Class sizes are important, and I hope you get the support you need.

I suggest looking at other options too: do elementary kids really need the performing arts specialist? the science specialist? the p.e. specialist?

Eliminating the specialists would allow CSR to stay the way it is, and CSR is more important than the specialists, since the main teacher can and should be able to take over.

As a parent of elementary kids who also has high schoolers, I will not be donating, because HS kids got screwed along the way, beginning last year becase elementary parents insisted that having a science specialist was more important than the 7 period.

Community colleges are not accepting high school kids claiming budget cuts, and the HS cut the 7 period.

Good luck with your efforts but what goes around comes around.

Elementary parents were selfish and had the "me,me" mentality last year. The lack of support for your effort from the upper grades may be because of that.

Honestly, if an elementary teacher cannot take over the duties of the science specialist, there is something wrong and last year, for elementary parents to be willing to screw the HS kids because they had to have science specialists and music specialists for their little ones was simply outrageous.

We can only do our best to move forwards in a positive way and try to do what we can for our children of all ages and our community.

Instead of pouring more of your hard-earned money into the black hole of teacher's union infested public schools, hire a tutor. Or relieve your kids from public schools altogether by home schooling them, or switching to private schools.

FREE your kids! They're worth it!

If maintaining our current class sizes in K - 3 is one of your priorities as a parent or community member, please help by pledging at www.PleasantonCSR.org today. These students are in their foundation building years of their education, along with the very high standards of California to meet, and their foundations will start to crumble if we keep increasing class sizes. Every child, regardless of their capability, deserves individualized time with their teacher to nurture their specific needs and interests, and that time greatly contributes to each child succeeding overall in their educational learnings.

Smaller is by definition better, so good luck on that.

The thing is, though, that bigger isn't by definition worse. I direct your attention to class sizes in Asia, where, I think we would all agree, education is quite effective.

Two decades teaching taught me that the only way you can keep kids from learning is to lock them in the closet. Of course, some teachers may drive the material differently from others; but the highly qualified specialists working for the textbook publishers have pretty much covered content and presentation, including well-made teaching aids and other nifty stuff for the teacher such as sample tests and lesson plans.

Smaller class size did make it easier to mark homework and tests, but I wouldn't say that larger class size made helping individual students markedly tougher.

For my money, parents are the most important influence on learning, not the size of the class or the teacher in it. Parents are the part of the educational team that provides the environment and expectation for learning, the educational values that the child tends toward in the classroom.

Maybe our money should go toward shortening the work days of parents with school-age children.

Thank you, community, teachers and this amazing committee!

We've made our pledge!

www.pleasantonCSR.org is GREAT at explaining the facts, too! We're excited about this effort!

We love our teachers and the kids REALLY deserve this! Please take the time to check it out! :)

Please read today's article from the Mercury News on school reform. To quote: " Of all the strategies available to improve student performance, decreasing class size is among the most expensive and least effective."
This is a lot of good money and effort from good people going in the wrong direction. If we want to improve our schools, let's support programs that WORK, not ones that seem like they should but don't.
P.S. I am a retired public school teacher who continues to volunteer, three days a week, for the PUSD even though my kids are in college, so don't make me out to be a teacher, student, or school basher.

Hi all, here is an article explaining the benefits of smaller class sizes in America:

Web Link

"The Institute of Education Sciences, the research arm of the United States Department of Education has concluded that class size reduction is one of only four, evidence-based reforms that have been proven to increase student achievement through rigorous, randomized experiments — the “gold standard” of research"

"Every controlled study of the California class size reduction program — and there have been at least six so far — have shown significant gains from smaller classes"

Comparisons to Asia as less meaningful because a lot of background factors that are different in Asia.

Also, don't forget smaller class sizes are hugely subsidized by the State -this is a very cost effective program to keep in Pleasanton.

And do we want to be the only district in the area to go to 30:1 next year?

"The Class Size Debate" Web Link

What's really encouraging is that the weblink provided by the Keep Class Sizes Low Team also said:

"Moreover, it is possible to reduce class size without spending any more money, by redeploying out-of-classroom staff. See this study, for example, by Christopher Tienken and Charles Achilles, showing how a middle school in New Jersey managed to reduce class size and dramatically lower student failure rates at no extra cost."

I understand there have been staff cuts - but we need to all start being a lot more creative, rather than continuing to throw money at things, hoping it will "improve", or we can "save" it. It's a horrible habit we've all gotten into, and everytime we want to do anything, it's back to the taxpayers with open hands (but not open hearts).

I agree with a lot of different points that have been made here - it seems reasonable to expect that CSR might help some of the students, but I have to agree wholeheartedly with Mike regarding the overwheleming importance of parenting. So if for some reason class sizes increase, you should all be encouraged that all is not lost, and that you actually have a lot of power in this situation if you are a parent. Maybe there is a way to identify the children that will most benefit from CSR, and provide it for them. Those that are more voracious learners despite the class size - keep them in the larger classes. My children graduated from Pleasanton schools, and just missed CSR by a few years - all survived and are well-educated, motivated, hard-working young adults. Praise God.

Thank you for all the postings and different viewpoints.

Here's another way to look at it. Class size reduction is costly. However what is the cost of not having smaller class sizes? Class sizes were reduced to 20 in the mid 1990's to meet the new California education standards. Reading, writing and math are now critical skill sets taught in kindergarten. However going to the fall of 2011, there will be 50% more children in a K-3 classroom than the original design to meet these standards, each receiving 33% less individual time w/ the teacher. Children need one on one attention from their teacher to achieve and assess these standards for a variety of reasons but one important one is if children are not reading at or above standard by the end of 1st grade, they only have a 20% chance of ever achieving standard.

Given the standards have not changed, what we can expect is that opportunities for differentiation to meet the individual student's need will be all but gone. Teachers are then forced to choose to what level of ability do they teach the group as a whole - is it the lowestt common denominator, the middle or the high?

Is it realistic to expect the same positive results we've had over the last 15 years with this equation?

We need to ensure a strong foundation in K-3 because that is the foundation for all other subjects going forward.

This has got to be the first place I've ever seen a thread where people were actively discouraging others from donating to a charitable cause. This boggles my mind. It sure sounds suspicious. There were a lot of people in this community who said they wanted to "send a message" to teachers. Are you people worried that teachers will get the wrong message if a group of donors manages to preserve CSR? Is that why you are so concerned with telling us what to do with our own money?

Dear "I Don't Get It,"
Really! Really! You interrupt a productive exchange of ideas with a conspiracy theory? I am all for donating to the schools; I am just encouraging people to do it thoughtfully and with the facts. Our community does have limited resources which we should all use wisely. I have said on other threads that my money will go to Barton because I believe that does the most good with least financial outlay.
Keep Class Sizes Low Team's link reads: (The other three "gold-standard" reforms are one-on-one tutoring by qualified tutors for at-risk readers in grades first through third...) which is the definition of Barton. Most of us are on the sides of the students, even if we disagree about what is the best solution for the current problems. Don't throw your demonization and suspicions into what was probably the longest-running, civil, intelligent exchange of ideas to transpire on this forum, until you interjected with your "suspicious" nature.

I don't know why, but I feel there's a degree of hysteria going on. That if class sizes go up, somehow everything's going to fall apart for most kids. To me, that's putting way too much faith in the CA education standards, in each and every teacher (not every teacher is the best), and not enough in the parent and in the natural inquisitiveness and desire of the child to learn. My goodness - we were in CO for a few years when my daughter was in 3rd-4th grade. The powers that be decided memorizing multiplication tables was out - so we had some serious remedial work to do at home when I realized my daughter was struggling in math after moving here. (Have you ever tried to tell a child they need to memorize the mult. tables when their teacer says they don't?) She's now a CPA. I think the struggle actually convinced her that usually it really just came down to hard work.

I'm not belittling parents' concerns - I was (am) a very concerned parent too. Wanting the best, trying to maximize the opportunities for all of my children. But I see a slightly different attitude evolving - where parents are being convinced they can't help their children at home. I think a teacher facing a growing class size might be working on how they can best engage their students' parents in order to make up for the lost one-on-one time. Or maybe it's a matter of getting more parent volunteers in the classroom.

If I were a parent facing this particular dilemma, I would make sure I found out what exactly my child needed to know for these assessment tests, and then do all I could to augment what they are learning in the classroom at home. Yes - there will be children who don't get help at home. And yes, they will probably take up more of the teacher's, or volunteer's, time. But that's pretty much how it's always been. Have confidence in yourself as a parent - that you can help your child. Your child in turn will develop that confidence in themselves.

yet another resident-
I'm so glad to see you are involved in your child's education and that they had support at home. As a classroom teacher we have to be concerned for the well being of all students. This year, a clear third of my students (33 total in my class) do not have the supportive household that you describe. Thank goodness I have had parent volunteers because it is not possible to reach these kids during the day, in order to meet their very individual needs. I also keep many of these kids after school daily to work on their skills.

Since CSR has been incorporated the standards have risen- the level of mastery has dropped an entire grade level. Students not meeting these standards will be marked at risk. With less in the classroom, it is possible to remedy these challenges students face during the school day. As they advance in the grades ( reaching 30:1 in my classroom) these needs are many times improved to the point of mastery making it easier for them to master the level of standards I present. Take for example second language learners- we had a class where 50% of all Kindergarteners entering school were language learners, by 5th gr. they were all reclassified except for 4 that were new to the school. This was possible because of the individual needs that were met with fewer in the classroom.

You're correct, CSR is not mandatory- I've never had it, yet there are very concerning results we will inevitably experience without it next year. Is this what we want for our children? Even those who have a reality unlike your home? I would think a community would be concerned about all it's members, not just themselves. We are held to that standard, why discourage those who also believe this way in working to fund CSR? We have taken it for granted that our schools are above standard, I certainly hope that it will be recognized that the education will look very different in the years to come and that it is understood why.

If you are going to raise class sizes and reform the school system, there are many other things you need to change to ensure a quality education. You can't just change the class size without changing the standards. And this kind of change is not going to happen by late august. I hope everyone considers pledging this year.

"I don't get it said:"This has got to be the first place I've ever seen a thread where people were actively discouraging others from donating to a charitable cause. This boggles my mind. It sure sounds suspicious. There were a lot of people in this community who said they wanted to "send a message" to teachers. Are you people worried that teachers will get the wrong message if a group of donors manages to preserve CSR? Is that why you are so concerned with telling us what to do with our own money?"

Very well said. You echoed my thoughts exactly. Look, we're at the point where we are now because 35% of voters blocked Measure E saying that they didn't want to contribute money for the cause for various reasons. Fine. OK, we're past that now, Now we're at the stage where those who want to voluntarily contribute to the cause of reducing CSR are organizing a campaign on their own. You don't want to contribute? Fine, you don't have to. But please don't be an intrusive busybody trying to tell other people what they should be doing with their own voluntary contributions.

"I'm so glad to see you are involved in your child's education and that they had support at home."

"You don't want to contribute? Fine, you don't have to."

Man - it's really hard to have civil discourse on the PW blogs. Too bad. Wow. I'll leave you to yourselves. Good luck!

Yet Another Resident,
I appreciate your contribution to this thread and understand your disgust. Roger and out.

Since it is said by Sam that 35% of the voters blocked the tax, I expect to see 65% of the community donate to the schools voluntarily. If we do not see a 65% donation rate then you might expect a lot of the votes for the tax were by seniors who were going to take the exemption and not pay the tax.

I think people should pledge to donate money and/or time. If there is not enough money for CSR, having some parents in the classroom to help out will help. While the teachers are needed to instruct, when there is an assignment and some students are stuck with questions, many parents can be the front-line support and try to support those kids. These parents can also be of assistance for the ESL learners. However, we had many immigrants before with larger classroom sizes and that worked. Maybe our expectations on learning English needs to be revisited. If you are an ESL person, perhaps there should be a mandatory after-school study sessions to help with the language barrier. Having a classroom that has to deal with multiple languages brings everybody down.

yet another resident- when I said "I'm so glad to see you are involved in your child's education and that they had support at home." I was not being sarcastic and Im sorry to hear you took it that way.

I have many supportive parents both at home with their child and at school in the classroom. This is not anything I would ever criticize, yet I wish it was true for all of my students. It makes all the difference! Sometimes it is the third in my classroom that are often forgotten as a reality for any classroom.

It seems like as a teacher my word is never accepted here as well, as if no one wants to really hear what we are really doing in our classrooms with serious cuts to our program and budget. I was adding to the civil discussion and sorry if you were offended.

Thank you Really, Really for your support. And Be Positive, I take you at your word, and apologize if I misinterpreted. There's just a minority of bloggers that put us all on edge - kind of like the minority of aggressive drivers that make us all suspect each other when we are behind the wheel.

My thoughts about the 1/3 of students that don't have the parental support: wish we could figure out a way to work on that. Teachers only have their kids for a year - even if it's a smaller class size, will that help that child's situation in the long run? I realize it's better than doing nothing, but...

NOW, Roger and out. :)

"I'll leave you to yourselves. Good luck!"

Thank you.

"I appreciate your contribution to this thread and understand your disgust."

I don't appreciate it. It is pretty clear when people say things like this:

"and everytime we want to do anything, it's back to the taxpayers with open hands (but not open hearts)."

Those people have a political agenda. Furthermore, you don't sound "civil". You sound condescending.

I agree with the remark about "condescending" comments. When I read platitudes like "Have confidence in yourself as a parent - that you can help your child", it just makes me roll my eyes.

When the issue of Measure E was up for vote, that was the opportunity for those for and against additional funding to voice their concerns. We were all in this together. But now that the nature of the effort to preserve CSR has been transformed into a unilateral effort involving voluntary contributions by supporters, I'm baffled as to why some people still think that the matter is a proper subject for debate. If you support the effort, contribute. If you don't support the effort, don't contribute. There's nothing to debate here.

I feel badly for the K-3 families....however, we didn't pass the parcel tax and the cuts throughout PUSD are huge. CSR comes with a big price tag and touches only a quarter to a third of the student population. CORE makes more sense to me as it impacts all schools and every grade level. Technology and library support is essential to all teachers and students...including K-3! I'm also looking forward to the new direction PPIE is going in. Fundraising year round targeting bigger pools of money may be the answer for programs such as CSR. Look at the bigger picture and put your efforts in the places that can make a difference today.

Sam,

The condescending remarks stem from the ongoing feeling that another taxation attempt is clearly brewing and inevitable. While we have spent years trying to teach our sons and daughters that no means no, PUSD apparently disagrees.

resident,

This thread is about an entirely voluntary cause, and nothing to do with a "taxation attempt". Please take your comments elsewhere.

CSR Team,
So, obviously, $1.3 million cannot cover the entire cost of the program. Will the extra come from the state or the district?

Going to 30:1 will save the district $1.3 million and cost 26 jobs. The rest of the money comes from the state.

This is a totally non-political effort and should appeal to yes or no on E who are interested in keeping class sizes at 25 students to 1 teacher in K-3 in Pleasanton. We very much support CORE and hope people can contribute to both efforts.

I think it's sad that this group is taking away from the CORE campaign efforts. What good is class size reduction with no library aide and the schools technology falling apart? While I applaud people stepping up to do something in this budget emergency it is narrow minded in my opinion to only focus on the needs of the k-3 grades. All grades are important and as a Community we should be supporting our students across the board.

It is not at all our intention to take away from the CORE campaign efforts. We very much support it and are actively promoting it. If you check the PPIE website, CORE contributions from elementary are pretty much the same % towards reaching our goal as middle and high schools, so it looks like people are contributing to both. We have a supportive community which values both efforts and it's important to save as many critical programs as we can.

Dear Keep class sizes low team,
While it may not be your intention to take away from the CORE campaign it will. I support fundraising for our schools but starting another group will just split the efforts. No library and not working, out of date technology are bad for the quality education we hope for in Pleasanton. The teachers cannot do it all and CSR only touches K-3. Please group with CORE to maintain support to all our students and teachers across the grade levels.

"While it may not be your intention to take away from the CORE campaign it will. I support fundraising for our schools but starting another group will just split the efforts. No library and not working, out of date technology are bad for the quality education we hope for in Pleasanton. The teachers cannot do it all and CSR only touches K-3. Please group with CORE to maintain support to all our students and teachers across the grade levels. "

I think it is unrealistic to ask parents to give 150 dollars per kid to CORE plus the amount for CSR.

btw, I am not anti-education, in fact, I voted for measure E. But I do think that elementary parents have what they asked for. They thought THEIR programs were more important than anything, and now they want US to help? NO!

That said, people with kids in the upper grades will give to CORE and not to CSR. If k-3 parents give to CSR and everyone else gives to CORE, both efforts should be fine.

I personally prefer CORE even though I have elementary kids as well. I did not like how elementary parents got their way last year at the expense of our High school kids.

Now they want the entire community to help even though our high school kids saw their programs gone. Perhaps the lady that spoke before the board and said that she grew up in Livermore and that HS did not need AP classes or this or that, maybe SHE should fund CSR for her kids, because the rest of us parents with upper grade kids still remember the selfishness of elementary parents and the teacher union (yes, HS teachers gave up their collaboration period to fund elementary programs, and that in turn affected the HS 7 period)

"While it may not be your intention to take away from the CORE campaign it will. I support fundraising for our schools but starting another group will just split the efforts. No library and not working, out of date technology are bad for the quality education we hope for in Pleasanton. The teachers cannot do it all and CSR only touches K-3. Please group with CORE to maintain support to all our students and teachers across the grade levels. "

I think it is unrealistic to ask parents to give 150 dollars per kid to CORE plus the amount for CSR.

That said, people with kids in the upper grades will give to CORE and not to CSR. If k-3 parents give to CSR and everyone else gives to CORE, both efforts should be fine.

I personally prefer CORE even though I have elementary kids as well. I did not like how elementary parents (with no kids in the upper grades) got their way last year at the expense of our High school kids.

Now they want the entire community to help even though our high school kids saw their programs gone. Perhaps the lady that spoke before the board and said that she grew up in Livermore and that HS did not need AP classes or this or that, maybe SHE should fund CSR for her kids, because the rest of us parents with upper grade kids still remember the selfishness of elementary parents and the teacher union (yes, HS teachers gave up their collaboration period to fund elementary programs, and that in turn affected the HS 7 period - guess elementary teachers have a stronger voice than the HS teachers)

btw, I am not anti-education, in fact, I voted for measure E. But I do think that elementary parents have what they asked for. They thought THEIR programs were more important than anything, and now they want US to help? NO!

Rumors are that we are "rehiring" all the pink slip staff at PUSD. No huge budget cuts after all. Once again the District administrators and board members have been "Crying Wolf" and the "Sky is Falling". Is this now the second or third time they have done this to us? Now I understand why they put Measure E on the ballot before the money was announced. Hard not to think this was a sick fraud on the voters. I believed them. What an idiot I was. Never again.

Can you please explain where you are getting these "rumors" from? Because I'm a teacher and at my school, all of the pink slipped teachers are packing up their classrooms as we speak. The teachers that have jobs, have no clue what they are going to be teaching in August and are not getting any communication about their schedule.

Maybe you should enroll at my school. Your "rumors" are very similar to what we here from teenagers.

Last board meeting mentioned bringing layoffs back. And the finance manager was talking about money from Sacramento. Sure looks like the panic is over.

Winston,

Please post your comments elsewhere. This is not a thread about parcel taxes.

Winston is correct. Here is the info from the PUSD website:

At the Special Board Meeting scheduled for this Friday, June 3, Cabinet will recommend restoring the following programs for 2011/12:

.5 reading specialists at 9 elementary sites and .5 Barton ($400,000)
Physical education sections at elementary schools ($400,000)
Maintain 25:1 in grades K-3 ($1,300,000)
Counseling ($200,000)
Total $2,300,000

It is anticipated that this issue will be addressed at approximately 4:30 p.m. on June 3.

The Cabinet is confident in recommending the restoration of the programs listed. Not only do we believe that adequate funding will be available, we also recognize that these items are priorities for students, staff, and the community.

OK, so I guess I do not need to donate to CORE, then. The 7 period in HS is not being restored yet all the elementary stuff is. I guess the district does not need further donations if they can afford to spend so much money on the elementary programs

Jill is right. PUSD is restoring what would have been funded by measure E. Read about it straight from the PUSD website if you still do not believe it:

Web Link

I voted for measure E but now I am glad it did not pass. I guess the district never really needed the money? What would have been done with E funds had it passed? (I do not see any willingness to restore HS programs)