All Day K

[EagleDad]

momto4 said:

eagledad said:

Actually, I find this offensive also. I would elect to send my child to All-day-K due to the increased exposure to structured learning and socialization at a very critical development age.

Arch, you send your kids to public school, and do not home school - does that mean you're shirking your parental duties and outsourcing parenting by not home-schooling?

My guess was that many of the people who take advantage of this will because they work and it makes for easier logistics. Personally, I think most kids at age 5 don't need more structure and academics but mostly unstructured time with family and/or friends.

I'm happy with the transition of child at home full-time to half day K to full day 1st grade, OR 2 mornings a week preschool at age 3, 3 mornings at age 4, 5 half-days of K at 5, all day 1st grade at 6.

The new plan let's us all choose what we want for our kindergarteners. It does not give the parents of kids in grades 1-5 any choice in what will happen in regard to permanent overcrowding in some buildings and looking for space for programs in every available nook and cranny (which I've been through too many times already and thought we were mostly beyond).

However, if enough people choose half day, maybe these problems won't come to pass.

And you are fully entitled to the opinion that all-day-K is not needed and not select it.

Just realize that because I don't happen to agree and I am in favor of All Day K, it does not make me a "Yummy Mommy" or slacker parent shirking my duties. It is possible for someone to want all-day-K because they think it is better for the development of the child and not as a scheduling convencience.

[blankcheck]

My point is that they have been hiring quite a few new people to the district now they want to hire over 60 new teachers and implement this program. Can you even imagine what that 09 referendum is going to be?

Bob- The buck has got to stop somewhere. I can see the headlines now - "PE Teachers may not be rehired "or "Approve this or your school won't open" or .......... We have heard it all before. See the problem lies in the fact that they spew out tiny bits of information in hopes that no one will remember what they have done in the past.

With the current situation of our district, I feel that not only is this irresponsible - fiscally but has no merrit on how long the program will be here,transportation costs ect. That does not even go on to mention that there are parents out there who wish their child would only be in school for half day and therefore are now in the position of either sending their child to another school that MAY offer 1/2 day or enroll them in full day in order to stay at their home school. They pushed this through so fast without giving the public a little time to digest the information. That is probably why Dr. D wanted to push all public comment to the end (yea I know that as each agenda item comes up there can be comment) At what point in the meeting was this item put on the agenda? Towards the end?

[Arch]

eagledad said:

momto4 said:

My guess was that many of the people who take advantage of this will because they work and it makes for easier logistics. Personally, I think most kids at age 5 don't need more structure and academics but mostly unstructured time with family and/or friends.

I'm happy with the transition of child at home full-time to half day K to full day 1st grade, OR 2 mornings a week preschool at age 3, 3 mornings at age 4, 5 half-days of K at 5, all day 1st grade at 6.

The new plan let's us all choose what we want for our kindergarteners. It does not give the parents of kids in grades 1-5 any choice in what will happen in regard to permanent overcrowding in some buildings and looking for space for programs in every available nook and cranny (which I've been through too many times already and thought we were mostly beyond).

However, if enough people choose half day, maybe these problems won't come to pass.

And you are fully entitled to the opinion that all-day-K is not needed and not select it.

Just realize that because I don't happen to agree and I am in favor of All Day K, it does not make me a "Yummy Mommy" or slacker parent shirking my duties. It is possible for someone to want all-day-K because they think it is better for the development of the child and not as a scheduling convencience.

That being the case, the comment didn't apply to you because you were not in the subgroup specified but somehow for whatever reason chose to include yourself in it, then feel insulted about it. If you don't go out of your way to set up a day full of 'things' that keeps your kids away from you when you could otherwise spend time with them so that you can have more 'me' time, you're automatically excluded anyway.

[bob]

I feel that not only is this irresponsible - fiscally

Let's see your numbers. I would like to see your proof on why this is fiscally irresponsible.

See the problem lies in the fact that they spew out tiny bits of information in hopes that no one will remember what they have done in the past.

There you go again dumbing down the voter.

That is probably why Dr. D wanted to push all public comment to the end (yea I know that as each agenda item comes up there can be comment) At what point in the meeting was this item put on the agenda? Towards the end?

So wait you don't even know when the item was brought up but you claim the Dr pushed the comments and item to the end of the meeting ? Even though you know people can comment on the agenda item before the SB can discuss it, you still insist on a conspiracy? Wow.

[momof3]

eagledad said:

And you are fully entitled to the opinion that all-day-K is not needed and not select it.

Just realize that because I don't happen to agree and I am in favor of All Day K, it does not make me a "Yummy Mommy" or slacker parent shirking my duties. It is possible for someone to want all-day-K because they think it is better for the development of the child and not as a scheduling convencience.

I really don't have an opinion whether ADK is the greatest thing since sliced bread or not.

I DO have the opinion that a badly implemented ADK program will hurt ALL kids in grades K-5. I don't understand what the emergency is with implementing this rush-rush-now. Glossing over space concerns in an FAQ page and brushing off the opinion of lots of parents and the president of the teacher's union is the bigger problem I see.

At least we felt like we were heard during the late start debacle. This is just more of the SHUT UP AND GO HOME we have been hearing since Steve Daeschner was hired.

[momto4]

blankcheck said:

They pushed this through so fast without giving the public a little time to digest the information. That is probably why Dr. D wanted to push all public comment to the end (yea I know that as each agenda item comes up there can be comment) At what point in the meeting was this item put on the agenda? Towards the end?

The public comment for every agenda item is PRIOR to the board and admin's discussion of that agenda item. The other parts of the meeting went quickly yesterday and we were on to all day K fairly soon, with the 5 speakers and then a LONG discussion of all day K and the effects thereof. Public comment on items that aren't on the agenda are at the end, and that would have been close to 9:30pm last night for a 7pm meeting.

Much of the public was likely unaware this was going on if they don't read the local papers since today's e-mail was the first communication from the district about it.

When this was addressed at the meeting last night, one of our illustrious SB members said something along the lines of - the public voted us in to make decisions, we need to make the decision, there would be no value in getting info to the public or comment back from them.

When Jeannette questioned what space was being compromised in order to find room in every elementary building to support all day K, she was accused of thinking the principals are idiots (since all said they can find space for this).

Dr. D's saying that this was so wonderful he didn't even understand why a discussion was necessary before implementing it makes me think of a dictatorship. Who cares what anyone else thinks or how others may be affected by this? There are some who think it's great, let's get on with it.

It was really not a pleasant evening, IMO.

[macy]

Yeah...

I too, sadly, think it's SHUT UP AND GO HOME! It seems so far that's the "Daeschner way".

Just wait til they announce the Metea location.

Hey... we got your money... oh, you think your opinion counts?? Guess what, NOT!

.... SHUT UP AND GO HOME! DEAL WITH IT!

I have a really bad feeling about what's coming.

[momto4]

momof3 said:

I DO have the opinion that a badly implemented ADK program will hurt ALL kids in grades K-5. I don't understand what the emergency is with implementing this rush-rush-now. Glossing over space concerns in an FAQ page and brushing off the opinion of lots of parents and the president of the teacher's union is the bigger problem I see.

At least we felt like we were heard during the late start debacle. This is just more of the SHUT UP AND GO HOME we have been hearing since Steve Daschner was hired.

I agree. It's going to be a long few years if this is how he is about everything. I was told that I should have been aware this was coming because it was on Dr. Daeschner's list of initiatives. Do we have access to this list? I don't remember seeing it.

[Arch]

Just google for his name..
There's plenty of information about his tenure on the web.

[blankcheck]

Bob-

I am looking at the agenda for the evening and the subject of Kg comes up on page3. Thanks for clarifying the meeting Mom4, I appreciate it.

My point of being fiscally irresponsible is the timing of this added expense.

Finally Bob- Your comments to me are becoming quite annoying. Dumbing down the voter? Please. You can do better than that. I'm sure some here will agree that when it comes to information the SD puts out to the public it is in little bits - even regarding this subject. How many people actually knew that much about it or for that matter that they were actually going to vote on it last night? Heck, how long were they debating Halloween or AC in the schools (that one still is a TBD) When was the last time you heard any news on where our district stands on the new HS?

You are a typical liberal Bob - don't like what you read , put the negative spin on the comment.

[bob]

blankcheck said:

Bob-

I am looking at the agenda for the evening and the subject of Kg comes up on page3. Thanks for clarifying the meeting Mom4, I appreciate it.

My point of being fiscally irresponsible is the timing of this added expense.

Finally Bob- Your comments to me are becoming quite annoying. Dumbing down the voter? Please. You can do better than that. I'm sure some here will agree that when it comes to information the SD puts out to the public it is in little bits - even regarding this subject. How many people actually knew that much about it or for that matter that they were actually going to vote on it last night? Heck, how long were they debating Halloween or AC in the schools (that one still is a TBD) When was the last time you heard any news on where our district stands on the new HS?

You are a typical liberal Bob - don't like what you read , put the negative spin on the comment.

Liberal? Don't think so. I am a firm believer in free markets in most situations. When I don't like what I read, I research the comment and find out the truth, especially on opinions posted on message boards.

Back to the subject.
Let's look at the agenda. The ADK was in the Action item section. When was the last time Action items were at the front of the meeting? So the Dr got control of the agenda, moved action items to the back for all SB meeting as soon as he got here so that when he wanted ADK he could force the item to the end of the meeting so people would have to wait to comment on it.

[blankcheck]

When was the last time an "Action" item got pushed through in 2 weeks?

[momof3]

blankcheck said:

When was the last time an "Action" item got pushed through in 2 weeks?

bc -

I have to agree with you on this. It sure has served as one giant distraction from the MVHS train wreck. No word on whether Steve is still in a ditch on that one.

[Arch]

This wasn't even thrown out as a "Let us look into this and find the best way to guage whether this is the right thing to do or not". It was simply a recommendation by the Admin to the board to DO IT and any criticism be damned.

[macy]

archwinsome said:

eagledad said:

And you are fully entitled to the opinion that all-day-K is not needed and not select it.

Just realize that because I don't happen to agree and I am in favor of All Day K, it does not make me a "Yummy Mommy" or slacker parent shirking my duties. It is possible for someone to want all-day-K because they think it is better for the development of the child and not as a scheduling convencience.

That being the case, the comment didn't apply to you because you were not in the subgroup specified but somehow for whatever reason chose to include yourself in it, then feel insulted about it. If you don't go out of your way to set up a day full of 'things' that keeps your kids away from you when you could otherwise spend time with them so that you can have more 'me' time, you're automatically excluded anyway.

Well... I guess I'm in that subgroup specified as I'm a female...

"Yummy mommies"- Ouch! Arch, although I see your point, I couldn't help but think it was a distasteful comment!

Not all of us fall into that category. In fact some of us are wrinkled up and prematurely aged because of all the worry we do for our kids and the fact we're racing off to work and trying to fit in time to volunteer in schools. There just might be a few other reasons that 204 mothers (and fathers) might be advocates for all day K.

On a personal level, I'm not sure how I feel about the concept. Just thought the yummy mommies comment was a little yuck.