Does universal pre-K help the children who need it most?


  • September 22, 2015
  • /   Reggie Dogan
  • /   early-learning

Katie Belk works with kindergarteners and first graders in her gifted enrichment class at N.B. Cook Elementary School of the Arts in Pensacola, Fl., Monday, February 2, 2015. (Michael Spooneybarger/ Pensacola Today)

I always believed that universal pre-K was a good investment in early education.

Based on common sense alone, every young child should, in an ideal world, have access to quality early learning before kindergarten, whether or not the child’s family could pay for it.

Empirical research shows critical brain development occurs in the early years of life. Compelling evidence indicates that preschool has long-term benefits for children, and it helps prepare children for the increased demands of kindergarten.

What possibly could be wrong with pre-kindergarten for all children?

Early education clearly is the right thing to do because all children of every race, gender and income level deserve a good start before kindergarten.

In cooperation with the University of West Florida Office for Economic Development and Engagement, the Studer Institute has devised 16 metrics to measure the economic, educational and social well-being in the Pensacola metro area.

Kindergarten readiness is a metric that measures the percentage of 5-year-olds found kindergarten-ready when evaluated in the first month of the school year. Children who are ready for school tend to have greater success throughout their academic career and have a positive impact on a community’s quality of life.

But is universal pre-K truly the panacea that educators, advocates and politicians make it out to be?

Maybe not, according to some experts who question if the $300 million spent yearly on New York City’s new universal pre-K program actually benefit the students who really need it.

New studies show that while low-income children benefit exponentially with preschool, children raised in high-income families do well regardless because they are naturally exposed to richer educational experiences.

In “The Reality of Universal Pre-K,” The Atlantic questions the veracity of universal prekindergarten, arguing that the city’s approach is wasteful because it includes the children of wealthier families who may reap minimal incremental benefits from government-sponsored early education.

The harsh reality is that most states, along with the federal government, don’t have enough money to fund preschool for all children. Even models that save money by using private-sector services are typically too expensive.

When efforts focus on creating across-the-board pre-K programs, the children who may be taking the biggest hit are the ones who would most benefit from a quality prekindergarten experience: those who are poor, those who speak English as a second language, or are otherwise disadvantaged.

An affluent parent can afford to send a child to a quality day care or preschool if care during the day is needed.

An engaged parent can provide education necessary for a young child by letting him or her play — something that is a far better solution than formal education which can adversely affect a child’s learning skills or impact more active children, especially boys.

Preschool for disadvantaged children clearly has many rewards, but that does not make the argument for a statewide program that offers a free ride for all children.

Your items have been added to the shopping cart. The shopping cart modal has opened and here you can review items in your cart before going to checkout