Playing to the NEA

A failure for all ages

A failure for all ages

Jut as with all government programs, Obummer vowed Tuesday to expand nursery school/Head Start classes despite their well documented, unbroken history of failure to accomplish anything but provide employment for adults.

HEADSTART: ANOTHER GOVERNMENT PROGRAM THAT DOESN’T WORK? “The evaluation, which was mandated by Congress during the 1998 reauthorization of the program, found little impact on student well-being. After collecting data on more than 5,000 three and four-year-old children randomly assigned to either a Head Start or a non Head Start control group, the Department of Health and Human Services found ‘few sustained benefits’.”

Posted by Glenn Reynolds

Going back years, but mentioned here back in 2009, and again last year, when an Obama administration’s study was released, anyone who’s analyzed the data has known that the Head Start program is merely a jobs program for inner city adults with no skills. Even the NYT conceded as much although, being liberal, insisted that the way to cure any government program involving social welfare was to spend more money while “holding people accountable”. Uh huh. If we in our wisdom want to spend $22,600 per year per Head Start pupil – that number was calculated by the government at a time when private nursery schools averaged $9,0000 – well, it’s China’s money, so why not? But pleeeease, stop calling it “an investment” – it’s just more welfare for grownups.


Filed under Uncategorized

7 responses to “Playing to the NEA

  1. Al Dente

    If it ain’t broke, break it!

  2. Peg

    I don’t get it. So much evidence that the positive results from these sorts of programs are short-lived – and that charter schools have significant, long-lasting good results. So – why do Democrats keep on pumping for the crap that doesn’t work – and voting against truly meaningful reform for disadvantaged children?

    Is it ALL the unions? Are they just this stupid? Inquiring minds want to know.

    • Unions, period. Unless you want to subscribe to the theory, a theory I resist, but with diminishing strength in the face of such a repeated pattern, that Obama and his crowd are set on the deliberate destruction of America, in which case the corruption of the educational system (Outcome Based Education, anyone?) is but a first step.
      Speaking of which, the WSJ asks an interesting question this morning: given the results of government interference in our higher grade levels, why should we think that extending that system to nursery school would accomplish a good purpose? And the answer is one of the two theories we’ve now mentioned.

      • Peg

        Yeah. Sometimes I worry about going to the “dark side” of conspiracy theories (they want to wreck America). Yet sometimes – avoiding this conclusion does become more challenging!

  3. Cos Cobber

    Unions and the notion that such programs would allow – at some capacity, more mothers to reenter the workforce faster….obviously that second point is suspect….as suspect as the notion that these programs have any meaningful impact.

  4. AJ

    ‘Proposed Early Head Start would require home visits by government bureaucrats.’

    ‘…The plan builds on Head Start and state pre-K programs that target low-income children. It will dish out government largess to middle-income families to entice participation.

    “The objective clearly is to get as many children into the clutches of the state educational system as early as possible,” Michael Tennant wrote on Sunday.

    Obama’s proposal to extend the reach of government into the lives of young Americans was cooked up by the Center for American Progress (CAP), the Democrat think tank funded by George Soros’ Open Society Institute and the Democracy Alliance, a Soros and Drummond Pike outfit staffed by former Clintonistas. It also funds ACORN and other “progressive” organizations.

    “All children ages 3 and 4 should be able to voluntarily attend a full-day public preschool program,” the CAP website states. “Preschool should be free for children from families at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty line ($46,100 for a family of four). Children from families above 200 percent of the poverty line should be charged a sliding tuition co-pay, ranging from about 30 percent of the cost to 95 percent of the cost (for families above 400 percent of the poverty line).”

    The offer to subsidize the tuition of families 400 percent above the poverty line is clear evidence that CAP and the Democrats are serious about directing the “cognitive and emotional development” of all children.

    Additionally, CAP wants double the funding of Early Head Start, a federal government program designed to “support the physical, social, emotional, cognitive, and language development” of infants and toddlers. The program calls for “home-visits” by government employees, “especially for families with newborns.”….’

    ‘Texas Schoolchildren Taught Communism’

  5. Barry O.

    i did not go to presholl becase it would have intevened in my TV watches shows> And I;am goink ok Please do not edit this is tonge in mout humor.