On November 27th, Elmbrook's school board will decide
the
very important question of should we continue or discontinue 4K. We do
not get to vote for or against it; our only opportunity to influence
that decision is to contact the board members.
Whenever I am faced with an important decision, I ask myself a few
questions: What are the expected benefits and consequences resulting
from my decision, and can I afford it. We don't
always have the luxury of knowing the results of trying something new,
but if
others have already made the change in question, I certainly like to
evaluate
the results of their decisions. Fortunately, with 4K, there is
longterm data available.
One basic question came to my mind regarding the 4K decision. If 4K is so important, so
beneficial to a student's success in school, then why does our state only
set the compulsory
school age at 6 years old on Sept. 1? (That means students with a later
birthday than Sept. 1 will start 1st grade at 7 years of age.)
The fact that children need not attend school until age 6 in Wisconsin made me wonder how our school age requirement compared to other states.
I found that answer and more in this article, Early Education
Shows No Benefit - Compelling children to attend school at an earlier age does
not yield expected results , by HSLDA, Home School Legal Defense
Association. It is a treasure trove of information on the subject of early
education.
The article stated in the section labeled: State-by-State Comparison:
A review of compulsory attendance laws across the
nation shows that requiring young children to attend school may be largely
unnecessary. Only eight states and the District
of Columbia require attendance of 5-year-olds, and
six of those nine allow exemptions for parents to withhold their children from
school until age 6. The other 41 states allow parents to wait until their
children are 6, 7, or even 8 years old before beginning formal education.24
That information makes one wonder about the long term success of earlier and
later starts in school. I read on in that section to find the National
Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) test results from schoolchildren in all
50 states:
Scores of children
from states that have low compulsory attendance ages (5-6) did not score any
higher than children from the other states, and in some subjects their average
was actually lower.26
There was a link to All-Day
Kindergarten Failing as Education Reform, which detailed information
published by the Goldwater
Institute:
All-day kindergarten fails to improve Stanford 9
reading, math, language arts scores
PHOENIX—A report published today by the Goldwater Institute examines Stanford 9
test scores and finds Arizona kindergarten programs initially improve learning
but have no measurable impact on reading, math, or language arts test scores by
fifth grade.
This test score information affirmed everything I had heard about the merits of earlier and earlier
education, that it may initially seem to give kids a head start, but that head
start does not translate into long term improvement. In fact, as a homeschooler,
we were warned that too early of an introduction to school is counter productive.
It actually causes burn out in the upper elementary grades through high school.
Earlier education does not benefit the underprivileged either. Head Start, the government early intervention program for at risk
children, is often touted as the poster child for earlier education success. I
mistakenly bought into this idea last year when I blogged, “You
may be able to make the argument that early education is beneficial for inner
city children, whose crack addicted mother may be passed out on the couch.”
But now I see I was mistaken:
The most important
goal of any education program is that children be educated. Studies of Head
Start, however, demonstrate that early education produces no apparent academic
benefits. In its early years, extensive studies were undertaken to prove Head
Start worked. But the opposite turned out to be true. In 1969, the Westinghouse
Learning Corporation found no difference in the behavior and educational
achievement between Head Start and other underclass children.
Sixteen years later,
the CRS Synthesis Project study, commissioned by HHS, came to the same conclusion.
Although children showed “immediate gains,” by the second grade “there are no
educationally meaningful differences.”23
As I mentioned last year, I attended 4 year old kindergarten in the Shorewood
school system. If 4K is so beneficial, shouldn’t Shorewood’s ACT scores be consistently
higher than our school district’s that didn’t offer 4K? The data shows that
this year was the first in the past few years that Shorewood edged out Elmbrook’s ACT
scores by 1.23 points. Of the top 10
schools in Wisconsin (Elmbrook consistently is in the top 10), at least 7 had no 4K program at
the time those students tested started school. Incidentally, over 250 school
districts have 4K so there should have been a better showing in the top 10 if it is so helpful.
All of this information presents quite a compelling reason to NOT start the
education process so early. So when I saw last week's Brookfieldnow
featuring those cute pictures of very young children enjoying 3K and 4K in the
private school setting, it made me bristle. The article was misleadingly
titled, "Learning early, 3-year-old kindergarten classes bring success to
two schools".
I ask you to look at the data, not the cute pictures in the Brookfieldnow
article. What criteria are we using to measure success?
No one is arguing that young children do not enjoy an outing or activity
from time to time. Our culture abounds with such opportunities. I still
remember the Bible stories and making fun craft projects in Sunday School. My
son used to enjoy his once a week, 2 hour visit at Elmbrook Church’s
Moms and More (I did too!). Children love birthday parties, toddler gym classes, Park and
Rec. programs, Library programs, trips to the zoo, and just doing things with mom! But all of these activities are
not the responsibility of Public Education. Enjoyable? Yes. Public Education? No.
The data just does not support starting school at age 4, and our
state does not mandate it. The
Brookfieldnow article shows that if these types of programs are wanted,
there are plenty of opportunities for parents to avail themselves of
them in the private sector.
The facts illustrate 4K is
actually detrimental to a child's long term success in school. The cost
of 4K then goes beyond just the financial investment in the program; it
costs our children's future success in school.
Please read through the information and contact the board--especially
Patrick Murphy, by phone, in person, or letter and Glen Allgaier.
FYI: The footnote numbers at the end of the quotes correspond to the Early Education Shows No Benefit article. Incidentally, that article affirms that internationally, the trends are similar:
The
country of Finland was a standout in both of these
international assessments [PISA, the Program for International Student
Assessment tests], ranking near or at the top in all tested
subjects. These impressive results were achieved despite the fact that
school attendance in Finland is not compulsory until age 7, later than
almost any other European country.17
Some of the lower scoring countries in PISA were Sweden
and Greece, which both emphasize early education. Sweden has some of
the most comprehensive childcare in Europe, with the vast majority of
children ages 1-12 having a place in a publicly funded child-care
center. Even with this emphasis, however, Sweden ranked among the
average countries in the PISA test, and Greece was among the five worst
nations in all three subject areas.19
Last year I blogged:
Research
shows that an earlier start in school does not translate to an increase in
academic proficiency. Raymond and Dorothy Moore have done many studies that
show an earlier start in school does not make for a better education or better
student. In their book, Better Late Than Early, the Moores found When children are ready
to learn, around the ages of 8-10, they quickly catch up to those who started
earlier. So, why start so early?
