Last night I caught a bit of the July school board meeting on cable TV*. The board was discussing Elmbrook's coming budget woes and the difficult decisions our district needs to make to keep our schools operating within budget. (Unfortunately, I missed at least the first half of the meeting, but I will watch again and take better notes.)

Glen Allgaier had created a list of cost saving possibilities--none of them an easy choice. The list included the unpleasant prospects of closing a school and increasing class sizes. The idea was we needed to dramatically cut spending in order to meet our financial obligations. There seemed to be agreement that drastic measures were necessary.

Then Dr. Gibson chimed in that we could also look at increasing revenue producers to solve our money problems as well as implementing cost savings measures. That was when he mentioned 4K as well as looking at nonresident students. Gibson acknowledged that we had decided to forgo 4K but it seemed the state aid dollar potential was still tempting him.

Another "revenue producer" would be to go to the taxpayers with a referendum to raise the spending cap!

The idea of coming at taxpayers on the heels of our $62mil high school referendum would be very distasteful to me--especially considering our budget shortfalls are nothing new.  While I had suggested a referendum to raise the spending cap to increase the maintenance/capital improvement budget as a way to deal with the high school improvements and needs, that spending cap referendum was to be instead of not in addition to the high school referendum!

4K was mentioned not as an improvement to education but solely as a cure for budget woes--as in increasing the school budget, not decreasing the taxpayer's burden. Our board decided last fall to eliminate 4K because it was not shown to improve student performance in the long run. But here we are again mentioning 4K as a possibility.

Universal 4K is also a subject of the presidential election. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama support the idea of nationwide 4K. The Democrat party believes in pre-K as it is sometimes called.

Today, the Wall Street Journal's Protect Our Kids From Preschool summed up much of what I wrote last fall when Elmbrook was deciding their 4K question. In a nutshell, there is no longterm evidence that 4K is beneficial in the long run:

Barack Obama says he believes in universal preschool and if he's elected president he'll pump "billions of dollars into early childhood education." Universal preschool is now second only to universal health care on the liberal policy wish list...

But is strapping a backpack on all 4-year-olds and sending them to preschool good for them? Not according to available evidence.
...
Mr. Obama asserted in the Las Vegas debate on Jan. 15 that every dollar spent on preschool will produce a 10-fold return by improving academic performance, which will supposedly lower juvenile delinquency and welfare use -- and raise wages and tax contributions. Such claims are wildly exaggerated at best.

In the last half-century, U.S. preschool attendance has gone up to nearly 70% from 16%. But fourth-grade reading, science, and math scores on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) -- the nation's report card -- have remained virtually stagnant since the early 1970s.

The piece concludes with:

If Mr. Obama is serious about helping children, he should begin by fixing what is clearly broken: the K-12 system. The best way of doing that is by building on programs with a proven record of success. Many of these involve giving parents control over their own education dollars so that they have options other than dysfunctional public schools. The Obamas send their daughters to a private school whose annual fee in middle school runs around $20,000. Other parents deserve such choices too -- not promises of subsidized preschool that they may not want and that may be bad for their kids.

Jay Weber talked about 4K in his 8am hour today too. A man whose wife taught in Elmbrook's kindergarten program called in. He said his wife presented 25 reasons 4K was beneficial at the board meeting, but the board voted to discontinue. The caller then added, he wouldn't send his children for 4K! (He must have had his own 26 reasons it wasn't beneficial?)

Finland was again mentioned as a standard. Finland doesn't start school until age 7. Their students do better than the rest of the world.

Taxpayers are asked for more and more money each year, whether at the local or national level. Can we at least narrow down the wish list to programs that actually work?

Past post: Does 4K deserve tax dollars? 

If you wish to read other past postings on this subject, just click the tag 4K and they will come up. 

*Our venture in to cable TV was short lived. We signed on with TimeWarner for a special deal that wasn't delivered as promised. Now to get the package that was presented would cost $30 more per month. Too much for television! Monday the cable TV will be shut off. 

Links: 

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin,   Vicki Mckenna

I admit it. I was surprised when Elmbrook's $62 million dollar referendum passed last April 1st. Usually, it takes 3 referendum tries before one will pass.

In my opinion, Elmbrook's referendum broke ranks and passed on the second try because of 3 reasons. One, it was held during a spring election (lower voter turnout) rather than a November presidential election (higher voter turnout), and two, there was virtually no get out the vote campaign from those opposed. (The third reason I call the secret weapon*, the HSST.  Voters really trusted that HSST committee theoretically made up of both "No and Yes" voters. But this third reason does not apply to this posting.)

Some might say, well, our 2007 referendum failed by a very high percentage. That one was also held in a lower voter turnout spring election too. True, but those opposed to that $108 million 2007 referendum leafleted nearly the entire Elmbrook school district with information as to why it was not a good plan. That did not happen in spring of 2008.

Why wasn't there an organized opposition? Fatigue. Those who worked hard to defeat the 2007 referendum were still too burned out from the last go round to muster much of a fight.

Why am I talking about this water over the dam now? Because Germantown's school board is sending their voters this coming November the very same referendum their residents defeated last April 1st! (H/T Jay Weber @ 7:35 am)

The Journal Sentinel's Mike Nichols wrote, Germantown School Board bucks voters. In that article, he reports how the Germantown board isn't even bothering to reduce and refine their April 2008 $16.5 million referendum. They are just sending the very same thing to voters again this fall.

"School boards do this sort of thing frequently. A referendum fails so they wait a little while, cut a little bit out and try again. And again. And again. Until the "no' voters get tired, or move.

"Germantown is taking it a step further. It's not waiting a little while, and it is not cutting.

Considering there are only so many pro referendum votes out there and there will be a larger voter turnout this November, it is hard to believe it will pass. Evidentially, the same thing happened in Hartford last November and this spring. Voters there defeated the referendum both times.

It seems unlikely Germantown's referendum will pass in November, but there aught to be a law against this!

Taxpayers need and deserve a break from this constant whining for more money from their school districts.

Jay Weber suggested this morning that a state law be made that would prohibit a school district from throwing referendum after referendum at their taxpayer base. A 2 to 3 year moratorium between referendums at least would be welcome. (He has mentioned this before.)

If districts knew they would have to wait for 2 years before they came at their taxpayers again, maybe, just maybe, they would present a more thought out and practical plan. Elmbrook's 2008 plan was not well thought out. For one, they budgeted for HVAC improvements before all of the condition reports were known.

While Elmbrook taxpayers know what they are in for now for the next 20 years (theoretically, we are nearly to the end of our referendums our district tells us), keep in mind many referendums are partially financed through the state. Remember Elmbrook paid for some of Janesville's referendum?

For our referendum, Elmbrook residents must pay “dollar for dollar” of all expenses. But according to Bob Borch, “They (Janesville) accounted for receiving 25% of every dollar needed to pay back the bonds as coming from state aid, this lowering the cost to the taxpayer for their borrowing.”

School districts should be prohibited from bombarding their taxpayers with repeated referendums. It would give taxpayers a breather in between referendum pleas, and that would be a breath of fresh air!

* The secret weapon, the HSST, made up of "No and Yes" voters, I think this was the main reason Elmbrook got voters to bite on their 2nd referendum try. Many people cited the reason they voted yes this time was that they trusted the opinion of that group's assessment of our needs. Many voters, for example, did not know they were voting for air conditioning both schools, including the gyms, or that the team started with the premise that new gymnasiums would be included. Members of the 2007 opposition expressed quiet doubts that the 3 No voters included on the HSST team were really No voters.

Links:

I attended the Human Growth and Development (Sex Ed.) work session Tuesday night. Several of the HG&D parent committee members were in the audience along with some interested parents. 

It was great to see many of our board members boldly standing up for the rights of the parent members of the HG&D committee as well as their own right to review and approve of specific lesson plans and materials used for Elmbrook's Sex Education program.

On a minor note, Glen Allgaier questioned the change in terms from STD (sexually transmitted disease) to STI (sexually transmitted infection). He said that the word "disease" caught his attention more than "infection." I would agree with that. Disease seems more detrimental than the term infection, especially considering some of these "infections" are fatal or incurable. The change from STD to STI was not made by Elmbrook, but was a change made by the CDC, I believe. (Update: See comment below from Cheri who notes that CDC still uses STD. Anyone know why we changed to STI?)

Another question about terminology that keeps cropping up is, what is meant by "curriculum?" This becomes important when discussing who is responsible for approving curriculum. Are we talking outcomes/general topics or actual teaching materials/lesson plans?

Dave Marcello said he would be in favor of getting curriculum in place, not outcomes. Outcomes is fuzzy.

Tom Gehl noted that it may be semantics, with curriculum, I conjure films, lesson plans, etc. 

Later in the meeting, Glen Allgaier suggested that they should just drop the word curriculum all together and just talk lesson plans and outcomes.

I would agree, because then everyone would know exactly what was being decided on. Are we agreeing to just the general topics of what is to be taught (outcomes)? or are we talking about the exact lesson plans and materials used to teach that topic?

If you remember, this was brought up before. Eileen Depka and Dr. Stewart say curriculum is the collective word for the total of individual outcomes. But State Statute 118.019 does state, "...nothing in the law prevents the [HG&D] committee from actually writing and developing lessons or a curriculum, for that matter." It later refers to "curriculum (lessons)" in their instructions.

Curriculum review is one area the HG&D committee does not agree on:

12 of the committee agreed: I believe that the HG&D Advisory Committee should review and approve all outcomes and Certified faculty should create the lessons. Grade Level parents (2 or more) should review the lessons and provide recommendations prior to adoption. Parents can review any lesson before their student participates in the class. (Current practice)*

5 of the committee agreed: I believe that the HG&D Advisory Committee should review and approve all outcomes and all lessons. Parents can review any lesson before their student participates in the class. 

*My note: It may be current practice in principle, but not in reality. At the last meeting we were told by the Pilgrim Park Principal that the binders were not available for parental perusal.  

So 5 of the HG&D committee wish a greater role in reviewing and approving the actual lessons taught. According to State Statute, they have that right.

Depka many times said that allowing the parents on the committee to approve of actual lessons would slow the process down. She seemed to favor that the teachers gather the materials--some prepared, some designed--and then parents (not necessarily HG&D parents) can look at the program. If all of that went to committee, it slows down the process.

David Marcello asked how long would that take?

One semester for the staff approval method, Depka answered. Dr. Stewart said that maybe we need to say, this is what we need done, this is the time frame.  She added, This time we are not starting from zero--some (outcomes) were not changed.

Marcello then said, we heard testimony for Pilgrim Park's Principal Galster that the binders are not in order. We ought to give support to teachers and parents sooner than later. I am in favor of speeding up the process, that is why I like the pre-printed materials. (The "Game Plan" Galster held up at the April school board meeting from Just Say Yes.)

I think Depka and Stewart said that they looked at them, but had not been given any materials.

Marcello estimated that 70% of parents probably would agree with the parents on the committee (that the pre-printed program was good.)

Board President Meg Wartman mentioned that the board had not approved of those materials. She also mentioned that as policy is written now, there is no formalized step for parent review. They then talked about where parent review would come in to play.

Dr. Gibson emphasized that the authority (for approval) resides with the board.

Steve Schwei doesn't think any board review of lessons is needed. (He earlier referred to board review as micromanaging.)

Marcello rebutted, someone should.

Gehl said, what I am looking for is elevating the voice of parents to that of staff.

The Journal reported Gehl as saying, "greater scrutiny is warranted because without it, Elmbrook and other districts have 'led to a case where (sexual) abstinence is presented as an option, but it's nowhere close to being presented as the healthiest option.'" We're not standing behind the policy that says abstinence is promoted. I looked at the pre-packaged, Just Say Yes. I liked much of it. It addresses hesitant teachers, it is uniform, transparent, consistent and aggressively promotes abstinence as the healthiest choice.

Gibson again said the way policy is currently written, (review) is not the role for the board or parents.

Marcello stood up for parents again, We'd like to see parents review this. Later he added, Why wouldn't you solicit the parents on HG&D? 

Depka stated that they want to expand to more parents to look at all materials. In just approving outcomes it took 1/2 year already. If we took actual lessons, it would take longer.

Allgaier said, We have a terrific source in this HG&D team. I would advocate for a very strong role of HG&D team parents. They will reach consensus, the ones (lessons) with disagreement will come to the board.

Wartman added, Prior to parent review, the HG&D team should review. 

There was lots of back an forth on the issue of who reviews the lessons. Some comparisons were made to how they approve of other classes like math, but to me, that is rather apples to oranges.

HG&D parent members, who wish a greater role in reviewing and approving what is being taught in HG&D, have every right to that role. Board members Allgaier, Marcello, Gehl, and probably Jones, seem like they are interested in reviewing/approving at the very least the HG&D lessons the committee couldn't come to consensus on.

It may not be the way we did it in the past, but that does not mean that the way we used to do it is the only way to accomplish the goal of a HG&D program. Plus, past methodology is hardly a shining beacon. Remember last year when oral sex instruction was going to be taught to 6th graders without proper approval process?

Considering there is pre-written curriculum in place that the parent members of the HG&D committee and middle school principal Galster thought excellent, it would seem pre-printed would be the more efficient place to start, rather than reinventing the wheel.

One statement from Dr. Gibson stands out as a glaring, What? Fairly Conservative talked about that yesterday. Please know that nothing the HG&D parents asked for was "Christian" material. Just Say Yes is not a Christian based group either, and an emphasis on abstinence as the best choice is the State's priority.

Past Postings: Updated: So What Happened With HG&D and School Board? April 11, 2008

Links:

(Be sure to contact our state legislators today about budget!)

Elmbrook's Human Growth and Development team (sex education) and the school board are meeting tonight for a work session.

Anyone can attend these sessions, though attendees are not allowed to address the board.

Agenda:

6:00      1.  Review Human Growth and Development Policy Revisions
                 as Recommended by Advisory Committee

6:45      2.  Review Process Questions
                 • Process for Review of Curriculum Outcomes
                 • Process for Selection of Materials to Deliver Outcomes

6:55      3.  Adjournment

It seems that although the state statutes emphasizes an abstinence first approach and prohibits directing a student to abortion only solutions to an unplanned pregnancy, the curriculum does not necessarily reflect the state's priorities.

I plan on attending; hope you will too.

April 8, 2008  HG&D Advisory Committee Recommendations 

Previous posts: Updated: So What Happened with HG&D and School Board? 

HG&D "Outcomes" on School Board Agenda Tuesday 

Links:

Thank you Elmbrook board for accommodating the few parents who still want a half-day kindergarten experience for their children.

Although I still am not convinced that all day 5K academically has any long term benefit, at least parents, who believe a full day for a 5 year old is too much, can opt for just the half-day offering.

I had wondered if something like a combined full-day/half-day class could be arranged but did not know how that would work out logistically. Elmbrook mixes in half-day kindergartners explains how it will work--at least curriculum wise. (Hopefully the half-day students will be sprinkled across all of the classes so we don't end up with 2 or 3 too small afternoon classes.)

Because of the concentration of core classes in the morning (can you call kindergarten classes core?), will parents feel a little more free to take their full-day children out of school for an occasional afternoon? I hate to see children have to give up a play date at the park on a beautiful day or a fun trip to Betty Brinn, etc. Only time will tell. 

Past Posts: Half-Day Kindergarten Extinct? Show Me the Benefit

Does 4K Deserve Tax Dollars? (Cites studies such as "Early Education Shows No Benefit")

Links:

Elmbrook just ended half-day kindergarten for 5 year olds. Why? Because there was lack of interest in half day kindergarten. The public only wanted full day.

But is that the way we make academic decisions these days? We do this or that just because parents want it?

Can anyone tell me the long term academic benefit of going from half day to full day kindergarten? Not the budget benefit to the school district, I am speaking of the academic benefit.

Last fall, during the debate over ending 4-K, School Board President Meg Wartman realized that Elmbrook never evaluated the long term benefit to all day 5-K in the same way they were scrutinizing the long term benefit to 4-K. The conclusion was of course that there was no measurable long term benefit to 4-K and so the district could not justify continuing 4-K.

But what about the long term All-Day 5-K gain? This is what I blogged from the 4-K vote meeting:

"Meg took issue with his assumption that a No vote showed a lack of planning. She said, 4K came out of a financed need in the 2005 study and 4K was not even at the top of the list. Since then, we have been trying to prove academic merit, which we can't find. That brought up a startling comment regarding all day 5K. Meg questioned the benefits of all day 5K--We have not even tried to show the benefit of it by 5th grade--have we ever shown 5th grade gain? (Again, check the broadcast for her exact words.)"

So why have we bypassed this same scrutiny for all day 5-K?

I think it is all about the budget--primarily when the decision to go to all day was made a few years ago.

You see, going all day in 5-K does the same thing as going half-day in 4-K. It increases the state aid by 100% per half day student.

State aid does not pay for the entire education costs per Elmbrook student. The Elmbrook taxpayer must make up the difference, which is significant. I believe in 2006, for example, Elmbrook received $1,701 per full time student in state aid. That would mean for half-day kindergarten students, Elmbrook received $850. So the move to all day kindergarten for those students who were half-day, the district would receive $850 more. The Elmbrook School District taxpayers must make up about $5,435 or more difference, however.

Granted, Elmbrook made the largest leap when all day 5-K was implemented. My question is, did Elmbrook ever weigh the cost to the taxpayer of going full day against the measurable long term academic gain? Judging by Board President Wartman's comments from last fall, it would seem not. 

The district could have handled the all day 5-K question much differently. If they would have provided only a section or 2 of all day 5-K (enrollment by lottery) and left the remaining sections as half-day, then I think we would see a different level of interest right now. Since all day is really just a nice-ity, not a necessity academically speaking, we should really be asking why we are going to all day 5-K. 

I believe that the school district has a responsibility to provide a good primary and secondary education to Elmbrook resident students. Period.  Extras, like all day 5-K (and extracurriculars) need to be examined under the the lens of longterm academic benefit.

Links: 4th Annual Weed Out, May 3rd, Mary Knoll Park

Kinsey Park Clean Up and Pier

There were about 40 residents attending last Tuesday's School Board meeting--most of them because of the HG&D topic.

Early in the meeting, one man from the Christian Civil Liberties Union threatened to picket Elmbrook's building project if the school adopted the controversial oral sex warning policy in the 6th and 8th grade.

At about 8:05pm, Dr. Stewart began her report by stating the HG&D team had 2 tasks. One was to look at policy and make recommendations and the other was to look at the curriculum and outcomes. She then asked the board if they had questions.

Steve Schwei requested that the chart of outcomes for each grade level be reprinted, so the rationale would be noted for every outcome: 73 Outcomes were unchanged, 38 updated, 17 new, and 19 eliminated. 

Ms. Depka clarified that Outcomes were the individual pieces of the total Curriculum picture.

(Please note that while those definitions may be Ms. Depka’s and Dr. Stewart’s interpretation of those terms, they do not reflect the entire HG&D team’s definition of “curriculum” or use of the term “curriculum” in the DPI’s instructions for HG&D. This issue is too large to cover here and will have to wait for another post. Just be aware however, that the DPI states, “...nothing in the law prevents the committee from actually writing and developing lessons or a curriculum, for that matter.” and refers to curriculum (lessons) in their instructions.)

Dr. Stewart (I think it was her, not Depka) stated that there were 2 areas that the HG&D team did not come to agreement on. One regarded the use of substitute or alternate lessons. Often the substitute materials are unrelated lessons, and they are not consistent. Should the substituted lessons be consistent so parents could know ahead of time what they would be? Should the substituted lesson be graded? This topic still needs further discussion but is not a hill to die on. 

The other area the HG&D team could not come to consensus on was much more important. Once outcomes are agreed upon and approved by the team, who develops and approves the actual lesson materials for each outcome/curriculum item? This is a question that needs answering.

*Currently, policy directs the Advisory Committee to make recommendations on curriculum/outcomes only. Faculty then creates lessons for the curriculum/outcomes and chooses educational materials to be used in the lessons. A public review by grade level parents is then held to obtain input prior to finalization of lessons. Once lessons are finalized, lessons and materials are available in various venues for review so parents have access to lessons and materials children will complete. Parents then can determine if they want to 'opt opt' of la lesson. The committee provided their views in the form of a survey, which can be used by the Board of Education for a final decision. 

*(Again, this is how Dr. Stewart is portraying the policy on curriculum development, not what State Statute 118.019 mandates.)

But does the current or future policy prevent a teacher from straying from the lesson? How would a parent know the level of detail and diversity in a broad Outcome?

Example: In the 1st grade one of the Outcomes is to "Describe different family structures". That could be rather innocent or not. One parent might just assume that means discussing how some families only have a mother and children, children living with grandparents, or some other traditional arrangement. But could a teacher go into detail about Johnny has two daddies or Johnny has two mommies or I don't even want to think about the possibilities?

By leaving the actual content of the lesson up to the faculty, there could be a very wide spectrum of information taught to the children because there is no hard-set curriculum in place at the time the HG&D team is approving outcomes.

If I were on the HG&D team, I would want to know exactly what the lessons plans were for each outcome before I would feel comfortable approving it.

If I were a parent of an Elmbrook student, I would want these lessons to be consistent and scripted. That way I could look at each topic and decide if I felt this was appropriate for my child or not--ahead of time.

It seemed some sort of easily accessible binder with the content of each lesson for parents to look at ahead of time does not really exist at the present time. The HG&D committee recommended that "Lessons should be available online for parent review, as well as at the Central Administrative Offices, schools, and local libraries."  (That would be an improvement!)

The board and members and the audience were flipping through the 36 page packet of proposed outcomes for each grade level during this time. Board President Meg Wartman emphasized that none of the proposed changes to the current HG&D curriculum would take place until Fall of 2009. 

Time now for the public comment... 

A young woman--a former Elmbrook student--stunned the audience with her comment that went something like this: (Watch the cable broadcast for her exact words--I don't have cable.)

I learned what oral sex was in 8th grade 'cuz I caught 2 kids doing it (in the bathroom?) at Pilgrim Park. (That is what I wrote down in my notebook--I could be wrong.) She went on to say something about how there was a 4 year gap between them addressing the subject and this incident indicating that in the meantime diseases were spread. Evidentially she and other kids thought, "it didn't count as sex" because they (teachers) didn't talk about it. Her premise was that you couldn't control being exposed to the subject, but The one thing you can control is who tells them about it.

I'm thinking, so you saw this going on and because no one ever told you about it before you thought it was a perfectly OK thing to do? I would not think that would be the reaction of someone witnessing that act. One very good question to ask yourself, if you are ever in doubt about if something is right or wrong is, would I do this in front of my parents or a trusted adult? If the answer is no, then chances are, it isn't a good thing to do. But that is just me.

We seemed to have a president who was also confused about "it didn't count as sex". I think the confusion points to a broader issue. There needs to be some sort of guiding principles to place in our minds and the minds of our children, because it is not possible to "warn" or "instruct" about every possible subject, fad, or rumor. A basic, Any sexual pleasure apart from that with your spouse is sin, and I will set no wicked thing before my eye, pretty much covers all areas. These of course are faith based. But statistics on depression and disease do support these faith based premises.

Needless to say, the audience was a little taken back by that young woman's comments. 

Later, when Don Galster the principal of Pilgrim Park and member of the HG&D team spoke, he noted that he had been here for 4 years (well after that young woman's time at Pilgrim). Don pointed out that the members of the HG&D team, who were present in the audience, were the middle school parent representatives. He stated that things were more volatile at the Middle School level. Things were unresolved. Something needs to happen at the Middle School that is different (not like the former student's example though!)

Principal Galster then made a very good observation. Whenever Elmbrook made the decision to do their own material, it may have been because there were not good materials available. We have a Middle School curriculum now that drifts off into Phy. Ed., Science, etc. The binders (with lesson information) are split up--they are all over the building.

He explained that parents want to know what their children are going to hear (but can't because the binders are spread out.) There are very good materials out there (now); there is curriculum that parents have supplied. Every sensitive topic is scripted, written in appealing way, with scary graphs and stories. If a parent walked in, they could show them (what the lessons would entail.) 

This was a camp program, but it is good, he said as he held up "Game Plan"  by JustSayYes. Elmbrook doesn't have to create the perfect program because it already exists!, he concluded. The audience applauded.

Other parents spoke. Since I am running long here, I will save them for another post.

Since that meeting, there has been quite a bit of commentary about the board meeting on Fairly Conservative. One comment surprised me; it was from the young woman who spoke at the board meeting. The content of her 2nd comment is a bit different from what my impression was on Tuesday. Her first comment seemed more definite, the second more rumor. Only the cable broadcast can confirm the first.

Comment 19 "When, in my opening statement, I said I first learned about oral sex from my peers when 2 kids were caught doing it in the bathroom in 7th grade. I will admit right up front that this could be pure speculation, but that isn’t the point. The point is that one person started saying it happened, and suddenly, by the end of the day, every kid at Pilgrim Park was talking about oral sex in the bathroom, and a fair amount of students (myself included) didn’t know what a [it] was. So, I had the pleasure of learning it from another 12 year old."

The meeting went on and it became very clear that finalizing the new HG&D program will be a monumental task. As Meg Wartman stated earlier, nothing will change until fall of 2009. But given the ordeal ahead of the HG&D team, the board, and faculty, I'm thinking they will be fortunate to be finished by then!

Since there are good materials out there now, I do wonder if adopting one of those programs would be the better way to go. I like the idea of scripted and consistent.  I also like the idea of the lessons being on DVD.

Still to come, Comments from the HG&D team parents and Are we following the State Statute correctly? 

Links:

Hard to believe there could be an issue I am as equally passionate about as preventing wasting taxpayers' dollars in our schools, but Human Growth and Development (Sex Ed.) definitely qualifies.

This Tuesday, April 8, 2008, from 7 - 10:15pm at the Central Administration offices, the school board will meet to discuss several important items. The usual agenda items start at 7pm, newly elected officers take their oath at about 7:35, the High Schools Facilities - Next Steps report is scheduled for 7:40. (This is important, but the cows are out of the barn here.)

The BIG issue of the evening is the Human Growth and Development Outcomes and Next Steps  agenda item at 8:00pm.

Parents, you need to be aware of what is going on in your child's classroom. I have a feeling I will be shocked at what is deemed age appropriate.

If you have been following the HG&D issue, you will remember that last fall, one parent sounded the alarm that starting in the 6th grade, students were to learn be warned about oral sex. A letter was sent to all middle school parents and one, who read through the whole thing, noticed the reference. That parent notified Cindy Kilkenny and she posted the letter. 

School districts frequently dismiss parental concerns about HG&D subject matter by saying that they can simply opt their child out of these classes. The trouble is, often there is not a set date these subjects will be taught. Undesired subjects can pop up at any time, which makes planning for an opt out nearly impossible. There is also a stigma attached to a child being opted out. This is why I suggested that these subjects only be taught in an opt IN arrangement.

There are about 45 minutes alloted for this discussion. If you look through the 50 page Human Growth and Development Outcomes, you will note that the criteria is very vague. If you discuss sexually transmitted diseases for example, how much detail do you go into? When they discuss different types of families in elementary grades, is that traditional families? or will there be 2 mommies, etc.? If I were a student's parent, I would want to know that.

What happens if a teacher does not feel right about teaching the material? Do they have the option to OPT OUT? I am wondering if 45 minutes will be enough time for this agenda item.

After that very important issue, the Pilgrim Park Middle School Boiler Study report at 8:45. Since Pilgrim is about the same age as Central, I am very interested in their solution to repair/replace.

Please spread the word about the HG&D agenda item to parents of Elmbrook students. They should be part of this discussion.

Other meetings of interest:

Park land for fire station? Monday, April 7, 7pm

District 7 and Concerned Calhoun Community meetings April 9th and 10th

Links:

Yesterday I received my copy of the Elmbrook Link. What did you think about the information they chose to include?

Compared to the information available last year, how do you think this year's information compares? 

If you open it to the center pages with the floor plans the large dark areas are for a new 2 station gym at Central and an Indoor track/ 4 station gym combination at East.

Can you see why ACADEMICS, NOT ATHLETICS: VOTE NO might be a theme for this year's referendum?

Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Wording of the April 1, 2008 $62.190.000 referendum 

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Key Academic Benefits: It's direct address is:  www.elmbrookschools.org/.../displayFile.aspx

(I am sorry, I still cannot access it from the 2008 referendum Table of Contents page.)

Tour Schedule  

Tax Calculator  

Frequently Asked Questions

Elmbrook asks for smaller expansion--JSOnline (Also includes links to past articles)

The countdown begins: Just 21 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

Links: Brookfield7, Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Although I am not in favor of the present $62.2+ million dollar referendum, I was pleased to see this practical solution for creating larger classrooms while on the Central High School Tour this week. They are proposing removing the approx. 8' x 9' office cubes from some of the classrooms.

(These would be those classrooms you visit at the top of the stairs at the beginning of the tour--same ones that last year were mentioned as only having 3 working outlets: The Tale of Three Outlets)

I have no idea what they were thinking when this school addition was built--like so many "new" ideas, it seemed like a good idea at the time? But the office within the classroom really plays havoc with the arrangement of student desks.

You can see in the first photo the front of the classroom with the green board. The 15 student desks are arranged perpendicular to the front wall.

The second photo shows the teacher's office cube in the back. The
remaining 15 desks are arranged perpendicular to the back wall.

Each set of 15 desks face each other.

Now, I am not claiming credit for this idea. I think the referendum committee just saw what I saw, a relatively easy and inexpensive way to expand and improve the layout of some classrooms.
 

I had suggested removing those small teacher's office cubes last year in a posting : Post WW2 era buildings = modern construction: 

One “need” on the referendum wish list is larger classrooms. Classrooms at Central are not large enough. Solution: knock out the teacher’s office cube inside the classroom and suddenly the room meets No Child Left Behind standards. Presently we are told the rooms are 750 sq. ft. If the office were removed the room would exceed 825 sq. ft. The layout of the room would improve too. The concept of a teacher having their own classroom is necessary at elementary schools but not at the high school level. This work can all be done “in house” with maintenance staff during the summer as other districts do.

By removing the office cube, the layout of desks improves and the number of potential students per room could increase--if needed. The teacher would be moved to a department office room that would have a private area for student/teacher meetings. Moving the teacher's office out of the classroom also helps when the classroom is used by another teacher. Where this departmental teacher's office area will be is not know at this time Principal LaBonte told us.

I don't believe we need a $102 million referendum ($62.2 million dollar + interest) to make this type of improvement.  Like School Board Member Patrick Murphy, I favor increasing our Capital Improvement budget--I suggested  by $1million a year, last year Murphy suggested by $2 million.

Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Wording of the April 1, 2008 $62.190.000 referendum 

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Key Academic Benefits: It's direct address is:  www.elmbrookschools.org/.../displayFile.aspx

(I am sorry, I still cannot access it from the 2008 referendum Table of Contents page.)

Tour Schedule  

Tax Calculator  

Frequently Asked Questions

Elmbrook asks for smaller expansion--JSOnline (Also includes links to past articles)

The countdown begins: Just 25 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Yikes! Gas prices rise 14 cents overnight!.

Last night I took the tour of Brookfield Central High School before the Elmbrook Candidate Forum. It did not seem there was much interest in either event.  

There were only 7 residents on the tour plus candidate Gary Jones. Principal LaBonte led the tour along with Central's head of maintenance, Shawn (I did not catch his last name or title). It was helpful to have Shawn along to answer some questions. It seemed I was the only one on the tour who would not be voting for the referendum. I took some pictures and will be posting them in future blogs.

The Candidate Forum was not very well attended either--maybe 19 people? Of that audience, 5 were connected with Elmbrook: Board members Wartman, Ziegler, Allgaier, and Murphy, and the Parent Leadership Council leader.

No real surprises in the Q & A, the candidates all supported the referendum.

I am not sure why more people did not attend these events. Possibly their minds are already made up on the referendum?

Is your mind made up yet?

Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Wording of the April 1, 2008 $62.190.000 referendum 

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Key Academic Benefits: It's direct address is:  www.elmbrookschools.org/.../displayFile.aspx

(I am sorry, I still cannot access it from the 2008 referendum Table of Contents page.)

Tour Schedule  

Tax Calculator  

Frequently Asked Questions

Elmbrook asks for smaller expansion--JSOnline (Also includes links to past articles)

The countdown begins: Just 27 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

So much for any choice in School Board candidates: Brooks Fleming now dropped out of the school board race. But there is still the School Board Candidate Forum tonight at Central High School's library, 7:30 - 9:30pm.

If you come earlier, Principal LaBonte will be giving a tour starting at 6pm. However, keep in mind the principal is not the best person to answer your maintenance questions.

Although there are no contested races, I still want to know if Gary Jones and David Marcello are worth of my vote. I do not vote for candidates simply because they are on the ballot.

Tom Gehl will be getting my vote though. Although we do not always agree 100%, I am grateful he is on the board.

Tonight may be a good opportunity for you to ask these new board members what they think of the new O.S. warning policy for 8th graders as well as their views on the April 1 referendum.

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

The countdown begins: Just 27 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

Technology can be a wonderful thing. Two weeks ago, we had that snowstorm warning on Sunday and the weatherman cautioned people to stay home. We were rather torn as to what to do, but since we just had 2 weather related fender benders that week, we chickened out and stayed home. The great thing was though, we did not need to miss our church service.

Thanks to the internet and some tech. minded members, we sat around the computer screen and watched the live sermon  from the comfort of our home! Not quite as good as being there, but we did virtually see and hear the LIVE service. I can also go back to the church website and review a sermon if I want to.

This technology has hit our beloved Yellowstone National Park too. We are what is kindly referred to as Geyser Geeks*--people who love to sit and observe geysers. If all goes according to plan, this summer we'll make our 5th pilgrimage to geyserland in 7 years.

To help us bide our time until the day we set foot on the Upper Geyser Basin, we now have the option of watching some of the geysers LIVE on the park's newly installed geysercam. Just this afternoon we watched Old Faithful and Plume go off. Pretty terrific.

As time goes on, I believe we will see more and more of this type of LIVE broadcast technology. It will enable people to "attend" events from the comfort of their own homes.

Currently, our Elmbrook School District is proposing a $62.2 million dollar high school referendum. The District states this is needed to solve our future facility needs. But I believe, because of technological advances, we can implement this type of live, virtual broadcast technology in our schools and thereby reduce our classroom space needs.

Virtual live broadcast could be used for some classes for all students, and virtual technology could also be used for all classes for some students. Either way, virtual education reduces the burden on classrooms. It also reduces the need for having a teacher for every class.

Virtual, live broadcast and virtual school should be looked at BEFORE we commit to 20 years of higher taxes.

*The official geyser watchers are called Geyser Gazers.

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

The countdown begins: Just 29 days until MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Email me your thoughts on the $62.2 million dollar referendum.

Be sure to read Representative Rich Zipperer's Legislative Update: Right to Bear Arms, Tax Relief, Ending Sanctuary Cities, Banning Partial Birth Abortion, and Virtual Charter Schools.
 

When I read the Community Watch posting, Board considers change in Open Enrollment* headline, I thought, at last they are starting to "get it".  (*Sorry, this is not a perm. link)

I thought the posting was going to state that the board would be reducing the number of non-resident students. I was half right, but the posting was not exactly what I expected.

Certain board members, Sylla and Schwei, are actually proposing that the number of non-resident students increase instead of decrease!  Elmbrook's current policy is to give preference to Open Enrollment students' siblings but not to guarantee siblings a place in Elmbrook schools if no open seats exist.

According to the posting, "Cheri Sylla said the lack of open seats hurts some nonresident families who have sent all of their children to Elmbrook high schools." 

I have to ask, what about the hurt to Elmbrook taxpayers? Remember, Elmbrook taxpayers must pay the difference between the state reimbursement of about $5,500*/Open Enrollment student and the real cost per student in the Elmbrook School District of about $13,000! That means for each Open Enrollment student, Elmbrook taxpayers must kick in around $7,500. (*The exact reimbursement figure of $5,435 for 2005 was supplied to me by Bob Borch last spring.) And let's not forget that one of the reasons we are looking at a high school referendum is because of "crowding".

Steve Schwei, always one eager to increase enrollments at any cost to Elmbrook taxpayers--even if that means building more schools, dismissed the effect of Cheri's request.  Not because there are not many siblings who would want to attend Elmbrook schools, but because "most siblings enter during elementary school". Most siblings are already IN OUR SYSTEM!

Thankfully, not all of our board is supporting this change. Board President Meg Wartman seemed wary of making a change that could increase the crowding at the high school level.

Tom Gehl did not support the sibling guaranteed enrollment. Patrick Murphy and Glen Allgaier wondered about the expense of making this change and the crowding issue. 

The exact number of proposed Open Enrollment students would be 46 for this year. The posting stated this was a "downward trend". According to some correspondence with Bob Borch from 2007, the figure from 2006 was 80 new students.

Keep in mind that 46 is not the total number of Open Enrollment nonresident students in Elmbrook, it is just the additional new students for the year. The total number of nonresident Open Enrollment students in 2007 was 430. (FYI we also had and additional 294 nonresident Chapter 220 students last year too.) 

The whole nonresident student issue is a very important one to the Elmbrook School District and the Elmbrook taxpayers. A total of around 720 non Elmbrook School District students is not to be dismissed lightly. These students crowd our schools and use our support services. Student population is one of the driving forces for our high school needs.

Contact the board and let them know how you feel about nonresident students in Elmbrook. They could vote on this Jan. 22.

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7

I know many parents of 4 year olds and preschoolers are upset that the Elmbrook School District failed to implement a permanent 4K program. I do believe the parents who communicated with the board were sincere in their enthusiasm for the program.

But there was a common thread to their comments that saddened me: many acted as if 4K was the only way their child could learn, achieve, mature, and flourish at this young age.

From Rose Moylan’s quote in the paper, "It [4K] stimulates and challenges (my son) in ways that I simply cannot do at home," to Katie, who spoke at the board meeting, They [4K teachers] can pull out an energy and excitement of learning [that I cannot], their attitude is that public school 4K is the only way this can be accomplished.

What a sad commentary on parenting today.

Since when have parents become so hesitant to nurture their own children? So insecure that they think they are not up to the task of teaching 4K skills at home?

I suppose this reluctance or feeling of inadequacy shouldn’t have surprised me. I heard it all the time in people’s voices when they found out I homeschooled my son K–12. Whether it was during the elementary years or high school years or even now that my son is in technical college, people’s reactions were and are always the same: I could never do that!

Some people I knew better than to try to persuade otherwise—their minds were made up. Others, I would encourage with, “Yes, you can--if you really want to.”

Parents are a child’s primary teacher. We teach them how to eat, talk, walk, use the bathroom, etc. But somehow, when it comes to schooling, some very intelligent parents suddenly feel ill-equipped.

HSLDA, Home School Legal Defense Association (naturally, a pro parents can be teachers stance) compiled some very interesting data that illustrates that anyone can teach their own children from a 1997 study.

Pay particular attention to the comparison between the mother’s educational levels and the basic battery test scores on page 2. The mother’s who did not even finish high school scored higher (83) than those who did graduate (80) and just one point away from the mother’s who had some higher education after High School! (84)

If you compare these test score averages to the public school sector on page 1, you see that even the drop out mom’s kids scored 33 points higher than the average public school students.

Another interesting graph shows the test score differences between homeschool parents who had teacher certification and those that did not. Surprisingly, the average scores were equal at the 4th grade level and 1 point higher in 8th grade if the parent had no educational certification!

Now this posting is not about the virtues of homeschooling vs. public education. There are many factors which contribute to those higher test scores of homeschooled students. Mainly that the child receives so much more one on one time and that the parent knows if the child is “getting it” or not. (When a child has to answer each and every question asked by the teacher, there is no faking it!)

Also, just by virtue of a child being at home and being part of the running of a household, there is much more life skills education taking place. Plus, homeschool families usually eat their meals together.*

Homeschooling parents tend to never turn off the teaching either. Everything is a teaching moment. (Many parents do this too, not just homeschoolers.)

I use this homeschool comparison information only to illustrate that if an uneducated parent can teach and guide their child to outperform the public school student, even in upper grades, certainly any parent can teach their child 4 year old kindergarten skills.

If a parent feels compelled to do a 4K program at home, there are a host of curriculum ideas, materials, and plans available. Rainbow Resource is one online source of all manner of materials. But please, don’t overload your children.

Personally, I do not think this is at all necessary. Just being with your child and involving them in your life: grocery shopping (colors, counting, sizes, etc.), meal preparation (measuring, counting, basic fractions, addition, subtraction), reading to your child (if they have a favorite book, point to the words as you read, when you come to a repetitive fun word, stop and let them say it—that is how my son learned to read), singing, art projects, nature study, pretend play (playing store is great—use real money!), going to the park or other special places, etc. Basically, you just take advantage of the teachable moments throughout the day--not in a tiresome, heavy handed way--make it fun.

PAMELAMUNCH left a comment regarding the importance of family time on my blog. Here is an excerpt:

I feel so many people want a 4k so they have some place to put their child for free (no tuition) so they can work. Why not promote less material gain and more importance on the value of our children at home with mom and family meals etc. I agree w/ LISAMCL and TESTOSTERONE that time with our families is our greatest gain.

Instead of your child telling you how they learned their left from their right hand, you teach it to them! (By the way, you can remind them that if they hold up their index finger, like they are pointing to the sky, and their thumb, out at a right angle, it forms the letter L if it is their left hand. Wish I would have known that when I was a kid!)

You are qualified to teach your own child. Don’t be afraid of it, be a part of it.

*Coming up next: Family Time and Family Meals—more important than we think

If any of you are thinking of homeschooling your children and would like some information, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Recently at a neighborhood party, a few of the moms were talking about school and the high cost of private school tuition. Two of them had their children enrolled in parochial elementary and high schools.

I believe it is the right of every parent to choose the type of school their child attends.Sending children to private school or homeschooling them is a financial sacrifice many parents are willing to make, but as our property taxes increase it is a choice that is becoming increasingly difficult. (The major portion of your bill is the school tax).

That discussion reminded me of something I read in January's 2007 Elmbrook Link regarding the budget.

There has never been a greater need than now to recruit all possible resident-student enrollments into our schools, according to assistant superintendent for finance and operations, Bob Borch. The amount of revenue that the State of Wisconsin allows school districts to receive each year is based on enrollment figures under what are called, "state revenue caps." Either the School District of Elmbrook increases its resident enrollment as one way to produce more revenue or it must continue to make dramatic spending cuts to keep the annual budget in balance.  (Emphasis added)

When that publication came out, some people made the comment that because property taxes (school taxes) were getting so high, soon residents would have no choice but to send their kids to public school--they couldn't could afford tuition on top of the property taxes. Elmbrook was taxing us out of our ability to choose! This holds true for homeschoolers too. (Most homeschool moms cannot work outside the home and teach their children at the same time, so they are single income families.) 

The absurdity of Elmbrook's rational in their wish to recruit every possible student is unbelievable. In very rounded numbers, the total cost per student is $13,000/year. The district receives about $3,000/student from the coveted state reimbursement mentioned in the Link. The remaining $10,000 per student comes from us, the ELMBROOK School District taxpayers!

But cost aside, is this what Public Schools were designed to be? Something that parents had to enlist their children in with out a choice? A drift net that would snag and snare every living creature in its path? Or