Limited Gains found in Chicago Preschool Program

The long-term social benefits to good preschooling for poor children found by a new study of a Chicago pilot program would be difficult to replicate for other children and towns, experts say.

The academic journal Science followed 957 low-income and at-risk children for 25 years after they participated in the Child-Parent Center Education Program, an intensive, small-scale program funded by the federal government. Study participants were enrolled in up to two years of half- or full-day preschool, and provided with intensive wrap-around family services for as many as four years following preschool.

In the study, adults who had participated in the Chicago program earned an average annual income of $11,600, slightly higher than the $10,800 earned annually by control groups of about 500 children who had either not attended preschool or had enrolled in Head Start, the most common preschool program nationwide. Five percent more preschool participants graduated high school, and college attendance rates for the preschool group increased from 11 to 15 percent. Incarceration rates dropped from 21 percent to 15 percent.

“Educators have struggled for years to develop early education programs that can change the trajectory of a child’s life. Unfortunately this study proves again there is no quick fix,” said Darcy Olsen, president and CEO of the Goldwater Institute. “In this case, a handful of program participants had positive outcomes, but the vast majority of children still suffered the long-term effects faced by disadvantaged children: high dropout rates, drug abuse, and incarceration. Changing a child’s trajectory requires fundamentally reforming our public schools into schools that can meet children’s learning needs throughout the years.”
 
Eighteen months of preschool cost about $9,000 in 2011, said the study’s lead researcher, Arthur Reynolds. Head Start, a federal block grant to states for public preschool, costs about $7 billion a year.

While researchers found modest gains for low-income children, education experts cautioned it would be difficult to replicate these outcomes on a large scale, as with programs like Head Start, or for middle- and upper-income children.

"Any argument for universal preschool must show that middle-income and upper-income children are helped by having government-funded preschool available to all children,” said Lance Izumi, senior director of education studies at the Pacific Research Institute. “Previous studies, such as the RAND study that was issued during the campaign for universal preschool in California, specifically admitted that there was little evidence showing that preschool improved the achievement and life circumstances of middle-income and upper-income children.”

States’ experience with offering universal or state-funded preschool programs have shown “disappointing” student achievement results, Izumi said. Internal reviews by the Department of Health and Human Services have shown for decades that the nation’s largest preschool program, Head Start, does nothing for students’ test scores past first grade.

“Concluding that a program like this would benefit the average, middle-class child is akin to suggesting that penicillin will improve your child’s health,” Olsen said. “Penicillin is great for fighting infection in the sick, but has no effect on those who are not in need and may even be harmful.”

Lindsey M. Burke is an education policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation.

Online Info
The study School-Based Early Childhood Education and Age-28 Well-Being: Effects by Timing, Dosage, and Subgroups, by Arthur J. Reynolds et al., was published in the June 2011 issue of Science.