Melissa Hamman Writes: Part 2

( Ed. note. This is the second of three posts.)

The High/Scope Perry Preschool study was undertaken from 1962-1967 in the Ypsilanti Michigan school district. They identified 123 low-income African American students assessed at high risk for school failure. 58 children were randomly assigned to the High/Scope preschool group and 65 were assigned to no preschool group (control). This study has been touted as the gold standard of early quality preschool for children living in poverty. Some sources even imply that Head Start was implemented as a result of this study. Its premise was that if high-risk students were provided with the High/Scope model of preschool, society would benefit enormously.

When one reviews the reports, there are striking societal implications including seemingly significant: lower incarceration rates, lower teen pregnancy rates, higher incomes and reduction of dependency on welfare for the group of students that were fortunate enough be assigned to the High/Scope preschool program. The exact cost benefit analysis of the High/Scope preschool program, in constant 2000 dollars, showed a return of $258,888 per participant on an investment of $15,166 per student, or $17.07 per dollar invested. This broke down to a $12.90 return to the public per dollar invested and a $4.17 return to each participant by age 40 per dollar invested. Amazing!

However, the problems with the study are twofold. The first is the statistically small sample. The study factored this into the statistical calculations, but a rebuttal of the study done at age 23 nicely demonstrates the limitations of the statistics (http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~adiep/zigrebut.htm). The second, more pertinent problem with the study is the initial investment required to provide the High/Scope preschool model. The High/Scope preschool model calls for 2 years of preschool (ages 3 and 4) provided to low-income students. Teachers required bachelor’s degrees and were certified in education. The teacher to student ratio was 5 or 6 to 1 and a specific curriculum (High/Scope) was followed. This means that $7,583 (in constant 2000 dollars) was spent per child per year to achieve this success. The authors of the High/Scope study explicitly state that the enormous social gains proven with their study group can only be achieved by strictly adhering to their regimen. Sadly, I cannot realistically envision any scenario in which Wisconsin (or any state) could afford to offer such rigorous preschool. I have found comparative cost data for various preschool programs that are provided in Wisconsin so you may contrast this with the Perry Preschool model.

The National Institute for Early Education Research (NIEER) summarizes all states’ annual preschool provisions and these data are taken from their reports. Refer also to the table provided in the Excel attachment (Preschool Cost and Quality Data).

Government funding in Wisconsin supports three preschool programs: Federal Head Start, Wisconsin Head Start and 4K. In 2001-2002, Federal Head Start provided $6,445 per student and Wisconsin Head Start provided $5,124 per student. 4K received the least government revenue in 2001-2002, averaging $3,335 per student. This is less than half of the High/Scope expenditure per student. (http://nieer.org/yearbook2003/states/index.php?StateID=WI). Adding the required local match of $1,667 (presumed at 1/3), total revenue for 4K in 2001-2002 was about $5002 per student. NIEER also ranks all states on three provision categories: four-year-old access, three-year-old access and resources provided. In 2001-2002 school year, Wisconsin ranked 11th for 4-year-old access, 20th for 3-year-old access and 11th in resources provided. Let’s move forward to the 2004-2005 school year. In that year, the same group (http://nieer.org/yearbook/pdf/yearbook.pdf) ranked Wisconsin 9th for 4-year-old access, 21st for 3-year-old access and only 23rd for resources provided. The abrupt fall to 23rd from 11th for resources provided is easily seen in state expenditure for 4K. Federal Head Start provided $6635 per student, Wisconsin Head Start supplied $5468 per student but the State of Wisconsin average revenue provision for 4K dropped from $3335 per student to $2895 per student enrolled. The drop in average local revenue, to $1662 per student, was less drastic, indicating a higher percentage of the cost being absorbed locally. The total average revenue provision for 4K students in 2004-2005 was $4557 per student, which is $445 less per student 3 years later. This probably reflects a 50% increase in students participating from 12743 to 18653. But the other programs show modest increases in revenue provision from year to year, not a nearly 10% reduction. This reduction in state revenue provision tells me that the legislature is not favorable toward 4K at this time. What sacrifices will the older students be forced to make to fund this service?

NIEER also does a quality points report card for all the states on their early education initiatives. Wisconsin’s Head Start program remained consistent at 6/10 quality points earned toward meeting the NIEER benchmarks in both academic years cited above for such criteria as curriculum, teacher degree requirements, assistant teacher degree requirements, class size, student to teacher ratio, home visits, screening requirements and meal provisions. Wisconsin 4K, however, earned only 3/10 quality points in 2001-2002 and 4/10 quality points in 2004-2005. This is abysmal. If the point of introducing 4K to Evansville is to achieve the High/Scope study results, as has been suggested in the committee report, Wisconsin needs to go back to the drawing board. Offering at-risk students mediocre programming is not going to help them. It’s clear to me that Wisconsin is trying to reinvent the wheel that Head Start has had nearly 50 years (and almost 50% more money) to perfect. All of the studies I have reviewed emphasize that these enormous gains are seen for students living in poverty. Head start addresses this demographic. The ECH program serves students with special needs. The at-risk population is already being served by superior programming. Why does DPI want to mess with success?

If the point of forcing 4K on Evansville is to extricate more state revenue, that seems to be a game of diminishing returns as well. I believe the citizens of Evansville are not willing to make up the difference in revenue as the state continues to reduce its contribution to 4K. The Wisconsin State Journal (June 4, 2006) summarized the state’s Four-Year-Old Kindergarten Task Force agenda. The task force was formed because “not enough information is available about the educational or societal benefits of the program.” Yikes! This statement was made about a program that the DPI spent $95.6 million to provide in 2005-2006. It appears that the legislators are also interested in seeing the side-by-side study I originally searched for and could not find. I would argue that the same question of validity could be asked regarding full day 5-year-old kindergarten. This seems to be a disturbing norm associated with DPI programming. Throw money at an idea first, ask questions later. Data is our friend. Let people see it to draw their own conclusions.

(continued below)