Benefits of pre-K questioned

November 1, 2007

It appears that no one else is concerned about the Advertiser's pro-editorial concerning pre-kindergarten schooling, funding and alleged benefits of state-instituted 4-year-old education.
One of the stated purposes was to teach children to sit and focus. This was "to get them ready for first grade." I personally have watched pre-K daycare, teaching K-level concepts, so they will "be ready" for kindergarten.

Now we can teach 3-year-olds pre-K so they will be ready for pre-K and then K. Thus logically we can begin forming 2-year-olds into organized groups so they can learn how to move to academic daycare to pre-K, then to K. Need I go further?

Regardless of terms or jargon, kindergarten had a "pass/fail" element when I retired in 2001. Is it possible a 3-year-old could fail staying in the lines, or fail scribbling, the beginning of writing and artistic expression?

Could it be "Child is unable to sit for 10 minutes"? "Child is unable to focus upon concepts of time and seasons."? "Child is unable to duplicate a square."?

"The Great Society," a term from decades long past, brought about the "womb to tomb" concept of an ideal social organization. Seems to me that to governmentally foster this upon 3- and 4-year-olds suggests that parents do not need to function as the first teachers, while increasingly early institutionalization of the young is the answer to society's problems.

West Marcus
Montgomery