|
- |
WHAT HEARTLESS PERSON wouldn't want to help a little kid get a good start in life? Who wouldn't invest a few dollars now for great social dividends in the future? That will be the thrust of the arguments voiced by advocates of Gov. Tim Kaine's Start Strong preschool education program. But lawmakers, taxpayers, and even educators should take a second--and third and fourth--look before buying into what could be one of the biggest boondoggles ever foisted on this state.
Mr. Kaine proposes spending $296 million per year to provide preschool education for 100,000 4-year-olds. Why? Because "high-quality preschool is vital to a child's success later in school and in life," he says.
Really? While dueling social scientists disagree, there's some pretty strong evidence that government preschool education not only doesn't help many kids, it actually hurts some of them. For example, a February 2006 study by the University of California, Santa Barbara (confirmed by other surveys) shows that any scholastic advancement achieved by children in a preschool program disappears by third grade. Researchers Darcy Olsen and Lisa Snell analyzed data from a 2005 RAND Corp. study and other sources and found "strong evidence that the widespread adoption of preschool and full-day kindergarten is unlikely to improve student achievement." One RAND study showed mainstream preschool programs failing to have any effect on "high school or college completion, earnings, or criminal justice system involvement."
Furthermore, research from Stanford and the University of California at Berkeley (that most famous of right-wing institutions) found that such programs can actually hurt: In middle-class kids, "preschool hinders social development and created poor social behavior, such as bullying and aggression, and a lack of motivation to take part in classroom activities." In other words, average kids did not benefit in the long term and were actually worse off socially and emotionally by being enrolled in preschool.
Nevertheless, the push for pre-K presses on. Why? Because some kids are at risk and need extra help. Because people love kids and believe the hype that structured schooling is the best hope for them. Because some parents are looking for state-funded day care. Because many fail to recognize the untestable, nonquantifiable value of the nurturing that a family best provides.
The rhetoric is already flying, as are the stats and studies. One problem with social-science research is that it's hard for the layperson to distinguish valid from invalid studies, so sorting out the truth is tough. For example, as Chris Braunlich points out on the Bacon's Rebellion Web site, one study cited by Mr. Kaine--a "highly regarded Michigan study" that showed "positive effects [of preschool] on adult crime, earnings, wealth, welfare dependence, and commitment to marriage"--looked at a grand total of 123 kids identified as likely candidates for "retarded intellectual functioning and eventual school failure." This is hardly a broad enough sample on which to base a statewide program for mainstream children.
Virginia's families need more support, not more of a tax load. Even now, taxpayers are groaning under the burden of funding K-12 public education. How will adding yet another dubious program help?
Mr. Kaine has cleverly started his push for pre-K with the "Smart Beginnings" tour, touting the importance of parents as a child's first educators. In its wake will come the "Start Strong" campaign. But don't be fooled by the touchy-feely "pro-kids" approach: Most children, especially preschoolers, do best in their own homes, with their own families.
After all, you can't hug a village. And nobody loves you like Mommy and Daddy. And if you think early nurturing doesn't affect achievement, you haven't been reading the right studies.
