As the State of the Union Address approaches, Democrats in Congress are likely to refocus on President BidenJoe BidenCory Booker and Rosario Dawson reportedly split US estimate of Russian forces on Ukrainian border at 130,000 Harris heading to Munich at pivotal moment MOREof the Build Back Better program in hopes of getting a bill passed before November.
Sen. Joe Manchin
Joe ManchinBlack voters are fleeing Biden in droves. Here’s why Sunday shows: No breakthrough in Russian-Ukrainian tensions Pelosi: ‘It’s not right’ for Manchin to say ‘what we’re doing is contributing to inflation’ MOREit is opposition to the $2.2 billion version of the plan passed by the House in November will force congressional Democrats to revise the legislation. A good place to start would be to rethink the universal pre-k curriculum.
President Biden proposed to establish universal preschool for 3- and 4-year-olds with $109 billion in new expensesciting proof that expanding access to pre-k provides lasting benefits such as higher test scores through grade 8 and increased economic growth.
But a new empirical analysis of the Tennessee State Pre-K Curriculum casts serious doubt on the benefits of Universal Pre-K:
“Data up to sixth grade from public education records showed that children randomly assigned to pre-kindergarten had lower state achievement test scores from third to sixth grade compared to children randomly assigned to pre-kindergarten. control children, with the strongest negative effects in sixth grade. A negative effect was also found for disciplinary infractions, attendance and receipt of special education services, with zero effects on retention.
In other words, disadvantaged children who attended the state’s pre-k program had lower academic achievement and poorer behavioral outcomes than their peers in the control group.
Professor Vanderbilt Dale Farran, one of the study’s authors, put these findings into context: “At least for poor kids, it turns out that something is not better than nothing,” adding that “[t]The kind of pre-kindergarten our poor children are going into is not good for them in the long run.
This is not the first rigorous, long-term evaluation of a government preschool program that has found disappointing results. A 2012 congressional mandate review of the federal Head Start program showed no lasting benefit for participating children at the end of the third year.
Given the dismal long-term results of the Tennessee and Head Start programs, Congress should consider other ways to use government funding to help underprivileged young children succeed.
Consider how much taxpayers spent on the Tennessee and Head Start programs. According to Tennessee state government data, the cost per child of the voluntary pre-k program was approximately $4,800 in 2017-2018. The Department of Health and Human Services reported that Head Start cost more than $11,000 per child in 2019.
Rather than funding these ineffective programs, policymakers should provide pre-k grants directly to parents of low-income children. For example, the government could assign children a Head Start Education Savings Account (ESA) that parents could use for preschool or save those funds for future education expenses.
There is encouraging empirical evidence indicating to parents that pre-K ESAs would have both short-term and long-term benefits for participating children.
A new assessment Indiana’s “On My Way Pre-K” voucher program resulted in long-term academic achievement gains that lasted through 3rd and 4th grade.
Through the “On My Way” program, 4-year-old Hoosiers are eligible for pre-k scholarships if they live in households with incomes below 127% of the poverty level. Indiana regulates eligible early childhood education providers and limits options to those the state deems to be of high quality.
Beyond higher math and English scores in elementary school, Purdue University researchers also find short-term benefits, including that participating children were better prepared for school and had early literacy skills than their peers. The Indiana state government reports that parents were extremely satisfied with the “On My Way” program.
An older study of another type of early childhood benefit program should also inform policymakers’ thinking about how preschool grants could be better used to help disadvantaged children.
In 2016, researchers from the University of Washington studied an Oklahoma program that gave low-income children $1,000 investments in the state’s 529 program that provided tax-free savings for college expenses. Researchers find the program has improved parents’ expectations for their children’s education, mothers’ mental health, and children’s social-emotional development.
An Office of Government Accountability 2020 review found that savings account programs operating across the United States have “positive short-term effects on families, including those with low incomes.”
Giving low-income parents control of their child’s share of Head Start or pre-k benefits in a college savings account would improve equality of opportunity. Many parents would use the money to enroll their child in a high quality preschool. Others may choose to save some or all of their child’s pre-k funds for future tuition (including K-12 tuition, since federal law now allows for use funds saved in 529 accounts for elementary and secondary school expenses.)
The Build Back Better plan would have steered millions of American children into public preschool programs that could do more harm than good. A better approach would be to give parents control of existing preschool funds to make the right choices for their children.
Dan Lips is a Visiting Scholar at the Equal Opportunity Research Foundation.