Many thanks to those of you who commented on the question in the previous post. In addition to posting here, I had a few answers via Twitter and a few in person conversations to add to the mix. I'm not going to claim I've had a representative sample...and I also can't claim that there is much in the way of consensus, either. Like most things that have to do with schools, "the answer" rarely exists. But I am glad that you all have helped narrow things down. That is most helpful.
So, here is part two of the assignment I need your help in completing.
Suppose you had access to a science specialist at your school---someone who would teach science lessons a couple of times a week (in the same sense with which you might access PE, library, music...). Would you welcome science specialists for delivering science instruction to students---and what obstacles do you see in implementing it?
For example, maybe it's an awesome idea, but you just don't have a spare classroom...or the schedule is packed as it is. (Secondary educators rarely believe me when I tell them how difficult elementary schedules can be to build. They think they have the market cornered.) Or perhaps you wouldn't want a specialist because there are things you learn about your kids or places you like to connect the curriculum.
Nearly every educator I know is working in a school where budgets are being cut...and the most expensive portion of a school budget is people. Perhaps adding people, in this sense, is not a feasible option, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth pursuing if the payoff for kids would be worth it. (Side note: I would SO leave my current job if I could be an elementary science specialist.) If nothing else, it might serve as a reminder that legislators need to put their money where their collective mouth is.
What do you think?