Preschool is overhyped
Todd M.
09/18/2002
Preschool is overhyped
By David Salisbury
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2002-09-18-oppose_x.htm
Advocates of universal preschool claim that starting kids in school earlier
is the key to improved academic achievement and higher intelligence. This
claim is made so often that one would expect it to rest on solid evidence.
But that is not the case. Proponents exaggerate the benefits for young
children, or fail to mention that the benefits fade after a few years. No
wide-scale longitudinal study, representative of the American population,
has found long-term positive effects from state-funded preschool.
Most mothers like being at home with their children, especially during the
preschool years, and many make substantial financial sacrifices to be able
to do so. Parents also recognize that it is wrong to make one struggling
family pay for the child care of other families. According to a report from
the non-partisan Public Agenda, more than seven in 10 parents with children
5 or under say they should be responsible for paying the costs of caring
for their own children; only 24% say other taxpayers should help pay the
costs. Even a majority of parents earning less than $25,000 a year believe
that they, not their neighbors, should be responsible for the costs of
raising their children.
The push for these programs doesn't come from parents, but rather from
politicians, who prey on the weaknesses of parents who are often strapped
financially. Pushing universal preschool may be good for politicians, but
it is not good for children, nor does it help build a social structure of
independent, healthy families. Instead of trying to "help" parents by
offering "free" preschool, politicians need to adjust current policies so
that parents and extended family members can spend more time with their
children, not less. Providing non-discriminatory assistance through tax
cuts would help all parents, whether or not they choose at-home parental
care, preschool or a combination of both for their children.
The key to producing intelligent, healthy children does not lie in putting
more of them in taxpayer-funded preschools. Although child care outside the
home is necessary for some parents, especially single mothers, it should
not be promoted as the norm for all families. Instead of forcing mothers
into the workplace through heavy taxation, the government should reduce the
tax burden on families and, thereby, allow child care to remain in the
capable hands of parents.
David Salisbury is director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the
Cato Institute.
====================================
I was going to join the Paranoids anonymous group,
but they won't tell me where they're meeting.
Preschool is overhyped
By David Salisbury
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2002-09-18-oppose_x.htm
Advocates of universal preschool claim that starting kids in school earlier
is the key to improved academic achievement and higher intelligence. This
claim is made so often that one would expect it to rest on solid evidence.
But that is not the case. Proponents exaggerate the benefits for young
children, or fail to mention that the benefits fade after a few years. No
wide-scale longitudinal study, representative of the American population,
has found long-term positive effects from state-funded preschool.
Most mothers like being at home with their children, especially during the
preschool years, and many make substantial financial sacrifices to be able
to do so. Parents also recognize that it is wrong to make one struggling
family pay for the child care of other families. According to a report from
the non-partisan Public Agenda, more than seven in 10 parents with children
5 or under say they should be responsible for paying the costs of caring
for their own children; only 24% say other taxpayers should help pay the
costs. Even a majority of parents earning less than $25,000 a year believe
that they, not their neighbors, should be responsible for the costs of
raising their children.
The push for these programs doesn't come from parents, but rather from
politicians, who prey on the weaknesses of parents who are often strapped
financially. Pushing universal preschool may be good for politicians, but
it is not good for children, nor does it help build a social structure of
independent, healthy families. Instead of trying to "help" parents by
offering "free" preschool, politicians need to adjust current policies so
that parents and extended family members can spend more time with their
children, not less. Providing non-discriminatory assistance through tax
cuts would help all parents, whether or not they choose at-home parental
care, preschool or a combination of both for their children.
The key to producing intelligent, healthy children does not lie in putting
more of them in taxpayer-funded preschools. Although child care outside the
home is necessary for some parents, especially single mothers, it should
not be promoted as the norm for all families. Instead of forcing mothers
into the workplace through heavy taxation, the government should reduce the
tax burden on families and, thereby, allow child care to remain in the
capable hands of parents.
David Salisbury is director of the Center for Educational Freedom at the
Cato Institute.
====================================
I was going to join the Paranoids anonymous group,
but they won't tell me where they're meeting.