Why do some MoCo elementary schools offer Pre K and others don't?

[Anonymous]

Our assigned ES doesn't offer Pre K but a friend's ES less than two miles away does. Why? I'd love to stop paying for nursery school a year early .

[Anonymous]

I don't live in MoCo, but in our county, pre-K is available in low income schools only and then there aren't enough spaces for everyone. Parents have to fill out forms showing their income, etc and if they fall below a certain threshold, they are eligible for the pre-K program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't live in MoCo, but in our county, pre-K is available in low income schools only and then there aren't enough spaces for everyone. Parents have to fill out forms showing their income, etc and if they fall below a certain threshold, they are eligible for the pre-K program.

Same in MoCo; Pre-K/Head Start is for qualified low-income families.

[Anonymous]

Disgusting. It's not like many in middle class can barely afford nursery school anymore. In fact, it's a large reason why I and several others I know quit our jobs when we had children. It just didn't make "cents" to work.

Why should we subsidize day care for others when we can't even afford it ourselves. Then the county struggles so badly to pay it's bills they have to install speed cameras and impose 5 cent bag taxes.

Disgusting. Just disgusting what's coming of our system.

[Anonymous]

Agreed - it's repulsive that I even have to consider the cost of daycare into whether or not we can have more children, whilst others in the community do not have that burden. You should have no more children than you can afford to love and take care of.

[Anonymous]

Most research shows it is most cost effective to provide pre-K services to lower income students. They are the ones most likely to start K behind due to language differences/less educated parents/fewer books at home etc. The county is not really just being generous, they are looking out for the all mighty 3rd grade test scores a few years down the line. Education is the best shot kids have to be productive adults which is good for us all and those who are starting out disadvantaged need it the most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Disgusting. It's not like many in middle class can barely afford nursery school anymore. In fact, it's a large reason why I and several others I know quit our jobs when we had children. It just didn't make "cents" to work.

Why should we subsidize day care for others when we can't even afford it ourselves. Then the county struggles so badly to pay it's bills they have to install speed cameras and impose 5 cent bag taxes.

Disgusting. Just disgusting what's coming of our system.

You must be an idiot. Really, there are so many arguments against this it's hard to even know where to start. How can you be this ignorant?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agreed - it's repulsive that I even have to consider the cost of daycare into whether or not we can have more children, whilst others in the community do not have that burden. You should have no more children than you can afford to love and take care of.

So you are drawing the conclusion that people who put their kids in subsidized daycare don't love them?

[Anonymous]

I think PreK is also available for 'special needs'? We have a family in our (solidly middle-class) neighborhood where the two daughters were diagnosed with 'speech delays' and get free PreK. As in, the girls get bussed to school, and bussed home, and the parents don't pay a cent. I know they are definitely not low-income - they own their home/drive 2 decent cars, mom stays at home, dad has a good job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think PreK is also available for 'special needs'? We have a family in our (solidly middle-class) neighborhood where the two daughters were diagnosed with 'speech delays' and get free PreK. As in, the girls get bussed to school, and bussed home, and the parents don't pay a cent. I know they are definitely not low-income - they own their home/drive 2 decent cars, mom stays at home, dad has a good job.

This.

"Pre-K" is actually the PEP program, which is for Special Needs kids with orthopedic, motor, and speech disabilities, Down Syndrome, and other disabilities. There are a few spaces in the PEP Collaborative program reserved specifically for so-called "normal" kids. So investigate that if you are feeling like you really are in need of "free" preschool. It is a half-day program four days a week.

To the poster who called this "disgusting." I have no words for you.

[Anonymous]

By the way, all kids are eligible for PEP and Pre-K regardless of what school they go to in MoCo. It's just that the program requires special equipment, classrooms and teachers and that is only available at a few schools. If your child doesn't happen to go to that school, he/she is just as eligible for the free program and as another poster said, gets free transportation.

[Anonymous]

In MoCo, Pre K and Head Start are available for low income families (and they have to be seriously low income, not just FARMS but well below the poverty line). PEP is a different program that is available for young children with specific disabilities. None of these is "subsidized day care.". It is school.

[Anonymous]

A) preschool/pre-k/nursery school is not actually required, so save yourself some money if it's really hurting you to not have free pre-k

B) it's not the children's fault their parents don't have a lot of money, wouldn't you rather those children be educated and potentially break the cycle of poverty that can later reduce our tax burden? I know it's not black and white like that but give some kids a chance to succeed--and survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agreed - it's repulsive that I even have to consider the cost of daycare into whether or not we can have more children, whilst others in the community do not have that burden. You should have no more children than you can afford to love and take care of.

So you are drawing the conclusion that people who put their kids in subsidized daycare don't love them?

Nice way to pervert the point of the PP to the benefit of your own agenda. They said "that you can afford to love and take care of." It's time to get on board with a reading comprehension program for yourself.

Subsidized day care clearly falls under the category of "affording to take care of." You'll surely have to come up with a better approach the next time around, and yes I would agree that there is a legitimate justification for resenting that some people have to factor in the cost of daycare into having more children, while at the same time shouldering the burden for those that didn't consider it a contributing factor. At best, the argument about early education intervention for poor and special needs children that may not be getting stimulation at home is what makes sense here. At worst, however, with respect to the poor (not the special needs), it's a dangerous socialist program that is bound to contribute to the collapse and overtaxation of an already overburdened system. The reality is somewhere in between, but make no mistake, it's not all good.

[Anonymous]

PP, thank you for saying that. That some people in the county are able to get free daycare at the expense of others who have to watch their own budget when thinking about a 2nd or 3rd child is yet another example of a system run amok.

A vision of too many people taking a ride in the wagon, and not enough pulling comes to mind. Aside, from being wrong, it's an unsustainable economic model.