2007 Senate Bill 162 (Mandate full day kindergarten for all five-year-olds )

[Comments on this legislation] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Sen. Irma Clark-Coleman on February 6, 2007, to mandate that all children who turn five years old before December 1 must be enrolled in full-day kindergarten beginning in September, and require school districts to provide full-day kindergarten.
- Referred to the Senate Education Committee on February 6, 2007.

Line

Comments

Introduced by Sen. Irma Clark-Coleman on February 6, 2007. New Comment

1) passionate commitment to government forced schooling [by Anonymous Citizen on September 5, 2008]
“Did you know that in Sweden, a country legendary for its quality of life and a nation which beats American school performance in every academic category, a kid isn’t allowed to start school before the age of 7? The hard-headed Swedes don’t want to pay for the social pathologies attendant on ripping a child away from his home and mother and dumping him into a pen with strangers. ... Did you know that the entire Swedish school sequence is only 9 years long, a net 25 percent time and tax savings over our own 12-year sequence? ...

“Did you know that Hong Kong, a country with a population the size of Norway’s, beats Japan in every scientific and mathematical category in which the two countries compete? Did you know that Hong Kong has a school year ten and one half weeks shorter than Japan’s? How on earth do they manage that if longer school years translate into higher performance? ...

“Or did you know that in Flemish Belgium with the shortest school year in the developed world that the kids regularly finish in the top three nations in the world in academic competition? Is it the water in Belgium or what? Because it can’t be the passionate commitment to government forced schooling, which they don’t seem to possess. ...

“If you trust journalism or the professional educational establishment to provide you with data you need to think for yourself in the increasingly fantastic socialist world of compulsion schooling, you are certainly the kind of citizen who would trade his cow for a handful of colored beans.”

How We Do It…..

"Non-intellectual, non-skill schooling was supported by a strange and motley collection of fellow travelers: from unions, yes, but also from the ranks of legendary businessmen like Carnegie and Rockefeller, Ford and Astor; there were genuine ideologues like John Dewey, yes, but many academic opportunists as well, like Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia; prominent colleges like Johns Hopkins and the University of Chicago took a large hand in the deconstruction of American academic schooling as well as a powerful core of private foundations and think tanks. Whether they did this out of conviction, for the advantage of private interests, or any hybrid of these reasons and more I'll leave for the moment to others for debate. What is certain is that the outcomes aimed for had little to do with why parents thought children were ordered into schools; such alien outcomes as socialization into creatures who would no longer feel easy with their own parents, or psychologization into dependable and dependent camp followers
it was firmly in place by 1917 - all that remained to reach the target was a continual series of experiments on public schoolchildren, some modest in scope, many breathtakingly radical like "IQ tests" or "kindergartens", and a full palette of intermediate colors like "multiculturalism", "rainbow" curricula and "universal self esteem". Each of these thrusts has a real behavioral purpose which is part of the larger utopia envisioned, yet each is capable of being rhetorically defended as the particular redress of some current "problem".

"Shortly into the 20th century American schooling decided to move away from intellectual development or skills training as the main justification for its existence and to enter the eerie world of social engineering, a world where "socializing" and "psychologizing" the classroom preempted attention and rewards. Professionalization of the administrative/ teaching staff was an important preliminary mechanism to this end, serving as a sieve to remove troublesome interlopers and providing lucrative ladders to reward allies and camp followers."---John Tatto

Reply New Comment

Line

2) The Agenda of The Enemy? [by Anonymous Citizen on September 5, 2008]
The NEA Spells Out Its Policies
Phyllis Schlafly
Monday, July 28, 2008

The nation's largest teachers union, the National Education Association, attracted 9,000 delegates to its annual convention in Washington, D.C. over the Fourth of July weekend. Delegates sported buttons with provocative slogans such as "Gay marriage causes Global Warming only because we are so hot!", "Hate is not a family value," "The 'Christian Right' is neither," and "Gay Rights are civil rights."

The delegates passed dozens of hard-hitting resolutions that now become the NEA's official policy. The resolutions authorize NEA members and employees to lobby for those goals in the halls of Congress and state capitols.

NEA resolutions cover the waterfront of all sorts of political issues that have nothing to do with improving education for schoolchildren, such as supporting statehood for the District of Columbia, a "single-payer health care plan" (i.e., government-run), gun control, ratification of the International Criminal Court Treaty, and taking steps "to change activities that contribute to global climate change."

The NEA fiercely opposes any competition for public schools, such as vouchers, tuition tax credits, parental option plans, or public support of any kind to non-public schools. The NEA strongly opposes designating English as our official language even though such a designation is supported by more than 80 percent of Americans.

The NEA opposes home schooling unless children are taught by state-licensed teachers using a state-approved curriculum. The NEA wants to bar home-schooled students from participating in any extracurricular activities in public schools even though their parents pay school taxes, too.

The NEA wants many additional (job-creating) services and programs to be provided by public schools such as early childhood education (i.e., baby-sitting for preschoolers). NEA resolutions call for "programs in the public schools for children from birth through age 8," and for "mandatory kindergarten with compulsory attendance."

NEA resolutions include all the major feminist goals such as "the right to reproductive freedom" (i.e., abortion on demand); "comparable worth" (i.e., government control of wages according to feminist ideology rather than the free market); full funding for the feminist boondoggle called the Women's Educational Equity Act; and "the use of nonsexist language," i.e., censoring out all masculine words such as husband and father.

The NEA even urges its affiliates to work for ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment. The ERA was declared dead by the U.S. Supreme Court 26 years ago.

The influence of the gay lobby is pervasive in dozens of NEA resolutions adopted by 2008 convention delegates. Diversity is the code word used for pro-gay indoctrination in the classroom.

The NEA's diversity resolution makes clear that this means teaching about "sexual orientation" and "gender identification," words that are repeated in dozens of resolutions. The NEA demands that "diversity-based curricula" even be imposed on preschoolers.

NEA convention delegates were invited to an open hearing by the SOGI Committee in Room 149A on July 1. In case you don't know, SOGI stands for Sexual Orientation Gender Identification.

The NEA urges its members to offer "diverse role models" via the "hiring and promotion of diverse education employees in our public schools." The NEA puts "domestic partnerships, civil unions, and marriage" on an equal footing.

The NEA wants every child, regardless of age, to have "direct and confidential access, without notification to parents, to comprehensive health education. That would include things such as learning how to use condoms for premarital sex, as well as social, and psychological programs and services."

The NEA wants public schools to take over the physical and mental care of students through school clinics that provide services, diagnosis, treatment, family-planning counseling, and access to birth control methods "with instruction in their use." Family planning clinics are called on to "provide intensive counseling."

The NEA wants all sex-education courses, textbooks, curricula, instructional materials and activities to include indoctrination about sexual orientation and gender identification plus warnings about homophobia.

The NEA is very generous with taxpayer money spent on illegal immigrants. The NEA not only favors amnesty for illegal-immigrant students, but also in-state college tuition and financial aid to illegal-immigrant college students.

The NEA is strong for "multicultural education," which the resolution makes clear does not mean studying facts about different countries and cultures. It means "the process of incorporating the values" and influencing "behavior" toward the NEA's version of "the common good," such as "reducing homophobia."

Of course, the NEA supports "global education" to teach "interdependency in sharing the world's resources." It's also no surprise that the NEA adamantly opposes any requirement that schools "schedule a moment of silence."

Will parents be silent about the radical goals of their children's teachers?

Reply New Comment

Line

3) Um, homeschool? [by Anonymous Citizen on September 5, 2008]
Did you know that you can "homeschool" for core curriculum and still send your adorable child to public school for all the "specials": art, p.e., library, recess, etc.? This is a legal mandate, too. They HAVE to let you (my DH is a lawyer).

My son (4) is already reading chapter books and doing great at math. He's been writing me notes (okay, very simple ones) for almost 6 mo. He is going to kindergarten in 2009 at age 5.

He does not need full-day kindergarten for any academic reasons. I will just send him 1/2 day anyway for the fun parts and to see his friends. Thanks, Michigan. Love your mandates, JK.

My opinion: full-day kindergarten isn't for the kids. It's for budget reasons or working parents. If your schools suck, is spending more time there really going to help?? Sure, if you don't want to pay for daycare or mid-day busses.
Reply New Comment

Line

4) Great Spirits [by Anonymous Citizen on September 5, 2008]
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. --Albert Einstein

Question: Does attending a mediocre school all day make you smarter than attending a mediocre school for half of the day?

Reply New Comment

Line

5) Question [by Anonymous Citizen on September 5, 2008]
Does ripping children away from their parents at an earlier age and for longer periods make smarter, better citizens or just better indoctrinated sheeple that will never question the nanny government?
Reply New Comment

Line

6) Great Spirits [by Anonymous Citizen on September 5, 2008]
Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds. --Albert Einstein

Question: Does attending a mediocre school all day make you smarter than attending a mediocre school for half of the day?

Reply New Comment

Line

7) Kindernapping [by Anonymous Citizen on May 5, 2007]
When children are stolen from parents at gunpoint, we call that kidnapping. When the kidnappers loot the neighborhood to support their kidnapping activities, we call that robbery.

Except when the government does those things. Then we call it "public education."
Reply New Comment

Line

8) Yes! Yes! Yes! [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2007]
Finally! Glad to see we are making progress. Lets get this bill passed ASAP!!!
Reply New Comment

Line

9) No more half measures like this bill.. [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2007]
We need to seize those children from their parents at birth and put them all under the care of government trained and licensed social workers. Creating a docile and well trained work force to pay the taxes of the future is too important a job to be left to the unregulated, uncontrolled private sector.
Reply New Comment

Line

10) Full Day Kindergarten [by Anonymous Citizen on May 4, 2007]
I think its a great idea for all day kindergarten. American education needs to step up its standards and not be so relax. It all starts in kindergarten. At age 5 kids don't need a nap. We should not be charged for the second half day as we are now. Pass this bill today!!!
Reply New Comment

Line

11) Standards [by Anonymous Citizen on May 6, 2007]
Have you even taken a look at the curriculum standards for Michigan before you posted your comment? I doubt it! They are certainly not lax! If anything they are the most developmentally inappropriate standards I've seen in a long time. Somehow, we've lost the understanding that these are children. Let me give you an example of what we are expecting these kids to do. This is an example from the 3rd grade curriculum (remember -- these kids are 8 years old). We expect them to read a piece of fiction and a piece of non-fiction, find the usually obscure common theme in the two pieces, relate that theme to a time or experience in their own lives and write a well-constructed 5 paragraph essay about the above. We expect kindergarteners to be able to read/listen to the same types of pieces and relate them to their own lives. Still think these are lax standards?
Full day kindergarten may be a good option for some children, especially for those that have little or no literacy experience. However, it is not the right option for all children. It should not be a mandate.
Reply New Comment

Line

12) Absolutely [by Anonymous Citizen on May 2, 2007]
PLEASE require it. I seek out a private all day kindergarten at a cost of almost $7,500 per year. My daughter attended one and she was able to walk right into 1st grade with ease and has been excelling ever since. I attribute that to spending more than 2 hours a day in the classroom. My son is slated for kindergarten in the 2008-2009 school year. PLEASE pass it in time! WE all need it! There's only benefits to sending children to school more than 2 hours a day!
Reply New Comment

Line

13) there are, not there's [by Anonymous Citizen on September 5, 2008]

"There ARE only benefits . . . "
Reply New Comment

Line

14) Oink [by Anonymous Citizen on May 5, 2007]
"PLEASE require it. I seek out a private all day kindergarten at a cost of almost $7,500 per year."

Yes, I think you should be able to mug the rest of us so you can have it for "free".
Reply New Comment

Line

15) Kindergarten [by Anonymous Citizen on April 23, 2007]
All children do not need full day kindergarten. My own children would not have benefited from being in kindergarten longer. They were already far above grade level prior to entering school. Full day kindergarten is not for everyone and should not be a state mandate.
Reply New Comment

Line

16) All-Day Kindergarten Is Good, But Doesn't Need State Mandate [by Anonymous Citizen on February 13, 2007]
All-day kindergarten is not an inherently bad idea. In fact, all-day kindergarten is a proven winner for kids, where it has been implemented. In my part of the state, all-day kindergarten is regarded as highly desirable, both by educators and conscientious parents.

I don’t see any good in having it mandated by the state, however. Offering good programs like all-day kindergarten is one of the few ways public schools have at their disposal to differentiate themselves from competitors in the enrollment marketplace. The state should leave this one alone.

Reply New Comment

Line

17) Agreed [by Anonymous Citizen on April 15, 2008]
Yes, parents and educators are most qualified to determine a child's readiness for kindergarten--NOT a politician.
Reply New Comment

Line

18) Agreed [by Anonymous Citizen on April 15, 2008]
Full-day kindergarten is a proven success for children who are ready. It should not, however, be thrust on young 5's who are still struggling to learn to count past 10 and identify letters. The existing kindergarten reading/writing curriculum is extrememly challenging, even for students that are ready. They will be reading, writing and counting to 100 (by 1's, 2's 5's, 10's) when they 'graduate' to 1st grade. The school system should not be charged with making emergent readers and writers out of 4 and 5 year olds that simply aren't ready. One has only to walk around a kindergarten classroom to easily pick out the existing disparity in kindergarten ability. Why make it worse? Should students be entitled to full-time kindergarten, yes, should it be mandatory, NO!
Reply New Comment

Line

19) One more reason this is a bad idea! [by Anonymous Citizen on February 13, 2007]
Has anyone taken into consideration the transportation of these 4 and 5 year olds to their all-day kindergarten? As in, these babes would be on a bus with bigger kids. I don't know if you've been around kids on busses much lately but there are some even 5th and 6th graders that I wouldn't want my small child around! Transportation is almost more scary than the fact that these little kids would have to be in school all day! Bad idea, this bill!
Reply New Comment

Line

20) I certainly hope this bill goes nowhere! [by Anonymous Citizen on February 13, 2007]
It's sad that kids are being forced into academics that they're not ready for, at an earlier and earlier age. We wonder why kids are having more and more mental and emotional problems, at younger and younger ages. We wonder why more and more kids are being put on drugs for ADD/ADHD. Is it simply because they're not allowed to just be kids anymore? Is it because they're being pushed into settings that they're not ready for, at younger and younger ages?

I'm glad I homeschool my children, where btw kindergarten takes at most about 1.5 hrs a day, and we're doing more than what those kids in school would be doing on a given day. There's no way kids would have been ready for all-day kindergarten at the tender age of 5. Thank goodness we didn't have that choice to face.
Reply New Comment

Line

21) Do the Math [by Anonymous Citizen on February 13, 2007]
In addition to this absurd and controlling bill, Granholm has another bill out there that is requiring students to remain in school until age 18 (instead of 16). If a child begins at age 5 and goes to school thru grade 12... how old does it make that child? NOT eighteen. Shall we add a grade 13 and 14? Shall the child just repeat his/her senior year until they reach Granholm's required age? What a joke!

All of this is preposterous. Worse, it's taking away the parent's right to decide what is best for their child. If a child is not ready to school full-days at age 5, should not the parent (who actually KNOWS the child) have the right to act in their best interest? Or does the state usurp the responsibility and authority of the parent? I didn't have my children to hand them over to the state.

Further, how will the kids feel at 16 when they feel they know everything and see themselves as being 'held against their will' in a school building? Who will stem the violence, handle the truancy, teach the extra grades...? If Michigan is one of the worst states in student scores, literacy, and more, will this really help anything, or overtax the teachers even more?

I really wish the government were more concerned with improving the mess they already have rather than extending the mess across larger spans of time. It's no wonder more and more people are turning to homeschooling. Why put money into the disaster the state has going?
Reply New Comment

Line

22) "Do the Math" Reply [by Anonymous Citizen on May 6, 2008]
This whole comment section is ABSURD!

I wont even begin to address your individual statements, but rather respond to an obvious misunderstanding you have on Granholms bill.

UNDERSTAND that this bill requires a teenager to remain in school until 18 ONLY IF they have not already graduated.
So... if a 16 yr old has passed grade 12 then he is free, but if he is not passing his classes because "they feel they know everything" then they have an extra 2 years to prove that they really do!

Reply New Comment

Line

23) bred [by Anonymous Citizen on August 16, 2008]
see this thanks
Reply New Comment

Line

24) nick [by Anonymous Citizen on July 29, 2008]
HoJE0x hi! hice site!
Reply New Comment

Line

25) nick [by Anonymous Citizen on July 27, 2008]
eSMnEn hi! hice site!
Reply New Comment

Line

26) jKTxebrqcjBs [by Anonymous Citizen on June 5, 2008]
tickets_5.txt;2;2
Reply New Comment

Line

27) TWWrkUjkNiyxkTGHe [by Anonymous Citizen on June 5, 2008]
tickets_4.txt;2;2
Reply New Comment

Line

28) YXcsmwlKkkOFyEdRKX [by Anonymous Citizen on June 5, 2008]
tickets_3.txt;2;2
Reply New Comment

Line

29) arni [by Anonymous Citizen on May 19, 2008]
great work man thx
Reply New Comment

Line

30) arni [by Anonymous Citizen on May 19, 2008]
good work man
Reply New Comment

Line

31) GVrWNBHcQ [by Anonymous Citizen on May 17, 2008]
YG2L68
Reply New Comment

Line

32) Concerns over Senate Bill 162 [by Anonymous Citizen on February 13, 2007]
To Governor Granholm, and the Michigan Senate, Feb/16/ 2007

I would like to take the time to let you know my opinions about Senate Bill 162. I believe this would cause more problems than it is worth.
I live in Byron Center Michigan which is just south of Grand Rapids. We have a lot of problems with our school system but the age and length of attendance are not among them. I have a few questions:

1. Will this require increased taxes?
2. If so, what is the estimated amount?
3. How can the government possibly know if a given 5 year old is emotionally or intellectually ready to attend school?
4. Can a parent make the choice to advance their intellectually gifted child?
5. What / where is the evidence that this proposal will make a difference.
6. What is the problem that requires this senate bill?

Having followed my children’s academic journey through the public school system, I am more worried about the quality of the curriculum than the age that a student is when they start or finish school. From what I’ve seen, I think that we need to worry more about the lack of teaching ability than the age of the students.

I was shocked to learn that the students are given a study guide for the MEAP tests that contain the subjects and answers to the questions. I find it difficult to believe that an individual’s academic ability can be accurately assessed when they have almost been given all the answers.

I’m sure that as the parent of my child, I have a good idea if he/she is ready to go to school. I read the text of the bill. I could not determine what this bill will fix. Is the Michigan government really concerned with the future of our state? As an engineer, I fully understand the need for an excellent education. I guess I just do not see how Senate Bill 162 will help.

I would like to give you an example of a real problem. I had a conversation with my youngest child’s principal regarding the lack of correction of spelling errors on my child’s work. Basically, the teacher did not care that that there were spelling errors. When I asked the principal about this I was told that be able to spell was not something that the school really cared about. He said that with the advent of the computer and spell checking it was all that important. I find this to be pretty irresponsible. For example:
DEER, DEAR, TO, TOO, TWO, THEY’RE, THERE, THEIR. When I used these examples the principal was silent. I believe that he did not take into account the importance of correct spelling in trying to communicate an idea or a point. I want you to know that Byron Center has been given the BLUE RIBBON for academics. I’m not sure why though.

I have talked to many of the students who currently attend high school there. (The spellchecker on this computer tells me that I should use TOO instead of TO in the previous sentence).
Repeatedly I have been told that the Byron Center School System is “a joke”. These students have told me that they are concerned that they are not being taught subjects that will help them succeed in their future life. My high school student has told me that two of the teachers spend most of the class time Instant Messaging each other while allowing the students to hang out outside the door or wander around the halls. I remind you, this is a BLUE RIBBON school.

It seems to me that the Michigan government should spend their resources on improving the quality of the teaching personnel rather than trying to take the ability of the parents to decide when a child should start school.

Please thoughtfully consider my letter to you.

Sincerely,
Larmie Hamilton

Reply New Comment

Line

33) rustyone [by Anonymous Citizen on February 12, 2007]
The only reason that I can possible see for having all day kindergarten is so that both parents can work full time jobs - they would be the benificiaries of such an idiotic action, certainly not the 5 year olds. And then, of course, we the taxpayers can pay for their full time babysitters. In a word, that's ridiculous!

Reply New Comment

Line

34) full time jobs??? [by Anonymous Citizen on February 12, 2007]
okay, what full time job starts at eight and ends at three? (other than a teachers)

what happens to the kid for the other two plus hours?

as a parent that is working hard to work out that little problem right now, i can tell you that it sucks for the parents. it's no fun asking my boss for a few minutes off to pick up my daughter from school, and even less fun making it there and back in the few minutes i'm sometimes allowed.

Reply New Comment

Line

35) Hours [by Anonymous Citizen on February 12, 2007]
No teacher I know works only from 8 to 3. Most are in the building longer than that in addition to the work they bring home to work on there.
Reply New Comment

Line

36) What are you thinking? [by Anonymous Citizen on February 11, 2007]
Mandated kindergarten for all 5 year olds (and actully even 4 year olds who turn 5 by Dec 1)????? What are you thinking? Children are children. Let them be children and work their way into kindergarten. My son is in K now and is very tired at the end of his half day week. Five year olds (let alone 4 year olds) cannot focus for a whole day every day on an academic level. They have 13 years of school followed by years of college to look forward to. What is the point is stressing them and their parents out this early in life? I truly understand the importance of a good education (I have a Masters degree) but this is truly OVERKILL!!!!! I am curious as to the background of this senator and why she chose to introduce this bill. When was the last time SHE saw or interacted with a five year old for a whole day or even a whole week? She needs a reality check!
Reply New Comment

Line

37) Nanny-Government [by coneyb on February 12, 2007]
Well the government certainly knows what's best for our children!! Please tell me what my child should wear for school tomorrow, I can't decide. Please tell me what my child should eat, I'm not sure. Please tell me what is best for my child, because I'm sure you have their best interests at heart. I'm sure you're not considering the best interests of deep-pocketed special interest groups and unions! Please note the above is SARCASM!!
Reply New Comment

Line

38) Another MEA plot? [by Anonymous Citizen on February 10, 2007]
This sounds like another way for the MEA to collect more money from the taxpayers, especially ones that pay property taxes.
It is also one more step to socialism.
Reply New Comment

Line

39) aug. school board election [by Anonymous Citizen on February 10, 2007]
this is better then nothing.but all school board elections must be in NOV. AT THE GENERAL ELECTION
Reply New Comment

Line

40) kindergarden [by yorkark on February 10, 2007]
I beleive this is a great idea, but you better keep some of these schools being closed ready to open if this goes through. There needs to be monies allocated with this law also.
Reply New Comment

Line

41) Full day kindergarten [by Anonymous Citizen on February 10, 2007]
We would have the opposite occur - preservation of jobs. Our district is now considering going from full day to half day kindergarten -- as a cost savings measure. One teacher would be needed as opposed to 2.
Reply New Comment

Line

42) Kindergarten [by Anonymous Citizen on February 7, 2007]
Again you are mandating things without considering the impact of those mandates. If you mandate full day kindergarten, you are doubling the requirements on the districts. My building would need another kindergarten teacher, another classroom (we do not have an empty room anywhere in the building), another set of supplies and another set of classroom furniture. Multiply those requirements by every elementary school in the district and the costs become staggering. Where is the money going to come from? What will the districts have to cut in order to provide mandatory, full day kindergarten?
Reply New Comment

Line

Home
Create an account
Legislation watch
Search Legislation
Search Voting Record
Reports
- Recent Laws
- Missed Votes Report
Links
About
Tell a friend about this site