Milford Patch: I've noticed in Milford Education that they have some more programs. There are more AP classes and more programs involving coaches for Math where they're going into classes and working with the teachers. Do you think that's a good thing to expand in that way or do you think that there should be less money spent on education? I know that a lot of the programs aren't using more money, but do you think that--
Pam Staneski: They're putting the right people in the seat on the bus. Again, I want to talk about education, but I also want to talk about the economy, if you don't mind. I will say this: I've said from the beginning that when our children walk across those ball fields to get their degree, that degree ought to mean something.
It ought to say to the people who are employing them here in Milford or to the colleges that are looking at selecting these students, 'Hey, I know those people graduated from the Milford Public Schools and I know that they can do this.' Now, when you talk about more AP classes, if that's what our community wants, our local community wants, then there should be a way to fund it.
And you talk about coaching for Math, again, I would want to have the conversation with the teachers, really they are the ones that are there in the trenches, they're the ones that are doing this, and they know better what could help their children, their students excel.
A prime example is one of the things that the State and the Federal Government really misses on--well, really two things. Let me back up, there's many, but two concrete examples: No child left behind.
I could vomit just telling you the things that that laid in unfunded mandates on our school system. But, say you have a teacher who's teaching 3rd and 4th grade. We are very lucky because we have a great core of teachers at that younger level. And you have a student coming in reading--reading is measured on grade level, so, 3rd grade.
You have a student that's coming in reading at 2.5. So that would be 2 years and 5 months. They're expected to be there at 3 years, but that's not realistic. We all know that. We're not making widgets.
So, if they're at 2.5 and the no child left behind, and some other things that the State has put up on school systems, they needed to make a year's progress in a year's time. So that student moves from 2.5 to 3.8.
That's a year and two months that that teacher and their work with that student and family and support systems raised that child to 3.8 in their year as a third grader, well do you know we'd get penalized for that? Because he's not at 4 going forward?
Yet, what else can you expect? I mean, a year point 2. That child made more than what all of our government agencies said they should have. They made more than a year's growth in a year's time and I think that if we take those handcuffs off of our education system, then we'd start to see some real growth.
Check out our education discussion with 119th District Democratic Candidate .