March 23, 2007, Lansing
State Journal
It's the right thing to do, but that doesn't mean they'll do it.
In fact this concept could die a slow and agonizing legislative death
because it sounds way too radical, too expensive - and has racial
overtones to boot.
House Democrats recently embraced a way to improve the education of our
children. In a nutshell, get them into the classroom before age five. The
concept has been bouncing around for years, but remains just that - a
concept.
Researchers tell us that by age 5, the educational die is cast for most
kids. Teachers can tell from the opening school bell which kindergarten
kids have been prepped at home and which have not.
The notion is, if you force kids into pre-school around age 3 or 3.5, and
then bump up the starting age for kindergarten to age 4, you would
increase the chances kids would graduate, get a good job and become
productive members of society. This is especially critical for children on
the bottom rung of the socio-economic ladder.
When teachers ask, "Let's have a show of hands of who knows their ABCs,"
the hands staying down painfully reveal which children have not had help
at home.
The sorry fact is some kids don't have parents at home, or, if they do,
the parents have trouble reading or they are so busy trying to make ends
meet that there's little time to play pre-school with their children.
While the concept clearly has merit, everybody in town knows that pumping
change into the state's education bureaucracy is easier said than done.
After all "we've always started kindergarten at age 5," the status-quo
lobby will argue.
And then the next line will be, "We need more money to do this and where
will it come from?" On top of that, you'll hear some non-urban lawmakers
whisper that they can't spend more money because most of it would end up
in Detroit, Flint, Saginaw and Lansing - and that could cost those
non-city lawmakers their jobs.
It would be unfortunate if this debate degenerated into the haves vs. the
have-nots. Given the behavior by previous legislators, though, it's a real
possibility.
But what about the kids?
Ever since term limits, the new lawmakers have had difficulty thinking
much beyond their collective noses. Long-term thinking and planning are
pretty much a joke. And this early childhood education stuff demands both.
It's hackneyed but true, the state can spend "X" amount of dollars at the
beginning of life to educate all of our children, or we can spend 10 times
"X" when we send them to prison after they have failed.
This is not a tough choice but it's not a gimme.
"This will not be easy," confesses Rep. Tim Melton, D-Auburn Hills, who is
leading the charge for change.
Gov. Jennifer Granholm is fond of saying we are all in this thing
together, which reflects her religious convictions that we are the keepers
of all our brothers and sisters.
Moving up the mandatory starting age for education will put that notion to
the test. It would be nice if lawmakers didn't flunk it.
What do you think? Tim Skubick is a local television
correspondent who writes a column for the State Journal on Fridays. |
