we4
Junior
Girls Can't Do What?
Posts: 245
|
Post by we4 on Nov 13, 2007 8:53:18 GMT -6
When I first heard of this possibility I was very excited. You all have very valid points on the pros and cons of all day K.
Let me start by saying, it was our choice to have 4 kids, our choice to send them to 3 and 4 year old pre-school and our choice to send them to public school for K. But, after going through 6 years and into the 7th of split days, I am ready to be done. My 3 year old son is not going to 3 yr old pre-school because my daughter is in K. Am I saying it is the school's fault? Nope, our choice. If you have ever had to do morning pre-school and afternoon K, it can be difficult. Even both morning or both afternoon can be difficult.
I understand the adding more teachers, need more space in each school, art, music, etc in the classroom in stead of out, getting the new hs started, maybe even a/c in schools needs to addressed. But from an almost 10 year stay-at-home mom, all day K would be a very welcome change.
edit: It may sound like I don't like being at home with my children, but I do and wouldn't change a thing, except K. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Nov 13, 2007 8:54:20 GMT -6
More kids competeing for teacher's time = someone is going to get the short end of the stick. IMO, it is the kids in the middle of the pack who suffer the most in this situation. I agree with you completely. This is the striation layer that people assume need 'no help' when the truth is, all kids need help to be well rounded, but in different ways. |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Nov 13, 2007 9:10:13 GMT -6
More kids competeing for teacher's time = someone is going to get the short end of the stick. IMO, it is the kids in the middle of the pack who suffer the most in this situation. While I understand the pro's and con's of this - and there is surely upside, what I caution against is shortchanging other areas to accomplish this. If there is room for this - and they will hire the appropriate teachers - go for it. My concern concerns come from a room / space standpoint ( much like JC's concerns) - not the all day K program itself. I am confident they will se tup an excellent program. When my oldest was at May Watts - it was before they added the addition. By 2nd grade they went from all classes in rooms to " art on a cart " , "music wherever they could meet ", and computers all over the LMC. We knew it was temporary but I can tell you it did have an affect on education regardless of what was said last night - yes I am sure the lessons were taught - but the absorbtion by the students was nowhere near as good. In this case they put 2 music sessions together in varous rooms as available - and there were 55 - 60 kids in that room. The kids went from very close attention to sometimes teachers not knowing thir names for quite a period of time. Kids had to take turns with instruments because there weren't enough ( OK - these were tamborines and triangles and the like) - - and I can tell you my kid turned off. Now she had private piano lessons until she was 13 - so she got her music - but it wasn't there any more - and it had been one of the more enjoyable classes. Art of a cart - taught on a stage when some kids are eating their lunch behind a partion there ( and we know how quiet that is ) - is not good - and today the computer classes as more important than ever. I witnessed the principals being 100% for the program yesterday - and again I truly understand the upside, and the earlier intervention for those kids who especially need it. I ask them however to also make sure the plans are in place to ensure the proper learning environment for all the other kids in these types of classes at the older grades too. I certainly would never try and tell them how to do their jobs - they are professionals and the audience included some I have the utmost respect for - but be careful with this shiny new toy ( that I am sure they will get next meeting) - so that when you roll it out - you don't roll it over some other things. Just my view as a parent - that has lived through the crowding before also. |
|
|
|
Post by casey on Nov 13, 2007 9:15:14 GMT -6
Arch and BC, I agree. Interesting this year for us, one teacher is designated for the all day early intervention program. She has all 16 in one class. Two years ago, I think we had 12 kindergarteners, and they were split between 2 Kgdn teachers in which the needy kids were mixed in with the other K students. I will watch and see how that plays out this year. Don't know if that will make a difference or not. I certainly can appreciate the fact that there has been tremendous success with this pilot program. Imagine the advantages of a Kg. class of 12-16 kids in a class. Of course there will be HUGE success for these students and I'm glad. Early intervention is the key. However, it's hard to look at the Kg. numbers at Fry and feel that these kids are getting what they need. Kg. classes at Fry have 28 kids on the average. Maybe before moving into full day Kg. they should take a look on a school-by-school basis to determine what works best. Move 140 Kg. kids to all day at Fry? Where are they going to fit? We already have 2 AM classes of 28 kids and 3 PM classes with 28+ kids. The school is busting at the seams with almost 900 kids. The few future-Kg. parents that I've spoken to about the all day program do NOT really support the idea and prefer the half day program. IMO, the Admin is pushing the SB to move into all-day Kg. without thoroughly exploring the financial as well as space issues. Do we really have this extra money around to fund such a program? |
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Nov 13, 2007 9:17:58 GMT -6
All-day kindergarten nears reality is D204Naperville Sun November 13, 2007 By BRITT CARSON Staff writer Do you want all-day kindergarten in Indian Prairie School District 204? The future of a new program hung in the balance Monday as administrators presented the school board with a proposal to implement all-day kindergarten in all 21 elementary schools this fall. The board ultimately tabled the proposal until its next meeting, Nov. 26, as three board members were absent Monday: Chris Vickers, John Stephens and Bruce Glawe. "This is the most exciting thing we have looked at as a district that has the greatest impact academically on our kids," said Kathy Birkett, deputy superintendent. A half-day option will still be offered at some locations based on need, Birkett said. The district launched an all-day kindergarten early intervention pilot program this month at four elementary schools, Gombert, Georgetown, Longwood and McCarty. Kathy Duncan, assistant superintendent of instructional services, said based on a combination of research and the initial results of the students in the pilot program, many administrators wanted to implement the program districtwide. "We have seen significant gains in the children that are participating in the current program," Duncan said. Jenny Giambalvo, former principal at Young Elementary School, will lead the program. The program will require hiring 61 more kindergarten teachers and about $1 million in start-up costs. Martha Baumann, director of elementary education, said she has talked with each building principal and said there is room to house the additional students and staff. David Holm, assistant superintendent of business and finance, said the new program costs will be offset by up to a $7 million boost in general state aid since the average daily kindergarten attendance numbers will double this fall. The program likely will cost a total of about $6 million the first year and $5 million annually. Wow, note the difference between the Sun and Herald - none of JC's concerns about space covered here, including Longwood who already is piloting and has Art, Music and Computers all on a cart and will add more students to a crowded school. Now the principal said another grade going down att. wise so they will remain status quo - but is that the best scenario ? Is there a more creative way to cover both in the right setting? |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Nov 13, 2007 9:24:52 GMT -6
I have to mark this one down... So many on the same page on this issue...  |
|
|
|
Post by title1parent on Nov 13, 2007 9:25:04 GMT -6
Maybe before moving into full day Kg. they should take a look on a school-by-school basis to determine what works best. I agree with you. The children in the pilot program are extreme cases. And in our case, we have 3 sections of 1/2 day K + the 1 all day. Mind you our enrollment is 528. BTW- I am not a fan of Art on a Cart either. As We4 stated, there are valid points on either side. I just know, I would hate to see the "early intervention" K for extreme needs be removed. |
|
|
|
Post by scarbroughknight on Nov 13, 2007 9:35:17 GMT -6
I find it distrubing that on an important topic as this three members of the board chose not to attend. It only cements my opinion of the ineptness of the current board. The people of #204 deserve better.
|
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Nov 13, 2007 9:54:14 GMT -6
The district launched an all-day kindergarten early intervention pilot program this month at four elementary schools, Gombert, Georgetown, Longwood and McCarty. What I have seen these last 2 of 3 years of this pilot program is amazing results with these children with developmental delays. I would hate to see that all day program go away. This year we have 16 children in the program. The students from 2 years ago are thriving as 2nd graders this year. I hate to keep harping on space, but Longwood is suffering with overcrowding due to limited implementation of all day K. I'm all for all day K but what are the tradeoffs? Dr. D says our principals have studied it and can fit it in our buildings. Where are our 1st - 5th graders going to get shoved long term to accomidate this program? Or how big will class sizes get? And if the principals have looked at it and say "we can fit it in" what about after buildout? Sure Peterson has room but what about all of the other new construction going on in the district? That entire area north of the mall isn't going to come with no kids. |
|
|
|
Post by wvhsparent on Nov 13, 2007 9:54:19 GMT -6
What usually happens in an increase teacher student ratio is that the average kid suffers. Project Arrow kids lose nothing and the kids needing real help won't either. The kid in the middle of the pack will have to compete with more kids for the teacher's time. They are the ones that will suffer in a ratio increase. I personally like half day K. My friends are chomping at the bit for all day K. That's exactly wat happened to my son. He was on the low end of average, and could have used some extra help, but because he was doing ok in the schools mind, they had others that needed more help. I really think that affected him from that point forward. When we asked for more help, he might get it for a day or so, and show great improvement, but then they would stop helping and he would revert back. They always said he not doing "Bad enough" to warrant extra help. |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Nov 13, 2007 9:57:38 GMT -6
More kids competeing for teacher's time = someone is going to get the short end of the stick. IMO, it is the kids in the middle of the pack who suffer the most in this situation. BINGO! No more room for breaking up big classes - we are stuck. Too bad if your kid is stuck in a "blip" class that is bigger and needs an extra classroom - no room. This is a PERMANENT choice to limit space in our ES. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Nov 13, 2007 10:01:36 GMT -6
From the articles , it looks like the costs of all day K will be covered by the state.
|
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Nov 13, 2007 10:05:39 GMT -6
From the articles , it looks like the costs of all day K will be covered by the state. Although it was hard to grasp all with out the handout - the pitch yesterday basically said this will be a program that runs in the black with regards to the bottom line for the district - when all is done and said. |
|
|
|
Post by momof3 on Nov 13, 2007 10:06:07 GMT -6
From the articles , it looks like the costs of all day K will be covered by the state. I buy that but I do not buy that a thorough analysis has been done on the tradeoffs they are asking for. It's not all upside and I don't want the downsides glossed over. I would rather have my kids have a great 1st - 5th experience than a great K experience followed by an overcrowded 1st - 5th. I just keep going back to the numbers used to determine the boundaries for the new HS - after build out. Did Dr. D ask the principals to use those numbers to determine where the kids are gonna fit or did he ask them to use TODAY's numbers? eta - I keep trying to understand the urgency on this issue. Does the district need a "win" to distract folks from the MVHS train wreck? Did they think this would be an easy win and D204 residents would be dancing in the streets? eta2 - With the trust level I have of the administration, I absolutely will not believe any "promises" made regarding class size. I know my kids will have larger class sizes if this is railroaded through. Really, nothing they could say would convince me otherwise. |
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Nov 13, 2007 10:15:57 GMT -6
So, in a state where other districts need the money far more than we do, we pull up to the trough to get even more money from the state which makes it unavailable for other districts that don't even have the basics covered.
It's not that we can't afford it here, it's that we can make the rest of the state pay for it too.
From simply an ethics point of view, I have a HUGE problem with that.
|
|
