There is no broad based evidence that full day of Kindergarten would better prepare students for their K-12 education and give students a more competitive edge in the global work force, and ultimately attract even more businesses and families to the city. The proposal is just a feel good approach to education coupled with a drive by the teacher union to expaned its work force.

Think about it, recent federal studies related to Head Start, reinforce that all day K provides any significant benefit. In fact it may harm the child's learning process.

Citing mandated curriculum requirements as motivation for full day Kindergarten is specious at best. Requirements are described in detail in NJ Administrative Code Title 6, Chapter 8(a), available at http://nj.gov/njded/code/current/title6a/chap8.pdf. Please read it, or, at least browse through it.

Summit falls short of the mark on many of these requirements. School administrators would do more to meet their responsibility to the children, to their parents, to the city, and to society by fixing what they already have that is broken before expanding programs.

Looks like just another excuse to raise taxes and get around the 2% cap on taxes.

Based on this article, there were no strong arguments why FDK is necessary. One kindergarten teacher referred to a Summit education as strong and unique and another talked about students at different learning levels...and seemed to be blaming private k programs for this. I am not opposed to FDK, but there needs to be better reasons than the ones presented. frankly, there are so many deficits in the Summit schools once you get to middle school and high school, I see little reason to invest in FDK unless they are ready to fix MS and HS...want proof? Dr Parker could start by finding out just how many kids in his precious and highly rated schools are using private tutors to boost their grades...

Full time kindergarten or half time, kids are always on different levels. You have kids who chronologically are at different ages. You sometimes have a ten month difference. In my previous job before retiring I was a Title 1 tutor and so many of my kids were on the younger age of the spectrum. You would not expect a one month old baby to perform like the ten month old baby and a lot of times these kids are in the same class. Somehow, someone has decided that the kdg. curriculum should be what the first grade curriculum used to be. I see in my working in a school in San Francisco that many more children are retained because they can't handle the current k curriculum. I work on readiness skills with those children, the same readiness skills I used to work on for six weeks with most of my first graders in yesteryear. Those who needed more readiness got it. The others went on to the regular reading program. Summit is in a unique position to make a full day kdg. suit the needs of the many levels of children. To provide times in the day for the kids to play, construct, paint, learn to share and get along with each other. This is not what I see in the k's in my school here. I must check my former district on Long Island. Nevertheless, go to a Full Day but make it the best full day experience ever. I wish I had the power to do this with the kids that I work with. All I can do is encourage and praise them and hope that my message gets through to the teachers.

One other thing. Don't focus on the money issue. You are investing in the children's futures. I have no children in the schools yet I support the school and give my opinion when asked.

I taught preschool handicapped for 20 years and have raised three children (all products of the Summit School District, starting in grades 1 and 3). Full day kindgergarten is not a problem solver. The real issue is the huge age difference within the class and how "young" (in terms of maturation as well as age) some of the children are when they start school. Five year old children are not ready for full day learning and there is no reason to increase already high Summit taxes to provide "rest" time and additional play time, both which would become a necessity if the the day is lengthened. The more intelligent decsion would be for the parents to recognize that children with summer/fall birtdays are really not ready for school and they should wait another year before enrolling them. Every parent in our community has that option. There is no reason to rush to "start" thier chid's education (I chose to wait an extra year and never regretted my decsion). I have two children in Ivy League schools and one in a tier one university, so I don't think it hindered them in any way. Longer days is not the answer. Recognizing whether or not your child is ready for Kindergarten and holding them back if they are not, is the real solution.

The project would result in a "$68.17 tax increase for average assessed home at $410,000". This is equivalent to approximately $2.62 per biweekly pay period, which is cheaper than one trip to Starbucks. Are we "cutting off our nose to spite our face?" Let's strengthen the foundational years of OUR children. This is for Summit (not Union County, the State or The Union).

Anyone trying to argue that more schooling and education is harmful to a child is either misinformed or just plain stupid. The simple fact of the matter is that the overcrowding at the elementary schools has gotten to the point where there are now trailers in the school parking lots that double as classrooms. Address the overcrowding first before adding more children and more trailers. Whats next? Learning tents on the front lawn? FEMA gymnasiums?

If you have ever observed full day kindergarten it's mostly work and very, very, little play. That's my objection. So many of your comments mention money as the object of your objections.

Marion, you make a great argument against the full day program. The typical 5-year old is not ready for the mostly work and very little play model you describe. half day Kindergarten is a good stepping stone to the full days they'll be starting in grade 1. Even if cost were no object, I'd still oppose this for my children.

Full day kindergarten is the lowest of all priorities for the Summit schools. We already pay the highest property taxes in Union County. There remains space issues in ALL the schools, a problem which has been identified for over a decade. And we are STILL with out a credible and actionable plan to address those needs. Our students already perform well, as attested by the district in their assessment reviews. And the district already invests in early intervention for those students (ESL children and those with learning disabilities) who need it (which includes full-day preK and K instruction). The district appears tone deaf, at best, to the fact that most of our residents will be paying higher tax bills and living expenses starting this year thanks to the latest in government legislation (both federal and state). To add more is outrageous. I urge the Bd of Estimate to turn down this proposal. If the Bd of Ed is insistent on full day K, then they should press the Summit Council to work on Union County and get our county tax bill down and redirect those funds to support their less than urgent proposal.

Full day kindergarten is not something we should be spending money on in the current economic and tax environment. Our public school system is already doing an excellent job of educating our kids without this new program. There is no mandate that full day kindergarten is something we must provide. The slow growth economy with lingering high unemployment, especially in NJ, combined with the property tax cap and already very high taxes we face in Summit, argues persuasively against implementing this new program at this time.

I also have questions about the full cost. The article above states that the estimated construction cost is $10.3 million, which would result in an estimated $68.17 tax increase for the average assessed home at $410,000. Additional personnel would also be added, including nine teachers, 8 ½ aides, 2 ½ specialists and additional custodial staff, with an estimated total cost of $1,089,298.

Does the $68.17 tax increase include those personnel costs? And is $1.1 million per year really enough to fund salary and benefits for 20 additions to the educational staff plus added custodial costs?

I urge the Board of school Estimate to do what they can to stop this proposal.

Joe and most of you are right. I am not in favor or not in favor of FDK. I work as a volunteer in FDK and see the academic curriculum the kids are given. I work with the K kids who aren't ready and some of the teachers don't know what to do with these kids except from practically day one, mark them for retention. I use readiness books and while the kids are with me they can "taste" success. So, the problem I see with not having a full day is to research in your own district what the kids in your present k's are being asked to do. I belong to a National Org. that proposes more play in k. This isn't busy/fun time, it's a time for the kids to interact with each other, choose activities that engage them plus have academic activities geared to the appropriate kids. Whatever happened to grouping. Teaching in regular school I always had four reading groups and no child felt that they were in the bottom group. You can do the same in kindergarten. It doesn't take a lot of time to prepare the proper materials for the kids. So, you are all right. Full time/part time-Let kindergartten be what it was meant to bes-a garden of kids happily experiencing their first experience with school.
Hopefully, Summit Schools will then work on making the high school a great way for those kids to experience their last experience of public school. Good luck.

Should have said in favor or not in favor. Sorry.

Had I a Kindergartner, I would object to FDK on the grounds that I would be deprived of an additional three hours per weekday of interacting with, bonding with, and teaching my child. Parents are the most effective and most important teacher a child has. Compare the results of homeschooling with that of public schools.

The (conservative) $68.17 "average" fiscal year impact on an "average" $410,000 home covers only capital improvements (that is, enlarging the physical plant). Ongoing continuing expenses of at least $70 per year per "average" household are not included in that figure.

I urge the Board of School Estimate to do what they can to stop this proposal.

Six of my gtandchlldren go to middle and high school in Three Village and Smithtown School District where they have way more opportounities than my grandson here. It's kind of sad of making all this fuss about kdg. when your high school lacks so much for the kids. I love visiting my daughter in Summit since it is such a beautiful town with a beautiful mall and of course, my grandson. When my husband was Supt. in Hauppauge, L.I. they had so many great opplotunities for the high schoolers. He instigated many programs and the kids who took advantage of them are successful adults today. I read in my town paper about a boy who is a finalist in the Intel program which he participates in through his Smithtown High School. Why don't we have teachers willing to participate in such a program in Summit. Just asking and maybe hoping.