Article Review
Students Name
Institutional Affiliation
SPECIAL EDUCATION
The article talks about whether students with disabilities get the help they need and how funds by the government should be channeled to help. This can be done either through the school or given directly to the student’s parents. This will help them in perpetuating their education without any difficulties.
Bill Goodling argues that the funds given by the government to schools are not enough, and more should do to keep promises made by the federal government to the students. This helps students receive a quality education as the school will receive enough funds for it. Ron Paul argues that the funding should be directly given to the students’ parents as they are the ones who know more about the child and the kind of education that suits their child, this also ensures that the funding reaches the child and not enriching those who pretend to be advocating for more funds.
I agree that more funds from the government are required to fund the particular need students to fully explore their potential as they are the future of the nation, and this also reduces the financial burden parents of such students may face. Parents from low-income families can not afford an excellent particular need school, so getting funds from the government would greatly ease that burden from then. “Under the system set up by [IDEA], parents and schools often become adversaries, and important decisions regarding a child’s future are made via litigation” (Koch, 2019). Giving funds to schools instead of the parents is not a good idea as the funds don’t fully help students because some are pocketed by people pretending to help get the funds to learners, so its better for parents to get the funds directly as they are the ones who know what best suits their children need.
EVALUATING HEADSTART
The article talks about changing the governance of head start, whether the state to take more control over it from the congress or for other adjustments to be made like teacher qualification but not change its governance.
Ron Haskins argues that the government should be done by the state and states that have done this to coordinate and show others how they have done it, and a clear plan should be presented before implementation and also teacher qualifications to be raised. Daniell Ewen argues that changes in head start do not lie in changing governance, but in improving teacher qualification, states to collaborate as research shows that head start works it only needs few improvements which do not include management.
I agree that evaluating head start should be done as times change and new things come up. This is because evaluations bring the system up to date and therefore making it able to mitigate challenges that may come up in the future. There should be involvement of every person in these dialogues of changes, and states should exchange ideas on what worked and those that did not work them for the benefit of children in head start.
“The best solution for every child in Head Start is not a restructuring of governance but rather a stronger commitment of resources and improvements in quality” (Clemmit,2019). The policies on head start were given by congress are good ones. The problem lies in the implementation, which is at the school level. Everyone should be involved in these implementations, including the parents of the children, to ensure full benefits to the child.
HEADSTART
The article talks of a program for children from low-income families getting prepared for school in their early years through simple classroom instructions and some basic health routines. It talks of whether it should be expanded or remain as it is.
Marian Wright Edelman argues that the head start program works well for the benefit of low-income families as their children are up to date in immunization and also classroom work. They also bond well with parents as they are actively involved. Parents also benefit as they are employed in these head start centers, so the provision of family need is not a burden to them anymore. John Hood argues that what is being said about the head start is different from what takes place there; he says that the funds should have been directly given to the low-income family for them to decide on the kind of school thhttps://essaygroom.com/us-government-on-childhood-poverty/eir children should attend.
Yes, the head start should be expanded as it benefits a lot of the low-income families, both children and the parents. Children get to be educated and also immunized as those of the rich, and even their parents get to be involved in their kids’ life’s as it’s a whole round program, and also, the parents get employment, which enables them to take care of other family needs.
“This nation can ensure that children come to school ready to learn by fully investing in a proven early childhood program: Head Start. We know it works. Head Start offers a boost to disadvantaged children” (Glazer 2019) children learn basics about early education and are healthy and ready to learn as provided in head start so they are prepared for school despite being disadvantaged.
References
Clemmitt, M. (2019). Evaluating head start. CQ Researcher, 15, 685-708. Retrieved from http://library.cqpress.com/
Glazer, S. (2019). Head start. CQ Researcher, 3, 289-312. Retrieved from https:// library.cqpress.com/
Koch, K. (2019). Do Students with Disabilities Get the Help They Need?. Issues in K-12 Education: Selections From CQ Researcher, 49.