Voters Widely Back Measure on Preschools

A ballot initiative that would guarantee a year of free preschool to all California children has attracted strong support from the state’s voters. But the measure, the most ambitious attempt to expand the boundaries of public education for young children since the movement for universal kindergarten at the beginning of the last century, is drawing fire from some early childhood educators.

Hollywood activist Rob Reiner’s Preschool for All initiative, Proposition 82 on the June ballot, would provide nearly $23 billion over the coming decade to enroll 70% of the state’s 4-year-olds in free, voluntary, half-day preschool programs.

Proponents, including business, labor and education leaders, say the initiative would help close the achievement gap between disadvantaged children and their middle-class peers as they enter kindergarten. They cite research findings that quality preschool decreases dropout rates, reduces crime and would save the state money on its investment.

That argument may be resonating with voters: A recent statewide survey by the Public Policy Institute of California found that 66% of Californians support Proposition 82.

As with the kindergarten movement that came before, however, not everyone is convinced. Initial opposition by anti-tax groups centered on the initiative’s funding mechanism, which targets the wealthiest Californians and imposes a 1.7% tax increase on individuals earning more than $400,000 and couples earning more than $800,000.

But there also is a growing body of dissent among early childhood education advocates who question whether a new government-run program for preschoolers, operated by the same troubled school systems that control kindergarten through 12th grade, is a good idea.

Many private community-based providers, meanwhile, believe that the measure, while well-meaning, is flawed and could end up forcing them out of business if they choose not to participate or don’t qualify. And they worry that it would lead to a standardized, one-size-fits-all academic curriculum that is inappropriate for young children.

Other opponents argue that the measure, expected to bring in $2.4 billion annually, would subsidize preschool entitlement for affluent families rather than specifically target poor children who gain the most from quality programs. The state would be taking on the burden of educating middle-class children whose families now shoulder those costs, the argument goes. And since an estimated 62% of the state’s roughly half a million 4-year-olds already attend preschool, the funds generated by the initiative probably would likely boost the enrollment rate by only a few percentage points.

“I think Reiner’s aim is virtuous, and he’s highlighted a fundamental problem, especially in terms of the limited access to quality preschool for lower-income and blue-collar families, but is this the right blueprint and the most cost-effective way to help these families?” said Bruce Fuller, a professor of education and public policy at UC Berkeley who is critical of many aspects of the initiative. “I think initially this was cast as the good guy against the anti-tax people, but I think now many observers are coming to see that it’s not so black and white.”

Under Proposition 82, the state superintendent of public instruction would oversee programs and establish standards, with county superintendents distributing funds and implementing plans. The program would be available to any child one year before entering kindergarten, beginning in 2010.

In Los Angeles and San Francisco counties, which already have committed public funds for preschool programs and created independent boards to run them, those same boards would be permitted to administer the new funds rather than county superintendents.

The measure mandates that preschool teachers be paid “similarly” to K-12 teachers and provides the right to collective bargaining. The state legislative analyst’s office has estimated that the program would generate enough funds to provide about $6,000 per pupil, compared with current state spending of about $6,650 per student in kindergarten through 12th grade.

But the measure is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” that would exclude many excellent programs from public funding, possibly causing their demise, said Pamela Zell Rigg, who operates a Montessori preschool and teacher education center in San Leandro. The initiative calls for classes of no more than 20 children taught by teachers with a bachelor’s degree and early learning credential within a decade.

By contrast, Rigg notes, Montessori schools teach multiple age groups, under the philosophy that older children will share their knowledge with younger ones, and they adhere to larger class sizes. Montessori teachers receive specialized training and credentials that are not always recognized by state accrediting agencies, Rigg said, which might prove another barrier.

“We’re serving 100,000 children in California, and parents see us as a strong, vibrant educational choice. But by the standards of the initiative, we will not be one of the choices,” said Rigg, who also is president of the California Montessori Council. Many preschool teachers in the state, who generally are paid considerably less than public elementary schoolteachers, don’t have college degrees or formal training.

Many faith-based providers said they are concerned that private, independent preschools would be absorbed into school districts, becoming accountable to county superintendents.

Elizabeth Sholes, director of public policy for the California Council of Churches, worried that even if some of the state’s private preschools were to become part of the program, under its mandate they would not be able to use state money to renovate existing facilities or buy new ones without giving up ownership of them.

The measure, she said, also mandates a curriculum “aligned with statewide standards for elementary education,” which might lead to inflexible curricula and testing.

“We are gravely disappointed at how ambiguous this initiative is, because we have such hopes for preschool,” said Sholes, a former preschool teacher.

Some school officials also are uncomfortable with the measure, fearing that the equivalent addition of a new grade level would add burdens that would not be fully funded.

But such concerns are vastly overstated, said Amanda Stangis, executive director of the California Assn. for the Education of Young Children. The group says it represents more than 11,000 educators, providers and preschool teachers, and has endorsed Proposition 82.

The measure is designed to include private providers as well as school-based programs, and would provide financial aid for teacher training and money for colleges and universities to develop courses in early learning, Stangis said.

“This is an historic opportunity for a whole new movement focused on early childhood education and a chance to get the public and parents to understand how important it is,” she said.

Dennis Vicars, chief executive of the Professional Assn. for Childhood Education, a group of private providers, said the measure’s guarantee of parental choice and involvement would force all sides to work cooperatively. County educators and provider groups already are meeting to discuss how to make the initiative work, should it pass, he said. The initiative requires county superintendents to submit plans of action by July 2007.

“If the school districts don’t play fair, everybody is going to court and we will see lawsuit after lawsuit,” Vicars said. “It behooves everyone to do the right thing so that we help more kids.”

For Barbara Beatty, an associate professor of education at Wellesley College and historian of early childhood education, the preschool debate bears striking parallels to that preceding the expansion of public kindergarten.

Many fractious issues of the time, such as whether to teach children math and letters or focus more on socialization, echo today, Beatty said.

In 1830, a petition to incorporate “infant schools” into the Boston public school system was rejected on the grounds that too much early stimulation was damaging to children.

Then along came Bessie Locke, a middle-class daughter of a printer who took up the kindergarten cause and solicited support from prominent people such as Phoebe Apperson Hearst. She got Thomas Alva Edison’s studio in 1905 to film a short movie revolving around a kindergarten teacher named Miss Gray, who rejects a marriage proposal from her wealthy boyfriend unless he agrees to support the kindergarten cause.

Locke’s success in California in 1913 propelled the movement forward. And Beatty sees in Proposition 82 a chance for California to regain its luster as a leader in education reform.

“California was the model for states in kindergarten,” Beatty said, and “has a tradition of commitment to public education that is unique.”

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

Proposition 82

Here are the main provisions of the Preschool for All initiative on the June ballot:

Creation of a new preschool program

* Establishes the right of all 4-year-olds to receive one year of state-funded preschool beginning in 2010. No preschool child would have to participate.

* Offers the program for at least three hours a day for 180 days a year.

* Creates standards for curriculum, teacher qualifications and compensation.

New tax on high-income earners

* Imposes a 1.7% tax on individual incomes above $400,000 and $800,000 for couples.

* Tax revenues are to be used solely for preschool programs and related expenses.

Funding for new preschool programs

* Increases the per-child funding rate for state-funded preschools from about $4,000 to about $6,000.

* Provides funding for construction and purchase of facilities to house new programs.

* Provides grants to students and to colleges and universities to support training for teachers and aides.

Source: California legislative analyst’s office