All Day K

[wvhsparent]

Everyone brought up some very good points, which IMHO is going to add another hurdle to the 09 Ref they will have to overcome. This "magic money" pool always seems to appear when there is a perceived need for some things and it vanishes when another maybe more important need arises.
Ya know it's gonna be empty come 09 ref time and they (SB/SD) is going to be crying poor and predicting dire consequences if it fails.
I suppose this is a function/feature of government in all forms, as I have seen/experienced it at the County level many times, and we read about it on the State level too.
Makes you wonder.........I, unfortunately, am not going to be an automatic yes come 09 ref time.

[momto4]

bob said:

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.

Yep, I understand that. I just wonder if our cost numbers are accurate and if the state funding level will remain the same. I don't really care, it apparently either makes a little money or it doesn't, it won't be a large dollar cost to us either way. It is the other potential costs that concern me.

[casey]

I am really disappointed with the SB's decision to support all day K. I think it was Dr. D the whole way - ramming it down everyone's throat. Kudos to JC for sticking to her guns and not supporting it. Not very often do I agree with JC but I do this time.

Like everyone else, I worry about the severe overcrowding at some of the ES, as well as art and music on a cart, lunchroom concerns, financial issues, etc. IMO this was a very rash and quick decision on the SB's part.

Not that it really matters but I wonder what the impact will be on the private preschools that offer all day Kg.? I would think it'd be a crushing blow to them.

We're now stuck with the consequences of this decision and it could rear its ugly during the 09 Referendum. SAD.

[Arch]

Rare when so many of us agree, and worth noting the issues when we do...

(typo fix)

[momof3]

momto4 said:

bob said:

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

Yep, I understand that. I just wonder if our cost numbers are accurate and if the state funding level will remain the same. I don't really care, it apparently either makes a little money or it doesn't, it won't be a large dollar cost to us either way. It is the other potential costs that concern me.

Those numbers are based on Dave Holm's estimates which included an extra 300 kindergartners enrolled if we provided all day K.

Looking at the numbers, the K to 1 jump has not been close to 300, more like 200 and some change.

Each additional kid was estimated to net the district $6K in state funding. I'm thinking his numbers are already overestimated by somewhere in the neighborhood of $600,000 based on that alone.

[momof3]

One more thought - is this fight completely over?

Between active parents and the teachers union, don't we have some leverage? Not sure what, but we could get some petitions going. Any ideas are welcome!!

[momof3]

title1parent said:

momof3 said:

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.

M2 looked like he wanted to reach over and strangle her 2 weeks ago for bringing up valid concerns.

[bob]

There is a big loophole to exploit. Organize the parents and get the incoming K class to choose half day over full day.

[Arch]

bob said:

There is a big loophole to exploit. Organize the parents and get the incoming K class to choose half day over full day.

Bingo...

Unfortunately that too is an uphill battle as it seems more and more the yummy mummies want to outsource parenting as much as possible so as to not interfere with yoga, coffee, shopping and pilates classes.

[momof3]

title1parent said:

momof3 said:

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.

Before Mr. Daeschner started his job I was concerned about the circumstances of his employment availability. I guess they call it "a non-renewed contract" instead of "getting fired" nowadays. Anyway, I am beginning to see why he lost his Kentucky job. It was certainly not voluntary - who wants to yank their kids out of high school and start over at age 64?
I am beginning to see now why it happened. Even if you are doing what you think is best, if you do it in a way that pi$$es off the parents and the teachers, that will spell trouble for you down the road.

[momof3]

archwinsome said:

bob said:

There is a big loophole to exploit. Organize the parents and get the incoming K class to choose half day over full day.

Bingo...

Unfortunately that too is an uphill battle as it seems more and more the yummy mummies want to outsource parenting as much as possible so as to not interfere with yoga, coffee, shopping and pilates classes.

I was thinking about doing that at my es. If no one chooses all day K they won't have to take away classrooms to accomidate it. Throw in some teachers to speak against it and convince the incoming parents that it is bad for their schools.

arch - Mommy peer pressure is a powerful thing, too. If you convince the parents of the incoming kids that EVERYONE ELSE is choosing half-day they won't want their kids to be the only oddballs in all day. Perhaps they would have to be bussed to all day if we could get this to work.

[momto4]

bob said:

There is a big loophole to exploit. Organize the parents and get the incoming K class to choose half day over full day.

This is really the only thing I think can be done at this point. It is the board's belief that a large number of parents will take advantage of this next year, with increasing numbers each year due to people hearing how great it is (or wanting to make sure their kids don't fall behind the others?) and that eventually there will be so few who want half day that it will only be offered at a few schools (with transport provided by the district from other schools' attendance areas) and that at that point people will decide if all their neighbors are doing it, it must be good and they'll want it, too!

Many will be rejoicing at the opportunity for the full day childcare and/or the increased academics for 5yo's. Would love for someone to organize a large group of incoming kindergarteners who get to enjoy being little kids for one more year, but it won't be me leading it.

[gatordog]

casey said:

....
I don't feel as if parents will have a choice as to whether to participate in the all day program. Let's face it, if almost the full majority of families in your neighborhood opt for the all day program, what choice do you have? Sure, you don't have to send your child but most would probably feel that would be putting a child at a huge disadvantage if everyone else is doing it. Legally, a child doesn't need to be enrolled in school until age 6 and we don't see too many participating in that option. I'm somewhat sad for the future of our kindergartners as well as the few parents that I've discussed this with.

Casey has well described my personal situation here. I have a future K student, year after next, and this is exactly our feelings on the matter. We have a year to watch and see how this program developes before making our decision. We were perfectly happy with the half day program. Worked great for our two oldest.

I know from some two-house working parents I have spoken with, I think this may be wildly popular. I pointed out some of the other broader costs to them.

As many pointed out, the at-risk behind students fully well need this full day support. But for mainstream students, this seems like taxpayer funded daycare, chasing test scores, and teacher job creation program. One question: with lunch, recess, rest time, end of day fatigue....how much more engaged K classroom time will there be? It will NOT be doubled.

I also am deeply concerned with the Dr Daeschners attitude, as witnessed by title1parent.

But it is now official....K is the new 1st grade.

[bob]

What I don't understand is why Vickers voted for it? She is against increasing cost like hiring more teachers. Her vote doesn't make sense with her political belief system.

[gumby]

momof3 said:

Before Mr. Daeschner started his job I was concerned about the circumstances of his employment availability. I guess they call it "a non-renewed contract" instead of "getting fired" nowadays. Anyway, I am beginning to see why he lost his Kentucky job. It was certainly not voluntary - who wants to yank their kids out of high school and start over at age 64?
I am beginning to see now why it happened. Even if you are doing what you think is best, if you do it in a way that pi$$es off the parents and the teachers, that will spell trouble for you down the road.

We have a neighbor whose daughter is a teacher in the 204 school system. She was saying that Daeschner is rude and condescending and believes that school staff should unquestioningly follow along the lines of his opinions.