Students First, Not Parent’s Pocketbooks

George Laase

I have read various summaries of studies published on-line concerning the advantages of offering extended or full-day kindergarten over half-day sessions. Most of the executive summaries stated that there was an educational advantage to having full-day classes.

But it was only when I delved deeper into the reports, that I found that those gains previously cited were shown to be minimal, at best, and not at all long-lasting. The reports showed the “full-day advantage” was not long-termed because, as they put it, the half-day students had “caught up” with the full-day students by the third grade.

If there is only a short-lived advantage and no measurable long-term effect on student learning, then the only advantage in disrupting the education of the 70 Culver Park High School (CPHS) students is to reduce the childcare costs for the new, incoming kindergarten parents.

Is that what is really behind the moving of Culver Park: Only a decrease in childcare costs?

All El Marino’s 600+ upper grade students—second thru fifth--came through its half-day kindergarten program. Even though the other elementary schools in our district have had full-day kindergarten classes for some time now, El Marino Language School still continues to post some of the top API test results in the district—932 in 2011.

Since there is no state-testing done in Kindergarten, we should not expect to see a significant jump in El Marino’s API scores in the following years as these new full-day kindergarteners start matriculating up through El Marino’s upper grades.

Our Board’s Primary Responsibility

The last time I read the Board’s policy, it stated, "The Governing Board believes that its primary responsibility is to act in the best interest of every student in the District."

Yes, El Marino should have full-day kindergarten classes, if that’s what the school’s parents and educators want. But, what is the rush? If the decision comes down to choosing between El Marino parents saving on childcare and the disruption of the educational stability of the Culver Park  students, then, I believe our Board members would be duty-bound to protect the education of these 70 students until a new, suitable, permanent site is ready for them.

It makes me wonder if these old, yet to be refurbished bungalows in the back parking lot at Farragut Elementary, now destined to be Culver Park’s new temporary home, are going to be so good, as suggested by some Board members, why, then, don’t we just leave Culver Park where it is until a suitable site is found and move those bungalows onto the El Marino site and have the new, incoming kindergarteners use them, instead?

The district seems bound and determined to complete its full-day district program even if it means disrupting the high schoolers’ education. To an outside observer this rushed-into solution makes it look like Culver Park’s stability and its continued success is not as important to the district as is El Marino’s in-coming kindergarteners. And the finding of a new suitable place for Culver Park was only a mandated afterthought.

 This Board has already voted to start El Marino’s full-day kindergarten classes this coming September; thereby, putting these Culver Park High School students in direct conflict with El Marino’s full-day program.

In 2010, Culver Park High School was one of only 12 schools in California to be recognized by the State Superintendent as a California Model Continuation High School.  

It seems this Board is willing to put these continuation students’ education in a temporary limbo just in order to free up classroom space even before a new permanent site is found for Culver Park.

If you were to listen to the district tell it, it looks like the Culver Park students were intruding on El Marino’s school site. But, in reality, Culver Park had already settled into their school site long before the district had started its language immersion program at El Marino. So, it is actually the immersion program that is the Johnny-come-lately and is infringing on Culver Park; not the other way around. So why should Culver Park have to leave when it was at the site first?

The studies have shown that there is only a short-term advantage and no measurable long-term effects to attending full-day kindergarten. So the real outcome in removing this 2010 state recognized model school is just in saving El Marino’s in-coming kindergarten parents money on childcare by keeping their kindergartners in public school for a full day.

Again, this Board’s primary responsibility is to act in the best interest of every student; not in saving parents money in childcare costs.

The education of these 70 Culver Park High School students should come first, not the parents’ pocketbooks.

George Laase is a Staff Writer for the Culver City Progress Blog and a life-long resident of Culver City.