Michigan Votes Forum

Introduced in the Senate on February 6, 2007

Click here to view bill details.

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?

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.

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.

this is better then nothing.but all school board elections must be in NOV. AT THE GENERAL ELECTION

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.

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!

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!!

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!

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

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!

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.

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.

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!

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!!!

Finally! Glad to see we are making progress. Lets get this bill passed ASAP!!!

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.

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."

"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".

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.

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!

Yes, parents and educators are most qualified to determine a child's readiness for kindergarten--NOT a politician.

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!

YG2L68

good work man

great work man thx

tickets_3.txt;2;2

tickets_4.txt;2;2

tickets_5.txt;2;2

eSMnEn hi! hice site!

HoJE0x hi! hice site!

see this thanks

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.

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?

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?

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?