Just as I know charter schools are not private, but rather public schools, I also know that expending large sums of government [taxpayer] dollars into ever-expanding voluntary preschool programs is not a panacea that improves education long-term. Is it helpful to families that are poor, of course. Is it an entitlement program, of course. Is it the BEST WAY to spend money to improve academic outcomes? NO
No matter who says it, and no matter how loudly it is said, the data from the very few high quality, strictly controlled studies on VPK and similar programs simply do not show these programs as being that impactful--academically. At least not long term.
Are these programs huge money generators for states and communities? YES. Do they create jobs in communities? YES. Are these programs a benefit to poor families? YES. Are these programs wildly popular due to the dollars they bring to states? YES
But for strictly academic purposes, does the data from the most well conducted studies support the claim that these are the BEST ways to spend scarce dollars for the purpose of increasing academic outcomes for all children long-term? NO -according to a well conducted study of head-start by the US Government
NO, according to a recently conducted, well constructed study by Vanderbilt University. From that report:
"For that Intensive Substudy sample, we found that the effects of TN‐VPK on the WJ achievement measures observed at the end of the pre‐k year had greatly diminished by the end of the kindergarten year and the differences between participants and nonparticipants were no longer statistically significant. The only exception was a marginally significant difference on Passage Comprehension with nonparticipants showing higher scores at the end of the kindergarten year than TN‐VPK
