Focusing on Early Childhood Education and
Closing Performance Gaps

This year, the LWVMC Education Committee is focusing on early childhood education. Our research, including presentations by experts and local officials, has provided convincing evidence that access to early childhood education is key in eradicating the performance gaps that occur as children proceed through elementary and middle school. We will continue to explore the various issues that pertain to pre-K education and consider what we can do to help residents and voters understand the importance of such education.

Our views were expressed in the April 11, 2010 “Marin Voice” article published in the Marin Independent Journal.

FEDERAL ROLE IN EDUCATION STUDY

LWVMC Education Committee has organized locally the National League’s study of the Federal government’s role in education. This study is in anticipation of Congress’ revision and renewal of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), which in its current revised state is referred to as No Child Left Behind. The October 3 and November 7 Action meetings have been devoted to discussions and con- sensus taking on a number of issues involved. Conclusions and a national consensus will be report- ed at the LWVUS Convention in 2012.

The study includes the history of the federal government’s support for education during the early years of the nation, mostly in the form of land grants for higher education. Article I. Section 8 of the Constitution’s “general welfare” clause led to financial support for various forms of vocational education, the GI Bill of 1944, and the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) in response to the Russians’ Sputnik.

The 10th Amendment to the Constitution regarding designated powers leaves education a state and local responsibility to fund. The post-Civil War 14th Amendment, however, guarantees equal protection under the law, which eventually was interpreted in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education of Topeka to guarantee equality of educational opportunity.

Consequently, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 became a source of funding and support for specific populations of disadvantaged children needing special attention, with the goal of providing equity in education. This has amounted over the years to about 10% of California’s education budget.

The renewal of ESEA in 2001 brought a focus on accountability in the form of testing in reading and mathematics to measure students’ proficiency. Its intention to solve the “education gap” between minorities and the majority white population was laudable. The focus on testing, however, brought unintended consequences: time spent preparing for

testing detracted from other parts of the curriculum such as science and social studies. Furthermore, schools might be designated needing improvement or restructuring on the basis of a small number of their students. Pressure on teachers and administrators has led to unfortunate episodes of cheating on test results.

While the 2001 version of ESEA brought these difficulties, it has continued to provide funds for programs to educate to numerous kinds of disadvantaged students: children who are migrant or homeless, neglected or delinquent, children who are gifted, those with limited English proficiency, children in rural schools, Indian, Native Hawaiian and Alaska Natives, those who have experienced disasters.

Students who are disabled are enrolled under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 2004, which covers 6.6 million students ages 3-21, or 13% of all students enrolled in public schools. Known as special education, this includes students with physical or emotional disabilities or impairments. Increasingly, these children are served in regular classroom settings and have individual learning plans developed cooperatively with staff and parents. Federal funding for these mandated programs has been inadequate.

ESEA is long overdue for revision, and various pro- posals are awaiting the attention of Congress. Meanwhile, a development at the state level has led to the adoption of a “Common Core Standards Curriculum,” developed by governors and chief education officers of 44 states. One part of the League’s federal study has to do with how these standards, if implemented nationally, should be assessed.

An additional and important part of the League’s federal study has to do with early childhood education, includ- ing child care and preschool. Questions for consen- sus include how such education, including teacher and parent education, should be funded.

Nancy van Ravenswaay, Education

JOIN US: If you are interested in educational issues, our Education committee is a place where you can help make a difference. Please join us. Follow the join us link for details.