Near-universal support for universal pre-school

posted at 10:05 am on May 6, 2009 by Pundette
[ Education ]    printer-friendly

President Obama is known to be in favor of universal pre-school for four year-olds. Parents who pay others to care for their children have an obvious financial reason to support it, and politicians know it. In the state of Virginia, for example, all of the gubernatorial candidates, including the conservative McDonnell, support it.

“This is like ice cream and apple pie — you couldn’t be against preschool education,” said Michael J. Petrilli, vice president for national programs and policy at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, an education think tank.

But the support is not universal. My husband and I have a large family, with all the children now beyond the age of five. We sent nary a one to pre-school, believing that children are natural sponges who learn best in a secure and stimulating home environment from those who know and love them. We didn’t fall for the “socialization” myth, either. In other words, we thought they’d be better off at home. And they seem to be doing okay, intellectually and socially. They’re all literate, and not one tortures animals or starts fires.

But not only are we, mere parents, personally opposed to government pre-school, and to paying for it for others. So are some actual experts.

From Chester E. Finn, Jr., comes a book entitled Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut. It seems that the idea of universal pre-school is (surprise!) another case of throwing money at something that sounds good to most people but doesn’t hold up as well under scrutiny.

“Before taxpayers commit tons more money to this venture,” said Dr. Finn, “we should think twice about the benefits, tradeoffs and alternatives. Highly targeted preschool for the neediest girls and boys would be a far wiser investment of scarce dollars than a vast new program for everyone. Reshaping existing efforts like Headstart would be even more productive.”

Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut examines all the crucial angles of this debate and finds major flaws in the “universal” approach to preschool education:

• It is expensive, with much of the cost a needless subsidy to families making their own preschool or daycare arrangements.
• It does not deliver the education services that would do the neediest kids the most good.
• It evades responsibility to retool existing programs.
• Preschool experts cannot agree on the intended outcomes of such programs.
• Preschool benefits don’t last unless corollary reforms are made to the public schools. [a challenge, to say the least]

Mr. Finn asks some pertinent questions about the need for and implementation of universal pre-school, and about the motives behind this boondoggle:

Is this more about extending the mandate of public-school systems or furnishing needy young children with important skills?

Bingo. Expanding government is what the Obama administration is all about. How the government would love to sink their claws into younger, more malleable children.  And once they get a foot in the pre-school door, what’s to stop them from decreeing “school” for two and three year-olds? Oops — my right wing extremism is showing.

You can bet that anyone who opposes government pre-school will be painted as a callous fiend who doesn’t care about children.

Cross-posted here.

Blowback