At the last meeting, the Board discussed a request for $53,000 for additional busing for the pre-K program, housed at Ben Franklin this year. I'd like to hear at-large opinions. Please refer to the Draft Minutes included in the packet for next Monday's meeting at this link. Pages 4 and 5 of the PDF. Also refer to Attachment 2 (page 4 of the PDF) from the previous meetings packet.

This amount is outside of the recently approved 2007-2008 budget.

This is a tough one, Bob. And I can see that with the time of day you posted this, it must be nagging at you!

On one hand, obviously, we want to assist those who are in great need and would likely benefit from extra preparation. I would suggest you check out the research about the impact of early intervention. My understanding is that most early intervention programs have reasonable impact that levels off over time....the cruxt of the issue is, is that worth it? What will kindergarten look like if these students don't have the early intervention? Will these students even be around still or is this a transient population? (Maybe that last point shouldn't matter....) $53,000 is a lot of money and would fund a full teacher position! At the same time, how do we turn away the most needy who might end up with some degree of success versus failure?

Here is a link regarding the value of early intervention:They say it works!

Here is a clip which argues why the research focusing on cognitive progress may not be the only thing to consider:
THE EFFECTS OF PRESCHOOL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The early studies and evaluations of Head Start programs produced a finding that educators and researchers of the 1960s and 1970s found disheartening: that while impressive cognitive gains result from preschool participation, these gains level off and, in most cases, completely "wash out" by the end of second grade. That is, before the end of the primary grades, there are no longer any IQ or achievement differences between children who had attended preschool programs and demographically similar children who had not.

Many writers, however, have pointed out that this convergence of scores for preschool participants and nonparticipants is to be expected. "We simply cannot," notes Zigler (1986), "inoculate children in one year of preschool against the ravages of a life of deprivation." Thus, the federally funded Follow Through program for primary children was developed to help them maintain and increase the gains they had made as pre-schoolers.

Meanwhile, other research was being conducted regarding Head Start and other preschool programs, and attention began to shift from the limited focus on the IQ scores of preschool "graduates" to other cognitive measures and, particularly, to noncognitive outcomes, both short-term and long-term.



Here is another article:RAND - a very dependable resource

Here is a clip:
News Release
FOR RELEASE
Thursday
January 12, 2006

RAND STUDY SAYS EARLY CHILDHOOD INTERVENTION PROGRAMS SAVE MONEY AND BENEFIT CHILDREN, FAMILIES AND SOCIETY

A RAND Corporation study issued today says well-designed programs for disadvantaged children age 4 and younger can produce economic benefits ranging from $1.26 to $17 for each $1 spent on the programs.

The report by RAND Labor and Population says effective early childhood programs return more to society in benefits than they cost, by enabling youngsters to lead more successful lives and be less dependent on future government assistance. Researchers say this is because such programs help children improve their thinking skills, do better in school and develop socially.



Good Luck!!!

Thanks, Amy,

The issue isn't nagging at me too much, I just happened to be working late and its coming up for a vote on Monday. I think the benefits of these programs for the kids are well established and I will probably vote yes. I just wanted to get opinions from the GEMB readers to see if there is any viewpoint I haven't considered.

Hi Bob:

I don't have a strong opinion on this matter but I do have a question. Why is the cost of additional pre-K busing $53,000? That seems awfully high to me.

Vu2

I have no problem when $ are spent directly on the kids, as it sounds is the case here vs. hiring another administrator or building a shed.

These questions are more about logistics than the program's merits - which I believe are solid. Does this program have to utilize the smaller busses or can larger busses be run on a slightly longer route? Can morning classes come from one side of town and afternoon the other? Could this reduce the the number of busses and maybe distance traveled? My kids have ridden the D41 busses for years, and quite frankly, the best and most efficient routes available are not always the routes chosen. Tweaking is often required based on the numbers getting on at different stops and distance between stops. I would look at where the busses are currently going and how many children are getting on at the various stops, and where the increase is predicted to be coming from to get a better idea of current and future needs.

In regards to the busing logistics there are two considerations given the age of the children. First, they are all picked up/dropped off door to door - no "communal" bus stops. Second, they all need child seats, which reduces the standard capacity of the bus.

Bob, I am all for the Pre-K program and like Amy said those that need it benefit the most.
I think our community benefits from this program whether we have used it or not.