Tweet
We are trying to decide whether or not sending our first to Pre-K is worth it. I define this as any structured learning environment before the start of Kindergarten, not just the year before. In doing some research on the subject I came across this interesting current summary on the Pre-K research out there:
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/duke_prekstudy_final_4-4-17_hires.pdf
Unfortunately, my general take-away from this and pretty much any other study I looked at was that gains were typically described relative to affluent children, and that those gains (sadly on many levels) have no convincing evidence of sustainment. However, I would think most of us would fall under the "affluent" category, so the data are less helpful to draw a conclusion for our situations. The alternative is to have my wife (who works from home and can spend time with him every day engaging in reading, writing, math, etc.) do the education, although admittedly on a far less structured basis with no background in child education.
So is there clear evidence that Pre-K holds an advantage over this alternative option of stay-home-parent based education, particularly for "affluent" children? I saw in the above research summary that most affluent kids are in some form of Pre-K - is this a keeping up with the Joneses effect, a marker for two parent households with two earners who don't have a stay-at-home option, doing it because they have the money, or is there a known advantage? Is there a known superior curriculum? Is there evidence to support the financial decision to invest in a private program over a "free" public one? We'll need to budget and possibly locums it up more if we decide to do it, so curious about your all's thoughts and how you approached this Pre-K situation. Thanks!
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/duke_prekstudy_final_4-4-17_hires.pdf
Unfortunately, my general take-away from this and pretty much any other study I looked at was that gains were typically described relative to affluent children, and that those gains (sadly on many levels) have no convincing evidence of sustainment. However, I would think most of us would fall under the "affluent" category, so the data are less helpful to draw a conclusion for our situations. The alternative is to have my wife (who works from home and can spend time with him every day engaging in reading, writing, math, etc.) do the education, although admittedly on a far less structured basis with no background in child education.
So is there clear evidence that Pre-K holds an advantage over this alternative option of stay-home-parent based education, particularly for "affluent" children? I saw in the above research summary that most affluent kids are in some form of Pre-K - is this a keeping up with the Joneses effect, a marker for two parent households with two earners who don't have a stay-at-home option, doing it because they have the money, or is there a known advantage? Is there a known superior curriculum? Is there evidence to support the financial decision to invest in a private program over a "free" public one? We'll need to budget and possibly locums it up more if we decide to do it, so curious about your all's thoughts and how you approached this Pre-K situation. Thanks!
... totally agree that a structured early education+socialization is head-shoulders above sitting a child in front a TV childcare setting. Like everything, it starts at home and THEN carries over to the daytime system if that is enhanced--not the other way around, IMHO.
Comment