JANUARY 14, 2010

New Head Start Study Shows No Long-Term Effects of Preschool

A study on students in Head Start released yesterday by the US Department of Health and Human Services shows no long-term academic improvement from the program.  In fact, the effects disappear after Kindergarten.

The study showed that at the end of one program year, access to Head Start positively influenced children’s school readiness.  When measured again at the end of kindergarten and first grade, however, the Head Start children and the control group children were at the same level on many of the measures studied.

This should not surprise - numerous studies show that any gains from large scale government-run preschool disappear after a few years.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 08:30 AM | 0 comment

OCTOBER 9, 2009

Is Preschool for All a Good Idea?

Chester Finn of the Fordham Foundation has a good article in the latest Education Next on the movement for "preschool for all." Finn is generally supportive of government programs for low-income and at risk children, but notes important differences between targeted programs, and universal, state-run Pre-K systems:

But the big issue with pre-K education is whether the gains and gap reductions last. Evidence is limited because the longitudinal studies needed to answer such questions are costly, complex, and obviously time-consuming. But the available evidence is profoundly discouraging. Most of the gains that can be found upon entry into school ebb over time, and the differences attributable to various kinds of programs tend to wash out, too. In fact, effects that may appear significant at the conclusion of the program itself frequently fade to the vanishing point by the time youngsters have progressed as far as 3rd grade. That fadeaway doubtless has more to do with what happens to students in the K—12 system—and the continuing malignant influences in the outside lives of many youngsters—than with preschool programs themselves. But it also suggests that universalizing the preschool experience is not the way to achieve lasting gap reduction. Indeed, as Fuller and others have noted, if the policy goal is to narrow gaps between haves and have-nots, why would the same programmatic intervention be administered to everybody? ...

What’s more troubling is this calculation: since 85 percent of four-year-olds already participate in some sort of pre-K program, as much as $30 billion of that $36 billion figure would replace money that is presently being spent—by federal or state programs, private charity, and out of pocket by parents—while as little as $6 billion would go to pre-K services for children who currently have none. And that’s if they participate. Since no pre-K program will be compulsory, at least some of the families that don’t sign on today will not do so tomorrow, either because they’re too disorganized or because they truly don’t want it for their daughters and sons.
Could this large additional public expenditure be worth it?

Finn's conclusion notes, among other things the importance of transforming Head Start into an effective program for low-income children - ensuring the billions taxpayers currently spend on preschool actually improves educational achievement.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 11:30 AM | 0 comment

SEPTEMBER 15, 2009

State-Run Preschool Doesn't Make the Grade

Cato has a new policy report, as well as a recent blog post which sums up the arguments, on why large-scale government preschool programs are not what advocates make them out to be.

As they note, claims about benefits of preschool (participants have higher academic performance, reduced likelihood of going to prison or being on welfare), are based on studies from the 1960s and 70s.  These studies don't apply to large state preschool programs being debated today, as they were extremely small programs served students with severe special needs, and included decades of additional intervention.

In contrast, universal preschool and large-scale programs for moderate-income families have been around for decades, with few positive results.  Head Start and universal preschool in Georgia and Oklahoma have not improved academic performance (any gains disappear after a few years), but have cost taxpayers billions.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 01:55 PM | 1 comment

AUGUST 17, 2009

Dramatic Government Spending Increases are Never Enough

The Patriot News has an AP story by Marc Levy, highlighting recipients of taxpayer funding that want more taxpayer funding.  It seems these groups are living in another world.  For instance take this quote about state social service funding:

"It seems like in good times there's never enough money and in bad times they're the first ones to get kicked out."

Yet under Gov. Rendell - mostly "good times" - Pennsylvania Public Welfare spending increased 62.6%, even using the numbers from the supposedly draconian PA Senate budget. I doubt many taxpayers have seen their incomes jump 63% (that would represent an increase from $50,000 to $81,500) since 2002.  And if they did get that kind of raise, I doubt they would complaining about that increase.

Furthermore, these advocates maintain the mentality that if government doesn't fund it, it won't occur.  They imply that the only way to show that we "care" is to take money from others through taxes and fund programs that do the best job of lobbying. 

One of the programs they talk about is preschool. Not only do they tout academic gains that will likely disappear in a few years, but they ignore the sizable private preschool market, which will be crowded out by government programs.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 09:39 AM | 0 comment

JULY 28, 2009

The Undelivered Promises of Government Preschool

The Sunbury Daily Item features a recent guest editorial claiming that taxpayer funded preschool, such as Gov. Rendell's PreK Counts, will have long-term savings by reducing crime and improving academic performance. The author claims a couple of studies back this conclusion.

What he fails to mention is that these studies were of decades-old, small, experimental programs, which served a handful of students with severe mental retardation and disadvantaged students, and provided not only preschool, but years of intervention. These programs offer little insight into state-funded "universal" or large scale preschool programs.

However, there have been studies of similar programs that are applicable. Millions of students have been served by Federal Head Start, yet all results point to the conclusion that academic gains fade after a few years. Some states have implemented universal preschool--Oklahoma was the first to do so, but has not only seen no improvement in academic performance, has actually declined relative to the rest of the country.

Large scale government-run preschool is problematic. It is a costly program, which has little or no benefit. It crowds out private options, taking choices away from parents. And it gives a public school system which is not adequately serving students from 1st grade through high school more responsibility, rather than reforming that system.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 09:39 AM | 0 comment

JUNE 8, 2009

Bonus Fact Check: Government Preschool

One point that has been raised during the Rendell administration's taxpayer funding lobbying campaign for higher taxes was the benefits of the Pre-K Counts programs.

On this, we have no quibble with the facts being presented - that is, student enrolled in preschool perform well in Kindergarten, and even in 1st Grade. 

Of course, Rendell's cheerleading team doesn't note that positive effects of preschool fade over time, generally disappearing after 3rd grade.  Preschool fails to offer long-term academic benefits, and states with universal preschool haven't improved academically.

Nor do they note that preschool has historically been provided privately, and instead of supporting additional choices for parents, state programs tend to crowd out private providers.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 03:59 PM | 0 comment

JUNE 3, 2009

Will Government-Run Preschool Help Fight Al-Qaeda?

The Patriot News has a blurb about former generals saying that government-run preschool will help improve the military, and that if the Pennsylvania Senate budget passes, the terrorists will win. The former general quoted also happens to be a current school superintendent - which would be like me saying, "As a former child, I think that to help the children, you should give money to the Commonwealth Foundation."

The idea behind this absurd rhetoric is, "The lack of a high school diploma and a criminal record are among the reasons why 75 percent of men and women age 17 to 24 are unfit to serve in the military" and government-run preschool would improve graduation rates and reduce crime.

But, while we might agree with the problems, government preschool does not improve graduation or crime rates, or even test scores or school attendance beyond 3rd grade. As we wrote in a 2007 policy brief, the effects of preschool programs are overstated and are nonexistent after a few years. Subsequent research further supports that conclusion.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 03:46 PM | 0 comment

MAY 15, 2009

Does Universal Preschool Improve Learning?

The Heritage Foundation has a new backgrounder asking, "Does Universal Preschool Improve Learning?"  

The short answer is NO.  For the long answer, they examine universal preschool programs in Oklahoma and Georgia, finding substantial costs, but virtually no long-term academic benefits.  Click here for the PDF version.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 09:12 AM | 0 comment

MARCH 20, 2009

Bailouts and Bull

John Stossel's latest 20/20 special on bailouts and bull debunks numerous big-government myths, including the bailout mentality.  Stosell also tackles toll road privatization, universal Pre-K, medical marijuana, the border fence, and other issues.  It is good television.

Stossel also talked with Reason TV on defending the market from within the liberal media click here for a transcript of that interview or go here for video/podcast.

posted by NATHAN BENEFIELD | 11:58 AM | 0 comment