Charen’s column on Head Start jumbles unrelated facts and figures

Mona Charen’s recent column, “Why, Goodness, Who Could Possibly Oppose Universal Pre-K?” mixes apples and oranges, and a few bananas. Her column mixes up day care and preschool (two very different programs) and a parent’s desire to work while parenting young kids. All three concepts deserve a separate column.

I have no doubt that some of the surveys that she quoted are accurate. It is exceedingly difficult to balance work and parenthood. Part-time work is a great compromise, as mentioned in her column. But balancing work and parenting is not the point of the president’s desire to expand preschool for all. Nor is it the point of his desire to offer two free years of junior college to all. The point is more education for more kids.

The “gold-standard” preschool study she notes only followed the kids until third grade. The Perry Preschool study followed them for 15 years and found great outcomes. Also, subsequent studies found that some kids in low-income neighborhoods need after-school tutoring throughout grade school as well.

All kids at age 3 are eager to learn. A former neighbor of mine and I used to talk about our “kids” in our classes. I used to complain about 17-year-olds who made it through high school lacking basic reading and math skills. She complained about 5-year-olds who were not ready for kindergarten. I had no idea that kids that young could differ so much in skills.

Head Start and other preschool programs are the great equalizer. They get kids ready to learn. President Lyndon B. Johnson started Head Start because he taught young kids from a very poor area in Texas and saw the need.

Ms. Charen should write a column devoted to the teachers who work with young kids every day.

Jan Goldberg, Riverside