****
Dear Mr. Colter, Ms. Portalupi, and ORCSD Board Members,
I am a Durham resident, taxpayer, and parent of two young children who will soon be ORCSD (Oyster River Cooperative School District) students. As you may recall, I have written to you in the past about the ORCSD bidding process and what seems to be a lack of due diligence when it comes to soliciting multiple, competitive bids. I look forward to the ORCSD Board’s Policy Committee report regarding this topic.
Spending the District’s precious tax dollars wisely is a serious issue. I believe that the ORCSD can restore public confidence regarding District expenditures by instituting a process of accountability and best practices including competitive bidding. However, I am concerned about program and curriculum spending as well. In particular, I feel that it is imprudent at this time to put tax money into a full day kindergarten program when there are higher priority items that should be considered.
In my opinion, any additional funds or re-allocation of funds should be used towards improving the middle / high school curricula. There are significant program deficits (e.g. lack of strong honors, Advanced Placement and foreign language course offerings) that should be addressed and be considered a higher priority than full day kindergarten.
Moreover, there has not been public debate on the academic priorities for the School District. Open, public debate should occur prior to determining that full day kindergarten warrants funding, especially in lieu of the aforementioned curriculum improvements.
If there were unlimited educational funds, I would support full day kindergarten, but that is not the state of the ORCSD.
As parents and taxpayers, we need the biggest bang for our buck. In the long run, I simply do not believe a full day kindergarten program is the best option with the strongest long-term benefits.
Please see below a letter Judy and Constantine Engalichev (Madbury parents and taxpayers) sent to the ORCSD School Board and Superintendent Colter in opposition to Full Day Kindergarten.
ReplyDelete****
August 30, 2008
Dear Superintendent Colter and Members of the Oyster River School Board:
As parents and taxpayers in the ORCSD, we were greatly distressed to learn of the limited scope and inadequate analysis of the full-day Kindergarten Study Committee.
By design and definition, Kindergarten is that period of time that provides our children transition into formal education. Immersion into the institutional school environment that a full-day kindergarten program constitutes denies children that important transitional period. The Feasibility Study Committee’s Report itself states that the long-term effects of full-day Kindergarten are inconclusive. In fact, the Study Committee’s Report quoted extensively from an ERIC Digest report but curiously omitted the conclusion which stated:
“The length of the school day is only one dimension of the kindergarten experience. Other important issues include the nature of the kindergarten curriculum and the quality of teaching. In general, research suggests that, as long as the curriculum is developmentally appropriate and intellectually stimulating, either full- or half-day scheduling can provide an adequate introduction to school. “ http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-921/full.htm
Further, the Study Committee’s Report suggests there is an academic advantage to be gained by 5 – year olds attending school for six hours, five days a week. However, the report itself states that the long-term effects of full-day kindergarten are inconclusive. In fact, The National Center for Education Statistics' longitudinal study of 22,000 children finds “no lasting reading, math, or science achievement differences between children who attend half day and full-day kindergarten" and reports a phenomenon coined “fade-out” where any academic advantage that did occur fades by grade 4.
The Study Committee Report projects enrollments in the District to gradually increase over the next 10 years. Where then would a full-day kindergarten program be housed when our two elementary schools are already beyond capacity? Would we then be discussing reassigning grades to different schools and dividing families with elementary aged children and thereby increase transportation costs?
One does not have to look very hard to find evidence questioning the pre-supposed conclusions of the committee. A study entitled, The Economics of Early Childhood Education, published in the February 2007 issue of the Economics of Education Review stated,
“Academic gains for children who attend full-day kindergarten programs compared to those who attend half-day programs are so short-lived that policymakers should take a hard look at whether the additional cost of full-day programs is worthwhile.” http://www.ernweb.com/public/942.cfm
According to the Feasibility Study Report, a group of parents approached the Board in the spring of 2007 to consider implementing full-day Kindergarten and the Board responded immediately with the formation of a Study Committee. I applaud the Board for its responsiveness to taxpayers but question why similar requests for programmatic review in the middle and high schools have been tabled time and time again.
In an economic climate of tightening budgets and striving to achieve more with less it is irresponsible of the Board and Superintendent to evaluate this program without a full cost assessment including facilities, staffing, resources, and impact to local businesses such as daycare providers. To rush to implementation without a full review of academic priorities in the District is fiscally irresponsible, philosophically inconsistent and a disservice to taxpayers.
Sincerely,
Judy & Constantine Engalichev
If you are opposed to full day Kindergarten, sign the petition found on the following link:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ipetitions.com/petition/opposefulldaykindergarten/
I presented the following comments (see below) to the School Board this evening (Sept. 3rd). Kim Clark and Jennifer Rief were the only two Board members who responded, as I requested, during Board comments. Both Kim and Jennifer raised the need to review academic priorities as this was tabled as an agenda item last Spring.
ReplyDelete**
I would like to raise my on-going concern about the Board’s fiscal policy and actions, in particular the District’s bid process, and making best use of our limited funds.
My understanding is that there is a Board committee examining the District’s bid process. I would like the Committee to address why the bid process policy, already set in place, was not followed on several occasions including the recent networking bid. Once the Committee’s findings are complete, then, the Board should hold those individuals responsible for the non-compliance fully accountable.
Part of fiscal responsibility is thoughtful spending. With this, I believe the Board needs to examine the District’s academic priorities prior to funding a full day kindergarten program. Although I am not opposed to the concept of full day kindergarten, I believe, as a parent and taxpayer, that there are curriculum deficits at the middle and high schools that warrant higher priority and Board attention.
The Board needs to encourage public debate about the District’s academic priorities as well as remedy the fiscal accountability issue prior to investing in another program. Restoring public confidence that tax dollars are being spent wisely and directed towards the most effective academic programs should be the Board’s immediate goals.
During Board Comments tonight, I call upon each individual Board member to offer his or her own opinion and recommended course of action on 1) the fiscal policy / non-compliance issue and 2) the need to address the District’s academic priorities prior to funding a new program such as full day kindergarten.
I respectfully request all Board member comments, including my own read tonight, be added to the meeting minutes.
Thank you for your time and consideration of these serious issues that effect our children and impact their futures.