Here’s More Proof for Pre-K Cynics

Are you facing community leaders or legislators who say there’s still not enough research to prove that high quality pre-K is effective — even imperative? A new article from The Washington Post provides new firepower to help you push back. In fact, this article debunks a poorly contrived “October surprise” policy brief from the Cato Institute, authored by David J. Armor. The Cato piece proposes that the success of some key programs can’t be generalized to pre-K overall, findings from other pre-K research projects are flawed, and the effects of pre-K fade out over time.  In the Washington Post article, author W. Steven Barnett, director of the National Institute for Early Education Research at Rutgers University, takes on – and knocks down – each of Armor’s claims. “If all the evidence is taken into account, I believe that policy makers from across the political spectrum will come to the conclusion that high-quality pre-K is indeed a sound public investment,” Barnett asserts.