I have been advocating for universal preschool for years, both here on HA, and more extensively at The Stranger. High quality early learning is the only education reform absolutely proven to work. And that is why I will be voting for Proposition 1B.
I’m not totally unsympathetic to the stated goals of the labor-backed Prop 1A, but to be clear, it does not implement preschool. It’s about raising the pay, training, and certification of childcare workers, and it sets a goal of reducing childcare costs to 10 percent of a family’s income. Which are good things. But it’s totally unfunded. And it does not create a single preschool classroom, let alone a high quality one.
Childcare and preschool are not the same thing.
Prop 1B, on the other hand, fully funds the gradual phase-in of citywide universal high quality preschool through a modest 11 cent per $1,000 of assessed value hike in the property tax—about $50 a year for the average homeowner. This evidenced-based program would ultimately be free to all three- and four-year-olds from families earning below 300 percent of the federal poverty line (currently $71,550 for a family of four), with generous sliding scale tuition subsidies for families earning more than that.
Yes, the implementation is a bit slower than a lot of people would like—the plan is to serve 2,000 children by 2018—but we have no choice but to implement slowly. Serving 2,000 students is the equivalent of creating five new elementary schools in a district that’s already struggling to meet capacity; we simply lack both the physical infrastructure and the number of trained and certified teachers sufficient to implement a high quality program overnight. And experiences in Boston and elsewhere teach us that implementing preschool right is more important than implementing it fast.
Furthermore, implementing a successful preschool program here in Seattle is the first step toward implementing high quality early learning statewide. If we do it right here, we’ll soon see similar programs in cities like Bellevue, Mercer Island, Shoreline, Renton, and Tacoma. Pretty soon voters throughout the state will demand the same opportunities for their children. Reject Prop 1B and you could set back Washington’s early learning agenda by a decade or more.
So yes, I am enthusiastically voting for Prop 1B, without reservations. Whatever the disappointing political machinations that led to this showdown, the clear choice on the ballot is between a measure that actually implements universal preschool, and a measure that doesn’t. I’m voting for the one that does. And so should you.
Of course, voters can pass Prop 1A and give a mandate for preschool while sending the City Council back to produce a plan that lacks 1B’s numerous flaws – including its ed reformy nature. Also need to address the space issue, since using SPS facilities is a non-starter.
and yet the courts ruled prop 1A and 1B were concerning the same issue, so they but them head to head.
Prop 1B does address the space issue. Read it before you spread more lies.
Goldy,
You have been led down the garden path albeit unwittingly.
See: 11 Reasons why Seattle’s Preschool for all Proposition 1B is a bad idea, http://seattleducation2010.wor.....-bad-idea/.
Some excerpts:
2.The city and its employees do not know enough to create such a program and then run it.
For example, the city has such a limited knowledge of how to establish and run an education program that they have hired expensive consultants, rather than local experts who have had years of experience and training in this area, to come in and create the program for them. Unfortunately they don’t know who they have hired. See reason number 3 as an example.
3. One of the two consultants who was hired to create and implement the preschool program, Ellen Frede, is also an employee of Acelero, a for profit group that has taken over four Head Start programs in other cities where Universal preK has been established in a similar fashion by the city.
Ellen Frede is Senior Vice President of Education and Research, for Acelero. See A for-profit approach to Head Start and Seattle PreSchool for All Proposition 1B: Acelero, the fox watching over the hen house
7. The KIPP charter chain and Teach for America, Inc. (TFA) are both part of Universal pre-K programs in other cities and have plans to expand.
Needless to say, I am sure Seattle is one of their next targets, using city and possibly state and Federal money to increase their coffers. See A Model Built on Rigor, Structure Adapting to the Schooling Needs of a Younger Group of Students and TFA’s Early Childhood Initiative.
KIPP is one of the approved programs for Washington state and Teach for America is struggling to stay alive in Seattle.
8. There will be a bloated city administrative staff with the addition of 42 individuals which comes out to 1 administrator for every 50 students.
This does not include actual teaching and support staff in the pre-schools.
Approving Proposition 1B comes with a price tag of over $50M to implement. Read your ballot carefully.
9. Programs such as Montessori and Reggio Emilia will not be included in the Preschool for All Proposition 1B plan because the material that is to be used in the pre-schools will be standardized and prepared by Pearson or a similar publishing company.
Pearson has been bandied about by city staff.
10. Will the Preschool for All program in Seattle be taking Race to the Top money for their program? It’s happening in Federal Way with the concomitant Common Core Standards and testing as the basis for their preschool program.
With the acceptance of Race to the Top money also comes a requirement to share all student information.
Federal funds, Race to the Top money, is available for pre-school initiatives and the City of Seattle has expressed an interest in these funds. But buyer beware, these funds come with lots of strings attached including assessments and personal information gathered and shared.
There’s more and I will post those reasons over the next few days.
Well, while I’m at it, there is this post, A letter from a concerned citizen about Proposition 1B and a City of Seattle Department of Education, http://seattleducation2010.wor.....education/.
“For the fourth year in a row, the state auditor’s office has slammed the Seattle’s Human Services Department over its management of grant funds.”
This letter came to me from a concerned citizen who lives in Seattle:
A letter from a concerned citizen
As you know, I’ve been concerned about the city’s pre-K Initiative 1B.
The City of Seattle will form a Department of Education. If the city’s pre-K Initiative 1B passes, pre-K programs will be overseen by the City of Seattle Department of Education. The city plans on staffing the Department of Education. by utilizing employees from Seattle’s Human Services Department. From the City of Seattle website:
“For the last several months, the Murray Administration has been working to shape the new department responsible for supporting early learning, K-12 and higher education in Seattle. Most of the positions in the new department would be filled by existing city employees moving from Seattle’s Human Services Department, Office for Education and other organizations.”
“The new department would house 38 employees and manage a budget of $48.5 million, including $30 million each year from the voter-approved Families and Education Levy.“
It is further troubling that the city has continual audit findings with the Department of Health and Human Services. See: State audit slams Seattle Human Services Department
“For the fourth year in a row, the state auditor’s office has slammed the Seattle’s Human Services Department over its management of grant funds.”
Also, according to Burgess, the system won’t be ready for a year or two so what happens between now and 2016 with preschoolers if Proposition 1B passes? When will this program really begin?
-Concerned Citizen
I would like to add my own questions:
Did the good people of Seattle understand the plans that were already congealing to roll out a city Department of Education when they voted for the levy? Did they know they would be paying for another overlay of bureaucracy filled in by existing city employees with no experience in education?
I don’t think so. I had not heard of this when I was voting, did you? In fact, shouldn’t this have been decided by the people and not just the Mayor, a politician, and Councilmember Burgess who came out of Law Enforcement (and led a failed committee on our police department) and not Education?
Dora Taylor
Also,
Proposition 1B: Someone needs to get their story straight
http://seattleducation2010.wor.....-straight/
Proposition 1B, the “trust me” prop
Someone told me that during the endorsement proceedings at the Metropolitan Democratic Club of Seattle held on September 24th, Councilmember Tim Burgess stated that students in his Preschool for All program would not be assessed using a “bubble test”.
Well that’s good because it’s really hard for a three or four-year old to hold a #2 pencil and fill in a tiny little circle.
The week before, someone on the Levy Oversight Committee who is pro-1B, stated in an endorsement meeting that I attended as an Education Committee member with the League of Women Voters (LWV), that there would be one test given at the end of the school year, a standardized state test, to evaluate the students and the program. The name of the test was not specified.
Which is it, or is it either?
I’m still standing by my prediction that preschoolers will be tested just as they have been in another preschool program that is being overseen by the Levy Oversight Committee. See #1 in the 11 Reasons why Seattle’s Preschool for all Proposition 1B is a bad idea post, and those scores will determine the amount of funding received by the preschool. Unfortunately the subsidies will directly correlate to test scores. The lower the overall assessments, the less money the program will receive.
By the way, according to the proponent of 1B who spoke to the LWV Seattle Education Committee, the Preschool for All program is to have eight committee members, four from the Levy Oversight Committee and four mayoral appointments.
Proposition 1B is a “trust me” proposition where all of the details will be worked out if it is approved, and will be developed into an Implementation Plan under the auspices of two hired consultants, one of them being Ellen Frede who is Senior Vice President of Education and Research for Acelero, a for-profit venture that has taken over Head Start programs in four cities so far. See A for-profit approach to Head Start and Seattle PreSchool for All Proposition 1B: Acelero, the fox watching over the hen house.
What’s there not to trust?
Seattle Public Schools is experiencing a huge capacity crunch. The District is having trouble finding seats for the K-12 students it’s already mandated to serve.
There’s no extra space for the City’s Pre-K ambitions.
Even Jose Banda admitted as much during a Families and Education Oversight Meeting, as the Committee was examining the progress of the Preschool for All initiative.
“José Banda said they have had a conversation in Seattle Public Schools that we will be hard pressed for facilities. This is a challenge as we move forward.”
http://www.seattle.gov/Documen.....FT_all.pdf
I am so disappointed to see this from Goldy – “without reservations”?? Any one of the points Dora lists should at least be a reservation! I have respected your work for a long time – not just as another lefty but as someone with real integrity around education issues (charters, McCleary, etc). In fact I am commenting for the first time on your blog because I feel deeply disappointed.
How about all the corporate donors to 1B? See publicola’s coverage. Does this raise any questions as to what might be behind this agenda?
The track record of mayoral control of education has been disastrous everywhere it has happened, why would we hand over an ever larger piece of the pie to the city?
Last but definitely not least, I would not want my own children attending a preschool with a prescribed curriculum and the associated mandated assessments tied to funding under the city’s contracting system. This should raise much, much more than just a reservation to anyone who cares about early childhood education.
Goldy,
After reviewing this new information, please reconsider your endorsement.
Dora
It’s fascinating to see the do nothing, anti tax unless it helps them , i got mine to hell with you, probably sock puppet paid shill people who have never posted here before come out out of the wood work to argue against this.
Goldy,
You’re wrong.
We should vote for neither and here’s why.
1) these two groups – labor and governance need to present ONE vision to voters. That they didn’t should give you pause for what happens if either one passes. For example, if 1A wins, you really think the City will be kumbaya and give them the support/money? I don’t
2) no room at the inn. Seattle Schools is THE linchpin for the City’s plan and it is in every single document they have put out. But there is NO room and won’t be. As well, the City is (and will) make demands on SPS staff time – again, no money for that. THe district’s state mandated (and yet unfunded) duty is K-12, not preschool.
Don’t put pressure on a district that is already struggling.
3) Burgess said at the Metro Dems endorsement that there would be only “classroom” assessments which is nonsense because every single kid would go into a database and be thoroughly tracked.
Both of these are confusing measures.
Instead of consistency and unity, we have confusion and division.
Vote NO on both (which you can).
Blah, blah, blah. Another sock puppet.
So continue to do nothing. Why are you afraid to spend tax money on other people’s kids?
Dora and Melissa,
I know you know how important high quality early learning is, and how important it is to make it accessible to all our kids. My question for you is, if we reject 1B, how do you propose to get there politically? Because we will have just rejected the only firm path toward funding universal preschool that ever had a chance of passing in our state.
Wish I had time this morning to write a thorough rebuttal to your concerns, but alas, the broader progressive community couldn’t bother to sustain me as an independent full-time blogger, so I’ve got to earn my living at my day job. Maybe tomorrow.
First of all to the troll, I wish someone would pay me for all of the hours I have put into doing research, writing and advocating for our children in terms of education. I’d be retired and doing this full time.
Goldy,
This is not an either/or situation.
We have in place now Federally funded and city approved preschool programs. They are Head Start (which the city is planning to roll into the city program which is concerning), Step Ahead and
Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP).
The focus is on low income families with all three programs. If people are concerned about pre-school, support those programs.
This push for pre-K started back East and is usually referred to as Universal Pre-K. The city’s proposition is the same. Bring in the suits (paid for by Gates), do a PowerPoint about all of the poor children, have folks in the background waiting to pounce on the money (KIPP, Teach for America and Acelero for starters) (by the way, the city hired a VP from Acelero to implement the program) and you have a recipe for disaster.
The proposal includes “assessments” and to understand what that means, check out Testing a kindergartner: How it feels as a teacher, http://seattleducation2010.wor.....a-teacher/ to understand what “assessments” really means.
Ask yourself why suddenly did Burgess start caring about minority children? That in itself is a red flag. He is really pushing this and I don’t think for altruistic reasons. There’s money behind this, a Department of Education within the city and their first real program they will oversee (A scary proposition on so many levels). It smells like a mayoral takeover of our public schools and that is not a good thing. A “coups d’etat in slow motion” as Hedges likes to say.
And the notion of Preschool for All? I would not send my child to a place knowing they will have standardized material and assessments. That is not and should never be pre-school and I’m betting that most parents who could, would not choose this program. This program with all of its “rigor” (See my article on KIPP charter schools and their preK program) is focused on minority children and others who feel that they have no other alternative.
It’s like global warming deniers, it’s not a magical perfect solution so do nothing
What is the better plan on the ballot then?
…and that is sad.
Dora what is your bias?
What plan do you see being passed by voters?
As I just stated above, there are already three programs in place in Seattle that take preschoolers. We need to ensure they are funded and allowed to grow.
We don’t need a slick pre-packaged deal from the city.
It’s sad to think that the only children who would be part of this program are the poor who can’t afford or don’t know of alternatives.
To understand more about me and why I am being so vocal about preschool, particularly for minority children, read
Race to the Tots: Universal (for profit) Pre-K, DFER and the suits,
http://seattleducation2010.wor.....the-suits/.
Then you might understand why I do what I do.
Better,
The ballot is very confusing and when I first found out how it will be worded I thought it was a joke but unfortuantely it’s not.
I’ll be posting the ballot on Seattle Ed hopefully in the next 24 hours but for now what I can describe is this:
First the quesiton is “Do you want preschool in Seattle, yes or no.”
“Even if you voted “No” above, which one would you want?”
So…if folks think they’re confused now, what until they see the ballot!
They want you to vote for one or the other, even if you don’t want the city to fund a preschool program. How whacked is that!?
This is thanks to a judge and the fact that Burgess wouldn’t budge when teachers came to him saying that there needs to be a minimum wage of $15.
That’s why there are two proposals, one written by highly paid consultans and one written and developed by actual early learning educators. I met some of these people who teach in preschool programs and/or run them in Seattle and know their passion and concerns.
There is a lot more detail on the difference of approaches with both props that we can discuss if you like. I plan to do a post comparing both props.
I won’t do any endorsements yet because there are a few other items on the ballot that require a greater understanding also.
Better,
I realized I didn’t answer your question fully.
Which one will pass? With people so confused about the issues and ballot wording that is even more confusing, and I think also illegal, it’s a toss up.
1B started running TV ads, no surprise there, and will come out with some slick PR. I’m guessing voter participation will be less than during an election year. And exactly how do the votes for either get counted? If you don’t want to pay for preschool by voting “No” but then choose one, how does that apply to the final tally?
1B might come out ahead because of PR but it’s second on the ballot.
Either way, I think because of the wording, it will be challenged in court.
I don’t follow education issues, so this may be a stupid question, but what happened to all the surplus school buildings emptied by declining enrollments a few years ago?
The one school up on the ridge in magnolia is bordered up. Rumors were it was too expensive to bring up to code or that they just had not found at way to sell it to a developer . Its has spectacular views
David @13 says: “Because we will have just rejected the only firm path toward funding universal preschool that ever had a chance of passing in our state.”
You make it sound like if 1B goes down, we never get pre-k. That’s just not so. When roads and transit went down in 2007, we brought ST2 to the ballot and it passed. When Prop 1 failed countywide in April, we brought it back to the ballot for Seattle this November.
The public wants pre-k. But we don’t want just any old plan. We want it to work. This plan doesn’t, for the numerous reasons stated above. If 1B fails it won’t be read as a lack of support for pre-k, it’ll be read as a lack of support for this particular plan. I will encourage the City Council and the unions to work with parents to develop a better plan that can be submitted to the voters next year, one that we can all proudly support and help pass.
Goldie, I’m mystified why you would come out for this obvious Trojan Horse known as 1B. It’s hard to believe you could fall for such obvious bait.
Now, I know that the tendency is for people to defend their prior statement to the death, no matter what, once it is out there in public; at least in the short term, and so I’m not surprised to see you doing that now. But I feel certain that IF this deceptive, mendacious neutron bomb of an initiative passes, over the better judgment of my fellow Seattle citizens, you’ll be back in another year, or two or five to say, “I had it wrong, and I’m sorry, and I’d take it all back if I could.”
I’m trying to get you to rethink this, here and now, when we can still prevent the damage from being done. And I hope you’ll set aside whatever ego might already be attached to this bad position of yours and that you’ll reconsider with an open mind. That’s all I can ask for at this juncture.
First, have you followed the money? Who is paying for 1B? Take a close look at who these people are and why they might be doing this.
Unless you think that they are motivated solely and selflessly by “wanting to help poor children” and “trying to just make the world a better place” with no mind toward financial or political gain, why then are these particular individuals so obsessed with this one ballot proposition? Since when have any of 1B’s big financial backers ever done anything without a personal payoff for them or their cronies?
Why do they want 1B so very much? (As “Glinda, The Good Witch” tells Dorothy in “The Wizard Of Oz”, while imploring her to keep The Ruby Slippers away from the wicked witch, “…their magic must be very powerful, or she wouldn’t want them so badly!”
When exactly did this collection of hedge funders, education privatizers, charter shills and union haters become transformed into Mother Theresa?
I have two Privatization Shills living in my neighborhood who each work full time for one of the pro-charter, pro-voucher, union hating, teacher demonizing “League of Education Voters”. They’re decent human beings—I have nothing against them personally—but they’re in it solely for the money.
And EVERY election, right around Labor Day, I know who NOT to vote for by looking at the signs on their lawns: In 2012, they were all “Vote For I-2012” (Charter Schools). In 2013, they were all “Vote Suzanne Estey” (The Privatizer’s Choice for School Board) and this year those Pro 1B signs couldn’t go up quickly enough.
These people aren’t selfless saints: they do what their boss, Chris Korma, tells them to do while she acts in her capacity as a Functionary for the Wealthy Ruling Elite that wants control of our public schools and will do ANYTHING to get it.
I can’t believe I’m telling YOU—the person who I’ve learned so much from over these past several years—about how to see through the smoke and mirrors and call The Powers That Be on their lies, cronyism and corruption.
Again, with no personal animosity or anger towards you, I implore you to rethink your support for something that clearly will not come close to meeting the needs of our city’s young children, but will do great, maybe permanent damage to our very fragile and frayed commons.
Don’t fall for the increasingly deceptive traps being employed by The Privatizers. It’s all that they have left in their never-ending quest to take control of our schools and the dollars that support them.
The paranoia expressed in this thread is depressing. If it is widespread enough to kill 1B then we will never get high-quality universal preschool because we will clearly never achieve a consensus in advance on what high-quality universal preschool is.
It’s a fucking four-year pilot program, folks. The standards, the curriculum, the partnerships are all to be decided. All this ordinance does is secure the funding and create the initial infrastructure for filling in the details and phasing in the program.
Gotta start somewhere. But you’d all rather vilify this for want of some unspecified ideal. Depressing.
To paraphrase Goldy, better half a loaf than no bread at all.
Once parents get a feel for what it can do they will want better. After all, the Apple Computer Company and all of its’ products grew out of the humble Apple 1.
1B comes directly from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the city has been working directly with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation:
http://www.edmonds.wednet.edu/....._paper.pdf
Without a doubt, we are looking at using toddlers for educational research. It is called P20 and these toddlers will be researched until they are 20 years old. As a result, taxpayers will fund research which will involve testing and loss of privacy for the individuals enrolled in this program. Per Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation:
“Bigger and tougher tests lay in the future. Once PreK-3rd systems are in place, will scores on standardized third grade and fourth grade math and reading tests improve? Will PreK-3rd’s promise of stronger educational starts create more on-time high school graduates, college students and successful adults?”
We can’t omit testing and data from this initiative.
Children need to play. Do the research. Research indicates that children in preschool for 6.5 hours begin to exhibit behavioral problems. Burgess/Murray are proposing a six hour day for these tots.
1B aligns pre-k-3 curriculum. Essentially, we’re looking at Common Core for preschoolers. The city wants to use Teaching Gold Strategy assessments. Again, do the research. YOu will find a plethora of online products for prek- including computer based learning. There is research to support the notion of keeping toddlers off of computers.
There is no elected board to determine prek-curriculum, folks. The Oversight Committee will be 12 individuals on the Family and Ed. Levy Committee and 4 mayoral appointments. SPS will represent 2 out of 16 voices. The city determines curriculum.
We’ve heard from Gates, politicos and those that will profit, but we’ve not heard from child development specialists. Microsoft has gotten into the conversation:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/livewire-the-case-for-early-learning-tickets-12101757683
SPS has consistently stated that they do not have space. Now, we hear campaign rhetoric saying otherwise. Show me the plan.
Seattle voters supported the largest Family and Education Levy in the history of SEattle at $232M. 1A is asking for $3M. IMO, a very good investment. There are vulnerable children in questionable circumstances. I’m disappointed that Burgess and Murray are so willing to turn their backs on these tots. Then again, when Gates speaks, it appears Burgess and Murray jump.
The city consistently states they will provide “quality”, but failed to define “quality”.
**Please provide evidence that the city will not place a charter preschool within SPS. Again, do the research. Charter Schools have gotten into the business of prek!
The city wants individuals with four year degrees and will provide “alternative teaching certification”. This sounds a lot like Teach For America- another Gates backed initiative. Can we be guaranteed that the city won’t partner with Teach for America?
It is time to send the city and union back to the table. Vote NO. If one initiative passes…it should be 1A. It is less of a monster.
“Prop 1B, on the other hand, fully funds the gradual phase-in of citywide universal high quality preschool”
Do the research. There is nothing “universal” or prek for “all” with the city. The city plans on providing 2000 preschool slots and hasn’t determined the amount of low, middle and high income students that will be enrolled in the program.
Burgess has admitted that he doesn’t know if the program is sustainable. Costs will start at $10K per child and will raise to $15K per child.
We don’t have K for all and we don’t have a fully funded K-12 system. Are we to believe that we’ll be able to fund “universal” prek and provide prek teachers with same salary as K-12?
Define “quality”, please.
Do the research. There is one “proven” program that was too expensive to expand.
Roger, those closed school buildings? It was all a big mistake (truly). The district did not read the demographics right, spent money to close buildings only to re-open them (plus other older closed buildings) at a huge cost. The district has grown at a 1,000 kids a year for the last 3 years with no let-up in sight.
They are looking at space everywhere…at one school,even the closets.
Goldy, you are being quite melodramatic. Let’s take a deep breath and I’ll explain it.
1) both parties need to go back to the table and hammer out ONE solid prop, put it on the ballot and I’d bet it will easily pass.
You think if either passes, the other side will be helpful? Nope.
2) Don’t forget the Families and Ed levy which is contributing $61M over seven years to….preschool services. Yup, as we speak tax dollars are being provided by Seattle voters to help preschool. So it’s not like nothing is being done.
3) No one is against preschool but this has to be done right and transparently and when I hear Burgess say bullshit like “only classroom assessments” then I know there’s something wrong.
When I see Seattle Schools take money from Title One funds, capital funds and baseline budget funds to send 5 staffers on Burgess’ multi-city pre-k junket, I know there’s something wrong. (And one staff, the deputy superintendent, backed out of going and the district lost all the money on his part of the trip.)
Lastly, the Metropolitan Dems? No endorsement of either.
The League of Women Voters? They say to vote NO on the first question which is should either of these be enacted.
We need to get this right.
We need consistency and unity, not confusion and division. The latter is what we face now on the ballot.
I just posted LWV’s statement about both propositions. Rather good descriptions of both.
See Seattle League of Women Voters on Propositions 1A and 1B: Neither, Nor,
http://seattleducation2010.wor.....ither-nor/
Goldy,
That’s another issue I have with 1B. Whenever I asked questions to folks who were proponents of 1B and had a hand in putting it together, they always said that the details, basically any question I had, would be worked out and all questions answered in the Implementation Plan which would be worked out AFTER it was approved.
It would be like voting for the Common Core Standards before knowing what they were as our state legislators did.
I need to call attention to the fact that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is behind the city’s prek initiative. It is the intention of the Gates Foundation to shift Title 1 dollars into prek:
“Use Title I: It will develop strategies and forums to help school districts determine if and when to shift federal Title 1 funding from elementary schools to early learning.”
http://www.edmonds.wednet.edu/....._paper.pdf
Taking existing funding- from an underfunded system- is a very serious issue. In essence, prek may paid from existing funds and taken out of Seattle Public School classrooms.
Again, we can’t ignore the fact that we’re looking at educational research on toddlers. I support expanding prek for toddlers, but not this model.
I’m afraid you’ve made a mistake, Goldy. I hope you reconsider your position.
wow, goldy @ 26 – you’re sounding like the guy who was all over DLC Cantwell in 2006 – ed murray is a shill for the over credentialed, over paid self serving yuppie scum from Gate$. period. “paranoid” ?? Dora etc etc spent all kinds of time with reasoned arguments, and, you’re lip syncing to the tunes of the lying yuppie scum of DFER, PFL, CRPE, TFA, NCTQ, LEV, SFC…
Just because you could fire everyone but the payroll & health benefit clerks at JSCEE yesterday and NOT make the district worse, it doesn’t mean you should start listening to lying yuppie scum. Notice I used “yuppie scum” 3 times – it isn’t because I’m limited in vocabulary, it is because I like precision.