5 ms·

Has early childhood education ever been shown to be effective? From what I've read, students with pre kindergarten were indistinguishable academically from stud

Has early childhood education ever been shown to be effective? From what I've read, students with pre kindergarten were indistinguishable academically from students without it by about 3rd grade. I think we could help ourselves out a lot by focusing more on high school success and less on pre-K/elementary school success.

mc32 11y ago
The article admits as much but hedges this by saying it may help to counter bad parenting by poor parents --which is dubious, since they offer no evidence. It's more of a feelgood/guilt piece. What we should do is have programs to make better parents. If they have children, make them take nurture programs, etc. I know, they don't have time... But they have time to want to raise children. When pregnancy and parenting is by and large by choice, given they are talking about "families" we should come to expect more from parents in rearing their children, poor or wealthy.
- sokoloff 11y ago
  The problem with such programs is that they are also discriminatory in some ways. Set aside the differences in culture, just the amount of time and logistics that some lower-income people spend just to live their lives. Add to that the requirement to go to some kind of classes (or suffer some kind of unspecified consequences if I read "make them" as having some kind of teeth) and you can get to an unsolvable situation for some. I volunteer occasionally at my young kids' public school and I'm saddened to see the differences in time that parents [/guardians] spend with their kids. It's readily apparent in the kids' behavior, even in pre-K and first grade.
  - mc32 11y ago
    For citizens it should be the duty az a parent, for immigrants it could be a condition of admission into country.
eitally 11y ago
It depends how you define effectiveness. Academic is just one. I think it's equally important to consider that daycare/preschool allow two income households that might not be possible otherwise. That also ends up leading to increased parent involvement, which leads to increased academic success.
- sokoloff 11y ago
  My wife left her (fairly well-paying) job when we had our second child in daycare. After taxes and daycare, she was only working for her retirement contributions and that wasn't worth it to us. Our kids now get the advantage of a very involved mom and the whole family gets the advantage of more home-cooked meals and a smoother running, better organized, less stressed to the breaking point household. Now that the kids are in public school, it would again be financially advantageous for my wife to work, but we've decided to delay that still as all four of us (five, if you count the dog) are happier this way. I hate to sound like I'm a time-traveler from the 1950s, but it's not clear to me that allowing/encouraging more two-income households is a recipe for greater family harmony and happiness for the next generation. It sure helps GDP, but it's unclear to me that it helps the kids or families.
  - mdorazio 11y ago
    Great example of how it often makes sense for one parent to stay at home. Just remember that 1) this is a luxury that many families don't get because living on a single income often isn't possible these days, and 2) we should be equally supportive of stay at home dads as we are of stay at home moms.
  - dnissley 11y ago
    Why deduct the whole cost of childcare from her salary? Why not split it and deduct half from each of your salaries?
    - AndrewGaspar 11y ago
      I think his point is that the child care cost completely goes away if she stops working. So, if you're judging the two options of her working and not working, the only + the column for his wife working was the 401k contributions.
protomyth 11y ago
Where pre-K programs shine is children with diagnosable problems. Failure to have these kids in some kind of treatment can cost the taxpayer a lot money in K-12 and beyond[1]. When I was working with a 6 weeks - 3 year program in the 90's we had quite a few cases of hearing and speech problems that could be corrected in that time frame. If the kids had made it to kindergarten like that, they would have been permanently behind because of all the brain development in those years.[2] Even making sure children were given an initial screening with follow up assessments (we used the Denver Screening and E-LAP) catches a lot of things. Yes, the other kids catchup, but the problem is some might have never have got there. As to pre-K / elementary, if the kid does not have STEM mentors in those years then you can probably forget getting them into STEM in HS. Opinions of cool and want develop pre-K through elementary. 1) obviously providing the child a normal or at least better life 2) I was rather horrified at how much of this got by family doctors
corysama 11y ago
"Study finds improved self-regulation in kindergartners who wait a year to enroll" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10571222 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10571222 Note that the article is not comparing 5 years olds to 6 year olds. It is comparing 11 years olds who started school at 5 vs 11 year olds who started school at 6.
- blacksmith_tb 11y ago
  The Finnish school system has a very good reputation, compared to the US, and they start even later, at age 7 [1] 1: http://eyeonearlyeducation.com/2014/03/19/finlands-approach-to-child-care-and-preschool-programs/ http://eyeonearlyeducation.com/2014/03/19/finlands-approach-...

mc32 11y ago

The article admits as much but hedges this by saying it may help to counter bad parenting by poor parents --which is dubious, since they offer no evidence. It's more of a feelgood/guilt piece. What we should do is have programs to make better parents. If they have children, make them take nurture programs, etc. I know, they don't have time... But they have time to want to raise children. When pregnancy and parenting is by and large by choice, given they are talking about "families" we should come to expect more from parents in rearing their children, poor or wealthy.

sokoloff 11y ago
The problem with such programs is that they are also discriminatory in some ways. Set aside the differences in culture, just the amount of time and logistics that some lower-income people spend just to live their lives. Add to that the requirement to go to some kind of classes (or suffer some kind of unspecified consequences if I read "make them" as having some kind of teeth) and you can get to an unsolvable situation for some. I volunteer occasionally at my young kids' public school and I'm saddened to see the differences in time that parents [/guardians] spend with their kids. It's readily apparent in the kids' behavior, even in pre-K and first grade.
- mc32 11y ago
  For citizens it should be the duty az a parent, for immigrants it could be a condition of admission into country.

eitally 11y ago

It depends how you define effectiveness. Academic is just one. I think it's equally important to consider that daycare/preschool allow two income households that might not be possible otherwise. That also ends up leading to increased parent involvement, which leads to increased academic success.

sokoloff 11y ago
My wife left her (fairly well-paying) job when we had our second child in daycare. After taxes and daycare, she was only working for her retirement contributions and that wasn't worth it to us. Our kids now get the advantage of a very involved mom and the whole family gets the advantage of more home-cooked meals and a smoother running, better organized, less stressed to the breaking point household. Now that the kids are in public school, it would again be financially advantageous for my wife to work, but we've decided to delay that still as all four of us (five, if you count the dog) are happier this way. I hate to sound like I'm a time-traveler from the 1950s, but it's not clear to me that allowing/encouraging more two-income households is a recipe for greater family harmony and happiness for the next generation. It sure helps GDP, but it's unclear to me that it helps the kids or families.
- mdorazio 11y ago
  Great example of how it often makes sense for one parent to stay at home. Just remember that 1) this is a luxury that many families don't get because living on a single income often isn't possible these days, and 2) we should be equally supportive of stay at home dads as we are of stay at home moms.
- dnissley 11y ago
  Why deduct the whole cost of childcare from her salary? Why not split it and deduct half from each of your salaries?
  - AndrewGaspar 11y ago
    I think his point is that the child care cost completely goes away if she stops working. So, if you're judging the two options of her working and not working, the only + the column for his wife working was the 401k contributions.

protomyth 11y ago

Where pre-K programs shine is children with diagnosable problems. Failure to have these kids in some kind of treatment can cost the taxpayer a lot money in K-12 and beyond[1]. When I was working with a 6 weeks - 3 year program in the 90's we had quite a few cases of hearing and speech problems that could be corrected in that time frame. If the kids had made it to kindergarten like that, they would have been permanently behind because of all the brain development in those years.[2] Even making sure children were given an initial screening with follow up assessments (we used the Denver Screening and E-LAP) catches a lot of things. Yes, the other kids catchup, but the problem is some might have never have got there. As to pre-K / elementary, if the kid does not have STEM mentors in those years then you can probably forget getting them into STEM in HS. Opinions of cool and want develop pre-K through elementary. 1) obviously providing the child a normal or at least better life 2) I was rather horrified at how much of this got by family doctors

corysama 11y ago

"Study finds improved self-regulation in kindergartners who wait a year to enroll" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10571222 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10571222 Note that the article is not comparing 5 years olds to 6 year olds. It is comparing 11 years olds who started school at 5 vs 11 year olds who started school at 6.

blacksmith_tb 11y ago
The Finnish school system has a very good reputation, compared to the US, and they start even later, at age 7 [1] 1: http://eyeonearlyeducation.com/2014/03/19/finlands-approach-to-child-care-and-preschool-programs/ http://eyeonearlyeducation.com/2014/03/19/finlands-approach-...