Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I started school at the age of 5 in kindergarten. We had only 1/2 day of school until 1st grade. At age 5, I could already read, having been taught by my mother while she read books to me. She was a stay-at-home mom. We were not wealthy, but taxes were sufficiently low that single income middle class homes were very common. Only a couple of my friends had moms who worked full-time.
At age 5 I was still not 100% in being able to control my bowels. Looking back, I would have been better off waiting until age 6 to start formal education.
Yet universal pre-K seems universally popular among Democrats. Julian Castro was very proud of imposing it when he was mayor of San Antonio. It seems to me largely motivated by a wish to create a huge new bureaucracy, public sector jobs, and public sector union dues. Where do the children fit into this equation?
If we really wish to help these children, why not provide training of parents, tax credits for poor mothers, and tax breaks for middle class families so that mothers with young kids can stay home with them, and read to them like my mother did for me?
Head start has been around since 1965. It is pre-K for disadvantaged children. In fact, my mother actually did volunteer work for Head Start for a while, after I started full time school in 1st grade.
Weighing all of the evidence and not just that cited by partisans on one side or the other, the most accurate conclusion is that Head Start produces modest benefits including some long-term gains for children. The much maligned public schools produce larger gains in achievement beginning in kindergarten which may well erase some of Head Start’s gains, but such efforts can be costly. Head Start’s cost-savings and other benefits may well exceed its costs.
As with most issues these days, it's effectiveness seems to be a function of whether the commenter has a 'D' or an 'R' next to their name.
I started school at the age of 5 in kindergarten. We had only 1/2 day of school until 1st grade. At age 5, I could already read, having been taught by my mother while she read books to me. She was a stay-at-home mom. We were not wealthy, but taxes were sufficiently low that single income middle class homes were very common. Only a couple of my friends had moms who worked full-time.
At age 5 I was still not 100% in being able to control my bowels. Looking back, I would have been better off waiting until age 6 to start formal education.
Yet universal pre-K seems universally popular among Democrats. Julian Castro was very proud of imposing it when he was mayor of San Antonio. It seems to me largely motivated by a wish to create a huge new bureaucracy, public sector jobs, and public sector union dues. Where do the children fit into this equation?
If we really wish to help these children, why not provide training of parents, tax credits for poor mothers, and tax breaks for middle class families so that mothers with young kids can stay home with them, and read to them like my mother did for me?
What do you think about universal pre-K?
It is not just popular. Studies done decades ago showed that the earlier kids started school (and I mean school, not daycare) the better they would do throughout life. More likely to complete high school. More likely to go on to have a stable career (whether college or trade)
I am remembering this from years ago so I dont have links to specific studies. I'm sure some teacherswill pop in to give more info.
A lot of the disparity we see today between middle class and richer neighborhoods, and the poor neighborhoods is because in the poor neighborhoods, kids are less likely to have moms like yours who read books to them at an early age, taught the alphabet and taught reading. Preschool will give these lower class kids what their parents cant give them. It really shouldn't be called preschool. It's just school starting at an earlier age.
Would be interesting if anyone knows why we settled on 5 years old for starting school in this country to begin with.
The paper’s authors conducted a randomized study with 153 socially disadvantaged Welsh parents with children aged 3 or 4. Some of the parents were given a 12-week “intervention programme,” in which two professionals taught the parents how to reward, punish, and discipline their children. The control group of parents were wait-listed for this workshop.
The results showed that the children of the parents who took the workshop behaved significantly better afterward, at least in the short term.
Yes, the earlier the state can get into the brain of your child, the greater the likelihood of success that they'll be a non thinking compliant slave. I expect examples of such to abound on this thread
I will preface this by saying that I don't believe we should have public schools. however, since that will never fly, I don't have a problem with some sort of public option. that way they can pay pre-k teachers/daycare workers more than the $9/hr they get paid around here. they don't require any licensing or formal education, so they can keep wages artificially low to subsidize the cost to parents. either get rid of the public school system, or pay daycare workers as much as teachers. their job is probably more important than the lunatic teachers that infect our public school system.
Yes, the earlier the state can get into the brain of your child, the greater the likelihood of success that they'll be a non thinking compliant slave. I expect examples of such to abound on this thread
This angle had occurred to me too. Indoctrination at an even earlier, more impressionable age. Democrats need to be careful about this however, as shown by the VA election results.
Yes, the earlier the state can get into the brain of your child, the greater the likelihood of success that they'll be a non thinking compliant slave. I expect examples of such to abound on this thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by t. raleigh fingers
This angle had occurred to me too. Indoctrination at an even earlier, more impressionable age. Democrats need to be careful about this however, as shown by the VA election results.
Paranoid. What kind of indoctrination can anyone possibly give a 3 year old? At that age you are teaching colors, letters, numbers and how to say please and thank you. Let's not get carried away here.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
