________________________________________  THE VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT May 23, 2005 - Vol. 5, No. 21 ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯  Covering education news in Vermont and beyond... Informative, provocative, unique... Published by Vermonters for Better Education  VBE is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization whose mission is to enlist parents and the public at large in achieving quality educational opportunities for all the children of Vermont by monitoring the state of education in Vermont; promoting the value of educational freedoms for all parents; and giving parents the evaluative tools with which to identify excellence. Libby Sternberg, executive director: VTBetterEd@aol.com SPECIAL ALERT... SPECIAL ALERT: EARLY ED LANGUAGE INSERTED IN BUDGET BILL! The Senate Appropriations Committee has sent a clear message to both supporters and opponents of publicly-funded universal preschool who share concerns about current early education initiatives. That message is: who cares what you think? The committee approved a state budget bill, H.516, late in the week that includes language on how to count preschool students in ADM calculations, thus allowing public school districts unfettered access to Education Fund money for preschool -- despite the fact that numerous attempts to pass an early education bill have stalled and rules containing similar language failed to make it past the State Board of Education. The bill will move to the Senate floor this week. The language included in the budget bill -- or "Big Bill" -- is actually more expansive than that included in S.132, the early education bill under consideration this session. S.132 specified that preschool students attending an approved preschool for fewer than six hours a week could not be counted in a school's ADM. The Big Bill early ed language does not include this caveat. Thus, any child enrolled in a public preschool program will be included in a district's ADM on a pro-rated basis, no matter how few the hours of attendance actually are. In an interview Monday morning, Sen. Don Collins (D-Franklin), chairman of the Senate Education Committee, said he was interested in introducing an early education amendment to the budget on "Wednesday or Thursday." The amendment, he said, would essentially codify current practice into statute. The current version of the Big Bill makes that amendment unnecessary. Including this language in the Big Bill is a slap in the face to supporters and opponents of S.132 alike. Both raised concerns about certain aspects of the bill, specifically its effect on private childcare providers. By going around the committee process where those concerns could be addressed, the Senate will be shutting down debate on early education, enacting an early ed law without addressing issues raised in previous discussions.  GOVERNOR'S STATEMENT ON EARLY ED LANGUAGE IN BUDGET BILL Jason Gibbs, the spokesperson for Governor Jim Douglas, released this statement late Monday on the Senate Appropriation Committee's inclusion of the early education language in the budget bill: "The Governor is very concerned that the Senate would insert this language into the budget without the support of both the House and Senate education committees. Why would Senate Democrats choose to short circuit the education committee process? "Childcare providers all throughout Vermont have expressed concerns about this language. In the Governor's view, their concerns should be addressed through the normal deliberative, and fully transparent, process in the education committees."  HOW TO CONTACT SENATORS  To stop the early education language from moving forward in H.516, the budget bill, a senator will have to move to strike the language from the bill and a majority of senators would have to agree. If you would like to contact Senators, you can find your Senators' email addresses and phone numbers at: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/legdir/legdir2.htm During the legislative session, it is best to leave a message for Senators by calling or faxing: Tel: 1-800-322-5616 Fax: (802) 828-2424 ...or by emailing them. If you agree that an early education initiative should be thoroughly discussed and considered in the education committees of the legislature and not tacked on to a budget bill, tell your Senators to strike the language that describes how to draw down the Education Fund using an ADM calculation for preschool students!   *   *   * COMMENTARY... A SLAP IN THE FACE  by Libby Sternberg What can one conclude from the following history: In the last legislative session, S.166, an early education bill, failed in the legislature when legitimate concerns were raised about its impact on private providers and its potential cost. Late last year, the Vermont Department of Education used that failed bill as a model for rules it presented to the State Board of Education for their approval. Numerous organizations weighed in with concerns and the rules were withdrawn. This legislative session, S.132 is introduced and considered in the Senate Education committee. A reworking of S.166, this bill still does not contain adequate protections for private providers and still raises concerns about potential costs because the bill would institute universal preschool -- not just for at-risk students but even for those whose parents can afford to pay for such a service. In other words, the day laborer in Orleans County will be underwriting the lawyer's child in Chittenden County unless this part of the bill is fixed. Both opponents and supporters of the bill raised concerns about the private provider component of the bill and it remains in committee. Any reasonable observer looking at this history comes away with a clear message -- that we still need to work on an early education bill in Vermont in order to get it right. The Senate Appropriations Committee, however, doesn't seem to care about getting it right, nor about addressing the concerns that have been raised year after year and have kept an early ed program from successfully passing. Without testimony or thoughtful consideration, they quickly tacked language onto the budget bill that effectively ends debate by turning the money spigot on full-force for public preschool in Vermont. If there was ever any doubt that current statute does NOT allow the draw down of the Education Fund for public preschool, the budget bill puts that myth to rest. After all, if language already exists in statute supporting publicly-funded preschool, why do we need to add it? Either it's in statute now or it's not. You can't have it both ways -- if statute says it's there now, you don't need to add it. The Vermont Department of Education deserves some blame for this confusion and the subsequent consequences. The VDOE continues to provide a road map to public school districts on how to draw down Education Funds for universal public preschools -- a process which can help public school districts keep money they'd otherwise lose because of shrinking K-12 enrollments. The VDOE's position has always been that statute currently allows this draw down. It must come as a surprise to them, then, that language supporting their position has to be added to statute. Because the VDOE has encouraged the draw down of Ed Funds for public preschool, however, the Senate Appropriations committee might have felt compelled to act. If so, the VDOE has perpetrated a very shrewd scheme - encouraging what could be illegal behavior and then urging the legislature to make it legal before anybody runs afoul of the law. Senators should resist the urge to go along with such a plan and continue the deliberate examination of the concerns raised during EVERY SINGLE CONSIDERATION of this early education program. These concerns, by the way, continue to grow. A recent mailing to private childcare providers in the state by the advocacy group FreedomWorks-Vermont found that many providers were unaware of the early ed bill, let alone what was in it. In addition, as stated earlier, BOTH supporters and opponents of the early education programs want better protections for private providers and more well-defined choices for parents. Why can't the Education Committees address those concerns? Why does the Senate Appropriations Committee feel compelled to ignore them and ram this thing through? And has the Vermont Department of Education in any way encouraged the Appropriations Committee to act as it did? Bypassing the education committees is a slap in the face to all who have tried to get the early education issue right and to the private child care providers in the state who only recently began to become aware of the early education bill. But perhaps that is the reason for the Appropriations Committee's haste --- as private providers become more educated on the early ed initiative, maybe it was becoming less and likely it would pass in its current form. # # # # # GET ON THE FREEDOMWORKS MAILING LIST FreedomWorks-Vermont, a new organization that shares VBE's concerns about S.132, would like to build an email list. Co-founded by staunch school choice advocate Jack Kemp, FreedomWorks is 501c4 grassroots organization dedicated to fighting for greater economic opportunity less government intrusion. The Vermont chapter of FreedomWorks is organizing and mobilizing throughout the state. To learn more about FreedomWorks-Vermont, or to become a member, visit http://www.freedomworks.org, http://www.freedomworks.org/processor/signup.php, or contact State Director, Rob Roper at rroper@freedomworks.org, or 802-999-8145.   *   *   * COMMENTARY... Excerpts from  "CUTTING THROUGH THE PRESCHOOL SMOKE & MIRRORS" by John McClaughry Senators need to take a very clear-eyed look at the proposition (universal publicly-funded preschool) before them, and the nature and interests of its chief advocates. The pressure for universal preschools came initially from then-Education Commissioner Ray McNulty in 2002. The Department, and its satellite education lobby groups, is very aware that Vermont's school age population is going down, while school costs are going sharply up. Taxpayers don't like this. The solution is to get more kids into the system. By adding two more grades below kindergarten, the system can find the new pupils that will help to justify its ever-increasing spending. ... A significant number of local school districts have already cobbled together their own pre-school programs. These programs, which now cost $14 million, have never been authorized by the legislature, and are thus arguably unauthorized expenditures of taxpayer dollars. Nonetheless, the Department has vigorously encouraged their expansion. It has even put out materials to show local districts how enrolling a bunch of low-cost pre-K kids will allow the districts to hold down their per pupil spending, and thus avoid higher, and politically unpopular, local share property tax rates. Those districts would welcome statutory protection. For years the state has made grants to schools for "essential early education" services for pre-K children who are certain to become special education students once in kindergarten. Act 68 also gives districts additional Education Fund money for pre-K programs and mentoring for "at risk" pupils from poor families, or who don't speak English at home. The general fund also provides $1.3 million for the Department's "early education initiative". Three well-known academic studies show that spending large amounts of money on at-risk children, including lots of family intervention, can diminish emotional and behavioral problems, promote social adjustment, and improve cognitive learning. But after years of studies, there is no evidence to show that giving all children two years of Pre-K results in anything of lasting educational value. ... # # # # # John McClaughry is President of the Ethan Allen Institute:  http://www.ethanallen.org   *   *   * WHO COVERS EDUCATION IN VERMONT? We do! Consider a gift to Vermonters for Better Education, the publisher of the weekly Vermont Education Report, Vermont's ONLY continual source of education news. Send donations to: VBE, 170 Church Street, Rutland, Vermont 05701. VBE is a nonprofit organization and contributions are tax-deductible.  *   *   * The VERMONT EDUCATION REPORT is published by Vermonters for Better Education 170 Church Street, Rutland, VT 05701, 802.773.5240 Contact VTBetterEd@aol.com for more information.   Subscribe Here SubscribeRemove

---

Return to Education Report Index | Return to VBE Index | Vermonters for Better Education Homepage

---

........