I'm so sorry I need to make a correction to my post. My phone rang and I posted without proofreading. Here's what I meant to post.

Shelly Buckmeier
Bethesda Sharing Center
Aberdeen, SD, United States

03/17/2015 10:08 am
Did the research include whether or not the preschools were developmentally appropriate or not? In my opinion that would make a huge difference in whether or not a child would benefit from a program. I feel a child that is enrolled in a program that focuses on worksheets and learning by repetition would be much less beneficial than a preschool that is based on play and provides hands-on activities. Too much research is out there that supports that young children learn best through play and hands-on activities. An age-appropriate preschool classroom proves that day after day! All you need to do to do your own research is to spend some time in one!

Did the research include whether or not the preschools were developmentally appropriate or not? In my opinion that would make a huge difference in whether or not a child would benefit from a program. I feel a child that is enrolled in a program that focuses on worksheets and learning by repitition would be much less beneficial than a preschool that relies on worksheets and learning by rote. Too much research is out there that supports that young children learn best through play and hands on activities. An age-appropriate preschool classroom proves that day after day! All you need to do to do your own research is to spend some time in one!

I agree that these stats could be misleading, but to me they are very clear. The push-down drill and (s)kill curriculum happening in way too many places ISN'T WORKING for our kids! Let's get these stats out there, so everyone knows that academic preschools are NOT the way to go for children. Then we can get back to what children really need -- sand, water, paint, playdough, blocks, dress up -- and a responsive teacher who is educated in child development and LISTENS to the children!

Sheila makes a great point--what does preschool really mean? In my school--three year-olds can only attend two days a week; parents of four year-olds can choose three or five days. We run a morning program (9-11:45) with optional lunch programs that only run until 2. We do not offer daycare type services and so are only reaching out to what seems like a small segment of modern society that does not require all day care for their children. I do not like using the term school when referring to daycare--what child attends school for up to 10 hours a day all year long? I believe the children suffer because they are placed into these formal settings from very early ages and don't have enough time to just be themselves. When you are at school (or daycare) there are expectations for behavior--the child is facing stressful situations from 6 weeks until who knows when. Even in a quality care facility--the ratios permit one teacher (caretaker) to four babies----not a normal ratio in any American household. It all comes down to the money but the children need more, not less, adult supervision, interaction and guidance and it would be wonderful if they could just spend more time at home!

This is an interesting perspective, but short sighted.
The findings used to support this argument are based on data that doesn't take in to account whether the kindergartens were quality classrooms or if by third/fourth grade the children had quality, meaningful instruction.
We know that until recently social and emotional health and well being was not even considered as important in elementary schools. We still see classrooms that are not ready for children to learn effectively. . . consider the amount of transitions/ wait time, the lack of connected meaningful content and the restricted environments/lack of movement most children endure in K thru 3rd grade.
It's no wonder when a child enters a K classroom after a quality preschool experience, a child not supported might be aggressive and that by 3rd and 4th grade we see disengaged learners.

I think part of this confusion stems from the fact that we don't really have one commonly accepted (and clearly defined) understanding of the word "preschool." We're also guilty of using the term "teacher" very loosely to describe anyone who works with young children, regardless of whether or not an actual teaching license is involved.

Any statistics about children attending preschool programming should explain exactly what they're referring to- because although I've seen research about aggression in children who attend daycare, I have not seen the same statements being made about preschool programs outside of child care settings.

Some people use the term "school" to refer to daycare. Some people only think of Head Start. Some people think of small programs in the basements of churches in the summertime. Some people think of preschool special education programs that also enroll typical children and are run by local school districts or departments of developmental disabilities. All of these kinds of programs are called "preschool," but they are all vastly different in structure, licensing, staffing, funding, programming, etc.

Until we clearly define what we're taking about (i.e., "child care" vs. "school," or "teacher" vs. "child care provider," among other important distinctions), the arguments in the Wall Street Journal article regarding "preschool" are meaningless.

This article was interesting and annoying all at the same time. As a early childhood educator for over 25 years, many factors were excluded in making the claims in this article. There is a big difference between "preschool" and "daycare". There is also a huge disparity in the quality of care and education being given to all children. Many children are in "daycare" for 8 or more hours a day but are not necessarily getting the educational and social skills necessary to move forward. In addition, the differences between what is being taught and how it is being taught in preschool compared to what is being taught and how it is being taught in the public educational system makes it very difficult for children to succeed at 4th grade testing levels. In regards to the comments on Universal Preschool, Universal Preschool is a governmental effort to give all children a preschool experience but does not necessarily give the highest level of quality. Comments related to hyperactivity and aggression have a lot to do with the individual child, what experiences they had in preschool or daycare and what their home environment gives them. To suggest that children are hyperactive and aggressive simply due to their preschool or daycare experience is irresponsible. From my personal experience, I would much rather have a child who attended a quality preschool than one who did not.

I look at Early Childhood Practices versus Elementary School Practices. WE DO NOT TEACH THE SAME WAY!. Early Childhood our standard is to meet kids where they are, set up a learning environment and be responsive to their interests. Early Childhood educators are taught to set up environments that are ready for the child. Then, when it is time for elementary school it shifts to the kids have to be ready for school. This is some backward thinking. HANDS ON ACTIVE LEARNING THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO THE CHILDREN. Math problems, how many legos does it take to build this structure? What happens if you take these blocks away at this angel? Creative teaching. Sadly, elementary schools have testing and high production commands put on them. And, once again, early childhood is all about the process not the product. Elementary school lose the process because they have to have a product.

Would love to know the type of preschool they observed! Kids from academic preschools would fit this, however strongly doubt kids with a play based philosophy preschool would! Bit enough information.
The social benefits of an age appropriate school greatly benefit children I believe.

We know that ONLY high-quality preschools support children's development. I personally know of some very good programs and many really great teachers. High-quality can be described and defined, but it is not often implemented. Even the NAEYC estimates that only 40% (and I think that is a high estimate) of programs can be considered high-quality.
In many years of observing in classrooms and reading student observations, I rarely encounter classrooms that can be considered high-quality, developmentally sensitive examples. Later school success depends on early development of confidence, security, trust, and interest in learning! Not on early exposure to academics.
If we created real caring communities of safety, security, joy, support, encouragement and discovery, we might change the picture and we most certainly would see improvements in successful learning once children entered school. If we provided long periods of uninterrupted time in which children made decisions about engaging with materials and people, we would be preparing them for school. As long as we push down academics into our early childhood programs, demand practice and performance of Kindergarten level skills, treat children and each other with disrespect, work in sub-standard environments where materials and time are insufficient and salaries do not support the value of the teachers, we will continue to promote poor quality. This is the problem.

Efforts to improve quality have not been successful. Policies that demand an emphasis on outcomes and academics hurt children. Teachers who use punitive strategies traumatize and re-traumatize children. This is what I see and read about everyday and the reports come from all types of public and private programs.

There are models of good, high-quality programs that are supported by policies and practices that value childhood and value the people that teach the children. Unfortunately we often have to look to other countries to find them.

We should all be concerned that there is at least some truth in what the authors say and we might look at articles like the one published here to really look at what we are doing, rather than defending the status quo. Then we would challenge ourselves to become champions for children and for what we KNOW is best for them.

Exactly, Cathy. Preschool is a whole different ballgame. You can't water stuff down. It's about learning through play. Does the teacher understand child development? Does the teacher know how to manage behavior and promote social and emotional development. Is she going to yell at kids because she doesn't have any appropriate strategies? Imagine if she is using worksheets, has inappropriate academic and behavioral expectations, etc. Kids will feel like failures. Kids will act out. Kids will become distraught, aggressive, etc. And for poor kids, it won't level the playing field before they enter K because they will not be getting the opportunities they need regarding oral language development, etc. through play that more affluent kids are likely to get at home or at a high quality preschool.

So they are looking at cause and effect. What are the other variables? Quality of the preschool? Qualifications of the teachers? Poverty? We need HIGH QUALITY universal preschool. AND we need to consider the effects of poverty. Teachers are not magicians.

I'm not sure what these stats mean. Do they mean that preschool children don't learn how to test well? (That doesn't bother me. We shouldn't be testing children, but looking closely at what they want to do, and then helping them do it.) Do they mean that teachers have been given curricula that are developmentally INappropriate? I see that all the time.

The kindergarten was invented to help children like to go to school...a place to play and learn to be in a group. Under very bad direction, it now is often a place to learn letters and numbers (with no context) and fill in workbook pages, and march. There often is little or no music or dance or painting or modelling with clay. We know that quality matters, but we haven't any system of making sure it happens, especially with the gulf between what we know to be the best work (wholistic, child-respecting, arts-based, guided by observation and documentation) and what we see. It's time for children to become the highest priority ... not war and "defense" (on which our country currently spends more than 60% of the budget, as opposed to education, a mere 12%.

I wish articles such as this would make clear that they are looking at statistics coming from public school pre-school programs which typically do not provide developmentally appropriate programs for young children. I truly believe that a high quality program taught by people who have been educated in child development and early childhood education can and does provide a strong foundation for children to build upon as they progress through elementary school and beyond. Until legislators and public school administrators take into consideration developmental differences and learning styles and understand that time for play is a vitally important component of an appropriate program for young children, these statistics will probably not improve. They need to understand that play provides a time for increased language development, problem solving and further development of social skills. It also provides an opportunity to have real life experiences, leading to a deeper understanding, of concepts children are learning.

Of course, Research can be skewed to reflect findings biases of the researchers.
The more telling supposition here may be the inadequacies of the classroom offerings which speak more to issues with the education system overall.
Lack of developmentally appropriate curriculum coupled with reliance on questionable testing has created a system which is doomed to failure.We fear that our children may be influenced and led to join cults or terrorist groups yet train them to be followers with negative consequences for attempting to perform as the individuals at the pace and level of their ability. Then we wonder why they become more aggressive , anxious, hyperactive,less motivated and exhibit poor social skills. namaste

Brain research data indicate that an emotionally safe, differentiated, and high quality learning environment according to the Environmental Rating Scale promotes instructional strategies that increase intellectual potential and develop crucial skills for success. Funding for Universal Pre-K must be available for all programs that meet these standards and parents and children deserve to choose the best program. Public education and school districts do not offer this choice and do not typically offer this high quality learning environment. Our children, parents, and country deserve the best possible education for life-long success.

The one point that really gets to me is their "finding" that the 4th grade test levels have remained stagnant. Sorry, this sounds cold, but I believe that speaks more to the current status of our elementary schools, not preschool.
Preschool and early childhood care and education needs to protect the field from becoming just a push down version of the elementary system, testing and all. The basis for strong early childhood development is in strong, healthy relationships. That is difficult enough to achieve, without adding unacceptable amounts of academic demands. It is hard enough to connect with each child without having to continually measure them to see if they are achieving at the desired level. Our culture/society needs to let go of some of our unrealistic expectations of perfection. Only then will we be able to help children develop, learn and grow into being active, loving, engaged members of our communities.

I would agree that the negative impact facts may be true, but the critical piece to consider is the design of the program and it's expectations. Is the pre-school developmentally appropriate and does it consider the child and their development as a whole? Are the teachers educated and knowledgeable in early childhood education, birth to 8 years old? Do they understand the natural trajectory of how children learn? Are they aware that children need to move and learn from mistakes as they manipulate a variety of materials? Do they offer a program that is allowing children to learn through their experiences and explorations or are they expecting children to spend endless amounts of time sitting as they "teach"? It is not pre-school that is the problem it is the unrealistic design and expectations that pre-school should be implemented as a traditional elementary school classroom that is more appropriate for children in third grade or above that is causing the issues we see in children in terms of behavior and lack of motivation to learn.

Is it an opposing view or the reality that one size doesn't fit all? Working with poor, urban families over the past 25 years I have learned that one system doesn't meet everyone needs and doesn't guarantee the outcome. We know some children truly benefit from being engaged in preschool while other children may have support from home that nurtures and prepares them. Why do we continually feel the need to legislate systems to control behavior? This is America where we have free choice. Let's put the energy into making opportunities available and encouraging families to participate in ones that meet their needs.

I have wondered recently if the school systems are doing a disservice to early education by trying to adapt elementary education for four year olds. With the research gathered for years that early education is valuable and contributes to children's success, this latest trend toward state education folks running preschool may be causing the disconnect. A high quality preschool classroom isn't best led by a 3rd grade teacher who is willing to work with younger students. Early child development is an entirely different skill set. Unfortunately, legislators assign funding for preschool to the school districts, who are often ill-equipped to meet the needs of four year old children and their families.

The article is definitely food for thought. I have seen others like it. I believe that preschool classrooms are dynamic environments and there are a myriad of emotions and social situations that the children need to deal with on any given day. The concepts of literacy and numeracy go hand in hand with the social-emotional component--I venture to say that the social-emotional component is much more important. Colors, numbers, letters are all around and can be part of any conversation we have with the children or in their exchange of ideas to one another. I witness children being kind and compassionate and I witness children being mean and hurtful---teachers need to be there to guide the children, to help them understand their emotions and good ways to express them. I am fortunate that in a class of 15 children, I have two assistant teachers--many times I feel as though I could have one teacher per child. The children want so much to talk and share with the teachers. The classroom naturally has stressful situations for the child: leaving the parent, sharing, listening when they want to be playing, making friends---I would hope that any preschool or the idea of universal pre-k would not place ridiculous expectations on the children especially in regard to academics and testing. Preschool should be a time that the children learn school is a fun, safe place to be. A place where someone (teacher) will help them through the emotional-social situations that they find themselves in. If we focus on the wrong thing (academics), or have expectations that they will sit for long periods of time as older children do then we are doing the children a tremendous disservice. The children learn so much from one another---good and bad--there needs to be more than adequate staffing to observe and guide the children in these social situations.