Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:0935 The importance of excellent teachers is a key point. DH and I were discussing this last night. I do realize that ideal curriculum, if poorly implemented is problematic. Highly intelligent very verbal and caring teachers are decidedly what students, especially in the young years need. I would love to see a primary school that recruited and supported the best and brightest educators and also implemented best curriculum practices. If you know of such a school or have information about particularly outstanding teachers please share! Thanks, OP

11:03 again. If what you want is for people to suggest schools that have "recruited and supported the best and brightest educators" and also implemented what those schools consider to be "best curriculum practices," then you likely will be flooded with suggestions. The DC area has many fine schools, and many people here are not shy about touting their favorites. But again, I worry that a stumbling block may be the difference between your imposed definition of "best practices" and the schools' interpretation of that same goal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi 11:03, I am open to conversation about other curriculum and why professional educators have chosen the particular programs that they have for their schools. I would very much welcome that conversation! This is a forum where that could take place. When visiting a school in person, I have to restrain myself because while I am genuinely interested in dialogue on the subject, very specific questions can come across in a way that makes the administrator or teacher feel defensive. There is research that supports my curriculum preferences, but I always want to be open to learning and discussing and am aware that this is a complex issue.

I think it is all in how you approach the admin or teacher. At DC's school, we had those sorts of conversations before applying and I never found the educators to feel defensive - they seemed eager to have the conversation. Maybe I was lucky - I have an education background, so perhaps I could "talk the talk", but I'm not sure it was anything more than my expressed interest in understanding the school's curriculum, how it is implemented, and why the school made the choices it made. It has been a good fit for DC!

Anonymous wrote:Hi 11:03, I am open to conversation about other curriculum and why professional educators have chosen the particular programs that they have for their schools. I would very much welcome that conversation! This is a forum where that could take place. When visiting a school in person, I have to restrain myself because while I am genuinely interested in dialogue on the subject, very specific questions can come across in a way that makes the administrator or teacher feel defensive. There is research that supports my curriculum preferences, but I always want to be open to learning and discussing and am aware that this is a complex issue.

Looking for a warm nurturing lower school with small class sizes, phonics based reading approach (not whole word, not balanced literacy), Singapore Math, and 2 recess periods a day. Play based learning and time for open-ended creative and dramatic play in the early years and a fantastic music program are welcome too.

Anonymous wrote:0935 The importance of excellent teachers is a key point. DH and I were discussing this last night. I do realize that ideal curriculum, if poorly implemented is problematic. Highly intelligent very verbal and caring teachers are decidedly what students, especially in the young years need. I would love to see a primary school that recruited and supported the best and brightest educators and also implemented best curriculum practices. If you know of such a school or have information about particularly outstanding teachers please share! Thanks, OP

Anonymous wrote:0935 The importance of excellent teachers is a key point. DH and I were discussing this last night. I do realize that ideal curriculum, if poorly implemented is problematic. Highly intelligent very verbal and caring teachers are decidedly what students, especially in the young years need. I would love to see a primary school that recruited and supported the best and brightest educators and also implemented best curriculum practices. If you know of such a school or have information about particularly outstanding teachers please share! Thanks, OP

Anonymous wrote:Thanks for the replies. I wanted to respond to the question about why I would like a pure phonics introduction, not whole language, or a hybrid curriculum. The answer is that research supports what Joyce Watson refers to as synthetic phonics as the best practice for teaching my DS to read. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/02/20688/52449

Even though the information about best practices is known, surprisingly few teachers are taught these methods in their education programs. I highly suggest reading "The Good School" by Peg Tyre. http://www.amazon.com/The-Good-School-Parents-Education/dp/B0099SALV2

The developmental need for unstructured outdoor play time is also supported by research and discussed in Peg Tyre's book. As a mother I just knew about this one, but her book backed-up what I already knew.

I have been researching area schools (as best I can) for a while and have only found the type language and possibly the math that I am looking for at Primary Day.

There are other important facets of education, however, and the play based early experience is important as well. If there was a school that mingled Grace's warm environment, outdoor time, music, and play based early learning with Primary Day's phono visual curriculum and used Singapore Math, I think that the administrators wouldn't be able to handle the flood of applicants.

Appreciate the Beauvoir mom taking time to write such a detailed response. We don't have any sort of "hook" so I doubt that it is a possibility. Sounds like a lovely place.

In the end I realize that no school is perfection and that my job is to do due diligence and then let go.... and supplement!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Primary Day School. Not sure about number of recesses though.

Second that about Primary Day; plenty of playtime (2 recesses + PE) and very strong curriculum in reading and math. Not for every child though, it is expected that your child will be reading in their prek year.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but I find this astonishing. The expectation that children be able to read at this age flies in the face of most accepted thinking by education academics. I actually find it a little hard to believe that this is an expectation from any decent school (although I can certainly understand many parents pushing for it).

Your view (I am not the previous poster) is most certainly a Western/American one. In Asia, kids are all reading at some speed or another, by 4, and the better ones reading at least just words at about 3.5. Obviously this means that children of that age CAN do it, but it is this classic American/Western style of holding kids back that makes this sound so astonishing. Offtopic: Kids in Asia btw are also potty trained before 2. It is very much a western thing to keep a diaper on at that age (and beyond. Yuck).

"Learning to Read in Japan" (1989)
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/17512/ctrstreadtechrepv01989i00449_opt.pdf

Since hiragana is a syllabic language and, with only a few exceptions, each letter corresponds to exactly
one syllable, while English is a phonemic language and most letters have multiple pronunciations, it is
no surprise that Japanese children begin learning to read at an earlier age than do American children.
A 1969 survey of Japanese preschool children (Early Childhood Association of Japan, 1979)
determined that 69% of 4-year-old children and 91% of 5-year-olds could read their own name and
32% of 4-year-olds and 76% of 5-year-olds could write their own name in hiragana. Muraishi (1972),
testing over 2,000 4- and 5-year-old children, found that halfway through the kindergarten year 34% of
4-year-olds and 63% of 5-year-olds could read 60 or more of the 71 letters. In a retest, just before
entrance into first grade, 88% of the 5-year-olds could read 60 or more letters. In a smaller but more
recent study, Muto (1987), testing 60 3- to 6-year-olds, found that 20% of 3-year-olds could read some
words and there was a rapid increase in reading hiragana by age 4, with performance above 90% by age
5. Uchida (1987) found that Japanese 5-year-olds could read a 64-word poem with natural intonation
with only one or two errors. Tests of American kindergarten and first-grade children, by contrast,
indicate that while 5- and 6-year-olds can identify letters, few are able to read connected text before
receiving instruction in first grade (Durkin, 1966; Mason & Dunning, 1986).