Here is my main rationale for opposing including early learning in the definition of basic education: With the constitutional obligation of the state to amply fund basic education comes the authority of the state to compel children to attend public school. I can't imagine that the state is considering adding preschool to compulsory education --- if they are, that's a whole new kettle of fish and one that would most likely doom any conversation regarding the addition of early learning in basic education. But, with that said, how does the state and local school districts plan on budgeting for the appropriations to support early learning? Put another way, school districts plan their long-term budgets upon complex but relatively accurate formulas that predict, based upon housing patterns, age of the population, etc., the number of school-aged children residing within the district. And since all of these resident children will be compelled to attend schools within the district (minus private school and home-school children --- which, by the way, have predictable percentages), the district is able to plan their long-term budgets. But, at least in the foreseeable future, school districts have no way to predict how many of these resident young children will attend preschools within their districts and certainly will have no way to predict which ones will be "at-risk" and which of these at-risk young children will enroll in licensed preschools.
My second rationale is this: How are these preschools to be held accountable for performance?There must be accountability for performance in basic education. Increasing state and local bureaucracies to support and monitor early learning as part of basic education is not justifiable. I can imagine that many proponents of the inclusion of early learning in basic education simply see a predictable and protected source of revenue to support early learning in the future. But, have they considered the responsibility that comes with this constitutionally protected source of revenue? Like it or not, accountability for the performance of K-12 districts and schools is a reality, whether or not this takes the form of the federal accountability mandates of No Child Left Behind. The public demands accountability for public education and certainly increased investments in public education. So, again, how are preschools to be held accountable for performance? Furthermore, what are the performance measures and targets? And, who will hold them accountable once performance measures and targets are set? OSPI? The Department of Early Learning? [As for the latter agency, ask current preschool directors what they currently think of DEL, then ask them how they would feel about DEL enforcing performance standards in their schools. You'll very likely get a second opinion on the ramifications of including early learning in basic education.]
My third and final rationale is this: Where does it end? Early learning has not made its case, frankly, for inclusion in basic education above other programs in the education and training sector. If early learning justifies its inclusion in the definition of basic education, how soon will proponents of higher education demand its inclusion in the definition of basic education? And just so you are aware, this proposal, i.e., the inclusion of at least a two-year degree in the definition of basic education, has been made on a number of occasions. The same rationale for including early learning can be made for the inclusion of higher education: Investments in higher education have long-term positive benefits on our society as a whole. I for one would have a hard time disagreeing with this rationale if early learning is ultimately included in basic education. But, folks, we're talking huge amounts of money and huge bureaucracies to support and monitor all of this.
