All Day K

[title1parent]

ADK is a go. Five people spoke prior to the board discussing the issue. All against ADK. Especially the class size issues. Jeannette fought a good fight with some legitimate concerns. Curt had some concerns as well regarding the 1/2 day option and wanting to leave those kids at their home schools instead of being bussed. That option will be changed to leaving kids at their home school as long as there is interest up to a certain number of students. If not enough to make a certain class size number, then the school will go to all day with all sections.

[momof3]

title1parent said:

ADK is a go. Five people spoke prior to the board discussing the issue. All against ADK. Especially the class size issues. Jeannette fought a good fight with some legitimate concerns. Curt had some concerns as well regarding the 1/2 day option and wanting to leave those kids at their home schools instead of being bussed. That option will be changed to leaving kids at their home school as long as there is interest up to a certain number of students. If not enough to make a certain class size number, then the school will go to all day with all sections.

Unbelieveable...please tell me that Daeschner at least stayed awake for the vote. Not one person I spoke to at my ES was in favor of it. And they all have kids entering K in the next few years.

eta - What was the vote - who was in favor and who against?

[gatormom]

D204 OKs all-day kindergarten
Half-day attendance will still be an option

Naperville Sun
November 27, 2007

By BRITT CARSON

All-day kindergarten is coming to Indian Prairie School District 204 in the fall of 2008.

After a lengthy discussion, the board approved implementing the program by a 6-1 vote. Board member Jeannette Clark cast the dissenting vote.

Superintendent Stephen Daeschner implemented the program in two previous states where he was superintendent and has seen significant results.

"The most positive thing we can do is to get kids started right and early," Daeschner said. "All 21 principals have said we have the space to run this program."

The proposal was approved with two amendments. The first was that the district reserves the right to restrict the program due to finance and space constraints.

The second was in regards to a half-day option being made available for parents. Board member Curt Bradshaw suggested if the number of students interested in half-day kindergarten warrants a full class, they should be able to attend at their home school.

However, if that number falls below a regular-size section, parents have the option to either send their child to another school for the half day or choose the full-day program .

Although Clark said she supports the program, especially for at-risk students, she expressed concerns about space.

She said Monday she still had reservations, especially considering more parents may choose to enroll their students in the full-day program who would have otherwise chosen a private full-day program.

"What I am suggesting is for us to take a deep breath and take a step back and look at what we have here," Clark said. "These buildings rely on the flexibility of space and when we put this program in, we are losing that flexibility."

Five parents spoke on the issue during the meeting. They were concerned about class sizes increasing and not enough information on the program.

The full-day program is already being piloted for struggling students at four elementary schools: Longwood, Georgetown, McCarty and Gombert. The principals from those schools have spoken highly of implementing the program for all students.

At the district's Nov. 14 meeting, all 21 elementary school principals spoke in favor of the program.

The district expects the program to cost $7 million, which will add 61 teachers. David Holm, assistant superintendent of business and finance, said the program will mean a $5 million increase in general state aid, thus offsetting the costs during a three-year span.

Several of the residents who spoke and Clark suggested boundary changes might be necessary to even out the student population at the elementary level. Other board members said boundary changes are inevitable with the third high school coming on board and that until they get a handle on actual kindergarten numbers, they should wait.

Kindergarten registration typically begins in February and March and at that time parents will have to check which option they want for their child. After the numbers are in, the district can decide how to best proceed with plans for the half day option at each school.

[title1parent]

momof3 said:

title1parent said:

ADK is a go. Five people spoke prior to the board discussing the issue. All against ADK. Especially the class size issues. Jeannette fought a good fight with some legitimate concerns. Curt had some concerns as well regarding the 1/2 day option and wanting to leave those kids at their home schools instead of being bussed. That option will be changed to leaving kids at their home school as long as there is interest up to a certain number of students. If not enough to make a certain class size number, then the school will go to all day with all sections.

Unbelieveable...please tell me that Daeschner at least stayed awake for the vote. Not one person I spoke to at my ES was in favor of it. And they all have kids entering K in the next few years.

eta - What was the vote - who was in favor and who against?

Dr. D commented that he didnt understand WHY there even needed to be a discussion on ADK. He, IMO, slapped JC's hand for even bringing up any debate about it.

[title1parent]

This issue doesn't affect me personally. My kids are older. I am for the at risk kids as I see the benefit to them. My concern is for classroom space/ large class sizes and its affect on art and music. When art on a cart was implemented before because there were space issues and additions were being built to ES schools to accomodate the enrollment increase, it wasn't acceptable but was accepted because it was considered temporary. I guess now it will be acceptable.

[Arch]

Mental Note... The first in a long line of declining quality in the schools, starting from the beginning grades and it will ripple up. Chalk it up to a priority shift.

Gotta get them union numbers up though, +61 is a HUGE win for them, but I would imagine the individual teachers themselves are not too happy with it.

...And the principals seem to now only care about 'test scores' from what I've observed... almost obsessed with it.

Quantity not Quality, churn and burn.

[blankcheck]

I have several points I would like to bring up.
1) Years ago, they were busing the Kg's from Patterson to Builta because there was not enough room to house them at their home school. I'm sure many of you remember that. So lets say for example you have 4 rooms which house Kg's @25 students/room. That's 100 students both in am & pm. (200 total). Now, they have enough space to house those same 200 students all day? And you all are telling me that enrollment is increasing? Sure it is increasing on the upper end (middle & high school) but NOT at the elementary school considering all of the principals state they have room - not a problem.
2) Where the heck are they coming up with an extra 6 million for this program? Quite frankly, they must have enough $$$ in their operating fund for this program therefore is there truly going to be a need for another referendum in 2009?
3) Three months of a "pilot" program for at risk students does not mean that the program will work for all students. This whole idea has been shoved through the system Why? With all the other issues facing this district which need to be resolved, how does this one get pushed through so quickly?
4) How about lunch for these kids? Everyone complained about how their middle school student was eating so early/late when are these students supposed to eat? Maybe they will in their classroom? Boy won't that be fun. Stuck in your classroom all day - Ye Ha! Sign me up!!!!

[momto4]

archwinsome said:

Mental Note... The first in a long line of declining quality in the schools, starting from the beginning grades and it will ripple up. Chalk it up to a priority shift.

Gotta get them union numbers up though, +61 is a HUGE win for them.
...And the principals seem to now only care about 'test scores' from what I've observed... almost obsessed with it.

Quantity not Quality, churn and burn.

The president of the teacher's union was the first speaker last night. She also has concerns about the implementation of all day K and is definitely not for it at all costs.

Another speaker was the music teacher at Builta.

I think improving test scores is what Dr. D is all about, yet they're all losing sight of how keeping kids involved in an excellent fine arts program actually HELPS with that (yes, this was mentioned and disregarded last night along with a lot of other concerns).

Alka has mentioned how when it comes to math, reading, art, and music that everyone understands that math and reading are more important.

There was some discussion about keeping the maximum classroom size under 30 for grades 3-5 and under 28 for K-2.

[Arch]

blank, we have a lot of overlap on common thoughts about this specific topic

[momto4]

blankcheck said:

I have several points I would like to bring up.
1) Years ago, they were busing the Kg's from Patterson to Builta because there was not enough room to house them at their home school. I'm sure many of you remember that. So lets say for example you have 4 rooms which house Kg's @25 students/room. That's 100 students both in am & pm. (200 total). Now, they have enough space to house those same 200 students all day? And you all are telling me that enrollment is increasing? Sure it is increasing on the upper end (middle & high school) but NOT at the elementary school considering all of the principals state they have room - not a problem.
2) Where the heck are they coming up with an extra 6 million for this program? Quite frankly, they must have enough $$$ in their operating fund for this program therefore is there truly going to be a need for another referendum in 2009?
3) Three months of a "pilot" program for at risk students does not mean that the program will work for all students. This whole idea has been shoved through the system Why? With all the other issues facing this district which need to be resolved, how does this one get pushed through so quickly?
4) How about lunch for these kids? Everyone complained about how their middle school student was eating so early/late when are these students supposed to eat? Maybe they will in their classroom? Boy won't that be fun. Stuck in your classroom all day - Ye Ha! Sign me up!!!!

1) I don't understand either how we have space problems year after year and suddenly we have room for more than double the number of kindergarten classes. Makes NO sense. Do we really currently have one more elementary building than we need? Or will we be asked to build another when the ripple effect of this program is felt by other programs?
2) They say the cost is ~$5M a year and after the first year the state will reimburse us ~$6.5-$7M per year so we will be ahead on the third year. I have a hard time believing it will really happen this way.
3) Dr. D thinks it's great, 6 board members think it's great and it's worth whatever else we sacrifice for it and it's so wonderful that there's no need to delay. More than half of the kids in the state and nation are in all day K now, is what we heard last night. When it was suggested that perhaps the public should be notified first that this is going on, the board felt there was no need to get parents involved in such a decision. One board member said that they were elected to make decisions like this so they should go ahead and decide. What good could possibly come from notifying the community and getting feedback?
4) In my elementary the principal said they will start the first lunch period 10 minutes earlier and end the last 10 minutes later.

[Arch]

Workload from a lunchroom supervisor's perspective @ Watts.

This school year compared to last year, they added 1 lunch period, due to the overlapping of the in versus out times, that equates out to 25% more work at $2.50 more gross pay.

Now, add in next year with all day K, and that equates to an additional 20% more kids compared to this year again, for $2.50 more gross pay.

Interesting to note that all have said if AllDayK goes through, they will not come back next year.

Hope the district has other plans if that same sentiment is elsewhere throughout the ESs.

[blankcheck]

When does the first lunch period begin? 11:00 maybe?
The cost of about 5 million for 61 new teachers IN ADDITION to 1 million in start up costs. State funding would begin a year after the program begins. So you will always be running a year behind.
What happens if the school population does increase? They all of a sudden quit the program they have started? They are always saying new kids are coming - new kids are coming - obviously not fast enough considering they now have room to house these students all day.

[bob]

I don't think it was a 3 month pilot program. I believe some schools have had it last year and/or the year before that.

[momto4]

archwinsome said:

Workload from a lunchroom supervisor's perspective @ Watts.

This school year compared to last year, they added 1 lunch period, due to the overlapping of the in versus out times, that equates out to 25% more work at $2.50 more gross pay.

Now, add in next year with all day K, and that equates to an additional 20% more kids compared to this year again, for $2.50 more gross pay.

Interesting to note that all have said if AllDayK goes through, they will not come back next year.

Hope the district has other plans if that same sentiment is elsewhere throughout the ESs.

Interesting.

I'm wondering if we will lose some art and music teachers if they are in a shared room or on a cart. Why would they be willing to operate that way permanently when they could work someplace else?

[bob]

2) They say the cost is ~$5M a year and after the first year the state will reimburse us ~$6.5-$7M per year so we will be ahead on the third year. I have a hard time believing it will really happen this way.

They get more money because more student are enrolled. The K students will be counted as 1 instead of 1/2.