The Millionth Child

Sometimes the enormity of the positive effects of pre-k just boggles the mind. Public pre-k is one of the few government programs that actually brings a return on investment − and the volume of that return, when you consider that some states have supported pre-k since the '80s or '90s, can be astronomical. Take Georgia for instance. The state just became the first state in the nation to reach its millionth child served in its public pre-k program, Bright from the Start. If the return on investment is anywhere close to Karoly and Bigelow's calculations of $2.62 for every $1 invested, or the $2 to $17 returns suggested by Karoly, Kilburn, & Cannon, and you are looking at savings that are beyond impressive.

Recently someone calculated the financial impact for a single state. Wilder Research of St. Paul, Minnesota found that over the past 25 years Michigan had saved $1.15 billion. Here is the break down on the returns:

Schools – $221 million in K-12 savings from reduced special education costs, drop out, and grade retention.

 

Taxpayers – $584 million in reduced government spending and increased tax revenues from more productive adults.

The public – $347 million in reduced social costs to the public realized through reduced incarceration, destruction, and injury caused through violence and crime.

The economy – $1.3 billion annually including generated wages and reduced government spending.

A strong body of credible research that says, "pre-k pays" -- and yet there are still those who balk at the decision to invest in kids. In these tough economic times, we can only be certain of one thing: Our future will be determined by the success of our children. Maybe we should hedge our bets and invest in them.

Age vs. Development

One of my students, Makiera, will turn five in October.  She has been in my preschool class for two full years, and according to DC Public Schools (DCPS) Policy regarding birthdates, she will be required to attend a year of pre-k before beginning kindergarten.  You see, Makiera misses the age cutoff for kindergarten in DCPS by two weeks.  Her birthday is in October, and all children who attend kindergarten in DCPS are required to be five years old by the end of September.  

 

On the one hand, I completely understand this policy.  I see no rush in sending children to kindergarten; I know how valuable high quality preschool and pre-k classes can be, and I firmly believe that children who have a solid foundation in academic, social, and emotional skills are much better prepared for success in kindergarten.  By requiring all children to be five by a September 30 cut-off date, DCPS is increasing the likelihood that children will have developed these foundational skills either in preschool, pre-k or at home. 

 

On the other hand, I see the importance of considering the needs of individual children.  Makiera, who has been in pre-k for two years now, is already reading, writing, and doing math at a kindergarten level.  She engages in complex play with her peers, solves problems creatively, and regulates her emotions with ease.  In my opinion, Makiera is more than ready for kindergarten.

 

In DC, Makiera would be required to attend pre-k next year, regardless of her developmental level.  But there's a hitch, Makiera's family is moving to a neighboring school district this summer with a slightly different kindergarten entrance policy.  In Montgomery County, Maryland, children typically must be five years old by September 1st before entering kindergarten.  But there is some flexibility with this policy.  If a child turns five between September 1 and October 15, they can apply for early entrance to kindergarten.  As described on the Montgomery County Public Schools website:

To be recommended for early entrance to kindergarten, children will need to demonstrate above average performance and development in academic skills as well as social/emotional and physical development. The standards for early entrance are very high to ensure that students are not frustrated by their advanced grade placement...  Assessments include a variety of activities that measure a child's performance during whole group and individual activities within the following developmental domains: personal and social development, language and literacy, mathematical thinking, physical well-being, and motor development. Recommendation for early entrance to kindergarten will be made based on a review of screening assessment data, parent application checklist, and any other relevant documentation submitted.  

Makiera completed this comprehensive assessment several weeks ago, and has been recommended for early entrance into kindergarten.  So now, because her family is moving just a few miles away, Makiera will start kindergarten a year before her DC peers born after September 30.

 

This whole scenario has gotten me thinking: how should school systems determine kindergarten eligibility?  Is it best to have firm cutoffs that attempt to ensure children's readiness for kindergarten, or is it better to consider entrance on a case-by-case basis?  How should unique exceptions to the policies be handled?  I'm curious to hear your perspective on the issue -- please leave a comment to share your ideas! 

A Real Life Story Problem

Math was never a favorite subject of mine.  I think it stems back to a difficulty with story problems throughout my elementary school years.  I attended a Math Institute this past week put on through the MN Department of Education.  I am pleased to say that we are incorporating many of the strategies in our classrooms already – always a good sign!

 

What was more interesting was to look at standards for mathematics at the early childhood level.  There is a slight difference in our state standards, or Early Childhood Indicators of Progress, and those put out by NAEYC (National Association for the Education of Young Children). 

 

As we discussed these standards and indicators of progress, our group was split pretty evenly.  One third of the programs represented were required to follow the standards and assess students to show progress.  One third used these indicators as a guide for their curriculum and used their own assessment model.  The final third were learning about these standards for the first time, although they include most of them in the programming already. 

 

As our state gets closer and closer to mandates related to Early Childhood Education, it will be interesting to see how programs respond to new or more strictly enforced standards.  Our director is currently researching curriculums, programming options and student contact time.  Quality rating systems are starting to play a role in funding and the choices parents have for early childhood opportunities. 

 

So now the story problem reads like this: 

 “Karissa is a teacher in an urban setting.  She has been told her 20 students need to show progress in all the areas of mathematics or her school will receive 3 stars instead of 5.  90% of her students start school without any knowledge of the English language and they have 6 hours of contact time a week due to budget cuts.  What would you do next?”

Taking Action

Last May, the District of Columbia City Council unanimously passed the Pre-K Enhancment and Expansion Act of 2008, which laid the foundation for a voluntary, high-quality pre-k program that would make pre-k available to every child in the District.  The legislation included provisions for professional development, quality improvement, and diverse delivery systems (pre-k would be enhanced in community, public school, and public charter school settings), and it was designed for both three- and four-year-old children.  If fully implemented, this legislation would put DC at the forefront of education policy nationwide.

 

Unfortunately, this year's budget reccomendation does not include sufficient funding for full implementation of the legislation.  The City Council is in the process of holding hearings about the budget, and I was fortunate to be able to testify at a hearing earlier this week.  Below is the testimony that I presented to the Council:

 

Good afternoon, my name is Jennifer Rosenbaum and I am a preschool teacher in the District. I would like to speak to you today regarding the proposed appropriations for the Pre-K Enhancement and Expansion Act of 2008.

Over my past two years as a preschool teacher, I have witnessed amazing progress in all of my students. They have developed the social-emotional, physical, cognitive, and language skills necessary to succeed in pre-k, kindergarten, and beyond. One of my students, Liliana, is an extremely observant, detail-oriented four-year-old who began school speaking only Spanish. She loved to tell stories and read books in Spanish, but was shy about speaking in English. I observed Liliana’s behavior carefully and devised individualized goals and instructional plans for home and school to help her build her language skills in both English and Spanish. Now, in April, Liliana is able to narrate complex stories, describe her emotions, and negotiate with her peers in both Spanish and English.

Another one of my students, Aaliyah, entered my class as an extremely energetic, outgoing three-year-old. She did not have many academic skills, but her interpersonal skills were strong and she was a keen observer of the world around her. Aaliyah quickly developed a love for reading (her favorite book is When Sophie Gets Angry...Really, Really Angry by Molly Bang), and could soon retell and sequence story events, make predictions about books, and track the print as we read. Not long after school started, Aaliyah’s family lost their home. Her life became extremely chaotic, but school remained constant. Aaliyah thrived on our classroom routine and took pride in the fact that she knew and understood our daily schedule. I maintained high expectations – both academic and behavioral – for Aaliyah, and put in place some individualized support systems to help her succeed in school. Ultimately, she continued to learn at an astonishingly fast pace – she now knows 85% of letter names and 46% of letter sounds, and she can rhyme, segment syllables, read sight words, read and interpret bar graphs, use nonstandard units of measurement, and recognize patterns.

Both Liliana and Aaliyah would have been at high risk for failure in kindergarten, but because they had the opportunity to attend a high-quality preschool program, they will enter school prepared to succeed. Their stories are not unique. Throughout the District, young children who have access to high-quality early care and education programs are developing the social-emotional, physical, cognitive, and language skills that will prepare them for success in kindergarten and beyond. Investing in high-quality early care and education programs is the first, and most critical, step to reforming the District’s K-12 education system.

Last year, the Council took the first step toward a unified, high-quality early care and education system by passing the Pre-K Enhancement and Expansion Act of 2008. This ground breaking legislation has the potential to put DC at the forefront of early education policy nationwide. Unfortunately, next year’s proposed budget lacks critical investments in that would allow the full implementation of the legislation to begin. If the Council approves the current budget, the District will lack the funds necessary to develop a high-quality early care and education system that will prepare children for success in school and life. Specifically, next year’s budget does not allow for:

• Coordinated pre-k program expansion in community-based centers, public schools, and public charter schools as required under the Pre-K Enhancement and Expansion Act of 2008.
• Quality improvement grant programs as required under the Pre-K Enhancement and Expansion Act of 2008.
• Workforce development scholarships or grants as required under the Pre-K Enhancement and Expansion Act of 2008.
• Child Care Subsidy Rate Increase as recommended by the Market Rate Survey.

Without these appropriations, the quality of, and access to, early care and education in the District will remain stagnant. Children just like Liliana and Aaliyah will be denied access to a high-quality early education and will be at greater risk for failure in kindergarten through twelfth grade.

I urge you to fully fund the pre-k legislation in the amount of $14.1 million (as estimated by the Chief Financial Officer’s May 2008 Fiscal Impact Statement). By fully funding legislative implementation, the DC Council will be maintaining its commitment to early childhood, as exemplified in the unanimous passage of the legislation last year. The DC Council will therefore also be supporting the President’s focus on early childhood education as a key component of the nation’s economic recovery plan.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration of this critical issue. If you have any questions, I would be happy to answer them.

For more information about the legislation and its implementation, your can visit www.prekforalldc.org.  I will write another post later this spring to update you about the final budget appropriations! 

Where we need to move...NOW!

I just finished reading an article from the latest edition of American Educator, a journal primarily focused on educational research and ideas.  I was pleased to see an article devoted to prekindergarten.  Tanya S. Wright and Susan B. Neuman co-authored the article, “Purposeful, Playful Pre-K: Building on Children’s Natural Proclivity to Learn Language, Literacy, Mathematics and Science.”  As you read through the article, there is evidence of great research and thought.  The article is broken down into sections that highlight what the National Research Council deems, “privileged domains” – or “domains in which children have a natural proclivity to learn, experiment and explore.” 

 

The content throughout the rest of the article is helpful and informative.  It gives current pre-k teachers ideas and methods for creating the best possible learning environment.  Educators or older grades are able to understand why these domains are crucial to the lifelong learning of a child. 

 

Even so, I am frustrated after reading this article.  The reason is simple: you don’t have to tell me twice why pre-k opportunities are necessary.  We know quality, researched based pre-k experiences provide the best foundations for our young learners.  

 

That is why I would like to see more articles devoted to the HOW to make this an opportunity for all children.  The article states, “One estimate suggests that children from typical middle-class families experience 1,000 hours of book reading before entering first grade, while children from low-income families may only experience 25 hours.”  I hope this is unacceptable to anyone who reads it.  What is tricky is HOW to get the programmatic support to utilize the information from this article.  I currently have two full classes both with waiting lists.  I know a dozen more families who would love to be involved with our classes but struggle to pay the fees, provide the transportation or have to work full time to support their family. 

 

With the overwhelming research, what else can we do to persuade lawmakers, investors and even our own communities to commit to the cause?  

We Can't Do It Alone

 The Foundation for Child Development recently released a Policy Brief that insists that it is time that we face facts about Pre-K. Pre-K can't fix the entire educational system. The report asserts that there is only so much one initiative can accomplish. The Case for Investing in PreK-3rd Education: Challenging Myths about School Reform supports the funding of pre-k through third initiatives as opposed to Pre-K as a stand alone school reform. Instead of using this as a reason not to fund pre-k, as many "reformers" like to do, the policy brief gives it as the reason America needs to invest in all of the "early childhood" years. The early childhood years, according to the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), is the time in a child's life from 3 - 8 years old. This crucial time is when childrens' brains form many of their foundational neural pathways that will serve them for the rest of their lives. From the Policy Brief:

Children's success in school and in life must be built on a foundation of seamless learning during their earliest PreK-3rd school years. 

This can only happen when there is collaboration between grade levels in schools. Many think that bringing pre-k into the schools will only serve to push down the academic standards and rob children of their childhood. This is not necessarily true. There can be accountability and childhood in the same room. Just listen to how Jennifer descibes the academic learning in her classroom and you can tell there her students are learning at high levels. In fact, pre-k practices should be pushed up into the higher grades as a way to more effectively teach all students instead of those that are "ready" for school at age 5 or 6 years.

image from: NEFEC website

We Need Recess!

Jay Mathews, a columnist for the Washington Post, recently wrote an article questioning the need for recess in elementary and middle schools.  He notes that in urban schools, where students are often one to two grade levels behind their suburban peers and drastically in need of academic intervention, recess may simply be more hassle than it's worth.  The unstructured time is a breeding ground for disputes, accidents, and general unpleasantness, and it does not typically accomplish an academic purpose. 

 

As a teacher in an urban school, I can understand where Mathews is coming from. I have seen the nurse's office filled with scraped knees, the Principal's office occupied by students writing apology letters to peers and teachers, and the bathrooms abuzz with gossip about what happened on the playground that day.  But despite all of these challenges, I believe that recess -- if structured appropriately -- is a critical part of a child's school day.  Many students at my school live in a neighborhood where it is not safe to go outside and play, and they have limited opportunities to move and interact freely with their peers.  Plus, some of my students arrive at school at 8am and don't leave until 6:30pm; they simply do not have time to play outside at home.  

 

Now I'm not necessarily advocating for the standard "free for all" type of recess that I know is common in many schools.  I agree with Mathews that this is can be an unproductive use of time that in some cases can detract from classroom learning.  However, a more structured recess time, where students are offered games and provided assistance with solving social problems is highly deslirable.  In my classroom, I plan at least one structured activity for recess each day -- everything from "red light, green light" to animal races (earlier this month students ran like the different animals mentioned in Time to Sleep by Denise Fleming), to painting with water on the sidewalk.  Students do not have to join the activity, but the option is there if they choose to do so.  I also provide materials, such as chalk, balls, cars, etc. to enhance their outdoor play.  Finally, our classroom norms for interaction and problem solving still apply when we are outside.  I teach my students how to use all of the materials, play games, and be safe, while talking explicitly about how we should interact with one another while outside.  With this foundation, recess is an invaluable time to reinforce social skills, extend academic learning, and build gross motor muscles. 

 

I understand that my exact method for implementing recess in pre-k is not necessarily applicable to teachers in upper grades, but I do believe that the underlying principles are valid.  Teachers need to teach students how to interact during recess, just as they teach them algebra or how to walk through the hallways.  And when students do not learn or behave as teachers expect, teachers need to figure out why and reteach - not simply abandon the process all together. 

Dollars and Sense - Part I

The following is a two part post on the financial landscape of Voluntary Pre-K. It examines one of the many reasons that VPK makes sense for America. It is a sound investment that will not be affected by market volatility.

Pre-K teachers, researchers and advocates are not the only ones who think investments in Pre-K make sense. A Public Radio show, Weekend America, covered the movement last Friday. American RadioWorks' Emily Hanford has the story about how the support of business leaders is changing the debate about investments in education:

Hedge fund managers, CEOs and chamber of commerce presidents may not seem like obvious advocates for the expansion of social programs, but they've become perhaps the most enthusiastic and effective supporters of preschool. They see the issue in dollars and cents, and they're meeting in Telluride to hone their economic argument as government budgets tighten and policymakers face tough choices about what to fund. (Listen at the bottom of the post.)

Much of the argument against voluntary pre-k for all is around the “cost” of the program and who should pay that cost. I propose that the state governments have a financial obligation to its citizens to invest in the human capital of our children in order to secure the financial future of states. High quality preschools are not cheap. When you consider some key elements of the standards of quality as defined by the National Institute for Early Education Research, it is easy to see where all the money goes. Here are just a few indicators of a high quality preschool program:

 

  · Teachers hold bachelor’s degrees, assistants hold Child Development Certificates (CDA)

· Both positions are paid on par with public school personnel and they have specialized training in early childhood approaches

· Classrooms have no more than a 1:10 adult-to-child ratio

· Students receive vision, hearing, and health screenings

   · Classrooms receive all necessary special services, including special education and English language instruction. (Pre-K Now, High Quality, 2008)

The estimated costs of providing preschool services in a full day setting can range greatly, from $5700 to $9700 per-student per-year (Gault, et al, 2008).

Here in Virginia, Governor Kaine has pushed to expand funding for pre-k in our state. Virginia has funded its targeted preschool program for 2008 at $6000 per-pupil rate from the Lottery Proceeds Fund. Localities will be expected to contribute to this amount based on their composite index but not to exceed 50% (Virginia General Assembly, 2008).

The VPI program will be funded by Virginia Standards of Quality for 100% of at-risk students not served by Head Start for 2008 – 2010. But, if the state were to expand the program to become a state-wide voluntary preschool program, then who would pay? The simplest solution would be for the State to dig deeper and find the money.  However, this is not likely to happen, at least for some time. There are difficult funding issues including hiring qualified teachers, securing space, and the lack of interest in a local match of state funds prohibiting the state from funding preschool this way. There are a number of strategies that have been used by states, but the key is for state leaders to decide, “we can do this,” instead of hiding behind their constituents’ pocket books. Some of the creative solutions to funding pre-k around the country include public private partnerships, expanded use of Title I funds and other federal monies by localities, lottery revenues, gaming revenues, and “sin” taxes. (Stone, 2008) (pdf)

One creative approach was the Arkansas program that increased taxes on alcohol for a limited time (5 years expanded to 7) in order to jump start the expansion of preschool services (Stone, 2008). This approach changed the political nature of the decision by legislators to fund preschool. Once the services were in place, constituents did not want to lose the program and the legislature found the money to continue funding.

With the current economic crisis, states will have few options for expanding pre-k. But, given the evidence available to us, how can we afford not to?

Men and the Call to Teach

ABC news ran a story on the "Mistrusted Male Teacher" August 28th. It points out the inherent difficulties of being a male teacher in the early grades. As one of the fewest of the few, a male teacher in early childhood, I read the story with my own biases. Bryan Nelson, a 30 year veteran teacher, summed up the lack of men in teaching this way,

"People don't think of men as caretaking or nurturing, which many of the young grades require," Nelson said. "And if you're a single man and you're going out to date somebody, when they ask you 'what do you do?' it just doesn't have the same cache as saying I'm an engineer or a scientist."

I haven't had a lot of problems with parents and issues of trust, but I have had my share. I once had a parent who told me to my face, "I wish my daughter had any other teacher than you." Some folks might have asked that the child be taken out of the classroom, but I invited the parent to come in and watch what we do... every day. She came in for almost the entire year. I basically took her child from zero reading skills to reading in a year. We got along better and better over the course of the year. When it was all said and done, by the end of the year, she still didn't trust me. There was nothing I could do to change her opinion except be open and honest with her. I have sometimes thought that maybe I was doing my boy students a disservice by being capable of teaching them as active boys only to send them to kindergarten to fail because they "couldn't sit still," or didn't seem to "pay attention." But, I also know that for some, I have been their first introduction to what a caring man can be. I have even been able to help some kids with fathers because the fathers are more comfortable volunteering in my classroom. They see how they can care without being weak and nurture without giving up their masculinity.

Another recent article, Herland by L. J. WIlliamson, talks about this same issue. The author took a different point of view, sighting the lack of men in child care and teaching as contributing to keeping women, "in their place." She writes,

Of course, it won't be long before these kids get old enough to start noticing things like the fact that our country has never had a female president, or that male teachers typically don't come into their schooling until the academics get more serious. By that point, many will come away with the impression that caring for small children is women's work, and for the most part, they'll be right.

Also quoted in the article was William Marsiglio, Professor of Sociology at the University of Florida and author of Men On A Mission: Valuing Youth Work In Our Communities. He says,

"We pay our mechanics more to work on our cars than we pay people to watch our kids, which tells you something about our values. As long as we as society continue to perpetuate the narrative that being nurturing to children is inherently a gendered process, we'll never have gender equity. It will continue to be a society in which women are disadvantaged, and males are given an excuse not to be involved. "

I think the thing that bothered me about that ABC article is that it sort of treated the chance of your child getting a "bad" male teacher or "good" male teacher as 50/50. It's just not like that. My greatest mentor was a male instructional assistant who also happened to be a minister. He felt a calling to teaching as he felt a calling to serve God. Perhaps if people thought of teaching the way that most teachers do there would be less fear. Teaching is a calling, it is my calling, and it could be the calling of other young men, if they aren't pushed away from the field by the lack of social standing, pay, and support for being there.

My friend also forwarded these articles to me about men in the teaching profession.
"Why Are Male Teachers Absent From Classrooms?"

"The value of the male schoolteacher"

Photo courtesy of: http://www.uppercasegallery.ca 

What does the NAEP mean to pre-k?

Who reads the Wall Street Journal?  Pretty much anyone with any amount of political power reads it. So when the WSJ publishes an Op-Ed you know that it is going to be read by the people who will decide the future of public education in our country. A recent piece, titled Protect Our Kids from Preschool, threw the pre-k world for a loop. It made a big enough splash that two of the biggest advocates and researchers of pre-k, David Kirp and Steven Barnett responded in an Op-Ed in the San Francisco Chronicle. Other interested parties in the pre-k community also sent replies to the WSJ. Sadly, as pre-k folks like to practice what we teach in pre-k, they were polite. The responses included some pretty heavy hitters, including: Lawrence J. Schweinhart of High/Scope and James Heckman of University of Chicago (who were misquoted in the article), as well as Susan Urahn of Pew Charitable Trust, and Libby Doggett of Pre-K Now who pointed out the misrepresentation of the facts.

Then Dalmia and Snell fired back. "What!?" you say. Yes, they kept arguing that they were right because what they wrote, that the National Assessment of Educational Progress test scores had not increased very much in Georgia and Oklahoma was true, that their main point is valid.

I feel like I am telling a class of preschoolers it's raining but, your point is not valid.

Why?

One concept I would like to point out in the provocative debate that Dalmia and Snell have engaged the pre-k community in, is the relevance of the NAEP. The two researchers suggest, by basing their argument on the NAEP test results , that the NAEP is a valid indicator of preschool effectiveness. Although a 2000 RAND corporation study found that pre-k positively affected NAEP scores, this would not be the reason I would recommend pre-k to a parent or policymaker. They suggest that one year in a high quality pre-k should positively impact a test score 5 years down the road. A test based on everything a student has learned up to 4th grade. I am a believer in the value of pre-k for many reasons but, passing the NAEP is not one of them.

The NAEP is an important tool for policymakers and leaders to refer to when making decisions about policy. Especially policy that relates to the rigor of a states' standards. However, it is a poor indicator of which "grade level" is not keeping up their part of the proficiency goal.

Having taught in a public school setting my entire career I am keenly aware of the importance of standards and accountability. We are told every year, "The scores in 3rd grade and 5th grade are not the scores of the 3rd and 5th grade teachers, they are the scores of the entire school." Even though I teach beginning algebra, statistics, and reading in my class, I am not the only one responsible if one of my former students doesn't get the answers right on a test 5 years from now.

A study published by the Hoover Institute, found that Georgia, Oklahoma, and Tennessee had the lowest correlation between the number of students achieving proficiency on state tests and the number achieving proficiency on the NAEP. The study "graded" states on whether their proficiency scores matched up to the NAEP. Here is an explanation of the results:

We gauge the differences among states by comparing how students do on state assessments with how they  perform on NAEP tests. By comparing the percentage of students deemed proficient on each, it is possible to determine whether states are setting expectations higher, lower, or equal to the NAEP standard. If the percentages are identical (or roughly so), then   state proficiency standards can be fairly labeled as “world-class.” If state assessments identify many more students as proficient than the NAEP, then state proficiency figures should be regarded as inflated.

       

Not surprisingly, when states set low expectations for student proficiency, they did not score well on the NAEP.
         

Three states—Georgia, Oklahoma, and Tennessee—expected so little of students that they received the grade of F. The state of Georgia, for instance, declared 88 percent of 8th graders proficient in reading, even though just 26 percent scored at or above the proficiency level on the NAEP.

        What does this have to do with universal pre-k in these states? It means that even if pre-k is effective at preparing kids for the NAEP in these states we could never tell because the standards in K -12 are not high enough to pass the NAEP anyway.

What has improved as a result of pre-k in Georgia? One indicator is that exceptional education enrollment has decreased each year since 2006. This improvement not only improves lives but saves the state money.

For more on the long lasting effects of pre-k check out the most recent report from the National Institute for Early Education Research titled: Preschool Education and Its Lasting Effects: Research and Policy Implications.(PDF)

photo credit: courtesy of fragmented and  http://www.uppercasegallery.ca/