Early entry policy won't be changed -- yet

PALMER -- A motion to change the school district's policy for student admissions failed in Thursday's school board meeting. The board voted 4-3 to keep the policy as it stands.

Under current district policy, a child must turn 5 on or before Aug. 15 of the calendar year he or she enters school. The parents of a child whose birthday doesn't meet this cutoff date but who will turn 5 by Oct. 1 can apply for early entry. For the request to be considered, the child must be tested by a child psychologist at the parents' expense.

The child is tested for emotional readiness and must have the fine motor skills of an average child starting school, according to current policy. In addition, the child must have an intelligence quotient of at least 130. The district's special education director then evaluates the psychologist's findings and makes the final recommendation.

Board Policy 5111, if passed, would have made a child's birthday the only criteria for consideration.

"The board wanted to eliminate all potential for subjectiveness in early admissions for students," said Kim Floyd, the school district's public information specialist.

But board member Sarah Welton said she wasn't comfortable with the change.

"I believe we forget about the child when we think we can streamline a program," Welton said.

Welton argued that some children are ready for school at an earlier age. She pointed to studies that show a child might suffer long-term social or academic consequences if denied the opportunity for early entry. But board member Larry Devilbiss countered, saying there were just as many studies showing that starting school too early could be harmful for a child.

"I'm happy with the policy before us tonight," Devilbiss said.

Though the motion was defeated the board instructed the administration to explore other ways of implementing the policy.

"This is an issue that many districts grapple with," said Mike Chmielewski, school board president.

After this month's election is certified and the school board is reorganized, a new proposal could be brought before the board.

"We agreed not to reconsider the original motion, but to say that we're not done with it yet," Chmielewski said.