The sad thread about the homeless woman leaving her kids in the car for a job interview got me thinking about this.
My mom is a teacher and she mentioned that in her district they (not exactly sure who they is, but maybe the superintendent) were thinking about making preschool mandatory like kindergarten. However, there was a lot of push back with people saying that it's not a good idea.
I was just thinking how this would free up childcare costs for everyone if preschool were mandatory. I know people think kids are already over-tested and have higher expectations for young kids to learn these days, but I can't really think of many other negatives. Since when was being in school detrimental to a child?
I was just talking with my Dh about this tonight. Is love to see voluntary preschool (2+) staffed with people with early education backgrounds. It seems like the best way to give disenfranchised kids a shot at learning what school is, how to have healthy relationships, and give parents with financial challenges a break.
Ontario now has full-day kindergarten in most areas starting at 4 years old. I like it largely because it means women aren't worried about paying an extra year of daycare.
Ok maybe a stupid question, but what exactly does subsidized mean in this case? Can you pay on a sliding scale, so no matter what you make you can send your kid to school? Or is it really only for people who are below the poverty line?
I'd love to see free, mandatory, high quality early childhood education. Every study in the world says EC education is important, but it's damn expensive.
"Hello babies. Welcome to Earth. It's hot in the summer and cold in the winter. It's round and wet and crowded. On the outside, babies, you've got a hundred years here. There's only one rule that I know of, babies-"God damn it, you've got to be kind.”
Ok maybe a stupid question, but what exactly does subsidized mean in this case? Can you pay on a sliding scale, so no matter what you make you can send your kid to school? Or is it really only for people who are below the poverty line?
I honestly believe that, unless it is mandatory for all children, it will be seen as yet another social program to be cut by people who don't believe in "handouts". When it's mandatory, it's seen as actual education and receives different funding.
Yeah that's what I was thinking. That's why I think mandatory would be better.
Post by mollybrown on Mar 31, 2014 19:56:35 GMT -5
I don't think that it would necessarily help people like the woman in Arizona. The preschool at my son's public school (and most others in the area) is only 2.5 hours a day. That wouldn't help a working parent at all. Another problem is that there just isn't enough room to serve all of the 4 year olds. There's a lottery in my city for the spots, and they run the short programs so that they can fit twice as many in the day. I think something needs to be done, but it should be targeted towards providing full time child care for at risk children rather than being part of a school.
An unintended consequence of mandatory preschool would be that it would have to be provided free of charge to parents that don't need childcare as well. Funding would be a huge issue most places. I'd rather see the funds focused on kids who are at risk.
i agree mandatory is a slippery slope. I think it should be available at a subsidized cost for families who need it. But I SAH with my kids and I don't want my dd to be in school 5 days a week at 3, but I like sending her 3 mornings a week. So the when and how could be tricky.
I also feel very strongly that the free lotteries (my city has one) for public pre-k should be income based. I can afford to send my child to a private pre-k, but others can't, so I wouldn't take a space from them. I realize this is just my personal feelings, but it is why we didn't do public pre-k.
Preschool is harder on a working parent schedule. If you want to help low income / no income families like the news story, daycare subsidies and better daycare regulation enforcement would be more appropriate.
Yes. Full day PK 4 (and 3, really) and Full day K.
It is tied, well slots available to first, to those eligible for FARMs. I am okay with this, but the slots fill in most counties and then private is the only option for the rest. This will likely change, soon, in Maryland, though, so Yay.
Preschool is harder on a working parent schedule. If you want to help low income / no income families like the news story, daycare subsidies and better daycare regulation enforcement would be more appropriate.
That is only if it is half day. That is pointless, imo, and should be full day.
I think it should be like how it is in Georgia. Pre-K is free for anyone age 4 by Sept 1st but not mandatory (at least I don't think it is mandatory).
It is not mandatory. But at the public schools it is also by lottery, and not every county offers it, so some families have a hard time finding a free spot.
Ok maybe a stupid question, but what exactly does subsidized mean in this case? Can you pay on a sliding scale, so no matter what you make you can send your kid to school? Or is it really only for people who are below the poverty line?
I can only answer for my school system, which is NYC public schools. Universal pre kindergarten (UPK) is free for every 4 yr old resident of NYC, although there are not enough spots for all kids. In my area there are no public schools that offer it, but multiple "community based organizations" (i.e. private pre-schools) that offer it. My daughter's pre-school is one of these schools. Last year we paid about $5,000 for half day pre-school. This year she goes to the same school and it's free. (the one difference is that they can't do anything religious even though it is a Jewish school). Where I live it seems like everyone sends their kid to UPK, regardless of income. While I am a huge supporter of early childhood education, I think making kindergarten compulsory should be the first step. As of now kindergarten is only required in 14 states, although I've never met anyone who chose to not send their kid to kdg.
How would you differentiate between preschool and daycare? Or people who hire a nanny or send kids to private homes for care? Muddy waters.
Why not expand Head Start?
Most daycares by preschool age are basically preschool with expanded hours. It should be like public school--kindy hours, and anybody who still wants to pay for daycare or private school is welcome to do so.
And who is going to do pick up and drop off if it is mandatory?
Ok maybe a stupid question, but what exactly does subsidized mean in this case? Can you pay on a sliding scale, so no matter what you make you can send your kid to school? Or is it really only for people who are below the poverty line?
I can only answer for my school system, which is NYC public schools. Universal pre kindergarten (UPK) is free for every 4 yr old resident of NYC, although there are not enough spots for all kids. In my area there are no public schools that offer it, but multiple "community based organizations" (i.e. private pre-schools) that offer it. My daughter's pre-school is one of these schools. Last year we paid about $5,000 for half day pre-school. This year she goes to the same school and it's free. (the one difference is that they can't do anything religious even though it is a Jewish school). Where I live it seems like everyone sends their kid to UPK, regardless of income. While I am a huge supporter of early childhood education, I think making kindergarten compulsory should be the first step. As of now kindergarten is only required in 14 states, although I've never met anyone who chose to not send their kid to kdg.
Preschool is harder on a working parent schedule. If you want to help low income / no income families like the news story, daycare subsidies and better daycare regulation enforcement would be more appropriate.
That is only if it is half day. That is pointless, imo, and should be full day.
I definitely would not want that mandatory. Optional fine, but I don't want my kids in full day school at 3.
Most daycares by preschool age are basically preschool with expanded hours. It should be like public school--kindy hours, and anybody who still wants to pay for daycare or private school is welcome to do so.
And who is going to do pick up and drop off if it is mandatory?
The bus. Parents. Aftercare program. babysitter. Hey, look, lots of choices.
That is only if it is half day. That is pointless, imo, and should be full day.
I definitely would not want that mandatory. Optional fine, but I don't want my kids in full day school at 3.
Really? Hmm, I disagree and think it does wonders for them. 1/2 the day is instruction, 1/4 is rest/sleep. 1/4 is enrichment. I get parents that don't want full day PK3, but for many, esp working parents, it can be a godsend. But, again, more than that...benefits, services, etc.
It is not mandatory. But at the public schools it is also by lottery, and not every county offers it, so some families have a hard time finding a free spot.
I didn't realize that. I knew the public school has the lottery but there are other places in our town that offer it for free too. I haven't heard of anyone not getting a spot where we live. It's definitely better than Virginia. All pre-k is private and costs money unless it is head start or a special education program.
Atlanta Public schools don't offer it, so if you want it you have to find another place that offers it. There are definitely places (daycares, churches) but it is hard to get in to many of them. Dekalb County has the lottery, Decatur offers it, Cobb doesn't, Fulton does. Our local elementary (Dekalb) has typically 80 plus students in the lottery for 22 spots.
I definitely would not want that mandatory. Optional fine, but I don't want my kids in full day school at 3.
Really? Hmm, I disagree and think it does wonders for them. 1/2 the day is instruction, 1/4 is rest/sleep. 1/4 is enrichment. I get parents that don't want full day PK3, but for many, esp working parents, it can be a godsend. But, again, more than that...benefits, services, etc.
This is why I wouldn't want it to be mandatory, though. For us, DS spends 2 half days w/ my parents and actually gets a LOT of enrichment from that AND the simple matter of just time with them and building a relationship and memories. I'm glad we've had 5 years to have the freedom to do this. THey are sad, and I know DS will be sad, knowing that they are going to lose this time w/ him starting next year.
Really? Hmm, I disagree and think it does wonders for them. 1/2 the day is instruction, 1/4 is rest/sleep. 1/4 is enrichment. I get parents that don't want full day PK3, but for many, esp working parents, it can be a godsend. But, again, more than that...benefits, services, etc.
This is why I wouldn't want it to be mandatory, though. For us, DS spends 2 half days w/ my parents and actually gets a LOT of enrichment from that AND the simple matter of just time with them and building a relationship and memories. I'm glad we've had 5 years to have the freedom to do this. THey are sad, and I know DS will be sad, knowing that they are going to lose this time w/ him starting next year.