Universal Pre-K: Mozart for Babies All Over Again?

Education myths can be pervasive and costly.


Two decades ago, psychologist Frances Rauscher conducted an experiment in which she asked 36 college students to listen to different kinds of music before visualizing how a folded-up piece of paper would look when cut and then unfolded.

The results seemed to suggest Mozart might improve spatial reasoning. Nothing earth-shattering there — yet this one small study inspired a nationwide craze. Through something like a national version of the children's game of telephone, countless Americans glommed on to the idea that playing Mozart to a child in the womb would boost his or her IQ.

A new industry was born. What Amazon now calls the "baby brain-booster category" of consumer products soon grew crowded. Inevitably, politicians jumped on the bandwagon. Georgia Gov. Zell Miller directed that classical music recordings be sent home with new mothers. Florida mandated that state day care centers play symphonies.

Just one small problem: None of that had any scientific basis. True, babies can recognize music they hear in the womb for several weeks following birth. But this does not boost a child's IQ. Six years ago, Scientific American reported that a German review by "a cross-disciplinary team of musically inclined scientists … declared the (Mozart effect) phenomenon nonexistent." Even Rauscher, author of the original study, called the idea that playing music to a fetus will make it smarter "really a myth."

Study after study has reached the same conclusion. Yet companies still pitch the idea of piping tunes into the womb, and parents still lap it up.

Something similar may be going on now — with pre-kindergarten.

Back in February, President Obama proposed "working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every child inAmerica. Every dollar we invest in high-quality early education can save more than seven dollars later on by boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing violent crime."

The claim was bunk. But the president's proposal enjoys growing support.

Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine recently penned an op/ed supporting the Start Strong forAmerica's Children Act — a "10-year federal-state partnership to expand and improve early childhood education." Virginia Gov.-elect Terry McAuliffe favors expanding pre-K, too. The support crosses red-team/blue-team lines: The Virginia Chamber of Commerce would like the state to "improve access to high-quality early childhood education," and it was a Republican governor, George Allen, who launched the Virginia Preschool Initiative.

In his op/ed column, Kaine repeated the standard arguments: "Pre-K is good for the economy"; "early learning programs make it more likely that children will do well in elementary school"; and so on. It would be nice if we had an experiment somewhere to test the validity of those claims.

We do. It's called Head Start. The United States has spent more than $160 billion on that early education program for at-risk children. The results are amazing — as in amazingly poor.

In 2010, the Department of Health and Human Services reported on a congressionally mandated study of approximately 5,000 3- and 4-year-olds who were randomly assigned to either a control group or a group that had access to a Head Start program. It found that "at the end of kindergarten and first grade . . . the Head Start children and the control group children were at the same level on many of the measures studied."

Last year, HHS issued the results of another randomized study. It, too, found that Head Start produced "little evidence of systematic differences" in children's elementary school experiences through third grade.

It's pretty damning when the federal government itself concludes that a federal program doesn't work. But if you're still not convinced, consider a recent piece by Grover Whitehurst of the liberal Brookings Institution. Whitehurst is a development psychologist who spent his career "designing and evaluating programs intended to enhance the cognitive development of young children."

The rhetoric supporting the Start Strong legislation, Whitehurst writes, is "entirely predictable and thoroughly misleading. … If you're an advocate of strengthening early childhood programs, as I am, you also need to pay careful attention to the evidence — all of it." And the evidence, he says, "raises doubts on Obama's preschool for all."

Just as the baby-Mozart crowd extrapolated wildly from one small and unrelated study, Whitehurst says supporters of universal pre-K "highlight positive long-term outcomes of two boutique programs from 40-50 years ago that served a couple of hundred children" — the Perry and Abecedarian pre-school projects. Those projects focused intensely on underprivileged children: Perry's two-year intervention spent $19,000 per student.

Meanwhile, boosters ignore evidence that pre-K isn't all it's cracked up to be. That evidence, Whitehurst notes, includes "a newly released study of Tennessee's Voluntary Pre-K Program (TN-VPK). TN-VPK is a full day pre-K program for four-year-olds from low-income families."

The study found that "seven of the outcomes are negative. … In other words, the group that experienced the Tennessee Voluntary State Pre-K Program performed somewhat less well on cognitive tasks at the end of first grade than the control group."

"I see these finding as devastating for advocates of the expansion of state pre-K programs," Whitehurst concludes. "I wish this weren't so, but facts are stubborn things."

Granted, other studies suggest early childhood programs can help prepare children for kindergarten.

One study of the Abbot pre-school initiative in New Jersey also showed modest results into fifth grade. But the claim being advanced by Obama, Kaine and others is far more sweeping: that pre-K's benefits last long into the future — so long, in fact, that they raise graduation rates, decrease teenage pregnancy and reduce crime.

It's possible. It's also possible that piping Mozart into the womb makes your baby smarter. But shouldn't government policy — and taxpayer funding — rest on a firmer foundation than that?

This column originally appeared in the Richmond-Times Dispatch.

NEXT: HIV Returns in Men Thought Cured

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Sending my daughter to pre-school isn’t going to keep her from being pregnant. Good parenting did/does.

    1. Spaying helps.

      1. *snerk*

        1. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do,…


          1. Sounds good. Why the heck are you advertising to create more competition for yourself?

    2. In the future, try to just have sons. Avoids the problem altogether.

      1. I have 4 sons and the three who are old enough to walk (6, 5 and almost 3) have already kissed girls at school. Not sure we’re home free on the pregnancy problem. I’d rather they not bring a girl home only to find her daddy waiting for them with a shot gun 🙂

        How hard is it to raise a gentleman or four? Guess I’m going to find out.

        1. The son of my boss came home from his first day of kindergarten already having scored two girlfriends. I told her that boy was going to be trouble.

          1. I told her that boy was going to be trouble.

            …before we even had sex on the copy machine that one time.

            1. She still gets wet when I tell her that we are out of toner.

    3. In addition – if you are worried about your pre-schooler becoming pregnant, there may be some Jr. High School biology classes that you missed.

      1. I’m relatively sure I get your sarcasm, but to make a serial comment, it seems strange to me that there are highly educated people in this country that believe that scissors and glue at age 4 is a magic elixir against teen pregnancy.

        That maybe, just maybe, the kind of kids that go to preschool are the kinds of kids of have… you know, working parents and have to shove their kid somewhere so they can earn a living. That the parents’ drive to work, earn a living thus necessitating preschool might have more to do with the kind of family the kid is going to grow up in.

        Putting Suzie CrackHead’s daughter in preschool isn’t a bulwark against teen pregnancy, getting Suzie Crackhead off crack and into a fucking job where she has a sense of pride will do far more for Suzie CrackHead’s daughter than universal preschool.

        If someone wants to talk about subsidized preschool so Suzie Crackhead can get a job, I’m listening. Otherwise, getting Bill Gates’ kid into free preschool does not a better society make.

        1. Standing ovation. Whistles. Wooo!


        2. Don’t kid yourself. Nobody believes that scissors and glue at age 4 does a damn thing against teen pregnancy. This is about shoveling tax paid baby-sitting towards upper-middle class white women who want to “have it all” but are finding that a child is a very demanding fashion accessory. If they came straight out and demanded it, they would have to face the cold fact that they want the rest of us to pay for their lifestyle choices. But if its framed as a benefit “for the children” by bogus “research” then that’s OK.

          Expect to see a lot of similar bushwa out of the Public Education establishment in the next decades. They are fighting a desperate rearguard action against taxpayers who are suck to the teeth of high costs and poor results.

          1. Well, it also means hiring a LOT of new, Pre-K teachers. Unionized, AFT teachers. It’s basically a way to use the government to launder money for the Democratic party.

          2. I wouldn’t say my oldest daughter considers her children as fashion accessories, but she continues to believe that the US is, “backward,” because we don’t have a national maternity plan. She just had twins 4 months ago, and rails constantly on how she had to use her work sickleave, and how it was a tragedy that she had to go to work so soon. I tried to suggest that she stop going to Disney every 2 months, and stop eating out so much, so that she could stop working. Crickets.

            1. I wouldn’t say my oldest daughter considers her children as fashion accessories, but she continues to believe that the US is, “backward,” because we don’t have a national maternity plan.

              I have a serious question, although it may come off snarky.

              What was the purpose of your daughter having kids? Did she feel it was “just time”? Did she feel “biological clock” pressure? Was it a keeping up with her friends thing? Maybe it was the “next logical step”? Or was she truly passionate about having and raising children because she like children and being a mother?

              Note: I think only one of those answers ends up with children who are family rather than glorified pets/fashion accessories.

              1. It was the last choice – she’s always been passionate about children. She’s also an ob/gyn nurse, so she even takes that into her work. BTW, I didn’t find it snarky, I question the same thing with people, often.

              2. I think all of those options are over-thinking it (but I don’t have kids, so what do I know). Seems to me that if you don’t make a conscious decision not to have kids, then you will probably have kids. And most people have kids because they are animals and that’s how it works.

        3. Excellent point. It’s a markers school of thought on public policy. Things like preschool, college attendance and home ownership are the markers of the middle class. People with a vested interest presume that you can transform the poor into middle class by providing them with those markers, rather than devaluing the markers themselves.

    4. My wife’s a preschool teacher (presby. church, tuition paid). She has 3 year olds.

      You know what they’re learning right now? Scissors. Previous topic? Colors, and putting your own coat on.

      C’mon. The federal government needs to get involved in this as much as they need to get involved in diapering classes.

      1. Do you know the cost of diapers! Universal Diaper Care!!

        1. Expensive daipers encourages toilet training.

      2. But … the littlest learners! How can you look those cute little moppets in the face and then say No? Have you no compassion?

        1. Like this: No.

      3. SHHH _ They may hear you

      4. They let kids play with scissors??!! Call in the Feds!

    5. Sending my daughter to pre-school isn’t going to keep her from being pregnant.

      Being 5 probably does, though.

  2. Indoctrinate early and often. Also, make the parents as dependent as possible on what is essentially subsidized day care. Amazing how this shit all works out in the state’s favor, doesn’t it.

    1. I’d be interested to see the success/failure results of private schools compared to public and then let’s see the state make their case.

      1. This maybe regional, but every protestant church on the east coast offers pre-school – usually for less cost than daycare. You don’t need to be a member of the congregation and the actual religious component is minimal. It includes some Christmas/Easter dress up like shepherds and sing stuff but little else.

        Of course, pre-school isn’t full day – more like 3 hours @ 3 days per week. But that’s were universal pre-k will lead – kids institutionalized for 6-8 hours a day/5 days a week at ever younger ages.

        1. Spot on.

          My son went to full-day kindergarten. He and his schoolmates were all asleep on the bus home, even at age 6. Full-day pre-k sometimes is just too much for preschoolers.

          1. Yeah, they’re too small. Problem is parents want their kids to gain an ‘edge’ any which way they can get it.

            More school at an earlier age is seen as that.

            1. More school at an earlier age is seen as that

              Not for the affluent. Rich or nearly rich people don’t send their kids to full day preschool/daycare. They just don’t. They have a nanny if they both work. If they don’t work then they’ll use a church preschool.

              The most prestigious preschools for the richest NYC’ers aren’t full day/full time.

        2. we did the church, a Baptist place. You’re right, the religious stuff was almost exclusively around certain holidays, schedule was half-days, and the boys both loved it.

    2. Have the teacher’s unions been dwindling? From Obama’s perspective, that’s the only reason I can think of to push for this.

      1. I doubt they’ve been dwindling, but right now Obama is in a pretty bad spot, and he’s probably trying to shore up whatever solid bases he has, such as the teachers’ union. Also, getting children on the state indoctrination train earlier has been a TEAM BLUE wish for a long time, and Obama is certainly trying to check as many of those boxes (wish list items) as he can while he can.

    3. As if 12 years of mandatory indoctrination by unionized government functionaries isn’t enough….

    4. It figures Obama would take a shitty idea like subsidized daycare and run with it.

      I guess they don’t pay attention to Quebec where it’s a fucking mess. Unfair, confused, sterile, expensive and corrupt.

      1. yeah and we also have one of the oldest demographics in N America, it should be getting better but the gov still manages to screw it up.

      2. “I guess they don’t pay attention to Quebec where it’s a fucking mess. Unfair, confused, sterile, expensive and corrupt.”

        the more likely reality is that they do pay attention to how other people do ‘state provided daycare’, see the drain on public coffers it allows for, and saw that it was good. Its ALL ABOUT THE MONEY

    5. Right. More of the same from Obama’s gang.

      There should be an active movement toward abolishing these government-run, slavery-indoctrination centers rather than spreading their tentacles to even younger unformed minds.

  3. I support universal pre-k because our current k-12 system is so very effective and efficient – and not at all pathologically fucked-up – that I see no reason why we shouldn’t expand it to include even younger vulnerable victims – err, I mean students.

  4. SLD’s apply, BUT:

    If we MUST mandate preschool (for teh childrunz – duh), then at LEAST also mandate the end of these fucking, insipid “graduation” exercises. You don’t “graudate” from pre-school, or elemetary school. High school barely counts any more – but that’s the first level it’s allowed.

    No more Pre-School Graduation ceremonies! For teh childrunz!

    Also – fuck public school. Disclosure – we did send our kids to preschool. voluntarily…

    1. “I can’t believe you don’t even want to go to your own son’s graduation!”

      “He’s not graduating… he’s moving from the second grade to the third grade…”

      1. i watched the incredibles this weekend w/ my 2-year-old. Well written for a kids/ cartoon movie.

        1. “That will take me DOWNTOWN!”

    2. But what about the poor darlings’ self-esteem!!! After all, they had passable attendance!

    3. When did that start anyway? I’d never heard of elementary school graduation until a few years ago when a friend skipped out on a fun, grownup party to attend a 4th grade graduation. What the fuck?

      I did have an 8th grade graduation, which was also very stupid, but I wasn’t allowed to attend because I got caught smoking on the last day of school.

      1. Maybe it’s because for some of the little shits it’s the only graduation ceremony they’ll ever get?

        …Oh who the fuck am I kidding, it’s pretty much impossible to flunk out of school anymore.

        1. this is how i felt about high school graduation. it just feels so weird to celebrate such a trivial accomplishment is such a gradiose manner.

          imo the passage into adulthood and meloncholy for childhood is what drives this. externally, parents deluded hopes finance and socialize it.

          in modern american culture, a high school education just means you arent a subhuman troglodyte. nothing more. its about proving you arent a junkie who can regularly attend a workweek.

          having a job that is worth something is dependent on licensure, which means atleast a 4year degree from college.

  5. NBC News website did a ridiculous propoganda piece on this last week. “Our littlest learners!” Awww! How can you not want to help the widdlest wearners? They are so cute! Only an evil person would not want to fully fund another year of preschool!!!

    This issue really brings out the cliche in supporters. It is being sold as a “non-partisan, non-political, won’t someone think of the children!” issue. The fact that it would create tens of thousands more NEA members, some of whom would be called ‘teachers’, all of whom would be paid with tax dollars, is beside the point.

    1. The funny thing I have read is that the estimates of the cost per student per year run upwards of $25,000. And that is from the progressive policy sites.

      For that amount of money you can pay college tuition.
      Where the fuck are we going to get $25,000 per student to pay for preschool for every toddler in America?

      1. It’s a workfare program using children as human shields.

      2. We can just print more money! Or use a trillion-dollar coin! Or all the money that we will be saving from ACA! And besides, deficits don’t matter – they actually stimulate the economy!

        1. “The problem with Keyenes stating that ‘in the long run we are all dead’ is that Keynes is dead and we’re stuck in his long run”

          For the life of me, I don’t know who said this.

          1. Two trillion bucks says it wasn’t Keynes.

            1. you’re on, I’ll pay you when the dollar is worth less than they are in Zimbabwe.

      3. Hazel, in Quebec we have $7 a day daycare. People are now addicted to it. BUT, it costs the government in the neighborhood of $52-55 to run. That’s a $48 difference. Guess where that money is coming from? Taxes but even that it’s not enough so we run a deficit to run a luxurious program that really, the private sector offered just fine.

        Of course, the government engages in all sorts of lies and appeals to emotions suggesting private daycares are not as “clean” and “secure” as public ones. There are no reliable statistics to back those assertions up.

        They even claim there are “less complaints” with subsidized daycares. No fucking kidding. At $7 people are less inclined to complain. They’ll put up with all sorts of crap because, you know, they’re getting a “deal.” Boy, do I have stories for the fine folks here.

        Some deal.

        FYI: I charge $40. Who is cheaper for society?

      4. What ? Where do we get the money ?

        Have you not heard of the Federal Reserve?

        You must be stupid.

        1. You’re an idiot of supreme levels, know that? To be able to be an insulting moron AND not be able to read is a double accomplishment.

          Reread the comment sparky carefully. Notice something key to the point?

        2. Unless this was sarcasm but one never knows with you.

    2. What makes it especially disgusting is that kids that age are incredible learners all on their own. You’d have to tie the kid up and lock him in a dark closet to keep a 4 year old from learning much. And I bet anything that hanging out with mom or dad all day is going to be a much more valuable learning experience than some bullshit preschool. By that age I was climbing ladders and pounding nails.

      1. And I bet anything that hanging out with mom or dad all day is going to be a much more valuable learning experience than some bullshit preschool. By that age I was climbing ladders and pounding nails.

        Yep, I was reading books that other kids wouldn’t get to until middle school. This wasn’t because of some innate talent that I had and nobody else did. It was because my mom cared enough to take me to the library twice a week, and satiate my curiosity with trips to museums and other cool places whenever possible.

        Think about a curious kid in preschool today. They wouldn’t even have an inkling that books with more than 5 words per page existed, they wouldn’t know that museums exist, and their play would be so structured, both by the environment and by the shitty unitask toys, that they would be burnt out of learning before even starting grade school.

        1. My experience exacty in the early 60’s and my mother was a school teacher. I was doing Seuss at 4.

          I also was exploited by the Minneapolis Star/Tribune when I delivered their newspaper for 5 bucks a week. Also exploited by the bean farmers that paid me 50 cents and hour to pick weeds. Let’s not forget the neighbors across the street that paid me 50 cents an hour to babysit their progeny. Let’s not forget corn detassling in late August where you could make a hundred bucks in a couple weeks, it was how most girls I knew paid for their their back to school wardrobe.

          If we only had the SEIU back then I’d be Warren Buffet.

      2. By that age I was climbing ladders and pounding nails.

        Now CPS would take you away from your parents and place you into some hellhole foster home for allowing you to do such dangerous things as climb ladders and have access to hammers. Because your parents clearly were monsters who needed to be punished for not having you indoors staring at some tax-payer funded giant bird suffereing from schizophrenic hallucinations. And besides, look how you turned out! A *gasp* libertarian! *falls over onto fainting couch*

      3. “Zeb|12.9.13 @ 1:08PM|#

        What makes it especially disgusting is that kids that age are incredible learners all on their own. You’d have to tie the kid up and lock him in a dark closet to keep a 4 year old from learning much””


        You can take kids that age and set them loose in a junkpile and they’ll “learn” sans any ‘teaching’. and no, im not suggesting kids be exposed to poisons and broken glass = im just pointing out that there is a terrible misconception about early development that falsely believes ‘tutelage’ is more important than simply making sure they dont stick their fingers in light sockets or swallow marbles. kids at that age are constantly experimenting and learning and the most people can do is often to get out of the way.

        1. Exactly, we used screw around in a marsh behind our house messing with frogs, salamnders and other things out of curiousity. Kids at that age are curious. That’s how you learn and the prog tard agenda types want to insulate youngsters from that very type of learning. It’s mind boggling the stupidity we tolerate.

          Free the Kids, they know better how to spend their time than a bunch of anal academics.

      4. Well of course. We can’t let the message get out that this is just babysitting. We have to make people believe that you need a dues-paying NEA member in order to properly instruct their 4YO charges on how to hang up their jackets and how to fingerpaint.

      5. It might be best that many 4 year olds aren’t learning from their parents.

        1. You’re a fucktard and statist ass to assume that. You sound like a progtard apologist to assume that most parents can’t look out for the best interests of their kids.

          In some cases yes, but you seem to assume that it is the the norm, so yeah, fuck off.

  6. It’s a full employment for union teachers project, that’s it. Pass a federal law, which will of course require certified teachers. It’s Democratic sop to a powerful ally.

    1. Esxactly, which is why it’s estimated to cost $25,000 per kid per year.

      That’s like four kids funding each teacher’s salary, overhead, and bennies.

    2. “albo|12.9.13 @ 12:15PM|#

      It’s a full employment for union teachers project, that’s it. Pass a federal law, which will of course require certified teachers. It’s Democratic sop to a powerful ally.”

      ring a ding ding.

      as per my comment below – this is (as far as i am concerned) the far more important angle vs. ‘is it good for kids’? this is just a stealth entitlement scheme to allow for vast expansion of teachers unions and to create more dependents for the progressive welfare state.

  7. What people really want is free daycare.
    The universal preschool thing is really just a rationalization for that.
    They want a place where they can dump their kids during the day so they can go to work and not have to spend an arm and a leg on day care.

    What we should really do, to counter this, is push for deregulation of private daycare so that it is more affordable to working parents.

    1. Yeah, but all it takes is some 19-year-old daycare worker to get hopped up on goofballs and bake a kid in the van after a trip, and then the scream for government regulations deafens us all.

      1. True, and then these same people will hear nothing about the quality of teachers in public schools or how it’s impossible to fire them.

        Somehow teacher’s union membership gives people the magical stamp of honestly and caring.

        Take care of children at a private daycare – you must be a child molester.
        Take care of children at a public elementary school – bless you for your noble profession.

        1. BOOM, Hazel

      2. So….I guess they found the body. And the van. And the goofballs.

        1. See? What’d I tell you? Hopped up on goofballs!!

    2. Exactly why my kids went to pre-school – we couldn’t bring them to work. They didn’t learn anything beyond not punching other kids.

    3. Yup. Right now, you have situations where high-income people getting subsidized spots that were “supposed” to go to low-income people. What happens then is I get calls from low-income parents who can’t afford $40. The government, though, will offer tax-credits depending on family income for such families (anywhere between 10 and 75%).

      Guessing the psychology of people’s needs behind all this is hard to wade through.

  8. My kids got high quality preschool education without my receiving a single dollar from the state or federal governments.

  9. But don’t you see? Children have to be sent to pre-K so they can find out what numbers are! Without Head Start, children don’t learn about numbers. Why do you want America’s most precious resource to grow up without ever knowing how to count?

    *source: NYT idiotorial about math education over the weekend.

    1. This one?

      I found this sentence to be particularly interesting:Only 18 percent of American adults can calculate how much a carpet will cost if they know the size of the room and the per square yard price of the carpet, according to a federal survey.

      And still, the conclusion is more government education?

      1. What we really need is fewer stupid children.

        1. You should talk to albo and plan something.

      2. And still, the conclusion is more government education?

        Well, if your intention is to dumb down the teaching of STEM subjects even further (as the Times article pretty explicitly is), it just might well be.

      3. The government education package wasn’t big enough!

    2. That’s funny… I could read and write and count, add, multiply and divide before I went to kindergarten, all without preschool, and I can guarantee that no one played Mozart when I or my siblings were in our mother’s womb — we had to compose our own dang music.

  10. Back in February, President Obama proposed…

    That guy is a sleazy doofus.

    1. Give him a break! He was reared in the dark ages before Universal Government Prescrewal.

      1. Did they even have preschool in Kenya, I mean, Hawaii?

  11. You don’t need to be a member of the congregation and the actual religious component is minimal. It includes some Christmas/Easter dress up like shepherds and sing stuff but little else.

    OMG SoCon Dictatorship!

    1. Truly, The Handmaid’s Tale.

    2. Hove you ever met any East Coast Protestants? There are loads of Christmas pageants featuring multiethnic, midget, gender-queer shepherds.

    3. We had school Christmas plays in my Bible Belt public school when I was a kid. We thought mixed marriages were Catholic-Protestant. We got Friday afternoons off to go to catechism, and could choose any mainstream Christian church we wanted.

  12. Comrades, we must not shirk our responsibility to ensure future generations are productive members of the State. What could bring more meaning and sense of fulfillment to these young citizens than to deploy their talents for the cause.

    1. It’s not about deploying their talents. It’s about turning them against their parents, before it’s too late.

  13. This is a great example of how State cannot provide optimum results.

    Young children are learning sponges. My children were reading by the time they were two. The problem is, it is unpossible for the State to provide the kind of individual attention required to teach very young children. A loving parent can do it for a very few children at once, a disinterested bureaucrat can’t do it for many at once, but they can vote solidly for State expansion.

    1. “Young children are learning sponges” – Yes, that’s why people with a totalitarian bend like to get their hands on them early, whether it’s communists, Catholics, or merely progressives.

  14. These people truly hate children, don’t they?

    1. They don’t hate children, they merely see children as pawns in their power game. Because they’re sociopaths. They view you or me the same way.

      1. They really don’t give a shit.

        Wait. It gets better. Wait until you see striking subsidized daycare workers demanding six weeks vacations, benefits and high wages.

        They don’t give a shit about your kids.

        I’ve been asked to join these stupid “manifestations” and always turned them down. I stand by my parents who rely on me to be present and open.

        My sister wouldn’t think twice about this. The kids come FIRST.

    2. So do I, but you don’t see me pimping for more NEA members.

    3. Yes.

      Just for fun: The Artic outdoor preschool

      1. I don’t think a program like that would fly with modern US helicopter parents.

      2. One of the kids had a knife carving his boat.

        In today’s America that would get him a Zero Tolerance criminal record at the grand old age of 4.

    4. I don’t think hate is the right word. They value them, but only as roughly interchangeable future productive members of a just society.

  15. These people truly hate children, don’t they?

    Those delicate little babies could get hurt if they were allowed to go outside and run and jump and play. They could climb up something and fall off.

    1. Oh, far worse things could happen to them. They might actually learn to rely on themselves and think independently, instead of having authority figures drill government-approved curricula and values into their little heads, and down the road. Down the road, they might even turn into libertarians. We can’t have that!

  16. …”Every dollar we invest in high-quality early education can save more than seven dollars later on by boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing violent crime.””….

    “If you like your insurance…”
    Sorry, you lying POS, you have no cred.

    1. “If you like your children…”

  17. Can the cronies and politicians for once at least be honest about what they’re looking for? They want to give away free childcare. That gets votes for politicians, and business opportunities and benefits reductions for cronies. Claims about improving children’s academic abilities are a smokescreen and they know it.

    1. Can the cronies and politicians for once at least be honest about what they’re looking for?

      If they were capable of honesty they wouldn’t be cronies and politicians.

  18. “Every dollar we invest in [insert inane puffery], will save us [insert wildly overoptimistic number pulled directly from ass] later. WE CAN’T AFFORD TO NOT DO THIS!”

    1. Notice we’ve lost the term “invest” much as we’ve lost the term “liberal”.

      1. We’ve also lost “progress”, “community”, and “social”. Of course, on the right, we’ve also lost “conservation”, “tradition”, and “value”.

    2. So fucking predictable when they say that isn’t it? No one ever asks the most obvious question; why not sink the whole damn budget in this bullshit cause? And with the profits from that, reinvest it into another one and so on and so forth. Like most progtard positions, you just have to take them one step further to collapse their logic.

      raise the minimum wage: Why not raise it to 100$ an hour and eliminate poverty altogether?

      This gov mandated product is better: why aren’t people buying it by themselves then?

      Wage gap: Why aren’t companies only hiring women and saving 20% on labour costs?

      rinse and repeat until accusations of “racist, sexist, classist, speciest, etc ensue.

      1. Admit it – you just think this way because Obama is black! I didn’t hear you complaining when a white man was president!!!

        1. You weren’t listening then.

  19. Re: This thread

    Its unanimous. This site doesn’t get any public school trolls? This isn’t even fun.

    1. Take the article and post it to FB.

      1. Good idea, but don’t have an active account. Someone needs to help us out, here.

    2. Give it time. They’ll be around. What is it that you think the teachers assigned to the rubber room ?…..eacher-1m/

      And who said they weren’t productive to the public education system?

      1. Wish they’d hurry. All these sharks swimming around with nothing to eat makes me nervous.

    3. “Its unanimous. This site doesn’t get any public school trolls? This isn’t even fun.”
      Last time this came up, we had an idjit defending pre-school and doing so by citing the gummint study that said it didn’t work.
      S/he read the first line of the study which said ‘some improvement’ and didn’t get a page into it where the ‘improvement’ disappeared by G3.

      1. It’s not her fault she can’t read. She went to a public school.

  20. They need another year of indoctrination. There’s still way too many non-statists and libertarians out there.

    It’s pretty damning when the federal government itself concludes that a federal program doesn’t work.

    So, I guess we can expect this program to be cancelled any day now…

    1. No, they will fix it with more money.

  21. Granted, other studies suggest early childhood programs can help prepare children for kindergarten.

    So they’ll go into kindergarten being able to color within the lines?

  22. Concentrating our children in a single, known building throughout the day is like laying out a welcome mat for every child molester, mass shooter, party clown, and toy seller in the area. I refuse to support this program until the prison guard union is guaranteed adequate funding to place a guard at every window and three more at every door to every pre-school in the nation.

    1. All the prison guards on the planet won’t prevent an infectious disease from originating and/or spreading in said environment (quite the opposite). Referring to another article here at Reason, no amount of vaccinations will prevent a meningitis or whooping cough outbreak there as well.

      It’s a sad day when men of power make Jeff Goldblum look profoundly intelligent;

    2. You’re assuming the prison guard population doesn’t have substantial overlap with the population groups you want to protect your children from…

      1. they are in a union which makes them hard-working selfless paragons of humanity

  23. This site doesn’t get any public school trolls? This isn’t even fun.

    They show up now and then. It’s almost nap time.

  24. can we please, please stop pretending Green Energy is about the environment, Common Core is about education, or preK is about teh Babies? its about excuses to give money to preferred constituents, noting more or less. preK has nothing to do with kids, and everything about teachers unions and the feds staking out areas to expand and entrench themselves. there’s no point even bothering to debate these issues on their ‘merits’ = because doing so plays entirely into their narrative. Clearly you just hate babies and working women because you oppose this “potential” good thing. see how that works? let other people point out that their claims are bogus = the more important story is how these policies are all just forms of Power Grabs by the progressive machine.

    1. Agreed. Not to mention leftists often conveniently ignore the actual results of programs into which insane expenditure was poured, because media distractions have successfully guided them onto the next horrendous injustice they must fix by voting for more regulation.

  25. my buddy’s mom makes 80 dollars every hour on the laptop. She has been unemployed for 9 months but last month her payment was 14780 dollars just working on the laptop for a few hours. visit here

    1. It’s nice when the trolls put their stuff in bold text, so Reason can ban them more efficiently.

  26. The photo to this story shows one of my pet peaves – graduations for basically any and all things. Pre-K graduation, Kindergarten graduation, primary school (do they still call it that?) graduation, et cetera. Let’s all tell the kids how wonderful they are for doing something that was expected.

  27. until I saw the bank draft for $7998, I be certain that…my… best friend woz like realy bringing home money part-time on their laptop.. there neighbour haz done this for under fourteen months and just took care of the morgage on their condo and purchased a new Mazda MX-5. visit this web-site


Please to post comments

Comments are closed.