Pay for K
As requested. The issue has never made sense to me. Some schools offer free all day Kindergarten and other school charge. I believe the schools in the NE cluster talked about creating a standard fee because it wasn't fair for families to get assigned to a school with a higher monthly fee. My understanding is that each school's Building Leadership Team (BLT) determines how many Kindergarten classes to offer and whether they want to charge parents to pay for additional FTE (full time employee) since 1 kindergarten teacher could teach 2xs as many 1/2 day kids. Title 1 schools have free all day Kindergarten and kids who qualify for free/reduced lunch don't have to pay either.
Comments
I worry that now the district would collect the money... not sure it would go back to the school...
Last year, almost all of the schools south of North Capitol Hill had free all day K for everyone enrolled at the schools (there were a few exceptions). I am under the impression that this change means that every non-FRL K family in the District will be paying $207 a month next year, even if their kid attends a school with 90% FRL rate. Does that sound right to others who are following this?
It isn't clear to me what will happen to any extra money raised by the District next year--I assume it will just all go into one big pot and (non-FRL) parents will pay for all ten months even if their building's cost is covered.
I don't understand what happens to you if you just don't pay. I know this year parents have received memos threatening late fees, but I don't know what the collection procedure is for people who don't pay. Do they lock your kid out in the hall? Do they send them home?
Maureen, why should every family in a school that is 90% FRL be exempt from tuition? Souldn't the 10% that can pay, have to pay, like everyone else? Then scholarship the remaining 90%.
Honestly, I don't think any familt should have to pay for K. But if we have to pay then I think there should be a fair, consistent, and even system for levying tuition. I think it's crazy that some schools charge $300, others charge $90 and others charge nothing. Fees could skew parents choice and they may choose a school based soley on what tuition they can afford. That seems wrong to me.
Do any other districts in the US have their families pay for K? Or is it just us?
I know it's easier on staff to have the district collect the tuition, but I'm worried that money will go into one big pot and then be divied up at the districts discretion. IE they may hire less staff, increase class sizes, only offer two K classrooms instead of 3 or 4, etc.
I don't like and don't trust the Central office controling pay for K funds....at all.
I think they should have a sliding scale or a scholarship fund that non-FRL families can access. As is, whether your family of four earns $3401 per month or ten times that, you pay $207 to SPS. I suppose that is cheap relative to daycare, but many families are making sacrifices to keep a parent at home and to have time to volunteer at school.
I got the impression at the North Beach open house that the 1/2 day K funding they collect pays for teachers/assistants or activities beyond the usual offerings. Anyone know more about that?
Although the enrollment services site has been updated, it is not easy to find information about kindergarten. No mention of fees or 1/2 or full day options.
-BTW, thanks for the thread.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing--but now a bunch of kids are going to be categorized as FRL who wouldn't have been before. I'm assuming that they are the kids who are closer to being middle class and so less disadvantaged. The WASL scores for those kindergarteners older sibs will suddenly switch into the FRL category. If scores go up, will SPS recognize that it is because different kids are in the group, or will they call it an improvement?
My understanding of the transition plan is that one of the "strategies" for capacity management at some schools may include only having 1/2 K. That said, it may not happen or it could happen at just a few schools for a few years.
I would think they wouldn't know if they needed to do this under AFTER Open Enrollment thus adding to the worry for parents.
My understanding of the transition plan is that one of the "strategies" for capacity management at some schools may include only having 1/2 K. That said, it may not happen or it could happen at just a few schools for a few years.
I would think they wouldn't know if they needed to do this under AFTER Open Enrollment thus adding to the worry for parents.
What I understand...the State pays for one full day K class per school and also the full-day fee for children qualifying for FRL.
I share the concerns of Anna B. What will happen with the funds if the District decides to collect instead of the local school?
Schools in our area vary widely in their pay for K rates. Mainly, because of the number of full day K classes offered at a school, and the seniority of the teachers teaching those classes.
All of the schools I know of try to be very fair in setting their pay for K rates.
Some schools with more than one full day K have the PTA subsidize so that they charge anywhere from $0 to $240 a month to help meet their true expense.
Other schools vary their amount each year based on their costs and charge no more than what it costs them to fund more than one full day K class. One school I know of in our area has two full day K classes and charges $140 a month.
What will happen for schools that have unreimbursed expenses above $207 per child? Will they remain underfunded with the stated belief of MGJ that the PTA's will make up the difference?
What will happen for schools with unreimbursed expenses below $207 per month. Will the District pocket the difference or will it be passed along to the school?
Overall, I trust my local school much more than I trust Central Administration when it comes to the appropriate use of funds for educating my child.
To respond to some other queries...At our school if you do not pay your Pay for K fee by the 10th of the month you receive a past due notice. If you have not paid by the 1st of the following month then your child is dismissed from school at the half day point (prior to lunch.)
I do know that Mercer Island has a pay for full day program. Last year it was $400 a month. However, they call it enhanced K as they take many field trips, outside music and art classes, etc.
To clarify...Tracy did say that the 1/2 day K decision at some schools (for capacity management) would not be made until after Open Enrollment.
You may enroll for full day K and then be informed in May that you may only have a half day option.
who will be makign the "1/2 day for capactiy" decision? the principal or district?
It says, in part:
The state of Washington only provides for half-day kindergarten. Seattle Schools provides one full day kindergarten with options for schools to use discretionary funds, grants or fee based programs to extend full day kindergarten to all students.
It is my understanding that the state does not pay for full day K for all FRL students, although in the past, students in Title I schools (FRL rate > 50% or so) did get free all day K in Seattle. So , in the past, prices were set at schools so nonFRL families paid enough to cover the share of FRL families at that school.
Wouldn't it be lovely if for planning purposes, families with split siblings (based on this month's assignment letters) could indicate on the enrollment form in March their relative interest in full-day versus half-day K? If I remember correctly, you could do that under the old system for schools like Laurelhurst - there was a code for full day K and another code for half day. You could rank one or both of those options on your form in the past. Of course, this would only capture data from those unhappy with their original assignment. The other necessary step would be for the potentially over-enrolled schools to independently survey the assigned families about their interest as well.
Who knows how many families might like 1/2 day K? Many assume that no one wants it, but we might be surprised. But I'd at least like to see the district make the effort to learn people's preferences before doing something drastic like random assignment to 1/2 day K at schools where such a program has not traditionally existed.
It's interesting to see that there are other potential motivations to register for FRL.
I suspect they got away with it under the old system because every school did charge something different, and you felt like you were joining a community of your choosing (for most of us at least), and knowing that you wrote the check directly to your school and that the funds were used locally made it a bit more palatable. And in my part of town, a lot of us were paying much much more for preschool, so the $200-or-so per month fee was actually a cost savings! We viewed it as making our cash contributions to the school on a regular basis rather than thru sporadic fundraisers. We just figured we'd spend less on fundraisers that first year while paying for K then increase our donations to PTSA, the auction, etc in later years.
However, now that parents can no longer choose a school, the district has to standardize the fee out of fairness. You can't assign one family to a school charging $140/month while the family across the street is assigned to $240/month. I wonder if this change (schools that charged nothing this year will charge $207 next year) may be just the thing to spark a legal challenge to the practice?
(I'm also with Di in wondering why stop at pay for K? Why not charge a monthly fee for other services? At our school, the 4th and 5th graders no longer have art with the art teacher. Why not charge those families a monthly fee to pay for a part-time art teacher? What's the difference?)
"If my new attendance area school charges a fee for full-day kindergarten, will
I have to pay for it?
SPS is currently studying and considering whether a change in policy will be made.
Currently, the State of Washington pays only for half-day kindergarten. Thanks to
voter-approved levies, Seattle Public Schools has offered one full-day kindergarten
class at every school. Some schools are able to add additional full-day K classes
through funds allocated from the federal government, such as Title I. Other schools
have chosen to add additional classes by charging fees. We will post information to our
Web site when these decisions have been made."
http://www.seattleschools.org/area/eso/transition_quickfacts.pdf
Education Commission of the States . Scroll down to WA entry: Kindergarten attendance is not mandatory in this state.
That's how it is in California and always has been.
Kids need kindergarten to prepare them for first grade. It's the natural step between nursery school, pre-K and first grade.
If that was a way for the state legislature to not pay for kindergarten than that is totally bogus.
Maybe with this court judgment for the state to provide the mandatory money to the school districts, kindergarten will be paid for in full.
You need to demand that of your legislature instead of worrying about how much you have to pay. You shouldn't have to pay anything!
It is no longer a tolerable situation to accept the status quo.
For the quality of education to improve here, you need to question everything and demand far more than you have so far.
Dora where did you find this number? I'd like to see it for myself. Also does anyone know where to find our state ranking statistics? I've heard we rank in the 40th percentile for class size and I'd like to read more about that too.
And Dora I don't agree that kindergarten attendance should be mandatory. Some kids are not ready for kindergarten and would do better at home or in pre school for one more year.
My kids went to a Waldorf pre school where the philosophy was to focus on the social aspects of pre school, play, learning to share, take turn, etc. But they did not teach any academics. At all. No ABC's, no counting, nothing. Despite what a warm and nurturing place the pre school was I had friends who truly thought I was doing my kids an injustice and that they would be totally unprepared for KINDERGARTEN.
When my oldest arrived at kindergarten he could count to about 17, and could sing the ABC's, but could not identify any numbers or letters by sight. It is true that when he arrived he was behind the other kids that could identify every letter in the alphabet, write some words, write their names, do basic addition, count to 100 and so on.
Yet, my son was the first to read in his class. He was also well ahead of the class in addition by the end of the year. And socially he thrived.
It's not always about how early we shovel or force feed facts into kids brains. There is a human aspect to learning too. Some kids are ready for kindergarten and some are not. It should be a parents choice whether or not to send their child to K, not a state mandate.
Whether they are learning ABCs or just playing, the children in preschool are learning the basic structure and expectations of participating in a group, following rules, etc. That alone can give a child an advantage of one who has only been in the home (or grandma's or an in-home daycare).
If kindergarten is not mandatory, then some children will be entering 1st grade—the time when academic learning AND testing begins—at a disadvantage. Where their classmates are already versed in the code of conduct and may already be reading, the child without the pre/K advantage will be trying to navigate new waters.
I believe early childhood education is the key to closing the gap and could solve a lot of the problems we see in education today.
Step J, that is what I said.
Tamara, you're right. I know that some schools, especially middle and high school, try to do outreach to parents to let them know about multiple opportunities available to their student under F/RL. I recall our principal asking us to put in the PTSA newsletter.
WS North, that stat has been around a long time and used by the district, LEV, School Board, you name it. Some dispute it because as we all know you can manipulate stats but we are definitely in the lower rungs of funding.
Under the BTA levy, they allegedly will be building 4 new pre-school classrooms in the south end. How they will be funded, I don't know.
Is this the predictability the new SAP was supposed to provide? You may or may not get a full day of schooling, but at least you'll know what building it will be in. Thanks. How helpful.
What are you supposed to do if you have a job? Do the schools that have half-day K have after-care for the rest of the day? Does it cost the same as pay for K? Or does havin a job make you 'priviledged' and therefore not a priority?
Give parents some credit, please.
You gave the example of your children going from Waldorf preschool and thriving in Kindergarten, which is a wonderful story, but I'm not following how that makes your point that some children should delay entry to school. Did you hold them back a year before starting Kindergarten?
The issue of red-shirting, of course, is a tangent to this thread and has opinionated folks on both sides of the argument. My intent wasn't to start discussing that. Just want to understand better the argument against mandatory K attendance.
I do believe there are is an occasional kid who is better off sitting out kindergarten and going straight to first grade - the case I know was a boy with plenty of academic aptitude who was just not developmentally ready to sit still and focus until a year later. Still, a parent in this case could deal with the mandatory-ness the way homeschoolers do, right?
I respect parents rights. I think parents should be the ones to decide what is in the best interest of their children and whether or not their child is ready for kindergarten. And, if they feel their child is not ready for kindergarten then we should respect that.
It troubles me when people start discussing mandates, and taking away parents rights to choose what is in the best interest of their children. Parents have many choices in the education of their children, and we should respect that.
Maybe part of the legislature's response to the underfunding of public education could be fully funding kindergarten. That would also simplify busing.
At Sacajawea in 2006-07, there was one class of full-day kindergarten, one combined class of full-day kindergarten-1st grade, and one class of half-day kindergarten. Almost all of the half-day kindergarten kids were enrolled in the kindergarten arts program in the afternoon, which was organized by the PTA and funded by the parents. The PTA did offer it for free or reduced fees for FRL families.
As far as what SPS can do, I agree with having the fee be standard, now that there's little choice in schools. But I am worried about how much will make it back to the schools.
We live close to our school, and if I do both drop off and pick up of our children, and then commute to work by bus or bike, I can get maybe 5 hour day in at the office (if the busses are on time). 5.5 if I drive and pay for downtown parking. Throw in early dismissal and in-service days, xmas, february and spring breaks and you are lucky to get 20 hours in a week.
You will need to pay one way or another, for before and/or after school care, or full day K, most likely both if you work full time and don't have flexible jobs. Having great neighbors who have one stay at home parent helps. It doesn't ease the parental guilt though.
I also think some 5 year olds are really not ready for 6 hours in a classroom, especially if the focus is on academic achievement and mastering organizational tasks.
There is not a similar infrastructure from 12-3PM. For a working parent, this is a big problem. Remember that kids with working parents have typically been in daycare/preschool for 9-10 hours a day for several years (even their whole lives) before starting K. 6 hours is a breeze for these kids, with the biggest problem being that nap-time moves to after 3pm at the YMCA instead of after lunch at preschool.
This isn't a personal issue for me, as my child is in K this year. I am just frequently astounded at the district's complete disregard for the needs of families, and complete lack of understanding of what life is like for a modern working family. It's right up there with being astounded that there's lousy math instruction and no foriegn languages in elementary school. The district just doesn't "get it", and that makes me crazy.
But, I don't think that all schools offer these opportunities, and at some, spots are limited. We toured a local school 2 years ago whose paperwork claimed there was afterschool care, but learned (only after specifically asking) that there was a waiting list and some families waited a year or more to get a spot.
So what do you do if you are assigned there and can't get into the afterschool program and you don't have a flexible job that you can leave daily prior to 330PM?
And if 1/2 day K is mandated at some schools, will their after-care facilities and programs be available starting at noon for the few children at any given school who might need it? Right now, those programs work because there is a critical mass of children from all grades who participate; that's not necessarily true if you are talking about accommodating one half-day class where only a few will want such a program.
If a school switches to half-day K after open enrollment, K families should be given the option to transer to another school that offers full-day K, with transportation.
How is this equitable?!
I guess one question I have is, why, if they know they could have a problem, and they know they are expecting overflow, and they are planing for all this - WHY didn't you have to forcibly register for Kindergarten in December, after the final maps were approved, so they could have a better idea of what is going to happen?
And I fully oppose having to pay for K at all. Get rid of some of the "coaches" and maybe we would have money for 2 full day kindergartens in every school. Making people pay for kindergarten drives me crazy.
And no one will know until May what is going to happen. Nice job SPS. I thought the new plan was going to make things easier? Faster? Doesn't seem so.
IF we had more "choice" in schools (the way we did BEFORE the SAP), it might be possible to better "match" kids with programs -- so we would do less harm by stuffing them all into "real school" at the age of 5, where those who are not ready "learn" that they are not very good at school, and that they are "behavior problems" -- and learn to hate school and think of themselves as bad students. Children in Finland don't start "academic" school until 7, and one study found that while English children were ahead of them academically at age 6 (after "academic" kindergarten/preschool), Finnish kids were academically ahead in all areas at age 15.
See: The education standards of six-year-olds in England, Denmark and Finland: an international comparitive study (2003) is available from www.ofsted.gov.uk, reference HMI 1660.
The report highlighted the contrast in the experiences of six-year-olds under two radically different systems. In Finland and Denmark they went to pre-school, where the focus was on their social, physical, interpersonal and moral development. The outcomes of the systems were different. Six-year-olds in England were generally well ahead of those in Denmark and Finland in terms of the three Rs. However, by the age of 15, according to a international survey, Finnish children outperformed all others in reading and mathematical and scientific literacy.
If "fairness" demands that we make it free (it is not free in Germany or other places), so be it. But it should not be seen as "mandatory" unless we are prepared to grapple with the disconnect between "school" as it is now delivered, and the social, emotional, and academic developmental needs of small children (and not "normed" groups of them -- but of EACH small child).
And while I suppose it is possible to get to this result by forcing every family that doesn't want their child to enter structured school at five to apply to "homeschool," I think the current system -- where parents can send their kids if they want to, or leave their kids in preschool, or keep them at home and do playdates and informal stuff -- is far preferable.
Now I don't know. But I think that the train has really left the station on whether it's good for kids. I'm mean now we want to mandate accessible pre-school for free/reduced lunch kids on the idea that too many kids come to school way behind others. There's another good article I have and I'll spin off a thread from it.
I think this is a crucial piece in closing the achievement gap. But parents of course should be able to choose whether or not they want to take advantage of it.
Unfortunately, I think Melissa is right -- the train has left the station and the shortsighted thinking is that if kids could only be better prepared for Kindergarten all the other pieces would fall into place.
A counter to TechyMom's point that a 6 hour day of K is a cakewalk for kids that have been in 8 or 9 hour daycare: It could be if they were spending more time on play and age appropriate activities, not to mention the fact that they must do homework when they finally do get home.
I worry that the the push for more pre-school and kindergarten readiness programs will be a failed attempt to fix to a problem they have no idea how to address.
Yes indeedy, a good question. If kindergarten is such a question mark, it probably would have been better for all concerned to enroll earlier so the district could start making plans sooner. (And, of course, parents can plan for what they need to do.)
Maybe they couldn't have done it with the VAX. I don't know.
But it could be quite the chaotic free-for-all if the district decides, say in May, that half of the NE schools (and maybe a few elsewhere) will only have half-day K. Would that cause an exodus to those schools that have room at full-day K? If you had many parents at one school who needed some kind of day-care, how could that be handled? Not on-site because with the capacity surge plan, every available space might be taken up. Maybe at a nearby church or community center? I would hope the district, because they are the ones sending this into motion, might at least take the lead.
FYI, Seattle Metropolitan magazine is writing a story on the new SAP and its issues. I tried to help them fill in the blanks and the reporter was pretty surprised at how much seems to be up in the air even after you have a finished plan and transition plan.
When my 6 year old son became a "behavior problem" and a "school hater" I felt my only guaranteed option was private school. Yes, I could have put his name on a long wait list to a school that was on the other side of town only to never get in. Fortunately, we had the means to make the choice that met our needs.
Lowell actually has diapering facilities because some of the kids in special ed need them, so once the sprinklers are in, I am hopeful that Lowell will actually meet the new standards. That said, it's silly to apply diapering rules to a school-age daycare.
The real issue is that the state isn't fully funding education, and should be paying for all day K. Or 6 periods of high school a day rather than 5.
All of the debate over the math case worries me that people missed the bigger decision that came out that day. The people you should be lobbying not to appeal is the Gov and local legislators.
Is this true? Are there statistics about enrollment for 1/2 or full-day kindergarten from the past few years.
Is there a need for 1/2 day? Do parents ask the school for more 1/2 day classes so that their kid is with other 1/2 day kids? I can honestly say I don't know anyone with a kid in 1/2 day.
*My opinion is that there should be more 1/2 day kids because they aren't ready to be in the classroom for a full day, but come on 2.5 hours? That is too little time. Neither option is great in my opinion. Also the whole 1/2 day afternoon kindergarten. Really? I can't think of many people that would want their kid's academic day to begin after noon. Mandate or no, my kid would never go to afternoon 1/2 day kindergarten.
Ahhhhh........
Any child at an entry level grade (such as K) is guaranteed a seat at a school based on their address. The new boundaries were drawn with some best guesses and some known data. But, until school starts in September they (District and us) won't know how many K kids will need to be accommodated. If they (District) thought maybe 70 kids would show but it turns out to be 150 then kachow -- your school will have nothing but half day K. What has been done in past years will not make a difference.
As others have said...in the long-term this strategy does not make sense as there is no half day 1st grade, etc. How will all of these kids move on through the school? Perhaps the District planners are just trying to buy time to make adjustments to boundaries and have another year to figure things out?
Latest word on the street is that the enrollment forms will not specify full or half day K - just list an option for Kindergarten. That way no promises are broken - right? You just registered for Kindergarten - not full or half day. So as our K teacher tells the kids -- "You get what you get and you don't throw a fit."
I believe MGJ's contract is not up until 2012 or 2013? As she doesn't think class sizes matter (no big deal if your kid has to sit on the radiator to attend class), and seemingly does not care about the impact of perpetual uncertainty to students and families it is likely to be quite the turbulent ride for the next few years.
Perhaps frequent boundary changes to keep your elementary kids perpetually assigned to separate schools? Just my jaded thought pattern – but parents please be aware that enrolling in your attendance area school does not guarantee that younger brother and/or sister will be guaranteed a place in the same school.
Boundary changes may occur annually and with it your certainty.
Parents – you might want to follow MGJ’s lead in enrolling your oldest elementary age child in an Option School. That might be one school type that can provide a full day K as enrollment is optional vs. guaranteed. If you get a good lottery number you are in! Plus, even if the boundaries change for your attendance area school you have almost certain entry for younger siblings to an Option school as all seats are open for enrollment and sibling is the first tie breaker. Sibling Preference lives on at Option Schools.
But please fill out your paperwork correctly. List an Option school as your first and only choice. That way you do not give up your seat at your Attendance Area school if you don’t get into your Option School choice. Be careful parents. The playing field is neither level nor tilted in your favor.
I do not believe that boundary lines will be changed annually. I do believe that schools will have "overcrowding" at levels they haven't had under the old SAP.
I think blaming this on MGJ is foolish. She was chosen by the school board to implement changes to a "neighborhood" school system.
I would gladly be the "fool" for all of Seattle if it meant certainty and peace of mind for parents.
wv: "twinsio" -- Twins got me into this but perhaps with the twins/multiples guarantee I have repaid?
Yet she chose the New School for her child next year - with it's unprecidented small class size and private funding. Go figure...
Do 1/2 day K students get transportation in the middle of the day (either home from a.m. K or to p.m. K)?
This doesn't necessarily apply to the schools with capacity issues--they don't really have a choice if they need seats for a certain number of kids, but for schools that are charging just to make revenue it's a losing proposition. Unless all of the kids are within the school's walk zone, they will save money in the instruction budget, but lose it on transportation.
I have recently started to have the concern that the mention of half day K in the Transition Plan may not be to address capacity but perhaps a way to disguise some intended teacher RIFs?
Half day K appeared as a possibility in the Transition Plan at the eleventh hour along with the reduction of grandfathered transportation from five years to two.
Just the fact that half day K was inserted at the last moment bothers me - something doesn't seem quite right.
Using your example Maureen - what if a school normally has three full day K classes but that is altered for 2010 so the school offers one full day class and two half day classes? Suddenly, you have a full FTE K position to be eliminated. The norm. is to have one teacher take on two half day classes vs. one teacher per half day class.
In that scenario there would be more operational savings than transportation savings as a full FTE K teacher at $80k would take a bigger bite out of the budget than the $52k for a yellow bus.
Is this how sums will be siphoned from schools around the District to provide the currently undefined monies for STEM?
I feel odd going all conspiracy theory. I just can't shake that something isn't quite right with how half day K was tossed into the Transition Plan and am trying to figure it out.
Dr. Goodloe-Johnson.
Please join me in questioning this illegal act by writing to the district, state legislature, and Goodloe herself.
G father of 3
West Seattle
My daughter is one of three kids doing half-day at Bryant where there are five full-day classes.
She is getting left out of a lot of the fun stuff. Even though that makes us really sad for her, she doesn't seem to be suffering. We're staying positive about all the things we can do as a family in the extra time and kinda "homeschooling" the things she's missing. That's working for now.