ASCD Whole Child: FAQs about ASCD's Whole Child Initiative

The whole child initiative is about turning political rhetoric about "investing in the future of our children" into a reality. The rationale is straightforward. If students are to master world-class academics, they need to be physically and emotionally healthy. They need to be well fed and safe. They need to be intellectually challenged and have supportive adults who know them well and care about their success. And they need to be interested and engaged in what they're learning. It is common sense—a hungry student can't learn, a scared student can't think, and a student who is bored or intimidated by schoolwork will just slip through the cracks. The 175,000-member Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) is coordinating the initiative. (Top)

What are we asking schools to do? Parents? Communities? Policymakers?

We're calling on all parents, educators, policymakers, and communities to join forces to ensure our children become productive, engaged citizens. We are asking schools and communities to examine how well they address students' five basic needs—to be healthy, safe, engaged, supported, and academically challenged—and how they might do better. We are asking schools, parents, and communities to become partners in helping prepare students to learn and grow into fulfilled, productive adults. We are asking policymakers to support policies that address each of these critical areas. (Top)

Why is a whole child approach necessary?

First, educating the whole child is the right thing to do morally. We often hear talk about how children are our future, but we need to act on that premise if we are serious about nurturing the next generation of leaders and citizens. It also is the right thing to do economically. If our students are to be competitive on a global scale, in a digital world where the only constant is change, we must make sure they are engaged and prepared. The U.S. position as a world leader in education is neither a guarantee nor a right. We must do more to ensure our students get a 21st-century education. (Top)

What specifically is ASCD doing to help address the needs of the whole child?

Advocacy for the whole child is at the heart of our mission. We convened the Commission on the Whole Child to examine what it means to be a successful learner and published its report in March 2007. We developed a five-part Whole Child Compact that asks local, state, and national policymakers to ensure conditions that support comprehensive approaches to learning and engaging the whole child. We are reaching out to stakeholders—including educators, parents, communities, and policymakers—to provoke more meaningful discussion. We have developed this grassroots campaign Web site to build support for whole child education. We will be hosting a series of community conversations and forums in multiple states to allow local stakeholders to explore and discuss the best ways to support the whole child. (Top)

What role does accountability have in educating the whole child?

Accountability is essential. Part of what we're seeking is for communities, parents, and schools to stand up together and be accountable for the education of the children in their communities. If accountability is defined only in terms of reading and math test scores, our kids lose and we lose. The adults in the community also need to be accountable for ensuring that students are safe, healthy, engaged, and supported and that they have access to a broad curriculum that includes art, music, foreign languages, history, and social studies. (Top)

Isn't some of what you're talking
about the responsibility of
parents and families?

Families, schools, and communities must work together to ensure children are prepared to learn and receive the support they need. This is particularly important for students who do not have a strong support system at home. In these cases, we need to collectively provide it—for the sake of those children and our society. Clearly, schools cannot and should not be expected to take on these additional responsibilities by themselves. They should partner with community groups, faith-based groups, business volunteers, and government agencies to ensure students have the support they need. (Top)

Shouldn't schools ensure that kids learn the basics before taking on a more ambitious agenda like you're describing?

Educating the whole child is basic. A child simply cannot learn at his or her best if he or she is not healthy, safe, engaged, supported, and challenged. Most of us come to this whole child initiative having spent decades working to improve schools, and we understand that many schools can do better. We also know kids need support to help them be prepared to learn and encouragement to become engaged. It's hard to imagine that students who are ill, who are hungry, who are depressed or scared, or who lack caring adults in their lives will be able to read and write or tackle math problems or other subjects very well. (Top)

Is there any hard evidence that links improved student achievement to the whole child approach?

Research shows that students have better grades and attendance when their health needs are met. Increased physical education time has been shown to have favorable effects on academic achievement. Students' feelings of personal connection with their school community also are associated with higher levels of achievement.¹ (Top)

What will this cost,
and who will pay for it?

Educating the whole child is an investment in our future. Like any investment, costs up front are necessary to reap future benefits. Some of what needs to be done will require significant investment, such as providing health care to all children. But that will pay off considerably in healthy students who are better able to learn and healthy adults who require less from the health care system. Much of what we're talking about is not costly at all. Ensuring all students have caring, supportive adults who know them well or establishing partnerships with existing community groups, for example, may have little or no associated cost.

We ask, instead, what is the cost of maintaining the status quo? What is the cost of inaction?

The United States has a steady high school dropout rate of nearly 30 percent, and the rate is significantly higher among Latinos and African Americans.² Researchers estimate that dropouts are far more likely to become incarcerated,³ suffer poor health,⁴ and have shorter life spans than high school graduates.⁵

The Alliance for Excellent Education estimates that if the 1.2 million high school dropouts from the class of 2007 had earned their diplomas instead of dropping out, the U.S. economy would have seen an additional $329 billion in wages over these students' lifetimes. And that's only for one class. If this annual pattern is allowed to continue, more than 12 million students will drop out of school during the next decade at a cost to the nation of more than $3 trillion. (Top)

_{1. California Department of Education (2005), Getting Results: Developing Safe and Healthy Kids, Update 5: Student Health, Supportive Schools, and Academic Success, (www.cde.ca.gov/re/pn/fd/documents/getresultsupdate5.pdf).

2. Barton, P. (2005), One-Third of a Nation: Rising Dropout Rates and Declining Opportunities, Educational Testing Service; Thornburgh, N. (2006), "Dropout Nation," Time, 167(16), 3040.

3. Coalition for Juvenile Justice (2001), From the Prison Track to the College Track.

4. Muenning, P. (2005), Health Returns to Education Interventions, paper presented at Teachers College, Columbia University.

5. Alliance for Excellent Education (2003), Fact Sheet: The Impact of Education on Health and Well-Being.}

Whole ChildResolution Tool Kit

Frequently Asked Questions

Whole Child
Resolution Tool Kit