Friday, September 28, 2018

Sharing Web Resources (Week 4)


  • What specific section(s) or information seemed particularly relevant to your current professional development?
    • The sections on policies and programs are most relevant to my professional development. The policy priorities are child poverty, child health, early childhood, education, child welfare, youth justice, and gun violence. The programs listed are the CDF Freedom Schools, Beat the Odds, and Faith-Based programs. I think these resources provide a wealth of information that will aid professional development.
  • 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?
    • Gun violence was one policy I wasn't expecting to see. It's definitely a controversial topic. CDF works to promote an environment where children can grow up safely. They offer solutions such as implementing universal background checks, prohibiting firearm access for high-risk groups, enacting child access prevention laws, requiring child safety features for every gun, banning military-style weapons, and funding gun violence prevention research. 
  • What information does the website or the e-newsletter contain that adds to your understanding of how economists, neuroscientists, or politicians support positive social change through the early childhood field?
    • CDF offers information on combating child poverty, stating much of the same research we covered in class this week. Resources need to be used to ensure children's basic needs are met, the playing field is leveled for disadvantaged students, and increase employment and wages for working families. These investments will in turn yield more for our economy in the future.
  • What other new insights about issues and trends in the early childhood field did you gain from exploring the website or e-newsletter?
    • A recent CDF press release addressed the continued child poverty crisis across the nation. I learned the following:
      • More than 1 in 5 children were poor in 16 states and the District of Columbia in 2017.
      • More than 10 percent of children were extremely poor* in 7 states and the District of Columbia.
      • More than 1 in 5 children under 6 were poor in 20 states and the District of Columbia.
      • More than 1 in 3 Black children were poor in 22 states and the District of Columbia.
      • More than 1 in 3 American Indian/Alaska Native children were poor in 15 states.
      • More than 1 in 4 Hispanic children were poor in 28 states.
      • The youngest children remain the poorest. In all but three states, poverty rates were higher among children under 6 than among children 6-17. In seven states and the District of Columbia, 1 in 4 children under 6 lived in poverty. No state had less than 10 percent of young children living in poverty.
*Poverty is defined as an annual income below $25,283 for an average family of four, or less than $2,107 a month, $486 a week, or $69 a day. Extreme poverty is defined as less than half of the annual poverty level, or less than $12,642 for a family of four.

6 comments:

  1. The statistics were very eye opening that you posted from your chosen website. Thank you for sharing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very interesting write up. I like that CDF is fighting against increased gun violence and demanding strict gun laws. It baffles me how easily guns can be purchased in some states in the US and I believe that the policy makers need to sit up and do something about it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I feel policies and procedures are very important to any program. I find myself looking at other policies to bring my center up to speed with today's trends and issues. I feel gun violence is a great topic to discuss because there is so much going on in today's society. From school shootings, to home invasion, and random shootings.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Jamie,
    Thanks for the interesting and informative post. While all of the information you provided is insight, I find one of the programs most striking. You mentioned Beating the Odds. My initial thoughts were proven ---Schools that perform higher than similar schools are considered “Beating the Odds.” It is unfortunate that some are born with odds already against them. Thanks for sharing.

    Schneeka

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jamie,
    Thanks for the interesting and informative post. While all of the information you provided is insight, I find one of the programs most striking. You mentioned Beating the Odds. My initial thoughts were proven ---Schools that perform higher than similar schools are considered “Beating the Odds.” It is unfortunate that some are born with odds already against them. Thanks for sharing.

    Schneeka

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is very interesting because the educational environment should be catered to the needs of poor children.

    ReplyDelete