Home › Blogs › No Issues Left Behind
« October 2005 | Main | December 2005 »
November 30, 2005
The Laptop Laboratory
In Fullerton, Kids K-12 are required to participate in a year long study that requires them to have Laptops in class, and to take home. Parents are required to provide the laptops, either through a purchase, or through a laptop loaner program.
The laptop loaner program requires financial disclosures, to show need.
The California Constitution requires that public education be free. But everything from musical instruments and athletic gear are provided by parents, and Education Foundations and the PTA raise money to fill the gaps where districts aren't providing the requisite funding.
Could you afford a laptop for your kid to take to school?
What if you have several kids?
Are the schools monitoring what electronic content is being brought to school?
Are these computers connected to district networks during the day? How are those networks defended?
Is it fair for these computers to be required? And, what about financial and language barriers that kep some kids away from the computer's benefits.
This is a discussion worty of debate. Read the article and post a comment.
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 08:19 PM
November 29, 2005
Golden State "gate"
If you think that California is the golden state, or can be again, read this troubling study by the National Center for Public Policy and higher education. A highlight:
We track the percentage of low-income eighth-graders in each state who score at or above "proficient" on the national assessment exam in math. Among the top states, an average 23% of low-income students are this well-prepared for higher education. California is only at 9%.
Read the whole article here
http://www.latimes.com/news/education/la-oe-callan26nov26,1,7114847.story?coll=la-news-learning
California's going to get a shocking education
By Patrick M. Callan
PATRICK M. CALLAN is president of the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education based in San Jose. Website: www.highereducation.org.
November 26, 2005
IF THERE'S STILL anyone who thinks that education levels and income in California will continue their steady rise, they may be in for a shock. If current education policies continue unchanged, the California workforce of 2020 is going to be less educated than today's, according to a recent report released by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, and the state's per-capita income will drop more substantially than elsewhere in the country.
The transformation will occur as baby boomers, the most highly educated generation in U.S. history, retire. Across the country they will be replaced by a growing population of young workers from the nation's least-educated minority groups. The share of the workforce that is college educated will shrink accordingly, losing the U.S. much of its advantage in the global marketplace.
The problem is national, but in California it will be particularly severe. Consider some of our report's findings: The Latino population, by far the least educated of any of the state's large minority groups, is expanding dramatically. By 2020, Latinos will make up as large a share of the state's working-age population (people 25 to 64 years old) as whites — about 38% Latino and 39% white. This is a seismic shift; in 1990, only 22% of working-age adults were Latino and 61% were white. And the gap in education between Latinos and whites in California will turn the demographic shift into a statewide economic decline.
Just look at the numbers. Among California's current working-age population, 46% of whites have a college degree, while 12% of Latinos do, according to census data. At the other end of the education spectrum, more than half of working-age Latinos do not have even a high school diploma, compared to 8% of whites.
Yet the state is making only limited progress with its current students. Over the last decade, California has managed to raise the percentage of 18- to 24-year-olds who have high school diplomas, and the percentage of those enrolled in college. But of those who do enroll in college or post-high school certificate programs, the percentage of those actually completing the programs is very low compared to other states. And on every one of these measures, the gaps between young Latinos, on the one hand, and young whites, blacks and Asian Americans remain large.
To some extent, the problem may be one of inadequate preparation in California's schools. Among the measures we follow at the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, one is particularly telling. We track the percentage of low-income eighth-graders in each state who score at or above "proficient" on the national assessment exam in math. Among the top states, an average 23% of low-income students are this well-prepared for higher education. California is only at 9%.
But preparation is not the whole story. The expense of higher education can also be prohibitive. California provides more low-cost college options than most states and has recently increased its investment in need-based financial aid. But for the poorest 40% of California families, the cost each year of sending a child to community college still amounts to more than a third of the average family income. The cost of sending a child to a public four-year college, even after figuring in financial aid, amounts to nearly half of such a family's income.
If California does nothing more to raise the education level of its residents, and particularly of its largest, fastest-growing and least-educated minority group, it can expect to lose economic ground against the world and other states. For the sake of all, California's continuing educational disparities must be confronted and removed.
Posted by Tim Keaney at 09:35 PM
What was that about waste in districts?
Almost 7,000 school district employees will have to show up at district headquarters this week if they want to get paid. Dateline - Oakland, CA
Posted by Tim Keaney at 09:25 PM
Can You Help?
The Chatsworth High School marching band, #1 in the City of Los Angeles is competing in a band competition this weekend in the Antelope Valley.
BUT THEY DON'T HAVE A BUS THAT WILL TAKE THEM THERE!
The typical costs to LAUSD for the use of a bus would be around $350.00 Another bus for the Drill Team would be an additional $350.00. They need busses (or at least one) to get to the Antelope Valley and show off their hard work!
Do you know of anyone that can help these kids get a bus for their competition?
Can you help by donating money to help them rent the bus if it's not donated?
Please contact me if you have any way of helping these Chatsworth High kids. As their former Drum Major (MANY years ago) I hope we can pull together and help them.
My e-mail address is tim@timkeaney.org
Thank you in advance.
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 12:31 PM
One Lawsuit Left Behind..
Tough week for the NEA - From the New York Times...
---editorial---
A Victory for Education
Published: November 29, 2005
A federal judge in Michigan took exactly the right action last week when he dismissed a transparent attempt by the National Education Association, the nation's largest teachers' union, to sabotage the No Child Left Behind education act. The ruling validates Congress's right to require the states to administer tests and improve students' performance in exchange for federal education aid. Unfortunately, it will not put an end to the ongoing campaign to undermine the law, which seeks to hold teachers and administrators more closely accountable for how their schools perform.
Another lawsuit, by Connecticut, is still pending. Moreover, the N.E.A. is likely to appeal the decision in its own suit in an effort to continue its campaign of vilification against the law. The No Child Left Behind program is the first in American history to require that states improve students' performance, and shrink the achievement gap between rich and poor students, in exchange for the billions of dollars they receive in federal aid.
The teachers' union tipped its hand when it argued in the lawsuit that its members were being stigmatized when the schools where they worked were found to be performing poorly under federal law. Why does it put so much emphasis on the teachers? What about the children whose lives are cast into permanent shadow when they have to attend dismal, nonperforming schools?
The N.E.A. and the local school districts that joined the suit claimed that the federal government had illegally required the states and localities to spend their own money on testing. While it seems clear that test development is one of the better-financed parts of the law, improving school systems nationwide will certainly require more time, effort and money than the country has yet invested. But that should not be an excuse for doing nothing.
---end NY Times Editorial---
Comments?
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 09:29 AM
Darn Those Activist Judges
NOT!
Here is an editorial from the Wall Street Journal, in its entirety:
Texas School Lesson
November 29, 2005; Page A18
The Texas Supreme Court did the expected last week and struck down the statewide property tax for funding public schools. But what was surprising and welcome was the Court's unanimous ruling that the Texas school system, which spends nearly $10,000 per student, satisfies the funding "adequacy" requirements of the state constitution. Most remarkable of all was the court's declaration that "more money does not guarantee better schools or more educated students."
Think about that one for a second. To our knowledge, this is the first time anywhere in the country that the judiciary has flatly rejected the core doctrine of the education establishment that more dollars equal better classroom performance. And it is potentially very good news for students, especially those from the poorest neighborhoods, because it shifts the policy emphasis from money to achievement. Better send the paramedics to check for heart failure at National Education Association headquarters.
Even more encouraging, the court endorsed more choices for parents and the state's 4.3 million school kids. It said flatly: "Public education could benefit from more competition." The Texas Public Policy Foundation, which provided much of the academic research for the court, looked at the Edgewood school district in San Antonio, where donors started a privately financed voucher program. The results indicate that not only have the kids with the vouchers benefited, but so have kids in the public schools that are now forced to compete for students.
We hope that courts and school boards across the country study the Texas decision -- including its comments on school financing: "The Constitution does not require a particular solution," Judge Nathan Hecht wrote for the majority. "We leave such matters to the discretion of the Legislature." In other words, it's not the proper role of the judiciary to intervene in the operation or financing of the public schools.
That kind of judicial thinking tends to be the exception these days. Over the past two decades, courts in more than 30 states have intervened in education policy and ordered billions of dollars spent on schools in the name of boosting student performance and ensuring equitable financing. The result has been an avalanche of new spending on inner-city and rural schools, but, alas, not much measurable achievement by the kids who were supposed to be helped.
In one of the most notorious cases, in Kansas City, Missouri in the 1980s, a judge issued an edict requiring a $1 billion tax hike to help the failing inner-city schools. This raised expenditures to about $14,000 per student, or double the national average, but test scores continued to decline. Even the judge later admitted that he had blundered.
The hope now is that, as Republican Governor Rick Perry and the state legislature search for a new school financing mechanism next year, they will accept the court's invitation to open up the school system to a wide range of options including charters, vouchers, scholarships and rewards for quality, such as teacher pay for performance. If so, the Lone Star State, once the home of some of the worst public schools in the country, could become the national model for educational excellence.
---end editorial---
I welcome your comments.
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 09:05 AM
November 28, 2005
Does the Consitution draw the line?
Where would you draw the line in a discussion on the first amendment? Do you have the right to say ANYTHING? Do you have the right to use tax dollars to say it?
Here are two interesting articles where "the first amendment" is being used as both a crutch, and an excuse - what are your thoughts?
Tennessee High School Newspaper siezed by officials
Teacher gives "liberal quiz"
Talk to me!
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 03:17 PM
Forget that Special Election - Here's some Cash
From Dan Walters this morning in the Sac Bee
A must read - especially this part:
---
Although the state is still facing deficits for the 2006-07 fiscal year, the administration will almost certainly propose a big boost in school spending, thus providing spoils to the major victor in this year's political firefight, the California Teachers Association. If the CTA has conditioned voters to believe that schools are being starved, Schwarzenegger implies, he'll bow to that imperative, regardless of its effect on the state's precarious fiscal situation.
---
Comments?
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 02:54 PM
Do more for C4
The SVUSD is looking for participants for the Bond Oversight Committee to replace those who are bailing out. If you'd like to sign up, follow this link. This is the link you need for the PDF application (and too funny - the exact spelling of oversight from the District Web Site):
Application for Proposition C4 Citizens' Oversighte Committee
Your tax dollars at work...
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 08:34 AM
November 17, 2005
A vicious cycle of ineptitude..
Read it and weep from The Teacher's Commission and CNN:
Posted by Tim Keaney at 12:47 PM
November 16, 2005
There they go AGAIN!
The dark, evil corporate overlords who only care about their own profits and not the greater good are at it again. Click here for the story!
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 07:48 AM
November 15, 2005
Everything is at stake
Have you heard of The Teaching Commission?
Probably not - but if you think teaching is valuable, and that teachers should be treated and paid like the professionals they are, then it's time you learned more about the mission of The Teaching Commission.
Here, in PDF format is their report: "Teaching at Risk - a Call to Action"
Please read it, and post your comments.
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 10:33 PM
From Education Week...
For your reading & Commentary pleasure:
Published: November 16, 2005
Foes Seek Cooperation After Calif. Showdown
Teachers help lead defeat of measures backed by governor.
By Linda Jacobson
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger needs to look for ways to join with his political opponents to improve California’s failing schools, observers in the state say, instead of pushing proposals like the ones state voters firmly rejected in a special election last week.
The defeat Nov. 8 of all three Schwarzenegger-backed ballot measures of direct concern to schools and teachers gave the state teachers’ union and Democrats a decisive victory over the Republican actor-turned-politician, who faces re-election next year.
“He’s really going to have to reform education at the local level,” said Lisa Snell, the director of education and child welfare at the Reason Foundation, a think tank in Los Angeles that espouses free-market-based policies. “I think he’s going to have to work within districts rather than trying to pass statewide, one-size-fits-all reforms.”
Gov. Schwarzenegger did not make any comments the day after the election, but a spokesman, Rob Stutzman, said in a briefing with reporters that the results showed that the voters did not want a special election and that they want “the problems of this state to be fixed here in Sacramento.”
“There’s important work to be done and important cooperation to be forged,” he said, adding that the governor plans to work “across the aisle” to address issues such as the state budget and teacher quality.
The ideas embraced by the governor met with a string of rebuffs:
• With the defeat of Proposition 74, new teachers will continue to serve a two-year probationary period. Proposition 74 would have extended the period to five years and made it easier to dismiss ineffective teachers. Fifty-five percent of the voters cast ballots against the proposal.
National organizations focused on teaching were watching the measure.
Josh Greenman, the director of strategy and communications at the Teaching Commission, a privately organized group based in New York City that advocates a broad range of teaching policy, called the vote “an unfortunate outcome.”
But he said more still could be done to improve teacher quality, including rewarding high-performing teachers and creating incentives to attract teachers to low-performing schools.
• An overwhelming 62 percent of voters also turned down Proposition 76, Gov. Schwarzenegger’s plan to place new limits on state spending and to make Proposition 98—the minimum-school-funding guarantee that voters passed in 1988—more subject to annual decisions by the governor and state lawmakers.
“I do believe that with the defeat of Proposition 76, the people of California have once again sent a clear message that they want to invest in public education,” said state schools Superintendent Jack O’Connell, who had joined the California Teachers Association in campaigning against the measure.
In defeating Proposition 76, Californians echoed the protective attitude toward education spending that voters in Colorado showed on Nov. 1, when that state voted to suspend its strict Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Colorado’s TABOR law has limited annual spending growth and kept the state from fully funding an education finance formula. ("Colorado Voters Suspend Revenue Limits", Nov. 9, 2005.)
• Finally, on a measure that would have affected thousands of public employees—including public school teachers—53.5 percent of voters rejected Proposition 75, which would have stopped such employees’ labor unions from using dues or fees for political purposes without getting annual consent from individual members.
The CTA, the California affiliate of the National Education Association, and other unions argued that the proposal would hinder their efforts to fight ballot initiatives that they viewed as damaging to public education.
Teacher Mikki Cichocki, left, California Teachers Association President Barbara Kerr, center, and California Professional Firefighters President Lou Paulson celebrate election tallies on Nov. 8.
—Rich Pedroncelli/AP“Let’s hope the governor has finally heard the real will of the people and understands that his agenda was wrong for California,” CTA President Barbara Kerr said in a statement. “It’s time for the governor to keep his promises to our students by giving our schools the resources they need so all children can succeed.”
The three ballot measures last week that would have affected education had set up a bitter—and expensive—battle between the governor and the California Teachers Association. ("Calif. Teachers Rally Against Ballot Measures", Oct. 26, 2005.)
Meanwhile in New York state, voters last week rejected a proposed amendment to the state constitution that would have altered the budget process by requiring a contingency budget, based on the prior year’s budget, to take effect if the governor didn’t win approval for his spending plan by May 1 of each year. Supporters of the measure said it would lead to budgets that were on time—something that has happened only once in the past 21 years—and greater fiscal accountability.
Gov. George E. Pataki, a Republican, opposed the amendment, as did 53 percent of the voters. Mr. Pataki said the proposal was dangerous and would interfere with a governor’s responsibility to run the government.
Chance for Common Ground
The fate of Gov. Schwarzenegger’s favored measures in California’s special off-year election was widely viewed as a test of the governor’s 2006 re-election chances. Mr. Schwarzenegger, who came to office two years ago with the recall of Democratic Gov. Gray Davis, has seen his approval ratings slide this year, even though he has said he would like to run again.
In stumping for the initiatives, Gov. Schwarzenegger had contended they were needed to reform state government and bring spending under control.
After his defeats last week, Ms. Snell of the Reason Foundation said that shifting his attention to helping schools in “financial and academic distress” would be an agenda on which Gov. Schwarzenegger could find more common ground with his opponents.
As the governor prepares for his State of the State Address in January, she said, he might also be preparing an early-childhood-education initiative in the hope of pre-empting Rob Reiner, the actor-director who has become a leading advocate of universal preschool and is considered a potential Democratic candidate for governor next year.
Mr. Reiner spearheaded a successful early-childhood-services ballot initiative in 1998 and hopes to qualify another measure for the June 2006 ballot that would raise taxes on wealthy Californians to pay for preschool for 4-year-olds across the state, regardless of their parents’ income levels.
Ms. Snell called Mr. Schwarzenegger’s chances of being elected to a second term “weak to fair to middling.”
In addition to the failure of the three education-related measures, the governor’s plan to transfer the job of legislative redistricting from state legislators to a panel of judges was turned down by nearly 60 percent of the voters. Californians defeated all eight measures on the statewide ballot, including one that would have required parents to be notified at least 48 hours before an abortion is performed on a minor. More than 52 percent of the voters rejected the proposition.
Posted by Tim Keaney at 10:27 PM
No More for these C4 Folks
Rumours are swirling around the SVUSD, and the Bond Oversight committee that:
Much of the first round of money is gone - Sayonara to Phases 4 & 5
District leadership is still in denial over the $1.5 transfer of bond funds (it happened, get over it)
Much of the oversight committee will be leaving at the end of their terms at the end of December
An e-mail is circulating around parent groups and teacher staff rooms around town from members of the Oversight Committee to Dr. Scroggin. I am trying to get a copy, but feel free to post it if you have it - or the jist of it.
Given that the district won't come clean on the use of our $145 million, this may have to be the web site of record.
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 10:17 PM
Playing Taps for California
Dan Walters' article in the Sac Bee & Star this morning is worthy of your time.
Where does California go from here? After the election, the Governor met with the State's legislative leaders... for a total of 38 minutes.
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 08:11 AM
November 14, 2005
Welcome to Yikesville...
Well, at least there is one consolation to the failure of the governor's reform agenda. The average California 8th grader can't read the newspaper articles about the election. The results from the CST (California Standards Test) are startling.
Here is what the CST measures:
California uses the California Standards Test (CST) to test students' skills in English language arts and math in grades 2 through 11; science in grade 5; and social studies in grades 8, 10 and 11. High school students either took a grade level test or a subject-specific test in math and science, depending on the course in which they were enrolled.
The CST is a standards based test, which means it measures how well students are mastering specific skills defined for each grade by the state of California.
The goal is for all students to score at or above the state standard.
so...... How are Ventura County Schools doing for students in the 8th Grade?
Math
State Average 26%
Simi 40%
Conejo 30%
Ventura 34%
This is the % of kids meeting or exceeding the State Standards...
Language Arts
State Average 39%
Simi 48%
Conejo 67%
Ventura 48%
So what does this say about the status quo? What does this say about California training our youth to compete in the global, information economy?
I found one district in California that has increased it's % by over 80% in 2 years. Can you guess the district?
We have to admit that we have a problem, and that's it time to get busy with reform.
I welcome your comments and reform suggestions.
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 07:44 PM
November 11, 2005
Intelligent Design
If there was "Intelligent Design" in the creation of our universe, you have to admit that Pat Robertson sat out some of the classes on Public Relations. Say what you will about Intelligent Design and whether it belongs in the classroom, but Mr. Robinson is WAY out of line with his comments about retribution over voting.
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 09:20 AM
November 10, 2005
No NCLB, or we're out of here!
Say what you want about NCLB, and many of us say a lot - But for a program that involves such a small % of most district budgets, is it worth NOT teaching over? Ask the parents & teachers in Sandy, Oregon where teachers have been out of the classroom for 3 weeks over NCLB.
Posted by Tim Keaney at 01:40 PM
Fascinating
On the heels of Tuesday's special election, I think Antonio Villaraigosa has gotten "reform religion". Read this article
Posted by Tim Keaney at 01:32 PM
November 09, 2005
Whither California
Now that the election is over, and the results are in. What do you have to say about them? The citizenry has spoken loud and clear.
The governor, and his "Arnold's Advisors" clearly did not make the case for reform, and even the reforms that did make the case for were questionable. Personally, while there will be those who said the election was misguided, or a waste; I, for one, think the Governor actually under-reached and didn't put up a reform agenda worthy of anyone's time or passion.
The state is tumbling out of control with a $6 billion annual structural deficit. If the Governor had simply focused on fixing this problem, do you think he would have been successful?
The state's election districts are rigged in incumbent's favor. If he had solely focused on that, would he have been successful?
If he had started campaigning more than two weeks ago, would he have been successful?
If he and his advisors had truly had a clue what the problems are and how to fix them, would he have been successful?
Say what you will, but this is a repudiation not just of the governor, but of his governing style. The recall election two years ago was about California's hope and progress. Now, the status quo is the champion of the day.
Let it be said (at least by me) that leaders to the heavy lifting (no pun intended) and are able to reach across the aisle to compromise, make policy and then get out of the way of the people. Somehow, someway, the people of California, and the leaders they elect have forgotten that.
My rantings for the morning....
Posted by Tim Keaney at 07:58 AM
November 08, 2005
Interesting - so far
Propositions Yes Votes Pct. No Votes Pct.
73 Y Minor's Pregnancy 1,350,110 50.2 1,340,255 49.8 Map
74 N Teacher Tenure 1,327,279 48.9 1,385,880 51.1 Map
75 Y Public Union Dues 1,417,451 52.4 1,290,955 47.6 Map
76 N Spending/Funding 1,121,166 41.4 1,584,429 58.6 Map
77 N Redistricting 1,197,145 44.6 1,484,102 55.4 Map
78 N Rx Drug Discounts 1,125,687 42.1 1,542,311 57.9 Map
79 N Rx Drug Rebates 1,030,946 38.9 1,618,637 61.1 Map
80 N Electric Regulation 916,579 35.2 1,684,408 64.8 Map
Posted by Tim Keaney at 09:54 PM
7:40 - T-Minus 40 minutes
I saw my first "yes on 74, 75, 76, 77" sign tonight. Wow...
According to the most recent Field Poll, conducted in the last week of October, propositions 76 and 77 were both likely to lose by wide margins. The other two propositions, 74 and 75, were trailing by smaller margins, although both have lost ground in recent weeks, according to the same poll.
We'll be debating the year of reform all night...
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 07:19 PM
7:20 - T-Minus 40 minutes
I saw my first "yes on 74, 75, 76, 77" sign tonight. Wow...
According to the most recent Field Poll, conducted in the last week of October, propositions 76 and 77 were both likely to lose by wide margins. The other two propositions, 74 and 75, were trailing by smaller margins, although both have lost ground in recent weeks, according to the same poll.
We'll be debating the year of reform all night...
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 07:19 PM
November 07, 2005
Who wins in Teacher vs. Teacher?
Posted by Tim Keaney at 08:27 PM
Alliance for the Status Quo?
Do you agree with the assertions fron the Los Angeles Daily News?
http://www.betterca.com/prop74
Posted by Tim Keaney at 08:18 PM
In case you get confused
I know a lot of teachers and every single one of them can think for themselves. But that isn't what their union seems to think:. Check out this entry from October.
Yep - if you're confused, just vote no...
Wow...
Posted by Tim Keaney at 08:08 PM
You're invited
We'll be here, on the blog, starting at 7:30 tomorrow night to discuss the special election, it's ramifications and the future of California education as the polls close across our state. Log on, post a thought and share in the discussion.
Tim
Posted by Tim Keaney at 01:34 PM
November 03, 2005
Reform means ideas, guts...and votes
When the story of the "year of reform" is told, it will be said that there was no real reform on the ballot. Real reform requires ideas and guts, which is totally lacking on the November ballot.
If you'd like a glimpse of what real reformers are doing, you need to look no further than the Denver ballot proposition passed last Tuesday. Read it here
In short, voters approved a ballot initiative geared around student achievement, which will pay teachers more money for the performance of their students, and will pay teachers more for taking on and teaching the harder subjects like Science.
If this works, it will be the nation's most innovative teacher compensation program, and will put Denver on the Cutting edge of educational reform.
In California, we're debating teacher tenure going from 2-5 years, and whether unions can spend dues money arbitrarily on elections.
Real reform requires guts, and more importantly ideas. Unfortunately, we're not having that debate in California.
A debate and election like Denver had would have been interesting, challenging and perhaps one for the ages. But we'll never know how it would have turned out in California now, will we?
re·form (rĭ-fôrm')
To improve by alteration, correction of error, or removal of defects; put into a better form or condition.
To abolish abuse or malpractice in: reform the government
--end definition--
Ask yourself what reforms you want for our schools in California.
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 07:56 AM
November 01, 2005
It's time...
Studies show that kids who attend preschool are more prepared when they get to kindergarten, and more socially skilled and able to learn. Standards for kindergarten have changed dramatically since we were kids, and kindergarten teachers will tell you that students from good quality preschools do better over the long run, than those that aren't.
There is simply no question in my mind that kids need to attend preschool to get the right foundation for later learning. Kids need every advantage society can offer, and getting kids learning when they are young will help not only them, but society as a whole.
So what are we going to do about it?
There are those who will say "we can't afford it" and well, that is true.
There are those that say it must happen anyway, regardless of the cost.
There are those who don't see the benefit of preschool at all.
The expense is enormous. Good quality preschools costs can rival the best private schools. When my kids were in preschool, it was a HUGE part of our family's monthly budget. Could we afford it? NOPE. Was it a necessity that became much more than "child care"? Yes. And it dramatically helped my kids be ready on their first day of "school" - because in reality, it was just another learning day for them.
So our nation has a question that needs answering, and I am proposing we debate it right here in our little blog. If you like some of the ideas, pass the link along to your friends. If you have ideas and comments post them. Keep it civil and constructive. This is not about politics, this is about the future of our kids.
I'll float my idea now:
What happens when kids get to college age and can't afford to go? Many simply give up and don't go. Others go to community college and work their way through. Others get student loans at low interest rates and pay them off for years...
I propose the following:
Student/Parent Loans to attend accredited preschools
An Accreditation System to monitor these schools and bring others online
Parents could take government backed student loans for preschool education, and the lending agencies could turn & package these loans into tradeable and income producing securities.
At low interest rates, parents are basically making a down payment on a lifetime of learning. The "system" is financing a necessity for the advancement of society, and kids get to go to quality preschool. 20 years ago, who had heard of Countrywide and their "mortgage backed securities"? Now, homeownership is at an all time high because of the money and flexibility in the marketplace. The entire business of getting a home loan has changed. Now, the entire notion of preschool should as well.
Think of the way our society would change with a securities marketplace driven to send kids to preschool?
Next would be an Accreditation system so that parents would know what preschools are of the highest caliber, and where their loans could be spent. This accreditation system would tie into the expectancies of the kindergarten curriculum, and would change and advance as the cirruclum would advance.
With money flowing into the preschool system, you'll see:
More qualified and capable preschools
Better qualified preschool instructors and higher standards
JOBS!
Competition for students
Better choices for parents
Kids ready for preschool and better students throughout the learning years
It might even change parental involvement in schools. If parents feel they've invested actual dollars in preschool, they may be more likely to see that those kids excel as they go through the public schools.
And finally, and even likely, it should change the performance and quality of public education as they begin to get a generation of kids who are ready to learn.
Is this a nutty idea? Perhaps. So was the personal computer. Is this an expensive idea? Perhaps to set up the system yes. Is it worth it? We are falling behind other nations in educational quality, and we are not innovating fast enough as a nation to make up the difference. And frankly, we're not really even debating WHY!
Is it worth it? You decide.
The debate has begun. And that is worth it indeed.
Tim Keaney
Posted by Tim Keaney at 07:13 PM
