Pre K

[prioritizepre-k]

Show me. Show me the way. Teach me. Show me any longitudinal study on preschool education and how it results in ANY significant long term difference in the measurable outcomes of kids in reading, math, science, writing, etc. Core academic subjects. Not little bits of some reading scores... but fully in reading, writing, math, social studies, science. Show me how kids who have preschool graduate at a higher rate, have less crimal activity, have higher grades beyond second grade, have less teen pregnancy, have higher gradution rates in college, score higher in any grade level beyond second grade in standardized tests.

Show me how that happens because I can't find it. Show me a study that is not poor kids and disadvantaged kids and show me what preschool does for them. If we are going to put billions of dollars into it then we got to get SOMETHING out of it. Something in the way of EDUCATION.

Until then I will hold steadfast that we need to STOP taking research from poor kids and apply it to the reasoning for early education for the rest of the population.

They won't be able to show you. All of the studies advocates base their claims from were small scale studies done on the extremely disadvantaged children. They take the benefits of these small scale programs that were done decades ago and try to apply the benefits to the larger population. The advocates are not representing the entire picture and are cherry picking the benefits. I agree with you and am happy to see there are others who understand it. To learn more visit www.prioritizepre-k.com

[prioritizepre-k]

prioritizepre-k

Does this count? I have not been reading up on it but I googled it and found this; http://nieer.org/resources/factsheets/13.pdf or http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1116081424.htm

Pew Charitable Trusts are the largest advocates for "universal pre-k" in the nation. For the past 10 years they have spent millions of dollars setting up organizations, conduction research and publicizing their results in an effort to campaign for government funded universal preschool programs. NIEER is one of the organizations set up by PEW and their entire focus is to lobby for government funded preschool. Their studies are hardly objective.

All studies, even those cited by the advocates prove the preschool programs benefit disadvantaged children. These advocates are taking the results and applying them to the larger population. There is NO PROOF that these programs benefit middle or upper class children.

To learn more visit www.prioritizepre-k.com

[nannyde]

Pew Charitable Trusts are the largest advocates for "universal pre-k" in the nation. For the past 10 years they have spent millions of dollars setting up organizations, conduction research and publicizing their results in an effort to campaign for government funded universal preschool programs. NIEER is one of the organizations set up by PEW and their entire focus is to lobby for government funded preschool. Their studies are hardly objective.

All studies, even those cited by the advocates prove the preschool programs benefit disadvantaged children. These advocates are taking the results and applying them to the larger population. There is NO PROOF that these programs benefit middle or upper class children.

To learn more visit www.prioritizepre-k.com

I'm glad to see you joined the conversation. I would be even more specific with this: There is NO PROOF that these programs benefit middle or upper class children. and discuss the large lower middle class and the upper middle class.

I looked over your site and thsi article is very good because it focuses on Oklahoma where a lot of TALK about their success is used to bolster the need for UPK. They are a really good example of when the research is taken out of their hands and put into standardized testing that they fail miserably. We have to be cautious with the research and see WHO is funding it and what their agenda is. Standardized testing is a good way to take the emotion out of it and just look at the facts: http://www.prioritizepre-k.com/2010/...hen-it-counts/

and video

http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=13533552

and for our new Govenor just sworn in yesterday: http://www.prioritizepre-k.com/categ...e-states/iowa/

Can I ask you one thing? Why is it that there is little to no discussion about parental responsibility when it comes to preschool education? I don't mean just paying for preschool but actually DOING preschool with their own children. We seem to miss the mark when it comes to sending the message to parents that THEY can educate their infants, toddlers, and preschool children. If we assume that Home Providers who are statistically not educated as teachers can BE teachers then why not extend that ideology to parents themselves. Free preschool can happen right under your roof. I would love to see public monies going into evening and weekend classes where parents can come to learn how to teach their own children. Now THAT would be money well spent.

[prioritizepre-k]

prioritizepre-k

I'm glad to see you joined the conversation. I would be even more specific with this: There is NO PROOF that these programs benefit middle or upper class children. and discuss the large lower middle class and the upper middle class.

I looked over your site and thsi article is very good because it focuses on Oklahoma where a lot of TALK about their success is used to bolster the need for UPK. They are a really good example of when the research is taken out of their hands and put into standardized testing that they fail miserably. We have to be cautious with the research and see WHO is funding it and what their agenda is. Standardized testing is a good way to take the emotion out of it and just look at the facts: http://www.prioritizepre-k.com/2010/...hen-it-counts/

and video

http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=13533552

and for our new Govenor just sworn in yesterday: http://www.prioritizepre-k.com/categ...e-states/iowa/

Can I ask you one thing? Why is it that there is little to no discussion about parental responsibility when it comes to preschool education? I don't mean just paying for preschool but actually DOING preschool with their own children. We seem to miss the mark when it comes to sending the message to parents that THEY can educate their infants, toddlers, and preschool children. If we assume that Home Providers who are statistically not educated as teachers can BE teachers then why not extend that ideology to parents themselves. Free preschool can happen right under your roof. I would love to see public monies going into evening and weekend classes where parents can come to learn how to teach their own children. Now THAT would be money well spent.

I focus on preschool because I am the owner of a preschool. I do believe preschool is beneficial. I do not believe the government are the only one's who can do it well. With that said, yes i believe parents can teach their children the basics too. The only thing homeschooling won't accomplish is all of the social benefits the children receive by being in a classroom with a few of their peers. Taking turns, sharing, not taking too much of the teachers attention. etc. These are important skills they will need as they enter a Kindergarten classroom with 20+ kids.

I find if insulting when the advocates say parents can't identify a quality preschool. That is a load of cr-- These advocates do not give parents enough credit and yes they are trying to take kids away from their families at too young an age. The most influential people in a child's life are their parents. This should be celebrated. Our government should not be trying to interfere with the upbringing of our children.

https://www.prioritizepre-k.com

[QualiTcare]

I'm glad to see you joined the conversation. I would be even more specific with this: There is NO PROOF that these programs benefit middle or upper class children. and discuss the large lower middle class and the upper middle class.

I looked over your site and thsi article is very good because it focuses on Oklahoma where a lot of TALK about their success is used to bolster the need for UPK. They are a really good example of when the research is taken out of their hands and put into standardized testing that they fail miserably. We have to be cautious with the research and see WHO is funding it and what their agenda is. Standardized testing is a good way to take the emotion out of it and just look at the facts: http://www.prioritizepre-k.com/2010/...hen-it-counts/

and video

http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=13533552

and for our new Govenor just sworn in yesterday: http://www.prioritizepre-k.com/categ...e-states/iowa/

Can I ask you one thing? Why is it that there is little to no discussion about parental responsibility when it comes to preschool education? I don't mean just paying for preschool but actually DOING preschool with their own children. We seem to miss the mark when it comes to sending the message to parents that THEY can educate their infants, toddlers, and preschool children. If we assume that Home Providers who are statistically not educated as teachers can BE teachers then why not extend that ideology to parents themselves. Free preschool can happen right under your roof. I would love to see public monies going into evening and weekend classes where parents can come to learn how to teach their own children. Now THAT would be money well spent.

Who would go to the classes? They only offer things like that at "no cost" to the one demographic who doesn't want it. The only reason preschool gets kids in is bc it's free childcare to people who typically don't have jobs AND the bus picks the kids up. The effort the parents put in is worth the reward. The kids who get into preschool here are the ones who get the lowest scores on the entry test. They get the lowest scores even though they typically have a parent at home. I assure you it's not bc the parents need a class on how to teach colors or letters. It's bc they don't WANT to. It's a nice idea though. ::

[QualiTcare]

There are parents who wouldn't be able to choose or identify a quality preschool. They wouldn't be able to identify a hole n the ground. Have you worked with head start or public prek? There is proof

[prioritizepre-k]

prioritizepre-k

There are parents who wouldn't be able to choose or identify a quality preschool. They wouldn't be able to identify a hole n the ground. Have you worked with head start or public prek? There is proof

First you need to define what quality is. Next you have to ask - are parents unable to choose a quality program or are there no quality programs available to them because they live in rural areas or can't afford to pay for it?

This is why it is so very important our government prioritize preschool funding to those children most in need. Parents should have a choice when it comes to childcare and early childhood education. Some prefer to work and send their kids to daycare. Some choose to stay at home and send them to 1/2 day educational programs. Others chose to home school. That's OK, we should be allowed our beliefs. To make preschool universal and institutionalize our children at 3 & 4 is not benefiting them. Those benefiting from this government intervention are high paid teachers, administrators, researcher, lobbyist and special interest groups.

Children should come before special interests and politics.

https://www.prioritizepre-k.com

[prioritizepre-k]

prioritizepre-k

I'm glad to see you joined the conversation. I would be even more specific with this: There is NO PROOF that these programs benefit middle or upper class children. and discuss the large lower middle class and the upper middle class.

I looked over your site and thsi article is very good because it focuses on Oklahoma where a lot of TALK about their success is used to bolster the need for UPK. They are a really good example of when the research is taken out of their hands and put into standardized testing that they fail miserably. We have to be cautious with the research and see WHO is funding it and what their agenda is. Standardized testing is a good way to take the emotion out of it and just look at the facts: http://www.prioritizepre-k.com/2010/...hen-it-counts/

and video

http://www.newson6.com/Global/story.asp?S=13533552

and for our new Govenor just sworn in yesterday: http://www.prioritizepre-k.com/categ...e-states/iowa/

Can I ask you one thing? Why is it that there is little to no discussion about parental responsibility when it comes to preschool education? I don't mean just paying for preschool but actually DOING preschool with their own children. We seem to miss the mark when it comes to sending the message to parents that THEY can educate their infants, toddlers, and preschool children. If we assume that Home Providers who are statistically not educated as teachers can BE teachers then why not extend that ideology to parents themselves. Free preschool can happen right under your roof. I would love to see public monies going into evening and weekend classes where parents can come to learn how to teach their own children. Now THAT would be money well spent.

nannyde: you seem very passionate about the issue. Visit this site and really get yourself worked up.

https://www.investinginkids.net

This is a man who started a blog to promote his book Investing in Kids. His book was funded by NIEER/PEW. This is another attempt at rationalizing publicly funded pre-k.

Have fun

https://www.prioritizepre-k.com

[QualiTcare]

First you need to define what quality is. Next you have to ask - are parents unable to choose a quality program or are there no quality programs available to them because they live in rural areas or can't afford to pay for it?

This is why it is so very important our government prioritize preschool funding to those children most in need. Parents should have a choice when it comes to childcare and early childhood education. Some prefer to work and send their kids to daycare. Some choose to stay at home and send them to 1/2 day educational programs. Others chose to home school. That's OK, we should be allowed our beliefs. To make preschool universal and institutionalize our children at 3 & 4 is not benefiting them. Those benefiting from this government intervention are high paid teachers, administrators, researcher, lobbyist and special interest groups.

Children should come before special interests and politics.

www.prioritizepre-k.com

A quality preschool would prepare children for kindergarten and not by teaching them about dinosaurs for a year. They have to know what they're expected to know and learn in kindergarten according to the standards which I'd be willing to bet 90 percent or more of these self proclaimed preschool teachers have NO IDEA what the standards are, where to find them, how to cover and more importantly ASSESS (objectively) their progress throughout the year. They don't care about who needs it most, they care about who has the cash to pay for it. The preschools ran by the DOE and head start are the only ones who DO consider which children need it most and unfortunately there are way more applicants than spaces so we have all these kids who still need it desperately and might not be able to go bc their mom makes "too much money" even if she only makes 3 dollars over the limit. She can't afford a private "preschool" so little jonny misses out. those would be the kids to benefit from schools taking on pre k.

[prioritizepre-k]

A quality preschool would prepare children for kindergarten and not by teaching them about dinosaurs for a year. They have to know what they're expected to know and learn in kindergarten according to the standards which I'd be willing to bet 90 percent or more of these self proclaimed preschool teachers have NO IDEA what the standards are, where to find them, how to cover and more importantly ASSESS (objectively) their progress throughout the year. They don't care about who needs it most, they care about who has the cash to pay for it. The preschools ran by the DOE and head start are the only ones who DO consider which children need it most and unfortunately there are way more applicants than spaces so we have all these kids who still need it desperately and might not be able to go bc their mom makes "too much money" even if she only makes 3 dollars over the limit. She can't afford a private "preschool" so little jonny misses out. those would be the kids to benefit from schools taking on pre k.

I agree, private preschools should have learning objectives and be able to assess what the children are learning.

I disagree about most else you say. In my area there are many childcare/preschools run by highly educated/qualified people. "Universal" pre-k in my area is NOT universal. Children are chosen by lottery, regardless of economic need. Those children most in need can get shut out. They have been trying to institute a "universal" pre-k program for 15 years. This DOE isn't concerned that those most in need can be shut out, otherwise they'd be advocating for prioritizing the money. They care about holding on to their own jobs.

We all have our interests and motives. Yes private school owners look out for the profit margin. Teachers unions look out for members employment, salaries and benefits and State Education workers look out for their own jobs. The fact, Head Start is a prime example of a government program gone out of control. Unlike the public sector, the private sector is accountable to the people who pay the bill. The private sector is responsible to a higher standard, the paying public. When public programs aren't achieving benefits, they just ask for more money and raise taxes.

I want to make one more note, I too do not want little johnny to miss out on a preschool experience because he can't afford it. That is why we oppose universal pre-k. Our government should prioritize preschool funding on economic need.

[dEHmom]

Thank you QCare

[QualiTcare]

I agree, private preschools should have learning objectives and be able to assess what the children are learning.

I disagree about most else you say. In my area there are many childcare/preschools run by highly educated/qualified people. "Universal" pre-k in my area is NOT universal. Children are chosen by lottery, regardless of economic need. Those children most in need can get shut out. They have been trying to institute a "universal" pre-k program for 15 years. This DOE isn't concerned that those most in need can be shut out, otherwise they'd be advocating for prioritizing the money. They care about holding on to their own jobs.

We all have our interests and motives. Yes private school owners look out for the profit margin. Teachers unions look out for members employment, salaries and benefits and State Education workers look out for their own jobs. The fact, Head Start is a prime example of a government program gone out of control. Unlike the public sector, the private sector is accountable to the people who pay the bill. The private sector is responsible to a higher standard, the paying public. When public programs aren't achieving benefits, they just ask for more money and raise taxes.

I want to make one more note, I too do not want little johnny to miss out on a preschool experience because he can't afford it. That is why we oppose universal pre-k. Our government should prioritize preschool funding on economic need.

as of now, the children who qualify for "free" preschool ARE enrolled based on economic need. ask anyone who has ever tried to get their child into preschool and were told they make too much money. at least that's generally the case.

i don't doubt there are some private preschools that are owned by qualified people, but as we were talking about - only the people who have the $$ typically have the access to those preschools. the other children have access to preschools supplied to them in a list based on who accepts child care subsidies. as usual, it is the middle class and their children who get screwed on the deal.

[prioritizepre-k]

as of now, the children who qualify for "free" preschool ARE enrolled based on economic need. ask anyone who has ever tried to get their child into preschool and were told they make too much money. at least that's generally the case.

i don't doubt there are some private preschools that are owned by qualified people, but as we were talking about - only the people who have the $$ typically have the access to those preschools. the other children have access to preschools supplied to them in a list based on who accepts child care subsidies. as usual, it is the middle class and their children who get screwed on the deal.

That is not true in all states. In my state, enrollment is NOT based on economic need. The program is not universal and those most in need CAN AND ARE being shut out of programs.

Re the middle class - we all need to make choices in our life. We choose to have children, we choose to spend our money in many ways, big cars, big homes, vacations, pedicures, manicure, movies etc. The middle class does not get screwed. They make choices. Our government should not be creating middle class entitlement programs. They should be supporting families who, due to various circumstances, find themselves without choice because they are struggling just to put food on the table. Middle class people need to prioritize and ask themselves - do I get pedicures, drive a big gas guzzling suv, go on vacations or provide preschool to my child.

That is the reality of what is happening in my area. Those that can well afford to pay for preschool are getting into programs while others are shut out. Many are going to the gym, getting pedicures, shopping etc while their children are attending these programs that you and I are paying for. At what point does government entitlement end and personal responsibility begin?

Districts can't even afford to maintain their K-12 programs - we shouldn't be putting more of a burden on them by expanding their responsibilities. We should be helping them to maintain what they have.

[nannyde]

nannyde: you seem very passionate about the issue. Visit this site and really get yourself worked up.

https://www.investinginkids.net

This is a man who started a blog to promote his book Investing in Kids. His book was funded by NIEER/PEW. This is another attempt at rationalizing publicly funded pre-k.

Have fun

www.prioritizepre-k.com

I'll put that in the q

I found this link on your site: http://www.hoover.org/publications/books/8138



I likey Mr Finn Jr

I wish he could come to my house and see about my kids. There's an answer to this and it's not so complicated after all.

I said it before. I'll say it again:

Kids need an early childhood of close proximal supervision, excellent nutrition, free play, outdoor exercise, GOOD DEEP SLEEP, discipline, and affection. They need good CARE. If they have an early childhood of good care they will be great students. Good care CAN include "education" but it will not further them academically.

At the age of five/six the kids are ready for academics. For hundreds of years we have understood this is the age to begin their "education". Nothing has changed with this generation of students. They aren't more evolved at two/three/four then they were a hundred years ago. You can't cheat mother nature. We are humans and human babies and toddlers don't prosper from early "education". They prosper from good care in the areas I listed above.

We HAVE to get back to the basics. We aren't doing better after a couple of decades of "early education". We are failing our children because we aren't supporting what REALLY matters in raising quality kids.

[prioritizepre-k]

I'll put that in the q

I found this link on your site: http://www.hoover.org/publications/books/8138



I likey Mr Finn Jr

I wish he could come to my house and see about my kids. There's an answer to this and it's not so complicated after all.

I said it before. I'll say it again:

Kids need an early childhood of close proximal supervision, excellent nutrition, free play, outdoor exercise, GOOD DEEP SLEEP, discipline, and affection. They need good CARE. If they have an early childhood of good care they will be great students. Good care CAN include "education" but it will not further them academically.

At the age of five/six the kids are ready for academics. For hundreds of years we have understood this is the age to begin their "education". Nothing has changed with this generation of students. They aren't more evolved at two/three/four then they were a hundred years ago. You can't cheat mother nature. We are humans and human babies and toddlers don't prosper from early "education". They prosper from good care in the areas I listed above.

We HAVE to get back to the basics. We aren't doing better after a couple of decades of "early education". We are failing our children because we aren't supporting what REALLY matters in raising quality kids.

Chester Finn is our hero. We were sooo excited when we discovered him.