The House Education Committee voted down a proposal Monday that would establish a framework to evaluate the state's interest in pre-k education.

Lawmakers voted 9-6 to send SB 191 to the 41st Legislative Day, calling state-supported pre-kindergarten an intrusion into family lives and private business.

Supporters say the issue isn't settled and pre-k advocates are working to secure a House floor vote through the Legislature's “smoke-out” process.

Before voting, committee members heard testimony for more than an hour.

Proponents of the plan sang the praises of pre-k education, noting the differences early childhood education can have on student achievement. Supporters also stressed the voluntary nature of the legislation, attempting to beat-back fears that pre-k would become mandatory.

Critics decried the measure, arguing that the bill would take away parental responsibility and infringe on private businesses.

Rep. Tom Brunner, R-Nisland, said he was “very much opposed” to any plan that would allow the government to compete with private businesses. He also expressed concern about funding a program when the state can't afford to property fund K-12 education currently.

Rep. Mitch Fargen, D-Flandreau, asked committee members to vote based on the legislation in front of them, not the legislation opponents are making it out to be. The bill doesn't ask for funding, he said.

For more information on the legislation, click here.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The South Dakota Senate passed legislation that will advance the state's interest in pre-kindergarten education - a move that supporters say will establish a framework to better define the need and desire to expand access of voluntary pre-k programs to economically disadvantaged students.

Senators approved SB 191 on a 20-15 vote after trading spirited arguments encompassing a range of philosophical policy positions that has made the pre-k discussion one of this year's most interesting legislative debates.

According to the legislation, pre-k providers aren't required to adhere to any set of state pre-k standards, but they have the option to seek certification based on “evidence-based quality benchmarks.”

Though the legislation mentions state-funded pre-k programs, it doesn't contain an appropriation. The measure does clarify that any future state-funded pre-k programs could only serve students from families whose household income is at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level.

The bill also contains other safeguards intended to mitigate concerns of voluntary pre-k opponents, including a provision that no child may be required to attend pre-k. The legislation also makes it clear the communities – not school districts – will drive any expansion in pre-k access at the local level.

The merits of pre-kindergarten education

Lawmakers traded talking points, sharply disagreeing about the impact pre-k education has on student achievement.

Leading pre-k advocate Sen. Tom Dempster, R-Sioux Falls, relied heavily on a compilation of research from the Minneapolis Federal Reserve, arguing that economically disadvantaged students attending pre-k are less likely to fall behind, less likely to need special education or remedial services, and are more likely to graduate from high school.

Sen. Dempster also referred to gains made by pre-k students currently served by a pilot program launched two years ago in Sioux Falls, which he said has led to “huge increases in the kids' results.”

Lawmakers from Lead, Pine Ridge and Rapid City recalled pre-k success in their respective communities, urging their fellow Senators to support the bill.

Sen. Jeff Haverly, R-Rapid City, who owns a daycare business in and acknowledged being “involved in the industry,” questioned the academic benefits of pre-k programs.

He criticized prominent pre-k research, saying it was based on an academic environment that isn't easily duplicated. Gains experienced in pre-k are demonstrated to fade-out later in a student's academic life, he said.

Fighting over funding

Even though the bill doesn't contain an appropriation, critics of the legislation waged arguments against the measure they said will require state funds in the future.

Even the suggestion that the state would fund pre-k programs is troublesome, according to Sen. Haverly, who has been quoted as saying that the program would cost the state as much as $50 million annually.

“We as legislators already have a problem funding K-12 education,” Sen. Haverly said, adding that he believes most Senators would agree that local school districts aren't sufficiently funded.

“We should not strap future legislators with the decision to fund community programs, especially in these tough economic times,” he argued.

Pre-k advocates rejected those concerns, saying instead that the bill is structured to provide lawmakers with the information and data needed to make a decision about funding. Without the legislation, the state officials don't have the authority to develop a structure for high-quality pre-k program – an element supporters said is needed to empower communities to plan local pre-k programs.

Even if the Legislature does decide to fund pre-k programs in the future, Sen. Dempster maintained that the money would be a wise investment.

Taking on poverty

Supporters of the plan locked onto to the legislation's requirement to target pre-k services to children from households that are at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level.

Sen. Jim Bradford, R-Pine Ridge, asked lawmakers to consider the impact the legislation could have on the state's Native American students – a sub-group of students who perform far below their peers on state achievement tests.

“Sad to say, being poor is part of that,” Bradford said, referring to the academic struggles of Native American children. “Is it wrong to invest in them just because they're poor?”

Lawmakers turned to statistics to create urgency for the legislation, saying the number of single mothers and the high percentage of households with two-parent income earners suggest that families may not be able to afford high quality pre-k programs.

Waiting lists to access the federally funded early childhood education programs continue to balloon, proponents argued, meaning a need is not being met. The state's role in filling that gap would provide targeted assistance to students who are already at-risk of arriving to kindergarten behind their peers.

The proper role of government

Pre-k opponents raised fears of future mandatory participation and suggested that measure amounts to “nanny-state” legislation.

Sen. Larry Rhoden, R-Union Center, assailed the legislation, calling it another attempt to take away responsibility from parents.

“Every time we in state government assume another responsibility, and take it out of the home, there are responsible parents in this state that are more than happy to turn over their obligation to the state,” Sen. Rhoden said.

To further his point, Sen. Rhoden used an example from his time serving on the Meade School Board. He told his fellow Senators that once the school offered a breakfast plan to provide a morning meal for students who wouldn't get one, parents in the community deferred to the district to provide that meal.

“We end up with another government program that's mandated,” said Sen. Rhoden.

Sen. Stan Adelstein, R-Rapid City, said he wasn't concerned about a government mandate and that the legislation wouldn't take over for parents. If pre-k programs are created, they will only to serve those children whose parents aren't currently providing their children the opportunity.

“Are we willing to throw away children and their opportunity in this state and in this nation?” asked Sen. Adelstein.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

Legislation to establish quality benchmarks for voluntary pre-k programs cleared its first hurdle Thursday, winning approval from the Senate Education Committee on a 5-2 vote.

Committee members endorsed SB 191 (read more on the legislation here) after education advocates and business leaders told lawmakers that pre-k is a sound economic investment and will narrow achievement gaps between advantaged and disadvantaged students.

The hearing brought a familiar band of critics, including Concerned Women for America, the Family Policy Council and Eagle Forum. The groups spoke against past attempts to establish pre-k programs.

Opponents levied harsh criticisms for pre-k programs, calling the legislation the “community organizer pre-k plan” and a “fast-track to socialism.” In general, the groups were concerned that “government programs” are too costly and would replace parental rights.

Sen. Dave Knudson, R-Sioux Falls, who supported the legislation, offered what he called a “reality check” for the measure's opponents. He said there is a great need to provide at-risk children with access to quality pre-k programs – especially those from unstable home environments.

“These kids have a very dim future unless we can rescue them at an early age,” Sen. Knudson said.

Testimony in support of the legislation took two distinct tracks, with some supporters speaking directly to the economic benefits of pre-k programs.

Rob Gunewald, an economist with the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank, told lawmakers that the bank's research indicates strong public benefit from investments in high-quality pre-k programs.

“On the margin, the next dollar spent on early childhood education, before children come to kindergarten, would have the strongest impact on human capital and also have the highest return to the public,” Grunewald said.

Public benefit comes from eliminating achievement gaps before they impact a student's long-term academic success, he told lawmakers. Grunewald also praised the structure of the legislation, balling the bill voluntary, targeted and market-based – components he told lawmakers are essential to good public pre-k policy.

While Grunewald's testimony focused mostly on public investments in pre-k, Deputy Education Secretary Deb Barnett told committee members that it's too early to talk about state appropriations.

Barnett said the state must first establish a framework for high-quality pre-k programs – a process required by SB 191. Authoring high-quality benchmarks would ensure maximum benefit to students and taxpayers, Barnett said.

Sen. Bob Gray, R-Pierre, voted against the bill, expressing concerns about the need to fund the bill in the future. He said estimates suggesting the state would spend as much as $4,500 per-student for pre-k programs is triple the cost of private sector programs.

“Leave it to government to make something cost much more than it does in a private setting,” he said.

The legislation will be considered by the full Senate this week.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story

The state won't require early childhood education providers to adopt state-developed pre-kindergarten standards, according to measure lawmakers will consider this session.

Legislation authorizing the State Board of Education to develop pre-k standards has failed during the past two legislative sessions, largely due to opposition voiced by private pre-k providers who argued that minimum standards would create unfair competition and increase private-sector costs.

According to SB 191, pre-k providers aren't required to adhere to standards, though they have the option to seek certification. However, the bill does require that any state-subsidized pre-k programs must adhere to “evidence-based quality benchmarks.”

Though the legislation mentions state-funded pre-k programs, it doesn't contain an appropriation. The measure does say, however, any future state-funded pre-k programs could only serve students from families whose household income is at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level.

The bill also contains other safeguards intended to mitigate concerns of voluntary pre-k programs opponents, including a provision that no child may be required to attend pre-k. The legislation also makes it clear that K-12 schools won't automatically secure state funding – the process must first go through a early learning advisory group comprised community stake holders and then needs to be approved by the State Department of Education.

Sen. Tom Dempster, R-Sioux Falls, and Rep. Shantel Krebs, R-Sioux Falls, are the prime sponsors of the legislation.

Comments (0) | Link to this story | Send to a friend | Print Story