Again, this is a timely piece as DPS scrambles to reorganize and become effective again. My key takeaways are:
1) Hopefully this leads us back to letting kids be kids. They will figure it out - they always have. Even the "smart" people who champion the idea of Pre-K academics did just fine using fat crayons, paste you could eat, learning the alphabet & their numbers, recognizing 3 & 4 letter words and playing Red Rover.
2) Not only does this approach lead down the CTE path, it meets students where they are, not where some bureaucrat thinks they should be. (Something our district struggles with)
3) Economic considerations - this will stop "hamstringing" the trying to fill certified positions for which no one applies and it offers a truly viable solution to the Extended Day Program which we can not afford and would most likely be a waste of resources even if we could afford it. You could almost imagine a scenario where the district could pilot an approach like this with a clearly-stated, ultimate goal of cutting the program loose to be privatized once it is up & running on its own two feet.
Interesting article, with compelling research. A couple questions:
Is there even provision under the State Board of Education rules/guidelines, given the current administration's strong emphasis on expanding pre-K, for a district this size to go this route?
I note you state that high school graduates filling these positions would be under supervision... do I read that as supervision from accredited teachers?
Hey Doug, thanks for the questions. Here's what we know...
Regarding: is there even provision under the State Board of Education rules/guidelines, given the current administration's strong emphasis on expanding pre-K, for a district this size to go this route?
Absolutely! The state preschool funding provisions discuss, "Applicants other than public school districts...". However, the state still naively expects substantive learning to take place - and anyone can pretend to do that teaching particularly when the bar for proving any results is non-existent.. But as more and more research comes out about the ineffectiveness of preschool, and just as the ISBE is backing way off of common core requirements for high schoolers that choose a CTE path, this will change too. Which is a nice segue into your next question...
Regarding: I note you state that high school graduates filling these positions would be under supervision... do I read that as supervision from accredited teachers?
No! No! No! I want our district completely out of preschool! 375 out of 400 MacArthur and Eisenhower HS graduates will not get college degrees and thus never become accredited teachers. I want jobs for them!
And finally, from comments that I've heard about my research over the past week, I'm going to take this opportunity to also say:
Progressives should be completely on board with this plan because of the jobs it will provide in a community that needs them. And conservatives should be completely on board with this plan because it will take preschool back to what it used to be (daycare and play!) and save the taxpayers substantual money.
Again, this is a timely piece as DPS scrambles to reorganize and become effective again. My key takeaways are:
1) Hopefully this leads us back to letting kids be kids. They will figure it out - they always have. Even the "smart" people who champion the idea of Pre-K academics did just fine using fat crayons, paste you could eat, learning the alphabet & their numbers, recognizing 3 & 4 letter words and playing Red Rover.
2) Not only does this approach lead down the CTE path, it meets students where they are, not where some bureaucrat thinks they should be. (Something our district struggles with)
3) Economic considerations - this will stop "hamstringing" the trying to fill certified positions for which no one applies and it offers a truly viable solution to the Extended Day Program which we can not afford and would most likely be a waste of resources even if we could afford it. You could almost imagine a scenario where the district could pilot an approach like this with a clearly-stated, ultimate goal of cutting the program loose to be privatized once it is up & running on its own two feet.
Interesting article, with compelling research. A couple questions:
Is there even provision under the State Board of Education rules/guidelines, given the current administration's strong emphasis on expanding pre-K, for a district this size to go this route?
I note you state that high school graduates filling these positions would be under supervision... do I read that as supervision from accredited teachers?
Hey Doug, thanks for the questions. Here's what we know...
Regarding: is there even provision under the State Board of Education rules/guidelines, given the current administration's strong emphasis on expanding pre-K, for a district this size to go this route?
Absolutely! The state preschool funding provisions discuss, "Applicants other than public school districts...". However, the state still naively expects substantive learning to take place - and anyone can pretend to do that teaching particularly when the bar for proving any results is non-existent.. But as more and more research comes out about the ineffectiveness of preschool, and just as the ISBE is backing way off of common core requirements for high schoolers that choose a CTE path, this will change too. Which is a nice segue into your next question...
Regarding: I note you state that high school graduates filling these positions would be under supervision... do I read that as supervision from accredited teachers?
No! No! No! I want our district completely out of preschool! 375 out of 400 MacArthur and Eisenhower HS graduates will not get college degrees and thus never become accredited teachers. I want jobs for them!
And finally, from comments that I've heard about my research over the past week, I'm going to take this opportunity to also say:
Progressives should be completely on board with this plan because of the jobs it will provide in a community that needs them. And conservatives should be completely on board with this plan because it will take preschool back to what it used to be (daycare and play!) and save the taxpayers substantual money.