This shaky stand causes the whole early childhood education system to clutch at straws, offering whatever services deemed best by the current clientele. Such shifts in ideas do not create ground for cultivating excellence.
In regard to this situation, they put the government at fault. Early childhood education in their view currently lacks vision, permanence, and infrastructure because the governments support for early childhood education fluctuates in regard to the national crisis. Policies that conform to changes in politics, economic and social flux led to lack of long term coordination in early education (572, col.1).
Given, the government and all policy makers try to create a level ground for all American citizens in terms of education and other opportunities. However, the difference in the economic status of individuals creates segregation in education opportunities and quality (Kagan & Reid, 2009). The sad part of this situation is that economic disparities are here to stay. Nonetheless, the government’s jurisdiction does not extend to dictating what that these disparities in early childhood education be stricken as the author tries to suggest. She goes as far as stating that this situation defies American values of equal opportunities (573, col.1)! America is a capitalist nation, in the event that the public sector for early education improves; the private sector will improve ten folds. What then will the author have to say to that?
The authors give reasonable and practical advice to the policy makers in regard to defining what early childhood education entails. She stresses on a developmental oriented programme. The programme will entail physical cognitive, social, and emotional development aside from care. Despite the authors appeal for government intervention, she holds firm the idea of respecting personal ideologies. It is clear that the authors are avid