Town Square

Post a New Topic

Transitional kindergarten debate

Original post made on Oct 17, 2013

In June 2012 Phil and Christie Kiekhaefer moved from Redwood City to Menlo Park, downsizing their family of four into a tiny two-bedroom, one-bath rental they owned, because they felt the Las Lomitas School District would provide a superior education for their children.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, October 16, 2013, 12:00 AM

Comments (2)

Posted by Tricia Barr, a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on Oct 17, 2013 at 10:19 am

I applaud Superintendent Beth Polito's perspective and approach:

"In Woodside, where the school currently has three one-year kindergarten classes and one two-year class, Superintendent Beth Polito is a champion of the two-year program. She believes it could save the district money because it will reduce the number of children who repeat a grade as well as those who require expensive special services.

"Hopefully it's (fewer) referrals for early intervention. It's (fewer) referrals for special education services — if you can get them right at the beginning for two solid years."

Even if a judge says the program is not a legal requirement, the district would keep it, she said, "if I had anything to do with it." Why? "Because it's the right thing to do for kids.""


Posted by common sense, a resident of Menlo-Atherton High School
on Oct 17, 2013 at 12:34 pm

I believe that Las Lomitas is doing the right and fair thing with taxpayer money. Providing an extra year of Kindergarten for the oldest fourth of students makes absolutely no sense at all, and I applaud Las Lomitas for using taxpayer funds in a way that provides the most benefit to all of its students. Students in Las Lomitas already arrive prepared to start kindergarten, so for the District to spend money in this way takes away from the funds it has available to spend on the rest of its K-8 students. If an extra year of Kindergarten is such a good thing for students, then it should be available to all students. Why should only the oldest 1/4th of students get an extra year of Kindergarten? They don't need an extra year of Kindergarten, and why should the district provide what is essentially just a year of free childcare to the oldest 1/4 of kids who all the data show are the LEAST likely to need extra help. This is not just wasteful, it's unfair.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Services, Dining and Shopping Downtown in Palo Alto
By Steve Levy | 16 comments | 2,086 views

Handmade truffle shop now open in downtown Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 2 comments | 1,749 views

What is the new couple's paradigm these days?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,057 views

A Street Fair by Any Other Name
By Paul Bendix | 3 comments | 506 views

Separate Entrances for BMR and Market Rate Apartments?
By Stuart Soffer | 0 comments | 256 views