tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8895200797299787815.post-65804883420470311982007-05-30T20:26:00.000-05:002007-05-30T20:43:07.856-05:00<span style="color:#333333;">I was talking to someone about the last school board meeting and this person made a comment that really got me thinking. The comment "Why would you want to be on the school board if you are going to deny children an education?" The person was referencing the "no" vote by 2 board members to provide 4K education to Oshkosh children. For almost 10 years the Oshkosh district has had a 4K program for English Language Learners (ELL) students and the state informed Oshkosh that in order to receive state aide for that program the district needed to have a "universal access" 4K program. Meaning that 4K had to be available for all district children, not just targeted to certain groups. If the district did not move to universal access 4K they would not be able to have a 4K ELL program either because there is no money in the budget to fully fund such a program. I hadn't really thought about the fact that voting against 4K was denying children an education but that is what would have happened. Those same board members then voted against providing summer school programs for students because they believe that the pay for summer school teachers is too high, but that is something that is bargained with the union and cannot be changed unilaterally. It does seem strange that school board members would vote against providing programs that are not only needed by students but, in the case of 4K ,wanted by 85% of parents surveyed. </span><br /><span style="color:#333333;"></span><br /><span style="color:#333333;">There is a multitude of research by not just educators but also economists that show that 4K is not only beneficial for children (with univeral 4K considered more beneficial for children in need than targeted programs) it has a huge return on investment for governmental units. Yet these board members still voted against 4K basically denying children an education. I just don't see how it can be justified that the best interest of the children were served by those "NO" votes.</span><div class="blogger-post-footer"><img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/8895200797299787815-6580488342047031198?l=oshkoshstudents.blogspot.com'/></div>Questioningnoreply@blogger.com47