Granby School Board Approves All-Day Kindergarten and Integrated Pre-School Without Funding

It's clear is that a majority of the Granby Board of Education supports the concept of implementing both all-day kindergarten and an integrated preschool program into the district.

Identical 4-2 votes Wednesday led the school board to approve the recommendations set forth by an Early Childhood Feasibility Committee and a Board of Education subcommittee to create seven full-day kindergarten classes as well as two half-day, integrated preschool classes.

What’s not clear is when, or even if, the measures will actually be folded into school system or how the two programs will be funded.

The least problematic of the two programs is the integrated preschool, which would be implemented in the 2012-13 school year. It would be run out of F.M. Kearns Primary School and would be staffed by one certified teacher, 1.6 paraprofessionals, and several part-time service providers.

The preschool classes, housing 15 students each, would be comprised of 3- and 4-year-old students with a morning and an afternoon session of 2.5 hours each for four days a week. The fifth day would be for assessment and IEP development, according to Director of Pupil Personnel Services Aimee Martin.

If it gets off the ground, the preschool would hold a lottery for with 15 general slots available for students without special needs, while the remaining 15 slots would be dedicated those with special needs, according to Martin. The maximum class size would be 15 students, and the tuition would be $1,500, Martin said.

Proponents say that the program, at a cost of about $300,000, would be self-funded as the school district already spends about $308,000 a year using the current model. The existing model requires similar staffing but also includes tuition to private preschools for special needs students, a mandate required by law, as well as related services such as occupational and physical therapies.

According to an Early Childhood Feasibility study estimate, after the first year’s start up costs are absorbed by the school district, the annual savings would be approximately $53,000.

Still, despite the support for the program, school board members Ed Ohannessian and Matthew Wutka voted against the measure, citing, among other things, concerns over the preschool’s costs and whether the savings to the school district would actually be realized.

The financial component wasn’t the only issue board members or the residents in attendance Wednesday had with the proposal. The all-day kindergarten program drew less enthusiastic support and a variety of questions.

“We struggled with this concept,” school board and Early Childhood subcommittee member Ron Walther admitted. “We made the decision based on the increased demands placed on kindergarteners.”

While the cost, $714,000 or $317,000 more per year than the current half-day model, certainly was an overriding concern, members of the public also took issue with the demands placed on 4- and 5-year-old students by going to school for six hours a day – eight hours for some counting travel time. The program would include 16 students per class.

“Taking away four and five year olds from their caregivers is harmful,” said resident Jennifer Benson. “Plus, I’m against bigger education and bigger government.”

Others, including Wutka, questioned the educational value of offering all-day kindergarten, citing the lack of empirical data that shows that performance on test scores improve over time as a result of having a full day of kindergarten.

“I’m pretty proud of what [the Granby school system] puts out,” Wutka said. “I’m not seeing anything that justifies all-day kindergarten.”

Proponents of the measure said that while studies were inconclusive concerning the academic impact of all-day kindergarten, the benefits socially and emotionally were clear.

“I think it’s more than just test scores,” Director of Curriculum Diane Dugas said.

“Not everything is quantifiable,” Superintendent of Schools Alan Addley added. “Intrinsically, we think this is good for kids.”

Parent Darlene Richards said that her child was in half-day kindergarten and spent time in day care while she and her husband worked.

“My son is bored in day care,” said Richards, adding that he would benefit from added instruction time as opposed to unstructured play time.

Walther noted that the demands on half-day kindergarten teachers are such that art, music and recess have been eliminated from the school day in favor of reading and numeracy.

School board Chairman Cal Heminway voiced his displeasure over the elimination of recess in the kindergarten day.

“I’m embarrassed that the kids don’t have time for recess and the time demands on the kids,” said Heminway, adding that he was equally embarrassed that there was even a debate as to the merits of all-day kindergarten.

Ohannessian, in voicing his opposition to the measure, cited the Early Childhood Feasibility study, which found that 92 percent of the respondents were satisfied with the kindergarten experience in Granby.

“If you score 92 percent on a test, that’s pretty good,” Ohannessian said.

Currently, 68 towns in the state offer all-day kindergarten and, as school board member John O’Connor noted, the school district would be taking a leadership role if it implemented all-day kindergarten.

“You would be taking a leadership role,” Addley agreed.

In the end, the school board voted 4-2 in favor of the concept of having full-day kindergarten, with Ohannessian and Wutka again casting the dissenting votes.

But even with the support of the school board, it may be a while before all-day kindergarten sees the light of day in the school district.

Indeed, with the school district facing a $700,000 budget shortfall for the 2012-13 school year, the school board will be hard-pressed to add another $300,000 to the budget.

“Approving a $300,000 bill in this fiscal climate is just irresponsible,” Wutka said.