know that child care programs could initiate a referral without parental consent. “Language should also be included in this section indicating that while discussing a referral with a child’s parents is certainly recommended, parental consent is not required by IDEA before a referral is made to an IDEA program. Further, as primary referral sources, child care programs should make referrals whenever it is suspected that the child may have a disability. (DEC, 2016, p. 4)” The website also had links to political platforms of the major candidates zeroing in on the content that affects their members.  I think it is critical for all Americans to make informed choices by understanding where each candidate stands on the issues important to us.

Which ideas/statements/resources, either on the website or in an e-newsletter, did you find controversial or made you think about an issue in new ways?

            A link to an article on the topic we have been reading about agreed with what our resources have been telling us, but was very forth right in taking all adults to task for our poor support of young children, “First, “readiness” needs to be defined as children living within ready families, going to ready schools, and participating within ready communities. Readiness for families means access to healthcare, options for housing, adequate nutrition, and quality childcare. Readiness for schools means involvement of families, inclusive classrooms, well-prepared and supported teachers, and manageable class sizes. Readiness for communities means economic stability and growth, safety, civic involvement, valuing of cultural differences, and coordinated social services. (Pretti-Frontczak, 2014, p. 53)” “School readiness” continues to be a hot topic, I think because it is so complex.  There is no one size fits all answer and that is what is so frustrating at times.  The author gave a new perspective in including the health and well being of the family as being a key contributor to school readiness.  She also commented on the idea of having engaged communities, which I know first hand can make a huge difference.

What other new insights about issues and trends in the early childhood field did you gain from exploring the website or e-newsletter?

            Another letter expressing feedback from DEC to the Department of Health and Human Services on the topic of Family Engagement, the comments recommended in the letter were on the mark and reflected what we have been learning in our coursework.  Again reading the remarks gave me a different perspective on a topic I am quite passionate about.  They were able to suggest wording that would more appropriate and respectful of families’ uniqueness.  “Supporting family capacity as informed, equal participants, leaders, etc., must be systematic and ongoing, and is not only comprised of peer-to-peer mentoring (albeit this is a very important practice that deserves significant support). The work of parent training centers and community parent resource centers are one resource to these ends, but a much greater investment is needed in this area if the outcomes of family engagement are to be broadly realized. (DEC, 2016, p.4)

DEC, 2016, DEC responds to the U.S. departments of health and human services and education's request

for comments for their policy statement on family engagement, p. 4, retrieved on March 25, 2016 from http://www.dec-sped.org/news

DEC, 2016, Comments on child care and development fund notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), p. 4,

retrieved March 25, 2016 from http://dec.membershipsoftware.org/files/FinalDECComments%20on%20CCDBG%20NPRM.pdf

Pretti-Frontczak, K., (2014), Stop trying to make kids “ready” for kindergarten, Young Exceptional

Children, March 2014, retrieved March 25, 2016 from http://yec.sagepub.com/content/17/1/51.short?rss=1&ssource=mfr

Poverty in Mexico and Nepal

            I chose to explore some of the information in Mexico and Nepal around poverty.

    When reading about the state of poverty with regards to children in Mexico, it seemed somewhat hopeful in that the government has instituted several social policy changes to try to decrease the number of children and families living in poverty.  Mexico is considered to be a medium to high country in its wealth and value, yet "regarding poverty measures based on monetary income, about 25% of Mexican children (10 million approximately) lived in conditions of food poverty in 2005; in other words, they lived in homes where income was insufficient to purchase the basic food basket. (UNICEF, 2008, p. 1)"  Children living in the rural areas and part of the indigenous population are living in much worse conditions (33%) compared to the general population (12%).  (UNICEF, 2008) The remote locations of the indigenous populations makes it difficult to get them to the different social services.
     There has been improvement and the government has it on its priority list of policy changes to markedly decrease the plight of these children.  Education through the middle school level is required and yet "40% of youth fifteen years old and above cannot read and write, 9.5% of the popula- tion aged 5 to 17 years does not attend school (2005 CONTEO survey), and close to 12.5% of the children and youth work, which corresponds to approxi- mately 3.6 million children (INEGI, 2008 – National Institute for Statistics and Geography). (UNICEF, 2008, p.2)"
   The report also mentioned that while a decreasing percentage of children are still  showing signs of stunting, a new public health nemesis "childhood obesity" is on the rise.
      The situation in Nepal is much worse.  "The biggest single deprivation that children face in Nepal is a lack of access to sanitation. It affects 55 per cent of Nepal’s children — around 6.4 million young people. Sanitation deprivation has a direct impact on children’s health. Diseases linked to inadequate supplies of safe water and bad sanitation are the leading cause of child morbidity in the country. (UNICEF, 2008, p. 86)" "The second biggest deprivation is lack of adequate shelter which affects a third of Nepal’s children.    Malnutrition rates in Nepal are a scandal. One in every two children under the age of five is considered to be stunted. This means around 850,000 children will probably face difficulties meeting their full intellectual potential. (UNICEF, 2010, p. 87)"
    Nepal, not having the wealth of Mexico, not only has high rates of poverty, but child protective services are almost non existent.  Startling statistics are emerging "only about a third of children have their births registered and nearly a third of children aged 5–14 years work as child labourers. More than 127,000 children aged 10–14 years are engaged as porters, domestic workers and some of the other worst forms of child labour.  There are also a growing number of street children. An estimated 5,000 to 7,000 Nepali girls and young women are trafficked to India every year. A large number of children are victims of violence and need support and justice. Child protection activities, however, are under-funded. (UNICEF, 2010, p.87)"  
     So while Mexico is seeing some success in combating the poverty rates, Nepal lacks the resources Mexico has and children are not only facing poverty, disease, malnutrition, but also hard labor, being sold to other countries, and abuse.  Reading about the plight of children in these other parts of the world makes me ache in my heart.  Something needs to be done.  As long as we are not faced with the true situation, it is easy for us to bury our heads in the sand and not use our social conscious to do something about it.  I have not decided yet what I am going to do, but I have to do something.  
 
   
 





Reference

UNICEF, 2008, Retrieved Mar. 19, 2016.  http://www.unicef.org/socialpolicy/files/Mexico_ChildPovertyandDisparitiesReport(1).pdf, 

UNICEF, 2010, Retrieved Mar. 19, 2016 http://www.unicef.org/socialpolicy/files/Nepal_Child_Poverty_Report.pdf