"A couple months ago, the Brookings Institution came out with a paper questioning the evidence on pre-K’s effectiveness.
As author Dale Farran noted:
“The proposition that expanding pre-K will improve later achievement for children from low-income families is premature.
Premature as well is the presumption that solid research exists to guide the content and structure of pre-K programs.”
Farran’s observations were recently underscored by another report from the American Enterprise Institute.
In the report, authors Katharine Stevens and Elizabeth English take a look at the ten most commonly cited studies in the world of early childhood research.
Stevens and English also note that there is little evidence that short-term gains exhibited by some pre-K students – such as kindergarten success –translate into long-term gains.
But while there’s much to be desired in the area of preschool research, the authors note that there is one element which research consistently shows makes a difference in the lives of young children. That element is a novel thing known as… parents:
“The leading science and strongest research to date indicate that the clearest avenue to help disadvantaged children is not to send them to school a year earlier but to improve child care and support parents in better fulfilling their role as their children’s first teachers. Our current knowledge is insufficient to justify a large expansion of pre-K as the best path forward. And the growing pre-K push may well do more harm than good by diverting attention and scarce resources from other more effective approaches.”
Until we have more reliable evidence on the benefits of pre-K education, do we need to reconsider the rush to pull children out of their homes, away from their parents, and into the institutional environment of the education system?
No comments:
Post a Comment