What does it mean to be ready for kindergarten? As a country, we have
been trying to define this JELLO-like area of understanding children
for a long time. The big question is: Can you be ready for big school
if you have never dipped your toe in the water before? It is a good
question, especially for parents who are trying to decide if their
child is ready to be away from mom and dad for the first time. One of
the benefits of preschool is the social competence acquired through
daily practice of "school" skills that are necessary before the content
of the Kindergarten year can be taught.
Even with Kindergarten
still being optional in some states, all states offer
kindergarten if only for a half day. Currently, 98% of children attend kindergarten, so even
though attendance isn't required, it is the reality. It used to be that
kindergarten was the first time you were introduced to "book
learning"--now we begin introducing books as young as eight months with
fabric books, flap books, and books you can suck on. Some studies
suggest that Kindergarten readiness can be linked to the the language experiences in the home. Other studies say that math skills are stronger predictors. And finally, teachers
consider social/emotional development the most important factor in a
student's success. All of this research won't help parents know what
knowledge and skills they need to work with their kids on over the
summer.
Countdown to Kindergarten
portrays a kid frightened of going to kindergarten because she doesn't
know how to tie her shoes. She thinks that you have to know how to tie
your shoes before you go to Kindergarten and the teacher won't help you
learn.
Unrealistic expectations can fuel kids' and parents'
fears about going to school. From a teacher's perspective here are
three concepts that would be helpful for your child to know before
going to school:
1. Know their first name. This may sound funny,
but some children think their name is the nickname they are called at
home. When they come to school and the teacher tries to interact with
them, the teacher uses their "official" name. John won't even look at
the teacher if they have only been called "Johnny" or even "Jack" or
"Junior." Of course it would help if you tell the teacher your child's
nickname, but part of the teacher's job is to get your child to write
his or her name correctly. If Mia knows her real name instead of just
her nickname, Me-Me, she is half way to the goal.
2. Begin the feedback loop. Hopefully you have already done this but, if you haven't, here it is: Adult: Asks question Child: Responds Adult: Responds to response and asks probing question Child: Responds to adult question
This
feedback loop is the key to the learning process. Everyone has busy
lives but it is important to set aside just a few minutes a day to have
a long drawn out conversation with your kid about something they are
interested in.
3. Help your child apply understanding of
positional words, like front/back, next to, in/out, and behind. These
words are some of the most commonly used words in classrooms because
teachers must use them to orchestrate learning activities. Children are
asked to stand behind their friend, put crayons in or on a desk, and to
put the scissors next to the crayons.
Are these skills
pre-requisites? No. Will these skills guarantee your child's success in
Kindergarten? No. I had a student this year who came to school thinking
his name was Mo-Mo and left knowing how to read. However, knowing these
foundational skills will make your child's Kindergarten year a much
less frustrating experience for themselves and their teacher. What do
you do now? Have fun learning about the Disney fairies, transformers,
or the Wiggles. You will be glad you did even before school starts.
I always find that saying goodbye to my students at the end of the year is bittersweet. While it is exciting to see how much they've grown and learned throughout the year, it is also sad to say goodbye to our classroom community. We become our own little family throughout the school year, and it is difficult to leave that behind!
Fortunately, next year, most of my students will be together in the same pre-k class. They will be surrounded by familiar faces on the first day of school, and will continue to develop and solidify their friendships with familiar peers. Additionally, I have had the opportunity to collaborate with their future teacher. We discussed all of my goals and plans from the year, what my students learned in relation to those goals, and what types of goals would be ambitious and feasible for them to achieve in their second year of pre-k.
Armed with this information, their new teacher will be better able to plan her classroom to meet the individual needs of each student. She will be able to build on what they have already learned, and continue to foster their social/emotional, physical, cognitive, and language development.
So while I am sad to say goodbye to my students, I am reassured to know that they will be in a a supportive classroom tailored to their needs as individuals and a group. I can hardly wait to see what they will accomplish during the upcoming school year!
Guest blogger Libby Doggett, Deputy Director of the Pew Center on the States, reviews "Good Morning, Children" by Sophia E. Pappas
Many people watch 3- and 4-year-olds at home or at school and dismiss what they are doing as "just play." The same folks wrongly believe that anyone can teach young children. Sophia Pappas's book, "Good Morning, Children," aptly addresses – and counters – these two, common myths about educating young children.
Pappas's book brings to life how, in a high-quality pre-kindergarten classroom, children learn through play; and how that learning is enhanced by a qualified teacher who cares deeply about his/her children and what they learn. A Phi Beta Kappa graduate of Georgetown University, She learned that controlling a classroom required more than just smarts, persistence and compassion. Her book explains, through compelling anecdotes, how she learned to use her attributes to master her classroom.
One of my favorite stories is that of Aniyah, who, when challenged to find a solution for a small fish being eaten by a large fish (in Leo Lionni's classic,Swimmy), suggests that the small fish drive a water car out of the ocean away from the big fish. Aniyah is so excited about her suggestion that she even writes "wtr car" on the solutions list without guidance. But, this learning victory happens only after many months of effort by the teacher and Aniyah's mother helping the child learn to control her formerly disruptive behavior.
In this valuable book, the Pappas repeatedly describes the link between a child's social-emotional and cognitive development, and how that development in one area enhances the other. For example, Aniyah's improvements to her behavior facilitated her intellectual growth. As her disruptive outbursts subsided, she was better able to actively engage in discussions during story time and interact positively with other children in the learning centers. Pre-k is not just about learning the letters of the alphabet, learning to count and learning to write your name. It is about learning to share, take turns, work with a new adult, interact with other children and direct one’s own learning.
This book is wonderful for anyone interested in early education. For the policy maker, it gives substance to the importance of a well-qualified teacher, a strong curriculum, able school leadership and small class sizes and ratios. It also points us in new directions: the importance of having strong mentorship programs for all new teachers; better tools for measuring children’s growth and development; and, more creative ways to engage families in their child’s learning.
For directors and administrators, this book will contribute to your vision of excellence and your efforts to eliminate educational inequality. It offers new ideas for supporting your staff's efforts to help students realize their potential.
For new teachers, the book reaffirms the importance and challenge of your chosen field and assures you that, if you are persistent, you too can succeed. The author's stories show her eagerness to accept mentorship; willingness to reflect honestly on her practice; progress in learning effective classroom management skills; ability to explore innovative learning approaches with individual children; and, her determination to focus on positive communication with parents. These stories contain a formula for your own success.
And, for former teachers like me, the book is simultaneously a walk down memory lane and a reminder of how much the field of early education has matured. For most of my students, my first-grade classroom was their first experience away from home and I was expected to teach children their letters, letter sounds and how to read in a short nine months. Today, many children have ample time to learn those important foundational skills, and with teachers like Sophia, they can enter kindergarten prepared and excited about learning.
In December 2006, Sophia Pappas began writing about her experiences in
her pre-k classroom for Inside Pre-K. You can find the archives here. I was so excited when I discovered her in March of 2007 because I had not found many pre-k blogs, and hers was SO
good. I learned a lot from Sophia as she described what it was like to
move from novice teacher to teacher leader. Her perspective was
refreshing because it was open-minded and reflective. I really felt
like I was learning with her. I think Sophia inspired many people with
her thoughtful posts. I know she inspired me. Now, Sophia has published
a book based on those experiences titled: Good Morning, Children: My First Years in Early Childhood Education.
When I asked Sophia if she would do a 5 Qs interview with me ,she happily agreed. Without further ado.
1. How was the reality of teaching preschool different from what you expected when you decided to join Teach for America?
While
I understood the importance of high quality early childhood education
for furthering educational equity, I was not aware of the complex analytical and organizational processes required to meet the needs of
all pre-K students. My students could make tremendous progress in all
developmental domains only if I adopted a highly systematic and
comprehensive approach to planning, teaching, and assessment.
Policymakers interested in early childhood education investments need
to realize the wide range of skills required to realize the potential
of pre-K programs.
2. What did you learn about yourself from teaching
that no other job could have taught you? How has teaching affected how
you approach your work now?
Teaching, unlike any other job
I could have taken after college, proved to be a fundamentally
transformative experience in terms of its impact on my mindset and
leadership skills. My classroom experiences solidified my commitment
to eradicating educational equity by demonstrating the ability of all
children to succeed, regardless of their birth circumstances. Once you
see a child who came into your class in September uncomfortable with
school and with little to no understanding of letters ultimately leave
your classroom in June excited about school and on the brink of reading
basic sentences, you simply cannot accept any system that deprives
children of equal opportunities. As a teacher, I was able to take
ownership of managing an entire classroom, whereas most jobs right out
of college often do not provide you with the same level of
responsibility. It enabled me to grow as a leader and professional.
3. Can you describe a couple of your favorite moments from your teaching career and or what you miss about teaching?
Teaching enabled me to facilitate and to witness children growing
in formal learning environments for the first time. I miss being there
when my students make connections and express enthusiasm for learning.
Some teachers find taking anecdotal notes burdensome, but I remember
feeling incredibly joyful and proud of my students each time I wrote a
note that demonstrated their progress. I was still excited when the
note showed the need for further growth because I knew I would have the
chance the following day or week to analyze those weaknesses and work
with the child to address them. I guess more than anything, I miss
being in a position to have a direct impact on the foundational
learning of my students.
4. From your experience, how would you describe the importance of pre-k to a policymaker?
We
as a society affirm our commitment to ensuring that all children can
realize their potential through public education. We developed this
consensus on the importance of education for a variety of reasons,
ranging from the liberal philosophical case for respecting the dignity
and worth of each individual to economic arguments focused on fostering
a productive society. Given the critical role of brain development
before the age of five, the reality of achievement gaps that start
before kindergarten, and the potential for high-quality early childhood
education to help level the playing field, we cannot expect to fulfill
our promises of equal opportunity or to increase economic vibrancy
without investing in pre-K. It's not enough to ensure that young
children have a safe place to go during the day. We need investments
that concentrate on access and quality in order to make the most of
time spent with young learners.
5. What would you tell someone considering teaching pre-k?
Pre-K
teachers have one of the most important jobs. Early childhood
educators introduce children to the institution that has the power to
significantly influence their life trajectory. You should enter this
profession aware of the incredible responsibility you have in laying
the foundation of skills and attitudes a child needs to succeed. That
task, while seemingly intimidating, can be empowering if you approach
each day and the year as a whole as an opportunity to give young
children the highly enriching and engaging first year in school they
deserve.
Given the high stakes involved, you should become a
pre-K teacher only if you are willing to invest the time and energy
needed to meet the unique needs of each student. Concern for the
well-being of children is necessary, but not sufficient to be
successful. Similarly, knowledge about child development without a
sincere belief in the ability of all children to succeed regardless of
their birth circumstances unjustly limits the life paths of children.
You need to commit to leading your class toward significant growth in
all developmental domains and be willing to critically reflect upon and
improve your own practices to achieve that goal.
One of my students, Makiera, will turn five in October. She has been in my preschool class for two full years, and according to DC Public Schools (DCPS) Policy regarding birthdates, she will be required to attend a year of pre-k before beginning kindergarten. You see, Makiera misses the age cutoff for kindergarten in DCPS by two weeks. Her birthday is in October, and all children who attend kindergarten in DCPS are required to be five years old by the end of September.
On the one hand, I completely understand this policy. I see no rush in sending children to kindergarten; I know how valuable high quality preschool and pre-k classes can be, and I firmly believe that children who have a solid foundation in academic, social, and emotional skills are much better prepared for success in kindergarten. By requiring all children to be five by a September 30 cut-off date, DCPS is increasing the likelihood that children will have developed these foundational skills either in preschool, pre-k or at home.
On the other hand, I see the importance of considering the needs of individual children. Makiera, who has been in pre-k for two years now, is already reading, writing, and doing math at a kindergarten level. She engages in complex play with her peers, solves problems creatively, and regulates her emotions with ease. In my opinion, Makiera is more than ready for kindergarten.
In DC, Makiera would be required to attend pre-k next year, regardless of her developmental level. But there's a hitch, Makiera's family is moving to a neighboring school district this summer with a slightly different kindergarten entrance policy. In Montgomery County, Maryland, children typically must be five years old by September 1st before entering kindergarten. But there is some flexibility with this policy. If a child turns five between September 1 and October 15, they can apply for early entrance to kindergarten. As described on the Montgomery County Public Schools website:
To be recommended for early entrance to kindergarten, children will need to demonstrate above average performance and development in academic skills as well as social/emotional and physical development. The standards for early entrance are very high to ensure that students are not frustrated by their advanced grade placement... Assessments include a variety of activities that measure a child's performance during whole group and individual activities within the following developmental domains: personal and social development, language and literacy, mathematical thinking, physical well-being, and motor development. Recommendation for early entrance to kindergarten will be made based on a review of screening assessment data, parent application checklist, and any other relevant documentation submitted.
Makiera completed this comprehensive assessment several weeks ago, and has been recommended for early entrance into kindergarten. So now, because her family is moving just a few miles away, Makiera will start kindergarten a year before her DC peers born after September 30.
This whole scenario has gotten me thinking: how should school systems determine kindergarten eligibility? Is it best to have firm cutoffs that attempt to ensure children's readiness for kindergarten, or is it better to consider entrance on a case-by-case basis? How should unique exceptions to the policies be handled? I'm curious to hear your perspective on the issue -- please leave a comment to share your ideas!
Reform Movement weatherman Neal McCluskey has announced a change in the description of the pre-k for all movement in the panel discussion
of Checker Finn's book Reroute the Preschool Juggernaut. The reform
movement, also known as the P-3 movement, the Voluntary Pre-K movement,
and the Universal Pre-K movement, had been characterized as a Juggernaut
(an unstoppable crushing force) up until last Thursday. Now, McCluskey
has upgraded it to a Tsunami (a giant unstoppable wave). This
characterization begs us to consider why a reform movement, intended to
benefit children ages 0-5, would be so negatively portrayed. It doesn't
make sense. Maybe he meant it as a compliment. As in, there will be a
Tsunami of economic opportunities washing over the nation. Or there
would be a Tsunami of services to assist struggling families in our
country.
The problem that Checker Finn, Neal McCluskey, and
other opponents of pre-k seem to have with de-railing the pre-k for all
movement is that their tools (claims of confusing data, expensive
implementation, suspect benefits) can't stand up to the crushing weight
of evidence. It is especially hard when even on June 7th, Checker
acknowledged that he is "in favor of preschool for those who want or
need it. The book is not anti-preschool." (6.30 into the video)
As
a pre-k teacher who has seen the effects of pre-k over the last 15
years, I can tell you that cognitive skills are not the only thing
important to measure and teach in pre-k. There is a difference between
thinking skills and foundational skills like letter recognition,
naming, and use of phonemic awareness or what Checker calls cognitive
skills. These cognitive skills are really just the basis for later
cognitive development and are best taught through repeated encounters
with letters, numbers, and letter sounds in and out of context. The
real argument is that cognitive skills are not the only skill necessary
to succeed in school. In fact, it is just the easiest to measure. I
have seen physically active boys reading and doing math at a
kindergarten/first grade level who fail in kindergarten because the
definition of what learning looks like is so narrow that boys don't
meet the standard. In our current educational environment, learning
looks like children, as Checker has said, sitting, following
directions, and behaving. Not jumping, dancing and singing and using
manipulatives to do beginning algebra as we do in my classroom. Raise
the standards to include social/emotional school readiness and you will
discover that pre-k is vital in the development of the human potential
of our country.
In Checker's argument during the panel
discussion, he stated that he did not want to give middle class
families the option of attending high-quality state-funded pre-k
because it "offers an unnecessary entitlement style middle-class
windfall to millions of kids and families that have made their own
satisfactory preschool arrangements already without it."
On the contrary, a targeted preschool approach leaves some needy children outside the classroom. According to Education Sector,
“far too many families of modest means do not qualify for subsidized
preschool yet are too poor to pay for preschool themselves.” A targeted approach burdens middle income families with high costs for day care, which cuts into their earning capacity and, in some communities with fewer high quality choices, for child care. There is possible harm in denying access to preschool to low and middle SES families with individual need.
Historically, America has considered public investment in schooling a sound investment in human capital. Pre(K)Now points out that “targeting pre-k toward at-risk children
creates separate and potentially unequal programs for lower- and
upper-income children while failing to address the significant
readiness gap between middle- and upper-income children.” Schulman and Barnett write,
Research shows that the need for high-quality preschool education does not stop at the eligibility limits for targeted preschool programs. Rather, it proceeds on a continuum up the income scale. Many middle-income children—particularly those from families in the lower portion of middle income—lack the opportunity to attend high-quality preschool programs and as a result often start school unprepared.
If
families were expected to finance K-12 education themselves, they would
likely not invest at a level that would benefit society as a whole. Factors that influence the decision to pay for preschool include transportation, distance, quality, and cost. If a parent can choose to send their child to preschool, it will benefit them and society, but often they cannot or do not have this option. According to Karoly and Bigelow of the RAND corporation, the short and long-term benefits of preschool to families are important but the benefits to society may be more important. “Economists
refer to this underinvestment in preschool education as a market
failure that can justify public-sector resources to reach the socially optimal outcome.” Denying preschool to a child based purely on financial indicators denies that child justice if they need those services. It is not a matter of economy, it is a matter of equity. One cannot have a fair educational system without providing the same opportunity to all, even in preschool.
Recently I have been thinking a lot about how I ask my students questions in my classroom. I just received a comment on a post from last Fall from Tammera, who said, "I
believe you should not ask "what" from a preschooler, but "how" to
actively open their minds." In some ways I totally agree with Tammera,
but making generalizations like this can sometimes get us into
trouble-- especially when it comes to research about preschool and how
it applies to teachers. I totally agree that we want to get kids
thinking about "how" and "why" we do and say things. At the same time,
in my experience with my Head Start students, if I ask them, "Why did
you ____?" I get a blank stare. However, my own son, also a four year
old, could give me an elaborate answer. Whether the answer is true or entirely made up is the subject of another blog post.
I have recently been asked to implement dialogical reading
strategies in my classroom. The brief training and supplementary
reading I did technically suggests the exact opposite of what Tammera
suggests and what I would normally want to do when reading a story to
preschoolers. In dialogical reading, the teacher asks, "What" questions
about a story. The story is read to a small group of children multiple
times with the complexity of the "What" questions building over time.
So, in the first reading students are asked, "What is that?", "What is
going to happen?" "What is going on here?" Over time, the complexity
increases and students are asked, "What is going to happen?, Has that
ever happened to you?", "What is the ______ thinking?", "What do you
want to remember about this story?"
The
form of the question is not limited by the structural use of the word
"What." I think what Tammera is saying, and most people think when they
ask "What" questions, is that when the teacher or parent already knows
the answer to the question when they ask it they aren't developing
their children's thinking skills. "What color is that?" does not
require much thinking, just recall. Even though we don't want to stop
with these questions, they provide the necessary foundational language
for further discussion down the road.
I also recently read in
a book about managing students with ADD/ADHD. The book suggested that
many times kids with the symptoms of ADD/ADHD are not able to process
"How" and "Why" questions because it requires them to mentally make a
temporal leap from the present to the past, which they have difficulty
doing. By asking the student "What" questions, the child is able to
bring the process into the present and talk about their thoughts or
actions as if they were in the present moment. "What were you doing?"
replaces, "Why did you do that?"
These experiences have changed
how I think about interacting with my students. Thanks for your
comment, Tammera--you inspired some deep thinking.
As our school year draws to a close, I've asked my students to reflect on what they have learned in pre-kindergarten by drawing a picture and commenting on their illustrated accomplishment. Their thoughts, both insightful and accurate, depict the tremendous growth that they have made over the past nine months. Here are some of their most memorable observations:
Mayala: "I learned to do math like a kindergartener!"
Following her exclamation, Mayala wrote and solved simple addition problems all over her paper.
Jose: "I learned to play."
Jose drew a picture of himself playing with blocks.
Makiera: "I Lt to RTE my nem." [I learned to write my name]
Makiera then wrote her first and last name and drew a picture of herself with very large hands.
Suniah: "I learned to read. I like to read with Makiera on the pillows."
Suniah drew a picture of herself and Makiera sprawled out on pillows holding books in their hands. And on a side note, Suniah really did learn how to read! She is currently reading at an end of first grade/beginning of second grade level.
Ruby: "I LR to Ruby." [I learned to "Ruby" or I learned to write Ruby.]
Ruby wrote her name and drew rainbows all over her paper.
When I look at photographs, student work, and assessments from the beginning of the year, I can see concrete evidence that my students' reflections are true. I am so proud and excited by their collective progress, and am eager to see what they will accomplish in the years to come.
Since reading Chester Finn's article in the Washington Post
I learned that Dr. Finn will be in Washington on Thursday at a Panel
discussion about pre-k with Steven Barnett, the godfather of preschool
research at the National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER).
Also represented will be Neal McCluskey of the Center for Educational Freedom, Cato Institute and Sara Mead of New America Foundation. The moderator will be Richard Colvin of Hechinger Institute on Education and the Media. I wish I could attend, but I will likely be helping my students
complete their longest wooden train ever and talking about engineering
ideas like height, slope, speed, motion, and magnetism as we try to get
the train to circle the entire classroom.
In order to get a handle on
why Chester would say that the effectiveness of preschool is a "Myth,"
I decided to download Chester Finn's new book Rerouting the Preschool Juggernaut. I have to say the cover of the book is hilarious. When I think of juggernauts I don't think of The Little Engine that Could,
but the reform movement that is voluntary preschool is just that: the
reform that "Thinks It Can!" It is not as if voluntary universal pre-k has suddenly appeared on the scene. It has been chugging up the mountain of education reform for 40 years. I have never seen a fast rolling steam roller so to me the image evokes thoughts of big business running away from their responsibilities to children. If opponents really wanted to help children they would get on board and help get the train over the mountain and deliver children the services they need on so many levels.
I will talk more about the book in the
next post, but here is the second myth from the Washington Post op-ed.
Finn says,
-- Preschool is educationally effective. On the contrary,
while a few tiny, costly programs targeting very poor children have
shown some lasting positive effects, the overwhelming majority of
studies show that most pre-K programs have little to no educational
impact (particularly on middle-class kids) and/or have effects that
fade within the first few years of school.
It
is strange that Finn would say that only a "few tiny, costly programs
targeting very poor children have shown some lasting positive effects."
A RAND corporation study
disagrees and suggests that pre-k positively impacts every child who attends. RAND suggests that in calculating potential
benefit of high quality preschool, high risk students may realize 100%
of benefits, medium risk students may realize 50% of benefits and low
risk students may realize 25% of benefits. A voluntary universal pre-k
system would increase the total number of children realizing benefits
that would be passed on to our society as well as provide the most
benefit to the students that most need it.
Currently
in Virginia, almost 70% of low risk (high socio-economic) students
already attend center-based preschools, but approximately 20% of high
risk students and 40% of medium risk students attend center based
preschools. Oklahoma and Georgia have realized 70% total enrollment in
public pre-k across all risk levels. So if universal really means 70%
then low risk students already have a universal pre-k program. It is
only the poor and middle class that don't receive the benefit of a
universal system. The benefits of increased enrollment that might be
seen in Virginia would look like the following graph.
Comparisons are made by economic level and potential
benefit to the child. In these calculations, high risk students
received 4 points benefit (100%), medium risk received 2 points (50%),
and low risk received 1 point (25%).
Now, for the "fade" factor:
The long-term positive effects of preschool for at-risk students are well
documented by the Chicago Longitudinal Study, the Carolina Abecedarian Study,
and the High/Scope Perry Preschool Study. Benefits include
increased classroom productivity, higher achievement, higher graduation rates, and
higher rates of employment. Similar, though less substantial gains in school
readiness can be found for middle and high SES students. According to Virginia’s own position paper on school readiness, high-quality preschool, possibly for all students,
can increase the likelihood of school success.
Evidence
shows that it is not only low-income students who may benefit from preschool.
Nationwide, nearly half (49 percent) of children who enter kindergarten without
the ability to recognize the letters of the alphabet are middle-income children.
Twelve percent of middle-income children repeat a grade in school.
It seems that high SES students would not benefit as much from attending
a public preschool program but benefits exist. Affluence does not mean a
student is not at risk. In fact, high
SES students have been shown to be at greater risk than low or middle SES
students for depression and drug use in adolescence, both issues
that are positively affected by preschool. Academically, a RAND corporation study found
that children who attended preschool performed better on the National Assessment
Educational Progress. Finally, a study of five state preschool programs found all children were shown to gain from preschool regardless
of race or economic background.
Dr. Finn, when I dig my way out from under this tiny pile of
evidence, maybe we can talk some more about how pre-k can and does help
kids in the long and short term if they attend high quality programs.
How do you know when you are being sold shoddy merchandise? How do you
know when what someone is saying doesn't add up? A lot of times it
might not be so easy to point out the gaps in logic or the tinny sound
of a bald-faced lie when it is being told by an experienced Snake Oil
Salesman. This is why experts came about, to help the rest of us
separate the wheat from the chaff when it comes to big ideas like
public policy. But, I choose to have a personal relationship with
policy and research, and just because I may not be an expert, that
doesn't mean my opinions aren't valid.
Here is why.
In his book Blink,
Malcolm Gladwell said that it doesn't necessarily take a lot of
research to decide if something, like a work of art, is authentic or
fake. Many times it is just a feeling, a gut reaction. This is the
feeling I get when I read most of Chester Finn's work. His blog is one
in a long list of blogs that I subscribe to, just so I can keep tabs on
what opponents of preschool and teacher empowerment are selling. I also
read research and opinions outside of my personal beliefs so that I can
challenge my thinking. I never want to be so comfortable in my beliefs
that I am afraid to put them to the test.
When I read Chester Finn's recent Op-Ed in the Washington Post
I got that sinking feeling. I guess it's good, for a start, that a
Conservative writer like Chester has at least recognized that pre-k is
beneficial, and that we should start with the kids who need it most.
However, Chester loses his credibility by criticizing the need for
pre-k for all and promoting arguments with huge holes in them. His
strategy, to cheaply denounce something that helps so many kids (and
could help more) and that is backed by years and years of research will
break down under closer scrutiny. It was what Chester described as the
Four Myths of Preschool that made me queasy. As I read them, I felt my
finely tuned snake oil "detector" go off. It went off so loudly that I
decided I needed to address each of the points that made my tummy hurt.
So, for your debunking pleasure, over the next couple days, I will
demystify Finn's "Four Myths" of pre-k policy.
-- Everybody needs it. In fact, about 85 percent of
4-year-olds already take part in preschool or child care outside their
homes, paid for with a mix of public and private dollars. And fewer
than 20 percent of 5-year-olds are seriously unready for the cognitive
challenges of kindergarten in the No Child Left Behind era.
Not everyone in favor of voluntary pre-k for all says or believes
that "Everybody needs it." Actually, that is the one thing that both
sides agree on. However, pro-pre-k advocates believe it should be a legitimate choice
for every family. When high-quality pre-k programs are not accessible
to all children, only people who can afford private pre-k or those
living in poverty have a choice to attend a high quality pre-k
program. As a result, far too many children in the middle enter
kindergarten unprepared or behind the kids who had the opportunity to
attend pre-k. Just take a look at Pre-K Now's report, "The Pre-K Pinch."
The way Chester and others jump start this "fear factor" ignores the
sound reasoning behind pre-k for all. It's clear that this
manipulation is a tool to help readers buy into the skewed logic of
most of their arguments. That is why it is always the lead-off
statement in anti-pre-k propaganda. "The boogie man government wants to
take your kids."
Not true. Both sides know that this accusation is meant to play on your emotions not your intellect.
As for the 85 percent of four-year-olds already in preschool or
child care, he must have been hoping we wouldn't check out his numbers.
Or maybe he was hoping the consumers of his opinion couldn't add.
According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, in 2005,
57.2% of all preschool age children attended a center-based preschool,
11.6% of children attended non-relative care. That adds up to 68.8
percent. However, even these numbers are inflated. To begin, not all
of these programs are high-quality education programs. That's a
problem. More important, the statistic on school readiness is based on
a parent survey that used land lines. This means that the data is
skewed because people who use only mobile phones or have no phone, like
poor people, are not part of the survey. There was a bias study done of this data that found that the NHES study
...might
underestimate some indicators such as the percentage of preschoolers
who watch two or more hours of TV in a typical weekday and overestimate
some indicators such as the percentage of preschoolers with mothers who
are not in the labor force.
The survey is also of parents, not teachers or schools. The
dangerous thing about snake oil is not that it doesn't work, it's that
we think it does. It's the same with manipulative use of research to
support political arguments. It's not that the arguments are based on
shoddy statistics, it's that we might make decisions based on the
reliability of a snake oil salesman in an expert's clothes.
In my next post, Fact or Myth: Preschool is educationally effective.
Pre-K Now is a public
education and advocacy organization that advances high-quality, voluntary
pre-kindergarten for all three and four year olds.
Visit Pre-K Now >
