Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

TEACHING

Scary Preschool Utopia

More is fine, but just who is setting the agenda for what all 4-year-olds should learn?

June 05, 2005|Karin Klein | Karin Klein is a Times Editorial Writer

Did you know, the earnest lady asked, that one-quarter of even the affluent children in this country start kindergarten without full knowledge of the alphabet?

She clearly found this information a shocker, evidence that this nation needs universal pre-kindergarten, right away. This was, after all, Libby Doggett, the executive director of Pre-K Now, speaking at a seminar for reporters this spring in Denver.

Many parents, myself included, aren't so worried if our children don't know all their letters before age 5. Somehow, mine went on to be fine students, and I still harbor hopes that they will become productive citizens despite their early ignorance.

From where I sit, it's much scarier to contemplate the Doggetts of this world setting the agenda for what all 4-year-olds should know.

For The Record
Los Angeles Times Sunday June 19, 2005 Home Edition Opinion Part M Page 2 Editorial Pages Desk 1 inches; 62 words Type of Material: Correction
Preschool -- A June 5 Opinion article on the Reiner initiative reported the title of a children's book as "Pet the Bunny." The title is "Pat the Bunny." Also, though a Washington state study cited did find that home visits by nurses were a better dollar-for-dollar investment than preschools, it did not find that they returned twice as much money per dollar.

The value of universal preschool is one of those unquestioned nostrums sweeping the country. The way the question is framed for the public isn't whether we should love universal preschool, it's solely whether we'll pay for it. Now Rob Reiner -- actor, director, gadfly -- is planning an initiative for the June 2006 ballot. He wants to raise $2.3 billion a year by taxing the well-off and establishing a free, voluntary half-day preschool system for all 4-year-olds in California.

More affordable preschool is a great idea. Preschool can help children learn to play nice, identify colors, get used to the taste of finger-paint and even listen to the teacher occasionally.

But universal preschool isn't simply "more preschool" or "more affordable preschool." It's a species unto itself. Reiner's initiative would create standardization where now there is parental choice. It would insist on bachelor's degrees and credentials for teachers -- and require, insanely, that they be paid on par with high school science and math teachers, though there's little evidence that the education or expense is necessary. It would not raise test scores. And it would almost certainly push more and more academic work into the laps of younger and younger children.

Reiner's preschool utopia would force the state to set "content standards." and take oversight on such matters as whether to read "Pet the Bunny" or "Goodnight Moon" away from parents and preschools and hand it to education officials.

Parents now choose from a patchwork of public, private, church and family preschools. These reflect the wildly varying interests and needs of children and their families. There are academically oriented preschools and old-time nursery schools. Some focus on learning languages, some on art and some simply on a hearty game of "capture the flag." They're warm and cozy in a family living room, or big and exciting at a center with a huge jungle gym, for kids who might go twice a week, or three times, or five. And they're efficient: Many an excellent preschool costs far less than the $5,900 or so per child the Reiner initiative would spend.

Reiner's classes would have 20 children, each taught by a teacher and an aide, where now there might be three students, or 12, or in the current state-subsidized system 24 children taught by a teacher and two aides. Even some of the state's top preschool advocates say it would be hard for home-based family child-care providers to become part of the Reinerian dictate, unless they find a way to join forces to create classrooms of close to 20.

We don't need this. Preschool is already more "universal" in California than you might think. Somewhere within that patchwork are an estimated 70% of all the 4-year-olds in the state -- about 63% in preschool centers, and a handful in family child care. The universal-preschool crowd hopes to raise that to 80%. So to get an additional 10% enrolled, taxes would pick up the bill for the other 70% as well. California's nonuniversal system already covers a bigger percentage of its 4-year-old population than Georgia's universal pre-kindergarten system, now in its 12th year.

The universal-preschool crowd's response is that they're also about raising quality. Certainly, some teachers need more training -- though not a bachelor's degree. And although plunking a child in front of a TV all day is, as they say in preschool parlance, not OK, that's a matter of parents checking a place out carefully, not government regulation. Instead of providing standardized classes, better to give sliding-scale vouchers for low-income and working-class families, and educate them on how to tell a good preschool from a bad one. Let parents decide what fits their 4-year-olds, not people with presuppositions about early childhood.

Consider Doggett's description of what happens in a quality preschool class:

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|