This would be good news for MPCSD employees to know, yes? Maybe if Board Meeting minutes were posted to the district website (as they're supposed to be according to the Brown Act), we'd be able to find out things like this.

Per the Almanac article, “Representatives of both districts say that if the law isn't mandatory, they have higher priorities for spending their money.” Exactly what ARE the priorities that are more important than addressing the needs of the youngest, most vulnerable children in the MPCSD? Did the Board determine their priorities by examining the research on the effects of early intervention for children? It is unconscionable that one of the wealthiest districts in the state, supported by a 3.6 million dollar donation from the Menlo Park Atherton Education Foundation in June 2013, has decided to not do everything it can to prepare ALL students for kindergarten. In the long-term, the decision to not provide Transitional Kindergarten will negatively impact our children and will increase District costs to meet the students’ needs from kindergarten through 8th grade.

Apparently, it is not a high priority of Ghysels and the Board to ensure that ALL students are mastering the standards in English-Language Arts and Math. Per the Dataquest website, the MPCSD 2013 STAR scores in English-Language Arts (ELA) for "economically disadvantaged" students indicate that:
-94% of 3rd graders, 45% of 5th graders, and 65% of 7th graders scored Basic, Below Basic or Far Below Basic.
"Non-economically disadvantaged" students’ ELA scores indicate that:
-17% of 3rd graders, 8% of 5th graders, and 7% of 7th graders scored Basic, Below Basic or Far Below Basic

The MPCSD 2013 STAR scores in Math for "economically disadvantaged" students indicate that:
-73% of 3rd graders, 42% of 5th graders, and 80% of 7th graders scored Basic, Below Basic or Far Below Basic.
"Non-economically disadvantaged" students’ Math scores indicate that:
-23% of 3rd graders, 9% of 5th graders, and 15% of 7th graders scored Basic, Below Basic or Far Below Basic.

2013 STAR scores for "economically disadvantaged" students in the Ravenswood School District indicate that:
-In English-Language Arts, 77% of 3rd graders, 58% of 5th graders, and 64% of 7th graders scored Basic, Below Basic or Far Below Basic.
¬In Math, 47% of 3rd graders, 37% of 5th graders, and 76% of 7th graders scored Basic, Below Basic or Far Below Basic.

Our Stanford-educated Board members need to reflect upon the following 2012 San Jose Mercury News editorial written by Deborah Stipek, Dean: School of Education, Stanford University, 2001–2011 and Professor of Education, 2011–present. Per the Stanford website, Dr. Stipek’s scholarship concerns instructional effects on children’s achievement motivation and early childhood education. She is particularly concerned about policies and practices that afford children of color and children living in poverty the educational advantages of their more affluent peers. The Board should schedule a Study Session and invite Dr. Stipek to conduct a presentation regarding the research-based evidence related to the benefits of quality early childhood education.

Transitional Kindergarten has Real Value, Don’t Give it Up
“Without transitional kindergarten, children will be delayed access to formal education by three months, and 125,000 (in California) will lose a whole year. For a 5-year-old, this is a crucial time for laying the foundation for future learning. Research has shown that experience during the first five years of life have long-term effects on children's brains in ways that affect their learning long into their future. And when children enter school, their skills profoundly affect their ability to take advantage of the curriculum.”

The Board should also consider the Center for Public Education’s study,
“Pre-Kindergarten: What the Research Shows”
Many educators are discovering that reform efforts in K–12 education systems are sometimes too little and too late. By the time some children reach kindergarten, they are already far behind their peers in skills and measures of school readiness. These educational gaps tend to be much more difficult and costly to close as children advance through elementary, middle, and high school. This realization has led many states to try to get it right from the start by expanding their financial investments in pre-kindergarten services, with a goal to better prepare young children for school success. With public schools facing heightened accountability requirements, pre-k has emerged as an important strategy to promote school readiness and close achievement gaps in elementary school and beyond.

Those with the pre-k intervention had a higher IQ at ages twelve and fifteen and stronger achievement scores at age fifteen (Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute 2006). By comparison, non-program children were more likely to require special education or be retained in grade, two major costs for schools.

For the past 4 years, the Board supported District efforts to effectively address the significant achievement gap in the District. Per agreements posted in MPCSD’s Agenda Online, from November 2009 through June 2013, the Board approved contracts with the National Equity Project (formerly known as the Bay Area Coalition for Equitable Schools) to provide coaching for staff to improve educational outcomes for the District’s underserved students. The contracts covered a total of 30.5 months at a cost of $238,500. Ghysels and the Board now appear to have lost their zeal for educational equity in the District and have turned their focus to the grand plan for the O'Connor School makeover.

During the past 2 years, Ghysels has repeatedly stated that he is a supporter of early childhood education, and the Board made it clear that they wanted the MPCSD to become a "world class" school district. The decision to not provide Transitional Kindergarten belies Ghysels' proclamations, and it is yet another step in the wrong direction for a Board that wants to preside over a world class district.

The school officials are stewards of our tax dollars. I applaud the Superintendents for allocating their scarce resources toward the priorities that are mandated -- educating the kids that must be at school.

If the nanny state wants to expand the mission of our public schools to include a broader age group, the lawmakers need to implement the funding mechanism first. The only thing I read was that the County has a surplus, so there will be a way to make this work. That's a heads-in-the-sand approach. It really means spend less on the current kids so that the extra kids can attend.

By the way, I've never heard of any mandate that the Government spend every tax dollar on children first and then allocate what's left over to other priorities.

I'm tired of our legislature expanding Government and complaining they don't have enough money after they do so. This pre-Kindergarten idea is yet another example of bureaucratic bloat. If you want your kids to have pre-kindergarten, send them to a private school. Or, move to a district that offers what you want. Apparently, you've landed in the only place in California where this isn't offered.

Parents/tax payers in Las Lomitas and Menlo Park City elementary school districts school should realize that their school districts decision to fight transitional kindergarten will end up costing them on the bottom line. Lawyers are expensive, period, and it would appear that the state law will be changed specifically in response to the bull headed actions of your respective school boards. I would hope that the school boards would see that their stubbornness will not prevail, and that the cost effective, and right thing to do, is to comply with the spirit, and soon to be, letter of the law. If not, they are not representing you, or your kids interests by selfishly pursuing a lost cause, and should be promptly removed from their positions.

As a parent with a child affected by this, I do like the idea of offering earlier schooling.

But wow, California Democrats just NEVER learn, do they. After YEARS of deficits, the moment our state budget is no longer billions over budget, they go right back to increasing the taxpayer burdens...again. And keep in mind that not only does California have some of the highest sales and income taxes in the state, Prop 30 passed last year which increased taxes further.

I think both school districts did the right thing: do the best job possible for the kids their currently responsible for, and direct funding towards those kids. The disparaging remarks directed at the school boards for their stance are just ignorant.

That said, if the state government would keep spending under control, reduce our tax burden, and come up with a sustainable financing plan to support transitional kindergarten, I would be totally onboard.

It makes no sense to create this program if it ends up just being taken away during the next budget crisis.

> not only does California have some of the highest sales and income taxes in the state

Er, in the country :)

We are quite upset finding out about the news. We have no idea the decision was made this way. I guess good thing we have not processed out annul donation the school yet. We will reconsider the “wealthy” school districts decision.